Sixteen Christian Arguments for the Divinity of Christ — A Complete Refutation from the Bible Itself

Christ, peace be upon him, never said “I am God” or “Worship me.” The absence of any such explicit text is itself the greatest proof that the Christian arguments for his divinity depend entirely on interpretation — and every one of those interpretations collapses under examination of the same Bible that generates it.

Praise be to God alone, and prayers and peace be upon the one after whom there is no prophet. Christians have begun distributing pamphlets and booklets among Muslims at book fairs and in forums, claiming to prove the divinity of Christ, peace be upon him. These pamphlets do not contain any evidence that indicates, even remotely, the divinity of Christ. The existence of an explicit text on the tongue of Christ in which he says “I am God” or “Worship me” is completely impossible — and therefore they resort to interpreting texts attributed to him without evidence, in a way that agrees with what they wish to promote. Their very need for interpretation is the greatest proof that no explicit text exists.

This response addresses sixteen arguments drawn from the most prominent missionary writings circulating among Muslims, including “What Is the Meaning of Christ, the Son of God?” by a group of servants of the Gospel, “Christ… Who Is He?” by Dr. Adel Wahba, “The Divinity of Christ… Who Hides the Sun?” by the Church of Saints Mark the Apostle and Pope Peter, and “Show Me Whether Christ Said I Am God or Worship Me?” by Youssef Riad.

Christ, peace be upon him, spoke of servitude and approved it as a method and belief throughout his life. How can someone who refused to be called righteous — because righteousness belongs to God alone — accept being called a god with God?

---

1 — Emmanuel: God With Us

Christians cite Matthew 1:18–23, where the writer of the Gospel of Matthew quotes a prophecy from Isaiah:

The Isaiah Context: A Story Seven Centuries Before Christ

What came in the Book of Isaiah about the story of Emmanuel does not mean Christ, peace be upon him. Christ was never called by this name in his lifetime. The story in Isaiah speaks of events that happened centuries before Christ — God made the birth of this Emmanuel a sign of the end of evil from the children of Israel during the reign of King Ahaz and the destruction of the Kingdom of Razin.

The heart of Ahaz, king of Judah, trembled because the states of Israel and Syria conspired against him. The Lord commanded Isaiah to go with his son Shear-jashub and reassure Ahaz. The Lord promised him that in no more than 65 years, the states of Israel and Syria would be defeated. God gave him a sign that victory was imminent — the birth of Emmanuel. How can Christians claim this prophecy applies to Christ when there were more than 700 years between him and Isaiah?

The commentators confirm: “This prophecy (Emmanuel) is mentioned in Isaiah 7:14 and was inspired around 740 BC.” (The Great Treasure in Interpreting the Bible — Dr. William Adey: Interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew, p. 9)

The Distortion of the Hebrew Word Alma

This text was distorted from the original to become a prophecy about Christ and his virgin mother. The old translations of the Torah — the translation of Aquila, the translation of Theodosius, and the translation of Symmachus, all dating to the second century AD — put “the young woman” instead of “the virgin.” The term “young woman” includes the virgin and others.

The Catholic translation itself reflects this: the Arabic Van Dyck translation uses “the girl” instead of “the virgin,” and the biblical scholars comment in the Catholic translation: “The Hebrew word ‘alma’ refers either to a young girl, or to a woman who had not been married for a long time. However, the Greek Septuagint translated this word as ‘virgin.’ It is a witness to the ancient Jewish interpretation that the Gospel would adopt, as Matthew 1:23 sees this phrase as a reference to the virginal conception of Christ.” (Catholic translation, p. 1540)

In other words, the writer of the Gospel of Matthew fabricated the prophecy and distorted the original Hebrew word “alma” to refer to Christ and his virgin mother.

The Name Does Not Imply Divinity

The word “Emmanuel” meaning “God is with us” does not require that the one named by it be a god. God’s being with us is not evidence of someone’s divinity. The presence of Jesus, peace be upon him, among us is evidence that God cares for us and is keen on guiding us. That is what is meant by God being with us — He sent messengers out of His mercy.

God said to Moses and Aaron, peace be upon them:

If Christians infer from “Emmanuel” that Christ is God because Emmanuel means “God with us,” they must also believe that “Tobit” is God — for Tobit is a Hebrew word meaning “God is good,” as stated in the introduction to the Book of Tobit: “Tobit is a Hebrew word consisting of two syllables (Tobit-Yah) and it means: God is good. This word appears in the Holy Bible as the name of more than one person.” (The Holy Bible — Second Canonical Books, p. 17)

The word “Tobit” in its meaning “God is good” is stronger than “Emmanuel” meaning “God is with us” as a basis for inferring divinity — yet none of the Jews said that the person called Tobit was the good God.

---

2 — And the Word Was God

The Philonic Origin of the Logos

The scholar Deedat points out in his book “Christ in Islam” that this text was plagiarized by the writer of the Gospel of John from Philo of Alexandria (d. 40 AD), and that with its philosophical constructions it is foreign to the environment of Christ, the simplicity of his sayings, and the commonness of his disciples — especially John, whom the Book of Acts describes as uneducated:

Biblical scholars in their comments on the text in the Catholic translation acknowledge: “Christ is called ‘Logos.’ This word may be translated as ‘speech,’ but it seems that we are dealing with a word that was influenced by the ways of expression of wisdom literature and Hellenistic religion.” (Catholic translation, p. 289)

The priest Ibrahim Saeed, former head of the Evangelical community in Egypt, says in his explanation of the Gospel of John: “In the beginning was the Word. The Word… How profound is this description with which Christ is described here, as he is described as ‘the Word’ and in Greek ‘Logos.’ Providence prepared the minds of humans to understand this word ‘the Word’ before John uttered it. The Jewish mentality had become accustomed to it from the writings of the Jew Angelus, who translated the Torah from Hebrew to Aramaic in the second century BC. In his translation, he replaced the name of God with the word ‘Mamra,’ which in Arabic corresponds to ‘the Word.’ As for the Greek mentality, it was saturated with the word ‘Logos’ from the writings of ‘Philo,’ the Alexandrian philosopher.”

How can a text quoted from the writings of philosophers prove the divinity of one of God’s prophets?

The Greek Manuscript Distinction

Deedat points out a tampering in the Greek translation. The text “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God” uses the Greek word ho theos — God with the definite article, indicating real divinity. But the following phrase “And the Word was God” uses the Greek word theos without the definite article, which in the English translation should be rendered “god” with a lowercase letter, indicating metaphorical or delegated divinity — as in Exodus 7:1: “I have made you a god to Pharaoh.” The English translation distorted the Greek text by using “God” denoting real divinity in both places, when the Greek itself distinguished between them.

What “Beginning,” “Word,” and “God” Actually Mean

The word “beginning” is not necessarily eternity. It is used in Genesis 1:1 for the beginning of creation, in Matthew 19:8 for the time of revelation, and in Luke 1:2, John 6:64, John 8:44, and John 8:25 for familiar historical periods. Christians cannot claim the meaning of eternity without strong proof.

The word “the Word” has various meanings in the Bible — the divine command by which creatures were made (Genesis 1:3), the promised Word on the tongue of the prophets, or the one who reveals the Word of God. The meaning Christians want — the second person of the Trinity — was not mentioned in any of the prophets’ books.

The claim that “the Word was God” makes Christ God in essence produces this logical test: substitute “God” for “Word” and read: “In the beginning was God, and God was with God, and God was God, God was in the beginning with God.” The formula is incoherent if taken as a statement of essential identity.

Judges in the Torah were called what Christians think was called Christ:

And God said to Moses:

Being “with God” does not mean equality, as in Eve’s saying: “I have acquired a man from the Lord” (Genesis 4:1) — Cain is not equal to the Lord even though he came from Him.

---

3 — I and the Father Are One

The text from its beginning speaks of a metaphorical moral issue — Christ’s sheep follow him, he gives them eternal life, no one can snatch them from God who is greater than all. God and Christ want good for his flock — the unity is unity of purpose, not of essence. Christ made this explicit by saying that God’s will is greater than his own.

The Jews in Solomon’s porch misunderstood this — and the Christians misunderstand it identically. Christ knew they had misunderstood and corrected them:

He cited Psalm 82:6 — the children of Israel are called gods in the figurative sense. Christ is more deserving of this unity than the rest of the children of Israel, but it remains the unity of purpose.

The decisive proof that this unity is of purpose and not essence is Christ’s prayer for his disciples in John 17, which uses identical language:

If the unity of John 10:30 proves the divinity of Christ, then John 17:20–23 requires that the disciples also be divine — which no Christian claims. The unity is the same in both passages. It is the unity of purpose and path.

---

4 — He Who Has Seen Me Has Seen the Father

To understand this text, its context must be read from the beginning. Christ said to his disciples: “I go to prepare a place for you.” Thomas misunderstood and asked about a real physical way. Christ corrected him: “I am the way, the truth, and the life” — the journey is spiritual, not spatial. Then Philip asked to be shown God, and Christ rebuked him and said:

How can you ask that, Philip? You are a Jew who knows that God cannot be seen. The one who saw me saw the Father when he saw the works of God — the miracles — that God performed through Christ. This is exactly like:

The child is not Christ, and Christ is not God in that text — but receiving the child in obedience to Christ is as receiving Christ, and receiving Christ is as receiving the one who sent him. The logic is the same in John 14:9.

The vision is spiritual — the vision of insight, not sight. The decisive proof: “Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me” (John 14:19). He is speaking of the vision of faith, not physical sight. And:

If no one has ever seen God, then seeing Christ cannot mean seeing God in the literal sense. The text becomes a vision of knowledge — as Christ said plainly: “You do not know me, nor do you know my Father. If you had known me, you would have known my Father” (John 8:19). Knowledge, not sight.

---

5 — I Am in the Father and the Father Is in Me

Christians cite: “That you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him” (John 10:38), and “He who has seen me has seen the Father… the Father dwelling in me” (John 14:9–10), and “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

The investigators have shown that what is meant by indwelling is a metaphorical indwelling, as it came regarding others without dispute. The same indwelling language applies to all believers:

And to all who keep the commandments:

And to all who love one another:

And Paul says about believers:

The divine indwelling is in all believers — and no one disputes that this is metaphorical, meaning the indwelling of His guidance and support. The same applies to the indwelling in Christ.

---

6 — Before Abraham Was, I Was

What is meant is not the real existence of Christ as a person, but the predestined and elective existence — God’s choice and selection of him is ancient, as Paul said about himself and his followers:

Paul and the disciples were chosen before the foundation of the world — and no one claims that Paul existed as a person in eternity. The glory Christ had with the Father before the world was is the glory of election:

And he gave the same glory to his disciples: “And I have given them the glory that you gave me” (John 17:22).

Abraham’s vision of Christ was a vision of knowledge, not a personal encounter — “for he saw me and was glad.” If taken at face value, the text’s most that it can indicate is a historical existence going back to Abraham’s time, not eternity. Abraham’s time is not eternity.

Furthermore, if Christ was older than all creatures, he had a moment of beginning — as Paul himself said:

He is a creature — “the firstborn of creation.” Creation is incompatible with eternity. The created is not the Creator.

Among those who shared in this alleged eternity was Melchizedek, about whom Paul claims:

Why do Christians not say that Melchizedek is divine? He is described as having no beginning or end — attributes they associate with divinity in Christ. He is even superior to Christ in those terms, since he has no mother and no genealogy, while Christ has a mother and is given genealogies by both Matthew and Luke.

And Solomon said about Wisdom in Proverbs 8:12–25: “The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his way, before his works of old, from everlasting I was established, from the beginning, from the beginning of the earth…” This is Solomon speaking of wisdom — his own attribute — and the pre-existence language applies to him as it applies to Christ. The eternity in all these texts is the eternity of God’s knowledge and thought, not of existence and body:

As for the Book of Revelation’s claim that Christ is the Alpha and the Omega: those expressions were issued by one of the angels at the end of the book, as the context makes plain (Revelation 22:8–13). The Book of Revelation has been the subject of dispute among Christian scholars as to whether it is revelation or myth. The Catholic translation states: “The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Revelation were the most disputed. Their authenticity to the apostles was strongly denied for a long time.” (Catholic translation, p. 10)

---

7 — God Appeared in the Flesh

This is one of the most important pieces of evidence Christians use to prove the doctrine of divine incarnation.

The Manuscript Evidence

The word “God” has been deleted from this text in the Catholic Arabic translation. Arab Catholics did not see “God” in the flesh — their translation omits the word entirely. Is this contradiction not enough to invalidate the use of this verse to prove the Incarnation?

Where did the word “God” disappear in the Catholic translation? The verb in the text is in the passive voice — “appeared” — which after the deletion of “God” refers to “the mystery of piety” — meaning that the great mystery of piety is what appeared in the flesh. If the piety of God appears in the heart and limbs of a person, does that person’s status rise and become elevated among people? And if that person is a pious prophet, is that piety not justified in spirit, preserved by the care of God and His angels, and believed in by nations, and raised in glory?

The Contradiction Between Arabic and English Versions

The English text of the Book of Life “Arabic-English” translation says: “Christ who came to earth as a human being.” The Arabic text of the same translation says: “And by everyone’s admission, great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh.” These are supposed to be translations of the same text. They say completely different things.

Other English editions confirm the non-God reading:

New International Reader’s Version: “Jesus appeared in a body.” New Living Translation: “Christ appeared in the flesh.”

---

8 — Who Is the Image of God

Christians cite: “The glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4), and “Christ Jesus also, who, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:6–7), and “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15).

These sayings were made by Paul, and are found in none of Christ’s disciples and apostles — which alone casts a shadow of doubt on them. Then the image is different from the self. The image of God means God’s representative in conveying His law, as Paul said in another place:

The man is the image of God — meaning God delegated authority over woman to the man. No Christian claims this makes every man divine. Just as Christ being in the image of God cannot be used as evidence of His divinity, Adam shared this image:

If Christians insist on combining the image with divinity, then Isaiah contradicts them:

---

9 — They Fell Down and Worshipped Him

The Gospels speak of some of Christ’s contemporaries prostrating before him — the father of the bleeding girl (Matthew 9:18), the leper (Matthew 8:2), the Magi (Matthew 2:11). Christians see in Christ’s acceptance of this evidence that he was God, contrasting it with Peter’s refusal of Cornelius’s prostration (Acts 10:25).

Prostration is a manifestation of respect, but it does not necessarily mean that all prostration is worship. The same Bible contains:

Jacob, his wives, and his sons prostrated to Esau, son of Isaac. Moses prostrated to his father-in-law (Exodus 18:7). Joseph’s brothers prostrated to Joseph (Genesis 42:6). The leaders of Judah prostrated to King Joash (2 Chronicles 24:7).

Why do Christians consider bowing to Jesus as worship while bowing to all these others is not worship?

Prostration of worship is only for God Almighty — and this is what Christ himself said:

As for prostration of greeting, glorification, and reverence — there are many examples in the Old and New Testaments.

The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, addressed this when Muadh prostrated to him after returning from the Levant:

Muadh saw what the Christians in the Levant were doing to their bishops and patriarchs — prostration and glorification — because this has been their practice since ancient times. Why then is prostration to Jesus and only Jesus cited as evidence of divinity?

Al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir said in his commentary: “The meaning of prostration here is submission and surrender, like prostration when facing peace as was in the law of those before us, and as Allah commanded the angels to prostrate to Adam.” (Stories of the Prophets, p. 493)

---

10 — Your Sins Are Forgiven

Christians cite Christ’s forgiveness of the paralytic and Mary Magdalene as evidence of divinity, since forgiveness belongs to God alone.

But if we return to the story of the sinner, Christ did not claim to be the one who forgave her sin — he told her that her sin had been forgiven, and then clarified: “Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (Luke 7:50). God Almighty is the one who forgave.

In the story of the paralytic, Christ said: “Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you” — informing of forgiveness, not claiming to personally grant it. When the Jews accused him of blasphemy, Christ corrected them:

The crowds glorified God “who had given such authority to men” — not a god who stood before them. The authority was given, not personally possessed. Christ confirmed this:

If Christ had personal possession of the authority to forgive, he would have forgiven them himself. He asked his Father. And this authority was given to others:

The Church inherited this authority from Peter and the disciples — priests forgive sinners through confession, relying on the authority given to Peter in Matthew 16:19. This does not make the Pope divine.

It is not known from these authentic hadiths that Muhammad, peace be upon him, is a god — rather it is known from them that God Almighty is the source of this forgiveness and that the Prophet, peace be upon him, is only a conveyor of the message from his Lord.

---

11 — God Is the Judge

Paul says: “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom” (2 Timothy 4:1). Christians see in this evidence of divinity because the Torah says: “God is the Judge” (Psalm 50:6).

But there are texts that prevent Christ from being the judge:

Christ will not condemn anyone — he confirmed this himself. And if Christians insist that judgment is one of the works of Christ, others share in it — including the twelve disciples:

And the saints and Paul will participate:

The argument that Christ’s judgment proves his divinity is refuted by the Gospels themselves.

---

12 — He Was in the World and the World Was Created by Him

Christians cite Colossians 1:16–17, Ephesians 3:9, John 1:10, and Hebrews 1:2, where Paul attributes creative acts to Christ.

What is meant by these texts is not the creation of existence but the new creation — the creation of guidance. David spoke of this when he called upon God:

Paul said about believers in Christ:

And: “For in Christ neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation” (Galatians 6:15). And: “Put on the new man, created according to God in righteousness” (Ephesians 4:24). And James: “Of his own will, he gave us birth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures” (James 1:18).

Paul’s statement “For in Him were all things created, both in the heavens and on the earth” is an exaggeration well-known in biblical texts — like Moses’ statement to the children of Israel: “Behold, you are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude” (Deuteronomy 1:10).

Christ cannot be the Creator of the heavens and the earth in any other sense — since he is himself a creation. The created is not the Creator. And he who was unable to restore life to himself when he died is too incapable to be the Creator:

God raised him — he did not raise himself.

---

13 — He Who Comes from Above Is Above All

Christians cite John 3:31 — “He who comes from above is above all” — and John 8:23 — “I am from above. You are of this world, but I am not of this world” — as evidence of a unique divine origin.

The heavenly coming means the coming of gifts and the law — and this is the same with all the prophets, including John the Baptist. Christ asked the Jews: “Where was the baptism of John? From heaven? Or from men?” (Matthew 21:25–26) — implying that John’s origin was also from heaven.

The Gospels mention that everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ was born from above:

Christ also said about his disciples what he said about himself — that they are not of this world:

If “not of this world” in its literal meaning entailed divinity, then all the disciples would have to be gods. The expression is a metaphor: so-and-so is not of this world — meaning he does not live for the world and does not care about it. This is the case with all the prophets.

---

14 — He Ascended to Heaven and Sat at the Right Hand of God

The ascension was not unique to Christ. The same Bible records:

And:

If ascension to heaven were evidence of divinity, then Enoch and Elijah would be gods. No one has said this.

The Manuscript Evidence Against Mark 16:9–20

The paragraph in which Christ’s ascension is mentioned came in the Gospel of Mark, and this paragraph did not appear in the oldest manuscripts:

The Catholic translation states: “It is generally accepted that the conclusion as it is now (16/9-20) was added to alleviate the sudden pause at the end of the book in verse 8. But we will never know whether the original conclusion of the book was lost or whether Mark saw that the reference to the Galilean visionary tradition in the verse was not sufficient to conclude his narrative.” (Catholic translation, p. 124)

Some Christians argue that the ascension appears at the end of Luke 24:51. But the Gospel of Mark is the source of the Gospel of Luke. If this paragraph is not found in the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark, where did the writer of the Gospel of Luke get it from?

---

15 — Using the Words Lord and God in Reference to Christ

Christians cite the terms Lord and God applied to Christ — in Isaiah 9:6, Psalm 110:1–4, Romans 9:5, John 20:28, Acts 10:36, and Revelation 17:14 — as evidence of his divinity.

Names Do Not Confer Divinity

Paul and Barnabas were called gods when they performed miracles: “The gods have come down to us in the image of men” (Acts 14:11). Their names did not make them gods. Among Hebrew names: Ishmael means “God hears,” Jehoiakim means “God lifts up,” Joshua means “the Lord saves,” Tobiah means “God is good.” Their names did not require their divinity. And: “They shall put my name on the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:27) — yet they are not gods.

The Word Lord Means Master or Teacher

The word “Lord” used for Christ is in foreign translations meaning “master” or “teacher.” The Samaritan woman said: “Lord, I perceive that you are a prophet” (John 4:19) — she called him Lord and simultaneously identified him as a prophet, not a god. Mary Magdalene addressed him as “Rabboni, which means Teacher” and then told the disciples she had seen the Lord (John 20:16–17) — Lord and Teacher are synonymous here.

Thomas’s Exclamation

Thomas’s saying “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28) was not in the context of addressing Christ but was an exclamation of astonishment when he saw Christ alive after thinking he was dead. What confirms this: Christ said in the same context that he would ascend to “my God” (John 20:17). Christ has a God — he is not God. And Christ refused to be called even “good” because “No one is good except one, that is, God” (Matthew 19:17). How could he accept to be called Lord and God in truth and remain silent?

Isaiah 9:6 — None of These Names Were Applied to Christ

None of the names in Isaiah 9:6 — Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace — were ever given to Christ in any text of the Holy Bible. They speak of a victorious, triumphant prophet who will rule over his people and be the heir to the kingdom of David. Christ did not rule over his people for a single day. He fled when they tried to make him king:

And: “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). And the Isaiah text speaks of a Prince of Peace, while the Gospels attribute to Christ: “I have not come to send peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34). And of an Almighty One — while Christ said: “I can do nothing of myself; as I hear, I judge” (John 5:30), and “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father doing” (John 5:19).

The Holy Bible also forbids Christ from being a king over the children of Israel, as God forbade the kingship to the descendants of Jehoiakim, one of Christ’s ancestors:

Christ is from the descendants of this king — and the writer of the Gospel of Matthew omitted Jehoiakim’s name from the lineage of Christ, between Josiah and his grandson Jeconiah (Matthew 1:10–11), for reasons the astute reader will understand.

The Word God and Lord Applied to Non-Divine Beings Throughout the Bible

God and Lord are applied in the Bible to: angels (Judges 13:21–22, Genesis 16:11–13, Exodus 13:21–14:19), prophets (Exodus 4:16, Exodus 7:1), judges (Exodus 20:5–6, Exodus 22:8–9, Deuteronomy 19:17, Psalm 82:1), the entire children of Israel (Psalm 82:6), those who love one another (John 17), believers in Christ (John 1:12), Satan (2 Corinthians 4:5), and the belly (Philippians 3:19).

When Christ himself heard such uses, he made it clear that there is one true God:

This is the clearest possible statement: you — the one being addressed — are the only true God. And Jesus Christ is the one you sent. This is what Muslims believe about him, peace be upon him.

---

16 — Son of God

Gospel texts speak about Christ as the Son of God. The investigators draw attention first to the fact that Christ in the Gospels did not call himself the Son of God except once in John 10:37, and in other cases his contemporaries and disciples used the expression.

Singer says in his book “The Dictionary of the Bible”: “It is not certain that Jesus himself used that expression.”

Charles Juniper says in “Christianity: Its Origins and Development”: “Christ never claimed to be the awaited Messiah, nor did he say about himself that he was the Son of God, for this is a language that Christians later used to express Jesus.” He believes: “The concept of ‘Son of God’ originated from the world of Greek thought.”

Some believe Paul was the first to use the word — Christ’s own language was “servant of God,” and the Greek word for servant (pais) also means child, so Paul replaced “servant” with “child” to be closer to the new converts from the pagans.

Eighty-Three Son of Man Texts

These texts that describe Christ as the Son of God are opposed by eighty-three texts that called Christ “the Son of Man.” If those that called him Son of God indicate his divinity, then these confirm his humanity:

Christ is therefore not God.

The Term Son of God Applied to Many Others

Adam: “Adam is the son of God” (Luke 3:38). Solomon: “He shall build me a house… I will be his father, and he shall be my son” (1 Chronicles 17:12–13). David: “You are my son, today I have begotten you” (Psalm 2:7). Angels: “as the angels are sons of God” (Luke 20:36). Israel: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son” (Hosea 11:1), and “Israel is My son, My firstborn” (Exodus 4:22). Ephraim: “Ephraim is my firstborn” (Jeremiah 21:9). The disciples: “I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” (John 20:17). All peacemakers: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God” (Matthew 5:9). All believers: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God” (1 John 5:1).

The firstborn status is applied to Israel (Exodus 4:22), Ephraim (Jeremiah 21:9), and David (Psalm 89:26–27) — as well as to Christ. The title “Son of God Most High” is applied to Christ (Luke 1:32) and to all the children of Israel (Psalm 82:6) and to the disciples (Luke 6:35).

Christians cannot make the texts about Christ evidence of his divinity and then prevent the application of the same terms to Adam, Solomon, David, Jacob, and all believers. Their claim of a unique meaning for Christ requires a proof they do not possess.

The centurion who saw the crucified one dying said: “Truly this man was the Son of God” (Mark 15:39). When Luke told the same story, he replaced the phrase with its synonym: “Truly this man was righteous” (Luke 23:47). Son of God equals righteous — it is a title of piety, not a statement of divinity.

The demons called Christ “the Son of God” — and Christ rebuked them and did not allow them to speak:

If Christ’s silence or acceptance of the title proves his divinity, then his rebuking of the demons who applied it to him refutes it.

And Christ himself declared what all of this terminology means:

I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Jesus is the servant and messenger of Allah. This is what Muslims believe about him, peace and blessings of God be upon him.

---

---

References and Sources:

1. The Holy Quran.
2. Sunnah Books.
3. The Holy Bible — Al-Fandik Translation.
4. The Holy Bible — Translation of the Book of Life.
5. The Holy Bible — Catholic Translation of the Jesuit Order.
6. The Holy Bible — Second Canonical Books.
7. The New Testament — Translation of the Book of Life “Arabic-English.”
8. Explanation of the Gospel of John — Priest Ibrahim Saeed.
9. The Great Treasure in the Interpretation of the Bible — Dr. William Addy.
10. The Guidance and Light Series — Dr. Munqidh Al-Saqqar.
11. Introduction to the Gospel of Barnabas — Dr. Ahmed Hegazy Al-Saqqa.
12. Interpretation of Difficult Verses — Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah.
13. Stories of the Prophets — Al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir.
14. Christ in Islam — the Scholar Ahmad Deedat.
15. Then They Say This Is from God — Engineer Mahmoud Saad Mahran.
16. Christianity in the Balance website on the Internet.