Son of Man vs. Son of God

[Adam]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Because he was the second Adam. .Adams are created pure.. the first chose to sin.. the second did not.

This sounds reasonable. Thanks.

[DaveC519]

Originally Posted by Adam

Last night, I was on Netflix watching the film "The Gospel of John" with the actor from Lost (Henry Ian Cusick) playing Jesus (he's great btw). So, my question...When Christ refers to himself as the Son of Man, what exactly does he mean? Shouldn't he always refer to himself as the Son of God? I'm not a bigtime Bible scholar, so I thought I'd pose the question here.

"Son of Man" was not only an existing OT term, but an entire extra-biblical messianic motif first inspired by the Daniel 7 passage. It appears Jesus deliberately appropriated the term for its messianic connotation (specifically Mt 26:64- a direct reference to Dan 7). See here:

"Ninety-three of the 106 occurrences of the term in the Old Testament are in the Book of Ezekiel where it is God's standard way of addressing the prophet. Elsewhere it is also a reference to either humanity as a whole or to a particular human person except in Ps 8:4; 80:17; and Dan 7:13. As already noted, the writer to the Hebrews interprets Ps 8:4 messianically and probably 80:17 should be as well. Dan 7:13-14 introduces a different perspective. Here one like a Son of Man is an apocalyptic figure from heaven who receives an all-inclusive kingdom, unlimited by space or time.

Intertestamental references to Son of Man are in the same vein as that of Daniel's vision. In that section of 1 Enoch called the Similitudes or Parables (37 -71 ) the Son of Man is a heavenly person, eternal, righteous, and holy, who rules and judges. Second Esdras (4 Ezra) 1:13 relates a vision of "something like the figure of a man come up out of the heart of the sea ... this man flew with the clouds of heaven" (v. 3). He defeats the hostile (cosmic) powers and delivers captives through a series of actions that precede the confirmation of his reign.

Controversies abound about the origin, use, meaning, and implications of "Son of Man" in biblical literature and particularly its use by Jesus. The term could be a synonym for "I" or "a human person." Some scholars have thought it to be a corporate term including Israel (n.b., Dan 7:18) or the church (e.g., T. W. Manson), an office Jesus expected to receive (e.g., A. Schweutzer), or a figure imported into Judaism from a foreign source.

Jesus was in constant danger of being forced into limited or illegitimate messianic role (John 6:15). In response to Peter's confession (Mark 8:29-31) he accepted the title "Messiah," equated it with Son of Man, and linked his work with that of the Suffering Servant. In the Judaism of Jesus' day "Messiah" was frequently understood as a political-military leader whose primary concern was for the welfare of Israel. Jesus' usage seems to be an extension of the portrayal of the Son of Man in Daniel and the intertestamental literature. With the term Jesus dissociated his nature and mission from purely earthly, nationalistic notions. He is a transcendent, preexistent person whose mission is primarily a spiritual one that orginates in heaven and whose concern is with all peoples, nations, and languages."
(from Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Copyright © 1996 by Baker Books. All rights reserved. Used by permission.)

[pastorrick1959]

Originally Posted by joshua

Whatsoever is born of flesh is flesh and whatsoever is born of spirit is spirit. Therefore, the term "Son of Man" refers to His humanity and likewise "Son of God" refers to His Deity.
As the Son of Man He was hungry and yet as the Son of God He was the Bread of Life.

if son of god refers to deity ,then aint there 2 gods son a little lesser being son and all than the god that created him?/

[pastorrick1959]

Originally Posted by Adam

OK, folks, now I'm gonna lay a heavy on ya... ready?

So, if he was "human", how could he be spotless and without sin?

simple born with the nature of adam before the fall. he could have just like the 1st adam did ,, but he didnt ..

[Sandy]

Jesus was born without sin because he was not sired by a human father as I see it. Because, according to any scriptures I can find concerning this issue, it is the male that passes sin on down to their offspring, not the female. My saying this because of what it does say about this issue of sinfulness being passed onto us written in Ex. 20:5; 34:7; as well as Numb. 14:18.

Strangely that would have to mean that the devil was not after the female to partake of that Tree that obviously did bring forth sin within mankind at all, but he was after Adam. But went thru Eve to get to Adam of course. As that is naturally when they took on the attributes of Lucifer of course. Who knew both good and evil. They did what we are to do when we are born again by doing what Jesus said we are to do spiritually in what is written in John 6:58. And once Adam did this, all of us being born from the first Adam. we are thus born in sin. Tell you this by who the first two did become like in Gen. 3:22. I know the Trinitarians believe that proves that God is three persons, but oh no it doesn't. What it does prove is who man is born like. My saying that while reading about this one day, the Lord lead me to consider who was actually in the Garden at the time God did say that. There being God, the two humans, and the devil. And guess who the two humans became like when they partook of that Tree that day, including all the rest of us humans too that were born after the first Adam. And of course, God, had to remove them from the garden so they would not partake of the tree and of life, because mankind would never have been able to be restored back to Him at all if that had happened. So of course, it was also then God spoke the Words that would one day bring forth the birth of Jesus Christ within the woman he chose to do this also, to be born perfect.

And so far nobody nor I have seen any scripture that says the female is capable of passing down sin at all. Because the female cannot. Maybe it has something to do with the female being taken from Adam instead of being made as Adam was. Don't know. Just a thought I have had. Because females certainly are born in sin. But cannot pass it on to their offspring by themselves apparently.

[pastorrick1959]

you gotta watch them females sandy lol.. sneaky little devils..

[acerrak]

i dont believe people are born with sin. what sin has a child done? who sin do they inherit?

[Sandy]

Originally Posted by pastorrick1959

you gotta watch them females sandy lol.. sneaky little devils..

Hmmmm

Well yes, but consider this. As I see it, Adam sat there and watched her eat of that stuff, and evidently did nothing to stop her at all. Right? Provided he was there. And it sounds like he was by what is written.

So maybe he is the sneaky one instead. cuz he probably wanted to eat too. And figured, well if she dies I won't do it, but is she doesn't I will. And she didn't, and he did. Right?

So I am not sure who was the sneaky one after all.

[Adam]

I really like your explanation Sandy. BTW, our cat's name is Sandy, that is blowing my mind, in addition to the fact that folks have mentioned it goes back to "Adam", and that's my name. I'm sitting here thinking "What next is God going to trip out my mind with today?" It was been a day and a half, today.

[Sandy]

Originally Posted by acerrak

i dont believe people are born with sin. what sin has a child done? who sin do they inherit?

True a baby is not born sinning. But we are born in bondage to sin within. Paul referred to this bondage to sin in Rm. 6:6 as the old man. Which is why it is important it is put to death or remitted as well as being buried in Jesus Christ.

Meaning we are in bondage to this old man, which I believe is a spirit being that was put into the first two, this being passed down to us from then on.

And that is because of the Words God said in the very beginning about everything reproducing after its own kind. True at that time he was speaking of in the natural realm. But it is also true concerning the spiritual realm too.

And that is why we need a Savior. And is also why it says in Rm. 3: 23 all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

Also, I think if you check it out. The image of God that man was made in to begin with, was also lost when they committed the sin, partaking of that tree also according to what it says in Rm. 8:29. Otherwise, why would we have to be conformed to the image of His Son if that image had remained.

So people that think they are born in the image of God, have to be mistaken because of what that scripture says in Romans.