The Lord says ‘Jesus is my son’
Christians who believe and propagate that Jesus is the ‘Son of God’ cite the Biblical verse “Jesus is the Son of God” as the foremost authenticity for their belief.
“And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying,
This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”
(Matthew 3:17)
Christians cite this verse as the basis for their belief that Jesus is the ‘Son of God’. But then they fail to consider several other verses which refer to so many others too as the sons of God.
“Israel is my son, My first born” (Exodus 4:22)
This verse is more specific than the previous one. In the verse Matthew 3:17 the saying is reported to have come from heaven and not from the Lord. It could very well be the prank of the devil because in verses 4:8,9,10 of Matthew given below there is specific reference to the devil.
Again the devil took him upon an exceedingly high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and glory.
And he said to Him “All these things I will give you if you will fall down and worship me”.
Then Jesus said to him “Away with you, satan”.
(Matthew 4:8,9,10)
In the verse, regarding Israel, it is very specifically stated that it was the Lord who said it. Therefore logically it is Israel who deserves more consideration than Jesus to be claimed as the ‘Son of God’.
The list of ‘Son of God (?)’prolongs.
“You are My Son
Today I have begotten you”
(Psalm 2:7)
This was addressed to David.
“He (Solomon) shall be my Son and I will be his father” so said the Lord.
(I Chronicles 22:10)
“I am a father to Israel and Ephraim is My first born”
(Jeremiah 31:9)
“I will be his (Samuel’s) Father and he shall be my Son”
(II Samuel 7:14)
“I will be his (David’s) Father and he shall be My Son”
(I Chronicle 17:13)
Thus, some particular persons have been described as ‘Sons of God’ in the Bible. When there are so many ‘Sons of God’, to say that Jesus alone is the ‘Son of God’ is to contradict the teachings of the Bible. Actually it is not that some particular persons alone are said to be the ‘Sons of God’ but all men have been said to be the ‘Sons of God’ in the Bible.
“You are the Children of the LORD your God”
(Deuteronomy 14:1)
In all the above mentioned verses the phrase ‘Son of God’ has been used to denote not only Jesus but also some elites. Again it is not confined to elites alone but has been to denote even the common people. It is to be noted that the phrase ‘Son of God’ has not been used in the common convention sense of the word ‘Son’ but has been used to mean ‘slave of God’.
The fact that the true concept of ‘Son of God’ in the Bible differs form what the Christians have taken it to mean is clear from the following verses of the Bible.
“A father of the fatherless, a defender of widows.
Is God in his holy habitation”
(Psalm 68:5)
Christians who address and beseech Jesus by virtue of his being referred to as ‘Son of God’ in the Bible, do not address and beseech others who have also been referred to as ‘Son of God’ in the Book. Why is it so? This question fails to elicit a response from the Christian world.
Since the Lord is the father of the fatherless children, why don’t the Christians beseech the Sons of God who are in the refugee camp and those in the orphanages to help them.
Further, Jesus himself whom the Christians believe to be the ‘Son of God’ has in many instances referred to the people-good people-as ‘Sons of God’.
“For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly farther will also forgive you”
(Matthew 6:14,5.)
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called ‘Sons of God’
(Matthew 5:9)
“That you may be Sons of your Farther in heaven”
(Matthew 5:45)
“-……. How much more will your father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him”
(Matthew7:11)
“Do not call any one on earth your father, for one is your father. He who is in heaven.”
(Matthew 23:9)
“But as many as received Him to them He gave the right to become children of God”
(John 1:12)
“-…… and your reward will be great and you will be Sons of the highest”
(Luke 6:35)
“There since we are the offspring of God we ought not to think that Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone something shaped by art and man’s devising”
(Acts 17:29)
“The spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God”
(Romans 8:16)
“I will be a father to you and you shall be My Sins and daughters says the Lord Almighty”
(II Corinthians 6:18)
The Lord says that all the people are his children. Jesus too says so. The architect of the present day Bible Paul also says so. From these it should be inferred that the word ‘Sons’ has been used to denote righteous people. If the Christians are adamant in establishing that the word has been used in the conventional sense, then they should accept that all people are offspring of God.
Jesus has been referred to, in the Bible as ‘Son of God’. There are others too who have been similarly referred to as ‘Son of God’. How are we to discern this? There is no room for human wits. Discerning in the light of the Bible will alone amount to real reverence to the Bible. And the Christians will be truthful to the Bible only if they resort to this.
Are we to presume that the phrase, ‘Son of God’ means or refers to one who is begotten by God and to believe that such a person by virtue of being the Son of God has been elevated to Divinity. Does the phrase ‘Son of God’ means one begotten by God and hence God? Or does it denote one who submits to the will of God? This is exactly what the Christians are duty bound to probe. The phrase “Son of God” cannot be taken to mean the first sense, namely, offspring. Even the Christians themselves do not mean it where the phrase is used with regard to those other than Jesus in the Bible. It is therefore logical that the phrase be taken to convey the second sense. The Bible itself confirms it.
“Do not call anyone on earth your father; for one is your father; He who is in heaven”
(Matthew 23:9)
Anybody who ponders over this, cannot assert that the word “father” has been used in the conventional sense of the word. If it does convey the conventional sense, nobody under the sun can call his own father who begot him as father as per this verse of the Bible. Hereby it is confirmed that the word ‘father’ has been used to mean God. Now replace the word ‘father’ by ‘God’ in the above mentioned verse and read it again. ‘Do not call anyone on earth your God. For one is your God. He who is in heaven; you will grasp the true sense fully.
If, on the other hand the word father is taken to mean the conventional sense, the verse as a whole convey no sense at all. In schools, government offices, voters list, ration cards, passports and wedding registers and in so many other records you are required to mention the name of your father. What would be the state of affairs if in such records the father’s name is mentioned as the one who is in heaven? Will the Christians who are ordained in the Bible “not to call any one on earth as father”, refrain from mentioning in such records the names of their fathers who begot them and mention the one who is in heaven? No doubt the Christians have to mention the name of their fathers who begot them. Do they then transgress the commandment of the Bible? Will the Christians dare say that it is not possible to live on the earth without transgressing the commandment of the Bible? No. They will definitely conclude that the word father has been used to mean ‘God’.
If the word father means creator then correspondingly the word ‘Son’ cannot but mean ‘the created’. So also when father means ‘God’; ‘Son’ could mean only ‘slave’.
If this simple fact the Christians could discern, they will not utter that Jesus is begotten by God and hence he is God. In support of this argument other evidences could very well be cited from the Bible itself.
The belief of the Christians that Jesus is God since he has been referred to as “Son of God” in the Bible, is a great absurdity. So says the Bible, the Christians so reverently hold and read.
“I am the Lord your God………….
You shall have no other gods before Me”
(Exodus 20:2,3)
“…..... the Lord Himself is God; there is none other besides Him”
(Deuteronomy 4:35)
“Hear O Israel! The Lord our God; the Lord is the one”
(Deuteronomy 6:4)
These are some of the verses conveying the same sense.
What exactly does the saying of God “You shall have no other gods before Me” convey? There is no god whosoever other than Him. It is simple and clear. How do the Christians dare say contradicting this that Jesus is God?...
“And this is eternal life that they may know you the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.
I have glorified you on earth. I have finished the work you have given me to do”
(John 17:3,4)
The very same Jesus Christ whom Christians believe and worship as God has said, “I am not God”. This is an unambiguous statement by Jesus himself.
By the words “the only true God” he asserts that he is not God. “Jesus Christ whom you have sent” , so saying he affirms that he was only a prophet. The utterance “I have finished the work you have given me to do” goes to mean that he is duty bound to obey the ordainments of God. And by the words “I have finished” he ascertains that the task entrusted with him has been carried out accordingly. As such there is no need or use of people beseeching him.
To connote any meaning to ‘Son of God’ contrary to the proclamation of Jesus in the Bible “I am neither begotten by God nor God myself”, is to despise Jesus. Why do the Christians fail to realise this?
“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said to him ‘You shall love the Lord, your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment”.
(Matthew 22:36-38)
Do the Christians who have offered Jesus half of their heart, half of their soul and half of their mind, not feel that they have trespassed the first and great commandment? If their connotation of ‘Son of God’ is correct would Jesus have said this? (Ref. Matthews 22:36-38)
“I am God and there is no other, I am God and there is none like me”.
(Isaiah 46:9)
If the Lord has said “I am also God,” the Christians are of course justified in believing Jesus to be God. But what do the words in the verse Isaiah 46:9 above, appearing in the Bible which they read and chant, indicate? Don’t they emphatically assert that no one including Jesus other than the Lord is God? Does it not contradict the Bible itself, if the phrase ‘Son of God’ is connoted against the spirit of the Bible? Won’t the Christians realise this?
“But of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the son, but only the father” (Mark 13:32) so said Jesus.
Won’t the Christians ponder over this teaching of Jesus? The above mentioned verse refutes the connotation of ‘Son of God’ as God by the Christians. Won’t they then discern the truth?
If Jesus is God, could he ever proclaim that day and hour is not known to him and that it is known only to the Father? Is there anything not known to God? Let the Christians think over.
And he said to her “what do you wish?” She said to him “Grant that these two sons of mine may sit, one on your right and the other on the left in your kingdom”
(Matthew 20:21)
What was the answer of Jesus? He did not say that he would grant it. But Jesus answered and said”…. But to sit on my right hand and on my left is not mine to give, but it is for those for whom it is prepared by My Father?
(Matthews 20:23)
On the day when all would be summoned before God it is the special and unique privilege of the Lord to assign paradise or Hell. Jesus is not entitled to do it. This is what Jesus himself makes known for the Christians to discern the truth.
Even after Jesus proclaiming “I have no authority in the kingdom of God”, is it righteous on the part of the Christians to adhere to the wrong connotation of the phrase ‘Son of God’ and continue to worship and beseech Jesus?
“Now to the king eternal, immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise be honour and glory for ever, Amen”.
(1 Thimothy 1:17)
Eternity, immortality and invisibility are distinctive attributes of God says the New testament. How could then, Jesus who according to the Bible met with death and was physically visible while alive, be God? Will the Christians contemplate? “But go to my brethren and say to them “I am ascending to My father and your Father and to my God and your God”
(John 20:17)
Does this oration of Jesus not clearly indicate that clinging to Jesus is not the means to approach the Eternal Being and also what the real meaning of Father is?
What would be the reaction of Christians who have erroneously connoted ‘Son of God’ as God, to the Bible’s references to Jesus in several instances as ‘Man’ and ‘Son of a Man’?
“And Jesus said to him ‘Foxes have holes and birds of air have nests but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head”
(Matthews 8:20)
“But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins then He said to paralytic, “Arise take up your bed and go to your house”
(Matthews 9:6)
“Now when the multitudes saw if they marvelled and glorified God who had given such power to men”
(Matthews 9:8)
“When Jesus came into the region of Caesania Phillipi, he asked his disciples saying “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”
(Matthews 16:13)
“For the ‘Son of Man’ will come in the glory of his father with his angles and he will reward each according hid works”
(Matthews 16:27)
“Now while they were staying in Galilee, Jesus said to them “the Son of Man” is about to be betrayed into the hand of men.
But I say to you that Elijah has come already and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Like wise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands”
(Matthews 17:22)
“Now as they came down from the mountain Jesus commanded them saying “Tell the vision to no one until the son of Man is risen from the dead”
(Matthews 17:9)
“So Jesus said to them ‘Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel”.
(Matthews 19:28)
“Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the Chief priests and to the Scribes and they will condemn him to death”
(Matthews 20:18)
“Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life a ransom for many”
(Matthews 20:28)
“For as the lightening comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will be the coming of the Son of Man be”
(Matthews 26:24)
Jesus said to him “It is as you said. Nevertheless I say to you hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power and coming on the clouds of heaven”
(Matthews 26:64)
“Then he came to his disciples and said to them “Are you still sleeping and resting? Behold the hour is at hand and the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of the sinners”
(Matthews 26:45)
In all the above verses Jesus has referred to his own self as ‘Son of Man’. In other gospels too he has been referred to as such in many instances. There actually far in excess of these verses which denote Jesus as ‘Son of God’. If Jesus is actually the Son of God with Godhead why does he refer to his own self as ‘Son of Man’?
All these verses quoted above without exception indicate unambiguously that Jesus is neither God nor ‘Son of God’. They also go to prove that he did not possess Godhead. There are ever so many similar verses. They will of course be quoted at appropriate contexts. Therefore the phrase ‘Son of God’ wherever it appears should necessarily be connoted without contradicting these verses. If not it will naturally amount to gross transgression of the doctrine of the Bible.
If ‘Son of God’ is elucidated to mean one who is in total obedience to God, a righteous man surrendering himself to the will of God, it will definitely be in accordance with the verses of the Bible.
Which of these two, the Christians want to go for? Even after such elucidating evidences, if the Christians are adamant in taking ‘Son of God’ as ‘God’ they should eventually accept as such all those who have been referred to in the Bible as Sons of God. Factually the Christians who worship Jesus are also Sons of God, according to the Bible. Thus while they themselves are sons of God will they worship another Son of God? Whether they prefer the one or the other of the two connotations to “Son of God” with regard to Jesus, it is amply proved that they should neither worship nor beseech Jesus.
