Ah, the old "there is no contradiction if I can make up some conceivable way to explain them away Theology".
You guys seem to do that a lot
And we do the same in science. But usually in theology we don't have to invent a whole new theory of reality to deal with the apparent contradictions, as we've had to do with particle-wave duality in physics.
Frankly, I don't see it as worth wasting any more time on.
You are probably rigbht; I think we are at an impasse on this issue.
One group in this thread claims:
1) "creation of God" and "son of God" are essentially synonymous, and everyone is a "son of God".
2) biblical authors who use the phrase "son of God" differently (e.g. John in Jn 3) are anomolous.
3) the Bible is full of contradictions, and it is useless to try to reconcile them.
The other group claims:
1) "creation" and "son" are different words and concepts.
2) "son of God" is overwhelmingly used in a restrictive sense, NOT including all mankind
3) biblical contradictions are only apparent, and can be reconciled in numerous ways.
These two groups work from two different sets of presuppositions. Each is viewing the details through their own lenses. We're not really discussing the presuppositional differences, so will not resolve these differences.
(But frankly, I don't understand why the first group is even bothering to participate in a forum which asks "What does the Bible really mean?", because they don't really seem to care about this question.)