An Introduction to the Hidden Treasures of Islam — Page 101
101 and finished it at 9:15 a. m. after which it was read out. ‘Abdull a h A tham began his paper at 9:30 a. m. , but could not finish it within the time allowed. Five more minutes were given to him with the consent of the Promised Messiah as during which it was completed. The papers were signed by the president and certified copies were handed over to the parties. The Promised Messiah as laid down one basic fundamental principle, right in the beginning of the debate and also in the beginning of his paper, that the advocate of a religion should put forward his claims supported with reasons from recognized scriptures of that religion. Then, he referred to Quranic verses which refute the Divinity of Jesus with an appeal to human experience and inductive truth. He explained that from the beginning of this world, all messengers of God have been human beings. Never a son of God was sent to the world. There is not a single instance of that kind in history. To illustrate it, "we know by observation and experience that man has two eyes and he does not eat with his eyes and now if some one claims that he could eat with his eyes, no one would believe him. There has never been a man who has had twenty eyes nor has there ever a man who ate with his eyes. Therefore, it is absolutely incorrect to draw the inference that a man can eat with his eyes. " He emphasised this point that unless and until it was shown that there had actually been any instance which definitely contradicted the general human experience, the mere claim of Jesus to divinity could not be accepted as true as an exception. The fact that Jesus had a mother and that both of them ate food further showed that he was only a human being and nothing more. A tham admitted the reasonableness and the validity of the method of induction but could not refer to any actual fact, by way of an instance, which could prove the divinity of Jesus. All he said was that Jesus was called the son of God in the Bible which is obviously begging the whole question. The Christian advocate contended that reason and experience could not be a guide of faith and man cannot understand the doctrine of the Trinity.