I just returned from the Evangelical Theological Society annual meetings in Milwaukee, Wisconsin where I picked up a copy of D. A. Carson鈥檚 new little book, Jesus the Son of God: A Christological Title Often Overlooked, Sometimes Misunderstood, and Currently Disputed (Crossway).聽 On the taxi ride from the airport to the conference, I briefly tried to share the Lord with a taxi driver named Hassan.聽 We were about a minute into the conversation when Hassan commented rather ardently, 鈥淲e Muslims believe that Jesus is a prophet, and not the son of God.鈥澛� I explained to him that Christians don鈥檛 believe that God had physical relations with Mary that led to her pregnancy, as many Muslims assume and consider blasphemous.聽 The problem for dialogue with Muslims like Hassan is that many Muslims think that is precisely what we Christians mean when we use the expression 鈥淪on of God鈥� in reference to Jesus鈥攚hich, of course, we don鈥檛.聽 So what if you were a Bible translator in a Muslim country and knew that many of your readers would make the same assumption that Hassan did about the expression 鈥淪on of God鈥�?聽 Perhaps you should change the words 鈥淪on of God鈥� to something else that is proximate in meaning but less offensive.聽 Or maybe you shouldn鈥檛鈥�

If you haven鈥檛 heard, there is a vigorous debate currently raging on this topic among Bible translators working in Muslim countries.聽 It鈥檚 not as simple as saying, 鈥淲ell, the Bible uses the terminology 鈥楽on of God鈥� repeatedly, so we should too.鈥澛� What if the terminology itself creates significant misunderstanding and thus is a block to gospel proclamation?聽 Can鈥檛 we simply insert something else like 鈥淢essiah,鈥� since 鈥淪on of God鈥� often carries with it messianic overtones in the Bible?聽 Or how about 鈥淏eloved of God鈥� or 鈥渢he Son who has a special relationship with God鈥�?

D. A. Carson has provided some good reasons to hold on to 鈥淪on of God鈥� in our translations, despite possible misunderstandings.聽 The first chapter of this short three-chapter book surveys the range of usage of the expression 鈥淪on of God鈥� in the Bible.聽 The second chapter delves deeper into two New Testament passages, Hebrews 1 and John 5:16-30, to lay bare some of the internal logic of those passages.聽 In this second chapter, Carson is trying to model a 鈥渢hick鈥� reading of those two passages that takes into account the reverberations of the Old Testament in the New Testament.聽 It is Carson鈥檚 contention that many translators are not sufficiently familiar with the Bible鈥檚 own intertextuality to 鈥渉ear鈥� resonances from one passage to another.聽 Many of these resonances, Carson contends, would have been heard by the Bible鈥檚 first readers and are often crucial for proper interpretation of the expression 鈥淪on of God.鈥�

Chapter three is entitled:聽 鈥楯esus the Son of God鈥� in Christian and Muslim Contexts.聽 Let me lay out for you Carson鈥檚 six main foci early in the chapter, employing his own subtitles.聽 There is a lot of wisdom packed into these observations.

  1. Not all uses of 鈥淪on of God鈥� are the same.
  2. Biblical trajectories are important if we are to understand how 鈥淪on of God鈥� commonly 鈥渨orks.鈥�
  3. The relationship between the exegesis of the biblical 鈥淪on of God鈥� passages and the categories of systematic theology is not a simple one.
  4. The 鈥渆ternal generation of the Son鈥� is especially convoluted territory.
  5. Understanding Jesus as the Son of God ought to have a bearing on our evangelism.
  6. Understanding Jesus as the Son of God ought to have a bearing on our worship.

Carson then carefully walks through an evaluation of those who would promote replacing the expression 鈥淪on of God鈥� with something else and recommends consistently leaving it as 鈥淪on of God.鈥澛� Here are a few considerations I found helpful in Carson鈥檚 discussion:

  • Carson contends that it is right and well to recognize that 鈥渟on of鈥� expressions are used in a variety of ways in the Bible.聽 But he adds that one must consider what might be lost when dispensing with theologically rich expressions like 鈥淪on of God.鈥澛� If such 鈥渓oss鈥� is in fact theologically significant, as seems to be the case in some of the 鈥淪on of God鈥� passages, translators might want to take a long pause before jettisoning 鈥淪on of God.鈥澛� For example, since the expression sometimes carries with it overtones of preexistence鈥攕omething that is important for anyone with a high Christology鈥攖ranslators need to tread carefully on such high and holy ground (my metaphor).
  • Carson argues that just because the expression 鈥淪on of God鈥� carries strong messianic overtones in many New Testament passages, this does not entail treating 鈥淪on of God鈥� and 鈥淢essiah鈥� as synonyms that can be inverted at will.聽 Having the same 鈥渞eferent鈥� is not the same thing as carrying an identical meaning.
  • Carson suggests that the biblical trajectories from Old Testament to New Testament that lead to the employment of the expression 鈥淪on of God鈥� in the New Testament need to be factored in more strongly than they often are in discussions among translators.聽 Look up passages like 2 Samuel 7:14, Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 9:6, and Psalms 89:20f and their New Testament parallels and ask yourself whether this point is significant or not.
  • Carson says that there is no language or culture鈥攐r individual in any culture鈥攖hat is quite prepared for what the Bible asserts about Jesus through its use of 鈥淪on of God terminology.聽 It isn鈥檛 as though American culture is going to 鈥済et鈥� it right away, and Iranian, Egyptian, or Indonesian cultures aren鈥檛.聽 Everyone faces a rather steep learning curve when it comes to understanding 鈥淪on of God鈥� in the Bible.聽 People in the first century faced a significant learning curve; and people will today.
  • Carson suggests that a translation that avoids using 鈥淪on of God鈥� will make it difficult for new converts to connect with the history of confessional Christianity, including early councils and creeds.聽 This will cut off new converts from their historical roots.聽 I would add to his observation that new converts who have never been exposed to the language of 鈥淪on of God鈥� get cut off from fellowship with modern Christians worldwide who regularly employ this expression.聽 Ironically, removing a familial term (鈥淪on of God鈥�) could lead to removing familial unity (鈥渂rothers and sisters in fellowship with one another鈥�).

There is a lot more in this little book, but I wanted to share with you a few nuggets from a seasoned New Testament scholar who wants to help you wrestle through a difficult鈥攂ut truly significant鈥攓uestion for evangelism, theology, and Christian unity.聽

By the way, you can pray for Hassan.聽 He was excited when I told him that I wanted to send him an Arabic Bible so he could read it for himself.聽 Perhaps he will personally come to know Messiah Jesus the Son of God as he reads about him in the Bible, God鈥檚 Holy Word.