(January 8, 2014 at 11:18 pm)rightcoaster Wrote: "Son of God or Messiah" is a nonsense conflation in the way you mean it, and would have been to the "apostles".
It's OK for Jews to believe in a man-Messiah/Mashiakh, there is and apparently was no other option for Jews: Bar Kokhba was the Mashiakh in the 135 revolt, and there are many others; I'm not aware of any divine men (well, my wife once in a while may consider me such, but she's not exactly correct). Here is one take on the subject: http://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm
But to take the "son of God" stuff literally is a misinterpretation, an idea that was slathered on later. The followers knew who his parents were, his family thought he was nuts, etc. I am also the son of God, and the son of Man. And so are you (unless you are a daughter, and nowadays a son can become a daughter and vice versa).
Where in the stories does Mary say something like "Jesus ... oboy, your father, God, is gonna whup your tukhis when he hears what you are doing"? Or (Catholic theology I think requires perpetual virginity) where is she quoted as referring to her unruptured hymen? You can deny the whole thing as a fabrication, which affords something of a cop-out for Mini; but other than that route you cannot dismiss only the stuff that is adverse to Christology as false, and accept as true only the stuff that fits orthodox theology. Well, you can do what you want, of course, but it doesn't hold up to criticism.
Good point. I probably should have said "Son of Man or Messiah."
