title Son of God is also given in the Gospel (Luke iii. 38), as it is to the angels in the Old Testament and to believers in the New (1 John iii. 2).

C. Doubtless the meaning of that verse in the Qur'an and the verse in Luke is that Jesus was like Adam in having no human father. The angels are probably called sons of God in Job i. 6; ii. I, &c. But neither of Adam nor of the angels are the other things said that are said of Christ. (Vide Heb. i.) For example, Adam was not sinless, nor is he called "The Word of God" (vide ยงยง 117, 118, 119). All the prophets believed in Christ and received life from Him (John xiv. 6). The difference between them and Him is seen from the whole teaching of the Bible (e. g. John i. 17, 18). Believers become "sons of God" only through union with God's Son (John i.12).

114. M. The Bible certainly does call Jesus the Son of God (John i. 34, &c.), and teaches His Deity. This is contrary both to reason and to the Qur'an, as is clear from Surahs IX., At Taubah, 30; X., Yunus, 69; XXXIX., Az Zumar, 6; II., Al Baqarah, 110; VI., Al An'am, 100, 101; XIX., Maryam, 36, 91-93; LXXII., Al Jinn, 3; XLIII., Az Zukhruf, 81; CXII., Al Ikhlas, 3; and V., Al Maidah, 19, 76, 78.

C. Many of these verses (e. g. VI., Al An'am, 100, 101) show that what Muhammad wished to repudiate was the carnal idea of the generation of a Son, an idea similar to that which the heathens of Greece and Rome had held before they became Christians,


just as the Hindus hold it now regarding some of their deities. The heathen Arabs of Muhammad's time held it also, and called their goddesses daughters of God (Surah XVI., An Nahl, 59). Such an idea is blasphemous, and Christians have never held it. Centuries before Muhammad's time a learned Christian writer, Lactantius, wrote a work in which he told the heathen that the Christians did not hold such carnal and blasphemous ideas regarding the generation of Jesus Christ as those which were attributed to them. It is this heathen doctrine which is contrary to reason, not the Christian one. When the Gospel speaks philosophically, it speaks of Christ as "the Word of God" (كلمة الله ). The expression "Son of God" really denotes the same1, but is used for the benefit of simple people. It reveals the Love which must exist between the Persons (اقانيم Aqanim) of the Trinity. No human language can be really in every respect suitable to express the realities of the Divine nature, but we are quite justified in using the words employed by the inspired writers themselves. The relationship between the Persons

1 This is the reason why we call Christ Ibnu'llah and not Waladu'llah. In Arabic there is a clear and beautiful distinction between Ibn and Walad ("Son"), just as there is between Ab and Walid ("Father"). Christians never use the latter of each group of words (Walad and Walid) for "Son" and "Father" respectively in reference to the Trinity, as they denote physical Sonship and Fatherhood; not so the words Ibn and Ab, which are often used in Arabic in a spiritual or metaphorical sense. (Rev. Dr. Zwemer.)