September 24, 2025 • 12 mins
The objection is profound and sincere: "God is One. How can He have a Son without a wife?". This question reflects a noble desire shared by Christians and Muslims: protecting the majesty and purity of God from any association with human reproduction. Tonight's broadcast, sponsored by Misa.solutions, the AI Socratic Method Tutor, used careful questioning to move beyond this surface misunderstanding.
1. Adam: The Proof God Transcends Biology
The discussion begins by asking if God acts beyond human biology. Both the Bible and the Quran affirm that God creates without requiring normal biological processes.
The Quran draws a parallel: "Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam". Adam was created without any parents, simply by God's word, "Be, and it was" (Kun faya kun).
Socratic Question: If God could create Adam without parents, why would God be limited to human biological processes when creating Jesus?.
The very idea that God needed a wife to produce Adam seems absurd and blasphemous. Since neither faith believes God reproduces biologically, the real issue is understanding what divine Sonship means. Even human language uses "son" non-biologically, such as calling a traveler "ibn al-sabil" (son of the road).
2. The Eternal Word Made Flesh
To grasp Christian claims, we explore God's eternal attributes. Muslims affirm that God's Word (Kalam Allah) is eternal and uncreated, existing forever with God.
Socratic Question: If God's Word is eternal, is it separate from God or part of God’s eternal nature?.
Christians make a specific claim: The Word of God (Logos) is not just an attribute but a Person—eternal, uncreated, and sharing the divine essence.
Divine Action
Islamic View
Christian View
Eternal Word became...
A book (the Quran)
A person (Jesus Christ)
The Quran uniquely calls Jesus "Kalimatullah" (Word of God) and "Ruh Allah" (Spirit from God). Dr. Kenneth Craig observed that this unique testimony raises questions about why Jesus is identified this way if merely a prophet. When Christians speak of the "eternal generation" of the Son, it describes an eternal relationship within God’s being, akin to the light generated by the sun—always existing together and sharing the same essence, but distinguishable.
3. Language: Hands vs. Son
Both faiths struggle to describe the infinite God using finite language. Muslims accept that anthropomorphisms like God having "hands" or "face" do not mean physical body parts.
Socratic Question: If we accept that Quranic language about God's "hands" doesn't mean physical hands, why should we assume that Biblical language about God's "Son" means biological son?.
Professor Lamin Sanneh notes that both traditions must use metaphorical language for divine realities.
4. Sonship as Representation and Unity
Divine Sonship means perfect representation, essential unity, and eternal relationship. The Son shares the divine nature ("Light from Light") and perfectly represents the Father ("whoever has seen me has seen the Father").
Crucially, the Quran attributes to Jesus capabilities reserved only for God: creating life (clay birds), knowledge of the unseen, and power over death (raising the dead, Surah 3:49). Dr. Nabeel Qureshi noted that Jesus was "categorically different," pointing to Himself as the way to God.
5. Unity Beyond Mathematics
Christians affirm fierce monotheism: The Lord our God, the Lord is One. God's oneness (Tawhid) is a unique divine unity, not merely mathematical oneness (1=1).
The Trinity is better understood as $1 \times 1 \times 1 = 1$ (one God existing in three persons). The incarnation—God the Son taking on human nature without losing divine nature—does not diminish God. It shows that if God is truly all-powerful, He can reveal Himself uniquely within creation while remaining transcendent above it.
The disagreement is not about whether God needs a wife—both faiths reject this. The enduring Socratic question is: "What is God revealing about Himself through the language of Father and Son?". As C.S. Lewis wrote, "The Son of God became a man to enable men to become sons of God".
James Henderson is the founder of Misa.solutions, a veteran-owned company bringing the Socratic Method into modern education through AI-powered tutoring. With a passion for helping K–12 students, homeschoolers, and educators move beyond memorization, he focuses on building curiosity, wisdom, and critical thinking for the next generation of learners.
1. Adam: The Proof God Transcends Biology
The discussion begins by asking if God acts beyond human biology. Both the Bible and the Quran affirm that God creates without requiring normal biological processes.
The Quran draws a parallel: "Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam". Adam was created without any parents, simply by God's word, "Be, and it was" (Kun faya kun).
Socratic Question: If God could create Adam without parents, why would God be limited to human biological processes when creating Jesus?.
The very idea that God needed a wife to produce Adam seems absurd and blasphemous. Since neither faith believes God reproduces biologically, the real issue is understanding what divine Sonship means. Even human language uses "son" non-biologically, such as calling a traveler "ibn al-sabil" (son of the road).
2. The Eternal Word Made Flesh
To grasp Christian claims, we explore God's eternal attributes. Muslims affirm that God's Word (Kalam Allah) is eternal and uncreated, existing forever with God.
Socratic Question: If God's Word is eternal, is it separate from God or part of God’s eternal nature?.
Christians make a specific claim: The Word of God (Logos) is not just an attribute but a Person—eternal, uncreated, and sharing the divine essence.
Divine Action
Islamic View
Christian View
Eternal Word became...
A book (the Quran)
A person (Jesus Christ)
The Quran uniquely calls Jesus "Kalimatullah" (Word of God) and "Ruh Allah" (Spirit from God). Dr. Kenneth Craig observed that this unique testimony raises questions about why Jesus is identified this way if merely a prophet. When Christians speak of the "eternal generation" of the Son, it describes an eternal relationship within God’s being, akin to the light generated by the sun—always existing together and sharing the same essence, but distinguishable.
3. Language: Hands vs. Son
Both faiths struggle to describe the infinite God using finite language. Muslims accept that anthropomorphisms like God having "hands" or "face" do not mean physical body parts.
Socratic Question: If we accept that Quranic language about God's "hands" doesn't mean physical hands, why should we assume that Biblical language about God's "Son" means biological son?.
Professor Lamin Sanneh notes that both traditions must use metaphorical language for divine realities.
4. Sonship as Representation and Unity
Divine Sonship means perfect representation, essential unity, and eternal relationship. The Son shares the divine nature ("Light from Light") and perfectly represents the Father ("whoever has seen me has seen the Father").
Crucially, the Quran attributes to Jesus capabilities reserved only for God: creating life (clay birds), knowledge of the unseen, and power over death (raising the dead, Surah 3:49). Dr. Nabeel Qureshi noted that Jesus was "categorically different," pointing to Himself as the way to God.
5. Unity Beyond Mathematics
Christians affirm fierce monotheism: The Lord our God, the Lord is One. God's oneness (Tawhid) is a unique divine unity, not merely mathematical oneness (1=1).
The Trinity is better understood as $1 \times 1 \times 1 = 1$ (one God existing in three persons). The incarnation—God the Son taking on human nature without losing divine nature—does not diminish God. It shows that if God is truly all-powerful, He can reveal Himself uniquely within creation while remaining transcendent above it.
The disagreement is not about whether God needs a wife—both faiths reject this. The enduring Socratic question is: "What is God revealing about Himself through the language of Father and Son?". As C.S. Lewis wrote, "The Son of God became a man to enable men to become sons of God".
James Henderson is the founder of Misa.solutions, a veteran-owned company bringing the Socratic Method into modern education through AI-powered tutoring. With a passion for helping K–12 students, homeschoolers, and educators move beyond memorization, he focuses on building curiosity, wisdom, and critical thinking for the next generation of learners.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back to the deep dive. Today. We're waiting into
some pretty deep theological waters.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
We really are.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
We're looking at a question that comes up often and
very sincerely in dialogue between Christians.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
And Muslims, that question about divine sonship.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Exactly, God is one how can he possibly have a
son without needing a wife?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
And it's so important to start by respecting that question seriously.
It comes from this incredibly deep shared reverence for God's
absolute uniqueness is transcendent his unity what Islamic theology calls
tahid right, the pure oneness of God. The concern is
actually noble. It's about protecting God's majesty from well human biology.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Yeah, that makes complete sense. The confusion kicks in when
we sort of map our own limitations onto the infinite
precisely so to get past that, we want to use
a kind of Socratic approach today, not debating, but questioning
the underlying assumptions together.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Searching for clarity through reasoning. And the launching point is
that actually right there in the shared text. Okay, think
about the creation of Adam. The Koran says God created
him without a father or a mother. So the question
becomes did God need a wife to create Adam? Or
can God just act beyond biology?
Speaker 1 (01:13):
Okay, let's really unpack that. Let's use the logic found
in both traditions about God's power.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Well, the absolute baseline, the non negotiable truth for both
is that God creates by his word alone, un exactly
be and it is. He doesn't need processes or partnerships
or biology. His command is enough.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
And what's really striking is how the sources, specifically the
Koran here, draw a direct line between Adam's creation and
Jesus's creation. Sarah three, verse fifty nine says, Indeed, the
example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam.
He created him from dust. Then he said to him be,
and he was.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
It's such a powerful length. Theologically speaking, it forces us
to ask, doesn't it. Yeah, If God created Adam with
no parents just by saying be, why would we suddenly
think he's limited by needing a wife. When it comes to.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Jesus, it feels like a strange inconsistency. We accept this
incredible non biological power for Adam, but then we seem
to forget it completely when Jesus enters the picture. Even
the verses that clarify Jesus isn't a biological.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Son like Surah nineteen point thirty five.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Right, where God just decrees it b and it is
that verse itself confirms God operates beyond biology.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
And realizing that, as scholars like doctor Isada Laser point out,
that's the real breakthrough moment. Okay, the instant we grasp
that neither faith actually believes God reproduces like humans do.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
The surface objection kind of dissolves exactly.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
Then the conversation shifts. It becomes about meaning, not mechanics.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
And you know, we use this kind of non biological
son or father language all the time anyway. We do
think about founding fathers of a nation, or in Arabic
there's the term iban al sabil son of the road, yeah,
meaning a traveler obviously not the roads, biological kid, or
teachers calling students their sons. It shows the words the
cells are flexible metaphorical.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
So if we agree it's not biology, then what is
the relationship being described by Christians?
Speaker 1 (03:07):
Ah? Okay, now we're getting into the really deep end.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
This takes us to God's eternal nature, his attributes, specifically
the concept of the Word of God Coloma law.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
Right, So, moving beyond human creation, we're now talking about
God's own being before time, and.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
Standard Islamic theology affirms that God's word is eternal, it's uncreated,
It exists forever with God.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
It wasn't like God woke up one day and decided
to have a word.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
No, it's part of who God is eternally.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
But that raises a tricky point, doesn't it It does.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
It's a theological tightrope. If God's word is eternal and uncreated,
existing alongside him, how do you describe that relationship without
making it sound like a separate entity from God? Is
it just an attribute? Is it distinct?
Speaker 1 (03:51):
And this is where the paths is diverge a bit
in explaining how that eternal word is revealed.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
For Muslims, God's eternal word became manifest as a book,
the Koran, the divine speech in human language, Right, the
revelation is textual, Whereas for Christians, that eternal word, the logos,
became manifest as a person. In Jesus Christ John's gospel territory.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
The revelation is personal incarnate.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Yeah, it's a difference in the mode of that revelation.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
And what's truly fascinating is that the Koran itself uses
titles for Jesus that echo this, you.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Mean, Kalimatola and ru Allah precisely.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Sua four point one point seventy one calls him Word
of God and Spirit from God. These are unique titles.
No other prophet gets them. So the question becomes, what
does it imply about Jesus's nature if he's identified so
closely with God's own eternal word and spirit.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
Okay, So the Christian response to that, trying to explain
this eternal relationship without biology is the concept of eternal generation.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
Right. It's an attempt to articulate a relationship that has
no beginning.
Speaker 1 (04:54):
The classic analogy may be helpful, may be limited. Is
the Sun in its.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Light mm hm. The light is generated by the sun,
but it's existed as long as the sun.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
They share the same essence. Light is inherent to the Sun.
You can't separate them, and the Sun doesn't need a
partner to produce rais.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
It's about an eternal essential outflow or relationship, not a
creation event in time. That's the relational meaning.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
Christians intent understanding. That helps frame the next big challenge,
which is just language itself.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Oh, absolutely, the inadequacy of human words. When we try
to talk about God.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
We're using finite created concepts to try and grasp the
infinite creator. We inevitably fall back on analogies, on anthropomorphisms.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Describing God in human like terms, because it's all we have.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
And here's a really key question for you listening. If
both traditions accept that when the Qur'an mentions God's hands
or face, it doesn't mean literal body part.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Right, we interpret those metaphorically.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Then why the insistence that when the Bible uses sun
it must mean literal biological offspring.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
It seems inconsistent, doesn't it. Both fates co have to
interpret divine descriptions non literally.
Speaker 1 (06:02):
We say God is Raman merciful, but we don't imagine
him having like fluctuating human emotions.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Or when the Qoran says God is closer than the
jugular vein, nobody thinks that means God is physically inside
our necks.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
These are clearly metaphors pointing to deeper truths about God's
care or knowledge.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
They have to be. And there's linguistic nuance here too,
especially in Arabic. When Arabic speaking Christians historically used iban
allah son of God. They chose ibin that word has
a broader relational sense soun descendant, member of a group.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
They specifically avoided the word walid, which means balad implies
direct biological offspring progeny, the very thing they weren't trying
to say. So the language choice itself guys away from
the biological that's fascinating.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
It suggests we really need to move past the most literal,
almost crude interpretation exactly.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Professor Lemin Santa made this point. Theology isn't about finding
the truest possible meaning of divine language, but the richest
the intended meaning.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
Okay, so let's get to that intended meaning. What do
Christians mean by son of God? If not biology.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
They're defining Jesus by his relationship to the Father. It's
about perfect representation, essential unity, and an eternal connection.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Not origins, but identity and function.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
Precisely, it speaks to who he is in relation to God.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
So what does that perfect representation actually entail, Well, it.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Means sharing the divine nature itself. He's called light from light,
very God of very God in the creeds. Okay, it
means he perfectly reveals the Father. Think of the New
Testament statement, whoever has seen me has seen the.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
Father, implying an identity of essence, and that.
Speaker 2 (07:42):
He is the exact representation of his being. It's language
trying to convey shared identity, shared essence, perfect revelation.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
Now here's where it gets really interesting, because even if
you just stick to the Koronic text, Okay, the Qoran
itself grants Jesus unique abilities in Surah three, verse forty nine,
that no other prophet has a just creating life, breathing
life into clay birds, knowing the unseen, telling people what
they store in their houses, power over death, raising the dead,
(08:12):
and sinlessness.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
That's quite a list. It's qualitatively different from other prophets roles.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
It seems to set him apart.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
Categorically, it does, and it resonates with something doctor Nabil
Crochi noted in his work What was that? He reflected
that essentially all other prophets point away from themselves towards God.
They say, listen to.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
God, right, they're messengers.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
But Jesus consistently points to himself as the way to God.
Come to me, follow me. I am the way that
suggests a unique, almost divine claim about his own role.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
A claim that understandably raises that final big concern, God's
transcendence and unity.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
M hm, the ta hid concern. Does calling Jesus son
of God, even metaphorically, somehow compromise God's absolute oneness or
make God seem less transcendent?
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Does it somehow limit God?
Speaker 2 (09:03):
That worry comes from a place of deep piety. Absolutely,
But let's flip the question for a moment. Okay, does
God become less than God if he chooses to interact
with his creation in a unique intimate way, or does
it perhaps show that God is even more powerful, more relational,
more capable that our limited categories allow.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Huh, I hadn't thought of it quite like that. We
often define God by what we think he can't do,
rather than what he can.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Exactly, and our sources give us analogies for this kind
of divine interaction without limitation.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
Like the burning bush, perfect example.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
God speaks from within the bush. His presence is in creation,
but the bush isn't consumed. God isn't limited by the bush.
He's simultaneously present and transcendent.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Okay, that makes sense.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
What's another one think about? The idea of a great
king who chooses to walk among his people disguised as
a commoner. He takes on their experience, walks their streets,
eats their food. But does he stop being the king?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Oh, his royal nature is unchanged.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Exactly, His essence remains even while he voluntarily enters into
the human condition. It highlights the humility and power involved
in such an act.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
It's a powerful image. Obviously, the Christian claim of incarnation
is far more profound than that, But the principle.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
The principles that interaction doesn't necessarily mean limitation. We absolutely
affirm the shared belief there is nothing like him. Soa
forty two point one one God is unique, utterly unique.
But does being unique mean God cannot choose to reveal
himself from within creation while remaining utterly transcendent above it.
Maybe his uniqueness includes the capacity for that kind of
(10:37):
surprising self revelation.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
So, wrapping this up, where does this leave us? What's
the core takeaway?
Speaker 2 (10:43):
I think the core takeaway is that the language of
divine sonship in its intended Christian context, is fundamentally about
an eternal relational identity, not biological reproduction.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
It's about essence and representation.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Exactly, and the shared example of Adam's creation actually supports
this by showing God's power operates completely beyond any need
for biology.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
So we agree on the foundation.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
God is one, absolutely undivided, unique. But maybe the final
thought for you, the listener, is how we understand that oneness?
Speaker 1 (11:14):
What do you mean?
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Is God's oneness like mathematical oneness, simple solitary one equals one?
Or could it be a unique divine unity, something more
complex and dynamic than our human maths can capture.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Interesting? Are there analogies for that kind of complex unity?
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Well, people point to things in creation. Light is both
wave and particle one phenomenon dual nature. Water is H
two O one substance but exists as ice liquid scheme. Right.
These aren't perfect analogies for the trinity, of course, nothing is,
but they hint that unity isn't always simple singularity. The
Christian understanding isn't one plus one plus one or three polytheism.
(11:54):
It's trying to describe a mystery of unity more like
one times one times one still equals one, a single
divine essence shared in eternal relationship.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
So the real question for ongoing dialogue. Isn't that initial
biological one, How can God have a son without a wife, because,
as we've seen, both traditions essentially reject the premiss The deeper,
richer question is what is God revealing about his own nature,
his love, his plan through this language of father and son?
Speaker 2 (12:23):
What is the meaning embedded in that relational metaphor? It
points entirely towards relationship and representation.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Which brings us to that final thought from C. S. Lewis,
which really focuses on the purpose.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Yes, he said the Son of God became a man
to enable men to become sons of God.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Focusing entirely on the relational outcome the destiny offered, not
the biological impossibility exactly.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
It's about transformation and relationship, not literal parentage.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
A profound idea to reflect on. Thank you for joining
us for this deep dive. We'll see you next time.
Welcome back to the deep dive. Today. We're waiting into
some pretty deep theological waters.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
We really are.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
We're looking at a question that comes up often and
very sincerely in dialogue between Christians.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
And Muslims, that question about divine sonship.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Exactly, God is one how can he possibly have a
son without needing a wife?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
And it's so important to start by respecting that question seriously.
It comes from this incredibly deep shared reverence for God's
absolute uniqueness is transcendent his unity what Islamic theology calls
tahid right, the pure oneness of God. The concern is
actually noble. It's about protecting God's majesty from well human biology.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Yeah, that makes complete sense. The confusion kicks in when
we sort of map our own limitations onto the infinite
precisely so to get past that, we want to use
a kind of Socratic approach today, not debating, but questioning
the underlying assumptions together.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Searching for clarity through reasoning. And the launching point is
that actually right there in the shared text. Okay, think
about the creation of Adam. The Koran says God created
him without a father or a mother. So the question
becomes did God need a wife to create Adam? Or
can God just act beyond biology?
Speaker 1 (01:13):
Okay, let's really unpack that. Let's use the logic found
in both traditions about God's power.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Well, the absolute baseline, the non negotiable truth for both
is that God creates by his word alone, un exactly
be and it is. He doesn't need processes or partnerships
or biology. His command is enough.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
And what's really striking is how the sources, specifically the
Koran here, draw a direct line between Adam's creation and
Jesus's creation. Sarah three, verse fifty nine says, Indeed, the
example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam.
He created him from dust. Then he said to him be,
and he was.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
It's such a powerful length. Theologically speaking, it forces us
to ask, doesn't it. Yeah, If God created Adam with
no parents just by saying be, why would we suddenly
think he's limited by needing a wife. When it comes to.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Jesus, it feels like a strange inconsistency. We accept this
incredible non biological power for Adam, but then we seem
to forget it completely when Jesus enters the picture. Even
the verses that clarify Jesus isn't a biological.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Son like Surah nineteen point thirty five.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Right, where God just decrees it b and it is
that verse itself confirms God operates beyond biology.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
And realizing that, as scholars like doctor Isada Laser point out,
that's the real breakthrough moment. Okay, the instant we grasp
that neither faith actually believes God reproduces like humans do.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
The surface objection kind of dissolves exactly.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
Then the conversation shifts. It becomes about meaning, not mechanics.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
And you know, we use this kind of non biological
son or father language all the time anyway. We do
think about founding fathers of a nation, or in Arabic
there's the term iban al sabil son of the road, yeah,
meaning a traveler obviously not the roads, biological kid, or
teachers calling students their sons. It shows the words the
cells are flexible metaphorical.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
So if we agree it's not biology, then what is
the relationship being described by Christians?
Speaker 1 (03:07):
Ah? Okay, now we're getting into the really deep end.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
This takes us to God's eternal nature, his attributes, specifically
the concept of the Word of God Coloma law.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
Right, So, moving beyond human creation, we're now talking about
God's own being before time, and.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
Standard Islamic theology affirms that God's word is eternal, it's uncreated,
It exists forever with God.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
It wasn't like God woke up one day and decided
to have a word.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
No, it's part of who God is eternally.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
But that raises a tricky point, doesn't it It does.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
It's a theological tightrope. If God's word is eternal and uncreated,
existing alongside him, how do you describe that relationship without
making it sound like a separate entity from God? Is
it just an attribute? Is it distinct?
Speaker 1 (03:51):
And this is where the paths is diverge a bit
in explaining how that eternal word is revealed.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
For Muslims, God's eternal word became manifest as a book,
the Koran, the divine speech in human language, Right, the
revelation is textual, Whereas for Christians, that eternal word, the logos,
became manifest as a person. In Jesus Christ John's gospel territory.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
The revelation is personal incarnate.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Yeah, it's a difference in the mode of that revelation.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
And what's truly fascinating is that the Koran itself uses
titles for Jesus that echo this, you.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Mean, Kalimatola and ru Allah precisely.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Sua four point one point seventy one calls him Word
of God and Spirit from God. These are unique titles.
No other prophet gets them. So the question becomes, what
does it imply about Jesus's nature if he's identified so
closely with God's own eternal word and spirit.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
Okay, So the Christian response to that, trying to explain
this eternal relationship without biology is the concept of eternal generation.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
Right. It's an attempt to articulate a relationship that has
no beginning.
Speaker 1 (04:54):
The classic analogy may be helpful, may be limited. Is
the Sun in its.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Light mm hm. The light is generated by the sun,
but it's existed as long as the sun.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
They share the same essence. Light is inherent to the Sun.
You can't separate them, and the Sun doesn't need a
partner to produce rais.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
It's about an eternal essential outflow or relationship, not a
creation event in time. That's the relational meaning.
Speaker 1 (05:15):
Christians intent understanding. That helps frame the next big challenge,
which is just language itself.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Oh, absolutely, the inadequacy of human words. When we try
to talk about God.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
We're using finite created concepts to try and grasp the
infinite creator. We inevitably fall back on analogies, on anthropomorphisms.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Describing God in human like terms, because it's all we have.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
And here's a really key question for you listening. If
both traditions accept that when the Qur'an mentions God's hands
or face, it doesn't mean literal body part.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Right, we interpret those metaphorically.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Then why the insistence that when the Bible uses sun
it must mean literal biological offspring.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
It seems inconsistent, doesn't it. Both fates co have to
interpret divine descriptions non literally.
Speaker 1 (06:02):
We say God is Raman merciful, but we don't imagine
him having like fluctuating human emotions.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Or when the Qoran says God is closer than the
jugular vein, nobody thinks that means God is physically inside
our necks.
Speaker 1 (06:14):
These are clearly metaphors pointing to deeper truths about God's
care or knowledge.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
They have to be. And there's linguistic nuance here too,
especially in Arabic. When Arabic speaking Christians historically used iban
allah son of God. They chose ibin that word has
a broader relational sense soun descendant, member of a group.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
They specifically avoided the word walid, which means balad implies
direct biological offspring progeny, the very thing they weren't trying
to say. So the language choice itself guys away from
the biological that's fascinating.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
It suggests we really need to move past the most literal,
almost crude interpretation exactly.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Professor Lemin Santa made this point. Theology isn't about finding
the truest possible meaning of divine language, but the richest
the intended meaning.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
Okay, so let's get to that intended meaning. What do
Christians mean by son of God? If not biology.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
They're defining Jesus by his relationship to the Father. It's
about perfect representation, essential unity, and an eternal connection.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Not origins, but identity and function.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
Precisely, it speaks to who he is in relation to God.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
So what does that perfect representation actually entail, Well, it.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Means sharing the divine nature itself. He's called light from light,
very God of very God in the creeds. Okay, it
means he perfectly reveals the Father. Think of the New
Testament statement, whoever has seen me has seen the.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
Father, implying an identity of essence, and that.
Speaker 2 (07:42):
He is the exact representation of his being. It's language
trying to convey shared identity, shared essence, perfect revelation.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
Now here's where it gets really interesting, because even if
you just stick to the Koronic text, Okay, the Qoran
itself grants Jesus unique abilities in Surah three, verse forty nine,
that no other prophet has a just creating life, breathing
life into clay birds, knowing the unseen, telling people what
they store in their houses, power over death, raising the dead,
(08:12):
and sinlessness.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
That's quite a list. It's qualitatively different from other prophets roles.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
It seems to set him apart.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
Categorically, it does, and it resonates with something doctor Nabil
Crochi noted in his work What was that? He reflected
that essentially all other prophets point away from themselves towards God.
They say, listen to.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
God, right, they're messengers.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
But Jesus consistently points to himself as the way to God.
Come to me, follow me. I am the way that
suggests a unique, almost divine claim about his own role.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
A claim that understandably raises that final big concern, God's
transcendence and unity.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
M hm, the ta hid concern. Does calling Jesus son
of God, even metaphorically, somehow compromise God's absolute oneness or
make God seem less transcendent?
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Does it somehow limit God?
Speaker 2 (09:03):
That worry comes from a place of deep piety. Absolutely,
But let's flip the question for a moment. Okay, does
God become less than God if he chooses to interact
with his creation in a unique intimate way, or does
it perhaps show that God is even more powerful, more relational,
more capable that our limited categories allow.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Huh, I hadn't thought of it quite like that. We
often define God by what we think he can't do,
rather than what he can.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Exactly, and our sources give us analogies for this kind
of divine interaction without limitation.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
Like the burning bush, perfect example.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
God speaks from within the bush. His presence is in creation,
but the bush isn't consumed. God isn't limited by the bush.
He's simultaneously present and transcendent.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Okay, that makes sense.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
What's another one think about? The idea of a great
king who chooses to walk among his people disguised as
a commoner. He takes on their experience, walks their streets,
eats their food. But does he stop being the king?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Oh, his royal nature is unchanged.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Exactly, His essence remains even while he voluntarily enters into
the human condition. It highlights the humility and power involved
in such an act.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
It's a powerful image. Obviously, the Christian claim of incarnation
is far more profound than that, But the principle.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
The principles that interaction doesn't necessarily mean limitation. We absolutely
affirm the shared belief there is nothing like him. Soa
forty two point one one God is unique, utterly unique.
But does being unique mean God cannot choose to reveal
himself from within creation while remaining utterly transcendent above it.
Maybe his uniqueness includes the capacity for that kind of
(10:37):
surprising self revelation.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
So, wrapping this up, where does this leave us? What's
the core takeaway?
Speaker 2 (10:43):
I think the core takeaway is that the language of
divine sonship in its intended Christian context, is fundamentally about
an eternal relational identity, not biological reproduction.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
It's about essence and representation.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Exactly, and the shared example of Adam's creation actually supports
this by showing God's power operates completely beyond any need
for biology.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
So we agree on the foundation.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
God is one, absolutely undivided, unique. But maybe the final
thought for you, the listener, is how we understand that oneness?
Speaker 1 (11:14):
What do you mean?
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Is God's oneness like mathematical oneness, simple solitary one equals one?
Or could it be a unique divine unity, something more
complex and dynamic than our human maths can capture.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Interesting? Are there analogies for that kind of complex unity?
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Well, people point to things in creation. Light is both
wave and particle one phenomenon dual nature. Water is H
two O one substance but exists as ice liquid scheme. Right.
These aren't perfect analogies for the trinity, of course, nothing is,
but they hint that unity isn't always simple singularity. The
Christian understanding isn't one plus one plus one or three polytheism.
(11:54):
It's trying to describe a mystery of unity more like
one times one times one still equals one, a single
divine essence shared in eternal relationship.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
So the real question for ongoing dialogue. Isn't that initial
biological one, How can God have a son without a wife, because,
as we've seen, both traditions essentially reject the premiss The deeper,
richer question is what is God revealing about his own nature,
his love, his plan through this language of father and son?
Speaker 2 (12:23):
What is the meaning embedded in that relational metaphor? It
points entirely towards relationship and representation.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Which brings us to that final thought from C. S. Lewis,
which really focuses on the purpose.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
Yes, he said the Son of God became a man
to enable men to become sons of God.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Focusing entirely on the relational outcome the destiny offered, not
the biological impossibility exactly.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
It's about transformation and relationship, not literal parentage.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
A profound idea to reflect on. Thank you for joining
us for this deep dive. We'll see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.