Mauao Man

Servant, Son, or Strawman?

A Full Deconstruction of the Islamic Rebuttal to Jesus' Divine Sonship

Introduction: When Deflection Replaces Dialogue

A Christian asks a simple question:

“Why don’t Muslims believe Jesus is the Son of God, when the Gospels say he is, and he called God ‘Father’?”

Instead of engaging the question head-on, the fatwa spirals into:

Blanket rejection of the New Testament
Questionable appeals to 20th-century academic skepticism
Misunderstanding of biblical language
And a giant dose of “the Bible is corrupted, so nothing you say counts”

Let’s tackle this from the ground up.

1. "The Gospel We Believe In Isn’t the One You Have" — The Escape Hatch of Convenience

The answer begins with the usual fallback:

“The Gospel we Muslims believe in is the one revealed to Jesus—not the four Gospels you have.”

But here’s the thing:
There is no evidence whatsoever that a single, unified “Injeel” document written by Jesus ever existed—not in Islamic sources, not in history, not in archaeology.

The Quran never names this “original Gospel”
Muhammad never quotes from it
No early Islamic historian preserves a fragment of it
And no early Church father ever mentions a “book written by Jesus” being lost

It’s a mythical document invented to disqualify Christianity while upholding Islamic theology.

2. “The Gospel of John Is Fake” — But Only When It’s Inconvenient

Islam Q&A zeroes in on John’s Gospel, because that’s where the strongest affirmations of Jesus’ divinity are found.

Their tactic?

Claim it was written late (end of the 1st or 2nd century)
Attribute it to a student of Alexandrian philosophy
Quote selective lines from Encyclopaedia Britannica or unnamed “Christian scholars”

But here's what they don’t say:

The Gospel of John was universally accepted in early Christianity by the mid-2nd century
Manuscripts of John like P52 date back to 125-150 AD — too early for a complete fabrication
Internal consistency with other New Testament writings is high, especially regarding themes of Logos, divine authority, and Messiahship

And most importantly:

If John is to be dismissed for being “late,” then the Quran—written 600 years after Jesus—has zero standing in reconstructing what Jesus taught.

You can’t call John unreliable because it’s late and then quote the Quran as a corrective six centuries later.

3. “Everyone’s a Son of God, So Jesus Isn’t Special” — The Semantic Shell Game

Islam Q&A’s core argument is that:

“Son of God” is used metaphorically in the Bible
Adam, Israel, Solomon are also called “sons of God”
Therefore, Jesus isn’t uniquely divine

This is a category error.

The Bible uses “son of God” in two distinct ways:

Covenantal/metaphorical (Israel, Adam, believers)
Ontological/unique — applied exclusively to Jesus

John 1:14 says:

“The Word became flesh… the only begotten Son…”
That’s not metaphorical. That’s a claim of unique essence.

Matthew 3:17 — at Jesus’ baptism:

“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

Not “one of many sons.” Not “a servant among servants.”
The Father distinguishes him explicitly.

The Islamic counterpoint ignores this distinction entirely and reduces all uses of “son” to metaphor—even when the context clearly doesn’t support it.

4. “Jesus Is Just Another Prophet” — But the Quran Contradicts Itself

Muslims argue:

Jesus is a servant and messenger of God. Not divine. Not a son. Full stop.

But even the Quran struggles to keep Jesus “just” a prophet:

Born of a virgin (Qur’an 19:20–21)
Called the Word of God and Spirit from Him (Qur’an 4:171)
Performed miracles with no precedent — raising the dead, creating life from clay (Qur’an 3:49)
Still alive while all other prophets are dead (Qur’an 4:158)

And yet we’re told:

“He was just a messenger, like the others.”

The Quran elevates Jesus beyond the category of mere prophet — and then insists on dragging him back down to maintain Islamic theological continuity.

5. The Strawman Closes the Case

Finally, the fatwa ends with this:

“The Gospels you quote are unreliable. Your belief is like a spider web. And anyway, all believers are called sons of God.”

Translation:

“We don’t believe your texts are valid.”
“We dismiss your theological categories.”
“We won’t engage the actual argument.”

This isn’t a debate.
It’s a disengagement strategy disguised as rebuttal.

Conclusion: When You Can’t Refute, Reframe

Islam Q&A’s response doesn’t answer the Christian’s question. It avoids it by:

Discrediting the New Testament
Collapsing all uses of “Son of God” into metaphor
Cherry-picking historical doubts while ignoring Quranic gaps
And ultimately refusing to acknowledge that Jesus’ claims in context go far beyond mere prophethood

This isn’t theological analysis.
It’s polemic insulation.

Jesus didn’t die for being a prophet.
He was crucified for claiming to be divine.

That’s the issue Islam cannot afford to confront—so it rewrites the terms of the debate until nothing is left but dust.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------About the Author

Mauao Man is a blog created by a New Zealand writer who believes in following the evidence wherever it leads. From history and religion to culture and society, Mauao Man takes a clear, critical, and honest approach — challenging ideas without attacking people. Whether exploring the history of Islam in New Zealand, the complexities of faith, or the contradictions in belief systems, this blog is about asking the hard questions and uncovering the truth.

Mauao Man

Sunday, June 22, 2025