From: hayek@eemips.tamu.edu (Khalil Hayek)
Subject: Re: Son of God(was Shaheed)
Organization: Texas A&M University
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:29:33 GMT

First I want to apologize for having posted multiple copies of some of 
my articles. There was something wrong with the "rn" I was using. [fill up
that /dev/null, guys :-) ]

In article <nabeel.722054491@oracle.sce.carleton.ca> nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Nabeel Ghuzlaan) writes:
>In <4402@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
>	[.......]
>   You misunderstood the idea. I will give you a simpler analogy to illustrate
>how God is '3 in 1'. It is analogous to that 
>     Nabeel Ghuzlaan = Bulbul = Normand Arthur Beeline = ... = ...
>The three alter egos are aspects of the same personality, although each one
>of them has its own character. I think now it is really xtal clear.
>   The idea that Jesus Christ is the son of God is not biological so, God
>(or His Wife) did not give birth, but it is a lingual means of saying that
>Jesus is less authoritative than the Father (usually referred to as God).
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^      

Authority does not have anything to do with it. Actually, in this context, 
saying that one has more authority than the other means that one is more 
`complete' than the other, which is not true since they are both the same
divinity. Jesus, as God, is the Father, with the same authority and all 
the perks. 
Now, Jesus, as a full human, is subject to the laws of nature and time, and
thus, is no different than any other human, in body and mind. He even had his
times of trial, when the devil tried to lure him, and when he was afraid of
the torture he knew he must go thru. 

>   Jesus was not betrayed by his chosen ones, from the start he knew that
>this Judas guy is going to betray him but he did not resist, it's his mission
>anyway.
>   To illustrate that being human does not "take away ...", imagine an
>intelligence officer who is disguised as an ordinary citizen, does that
>take anything from his authority; he is doing his job.

A couple of days ago you replied to my post on this subject and said that
(I don't have the exact words but you can quote me in a previous article)
if what was inflicted on Jesus does not take away from a man's esteem then
what does. Something in my head tells me you have not converted to Catholicism
in 48 hours, so where did you get this inspiration?

>
>" It is too hard to believe there is any logic behind this '3 in 1' theory.
>
>   Not after this article ;-)

Christianity is eternally in debt, mein Herr. 

>
>" If it was meant for all mankind to believe in, why is it that it is so
>" complicated to understand?
>
>   It is not that difficult to understand, and also it was invented to test
>humans faith.
>
>" And where is it written in the Bible that Jesus
>" supposedly proclaims that he is the son of God (astaghfir Allaho atheem)?
>
>   It is written in all the gospels that Jesus in the only son of God, but I
>do not remember where exactly, I think it is towards the beginning of every
>gospel.
>
>" Wouldn't that (shouldn't) also apply to Adam?  And didn't Jesus say that
>
>   No, of course not! Adam was created, but Jesus was an human incarnation
>slash manifestation of the son of God.
>
>" there is only one God and to worship Him only?  How can Jesus be the 'Son of
>
>   Yes, Jesus was referring to the Father.
>
>" Man' and the 'Son of God' (astaghfir Allah) at the same time?
>
>   You confuse yourself by interpreting the word "son" in the biological
>sense, it is not. Son of Man is Jesus' title when he sits for judging
>people in the Judgement Day.
>

Simply, Son of Man means that Jesus is a human, physically, and thinks like
a human, hurts, rejoices, etc... "Son" here is in the genetic/biologic sense; 
"Man", however, refers to the race not to a specific man, i.e., not to a 
biological father, but means that Jesus was a human, from the clan of David, 
and lived among humans and shared in their culture and society.

Son of God refers to his divine attribute,
and to the fact that he is God: "son" here is in the linguistic sense.

>" Are you Greek or Russian orthodox?
>
>   I am Hindi ;;-) (How do you wink with two eyes?)
         ^^^^^^
??? You can't be a language! And trust me, you wouldn't qualify for a Hindu.

>
>" Thanks -
>
>   100 ahlain.
>
>" Anisa
>
>** wA shra.h lahA ^an ... :-D
>                     Fahid Ballan
>
>  

Nabeel, Now you're writing as N A Beeline and defending Christianity? 
What's happening man? It won't be full moon for a couple of weeks now!

Cheers.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Khalil Hayek                -   hayek@eemips.tamu.edu                
-----------------------------------------------------------------------