An excellent article from the Gospel Coalition that explains that contrary to the pagan claims made by certain people “Son of God” simply means heir to David’s(as) throne as stated in Psalm 2:7:
Yes Christian scholarship explaining the context to the Jewish saying “Son of God” is nonsense. God is the King and he appointed other kings to be His deputies as a test. David(as) is adopted as the “first son of God” and every subsequent king is called that. Jesus(as) calling himself “the son of God” means he too is the rightful heir to David’s(as) throne. That is ALL it means, no idolatry, no being one in three it simply means that, pagan gentiles entering the fold who worshipped any and everything then changed it to him being a demi-god like their idols.
An excellent article from the Gospel Coalition that explains that contrary to the pagan claims made by certain people “Son of God” simply means heir to David’s(as) throne as stated in Psalm 2:7:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-son-of-god-is-the-son-of-david/
The first king of Israel should have been God and the rest, including David, should have been sons of God, according to this scheme. More nonsense.
@ Erasmus
Yes Christian scholarship explaining the context to the Jewish saying “Son of God” is nonsense. God is the King and he appointed other kings to be His deputies as a test. David(as) is adopted as the “first son of God” and every subsequent king is called that. Jesus(as) calling himself “the son of God” means he too is the rightful heir to David’s(as) throne. That is ALL it means, no idolatry, no being one in three it simply means that, pagan gentiles entering the fold who worshipped any and everything then changed it to him being a demi-god like their idols.