Son of God
Historically, many rulers have assumed titles such as son of God, son of a god or son of heaven.
The term “son of God” is used in the Hebrew Bible as another way of referring to humans with special relationships with God. In Exodus, the nation of Israel is called God‘s “Firstborn son”. In Psalms, David is called “son of God“, even commanded to proclaim that he is God’s “begotten son” on the day he was made king. Solomon is also called “son of God”. Angels, just and pious men, and the kings of Israel are all called “sons of God.”
In the New Testament of the Christian Bible, “Son of God” is applied to Jesus on many occasions. Jesus is declared to be the Son of God on two separate occasions by a voice speaking from Heaven. Jesus is explicitly and implicitly described as the Son of God by himself and by various individuals who appear in the New Testament. Jesus is called “son of God,” while followers of Jesus are called, “sons of God”. As applied to Jesus, the term is a reference to his role as the Messiah, or Christ, the King chosen by God (Matthew 26:63). The contexts and ways in which Jesus’ title, Son of God, means something more than or other than Messiah remain the subject of ongoing scholarly study and discussion.
The term “Son of God” should not be confused with the term “God the Son” (Greek: Θεός ὁ υἱός), the second Person of the Trinity in Christian theology. The doctrine of the Trinity identifies Jesus as God the Son, identical in essence but distinct in person with regard to God the Father and God the Holy Spirit (the first and third Persons of the Trinity). Nontrinitarian Christians accept the application to Jesus of the term “Son of God”, which is found in the New Testament.
Rulers and Imperial titles
Throughout history, emperors and rulers ranging from the Western Zhou dynasty (c. 1000 BC) in China to Alexander the Great (c. 360 BC) to the Emperor of Japan (c. 600 AD) have assumed titles that reflect a filial relationship with deities.
The title “Son of Heaven” i.e. 天子 (from 天 meaning sky/heaven/god and 子 meaning child) was first used in the Western Zhou dynasty (c. 1000 BC). It is mentioned in the Shijing book of songs, and reflected the Zhou belief that as Son of Heaven (and as its delegate) the Emperor of China was responsible for the well being of the whole world by the Mandate of Heaven. This title may also be translated as “son of God” given that the word Ten or Tien in Chinese may either mean sky or god. The Emperor of Japan was also called the Son of Heaven (天子 tenshi) starting in the early 7th century.
Among the Steppe Peoples, there was also a widespread use of “Son of God/Son of Heaven” for instance, in the Third Century B.C., the ruler was called Chanyü and similar titles were used as late as the 13th Century by Genghis Khan.
Examples of kings being considered the son of god are found throughout the Ancient Near East. Egypt in particular developed a long lasting tradition. Egyptian pharaohs are known to have been referred to as the son of a particular god and their begetting in some cases is even given in sexually explicit detail. Egyptian pharaohs did not have full parity with their divine fathers but rather were subordinate. Nevertheless, in the first four dynasties, the pharaoh was considered to be the embodiment of a god. Thus, Egypt was ruled by direct theocracy, wherein “God himself is recognized as the head” of the state. During the later Amarna Period, Akhenaten reduced the Pharaoh’s role to one of coregent, where the Pharaoh and God ruled as father and son. Akhenaten also took on the role of the priest of god, eliminating representation on his behalf by others. Later still, the closest Egypt came to the Jewish variant of theocracy was during the reign of Herihor. He took on the role of ruler not as a god but rather as a high-priest and king.
Jewish kings are also known to have been referred to as “son of the LORD“. The Jewish variant of theocracy can be thought of as a representative theocracy where the king is viewed as God’s surrogate on earth. Jewish kings thus, had less of a direct connection to god than pharaohs. Unlike pharaohs, Jewish kings rarely acted as priests, nor were prayers addressed directly to them. Rather, prayers concerning the king are addressed directly to god. The Jewish philosopher Philo is known to have likened God to a supreme king, rather than likening Jewish kings to gods.
Based on the Bible, several kings of Damascus took the title son of Hadad. From the archaeological record a stela erected by Bar-Rakib for his father Panammuwa II contains similar language. The son of Panammuwa II a king of Sam’alreferred to himself as a son of Rakib. Rakib-El is a god who appears in Phoenician and Aramaic inscriptions. Panammuwa II died unexpectedly while in Damascus. However, his son the king Bar-Rakib was not a native of Damascus but rather the ruler of Sam’al it is unknown if other rules of Sam’al used similar language.
In Greek mythology, Heracles (son of Zeus) and many other figures were considered to be sons of gods through union with mortal women. From around 360 BC onwards Alexander the Great may have implied he was a demigod by using the title “Son of Ammon–Zeus”.
In 42 BC, Julius Caesar was formally deified as “the divine Julius” (divus Iulius) after his assassination. His adopted son, Octavian (better known as Augustus, a title given to him 15 years later, in 27 BC) thus became known as divi Iuli filius (son of the divine Julius) or simply divi filius (son of the god). As a daring and unprecedented move, Augustus used this title to advance his political position in the Second Triumvirate, finally overcoming all rivals for power within the Roman state.
The word applied to Julius Caesar as deified was divus, not the distinct word deus. Thus Augustus called himself Divi filius, and not Dei filius. The line between been god and god-like was at times less than clear to the population at large, and Augustus seems to have been aware of the necessity of keeping the ambiguity. As a purely semantic mechanism, and to maintain ambiguity, the court of Augustus sustained the concept that any worship given to an emperor was paid to the “position of emperor” rather than the person of the emperor. However, the subtle semantic distinction was lost outside Rome, where Augustus began to be worshiped as a deity. The inscription DF thus came to be used for Augustus, at times unclear which meaning was intended. The assumption of the title Divi filius by Augustus meshed with a larger campaign by him to exercise the power of his image. Official portraits of Augustus made even towards the end of his life continued to portray him as a handsome youth, implying that miraculously, he never aged. Given that few people had ever seen the emperor, these images sent a distinct message.
Later, Tiberius (emperor from 14–37 AD) came to be accepted as the son of divus Augustus and Hadrian as the son of divus Trajan. By the end of the 1st century, the emperor Domitian was being called dominus et deus (i.e. master and god).
Outside the Roman Empire, the 2nd century Kushan King Kanishka I used the title devaputra meaning “son of God“.
Although references to “sons of God“, “son of God” and “son of the LORD” are occasionally found in Jewish literature, they never refer to physical descent from God. There are two instances where Jewish kings are figuratively referred to as a god. The king is likened to the supreme king God. These terms are often used in the general sense in which the Jewish people were referred to as “children of the LORD your God”.
When used by the rabbis, the term referred to Israel or to human beings in general, and not as a reference to the Jewish mashiach. In Judaism the term mashiach has a broader meaning and usage and can refer to a wide range of people and objects, not necessarily related to the Jewish eschaton.
Gabriel’s Revelation, also called the Vision of Gabriel or the Jeselsohn Stone, is a three-foot-tall (one metre) stone tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew text written in ink, containing a collection of short prophecies written in the first person and dated to the late 1st century BC. It is a tablet described as a “Dead Sea scroll in stone”.
The text seems to talk about a messianic figure from Ephraim who broke evil before righteousness by three days. Later the text talks about a “prince of princes” a leader of Israel who was killed by the evil king and not properly buried. The evil king was then miraculously defeated. The text seems to refer to Jeremiah Chapter 31. The choice of Ephraim as the lineage of the messianic figure described in the text seems to draw on passages in Jeremiah, Zechariah and Hosea. This leader was referred to as a son of God.
The text seems to be based on a Jewish revolt recorded by Josephus dating from 4 BC. Based on its dating the text seems to refer to Simon of Peraea, one of the three leaders of this revolt.
Dead Sea Scrolls
In some versions of Deuteronomy the Dead Sea Scrolls refer to the sons of God rather than the sons of Israel, probably in reference to angels. The Septuagint reads similarly.
4Q174 is a midrashic text in which God refers to the Davidic messiah as his son.
4Q246 refers to a figure who will be called the son of God and son of the Most High. It is debated if this figure represents the royal messiah, a future evil gentile king or something else.
In 11Q13 Melchizedek is referred to as god the divine judge. Melchizedek in the bible was the king of Salem. At least some in the Qumran community seemed to think that at the end of days Melchizedek would reign as their king. The passage is based on Psalm 82.
In both Joseph and Aseneth and the related text The Story of Asenath, Joseph is referred to as the son of God. In the Prayer of Joseph both Jacob and the angel are referred to as angels and the sons of God.
This style of naming is also used for some rabbis in the Talmud.
In Islam, Jesus is known as Īsā ibn Maryam ( عيسى بن مريم, lit.‘Jesus, son of Mary’), and is understood to be a prophet and messenger of God (Allah) and al-Masih, the Arabic term for Messiah (Christ), sent to guide the Children of Israel (banī isrā’īl in Arabic) with a new revelation, the al-Injīl (Arabic for “the gospel”).
Islam rejects any kinship between God and any other being, including a son. Thus, rejecting that Jesus was the begotten son of God (Allah) or “part of” God (Allah). As in Christianity, Islam believes Jesus had no earthly father. In Islam Jesus is believed to be born due to the command of God (Allah) “be”. God (Allah) ordered the angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) to “blow” the soul of Jesus into Mary and so she gave birth to Jesus. Islamic scholars debate whether or not, the title Son of God might apply to Jesus in a adoptive rather than generative sense, just like Abraham was taken as a friend of God.
- Borgen, Peder. Early Christianity and Hellenistic Judaism. Edinburgh: T & T Clark Publishing. 1996.
- Brown, Raymond. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Doubleday. 1997.
- Essays in Greco-Roman and Related Talmudic Literature. ed. by Henry A. Fischel. New York: KTAV Publishing House. 1977.
- Dunn, J. D. G., Christology in the Making, London: SCM Press. 1989.
- Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds in Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing. 1993.
- Greene, Colin J. D. Christology in Cultural Perspective: Marking Out the Horizons. Grand Rapids: InterVarsity Press. Eerdmans Publishing. 2003.
- Holt, Bradley P. Thirsty for God: A Brief History of Christian Spirituality. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 2005.
- Josephus, Flavius. Complete Works. trans. and ed. by William Whiston. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publishing. 1960.
- Letham, Robert. The Work of Christ. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1993.
- Macleod, Donald. The Person of Christ. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1998.
- McGrath, Alister. Historical Theology: An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 1998.
- Neusner, Jacob. From Politics to Piety: The Emergence of Pharisaic Judaism. Providence, R. I.: Brown University. 1973.
- Norris, Richard A. Jr. The Christological Controversy. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1980.
- O’Collins, Gerald. Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. Oxford:Oxford University Press. 2009.
- Pelikan, Jaroslav. Development of Christian Doctrine: Some Historical Prolegomena. London: Yale University Press. 1969.
- _______ The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100–600). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1971.
- Schweitzer, Albert. Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study of the Progress from Reimarus to Wrede. trans. by W. Montgomery. London: A & C Black. 1931.
- Tyson, John R. Invitation to Christian Spirituality: An Ecumenical Anthology. New York: Oxford University Press. 1999.
- Wilson, R. Mcl. Gnosis and the New Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1968.
- Witherington, Ben III. The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1995.
- _______ “The Gospel of John.” in The Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. ed. by Joel Greene, Scot McKnight and I. Howard
Adapted from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia