If you'll notice, everyone of your Bible quotes refers to someone else, besides Jesus calling Him the "Son of God". Even referencing to God calling Him the "Son of God" are THIRD PARTY REFERENCES. Pay attention to what Jesus said, not what everyoe else said about Him.
I don't care what Peter said. I especially don't care what Satan said. Nor do I care a bout the later Christian books. Pay close attention only to what JESUS SAID.
I knew that response would come from you.
I guess you don't understand why He called Himself the "Son of Man".
This is straight out of the very respected Unger's Bible Encylopedia.
Moody Press, Copyright 1957, sixteenth printing, 1970.
Son of Man Greek, "huios tou anthropou"
This is a term, like "the Son of God," which is now theologiclly chiefly associated with Christ and is used in both the Old and New Testaments. Christ employed this expression to designate Himself some eighty times. It portrays Him as the Representative Man. It designates Him as the "last Adam" in distinction to the "first man Adam" (1 Cor. 15:45). It sets Him forth as "the Second Man...the Lord from heaven" as over against "the first man... of the earth" (1 Cor. 15:47). "The Son of Man" is thus our Lord's racial name, as the "Son of David" is distinctly his Jewish name and "the Son of God" His Divine Name. This term is uniformly used of Christ in connection with His mission (Luke 19:10), His death and resurrection (Matt. 12:40; 20:18; 26:2) and His second advent (Matt. 24:37-44; Luke 12:40). It transcends purely Jewish limitations and has application to the salvation of the entire race. Thus, when Nathaniel owns Christ as "King of Israel" our Lord's reply is, "thou shalt see greater things; the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man." It is, for example, in this name that universal judgement is committed to our Lord (John 5:22, 27). The term also implies that in Him the O.T. prophetic blessings centering in the coming Man are to find their fulfillment (Gen. 3:15; Psalms 8:4; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6,7; Zechariah 13:7). The term "son of man" occurs conspicuously in the Book of Ezekiel, being used ninety-two times in the addressing the prophet. The thought of going beyond the confines of Judaism is also involved in the phrase when applied to Ezekiel. When Israel was in her captivity, being oblivious of her special mission (Jeremiah 11:10; Ezekiel 5:5-8), the Lord reminds her(Israel) by this term of address to Ezekiel that He will not forsake her but that nevertheless she is only a small portion of the race for whom He is concerned. As used of Ezekiel, the expression "the son of man" suggests what the prophet is to God, not what he is to himself. As "the son of man" the prophet is chosen, spiritually endowed and delegated by God. These factors are also true of the Messiah as the Representative Man, the new Head of regenerated humanity.-----******
Now Jesus' designation as "Son of Man" is whole different meaning than God's designation towards prophets in the O.T..
The Messiah or Son of Man is designated to judge all mankind, an office only held by God Himself.
*******
One other problem we are dealing with here. The bible is not a "pick and choose" reference book of God's nature or historical presence/impact upon earthly man.
It was intended to be read and understood in entirety and not to be contextually rejected where it isn't authored by Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John. All, or most of the Epistles were authored by the apostle who replaced Judas who betrayed Jesus; Saul who was renamed, "Paul" by Jesus Himself.
Paul was accepted by the apostles as the bonafide 12th apostle, via his visit to Jerusalem, and his performing certain signs/miracles of Apostleship. This can be found in the book of Acts, authored by Luke.
******
When people want to refute the existence of God, they set their own parameters of what is acceptable to them and what is not in respect to scripture's communicative text.
You have set parameters.......namely only certain persons are deemed believeable and others are not in reference to identifying Jesus as the Son of God. Where is your authority to do this?
Also, if you were to gleen each scriptural verse I gave you in the previous post, you would find that there are some,
where Jesus does indeed refer to Himself as the Son of God, and not a second party doing it.
If you do your homework well, you won't have an argument with Jesus' divine identity.
Jesus gave up his Godly powers and allowed Himself to be totally flesh and blood and the second Adam to set our race back to a relationship with God the Father. Jesus was God's means through propitiation at the cross, to do so. Jesus allowed mere man and of course His Father in heaven to designate Him in the office of Son of God.
Only God can redeem man. Man cannot redeem Himself.
Jesus couldn't redeem man unless He was God incarnate. That's self explanatory. As Romans 3:23 succinctly says, "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". Only God could intervene, and the coming Messiah or the Son of God/Son of Man was anxiously waited-for for centuries until that special day in Bethlehem.
Jesus allowed His identity as "God" or Son of God to be made apparent through His Father designating that title via the "Transfiguration", and also when He allowed John to baptize Him. In both cases God the Father said, "This is my Son.........!" Do you want to question that part of scripture where God the Father designates Jesus as His Son????????
If you do.........then your just throwing up little road blocks and excuses to stick to your unbelief.........Your fighting against God, and not man........The scriptures are very clear. You are trying very hard to not accept or "see" the obvious. That's called "unbelief". The Holy Spirit works on the souls of every man/woman/child, and we are endowed with "free will" to reject the obvious and go our own way. So you have been "blessed" with the ability to determine to much extent your life's eternal destination. "Choose wisely"
