Truth About the Split — Page 35
35 published in the Akhbar-e-‘Am already quoted). This charge corresponds to that which the Jews brought against Jesus as , namely that he claimed godhood in the sense of being actually the Deity or His partner, both of which were blasphemies. The Promised Messiah as denies the charge of his enemies and says that he never claimed prophethood in the sense ascribed to him by them. This corresponds to the denial of Jesus as that claimed to be 'son of God' in the sense ascribed by the Jews. Then again the Promised Messiah as adds that the meaning which his enemies assigned to the word Nabi was incorrect; because, although it is true that the Prophets who promulgated new Laws were rightly called Ambiya ’, yet the word was not limited in its application to such men, but was applicable and had been actually applied to other people who promulgated no new Laws. In fact, according to the Promised Messiah as , the word Nabi , in its true significance, did not bear any such restricted meaning. He says, "Among the Israelites there have been several Ambiya ’ to whom no Law was revealed. They only announced prophecies which they received from God and which served to establish the truth and prestige of the Mosaic religion. It was these prophecies that entitled them to be called Ambiya ’. The same is the case with my mission. If I am not to