An article at Christianity Today by Collin Hansen, The Son and the Crescent: “Bible translations that avoid the phrase "Son of God" are bearing dramatic fruit among Muslims. But that translation has some missionaries and scholars dismayed.”
Hansen does a good job framing the debate.
Related Posts
Concerning the term 'the Son of God'
ReplyDeleteHere is an extract from my article on Jesus:
'It is the time-honoured Christian practice to read the New Testament gospels through the perspective of centuries of later church tradition. This later tradition developed in a very different environment to the milieu of Second Temple Judaism. Certain titles and expressions which had been used of or by Jesus underwent a radical semantic shift, resulting (to give but one example) in a title such as ‘son of God‘ acquiring a totally new and non-Jewish meaning in the Hellenistic world of the third and fourth centuries. The Catholic Church came to redefine the ontology of the man from Nazareth into categories of Greek philosophy and metaphysics.
Thus, the charismatic healer and prophet from Nazareth became a God. The doctrine of the Incarnation of God in Jesus has always scandalised Jews and, later, Muslims would also find it blasphemous, an unacceptable Christian dogma.'
From 'The Authentic Gospel of Jesus: Evidence That Demands Christians Rethink Their Faith'
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2007/the-authentic-gospel-of-jesus/