Page 260 - Demo

256he 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.