“Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined ...” (Matthew 12:25-27)

“Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand? And if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.” (Matthew 12:25-27)

What does Jesus' statement about being 'divided' mean?

Jesus' statement follows criticism by the Pharisees after Jesus healed a blind and mute person.

Following the people witnessing this proclaiming that Jesus must be the “son of David” (see below), the Pharisees made offensive statements about Jesus, accusing him of being satan or a demon.

Jesus questioned these statements logically: Why would a demon remove other demons? That would create a house divided.

It would be like a kingdom divided against itself because when there is no common ground, things fall apart.

This logic by Jesus essentially proves to the Pharisees that Jesus was not satan or a demon.

How did Jesus cast out demons?

Jesus was able to extract demons utilizing the Spirit of God, who is the Supreme Controller, having the ultimate ability to control everything, including where demons live.

This contradicts any notion that God somehow has a competitor in satan. God has no competitor. The Supreme Being controls everything.

At the same time, however, the Supreme Being gives each of His children the choice of loving Him or not. For those of us who choose not to love Him - our natural need to love turned inward, producing self-centeredness.

This self-centeredness caused our downfall to the physical world, requiring us to take on these temporary physical bodies. This was described in Genesis:

The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. (Genesis 3:21)

Now, what would "garments of skin" be then? Are they animal skins as some have interpreted? Did God go out and kill some animals so he could skin their hides and give the skins to Adam and Eve?

That would be a preposterous notion. 

What is being described is the physical body. Adam and Eve were covered up with physical bodies. After all, our physical bodies are each covered by skin.

Who are the fallen angels?

The concept of fallen angels has been hinted at throughout the Scriptures. But who are they?

We see in the texts of Genesis 3 above how God banned Adam and Eve. They essentially fell as they were "banished" from the "Garden:"

So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life. (Genesis 3:23-24)

This confirms that not only were Adam and Eve pushed out of the Garden: They were also barricaded from returning. God put a barrier between them and the Garden.

This illustrates that the Garden wasn't just a plot of land in the East or Middle East. This is a story full of symbolism, and the Garden symbolizes the spiritual realm. Adam and Eve symbolize all of humanity. And where Adam and Eve went in their new skins (physical bodies) was the physical world - where we are all now.

Then we find in Genesis 6 that God saw humanity as becoming increasingly wicked:

When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. (Genesis 6:1-5)

What we find in the Scriptures is the story of how we ended up here in the physical world, and how we have become increasingly self-centered since our arrival.

Each of us at some point rejected our relationship with God. We became self-centered, and this initiated the process of us being booted out of the spiritual realm and sent to the physical world.

In other words, each of us in the physical world is - to some degree or another - a fallen angel.

Why are we here?

The reality that we are fallen angels may come as a surprise to some of us. We may think that we are really good people. We may even think we are one of the better people. Maybe we think we are pretty great.

This, however, is our disease. Feeling that we are great - or at least the most important person around - is why we have fallen. You see, the nature of the spiritual realm is that its residents don't think very highly of themselves. They love God and love everyone else. They are always caring about others. They do not see themselves as great.

This is why Jesus taught:

Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant ... (Matthew 20:25)

However, each resident of the spiritual realm also has the freedom to change, and become self-centered. This is because freedom is required for love to exist.

So we exercised this freedom to become self-centered. This led to our fall into the physical world, and our taking on a physical body. Why?

To allow us to express our freedom in the form of self-centeredness. Here, our self-centeredness can expand into lust, greed, envy and even violence as we chase the illusory dreams of the physical world.

In other words, while there is no competitor to the Supreme Being, there are many who have become, as a result of self-centeredness, envious of Him.

This is why so many of us strive to win. We want to be the champion. We want to be in first place and have everyone adore us. So each of us tries to find our little niche - our sport or skill - that we can win within.

What is this need to win? It is the desire to be king - to be adored and worshiped.

In other words, we want to occupy the post of God. We want to be God.

This is the strict definition of a demon - someone who is envious of the Supreme Being.

The purpose of this world and these bodies is to not only provide a place for us to expand our self-centeredness. It is also a place that can teach us - in hopes that we might one day choose that we would like to return to our relationship with the Supreme Being.

How does demon possession happen?

This concept of driving out demons has been quite controversial in modern times. Modern scientists have questioned the concept of demon possession, while the media has perverted the concept in movies and other dramatizations.

But now that we realize that practically every person within the physical world - to one degree or another - is a demon, we can now focus upon what is possession and what is demon exorcism.

We are not these physical bodies. We are each spirit-persons.

This means that our bodies are all possessed. For most of us, the possession of our physical body is sanctioned. It is an approved possession.

But if the spirit-person who is occupying this body has a defect - say a penchant for harming others - well that body is being possessed by a demon. This can be symptomized also by a mental defect, illustrating the demoniac trait through activities.

It is also to be understood that during Jesus' time, a physical disorder was often considered to be a demon. If someone had leprosy, for example, that was considered to be caused by a demon. In this case, the "demon" is a bacterial infection (leprosy is caused by an infection of Mycobacterium lepromatosis).

These points should broaden our understanding of what was considered to be a cleansing of a demon during Jesus' time. If someone was healed of a disease, their demon had been expelled.

Given these potential disorders during Jesus' time, we find that one could be healed of a physical or mental disorder, the development of an addiction, or darkness within the soul related to a person's consciousness, all of which could be described as cleansing a demon.

Jesus was able to help any of these instances because he could heal a person's physical body or mental defect by the power of God. He could also change a person's heart, therefore curing a mental defect or issue of consciousness.

The more remote type of possession is the outside influence of a spirit-person who isn't the rightful possessor of a particular physical body. This can occur in the case of a spirit-person who seeks to influence someone in another body.

Sometimes, when a person dies and remains attached to the things surrounding their former physical body - or they commit suicide - they may stay in the subtle regions of the physical dimension without a gross physical body.

Such a spirit-person may become an intruder by becoming influential to someone else's physical body.

This has occasionally occurred in cases of schizophrenia and something called the “Jekyll and Hyde complex.” Sometimes it is a defect of consciousness. Sometimes, but rarely, it is caused by the presence of an outside influence.

This type of outside influence could also be removed by Jesus according to the Scriptures. 

Jesus’ method was described repeatedly: He touched the person while he prayed to or praised the Supreme Being. The prayer and praise brought upon that person the Supreme Being's presence, which had the effect of healing the disorder or otherwise circumventing the outside influence. 

Jesus confirms this as he says above:

"But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.”

“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them ...” (Matthew 20:25-28)

“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave - just as the Son of man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:25-28)

What does this have to do with the mother of the Zebedees?

This statement by Jesus followed his discussion with the mother of the Zebedees - James and John - asked Jesus to take her sons into heaven. Jesus responded that they will follow him ("drink from my cup") but their entrance into heaven is up to God ("have been prepared by my Father"). 

That led to a reaction by Jesus' other apostles:

When the ten heard about this, they were indignant with the two brothers. Jesus called them together and said Jesus called them together and said ... (Matt. 20:24-25)

This means that Jesus' statements are specific to his disciples being "indignant" about Zebedees' mother asking Jesus to give preferential treatment to her sons.

What does Jesus mean by 'the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them'?

The word "Gentiles" is being translated from the Greek word ἔθνος (ethnos), which means, according to the lexicon, "a multitude (whether of men or of beasts) associated or living together - a company, troop, swarm;" and "a multitude of individuals of the same nature or genus - the human family - a tribe, nation, people group." 

More importantly, the lexicon also says this Greek word can mean, "foreign nations not worshipping the true God" and "pagans."

Jesus was referring to atheists. He was not speaking of the Gentiles as a particular race of people. Jesus was not referring to those who were by race not Jewish.

In other words, Jesus was not a racist.

Rather, Jesus is referring to those who do not accept the existence of the Supreme Being. Jesus is referring to those who reject the existence of God - atheists. This is what pagan means from a historical and practical perspective.

At the time, Judea was occupied by the Romans. And most Romans and many others from the Middle East at that time were not believers. They believed primarily in the pantheon - either the Greek pantheon or the Roman pantheon. In other words, they were polytheistic.

Jesus referred to such people not as a race but rather, according to their religious leanings. Therefore, the most appropriate word to translate ἔθνος in this context would be "atheists."

So what is the importance of atheists being ruled over? Jesus is referring to the Roman hierarchy and others that have ruled over Judea. We are speaking of people like Herod, who murdered John the Baptist, and Pontius Pilate, who ordered Jesus' persecution, and others.

Jesus is speaking of an atheistic governing body that was ruling over a primarily atheistic society. Jesus is contrasting this with the system prevailing in God's realm.

How is that system different?

In the Roman Empire and within many other hierarchical systems within the physical world, people are forced to accept the authority of the rulers of the society. And those who are in the ruling class struggle amongst each other for their positions of authority.

Thus, the hierarchy system of the physical world is based upon greed, violence, and self-centeredness, as those who seize power must battle with others who seek it in order to achieve their power.

This is not the structure of what Jesus was teaching. Jesus stated that "whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant ..." This is an entirely different system.

This is not the first time that Jesus has stressed the importance of spiritual humility.

In spiritual life, there is no struggle for authority. Everyone in the spiritual realm accepts the Supreme Being as the ultimate authority and ruler. And they seek the most humble position for themselves.

This is the system of love. When a person truly loves someone, they put themselves in an inferior position - seeking to please the one they love.

This is the position the citizens of the spiritual realm put themselves in relation to the Supreme Being. They want to please Him and thus they serve Him.

And because the Supreme Being loves each of His children, pleasing God also includes service to His children.

Why did Jesus talk about being a slave?

This is not precisely slavery as we consider it in the physical world. In the physical world, some people have forced others to become slaves. This is not what Jesus is referring to. The word "slave" here is being translated from the Greek word δοῦλος (doulos). When used metaphorically, the word means "one who gives himself up to another's will" according to the lexicon.

It is not as if the Supreme Being wants slaves. And those who love and serve Him aren't being forced to become His or other people's slaves.

What Jesus is referring to is voluntary service given out of love. The Supreme Being wants our love - and He gives us each the freedom to love Him and serve Him or not. Thus each of us has the freedom to choose to love and serve God and His children - or not.

But if we choose not to love and serve the Supreme Being and His children then we are left with emptiness, which produces self-centeredness. This eventually leads us to become a slave of the physical world as we seek our happiness away from the Supreme Being.

But one who seeks to please the Supreme Being will find humility as their foundation. This is because the spiritual realm is full of love and everyone seeks the position of loving servant. The phrase, "whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant" renders the concept of service as the measure of advancement, rather than having authority over others - as it is within the physical world.

Why did Jesus say that he 'did not come to be served, but to serve'?

This clarifies how Jesus sees himself. He is not seeing himself as God - as many will attribute to him. Rather, Jesus sees himself as a servant. A servant of the Supreme Being, and a servant of humanity.

This is precisely why "servant of humanity" is the more appropriate translation for the Greek phrase being translated to "Son of man" - υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.

The Greek word that has been translated to “son” is υἱός. While this can indicate a relationship of offspring in the context of a physical family, in this context, as defined in the Greek lexicon, is "one who depends on another or is his follower."

And how would one properly describe someone who depends upon another and/or is his follower? We would call such a person a devoted follower or a loving servant. We know that Jesus is not speaking of becoming a follower of others. Rather, Jesus is speaking of service to others. And Jesus confirms this very meaning when he says he, "did not come to be served, but to serve."

Now if someone says they came to serve, are they not a servant?

Who did Jesus come to serve?

Jesus' teachings indicate that he is God's devoted loving servant: the loving servant (υἱός) of God (mistranslated as "son of God").

But Jesus is also referring to himself in this statement and elsewhere as, υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.

The Greek word, ἀνθρώπου, can either mean "man" or more broadly "mankind," "humankind" or (in context here) "humanity," and τοῦ means "of."

In other words, the Greek phrase υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (used in the statement above), is more appropriately translated to: "Servant of humanity."

Jesus clearly states that he and his followers are to be considered servants, not masters. Their position is to serve, and not be served.

What is a disciple?

The New Testament mentions the word "disciple" or "disciples" 297 times. Obviously, this is an important topic. What does it mean?

The Greek word being translated to "disciple" is μαθητής (mathētēs). According to the lexicon, the word means "a learner, pupil, disciple." It also means "adherents." That means in this context, a dedicated follower.

We must remember that Jesus is speaking to those who have taken the position of becoming Jesus’ disciples: They were his students, in other words. The word "disciple" is derived from the word "to discipline". 

This process of becoming the student and follower of the spiritual teacher had been handed down through the ages among the great teachers such as Moses, Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and so on (consider for example Eli and Samuel, or Moses and Joshua). Jesus also illustrated this process as well, when he became the disciple of John the Baptist by accepting baptism from John.

This ancient process of accepting an enlightened spiritual teacher, who has himself accepted a spiritual teacher, was heralded and exalted throughout the ancient world of Judaism. This is also the reason why many considered Jesus the υἱὸς (mistranslated as "son") or follower of David (such as in Matt. 20:30). Certainly, Jesus could not physically be David's son, as David had lived about (according to some scholars) a thousand years before Jesus.

Now Jesus is telling his students that in order for others to become eligible for entry into the spiritual realm, they must become loving servants of God. This also means becoming a student of God's messenger in order to come to know God.

This is also the path empowered by God. It is only God who can ultimately empower one of His servants to become His messenger. But first, they must be introduced to God. This is the true initiation process into the kingdom of God. It is about having a relationship.

This system has been all but forgotten among many institutions, which today select their teachers through elections by councils of people. Such political processes ignore the personal relationships that exist between the Supreme Being and His messengers.

What did Jesus mean when he said, 'to give his life as a ransom for many'?

This is one of the key phrases that some teachers cite to claim that Jesus died for everyone’s sins.

But if this were true, no one would face any consequences for their actions. We know this by simply looking around and looking at our own lives: Every self-centered activity produces a reaction.

The physical world is the world of consequences. "As you sow, so shall you reap" is the scriptural phrase used. We can see this cause and effect everywhere in the form of suffering as well as achievement. People are suffering in the world, not because of some cruel joke by God. There is suffering in the world because suffering is a consequence of previously causing the suffering of others - either in this life or the previous one.

This consequence learning system was accepted by Jesus as he stated:

"Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you." (John 5:14)

This was spoken to a person Jesus had healed. He was clearly indicating that sinning (self-centered activities) produces consequences.

So how did Jesus "give his life as a ransom for many" then?

Notice Jesus does not say "all" here. He is not speaking of granting a free pass for everyone just because he suffered on the cross.

Rather, Jesus is speaking of his accepting the persecution and murder of his physical body in order to teach us the importance of loving and serving the Supreme Being. Such a lesson - if we choose to learn it - has the ability to truly save us and purify our consciousness.

Just consider the importance of something that someone is willing to give up their physical life for.

When our consciousness is purified by the understanding of the importance of love for God, we have the ability to transcend the physical world and its various consequences and return to the spiritual realm.

Jesus confirmed that his act was an act of loving service to the Supreme Being (and all of humanity) when he prayed just before his arrest:

“My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.” (Matthew 26:39)

“What do you want me to do for you?” (Matthew 20:32)

Jesus said this to two blind men who sitting by the roadside as he was walking with a procession down the road:

As Jesus and his disciples were leaving Jericho, a large crowd followed him. Two blind men were sitting by the roadside, and when they heard that Jesus was going by, they shouted, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!" The crowd rebuked them and told them to be quiet, but they shouted all the louder, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!" Jesus stopped and called them. "What do you want me to do for you?" he asked. "Lord," they answered, "we want our sight." Jesus had compassion on them and touched their eyes. Immediately they received their sight and followed him. (Matthew 20:29-34)

Was Jesus really the son of David?

According to this translation, the blind men greeted Jesus as "Lord, Son of David." Really? What does that mean? David lived nearly a thousand years prior to Jesus.

The Greek phrase υἱὸς Δαυίδ is typically translated to "son of David" in most versions of the Bible. But could they or would they accurately address Jesus as the son of David? Was David, who was born about 900 years before Jesus was born, really Jesus' father? How could that be so?

Or do they mean that Jesus was a part of the family genealogy of David?

Two books of the New Testament (Luke and Matthew) illustrate two yet different genealogies that theoretically connect David to Joseph. However, Joseph was Jesus' adoptive father. So Jesus was not actually a genetic relative of David assuming these genealogies. This means that Jesus' body could not even be the great-, great- (et al.) grandson of David.

Furthermore, the modern texts of the New Testament indicate that Mary was a virgin. This means what is termed the immaculate conception - meaning that Jesus didn't have a physical father at all.

If these points are true - how could Jesus rationally be called the "son of David"? And how could Bible translators logically translate this phrase to "son of David"?

Could 'son of David' be a mistranslation?

The word "son" in this phrase has been translated from the Greek word υἱὸς. 

Yes, this Greek word υἱὸς can mean "son" when used in the context of a physical family. But it can also mean,  "one who follows or is dependent upon another," according to the Greek lexicon. 

This latter meaning, according to Thayer's lexicon, translates to being a follower or a pupil. Furthermore, Thayer also evidences the use of the word in the context of being a representative.

In other words, the more appropriate translation of υἱὸς Δαυίδ is that Jesus was a follower of David, a student of David, or a representative of David within the context being spoken of in this conversation.

Jesus was not the physical offspring of David. Rather, he was in line with the teachings of David and was a follower of David's teachings. We know this because Jesus often quoted David. Jesus even quoted David during his last moments on the cross.

What about the genealogy linking Jesus to David?

Let's review the details of what was said above regarding the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. 

In both Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23, we find that both genealogies are linking Jesus through Joseph.

Yet we also find both Gospels state that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. This means Joseph was not Jesus' father.

We also find that both Gospels suggest otherwise that Joseph, who was much older than Mary, was not the father of the child:

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 1:18)

This would indicate that Joseph was not Jesus' father. Therefore, both genealogies are not portraying Jesus' ancestry.

We should also note that Matthew utilizes the terms υἱός, defined above; and γεννάω, a word that can mean "to begat or give birth" but also "imparting to them spiritual life" according to Thayer's lexicon.

This means that both of these supposed genealogies may have intended originally to describe the teaching lineage of Jesus - rather than Jesus' physical ancestry.

Regardless of the original intent, it is clear that for thousands of years, and among ancient Judaism, the teachings of love for God had been passed down personally from teacher to student. From devoted teacher to devoted student, the truth was passed on for centuries.

In some but not all instances, the student was also the physical son of the teacher, such as Jacob and Joseph. 

But then we find that Joshua was not Moses' son. Nor was David Samuel's son, or Saul's son. And Samuel was not Eli's son. And Lot was not Abraham's son. Nor was Melchizedek Abraham's father. Yet in all these and other instances the student was not the son of the teacher.

Genealogy has been highlighted among the translations of the Bible is rooted in the penchant among some institutional temples (which Jesus argued against) to establish the notion of there being a "chosen people." As though being born within a certain family gave one person greater rights to being devoted to God.

This notion is not only untrue historically as pointed out above. It also bears witness against the very nature of the teachings of the Prophets: That any one of us could devote our life at any time to the Supreme Being.

Indeed, each of us has the opportunity to worship God. The family our body is born into does not dictate that opportunity.

Servants instead of sons?

A follower, pupil or representative as noted above, would be an appropriate translation of the Greek word υἱὸς. These also yield another possible translation in the context of a devotional relationship. One of deference or service to another:

"The greatest among you will be your servant." (Matthew 23:11)

From Jesus' statement in Matthew 20:32, these are not the words of someone who feels in charge. Jesus did not greet the blind men as though he were their ruler or master. He spoke to them humbly, as he cared for that person's welfare: “What do you want me to do for you?”

This is a statement of someone who is in the service of another.

The concept that Jesus was a servant of God is supported by Jesus himself. In many instances, such a position was translated into the word "son" or "sons" when Jesus was referring to "servant."

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons [servants] of God.” (Matt. 5:9)

and

"For they cannot die any more, because they are equal to angels and are sons [servants] of God, being sons [servants] of the resurrection." (Luke 20:36 RSV)

Jesus also uses the word υἱὸς to refer to "servant" or "follower" elsewhere:

"while the sons [servants] of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth." (Matt. 8:12 RSV)

and

"Can the sons [servants] of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they fast." (Matt. 9:15 ASV)

In all of these statements, we find the Greek word υἱός being used by Jesus, and none of them refer to a physical offspring. They all refer to people devoted in some way, to either God and the resurrection, "the kingdom," or to the bridechamber (Matthew 9:15 has also thus been translated to "attendants of the bridegroom" (NASB)).

To this, we add other statements from the and there are multiple references to "sons of God" among the English Bible translations:

When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them the sons [servants] of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. (Genesis 6:2)

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons [servants] of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. (Genesis 6:4)

Now there was a day when the sons [servants] of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. (Job 1:6)

Again there was a day when the sons [servants] of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. (Job 2:1)

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons [servants] of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:7)

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons [servants] of God." (Matt. 6:9)

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons [servants] of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons [servants] of God. (Romans 8:14)

For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons [servants] of God. (Romans 8:19)

These all point to "sons of God" being used to describe devoted servants of God.

Other statements in the Bible confirm this interpretation:

…the sons [servants] of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. (Genesis 6:2)

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons [servants] of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. (Genesis 6:4)

Could Jesus be considered the servant of David?

This, of course, is also consistent with the translation of υἱὸς in context as described above. In various verses, υἱὸς is used in connection with God (υἱός τοῦ θεοῦ), with David (υἱός τοῦ Δαυίδ) and with all of humanity (υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου). (τοῦ means "of"). So rather than Jesus being the son of everything:

• the son of David
• the son of God
• the son of man

Jesus actually saw himself (and others saw him) as their loving servant:

• the servant (or devoted follower) of David
• the servant (or devoted follower) of God
• the servant of humanity

In the context of Jesus, we must add that the term υἱός τοῦ θεοῦ may be better translated to "Representative of God." This was also pointed out in Thayer's lexicon, "the Jews called the Messiah o vios tov Oeov pre-eminently, as the supreme representative of God."

Jesus was not simply pretending to be a servant. He sincerely felt that he was a servant of others and God. He took the lowest position. Remember, for example, when Jesus washed his disciples' feet. Jesus was not assuming the position of boss or master. He saw himself as a loving servant of God and humanity. And this is why he said to the blind men: "What do you want me to do for you?"

This means that Jesus is not God. He is the loving servant and representative of God. Like any loving servant, Jesus has a oneness with God because he is doing God's will. This means they are one in will. Thus Jesus spoke words from God. He represented God and did God's will. This means that Jesus was His exalted representative and loving servant.

" 'From the lips of children and infants you, Lord, have called forth your praise'" (Matthew 21:16)

The blind and the lame came to him at the temple, and he healed them. But when the chief priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he did and the children shouting in the temple courts, "Hosanna to the Son of David," they were indignant. "Do you hear what these children are saying?" they asked him. "Yes," replied Jesus, "have you never read, " 'From the lips of children and infants you, Lord, have called forth your praise'?" (Matthew 21:16)

Is Jesus referring to one of David's Psalms here?

Let’s read the full context of the Psalm of David that Jesus is referring to in his statement above:

O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is Your Name in all the earth! You have set Your glory above the heavens. From the lips of children and infants You have ordained praise because of Your enemies, to silence the foe and the avenger. When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have set in place, what is man that You are mindful of him, the son of man that You care for him? You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honour. You made him ruler over the works of Your hands; You put everything under his feet: all flocks and herds, and the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, all that swim the paths of the seas. O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is Your Name in all the earth! (Psalms 8)

The key phrase they use to interpret that David is discussing Jesus is:

When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have set in place, what is man that You are mindful of him, the son of man that You care for him?

Is Psalm 8 about Jesus?

Some have interpreted that Jesus quoted this phrase from Psalm 8 because Jesus was trying to indicate that David's Psalm was prophesying about Jesus.

This is simply a stretch of the imagination. There is no indication from the Psalms or from Jesus that this was about Jesus.

As detailed below, David is referring to himself as the "son of man," just as Daniel and Ezekiel were both referred to as the "son of man." 

Furthermore, the crowds were not praising Jesus as the son of David as has been inappropriately translated from the Greek word υἱός. David was not Jesus' ancestor as has been sometimes acclaimed.

In this context, this Greek word translates to, "one who depends on another or is his follower." Thayer further defines the Greek word as "representative."

In other words, Jesus was a follower of David and the representative of David. This is why he often quoted David's Psalms in his preaching.

In other words, they were proclaiming Jesus to be a teacher within David’s teaching lineage - and the focus of David’s teachings was the praise of God, as he illustrated throughout the Psalms.

Was David referring to himself as the 'son of man'?

Yes. David referred to himself as the "son of man" in these verses. In fact, many other statements in the Bible refer to different people outside of Jesus as "son of man." Consider these verses:

God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? (Numbers 23:19)

"how much less man, who is but a maggot — a son of man, who is only a worm!" (Job 25:6)

He [God] said to me, "son of man, stand up on your feet and I will speak to you." (Ezekiel 2:1)

He [God] said: "son of man, I am sending you to the Israelites, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against me; they and their fathers have been in revolt against me to this very day. (Exe. 2:3)

(God referred to Ezekiel as the servant of humanity ("son of man") continuously, as evidenced by over 80 verses in Ezekiel).

As He came near the place where I was standing, I was terrified and fell prostrate. "son of man," He said to me, "understand that the vision concerns the time of the end." (Daniel 8:17)

So here we can see that Daniel was also referred to as a "son of man" (servant of humanity), as was Ezekiel, Job, and David - and of course, Jesus.

(Note that these are from NIV 1984. In 2011, NIV editors edited out "son of man" from many of these verses. These "son of man" translations still exist in most other Bible versions.)

Is 'son of man' a mistranslation?

In Hebrew, "son of man" is being translated from the phrase, בֶּן־אָדָם - which breaks down into בֵּן (ben) and אָדָם ('adam). The word בֵּן (ben) can mean "son" but also "a member of a guild, order, class" according to the lexicon. And אָדָם ('adam) refers to "man" or "mankind" or humanity."

When translated from the Greek - as spoken by Jesus regarding himself - the phrase is υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. The word υἱὸς means "son" or "devoted follower" or "loving servant" while τοῦ means "of" and ἀνθρώπου means "man" or "mankind" or "humanity."

Thus we find the translation to "son of man" actually has no real meaning - as every male is a son of a man and thus has no reference to prophets such as David, Job, Daniel, and Ezekiel, nor to Jesus - we find the more appropriate translation of both the Hebrew and the Greek phrases to be: "servant of humanity"

As truly these prophets, as well as Jesus, were in a position where they were serving all of humanity by giving others knowledge of the Supreme Being.

And this is the ultimate service to humanity because we are lost without the Supreme Being. Our life has no meaning without our relationship with God.

In other words, Jesus was not the only servant of humanity ("son of man"). A servant of humanity is someone who is sent by God (as in Ezekiel) to save people by bringing them home to God.

The phrase also indicates humility - just as the phrase "civil servant" indicates a government employee who considers himself a servant of the people.

Jesus illustrated his position as a servant to others in his washing the feet of his disciples. He also said specifically:

“Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.” (Mark 9:35)

Certainly, Jesus included himself in this instruction, as he considered himself to be υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου - servant of humanity.

The bottom line is that the meaning of David's 8th Psalm was not to predict Jesus' coming as misinterpreted by ecclesiastical sectarian teachers. It was clearly intended to praise God and give thanks to the Supreme Being.

With ‘From the lips of children and infants You have ordained praise" David is saying (and Jesus is referring to this) that God deserves praise from even the children - let alone everyone else.

David is saying that he is in awe of God David is amazed that God would care about even the most humble of men such as himself, relatively insignificant compared to the gigantic universe. David then goes on to discuss man’s position on the earth - that man rules over the flocks and herds and so many other animals. This is confirmed in Genesis:

“Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” (Genesis 1:26)

Remember that according to these ecclesiastical translations and interpretations, Jesus is being referred to as the “son of David” and the “son of God,” as well as the “son of man.” How is Jesus the “son” of all these at the same time?

Factually, he was the son (physical male offspring) of none of them. Even with regard to David, Jesus' genealogy only established a supposed family tie (although given differently in Matthew and Luke) with Joseph, who was according to the texts, Jesus' adoptive father and not his hereditary father. So if we are to accept that Mary was a virgin or at least Jesus was not Joseph's son, then Jesus could neither be David's physical son - or even great, great.... grandson according to the texts.

God wants us to return to Him. He knows that we will be happy only when we are back in His loving arms. So He calls to us from within our hearts. He sends His loving servants to try to convince us to come home. He calls us from within the scriptures. All of these activities are because loving God is not an empty phrase. Loving God means returning to our loving relationship with our Best Friend and Soul Mate - the Supreme Being. This is the consistent teaching of all the prophets as evidenced by Jesus' and Moses' very clear instruction:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matthew 22:37-38 and Deuteronomy 6:5)

"Therefore go and make disciples ... teaching them ..." (Matthew 28:18-20)

When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:17-20)

Why does it say 'some doubted'?

When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.

Why would they doubt? They were looking right at Jesus, weren't they?

As evidenced by the previous verse about Jesus asking the Marys not to be afraid, they didn't recognize Jesus. This is because Jesus was not appearing to them in his physical body. If he was appearing in his physical body they would have immediately recognized him without a doubt.

But Jesus didn't appear in his physical body, because his body died. At the time of death, Jesus rose up and left his physical body.

This also means that when he appeared to his disciples at Galilee, some did not believe it was Jesus because they did not recognize him.

They did not recognize him because he had risen from his physical body at the time of death.

And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. (Matthew 27:50)

The phrase, 'gave up his spirit' means the spirit of Jesus left his body. Jesus' spirit left his body. This is the definition of death - the spirit-person leaves or passes away from the body.

This is also confirmed in the Book of John when the soldiers tested to make sure Jesus was dead. His body was dead:

But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. (John 19:33-34)

Indeed, Jesus' own disciples confirmed that Jesus' body was dead:

Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. When he learned from the centurion that it was so, he gave the body to Joseph. So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. (Mark 15:43-46)

What did the disciples see and what happened to his body?

If Jesus' physical body was dead and his spirit had passed away (risen from the body), then what appeared to his disciples was an apparition - the spirit of Jesus. This is why some doubted.

This might bring up the question of what happened to Jesus' body if they did not find it in the tomb on the third day. We find that Jesus' body was put into a tomb, as was the custom during those times:

As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus' body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,  and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away. (Matthew 27:57-60)

We also find clear evidence that the tomb Joseph put Jesus' body into was not to be his permanent resting place:

Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jewish leaders. With Pilate's permission, he came and took the body away. He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. Taking Jesus' body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs. At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there. (John 19:38-42)

This indicates that the tomb that Joseph of Arimathea brought the body to was not meant to be Jesus' permanent burial tomb. The statement, "since the tomb was nearby" indicates that this location was a matter of convenience. Because of the holiday and the lack of resources, they could not properly bury Jesus' body.

The earlier verses indicate that this was Joseph's tomb. Matthew states, "placed it in his own new tomb." It was against Jewish law to bury a body in another family's tomb.

These points mean that Jesus' body would have to be moved to his own family tomb.

It is also possible that the soldiers who were guarding the tomb also moved Jesus' body. They didn't want someone to take Jesus' body so they removed it and hid it away.

Whatever happened, the bottom line is that Jesus had left that body behind. This is why others were handling the body - because it was dead. Jesus wasn't operating that body any longer. 

As far as the stone goes, the verses above indicate that Joseph rolled the stone in front of the tomb himself. Thus rolling the stone away to access Jesus' body would have been quite easy for the guards, Joseph or anyone else who wanted to move Jesus' body to a more permanent tomb.

Archaeology research has suggested multiple tomb potentials where Jesus' body ended up being buried.

Why did Jesus Jesus instruct them to teach?

This statement by Jesus directly contradicts the doctrine that Jesus' crucifixion in itself saves us and cleanses our sins. If this were true, then why would he ask them to go out and pass on his teachings? And why didn't Jesus teach or ask his disciples to teach that his crucifixion would save everyone and cleanse everyone's sins?

We should also note that the teachings of James and others did not state that Jesus' crucifixion would save everyone. This was Paul's teaching - and Paul was not a disciple of Jesus. Paul argued with James and Peter with regard to this and other teachings.

For those who did understand that this was the spirit-person of Jesus, Jesus then instructs them to go out and teach to others what he has taught them. This can be broken down into three instructions:

- Pass on his teachings throughout the world ("all nations")
- Teach what Jesus taught ("teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you")
- Make disciples so they would teach others; ("go and make disciples")

All three of these instructions are related to preaching what Jesus taught. This means teachings precisely what he taught - not making up a new doctrine as the Pauline philosophy and Nicene Creed perpetuated.

Why did Jesus Jesus instruct them to make disciples?

If all we need to do is accept that Jesus died for our sins then why did Jesus instruct his own disciples to go out and make their own disciples? Why couldn't everyone just accept Jesus' crucifixion saves us as is being taught by so many today?

Jesus became a disciple of John and then took on his own disciples. Then he taught them the teachings that were also taught by John the Baptist.

John in turn was teaching the same teachings that had been passed down for centuries through the Prophets and a lineage of teachers that included Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, Eli, Samuel, David, Solomon, Isaiah and Zechariah - John the Baptist's teacher and father.

Jesus is now empowering his disciples to go out and teach and make disciples of their own. Just as Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist, he is telling them to go out and do the same as he has done. He is instructing them to carry on his teachings as he had done with John's teachings.

Baptism is the same process as "anointing," described in the Old Testament. It is a ritual that represents the spiritual teacher accepting a follower as a disciple. A disciple is essentially a dedicated follower.

Today baptism has descended into a ritual signifying the joining of a particular sect.

The original intent was to signify a change of heart and a dedication of our life to the Supreme Being. While the ritual is not necessary to achieve love of God, the dedication that it was meant to signify is the cornerstone of spiritual growth. 

The ritual of baptism was never the important part. The important part is the dedication that takes place within the heart. A person who dedicates their life to following the teachings of love of God, then passes on those teachings is a disciple regardless of whether they have undergone the ritual.

But Jesus underwent the ritual in public because he wanted others to understand that becoming dedicated to the teachings of God's messengers is important. It was a public display of dedication to God.

What does 'in name of the Son' mean?

Jesus says to baptize them "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." What does this mean?

The word "son" is a mistranslation in this context. This word comes from the Greek word υἱός (huios). This word, according to the lexicon, can only mean "son" "in a restricted sense." This "restricted sense" would apply only to, "the male offspring (one born by a father and of a mother)."

This, however, is not the only meaning of the Greek word translated to "son."

Thayer's lexicon also defines υἱός (huios) as: "used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower."

What is a person who "depends on another or is his follower"? A person who depends upon another is a dependent.

And a person who follows another is a follower - someone devoted to that person.

This can better be described as a devoted person - a devoted follower or servant.

In the context of God, it can only mean a follower of God or a servant of God.

This is confirmed by Jesus when he said:

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons [servants or followers] of God.” (Matthew 5:9)

Jesus is quite certainly expanding the definition of "sons of God." This makes it apparent, as we've pointed out with this statement, that Jesus is referring to the followers of God in general with the word υἱός (huios) - which would be more responsibly translated to "servant" or "follower" in this context.

We can see how the word υἱός (huios) is used outside of the context of a physical family elsewhere by Jesus:

Jesus replied, "The people [υἱός (huios)] of this age marry and are given in marriage." (Luke 20:34)

and

"They are God's children [υἱός (huios)], since they are children [υἱός (huios)] of the resurrection." (Luke 20:36)

In both of these statements by Jesus, he is using the word υἱός (huios). In the first (Luke 20:34), "The people" is translated from υἱός (huios), and in the second, "children" is also translated from υἱός (huios). The first is referring to people who are subjects - followers - of the physical world ("of this age"), while the second is referring to people who are the followers or servants of God.

This is precisely how Jesus and others described himself:

1) υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, which means the follower or servant of God (τοῦ means "of" and θεοῦ means "God")

2) υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, which means the servant of humanity.

The correctly-translated term, "servant of humanity," is a humble self-reference that has roots in the Old Testament, though it has also been mistranslated there by ecclesiastical sectarian translators from the Hebrew word בן (ben), which can also mean "son" only within the context of a physical family, but also "a member of a guild, order, class" (similar in use to "follower").

Consider David's humble self-description:

"O Lord, what is man that You care for him, the son of man [servant of humanity] that You think of him?" (Psalm 144:3)

Job also humbly referred to himself as a servant of humanity when he prayed:

"how much less man, who is but a maggot - a son of man [servant of humanity], who is only a worm!" (Job 25:6)

God also referred to Ezekiel as the servant of humanity no less than 60 times:

"He said to me, "son of man [servant of humanity], stand up on your feet and I will speak to you."" (Ezekiel 2:1)

and

"He [God] said: "Son of man [servant of humanity], I am sending you to the Israelites, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against Me; they and their fathers have been in revolt against Me to this very day." (Ezekiel 2:3)

In this last verse, we see that God referred to Ezekiel as the servant of humanity as He was sending him to teach to the Israelites on His behalf. This is the quintessential servant of humanity: Sent by God to help (as a service to) humankind.

We also know that Jesus' followers also referred to Jesus as υἱός (huios) of David:

The crowds that went ahead of him and those that followed shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" (Matthew 21:9)

Are they really saying that Jesus is David's son? This is ridiculous, as David lived several centuries before Jesus' body was born.

But when we properly translate υἱός (huios) we can understand the reference quite clearly: Jesus was a "follower of David" or the "servant of David." This clarifies that Jesus was devoted to David, and his teachings were in line with David's.

There is a bond of devotion between Jesus and David. Jesus also comes from the same lineage of teachers as David. And because Jesus' students respected David as a great messenger of God, Jesus' being David's follower was considered an exalted position.

In other words, they were not exalting some sort of family status of Jesus - that his body belonged to the same family as David: They were speaking of his being part of the devotional family of David - the spiritual teaching lineage of David.

So when we translate the word υἱός (huios) within the context of Jesus telling his disciples to baptize "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," we can understand that Jesus was not referring to himself exclusively as υἱός (huios).

The bottom line is that Jesus was saying that they should make disciples in the name of - or on the account of - the servant of God. This brings the disciples into the lineage of becoming themselves, servants of God.

What did Jesus mean by 'end of the age'?

Jesus finishes by promising his followers:

"I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Sectarian teachers-for-hire would have us believe that he is talking about a supposed "doomsday" scenario, now more than two thousand years later and counting.

However, the Greek phrase συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος does not indicate the end of the world. The root word αἰών (aiōn) means "forever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity" according to the lexicon. And συντέλεια (synteleia) means "completion, consummation, end."

In other words, a more appropriate translation of his last statement to his disciples after he appeared to them after leaving his body is:

"And surely I am with you always, until the end of time."

Still in use today, the metaphorical use of "until the end of time" means eternity. It means forever.

In other words, Jesus was telling them that he will be with them for eternity. This is because their relationship is spiritual.

Their relationship is not dependent upon whether their physical bodies live or die. Their relationship was based upon their following the teachings from God as passed on by Jesus.

These were the same teachings that had been passed down through God's messengers over the centuries. They bind anyone who chooses to accept them, including any of us. Such a bond is tied together by following a simple, profound instruction by Jesus, which reiterated the teachings of Moses:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'” (Matthew 22:37-39)