Did Jesus Redeem Mankind? — Page 107
107 happens that later on he files claim of inheritance citing witnesses that he had been accepted as son in their presence. . It is recognized on all hands that such terms are expressive. of affection. In the same way, mother a uses similar terms in respect of her child, as, for instance, she would call him the apple of her eyes. Now it never happens that a live child is required to be buried with the mother, should she happen to die, because he was no more a child but that he was the apple of the deceased's eyes. None is known to have done such a stupid thing in the world. It is common knowledge that all such epithets are expressions of endearment and affection. Like words are sometime employed by. God the Almighty in respect of His favoured servants;. He sometimes calls them His children as he called the Messiah (peace be on him), or, for that matter, he used the term in respect of several other prophets. The naming of a particular person as son would not therefore mean that the Only God had henceforth ceased to be or that henceforward there shall be two or three gods. . Briefly speaking, the above quotation indicates that according to the Messiah (peace be on him), God is a different person, other than the Messiah. That is why the Only God has been spoken of as distinct from the Messiah. If the latter were God, he need not have been mentioned separately. The. Only God would have included God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. But he has been mentioned apart from the Only God; it means, therefore, that he is not a part of the person of the Only God. These quotations thus establish that the term "Son of God” was not used in the literal sense, in respect of the Messiah but that it was employed only as a metaphoric expression.