Why is Jesus favored over everyone else when it comes to being a Son of God - see below

Israel is My son, even My firstborn” (Exodus 4:22)

“for I (God) am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn.” (Jeremiah 31:9)

“the Lord hath said unto me (David): ‘Thou art My son: this day have I begotten thee.” (Psalms 2:7)

“For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” (Romans 18:14)

  • 1
    In quoting scripture you have missed out the important testimony of heaven (on two separate occasions) This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him. In Psalm 2, David is expressing words not his own. – Nigel J Jan 16 '20 at 16:09
  • What you need to better understand is the role of inheritance and birthright in Hebrew culture. This is a common colloquialism and a shorthand way to say that they have God's favor and inherit God's promise to Israel (the patriarch, then repeatedly the nation). Perhaps hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/37583/… and hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/24923/… will be helpful... – James Shewey Jan 16 '20 at 22:49

The big problem you have in your question Mr.theory is that your "assuming" Jesus Christ is a created human being like the rest of us, He's not. John 3:16 states, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life."

In other words, Jesus Christ is the "one and only" Son of God by virtue of Him having the same nature as His Father, which is deity. Jesus Christ did not have a human father. He had a human mother and this is one of the reasons Jesus is referred to as the "Son of Man." Jesus also referred to Himself as the "Son of God."

Jesus is the only person that has two natures, one on His Fathers side/deity, and one on His mothers side/human. It a universal law all sons and daughters share the same nature as their father. Also, the Bible makes it extremely clear that Jesus Christ came down from heaven.

John 3:13 which by the way is before John 3:16, "And no one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven, even the Son of Man." John 6:38, "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My will, but the will of Him/God the Father who sent Me."

Please note that Jesus says the Father "SENT" Jesus. Now, look at Isaiah 6:9, where it says, "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given." If someone is sent or is given that means they already exist. You can't send somebody (for example) to the store if they don't already exist.

Now, I specifically wrote on this very subject explaining what is means to be the "Son of God?" Please read the following:

There's a lot of things going on even before Jesus ask the question at Matthew 16:13, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" I'm going to work backwards in addressing your point. The Apostle John said at John 20:30-31, "Many other signs therefore Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book. Verse 31, But these have been written that you may believe THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST THE SON OF GOD; and that believing you may have life in His name."

At Matthew 26 which is the trial record the following is what the high priest Caiaphas as Jesus to swear to at verse 63, "But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest said to Him, "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether YOU ARE THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD." According to Luke's account at Luke 22:70, Jesus says, "Yes, I am."

At John 19:7 (according to John's trial record) it says, "The Jews answered him, (that is Pilate), We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because HE MADE HIMSELF OUT THE SON OF GOD."

At John 10:30, Jesus said, "I and the Father, We are one." At verse 31, "The Jews took up stones AGAIN to stone Him." Why? Verse 33, "The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man MAKE YOURSELF OUT GOD." Notice that the Jews left out the word, "Son." The Jews understood what Jesus meant when He said He and His Father are One. That is they are one in nature and essence. This is why they accused Him of blasphemy. Jesus is not blaspheming if He and His Father are one in purpose. And of course they are but that is not what is meant here.

Jesus then "escalates" the conversation by quoting Psalm 82:6 by saying (verse 34) "Has it not been written in your Law, I said you are Gods?" Verse 35, If he called them gods to whom the word of God came(and the Scriptures cannot be broken), Vs36, do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, "You are blaspheming, because I said I AM THE SON OF GOD."

So why did Jesus quote Psalm 82:6? I believe what Jesus is doing is taking the Jew's statement about Him blaspheming to its logical conclusion. That is to show that the Jews are being inconsistent. In effect, Jesus is saying, "If you say that I am blaspheming, you must also hold that God is blaspheming because He said to those by whom the word of God came, "ye are gods." Jesus in fact draws a clear distinction between Himself and those by whom the word of God came when He says that He was sanctified and sent into the world by God.

I could bring in John 8:58 where the Jews picked up stones to stone Him for claiming to exist before Abraham was born and Jesus says, "I am." Instead I want to bring up John 5:17-18. "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working. Vs18, For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."

So what does it mean to call Jesus "the Son of God?" The following is what C.S Lewis said. "Jesus is the only begotten Son of God (John 3:160, while Christians are adopted sons of God (Romans 8:15-17). Christians are called adopted sons of God because we are different from God and must become His children (hence, adopted, not begotten). Jesus is not called adipted because He never became God's Son, but has always been God's Son. Calling Jesus the only begotten Son of God mean that He is of the same nature as God, not a different nature. To beget is to become the father of; to create is to make. And the difference is this. When you beget, you beget something of the same kind as yourself. A man begets human babies, a beaver begets little beavers..

But when you make, you make something of a different kind from yourself. A bird makes a nest, a beaver builds a dam...Now that is the first thing to make clear. What God begets is God; just as what man begets is man. What God creates is not God, just as what man makes is not man. That is why men are not Sons of God in the same sense that Christ is."

It is a universal law that a son shares the same nature as its father. Now, there is something else at work here. The Jews have "idioms." One of those "idioms" is know as the "son of" idiom. For example, the title "sons of the prophets" is used throughout 1 Kings 2: to declare and authenticate the fact that the "sons" were indeed real, honest-to-goodness prophets. the distinguishing nature that the "father" and the "sons" share here is the gift of "prophecy" which they alone had.

The "idiom" is throughout the Bible including the New Testament. Son of peace (Luke 10:6) refers to a peaceful person. Sons of thunder is at Mark 3:17. One more, "Son of perdition (John 17:12; 2 Thessalonians 2:3) is the lost one or son of hell. Judas and the antichrist fit the bill here.

You will also notice that Jesus Christ Himself oftentimes referred to Himself as "the Son of Man" and the "Son of God." The "Son of Man" idiom demonstrates the human nature of Jesus on His mother's side. I think we have gone full circle in demonstrating that the meaning of the "Son of God" in the case of Jesus Christ is not just a son of God like men or angels. A question I like to ask based on the trial of Jesus is: "Why would the Jews accuse Jesus of blasphemy for claiming to be the son of God when the Jews themselves claim to be sons of God?"

  • How should we see -Melchizedek - According to the book of Hebrews, in chapter 7 and verse 3, the writer refers to Melchizedek the king of Salem (which later became known as Jerusalem) and a high priest of God Most High (cf. Genesis 14:18-20). What makes this rather astonishing is that the author claims that Melchizedek has no beginning or end of life, no parents, and no genealogy. – another theory Jan 16 '20 at 23:25
  • 1
    @anothertheory The writer is interpreting in that place in Hebrews. He makes spiritual allusions based on missing detail (no genealogy is recorded) and on present detail (priesthood and kingship). But the writer does not make the conclusion you are trying to force upon the passage (which you force because you wish to propagate "another theory".) – Nigel J Jan 17 '20 at 0:14
  • Excellent answer. Considerable effort. Much appreciated.Fully agree with your differentiating begetting and creating. – Nigel J Jan 17 '20 at 0:15
  • 1
    There are a few theory's as to his identity and one of them is Melchizedek is the preincarnate Jesus Christ. I don't believe this for a minute. At Hebrews 7:3,6 his priesthood is not dependent on ancestry. Also from Hebrews 7:7 his priesthood is greater than the Levitical priesthood. In short, our high priest is Jesus Christ and His reign will never end. Genesis 14:18, Melchizedek was king of Salem. Present day Salem is known as Jerusalem. I don't think the preincarnate Jesus Christ was the king of Salem. The preincarnate Jesus Christ is identified as the angel of the Lord in the OT. – Mr. Bond Jan 17 '20 at 0:37
  • @Mr.Bond 1 Your theory about God begetting God falls over as you have ignored a basic truth. While I agree Jesus and the Father are the same 'nature' - holy, without sin, righteous etc you have not allowed for the lineage from David thru Mary - a human substance to this new born child. And as Dottard included in a post, 'Mary... the mother of God' is a twist on scripture we can do without. 2 The Jews weren't accusing Jesus of being a son - they glossed over that to persist with the charge that could kill him - being God - or claiming equality with - Jesus never said either. – user48152 Oct 16 '20 at 4:36

I identified Persian kings in one of my posts, as a result you can calculate distances between events.

One of them being Jesus was born exactly 480 years after the consecration of the new altar in Jerusalem when the Jews came back from the Babylonian exile (1 Kings 6:1, John 2:19-21).

After the fact we can't witness the miracles Jesus did anymore, however this was an amazing result of my identifications which are anchored with historical facts.

  • Thank you for your comments - I attend a circle with mixed faiths and challenged with evidence from the bible which I am having difficulty answering. Hence the type of questions i ask. I have reasonable knowledge and do research. Having made the points you raise - this has been emailed to me - Psalm 2:7 7 I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, b“You are my Son; today I have begotten you. this relates to David. therefore Jesus is not the only begotten son. – another theory Jan 17 '20 at 10:37
  • Also when discussing the genealogy of Jesus - "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.” (Luke 3:38). Adam did not have a mother or father - does this and my previous comment make a difference to your analysis. – another theory Jan 17 '20 at 10:38
  • Hello another theory, – Evert Jan 19 '20 at 13:17
  • Hello another theory, for me the special distances, 120 for the length of the Babylonian exile and 480 years for Jesus birth (see also 1 Kings 6:1 and John 2:19-21) is a proof of Gods hand being involved. Nobody else would be able to make this so. – Evert Jan 19 '20 at 13:38
  • Hi Evert thank you for you comment - are you linking John 2:19-21 to the Crucifixion and to Matthew 12:40 'Jonah', anymore evidence to link. Also how do you calculate 3 days and nights. Do you agree with the 'CARM' analysis of the calculation. – another theory Jan 20 '20 at 11:35

Why is Jesus favoured over everyone else when it comes to Son of God ?

Only really one main reason - which leads to several other reasons.

Jesus was born without the corruption of sin that has infected mankind since Adam's sin. This was because the sinful nature was the default for everyone born of a human father. Jesus didn't have a human father. Rom 5:12

This enabled him to operate totally differently to every other human since Adam - he was 'at one' with the Father and his God in ways we can barely imagine.

Because of this, he was able to;

  • be a perfect sacrifice - the perfect Lamb without any blemish of sin or fault in any way. Rom 5:12-

  • be raised from the dead as death could not legally hold him (being sinless and not deserving of death) he was raised to a new spirit life, whereas he has previously died in the flesh. 1 Pet 3:18

  • become the first-fruit of the dead, the firstborn of many brethren into eternal life. Col 1:15-17 (the 'dead' isn't a state or being, but represents all mankind who is dead to sin - whether they are alive or not is irrelevant)Rom 6:23 Gal 2:19 etc. Which is also what, 'firstborn of all creation', is referring to - not the first born before anyone else, but the first to go from flesh and blood to spirit life. All creation(mankind) may follow now that he has done it first.

  • become the inheritor of all that God had made Heb 1:2

The bible never speaks of Jesus having two natures. Jesus himself said, 'I am a man who has told you the truth' John 8:40. We're either calling him a liar, or we are mis-understanding by calling Jesus God. God cannot die, Jesus died and was raised by his God and Father. (he didn't raise himself)

The bible never prophesied that the one to come would be God as a man. Jesus was made in the form of God or the image of God. Jesus himself used the coin showing Caesar to help us understand what an image is - it represents another. The impression of Caesar on the coin is NOT Caesar, but represents him with authority. Matt 22:19 Just as Jesus represents God. He did this by submitting to God and allowing God to do all things through him - miracles, words of wisdom and authority - including casting out demons and forgiving sin - not because he was God, but because God had given him authority to do and say Godly things. Matt 9:8 Jesus said he could do nothing of himself. Even his life came from the Father.

Jesus always said he has a God and told us the Father is the only true God, 1 Cor 8:6

Acts 2:36 God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”

We mustn't get sucked into the fable about the Jews claiming Jesus said he was God or equal with God by claiming to be God's son. The Jews had no idea what they were dealing with - they thought he had a demon! Jesus never claimed to be God, just the son of God (he didn't break the Sabbath either) There is not one verse claiming Jesus is equal with God.

God's plan to create Jesus through Mary was part of the plan from before the beginning - the perfect son, the perfect sacrifice, the perfect saviour, the perfect King.

For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you 1 Pet 1:20

  • Melchizedek & Adam had no mother or father. another issue is the meaning of word 'Begotten' can we really accept what it implies. Jews refer 'son of God' as followers of God not in the literal sense. – another theory Oct 22 '20 at 12:32
  • Sorry, I have no idea what yr talking about- bit of a jumble. – user48152 Oct 22 '20 at 12:37
  • You say Jesus is unique as he did not have a human father. Yet the others did not have a father or mother arguably more unique. Also can God really have a 'Begotten' son or doe this word have different meaning in the bible. my last point above was related to someone else saying Jew called themselves sons of God. – another theory Oct 22 '20 at 13:19
  • The begotten concept is not at all clear from Gr. Melchizedek is dubious interpretation too, Adam wasn’t without sin. No one fits the requirements like Jesus. – user48152 Oct 23 '20 at 4:12
  • I note your point, but they are more unique then Jesus, no Human mother or father. based on your initial point, Adam should also have no sin as he has no Human father. Jesus never said that he was literally the Son of God, many passages would argue against that point. Why need a Genealogy? 'Begotten' is relied on heavily to make this point - this is a low sexual act, how can that be attributed to God. Melchizedek - his in the bible, can we pick and choose for our own view point. – another theory Oct 23 '20 at 11:34

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.