Jeffrey Gibson

Only if you assume what needs to be proven -- i.e., that υἱὲ τοῦ θεοῦ means "god". Again you have never ever anywhere produced a whiff of evidence to prove that 1st century Jews thought that this was the case.

Now where is your evidence that "devils" are never presented in ancient literature as tormented by anyone except gods, let alone by kings?


Doesn't Mt. 10:1; 12:26; Mk. 1:24; Acts 8:5- show that this is not so>


Doesn't Josephus' and Qumran accounts of David (a king and a son of God) as an excorcist, Pseudepigraphical testimonies to Solomon (a king and a son of God as a demon tormentor, Rabbinical references (cf. P. Pesach 112b) to how Haninah (a human who was designated by Rabbis as a "son of God") tormented Agrath, the queen of the demons, and to how Simeon ben Jose tormented the demon Ben Tamilion (cf. b. Me'il 17b) and Philostratus' notation that Apollonius tormented devils (Life 4:20) stand as solid evidence against this -- not to mention as evidence that you have very little idea of what you are talking about?

Jeffrey

CartesianFart

I am sure that in ancient world that there were no mass produced books on the dictionary of phrases such as "Son of God" alongside the words Son and God. So I would not be suprised that alot more of confusion and petty differences happen due to many idiomatic uses of whatever expression a person makes by the sole product of where they come from and how they were brought up (education) at that particular time.

We will never know how would an early Christian think since we do not live in their era to know how in fact to think like them.

aa5874

Don't you realise In the MYTHICAL world anything can happen?

How can you tell when a real king torments a real spiritual devilish entity?

J.F. Gaul

There are some quotations from the Gospel of the Ebionites in the writings of Epiphanius. The gospel was a mid-2nd century document, but has many similarities with Matthew's gospel. Epiphanius' commentary states:

And they (the Ebionites) receive the Gospel according to Matthew. For this they too, like the followers of Cerinthus and Merinthus, use to the exclusion of others. And they call it according to the Hebrews, as the truth is, that Matthew alone of New Testament writers made his exposition and preaching of the Gospel in Hebrew and in Hebrew letters.

According to the Ebionites, Jesus was called the Son of God only after his baptism, in which the Christ came into him (Khristos being a noun-form of the adjective meaning "anointed").

they deny that he was begotten of God the Father, but say that he was created as one of the archangels, yet greater, and that he is Lord of the angels and of all things made by the Almighty, and that he came and taught, as the Gospel (so called) current among them contains, that, 'I came to destroy the sacrifices, and if ye cease not from sacrificing, the wrath of God will not cease from you'.

Jeffrey Gibson

Really? Perhaps you'd like to tell that to Josephus and to the author of The Testament of Solomon and of 11QPs(a), 11QPsAp(a) who thought and stated otherwise.

Jeffrey

J.F. Gaul

I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing against. Are you saying that if alternative interpretations of Matthew existed in early Christianity, they shouldn't have?

Jeffrey Gibson

So .. it is not just gods who according to the literature that you appeal to to back up your claim who can torment "devils"?

Jeffrey

aa5874

Can you prove that real kings have tormented real spiritual devils?

You need to do that for me to concede. Prove that those things really happened. Can you do that?

Jeffrey Gibson

Can you prove to me that real devils have been tormented by real gods, as you claimed they could be and were?

And can you prove to me that in Jewish thought "son of God" meant "god, as you also claimed?

Jeffrey