(the Son of God - hence God)
HUH???
The term "son of" appears to have been idiomatic in the time of Christ, carrying more profound implications than the JW's would allow. They understand the term in its most literal sense, i.e., literally the 'offspring of'. However, we can compare other usages in the NT: obviously, James and John were not the literal offspring of thunder (Mark 3:17). But there was something in their personalities that bespoke the nature of thunder, resulting in Jesus' applying to them the nickname, "Sons of Thunder." Similarly, Judas was not the literal offspring of destruction (John 17:12), but again, something in him carried the nature or essence of destruction. So when Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, the meaning to the Jews was more profound than simply saying He had received life from God, as the JW's would have us believe. He was claiming to share the very nature of God, thus to be God Himself, and that is how the Jews often understood Him and why they wanted to kill Him for blasphemy. Just as the title, "Son of Man" emphasized his nature as a human being, the term "Son of God" emphasized His deity.