I watched this movie ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ and noticed that he many times called himself “son of man”. why (i mean why would someone explicitly say that about himself)? and why do Christians call him “son of God” then?
share your suicide story
Report Post
Please log in to report posts
11 comments
Funny isn’t it?
Sixty-nine times in the Synoptic Gospels Jesus calls himself (the) “Son of man”, a Greek expression which in its Aramaic (and Hebrew) background could be an oblique way for indicating the speaker’s own self (e.g., Matt 8:20), or else simply mean “someone” or “a human being” (as in Ps 8:4, where it is a poetic variant for “man”). In Daniel 7:13-14 the “Son of man” seems to symbolize the angels (perhaps the archangel Michael) and/or the righteous and persecuted Jews who will be vindicated and given authority by God (Dan 7:18,21-22,27; 10:13,21; 12:1) rather than function as one individual, heavenly figure who represents the people.[16] What is clear from the evidence is that “Son of man” did not function in pre-Christian messianic expectations as a title for a deliverer expected to come in the last times. It was not even a sharply defined concept, with a specific content and reference. It could simply denote a member of the human race (Ps. 8:4) or be a way of pointing to a prophet’s insignificance and finite dependence in the face of God’s glory and infinite power. Therefore, God addresses Ezekiel ninety-three times as “son of man”.[
“son of man” seems very axiomatic to me. Just like the “hell/heaven tree,” it means what it says, and says what it means.
The creative interpretation of scripture, and the attempt to contort axiomatic statements into something “mystical” and “mysterious” is a product of the corrupted thought process taught through indoctrination into the psychological constructs of the group.
There is no need to define Jesus as “son of god,” or even as “god in human form.” There is no reason to make that invalid leap of logic (which is actually more like disregarding logic entirely).
Unless, of course, someone is so desperate to believe in the supernatural, that they try to twist everything into being connected to the meaning they’ve already chosen to take from it… even when it doesn’t really mean that.
Just tryin’ to blend in…
Dr. Zakir naik
Jesus is 100% God and 100% man. He calls himself the son of man because he came to earth to be born of a virgin. He calls himself the son of God because he is God. He is God in the flesh. He is the light of the world.
“All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” John 1:3-5
well from what i saw, he accepted himself as ‘the messiah’ very reluctantly and always avoided being linked to prevalent religious beliefs, although using them sometimes but more like blending his own meaning into them (like “kingdom of heaven is at hands”). i’m seeing many parallels between him and Buddha in the ways they spread their message in judaism and hinduism dominated society respectively.
all i’m wondering about is how he did those miracles.
I don’t think he did any actual miracles, i think people were not informed enough to know that what they were observing was not miraculous. People were generally very ignorant about all areas of science (physics, chemistry, biology, disease, anatomy, optics, etc.) back then. I think many of the miracles in the stories were outright fabrications, while others were simply mistakenly perceived as such by primitive people who lacked any basis for understanding what they had observed.
I think some people actually believed the miracles had occurred, while others simply went along with the group-think, as to not oust themselves from their preferred or perhaps only available compatible social structure. People need cooperation with others, to get along in this world (extremist survivalists notwithstanding). In the face of the ultimatum of “hell,” they dared not speak up, lest they be made examples of… which was apparently a common risk and practice at the time, and is still quite relevant today.
hmmm… but the raising of Lazarus from dead seems pretty baffling to me, because its quite a big claim to be fabricated out of nowhere. it was done openly and that too just by shouting. or did he go inside the cave (in texts) but it wasn’t shown in movie?
have you ever played that game as a child, where many sit in a circle, and one starts by whispering a message to the one next to him, and then he to the next, this process continuing until the message arrives again at the start point, but has changed?
bah,humbug