......"Son of God" means "Servant of God" in Hebrew.......

"Son of God" means "Servant of God" in Hebrew.



Bible agrees with Islam, not with pagan trinity:



The sections of this article are:

1- Comparison between Hebrew and Arabic.

2- "Son of God" is the same as "Servant of God" in Hebrew!

3- Articles with detailed proofs about "Son of God" means "Servant of God" in Hebrew.

4- Jesus "feared" GOD in the Old Testament: Another proof that he is a Servant.
5- Conclusion.







1- Comparison between Hebrew and Arabic:

In this article, I will prove that the Bible's "Son of GOD" translation is wrong, because it literally means "Servant of GOD" as Islam clearly defines it. I have shown ample evidence from Hebrew below.


The following definitions were taken from: http://www.thebabycorner.com/pregnan...ex=boy&begin=a

Important Note: Since "Abd" means "Servant of" in Arabic, and "Abel" means "Breath of" in Hebrew, then this means "Abel" in Hebrew could also mean "Servant of" or "Creation of", since it literally also means "Breath of".



The following Hebrew words and their definitions were taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_God

Important Note: Since "Beni" in Arabic means "People of", then this means that "Benie" in Hebrew also means "People of" or "Group of", or "Belongings of", which was falsely translated as "Sons of" throughout the entire Bible!



"In the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

This literature 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).

In Judaism, 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). In one midrash, the Torah is said to be God's "daughter" (Leviticus Rabbah xx.)"

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_God)

Important Note: "filial relation to God" means that a person or creation has a special place in GOD Almighty's Sight. Also, "sons of God" being identical with "the saints" means that the term "son of God" is not an accurate one in the sense of being physically or biologically "part of GOD" or "Son of GOD" respectively as the trinitarian Christians falsely claim.

Also, "In one midrash, the Torah is said to be God's "daughter'", further proves my point that "Son of GOD" today in the English bibles don't mean more than a "Creation of GOD" or "Servant of GOD"; perhaps a very dear or special servant of GOD Almighty, as the Torah was also called "daughter of GOD".

2- "Son of God" is the same as "Servant of God" in Hebrew!

"In modern English usage, the Son of God is almost always a reference to Jesus Christ, whom Christianity holds to be the son of the Christian God, eternally begotten of God the Father and coeternal with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

Human or part-human offspring of deities are very common in other religions and mythologies, however. For example in the Epic of Gilgamesh, one of the earliest recorded legends of humanity, Gilgamesh claimed to be of both human and divine descent. Another well-known son of a god and a human is Hercules.

A great many pantheons also included genealogies in which various gods were descended from other gods, and so the term "son of god" may be applied to many actual deities as well."

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_God)

Important Note: So as we can see, the "Son of GOD" theory originally comes from pagan Greek origins. And since most of the Bible's New Testament was written in Greek, then it had been without a doubt negatively influenced by such pagan theology, where Jesus being called "Son of GOD" is literally interpreted today as "part of GOD" or the "Creator of the Universe".



"In the Hebrew Bible Israel is both a man (Jacob, the son of Isaac) and the nation that descended from him.

Because of the shared name and organic identity, God speaks to the nation as though he were a single person. Israel is, in fact, God's son (Exod 4:22 — beni vechori yisrael; Deut 14:1 — banim atem l'Adonai; Jer 31:9 — ki hayiti le'yisrael le'av; Hosea 11:1 — mimitzrayim qarati livni).

Israel's Father nurtures him to grow up and become a worshiping servant (Exod 4:23 — "Let my son go that he may serve me")."

(http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/...ed-adonai.html)

Important Note: Here we see when Israel became GOD Almighty's "son", he reached the point of being GOD Almighty's "servant". This means that "son of GOD" is nothing but a "Servant of GOD" as clearly defined in Islam. It doesn't at all mean that the individual is part of GOD Almighty, or he is GOD the Father Himself.

This is further proven in this quote:

"The Inner Son Rescues His People
Read together, these texts make clear that the Plan (etzah) is set in God's mind. He will use the anointed one — and his circle of faithful-to-God disciples — as his agent for bringing rebellious Israel back to his sonship calling.

YHVH formed me from the womb to be His Servant,
to bring Jacob back to him,
in order that Israel might be gathered to Him.

It is too small a thing that you should be
my Servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob,
and to restore the preserved ones [netzurim] of Israel . . . (Isa 49:5, 6)

It's worth noting that the apostles Paul and Barnabas quoted this passage in reference to themselves, as being members of the Messiah's Remnant Israel (Acts 13:46-48; cf. Luke 2:32).

Thus, within the writings of Isaiah we observe the tensions, paradoxes, and hopes for fixing what is broken — both within God's servant people and in the creation as a whole. To accomplish this there are two who serve the Lord, two with the title "Eved." "

(http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/...ed-adonai.html)



Important Note: Again, we see that the Son of GOD's main responsibility is to Serve GOD Almighty and to Worship Him alone. So a Son of GOD is basically a Servant of GOD. Also, Jesus being called "Son of GOD" is also no different. Him being the "Son of GOD" means he is a Servant of GOD Almighty, or Abdallah, since "Abd" means "Servant of" and "Allah" means "GOD" or "The Supreme GOD Almighty above all gods".

3- Articles with detailed proofs about "Son of God" means "Servant of God":

Below are a list of articles that clearly prove from Hebrew resources that "Son of God" also means "Servant of God".



Article #1:

The following article was taken from: http://www.chick.com/information/bib...rorservant.asp.

(Emphasis below is mine)

Is Jesus "God's Son" or "God's Servant?"

Do you see a difference between these two Bible versions?

In the KJV, we find that Jesus is God's Son. In the NKJV, we find that He is God's servant. These are clearly not the same! The Greek word found in the text here is "pais". It can be used in Greek for either "son" or "servant." So which one is correct here?

The solution is simple: look at the context in which it is used. In English, we have many words that can have more than one meaning. If a translator, going from English to another language, came across the word "bear," he would have a choice of meanings. But it wouldn't take rocket science to figure out which one to use.

If the passage described a man with a heavy burden, the translator would understand that the man is going to "bear," or "carry" the burden. If, on the other hand, the passage described a hairy beast climbing a tree, the translator would understand the correct meaning here applies to a forest-dwelling animal that will eat nearly anything it finds. It's not really very hard.

Now look at the Bible passage above. What is being discussed?

"children of the prophets"
"covenant which God made with our fathers"
"in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed."

It's clear, isn't it? The passage is talking about "children," and "fathers" and "seed." The word "pais" means "son." But the New King James translators chose "servant." Why? They were not alone. The New World Translation, created by the Jehovah's Witnesses who deny the deity of Jesus, translated this word "servant" also. So do the NIV, ASV, NASB and other modern Bible translations.

Could it be that these modern translators disagree that "pais" can be translated "son?" No, the NKJV committee translates this very word as "boy," "child" or "son" in Matthew 2:16; 17:18; 21:15; Luke 2:43; 9:42; and John 4:51. Yet they refused to translate the word as "son" in this powerful sermon where Peter presents Jesus as Messiah and Son of God.

One has to ask, why were these translators so determined to deny the deity of Jesus in this passage? Is this a Bible you can trust with your eternal destiny?



Article #2:

From http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/l...1.2.3.15.html:

1.2.3.15 Jesus is God's servant

All of mankind are the servants of God. If a man were to own another man then that man would be his servant. Obviously this servant would be held in a lower regard than this man's own children (or himself). We do not usually find people telling their sons (or themselves): "come here my servant," or "Go over there my servant." Let us compare this with what God has to say about Jesus (pbuh):

Matthew 12:18: "Behold my servant, whom I have chosen."
Acts 3:13(RSV): "The God of Abraham, and of Isaac,.... hath glorified his servant Jesus."
Acts 4:27(RSV): "For of a truth against thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou hast anointed...."

The Actual Greek word used is "pias" or "paida" which mean; "servant, child, son, manservant." Some translations of the Bible, such as the popular King James Version, have translated this word as "Son" when it is attributed to Jesus (pbuh) and "servant" for most everyone else, while more recent translations of the Bible such as the Revised Standard Version (RSV) now honestly translate it as "servant." As we shall see in later chapters, the RSV was compiled by thirty two Biblical scholars of the highest eminence, backed by 50 cooperating Christian denominations from the "most" ancient Biblical manuscripts available to them today. Chances are that no matter what your church or denomination you are able to name, that church took part in the correction of the King James Version of the Bible which resulted in the RSV.

The exact same word "pias" is attributed to Jacob(Israel) in Luke 1:54 and translated as "servant":

"He hath helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;."

It is also applied to King David in Luke 1:69, and once again, it is translated as "servant":

"....the house of his servant David;" (also see Acts 4:25).

However, when it is applied to Jesus (e.g. Acts 3:13, Acts 4:27), NOW it is translated as "Son." (notice that it is not only translated as "son" but as "Son".) Why the double standard? Why the dishonest translation techniques?

"And verily, among them is a party who twist their tongues with the Scripture that you might think that it is from the Scripture but it is not from the Scripture; and they say, 'It is from Allah' but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while [well] they know it!"

The noble Qur'an, A'al-Umran(3):78

"The Messiah will never scorn to be a servant of Allah, nor will the favored angels. Whosoever scorns His service and is proud, all such will He assemble unto Him; Then as for those who believed and did good works, unto them will he pay their wages in full and shall increase them from His bounty. [But] as for those who were scornful and proud, He shall punish hem with a painful torment, nor will they find for themselves other than Allah any ally or champion"

The noble Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):172-174





Article #3:

The following excerpt was taken from: http://www.themodernreligion.com/com.../bible_son.htm

"Mr. Tom Harpur says in the preface to his book: "The most significant development since 1986 in this regard has been the discovery of the title "Son of God" in one of the Qumran papyri (Dead Sea Scrolls) used in relation to a person other than Jesus.....this simply reinforces the argument made there that to be called the Son of God in a Jewish setting in the first century is not by any means the same as being identical with God Himself." For Christ's Sake, pp. xii."

The article goes into great depth in refuting the polytheist trinity paganism. I recommend reading it.



Article #3:

The following excerpt was taken from: http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/god.html

"....And there is only one Jehovah God, who qualifies! In fact, the whole idea of Christ being just a man or lesser god, makes the Christian belief ridiculous.

Isaiah 43:10-11

"Ye are My witnesses, saith the Lord, and My servant whom I have Chosen: that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I AM He: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me.
I, even I, AM the Lord; and beside Me, There is No Saviour."

That word translated Lord there is in the Hebrew [yehovah] Jehovah. There is no god before who is the Saviour, and no god after. Jehovah God is the only possible Saviour. No man, nor superman, could accomplish the task of being burdened with all our sins, judged for them, and be resurrected without them. Even a non-Christians can understand the bankruptcy of any other idea. For when we actually stop to think about it seriously, it's quite ludicrous! Unless this man was the very revelation of God (the only one able to become sin for us, and withstand the judgment thereof), we have no Saviour! And that is exactly what God said in Isaiah chapter 43 verse 11. Who could accomplish such a feat to be a saviour? The answer in all reasonableness is, no one but Jehovah God is the Saviour."

Again, the article goes into great depth in refuting the polytheist trinity paganism. I recommend reading it.

4- Jesus "feared" GOD in the Old Testament: Another proof that he is a Servant:




Let us look at the following verses from the Bible:

1. A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.
2. The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him (Jesus)-- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of
counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD (Jesus fearing his GOD)--
3. and he will delight in the fear of the LORD. He will not judge by what he sees with his eyes, or
decide by what he hears with his ears;

(From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 11:1-3)

In regards to the Spirit of GOD Almighty resting on Jesus, please visit: The Spirit of GOD Almighty came upon others before and after Jesus in the Bible.

Anyway, a simple question here must be asked: How can Jesus be the Creator of the Universe if he feared GOD Almighty? Trinitarians often say "Jesus is the Son of God". And when one tries to get further elaboration from them about what exactly "Son of God" means, they end up telling him that Jesus is the Creator of the Universe.

Almost every single trinitarian Christian that I debated believes that Jesus is the Creator of the Universe.


Let us look at what Jesus said about himself and about GOD Almighty:

"I do nothing of myself (From the NIV Bible, John 8:28)"

"My Father (GOD) is greater than I (From the NIV Bible, John 14:28)"

"Father (GOD), into thy hands I commend my spirit (From the NIV Bible, Luke 23:46)"

"And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 24:36)"

Do these quotes suggest at all that Jesus is in the same level as the Creator of the Universe?

5- Conclusion:


As we've seen above, in Hebrew, "Son of God" can also be translated as "Servant of God", which literally means "Abdallah" in Arabic. Abd = Servant, and allah = Allah, or the Supreme GOD Almighty that is above all gods. So, Jesus being called "Son of God" does not mean anything about him being part of GOD or GOD Almighty Himself. It simply means "Servant of God" since Jesus existed among Jews and preached the Gospel to them.

Allah Almighty said: "And they say: "(God) Most Gracious has begotten offspring." Glory to Him! they are (but) servants raised to honour. (The Noble Quran, 21:26)"

Jesus himself in his own quotes in the New Testament refuted trinity as shown above. The Bible in the Old Testament also refuted trinity by saying that Jesus will have the spirit of fearing GOD Almighty in him.

How can GOD Almighty fear Himself? And why would the Creator of the Universe have any fear in Him?

Jesus clearly was the Servant of GOD Almighty as Islam claims. Jesus was the Jews' Messiah and Leader, and Allah Almighty's Messenger to them. But he was not part of GOD Almighty, nor His biological son.

Never say that... Blasphemy, may God forgive you.. Jesus was never Gods biological Son.. No Christian has ever believed that. Shame on you. :(

This is what you believe in.... Shame on you.

اقتباس:

---

Never say that... Blasphemy, may God forgive you.. Jesus was never Gods biological Son.. No Christian has ever believed that. Shame on you.

---

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة هشيم

This is what you believe in.... Shame on you.

---

No.. Truly it is not. It revolts me and saddens me greatly that you even think such a thing. What you imply for God to have a biological son in Jesus is blasphemy. I worry that you don't see this. :(

اقتباس:

---

No.. Truly it is not. It revolts me and saddens me greatly that you even think such a thing. What you imply for God to have a biological son in Jesus is blasphemy. I worry that you don't see this. :(

---

I am sorry, I 'never meant to cause offence.

We in Islam have a great respect for Allah. And we always have doxology "or exaltation, tasbihat" praising and appreciating Allah's creations ans signs. He has 99 best names/attributes. We usually open our dwha (invoking Allah) with exalting Him. Exalting and praising Allah in Islam is a great and long topic can not be written in one post.
But this meaning springs to mind when we hear Trinity. I am sorry and we are supposed to respect him not to talk about Him as if He is human being.




In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful
And it is He who begins creation; then He repeats it, and that is [even] easier for Him. To Him belongs the highest attribute in the heavens and earth. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise. (27)

If we leave out this sentences, which apparently Muslims, Christians and Jews refuse and regard as blasphemy and kfr.

But what about the whole article?




Peace to you.

I thank you for your gracious apology.

In regards to the article, I don't feel it of great importance as to how I personally view Christ Jesus. Jesus was given many titles from Son, messiah, rabbi and servant... Jesus was all these things and more. The problem I see here is just the Islamic view of what the term "son" means. What it does not mean, and has never meant is that Jesus was ever the biological son of God. So I see this is more an Islamic problem and not a Christian problem.

Christians refer to God as Father because that's how Jesus told us to call to God. Jesus claimed to have that close relationship and encouraged His followers to believe the same. I do not liken this term to my own father. God is Father of all, the term denotes family, and that's how we see ourselves as children of God. We love God our Father above all and everything we do in this our life by the grace of Him, Our Holy Father, we do to His Glory. I have absolutely no issue with the term servant used for Jesus, because Jesus did Gods the Fathers will as any servant would do as would also... any loving son. Yet in the term slave I see the connotation of obligation, I do not see any chance for loving community between master and slave. That's why you never really hear Christians refer to themselves as slaves to God, and yet we are. It's all just words. What's important is what you feel in relationship to God.

Peace to you.

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/clientsc...es/extra11.gif