Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis

[Drich]

For a Jew, the phrase "son of God" did not mean what Christians turned it in to.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articl...son-of-god

"The Pious as Sons of God.
The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha contain a few passages in which the title "son of God" is given to the Messiah (see Enoch, cv. 2; IV Esdras vii. 28-29; xiii. 32, 37, 52; xiv. 9); but the title belongs also to any one whose piety has placed him in a filial relation to God (see Wisdom ii. 13, 16, 18; v. 5, where "the sons of God" are identical with "the saints"; comp. Ecclus. [Sirach] iv. 10). It is through such personal relations that the individual becomes conscious of God's fatherhood, and gradually in Hellenistic and rabbinical literature "sonship to God" was ascribed first to every Israelite and then to every member of the human race (Abot iii. 15, v. 20; Ber. v. 1; see Abba). The God-childship of man has been especially accentuated in modern Jewish theology, in sharp contradistinction to the Christian God-sonship of Jesus. The application of the term "son of God" to the Messiah rests chiefly on Ps. ii. 7, and the other Messianic passages quoted above.
The phrase "the only begotten son" (John iii. 16) is merely another rendering for "the beloved son." The Septuagint translates ("thine only son") of Gen. xxii. 2 by "thy beloved son." But in this translation there is apparent a special use of the root , of frequent occurrence in rabbinical literature, as a synonym of ("choose," "elect"; see Bacher, "Die Aelteste Terminologie der Jüdischen Schriftauslegung," s.v.); the "only begotten" thus reverts to the attribute of the "servant" who is the "chosen" one.
It has been noted that the Gospel of John and the First Epistle of John have given the term a meta-physical and dogmatic significance. Undoubtedly the Alexandrian Logos concept has had a formative and dominant influence on the presentation of the doctrine of Jesus' sonship in the Johannean writings. The Logos in Philo is designated as the "son of God"; the Logos is the first-born; God is the father of the Logos ("De Agricultura Noe," § 12 [ed. Mangey, i. 308]; "De Profugis," § 20 [ed. Mangey, i. 562]). In all probability these terms, while implying the distinct personality of the Logos, carry only a figurative meaning. The Torah also is said to be God's "daughter" (Lev. R. xx.). At all events, the data of the Synoptic Gospels show that Jesus never styled himself the son of God in a sense other than that in which the righteous might call themselves "sons" or "children" of God."

---

There are many historical records of Pilate.
http://paulbarnett.info/2011/04/the-ques...us-pilate/

you guys must get sick of being wrong all the time..

Matthew 16:13-20 New Life Version (NLV)
Peter Says Jesus Is the Christ
13 Jesus came into the country of Caesarea Philippi. He asked His followers, “Who do people say that I, the Son of Man, am?” 14 They said, “Some say You are John the Baptist and some say Elijah and others say Jeremiah or one of the early preachers.”
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus said to him, “Simon, son of Jonah, you are happy because you did not learn this from man. My Father in heaven has shown you this.
18 “And I tell you that you are Peter. On this rock I will build My church. The powers of hell will not be able to have power over My church. 19 I will give you the keys of the holy nation of heaven. Whatever you do not allow on earth will not have been allowed in heaven. Whatever you allow on earth will have been allowed in heaven.” 20 Then with strong words He told His followers to tell no one that He was the Christ.

Here's the thing sport... if the remaining jews (because a great number counted themselves christian after 70ad)  saw everything we did, they would not be jews.