مَا ٱتَّخَذَ ٱللَّهُ مِن وَلَدٍ وَمَا كَانَ مَعَهُۥ مِنْ إِلَـٰهٍ ۚ إِذًا لَّذَهَبَ كُلُّ إِلَـٰهٍۭ بِمَا خَلَقَ وَلَعَلَا بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ ۚ سُبْحَـٰنَ ٱللَّهِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ Qur’an Al-Muminun (23:91)M a ittakha th a All a hu min waladin wam a k a na maAAahu min il a hin i th an la th ahaba kullu il a hin bim a khalaqa walaAAal a baAA d uhum AAal a baAA d in sub ha na All a hi AAamm a ya s ifoon a
This allusion to the pre-Islamic Arabian belief in angels as "God’s daughters" and the Christian dogma of Jesus’ "sonship of God" connects with the statement "they are intent on lying [to themselves]", which has been explained in the preceding note.
This is how almost all the classical commentators explain the phrase la-dhahaba bi-ma khalaqa (lit., "would surely have taken away whatever he had created"), implying that in such a hypothetical case each of the gods would have been concerned only with his own sector of creation, thus causing complete confusion in the universe.
See note [88] on 6:100 .
Cf. xvii. 42. The multiplicity of gods is intellectually indefensible, considering the unity of Design and Purpose in His wonderful Universe.