Could Not Answer

and to have changed many of the Mosaic and Biblical laws.
In order to ascribe divinity to Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’, Christians
impute a sin to every Prophet. In a debate between Muslims and
Christians, a priest who asserted that Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ was divine
was asked by an Islamic savant what his proofs were. He answered
that he had four proofs, and cited them as follows:
“My first proof is that he was created without a father,” he said.
When the Islamic scholar said, “Âdam ‘alaihis-salâm’ was created
not only without a father, but also without a mother. Also, angels
were created both without a father and without a mother. [Angels
are not male or female.] Then, Âdam ‘alaihis-salâm’ and angels
must be accepted as divine like Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm [may Allâhu
ta’âlâ protect us from saying so],” the priest could not answer him.
Then he went on and asserted his second proof.
“My second proof is that Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ resuscitated dead
people,” he said. Upon this the Islamic scholar interrogated, “As it
is written in the Taurah, a couple of Israelite Prophets also
resuscitated dead people. In fact, Mûsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ animated
the inert rod. These people, too, must be sons of Allâhu ta’âlâ
[may Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from saying so].” The priest could
not answer this, either. Then he passed on to his third proof.
“My third proof is Îsâ’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ ascension to heaven,” he
said. Upon this the Islamic savant said, “You say that Îsâ “alaihisaslam’
was lifted up to heaven after being killed along with many
insults. Christians and Muslims unanimously believe that Idris
‘alaihis-salâm’, too, was lifted up to heaven in an honourable and
dignified manner and when he was alive. Accordingly, Idris
‘alaihis-salâm’ would necessarily be more worthy of being a son to
Allâhu ta’âlâ.” The priest could not answer this, either. Then he
passed on to his fourth proof.
“Every Prophet committed a sin, but Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ did not.
This is an attribute of divinity,” he said. When the Islamic scholar
asked, “Which Prophets committed sins?”, he said, “(For
example), David (Dâwûd ‘alaihis-salâm’) did.” Upon this the
Islamic scholar said, “O priest! This statement of yours makes you
more evil, more repugnant than Jews. For the appositive ‘Jesus,
the son of David’ is written in all the four Gospels. If what you said
were true and Dâwûd ‘alaihis-salâm’ were an adulterer, [may
Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from saying so], then Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’
would be acknowledging that he were an illegitimate child [may
Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from saying or thinking so] by saying that
he is the son of Dâwûd ‘alaihis-salâm’. Could there be any doubts
– 369 –