Page 257 - New English Book L

256

he would only appear on the Day of the Last Judgment.
It was a policy and a cunning propaganda of dissuasion,
and then of persuasion, made purposely for the Jews.
Nevertheless, the fraud was discovered, and the Jewish
Christians belong to the Church that held these Gospels
to be divinely revealed. For nothing could be more
repugnant to Jewish national aspiration and religious
sentiment than to present to them the expected Messiah,
the great Barnasha, in the person of Jesus (pbuh) whom the
Chief Priests and the Elders condemned to be crucified
as a seducer! It is quite evident, therefore, that Jesus (pbuh)
never appropriated the title of “the Son of Man;” but he
reserved it only for Muhammad (pbuh) .Here are a few of
the arguments:

(a) The Jewish Apocalypses ascribe the titles “the
Messiah” and “the Son of Man” exclusively to the Last
Prophet, who will fight with the Powers of Darkness and
vanquish them, and then will establish the Kingdom of Peace
and of Light on earth. Thus, the two titles are synonymous;
to disown either of them is to disown altogether the claim
to being the Last Prophet. Now we read in the Synoptics
that Jesus (pbuh) categorically denied his being the Christ and
forbade his disciples to declare him “the Messiah”! It is
reported that Simon Peter, in reply to the question put by
Jesus (pbuh) : “Whom say you that I am?” said: “Thou art the
Christ [Messiah] of God.”[1] Then Christ commanded his
disciples not to say to anybody that he is the Christ. [2] St.
Mark and St. Luke know nothing about the “power of the
keys” given to Peter; they, not being there, had not heard of
it. John has not a word about this Messianic conversation;
probably he had forgotten it! St. Matthew reports[3] that
when Jesus (pbuh) told them not to say that he was the Christ

[1] Luke ix. 20.

[2] Luke (ix. 21) says: “He rebuked them and commanded them not to say that he
was the Messiah.” Cf. Matt. xvi. 20; Mark viii. 30.

[3] . Loc. cit, 21-28.