unique lineage

Nerin

Just doing a christology essay on Jesus' belief he was the unique son of god. interesting stuff, especiallly when i bring in all the other sons and daughters of gods,not to mention (in the biblical tradition at least) the technical descendants of god too,adopted children etc.
your thoughts?
no going to argue this one,just see peoples thoughts, in relation to how unique was jesus,or what you think of the other stories of children of gods (although im pretty sure of the answers )

Fanny Cradock

I'm sorry, I don't really get your question.

Nerin

originall posted by me:
just see peoples thoughts, in relation to how unique was jesus,or what you think of the other stories of children of gods (although im pretty sure of the answers )

how unique do ye think jesus was and why and what do ye think of the other stories of characters that supposedly were offspring of gods.

its pretty straight forward

Fanny Cradock

I wasn't having a go at you. I just found your post difficult to decipher. Maybe that's down to the late night I had.

Well, one one imagine that all Christians believe that Jesus was entirely unique. As for other gods and their offspring, being a Christian would preclude the belief in the existence of such things.

Nerin

i didnt think you were having a go, late nights are a killer.
yeah,that was pretty much the response i was expecting from the christians here. some christians on my course are writing on the virgin birth, but CRITICALLY examining it, taking ideas from all sources.

"In the Old Testament terminology angels are called sons of God while men are called servants of God. In the New Testament this is reversed. Angels are the servants and Christians are the sons of God."
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, Volume 2. (Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947), p. 23.

this is one of the sources i've put in my essay. i'm doing christology so theres little room to (and i feel,no point) in challenging the idea of christianity. what im doing is showing that he wasnt the first, nor the last to believe he was a child of god. again, another source i put in my essay, only this time talking about herakles.

And next I caught a glimpse of powerful Heracles—
His ghost I mean: the man himself delights
in the grand feasts of the deathless gods on high...
Around him cries of the dead rang out like cries of birds
scattering left and right in horror as on he came like night..." Odyssey XI, the Nekuia

Ancient critics were aware of the problem of the aside that interrupts the vivid and complete description, in which Heracles recognizes Odysseus and hails him, and modern critics find very good reasons for denying that the verses beginning, in Fagles' translation His ghost I mean... were part of the original composition: "once people knew of Heracles' admission to Olympus," they would not tolerate his presence in the underworld,"
Friedrich Solmsen, "The Sacrifice of Agamemnon's Daughter in Hesiod's' Ehoeae" The American Journal of Philology 102.4 (Winter 1981, pp. 353-358), p. 355.

ancient critics were similar to the modern ones we have it seems.

Fanny Cradock

nerin wrote: »

:)what im doing is showing that he wasnt the first, nor the last to believe he was a child of god.

I don't think that was ever in dispute.

Nerin

true. its more about his belief i guess.

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He (Jesus) replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

i wonder if kelly or any of the others who can throw the bible passage off the top of there head can say if this is correct, i always remember that when he was asked he said it is you who say i am

22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.

hmmm.

Fanny Cradock

Jesus made enough claims to be the Son of God for there to be no ambiguity, e.g. John 13:12-14, John 10:30, Matthew 27:43. Now regarding Luke 22:70 - depending on the translation you read, Jesus' response varies slightly, but they all amount to the same thing - his claim to be the Son of God.


You may find the following useful:
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusclaims/jesusclaimshub.html

Nerin

i was thinking it was a translation difference alright.

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He (Jesus) replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

i got that one from a islamic article.
thanks for the link btw.

In the texts of Ugarit, there were 70 sons of God, each one being the special deity of a particular people from whom they were descended.

is one im going to expad on a little, i always like to go wayyy back in time.

the flood as well will be a topic i'll cover,if not briefly, due to my incorporation of the subject of Nephilim .

Noah's bloodline had remained free of genetic contamination.
The Gospel Truth Magazine, Vol. 18, (June 1978), No. 7.

seems the inter breeding of angelic and human races is a good pre flood explanation as to why it was necessary

BrianCalgary

I'd be intersted in reading the paper when your done.

With Jesus, there are 60 odd different prophecies of the messiah in the OT, all come true in the life of Jesus.

Daniel 7:13-14 talks about the Son of Man. Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man on numerous occasions in the gospels.

Nerin

no problem,i have it done if you are interested

Nerin

there we go.
not sure what you'll think,but its just a simple essay.

robindch

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Daniel 7:13-14 talks about the Son of Man. Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man on numerous occasions in the gospels.

As a Jew, Jesus was probably quite familiar with the book of Daniel and the 'Son of Man' reference. Do you think that it's possible that Jesus (or the people who wrote the gospels) would have referred to himself using this phrase to establish or gain credibility?

Incidentally, the phrase "Son of Man" originated in Mesopotamia and appears in Sumerian and jewish as well as christian texts. More here.