Quote:
Originally Posted by MustafaMc  Could the same "mistranslation" have happened in the translation of the word that became "Son" when applied to Jesus because we know that Allah can not "father" or "sire" a son with a woman as we understand the process. |
I don't think that "Son" is a mistranslation because the Greek phrase
υιος του θεου (
huios tou theou) is very simple to translate.
υιος = son and [/i]θεου[/i] = God and
του is the definite article "the". The only thing that is tricky is to pay attention to the declension and case. In this instance
του θεου is in the genitive case which expresses possession. In certain grammatical constructions the genitive has other means, such as agency, but this is such a simple construction that it is quite easy to recognize that "son of God" (or literally "son of (the) God") is the proper English translation of the Greek phrase.
What you might wish to consider but didn't touch on is the possibility not of mistranslation, but misinterpretation of a correct translation. Remember, interpretation involves more than just getting the right word, but understanding what is meant by those words. Mustafa, you've been in my house and you have seen pictures on my walls of persons that I did not sire that I still call my children. Luke records a geneology of Jesus that goes from Joseph back to Adam:
Quote:
Luke 3
23Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,
the son of Heli, 24the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
25the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,
the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,
the son of Naggai, 26the son of Maath,
the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
the son of Josech, the son of Joda,
27the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
the son of Neri, 28the son of Melki,
the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
29the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,
the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, 30the son of Simeon,
the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
31the son of Melea, the son of Menna,
the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,
the son of David, 32the son of Jesse,
the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
the son of Salmon,[d] the son of Nahshon,
33the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram,[e]
the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,
the son of Judah, 34the son of Jacob,
the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
35the son of Serug, the son of Reu,
the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,
the son of Shelah, 36the son of Cainan,
the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
37the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,
the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,
the son of Kenan, 38the son of Enosh,
the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
the son of God.
|
(Let's leave aside some of the obvious anomalies in the list for another thread so that we can focus on the interpretation issue at the moment.)
Even if you don't speak Greek, you can probably see one of the interesting things in this passage:
Quote:
23και αυτος ην ιησους αρχομενος ωσει ετων τριακοντα ων υιος ως ενομιζετο ιωσηφ του ηλι
24του μαθθατ του λευι του μελχι του ιανναι του ιωσηφ
25του ματταθιου του αμως του ναουμ του εσλι του ναγγαι
26του μααθ του ματταθιου του σεμειν του ιωσηχ του ιωδα
27του ιωαναν του ρησα του ζοροβαβελ του σαλαθιηλ του νηρι
28του μελχι του αδδι του κωσαμ του ελμαδαμ του ηρ
29του ιησου του ελιεζερ του ιωριμ του μαθθατ του λευι
30του συμεων του ιουδα του ιωσηφ του ιωναμ του ελιακιμ
31του μελεα του μεννα του ματταθα του ναθαμ του δαυιδ
32του ιεσσαι του ιωβηδ του βοος του σαλα του ναασσων
33του αδμιν του αρνι του εσρωμ του φαρες του ιουδα
34του ιακωβ του ισαακ του αβρααμ του θαρα του ναχωρ
35του σερουχ του ραγαυ του φαλεκ του εβερ του σαλα
36του καιναμ του αρφαξαδ του σημ του νωε του λαμεχ
37του μαθουσαλα του ενωχ του ιαρετ του μαλελεηλ του καιναμ
38του ενως του σηθ του αδαμ του θεου
|
The term
υιος is used just once and applied to the whole list of names. Each of the other persons is baiscally "of ___________". Thus, Adam is "of God" (or the "son of God") in the same way that Isaac is "of Abraham" (or "the son of Abraham"). Now Muslims, Jews, and Christians don't agree on a whole lot, but we do agree on two things. (1) God created, he did not sire, Adam. (2) Abraham did in fact sire Isaac. Yet in one passage, one sentence, we see this term used to refer to both events.
Why is that important? It means that to say that Jesus is "the son of God" does NOT mean that one is saying that God sired Jesus anymore than it is to say that God sired Adam. But it is to say that Jesus is "of" God in the same way that Isaac is "of Abraham" and Adam is "of God". Well, how is that? They both come from, have their genesis, their beginnings, in the one they are said to be "of".
So, the phrase "Son of God" could mean several different things. It could mean that God sired Jesus -- but it doesn't. It could mean that God created Jesus -- but it doesn't mean that either. It simply means that Jesus is "of" God. That he comes from God, that he has his beginning with God in some way. To place futher interpretation into that term, one has to go beyond the mere words of the text and see how it is used in the context of the larger passages of which it is apart. It is in that reading, not the three-word phrase, that we see the divinity of Jesus being delineated and the term "Son of God" come into use as a title to mark his divinity for it is used and applied to Jesus in a completely different way than it is to Adam and others who are termed "sons of God" or "children of God".