Dylan

Hi all,

I recently finished reading Beyond Theology by Alan Watts. Excellent read.

Anyway, it got me thinking, since it often quotes Jesus. He did have some rather profound spiritual insights - even from an atheist's perspective. How did he become to be known as the son of god? Was he simply a good spiritual teacher gone power hungry? Schizophrenic? Delusional? Did he even claim he was the son of god?

If anyone has any insights, or websites/books exploring these questions, it'd be appreciated.

Chris Weimer

Just read through the various historical/mythic Jesus threads here. We've been debating this for years. Basically, I think it was Mark who made Jesus the Son of God via baptism, but Jesus probably held the title Son of God much like James who was Brother of the Lord, aka honorary titles.

Loomis

Gosh. Here’s a thought. Maybe it goes something like this:

Jesus is a myth. A historical Jesus never existed. Fictional characters can do weird things like claim to be “God� and to be the “son of God� at the same time.

A long time ago a group of religious folks worshipped a god named El. They believed that El had a goddess/ girlfriend named Asherah, and that the two of them had 70 sons. These sons were called the Divine Council (adat El).

Down the road there was another group of religious folks who worshiped a different god named Yahweh.

One day these two groups got together and tried to combine their religions. But there was a disagreement on how they should go about combining their gods. The El-worshippers wanted to portray Yahweh as one of El’s sons, while the Yahwists simply insisted that Yahweh WAS/ IS El.

Over time the Yahwist approach won the popularity contest, and the El-worshippers fell by the wayside. (Along with their view of Yahweh as one of El’s sons.)

Maybe the concept of a messiah as a “son of god� arose from the need to explain-away the residual myths portraying Yahweh as a son of El. It would answer the question, “If Yahweh is El, then what’s the deal with these other stories over here about a son of El.�

In other words, a messiah as a Son of God would be a way to reconcile the stories that were written by the El-worshippers to introduce Yahweh as a son of El, but that were later abandoned in favor of the “God has two names� approach.

Am I making any sense to anyone?

I am very curious to know if anyone understands what I am suggesting here.

The Inquisitor

^ I think I understand, but I don't buy the idea :-P.

sharon45

In Jewish belief, there is nothing really wrong with being called a son of G-d. The Jews already consider themselves the sons and daughters of G-d.

John's gospel on the other hand hints the most at jesus being the more real sense version of a son of god. Now besides it being logically impossible, it is also easily shown in the NT as an absolute lie.

One reason being is he really didn't say that much that was truly profound, wise, or logically sound, but it is still an obviously very large misconception that he actually did.

To really understand his mindset is anyone's guess, because it would have at least helped some if he was a lot more consistent.

MagiNoir

Because some 'bint' got herself pregnant out of wedlock and her savant boyfriend believed it was a miraculous conception.
Every mother thinks her son is perfect and must be the son of god!
People like to read too much into things, they just like a good supernatural mystery.

Diogenes the Cynic

The phrase "Son of God" was an honorific for kings, especially kings in the line of David, i.e. heirs to throne of David, i.e the Annointed. In Hebrew/Aramaic Jewish idiom it didn't imply any kind of literal, biological descendency from God (the notion would have been absurd). It was a figurative way to talk about God's favor.

Dharma

the title "ben elohim" was used for Jewish heroes before the Jewish flood...daughters of the middle eastern first man Adam impregnated by the Elohim...

In that sense, Jesus would more likely be a "Ben Elohim" rather than David, whose mother was NOT impregnated by the middle eastern dieties "Elohim".

Loomis

That certainly is the traditional view.

Nevertheless the author of Psalm 82:6 wants us to believe that the most high god (elyon) had sons (ben elyon), who were also gods (elohim).

'aniy-'âmartiy'elohiym 'attem ubhenêy `elyon kullekhem

In the next verse (Psalm 82:7) the author wants us to believe that these sons were condemned to die like humans (adham).

'âkhên ke'âdhâm temuthunukhe'achadh hasâriym tippolu

What good would the punishment (of dying like humans) be if they were human?

The phrase "Son of God" may have been an honorific for kings in some circles, but the author of Psalm 82 paints a different picture. He wants us to believe that the beny elyon were elohim, and that they were sentenced to die like humans for ‘making unjust legal decisions and showing favoritism to the wicked.’ (See verse 2.)

Sure it’s absurd. But the whole idea that a supernatural everlasting spirit creature is watching over us is absurd. So what’s wrong with a little more absurdity?

Visionary7

Read the last verse in the final chronology of Luke 3.37,now read Luke 3.27, now go to 1 Chronicles 10, Now read the name Zerubbabel at 1 Chronicles 19,Go back to Luke and read the name Enoch, now read about Enoch in Genesis 5.21.