The authority of parents, esi)ccially the father, over
children was very great, as was also the reverence en- joineil by the law to be paid to parents. The disobedi- ent child, the striker or reviler of a parent, was liable to ca|)ital punishment, though not at the independent will of the parent. Children were liable to be taken as slaves in case of non-payment of debt, and were expect- ed to perform menial ofMecs for them, such as washing the feet, and to maintain them in poverty and old age. How this last obligation was evaded, see Corban. The like obedience is enjoined by the Gospel (Gen. xxxviii, 24; Lev. xxi, 9; Numb, xii, 14; Deut. xxiv, 16; 1 Kings ii, 19; 2 Kings xiv, 6; iv, 1 ; Isa. 1,1; Neh.v, 5; .Tob xxiv, 9; Prov. x, 1 ; xv, 20 ; xxix, 3; Col. iii, 20; Eph. vi, 1 ; 1 Tim. i, 9. Comp. Yirg. ^n. vi, 609; and Servius, ud loc. ; Aristo]ih. Ran. 146 ; Plato, P/uedo, 144; De Legg. ix. See Drusius, Qucest. Hebr. ii, 63, ia Crit. Sacr. viii, 1547).
Tlie legal age was twelve, or even earlier, in the case of female, and thirteen for a male (Maimon. De Pros. c. 5; Grotius and Calmet, On John ix, 21).
The inheritance was divided equally between all the sons except the eldest, who received a double portion (Deut, xxi, 17; Gen. xxv,31; xlix, 3 ; 1 Chron. v, 1, 2; Judg. xi, 2, 7). Daughters had by right no portion in the inheritance ; but if a man had no son, his iidieri- tance passed to his daughters, but they were forbidden to marry out of their father's tribe (Numb, xxvii, 1,8; xxxvi, 2, 8). — Smith. See Ci£iiJ>.
Son, in Norse mythology, was one of the barrels ia which Fialar and Galar caught the blood of the white Quasar, in order to brew from it the mead which pro- duced poetic intoxication.
Son of God. This expression occurs, and even with some frequency, in the plural before it is found in the singular; that is, in the order of God's revelations it is used in a sense applicable to a certain class or class- es of God's creatures prior to its being employed as the distinctive appellation of One to whom it belongs in a sense altogether peculiar. It seems necessary, there- fore, in order to obtain a natural and correct view of the subject, that we first look at the more general use of the expression, and then consider its specific and higher application to the Messiah.
1. Sons of God viewed generally. We first meet with this designation in a passage which has from early times been differently understood. It is at Gen. vi, 1- 4, where, in reference to the growing corruption of an- tediluvian times, it is said, "The sons of God {bene Elu- him) saw the daughters of men that they were fair, and they took them wives of all whom they chose" (that is, having regard oidy to natural attraction). And again, "There were giants in the earth (literally, " the nephi- lim were on the earth") in those days; and also after that, when the sons of (iod came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] unto thein, these were the mighty men (the heroes, D''"i35il) who were of old, men of renown." The sons of God in these verses, say many of the .Jewish interpreters, were persons of cpiali- ty, j)rinces and nobles, and the daughters of men they married were females of low birth — as if the climax of disorder and corruption in the Bible sense were marry- ing below one's rank ! Such a view carries improba- bility in its very front, and is without any support in the general usage of the terms. In the Apocryphal book of ImiocIi, then by many of the fathers, and in later times not a few Catholic anil Lutheran theologians (including among the last class Stier, llofmami, Kurtz, Delitzsch), the sons of God is a name for the angels, ill this case, of course, fallen angels; who they think form the only jiroper contrast to the (laughters of men. In other passages, also, angels are undoubtedly called "sons of (iod" (,Iol) i, C, ; ii, 1 ; xxxviii, 7; i)an. iii, 25) and "sons of Elim," or the Mighty (Psa. xxix, 1; Ixxxix, 7). There are, however, other passages in which men standing in a definite relation to (iod, his peculiar peo|)le, are so called. Israel, as the elect na-
SON OF GOD
877
SON OF GOD
tion, is called his son, his first-born (Exod. iv, 22) ; but witliin this circle a narrower circle still bore the name of his sons, as contradistinfjiiished from those who cor- rupted themselves and fell away to the world (Deut. xxxii, 5); and those who had backslidden, but again returned, were to be designated sons of the living God (Hos. i, 10). Also in Psa. Ixxx, 17, Israel in the strict- er sense, as the elect seed, is named the son whom God (Elohiin) made strong for himself. There seems no reason, therefore, for supposing that the expression " sons of God" should be understood of angels any more than of men. Its actual reference must be determined from the connection, and in the case under consideration an- gels are on various accounts necessarily excluded. For (1) the procedure ascribed to those sons of God — choos- ing beautiful women for wives and marrying them — cannot, without the greatest incongruity, be associated with angelic natures, among which there is neither marrying nor giving in marriage (Luke xx, 35. 30). Even carnal intercourse between such parties was im- ])racticable ; but the actual taking of wives (the term used being that uniformly employed to denote the mar- riage relationship) is still more abhorrent to the ideas set forth in Scripture as to the essential distinctions be- tween the region of spirits and the world of sense. (2.) If a relation of the kind had been possible, it would still have been entirely out of place in such a narrative^ where the object of the historian manifestly is to trace the progress of human corruption — implying that the prominent actors in the drama were men, and not be- ings of another sphere. Hence, immediately after the first notice of the angels of God marrying the daughters of men, the Lord says, "My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh" (Gen. vi, 3) ; as if the whole quarrel were with the partakers of flesh and blood. (3.) The moral bearing and design of the narrative also point in the same direction, which un- doubtedlj' aimed at presenting, from the state of things which drew on the Deluge, a solemn warning to the Is- raelites against those heathen marriages which brought incalculable mischief on the covenant people. (4.) In like manner, the allusion of our Lord to the marrying and giving in marriage before the Flood as things which ■were going to be repeated after the same fashion before the second advent (Luke xvii, 27) requires them to be understood of earthly relationships, otherwise the al- lusion could have furnished no proper parallel to the state of things anticipated in the last days, and would have been beside the mark. (See Stosch, De Filiis Dei [Lingas, 1749]; Quintorp, ibid. [Rost. 1751]; Scholz, Ehe d. Sohne Goftes, etc. [Katisb. 1866].)