By Sam Shamoun (1, 2, 3, Original Article)
Oftentimes, Christians are challenged to produce biblical evidence in support of their belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ in substantiation of their understanding of Trinitarian monotheism. Muslims assert that the phrase “Son of God” does not necessarily imply that Jesus is Deity, and therefore does not support the Trinitarian belief of three Persons in One God. Since the issue of Trinitarian monotheism and the Deity of Jesus have already been dealt with (1, 2), we will not delve into these subjects here.
Instead, we will zero in on the biblical phrase “Son of God” in relation to Jesus. In so doing we will also be addressing the erroneous misinterpretation commonly given by some liberal and Unitarian theologians in their assessment of the New Testament witness to Jesus’ Divine Sonship. The reason for doing so is that Muslims are fond of quoting such individuals in their attempts at debunking the historic Christian understanding of the title.
It is often stated by those who do not hold to the historic Christian understanding of Jesus as God’s Son, that Christ is never addressed as “God, the Son,” only as “the Son of God.” Accordingly, this takes a major theological shift, since many personalities are commonly referred to in Scripture as the Son of God without any notion of divinity being attached to it. Hence, the phrase “Son of God” is seen as metaphor expressing one’s closeness to God due to one’s righteous conduct before the Creator. Proponents of such thinking claim that it is in this manner that Christ is referred to as God’s Son, having no divine connotations whatsoever.
It never ceases to amaze us as how one can make such outlandish statements in view of the overwhelming biblical evidence to the contrary. The Holy Bible explicitly teaches that Jesus is God’s unique Son. Due to the fact Jesus is viewed as being God’s Son in a unique way, Christians have come to the conclusion that God is One in essence, Three in Persons. This establishes the case that Jesus is God the Son, the second Person of the Triune Godhead.
With this in mind, we proceed to an examination of the biblical understanding of the title “Son of God,” especially in relation to Jesus Christ.
Usage of the phrase “Son of God” in the Bible
There are several ways in which the Bible defines the title Son of God:
- The title is used in relation to angelic beings who dwell in the presence of God and are his personal messengers. (Cf. Genesis 6:2-4; Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7; Psalm 89:6)
- Humanity as a whole since the entirety of mankind has been created and is sustained by God, he being man’s life-giver – (Cf. Luke 3:38; Genesis 1:26-28, 5:1-2; Acts 17:26-28)
- Those who have come into a covenant relation with God such as:
- Israel – (Cf. Exodus 4:22; Jeremiah 31:9; Hosea 11:1)
- King David – (Cf. Psalm 2:7; 89:19-20, 26-27)
- Solomon – (Cf. 2 Samuel 7:14; 1 Chronicles 22:7-10)
- Persons who righteously follow God, walking blamelessly before him, thereby reflecting God’s nature and characteristics. (Cf. Matthew 5:9)
Persons who are adopted into the family of God through faith in Jesus Christ in order conform to God’s image and righteous character. (Cf. John 1:12-13; Romans 8:14-17; Galatians 4:4-7; Ephesians 4:17-25)
Jesus as the Son of God
When examining the way the Bible addresses Jesus as God’s Son, none of these categories sufficiently define the term. This is due to the fact that Christ is pictured as the unique Son of God. The rest of the so-called sons of God do not share in Christ’s uniqueness.
The Lord Jesus personally referred to himself as God’s unique Son in John 3:16:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” KJV
The Greek term for “only-begotten” in the King James version is monogenes which means “one of a kind,” “one and only,” “unique.” Christ is portrayed as the unique or the one and only Son of God. That this is the more correct meaning of the term as opposed to “only begotten” is readily seen in the following citation:
“By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son (monogenes).” Hebrews 11:17 NIV
To say Isaac was Abraham’s only-begotten son would make no sense since Abraham fathered Ishmael before Isaac and had six other children as well. (Cf. Genesis 16:15-16, 25:1-6)
Therefore, monogenes can only mean “unique” in status, and does not necessarily imply generation or birth. Scholars are basically unanimous in their view that monogenes refers to uniqueness in position over generation:
Dr. James R. White notes,
“The key element to remember in deriving the meaning of monogenes[1] is this: it is a compound term, combining monos[1], meaning only, with a second term. Often it is assumed that the second term is gennasthai/gennao[1], “to give birth, to beget.” But note that this family of terms has two nu’s, ‘vv,’ rather than a single v found in monogenes.[1] This indicates that the second term is not gennasthai[1] but gignesthai/ginomai[1], and the noun form, genos[1]. G.L. Prestige discusses the differences that arise from these two derivations in God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1952), 37-51, 135-141, 151-156.
“Genos[1] means ‘kind or type,’ ginomai[1] is a verb of being. Hence the translations “one of a kind,” “one and only,” “of sole descent.” Some scholars see the –genes element as having a minor impact upon the meaning of the term, and hence see monogenes[1] as a strengthened form of monos[1], thereby translating it ‘alone,’ ‘unique,’ ‘incomparable.’ An example of this usage from the LXX is found in Psalm 25:16, ‘turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely (monogenes) and afflicted:’ (NASB)” (White, The Forgotten Trinity [Minneapolis, MN, Bethany House Publishers, 1998], pp. 201-202, fn. 27)
Newman and Nida’s A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of John (New York: United Bible Societies, 1980, p. 24) state:
“Only son is the rendering of all modern translations (i.e., John 1:18 – ed.). There is no doubt regarding the meaning of the Greek word used here (monogenes); it means ‘only’ and not ‘only begotten.’ The meaning “only begotten,” which appears in the Vulgate, has influenced KJV and many other early translations.”
James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, in The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, Eerdman’s, 1930, pp. 416-417), concur:
“Monogenes[1] is literally ‘one of a kind,’ ‘only,’ ‘unique’ (unicus), not ‘only begotten,’ which would be monogennetos[1] (unigenitus), and is common in the LXX in this sense… The emphasis is on the thought that, as the ‘only’ Son of God, He has no equal and is able to reveal the Father.”
George Beasley-Murray in his the Word Biblical Commentary on John (Waco: Word Books, 1987, p.14), says:
“monogenes[1], lit., ‘the only one of its kind,” unique in its genos, in the LXX frequently translates… (yahid) …”
Read the following on the original article if you desire…
