Ahmadiyyat or Qadianism! Islam or Apostasy? — Page 156
heaven would dare argue that according to this tradition, the Holy. Prophet would vindicate himself with the defence: 'I was a witness over them for as long as I dwelt amongst them but since Thou didst take me up alive, Thou wast a Watcher over them. '. On the contrary, they all agree that the Holy Prophet would defend himself against the transgression of some of his followers on the grounds that 'he could not have been a guardian over them after his death. '. It would hence not be unreasonable to argue that on the basis of the available evidence, the Messiah would defend himself against the blasphemy of his followers on the grounds that 'for as long as he remained amongst them, he commanded them to worship God Almighty but since God caused him to die, he was not accountable for their misdeeds. ". This view is supported by many a scholar of Islam. For instance, an edict issued by the Senate of the Al Azhar University, admits that according to verse 5. 117 118, Hazrat Isa would present his defence to. God Almighty on the grounds that he could not have been responsible for the beliefs of his followers after 'Allah caused him to die. '88. ABSTRUSE DOGMA OF CHRIST'S DIVINITY TO BE. DORMANT UNTIL AFTER HIS DEATH. This Quranic defence of the Messiah suggests that the abstruse dogma of Christ's and his mother's assumed Divinity was to remain dormant until after his death since according to this Quranic defence, the. Christians were to begin worshipping Jesus and Mary as two gods besides Allah only after God Almighty had caused him to die. . History bears record that the dogma of Christ's alleged Divinity was forged at the Council of Nicaea in 323 CE 89 and the concept of. Mariolatry originated at Ephesis in about 431 CR. 90 It would hence be logical to assert that Christ must have suffered his mortal death prior 88. Al Risalah, Cairo: Vol 10. No 462: pg 515 89. Weech, W. H: History of the World: pg 230 90. Bottener, L: Roman Catholicism: pp 175/176 157