The Holy War — Page 39
Proceedings—Debate 23 May 1893 39 surroundings. From this, it is proven that God was not in the fire and this is not the belief of Muslims either. In fact, Allah, the Lord of Glory , rebuts this fanciful idea in the next verse by stating that: 1 ۰۰ َو َنٰحْبُس ِهّٰللا ِّبَر َنْيِمَلٰعْلا Meaning that God Almighty is pure from such ‘passing into things’ and ‘descending’, and He is the Lord of every single thing. Similarly, it is written in Exodus 3:2 that during that time, ‘the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. ’ And whereas Mr. Abdullah Atham states that it is also written in the Quran at this place that, I am the Lord of your father Is ha q as [Isaac], and Ibr a h i m as [Abraham], and Y‘aq u b as [ Jacob]—this is completely contrary to the facts. This is not written in the Holy Quran anywhere. If this is the plight of the references cited by the aforenamed gentle- man, that he fearlessly presents a reference that is completely contrary to the facts, then those references that he has cited from the Torah and the New Testament also merit being checked for authenticity with the books at hand. Then the aforementioned gentleman states that in the Torah, the Messiah is referred to as نت ی � [ yak-tann ] and the Prophets as نم ی � [ yak-mann ]. I declare that neither the word yak-tann nor yak-mann can be found anywhere in the Torah. It would be a very great favour of the aforenamed gentleman if he proves, by explaining on the basis of the Torah, that whenever the other Prophets have been called the Sons of Allah, it was meant to be in the sense of yak-mann [that is to say, one in spirit], and that when the Messiah, peace be upon him, was called Son of Allah, it was meant in the sense of yak-tann [that is to say, one in body]. In my understanding, however, I believe the other Prophets excel 1. S u rah an-Naml, 27:9 [Publisher]