-
Articles_of_he_Bishop_of_Uramiah, page : 549
tion and relidous sentiment than to present to them the
expected Messiah, the great Barnasha, in the person of
Jesus whom the Chief Priests and the Elders condemned to
be crucified as a seducer! It is quite evident, therefore,
that Jesus never appropriated the title of "the Son of Man;"
but he reserved it only for Prophet Muhammad. 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 categorically denied his being the Christ and
forbade his disciples to declare him "the Messiah"! It is
expected Messiah, the great Barnasha, in the person of
Jesus whom the Chief Priests and the Elders condemned to
be crucified as a seducer! It is quite evident, therefore,
that Jesus never appropriated the title of "the Son of Man;"
but he reserved it only for Prophet Muhammad. 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 categorically denied his being the Christ and
forbade his disciples to declare him "the Messiah"! It is