Reply to Sohail, God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent:

Submitted by Susan (Canada), Dec 16, 2006 at 20:05

You said:

......You Christians seize on the word "son," saying that since the fourth verse describes things only G-d can do, this 'son' must be Jesus.

The full context is different. The writer, modestly proclaiming his own ignorance, asks who can do all of these wonderful things. In effect, he says, "I am ignorant and do not know what man can do this. Can you identify him for me? Can you identify his family?" Of course, no one can do these things except G-d. Asking for the name of a family member is somewhat comparable to the modern phrase "You and what army?" to indicate something which someone cannot do. The writer is emphasizing that humans can not match the abilities of the divine. It is a rhetorical question, sarcastic in nature, and has no answer. That is the point.

Note just two verses later: "6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." To say the chapter refers to Jesus is indeed an addition.

The most thing is to remember the following verse:

19God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? (Numbers 23:19)

You placed emphasis on Numbers 23, 19. What did you try to proove?
Every time "son of man" is used in the Bible it implies sinfull nature of humans. Nothing else.

Susan

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".