Posted on 08/15/2015 1:47:29 PM PDT by verga
Most of us who teach in the field of Christian Origins get asked from time to time by students or in public lectures, Professor, Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?
Scholars are aware of the rich and diverse ways in which the term Son of God is used in the Hebrew Bible, in subsequent Jewish literature, and in the New Testament writings themselves, not to mention various non-Jewish texts (including inscriptions and coins) of the Greco-Roman period. Most of us who teach in the field of Christian Origins get asked from time to time by students or in public lectures, Professor, do you believe Jesus was X. Sometimes X is Messiah, other times it is Divine, but in my experience, most often, the question is Do you believe that Jesus was the Son of God. In good Socratic fashion one is tempted to reply, Well what do you mean by the term Son of God, and such a counter question is certainly more than subterfuge. Here is a listing of most of the complex ways in which that term is used in the Christian Bible and other related traditions:
(Excerpt) Read more at jamestabor.com ...
Non-Catholic ping
Yes
Jesus himself asked his diciples who they thought he was and if you wish tou can hear their answer in Matthew 16:13-20. They were sure and so am I so YES, Jesus is the Son of the Living God.
The majority of Protestants and Catholics believe Jesus was and IS the Son of God.
Jesus IS God.
“Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?”
Yes.
Next question.
Yashua Hamaschiach.
appreciate the ping.
Jesus was God in the flesh - the second person in the Godhead, or Trinity, as we say.
YES. Was & Is.
Deceptions of the Last Hour
18Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that thed Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.
19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.
20But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and youe know all things.
21I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
22Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.
23Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
Nelson, Thomas (2009-02-18). Holy Bible, New King James Version (NKJV) (p. 1179). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.
Yes, I do. Apparently, the author does not.
Thank you for asking.
I hope you are filled with the Holy Spirit.
Yes he is the Son of God.
Of course.
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
praying to anyone but Jesus is un-Christian (and pointless)
Evan Satan is (was) a son of God, as are the rest of us...
History is full of men who have claimed that they came from God, or that they were gods, or that they bore messages from God - Buddha, Mohammed, Confucius, Christ, Lao-tze, and thousands of others, right down to the person who founded a new religion this very day. Each of them has a right to be heard and considered. But as a yardstick external to and outside of whatever is to be measured is needed, so there must be some permanent tests available to all men, all civilizations, and all ages, by which they can decide whether any of these claimants, or all of them, are justified in their claims. These tests are of two kinds: reason and history. Reason, because everyone has it, even those without faith; history, because everyone lives in it and should know something about it.Reason dictates that if any one of these men actually came from God, the least thing that God could do to support His claim would be to pre-announce His coming. Automobile manufacturers tell their customers when to expect a new model. If God sent anyone from Himself, or if He came Himself with a vitally important message for all men, it would seem reasonable that He would first let men know when His messenger was coming, where He would be born, where He would live, the doctrine He would teach, the enemies He would make, the program He would adopt for the future, and the manner of His death. By the extent to which the messenger conformed with these announcements, one could judge the validity of his claims.
Reason further assures us that if God did not do this, then there would be nothing to prevent any impostor from appearing in history and saying, "I come from God," or "An angel appeared to me in the desert and gave me this message." In such cases there would be no objective, historical way of testing the messenger. We would have only his word for it, and of course he could be wrong.
If a visitor came from a foreign country to Washington and said he was a diplomat, the government would ask him for his passport and other documents testifying that he represented a certain government. His papers would have to antedate his coming. If such proofs of identity are asked from delegates of other countries, reason certainly ought to do so with messengers who claim to have come from God. To each claimant reason says, "What record was there before you were born that you were coming?"
With this test one can evaluate the claimants. Socrates had no one to foretell his birth. Buddha had no one to pre-announce him and his message or tell the day when he would sit under the tree. Confucius did not have the name of his mother and his birthplace recorded, nor were they given to men centuries before he arrived so that when he did come, men would know he was a messenger from God. But, with Christ, it was different. Because of the OT prophecies, His coming was not unexpected. There were no predictions about Buddha, Confucius, Lao-tze, Mohammed , or anyone else; but there were predictions about Christ. Others just came and said, "Here I am, believe me". Christ alone stepped out of that line saying, "Search the writings of the Jewish people and the related history of the Babylonians, Persians, and Romans." Even the pagan, Tacitus, speaking for the ancient Romans, says, "People were generally persuaded in the faith of the ancient prophecies, that the East was to prevail, and that from Judea was to come the Master and Ruler of the world." China had the same expectations, as did the Greeks.
Another distinguishing fact is that once He appeared, He struck history with such impact that He split it in two, dividing it into two periods: one before His coming, the other after it. Buddha did not do this, nor any of the great Indian philosophers. Even those who deny God must date their attacks upon Him, A.D. so and so, or so many years after His coming.
The story of every human life begins with birth and ends with death. In the Person of Christ, however, it was His death that was first and His life that was last. It was not so much that His birth cast a shadow on His life and thus led to His death; it was rather that the Cross was first, and cast its shadow back to His birth. His has been the only life in the world that was ever lived backward.
Widely proclaimed a classic work of Christian faith, Life of Christ has been hailed as the most eloquent of Fulton J. Sheens many books. The fruit of many years of reflection, prayer, and research, it is a dramatic and moving recounting of the birth, life, Crucifixion, and Resurrection of Christ, and a passionate portrait of the God-Man, the teacher, the healer, and most of all the Savior, whose promise has sustained humanity for two millennia.
Catholic ping!
Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?
YES I DO.
James D. Tabor seems to be a very confused scholar. Not anyone that I would seek out again for his point of view.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.