Jesus, the Son of God: Biblical meaning, Muslim Understanding ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

St Francis Magazine Vol 7, No 3 | August 2011!valid practice? Or are these translators promoting a false idea thatshould be stopped in its tracks? This article sets out to show howthe above MIT claims are indeed false and that the solution is not tochange the Bible text, but rather to focus attention and ministryefforts on improving methods of teaching Bible truths to Muslims,enhanced by a clearer understanding of what they really believe andaccompanied by a genuine, sacrificial love for these lost peoplegroups.2 Is Jesus actually the Son of God,or is that just a metaphor? 3The answer to that question can help us determine what is, andwhat is not, an accurate and acceptable way for Bible translators totranslate Father-Son terminology when it refers to Jesus and Godthe Father in the New Testament.If Jesus really is the Son of God in a way that is not metaphorical(even if we do not understand exactly how), then it is not accurateto remove Father-Son references from the Bible text and/or changethem to something else, that is, we are not free in a translation tochange the facts of who Jesus and His Father are. This means that ifin certain cultures or parts of the world there are difficulties understandingthese terms (or even erroneous teachings about theseterms), the issue is mainly one of Bible literacy; in other words, peoplemust be taught the truth, including the Biblical facts about whatit means that Jesus Christ is "the Son of God".!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3 A metaphor is an expression in which one concept is likened to another, differentconcept, usually by speaking of it as if it were that other. In other words, the twoconcepts are not the same, but have one or more points of similarity by which theycan be compared. For example, the metaphor "the canyon was a furnace" is notintended to communicate that these two objects are actually the same, but ratherthat the canyon feels hot like a furnace. So when Jesus said to His disciples, "youare the branches" (John 15:5), He was telling them that they were like branches(that need to stay connected to the vine in order to bear fruit). In the same way,the MIT movement's labeling of the term "Son (of God)" in reference to Jesus as ametaphor means that Jesus is not actually God's Son but is only like a son to Him.In fact, since a metaphor cannot be the concept or entity that it is illustrating, it iscontradictory to say that "Son" and "Father" are only metaphors if one truly believesthat Jesus is the Son of God.St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision!"!
St Francis Magazine Vol 7, No 3 | August 2011!What is the evidence from the Bible that Jesus is God's Son andthat God is His Father? Would first-century Jews have understoodthese terms to be just metaphors or idioms as some have claimed, orrather, as they read the inspired writings of Jesus' disciples wouldthey have understood Jesus to be God's Son in a more real sense?The New Testament begins with a Jewish author writing to aJewish audience, using a Jewish genealogy to show who Jesus is.To move the genealogy forward, Jesus' disciple Matthew uses theverb "fathered" (from the Greek verb !"##$%) forty times, so that(following the Greek text), "Abraham fathered Isaac, then Isaac fatheredJacob... David fathered Solomon..." and so forth, until thegenealogy reaches its goal/peak and culminates in verse 16 with adivine passive 4 in the sentence, "Then Jacob fathered Joseph, thehusband of Mary, from whom Jesus who is called Christ was fathered[by God]." It is interesting how all five times that Matthewmentions women in the genealogy (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Uriah'swife and Mary) their role is not communicated with a verb, but witha prepositional phrase, the same phrase "from/by..." (Greek: ""&...")for each one. That pattern works together with the pattern of thefathers' role being communicated through the verb of each clause torivet attention on the final use of the verb in the genealogy when itis suddenly a divine passive, with God as the implied Father. 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!4 Bible scholars such as Leon Morris, Robert Gundry and Donald Hagner recognizethat Matthew uses a divine passive here.5 Matthew says in 1:17 that there are three sets of fourteen generations in his genealogy,but then only lists thirteen men in the last set. To remedy this apparentdiscrepancy, some Bible scholars have suggested counting one of the names in thegenealogy twice (for example, some include Jeconiah as a member of both the secondand third sets). However, if it is recognized that God is implied as Jesus' Fatherin verse 16, then Matthew's count is accurate as is and there is no discrepancy.There is also other evidence that Matthew intended to have the divine passivecomplete the pattern for the third set in his genealogy. For example, in order tohave fourteen individuals in each set (2 x 7 = double perfection), he left out at leastfour ancestors in the second set (including Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah from betweenJoram and Uzziah in verse 8, and Jehoiakim between Josiah and Jechoniah inverse 11), and he probably left out a few more in the third set (which is suggestedby the fact that in Luke 3 there are twenty-one, instead of only thirteen, men listedfor the same time period).St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision!#!
Page 1: JESUS, THE SON OF GOD:BIBLICAL MEAN
Page 5 and 6: St Francis Magazine Vol 7, No 3 | A

Jesus, the Son of God: Biblical meaning, Muslim Understanding ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?