The various naming of the Messiah in the Bible.

nointed by divinity [1] excepted(except) Allah [2] the very High. That the best greetings[3] are on the seers and the divine messengers of whom the Seal of the Prediction[4].

This sect, we know him (it), attributes(awards) to the Messiah (on him the Peace !) the name of God[5]. Is his(her,its) purpose to glorify him(it) by considering that the term "God" says himself of all which is big, either they want to mean there cleanly his (her,its) divinity ?

In this last case, the blindness of this sect would exceed that of all the others, and what makes them fall in such difficulties, it is their affection in the littéralisme which the healthy reason asserts absolutely foreign to the intentions of the author. Moreover how much we do not find in any Law revealed by visible senses(directions) which oppose to the healthy reason, but which the doctors of this Law explained symbolically ?

It is in difficulties of this kind (genre) that fell certain number of illustrious persons, among whom the one said: « purity to me ! [6] », the other one - « that I am big ! », and Hallaj[7] : « I am a God[8]! », " in this tunic, there is only God! " It was put by their part at the expense (account) of the mystic states which restrict the control of the language, to the point that we were able to say: « those there are drunk ! And the comments of drunk people, we keep silent about them and we do not bring back(report) them ». It is imperative (leads) because the healthy reason declares impossible that the literal sense (direction) is wanted by the author.

Furthermore, they seem to encourage to walk (work) in a road of the most narrow, in the point to become the light breeze (laughing stock) of the mockers but that no quiver of solidarity raises (draws up) anybody to defend (forbid) them. An exit, however and an excuse would be given to them, if they wanted him(it), to go out of the tight spot where they put themselves. Why, indeed, choose what offends the reason, when it is possible to hear(understand) the text in a correct sense(direction).

For the employment(use) of the word "union", we have already clarified him (it). As for the word " Lord[9] ", it is a common term at the same moment to God and to the owner of a thing (matter)[10]. We say the "Lord" of a house, the "Lord" of the good. Finally the word " Ilah[11] ", the God, is used (employed) at home for all which is big [12]. We indeed said in the Gospel : « you were called, in your Law, "gods ( Alihât)" it by addressing the Jews; and we find in Psalms[13]: « I called you gods and you are all sons (threads) of the Almighty »; and God, in Thora, says to Moses[14]: « I established you god for Pharaoh and your brother Aaron will be your messenger ». Furthermore we apply God's name ( Ilah) to whoever is liked rightly or wrongly[15]. Really the one who is engaged(opened) in an impracticable road, if he finds the occasion to go out of it, his perseverance in the error is of the blindness.

Paul gave all this explanation in his second letter to the chap. 9 of his (her,its) epistles [16], a way which lets remain no doubt, safe for the one who would have lost his two guides [17], the Reason and the Science. He thus says [18]: « there is the other divinity than the only God, although there are various beings on earth (ground) and in the sky which are called gods; and while there are many gods and many Lords, we have we only a single God, who is God the Father, from whom come any things and we are in Him, and a single Lord, who is Ichoua the Messiah, who holds any things in the hands, and we are too in his(her,its) power ».

This demonstration is really admirable! He (it) puts in it in light how the terms "God" and "Lord" also apply to the Powerful and majestic God and in the others who have no right to be liked. Then, he(it) attributes(awards) to the liked God Creator's quality, which is entitled to the worship, and he (it) makes divert from Him the existentiation of any thing(matter) by saying: « of whom is any thing(matter) and us, us are in Him ». He declares then that it is the true God there and he sings his (her,its) praise by proclaiming his uniqueness by these words:

« For us, we recognize only a single divinity, and it is a God ». He (it) denies in quite other the right the divinity, by saying: « there is a divinity only only He »! He (it) indicated (appointed) after that the Messiah, by giving him (her) " Lord's " name, the ambiguity of which we explained, using(employing) him (too) on owner's "sense"(direction), as indicates it the fact that it lends him(her) none of the attributes of the God about which he has just spoken, but only about a "wealthy" hand (the power to possess) among whom(which) it is the own to be attributed (awarded) to the owner.

All these indications are admirable. The intelligent man has no punishment (effort) to seize them and to admit them. I would indeed like to know how this Law [nun] was established on nonsenses so unrefined! The ignorance pulled(entailed) them, as well as the arrogance towards God, towards His seers, these guides of the people, His (Her) saints, Its moved closer, until forge in their spirit of the fables that they told, some in the others. So, they agree to say that the children of Adam were punished [19] because of the disobedience of their first father[20]; and that all the Seers and the Saints were precipitated in hell[21]. Then that their God promised to them to acquire(to buy back) them; that he(it) paid them of a generous ransom; but that the perfect generosity to the one who acquires(buys back), consists in being engaged(surrendering) itself. Now, as His (Her,Its) essence is simple, and would not so know how to suffer damage nor punishment(effort), God united with the human nature of Ichoua (on him the Peace!). This human nature with which He (It) united was then crucified [22], and its crucifixion is the cause of the safety of the seers and the saints and their liberation of the Hell! Yes, by God, we cannot find of people so foolish!

As if to wanting to attribute(award), as they make him(it), to God Powerful and Majestic the paternity and the filiation in Himself (Itself), to find some advantage there, or to establish a property which would pull(entail) the privilege in question, in fact he(it) is of use to them as nothing. The proof is there that in Thora, to the contents of which they add faith, he(it) is said concerning Jacob[23] (on him the Peace !): « Israel, my elder son »; and also [24]: « say to Pharaoh that if you do not send My elder son to like in the desert, I shall kill your elder son », wanting to indicate (appoint) the people of Israel there. Now, their number was then 600.000, without counting the women and the children. Here is how expresses himself Thora.

In David's Psalms - David according to them expresses himself in his Psalms[25] only by Revelation[26]: « you are all the sons(threads) says Almighty[27] »! And Ichoua (on him the Peace !) the same language, to him and to his applied, by saying [28]: « I rise towards my Father and your Father, my God and your God ». Believe still that the author of these words can be a God, it really is to get lost far from the evident truth. Besides he applied this language to his only auditors, when he says in the Gospel of Luc[29]: « cut the hope of nobody, your reward will be big and you will be the sons (threads) of the very High, because he (it) is merciful to the non-merciful and the miserable; be merciful yourself as your Father ».

His follower Jean son of Zébédée used(wore out) the same language when he had understood the metaphoric sense(direction) which we are going to indicate. He indeed said in his Epistle[30]: « the one who recognizes that Ichoua is the Messiah that one arose from God ». The sense (direction) on which it used(employed) this metaphor, while guaranteeing that he did not hear (understand) him (it) in his literal sense (direction), is that a father is carried(worn) by nature in a big tenderness, a leniency, a mercy and a pity to his son, that it is attentive to attract (entice) to him any sorts of possessions and to divert (hijack) any sorts from it of troubles, that he (it) tries hard to drive (guide) him(it) in the roads of the happiness, that he (it) urges him(it) to commit to it, that he (it) hurries to protect him(it) against what ends in the punishment, in the slander, in some persevering damage or in some blindness of spirit which would veil from him (her) the cause of bigger damage in the future. Here is the nature of the father, such as we see her (it).

As for the son, his nature is to be respectful to his (her) father, to deferential in its respect, to full of restraint in its presence, to docile in its orders, welcoming them with marks (brands) of reverence and respect, not violating it, being held in what he (it) prescribes him(her) and defends (forbids) him (her). Now, for Powerful and majestic God, if we consider His (Her,Its) kindness to everything to be, The mercy and Its condolence in its respect, the possessions which He (It) promises him (her) and the troubles which He (It) spreads (pushes aside) from him, the revelation which He (It) makes him(her) finally of what is convenient for Its majesty, the means which He (It) gives him (her) to release it, then, compared to it, what makes a father of the earth(ground), seems very insignificant and despicable. On the other hand, the respectful attitude of the seers to God, their restraint with Him, their obedience in the fact that He commands (orders), their submission Him (It) to defend(forbid), their reverence in Its respect is thing (matter) more admirable than the behaviour (canal) of the children to their father. God is so for them the most merciful of the fathers and they are for him the most pious of the sons(threads). It is the deep sense (direction) of the metaphor there when we use (employ) these terms. Thus, when Ichoua (on him the Peace!) use(wear out) the metaphor by applying the word "Father" to God, the sense(direction) is there that God is merciful and friendly in his respect; and when he(it) applies to himself(itself) the word "son" "sons","{thread)", the sense(direction) is there that it is full of profound respect and reverence for God[31]. It is so also that it is necessary to hear(understand) its words, when he (it) exhorts not to remove the hope. He (it) wants to say (means): « if you obey him(her) in all these rules, he (it) will treat (handle) you as the father treats (handles) his child ». It is also the sense(direction) of the words of his (her) follower: « that one arose from God... » Here is thus the mystery of these expressions into which the Seers had penetrated. So it was allowed them to make him(it) pass in their language, trusting the intelligence of the one that its difference would know how to protect from misleading imaginations. And here is now that they [32] come there themselves to use(employ) this term usually. Indeed, if they see a moîne or a bishop[33], they say to him (her): " our father ", while he is not really their father. But they have in the spirit, by resorting to this employment (use), what we indicated, that is they assimilate, for his (her,its) feelings of condolence, the priest to a father, and that is they assimilate themselves, by the respect which they carry (wear) him (her), to sons (threads).

David (on him the Peace!), he too, expressed in his Psalms what we indicated. He says[34]: « as a father is compassionate to his children, also the Lord shows himself compassionate to those who are afraid of him (it) ».

He (It) follows by what we said that " son's " term attributed (awarded) to him [35] contains no peculiarity which sets apart him (it) the others.

The Gospel confirms itself clearly this interpretation by these words[36]: « he gave them the power to become a son of God », that is he(it) gave to them to be able to benefit from capacities indicated above and which derive from the Paternity, following the supplied explanation. ( Explicit).

We ended our task and we filled(performed) our promise, to show that the passages ( scripturaires ) did not indicate the divinity (of Ichoua) and were not to set in a sense(direction) of which disapproves the healthy reason, and for reconciling that they believe to be irreconcilable, looking in all this for God's Face. That God puts us among those who behave in the light of His (Her,Its) advices and who are protected from any fault in their words and their actions, thanks to his(her,its) favorable assistance(audience), to its care as well as to the mercy which He showed in the best of his creatures, to Mohammad, to his family and to his regular visitors. ( Explicit).

[1] The Creator of heavens and earth(ground) is thus the only and real divinity which we like and which we owe like really.
[2] In Arabic language, Allah. In Hebrew, ïl. Divine name, he(it) is usually employed for people of the Gospel of Arabic language. In French, the term God is generally included, not as a divine Name, but rather as meaning Etre-Suprême, Creator and Boss of the Universe.
[3] Formulae of eulogies as: that God asks on him, approves him(her,it), made him(her) mercy, etc., formulae appropriate(clean) for the traditional Islam. The exegetes interpret the "prayer" divine as being a granting of Its mercy and the "prayer" angelic as a demand of forgiveness for creatures.
[4] Or: Ahmad-Mohammad, son(sons,thread) of Abd Allah, (...) Son(sons,thread) of Ismaël, son(sons,thread) of Abraham (on them the Peace!). For the traditional Islam, it is the Seal of the Prediction, the Seal of the seers and the divine messengers.
[5] In Arabic, ilah. The divine, to monophysistes, having absorbed totally the human nature.
[6] Aboû Yazid Bistâmi to say: purity to me; that my celsitude is big. And God is more Learned!
[7] Aboû Abd Allah Houssain son of Mansour Hallâj, was born to Tûr, in the province of Fârs (southwest of Iran) near the village of Beïza, in 244/847. One of the most eminent representative personalities of the mysticism ., for some. One of the biggest misled of the Islam, for the others. Following the example of the sect of Salafites. The Monotheist, of time, blamed him(her) the way she(he) speaks so and its doctrine of the mystic union, which they say, by confusing(merging) the divine and the human being, ends in a sort of pantheism. By this word, jurists and politicians of his(her,its) time intrigued to obtain against him a legal fatwa ) judgment; they to obtain him(it) from the big jurist of Baghdad, the son of Dawoûd Ispahâni, pronouncing that the doctrine of Hallâj was false, put in danger the dogma of the Islam and made legitimate its death sentence.
   Twice stopped(arrested) by the abbasside police, Hallâj was imprisoned in 301/915 and translates in front of the vizier son(sons,thread) of ' Isâ. This one, pious and liberal man, opposed to his execution. It was only a respite. Hallâj was kept(guarded) in prison during eight years and seven months. Things rushed with the coming to office of a new vizier, Hâmid, a relentless opponent of Hallâj and his(her) followers. The enemies of these returned to the load(responsibility) and demanded a new judgment of condemnation of the judge Aboû ' Omar son(sons,thread) of Youssouf who reached their demand. This time the judgment was executed, and Hallâj was put to death 24/11/309/27 in March 922. There are works concerning him(it).
[8] Aboû Yazid Bistâmi.
[9] Or, in Arabic, rabb. In our language: Lord. 1. Feudal lord. Owner of a fief, an earth(ground). 2. Honorary title given formerly to persons of high row(rank). 3. (With a capital letter.) the Lord: God. (For people of the Gospel:) our Lord: Jesus Christ. The Sunday: Sunday. 4. The one who holds(detains) the power, the authority (especially in the expression, often ironic, lord and master). Familiar, pleasant My lord and master: my husband. (V. © Hachette Livre, 1997). 5. According to Schalom Ben-Chorin: as for Jesus, we have a very simple proof of its informed pharisien membership: he is called "Rabbi” by his followers. Now, "Rabbi” is a title used exclusively by Pharisiens and not by Sadducéens, nor by Esséniens to indicate(appoint) a Doctor of the Law.
   And in note: the followers of Jean-Baptist also called their boss "Rabbi” (Jn 3,26); we can thus admit that he too was a part of the pharisienne opposition.
   We shall say: neither the son of Marie nor the son of Zacharie (on them the Peace!) were a part of a Jewish sectarian world. Such is not doubtless the case of those who will draft gospel after them. And God is more Learned!
[10] This, according to the Semitic languages of which Arabic. In the Bible, we find that the seer Joseph ( Youssouf) (on him the Peace!) is qualified as "Lord" (' adhoné, excellent plural) of Egypt (Bible. Gen. 42 30). According to people of the Gospel: the term "Rabbi" was used(employed) on the " teacher's " concrete sense(direction). (Jn 1:38.) But a little bit before the birth of Jesus, he(it) came there to be used among the Jews as the naming and as respectful and honorary title which meant “ my big, my excellent ”. This title was required(demanded) by educated men(people), scribes, teachers of the Law. They liked(loved) that we call them "Rabbi" to the sense(direction) of the honorary title. Jesus Christ condemned this request of titles and forbids his followers be "Rabbi" called, because it was him their teacher. — Mt 23:6-8. In the Bible, the term "Rabbi” appears only in the Christian Greek Writings. He(it) is 12 times employed in touch with Jesus, in the concrete sense(direction) of "Enseignant”: twice by Pierre (Mc 9:5; 11:21), once by two followers of Jean (Jn 1:38), once by Nathanaël (Jn 1:49), once by Nicodème (Jn 3:2), three times by followers of Jesus whose names are not clarified (Jn 4:31; 9:2; 11:8), once by the crowds (Jn 6:25) and twice by Judas (among whom(which) one is repeated) (Mt 26:25, 49; Mc 14:45). Jesus was called "Rabbouni" ( My Teacher) by Marie la Magdalène, as well as by a blind person whom he cures. The French possessive adjective "my" is in Hebrew a suffix, but, because of the custom(usage), it seems to have lost its meaning, as in "Sir", which meant originally " my Lord ". (Jn 20:16; Mc 10:51.) once, Jean the baptiseur is called Rabbi. — Jn 3:26.
   Rabbouni. Semitic word which means " My Teacher ". (Mc 10:51.) maybe the word " Rabbouni ” was a more respectful formula than "Rabbi”, title who wants to say "Teacher", or it expressed more personal heat (Jn 1:38). However, when Jean wrote, the suffix (i) of this word, to the first person, had maybe lost its particular meaning in the title, because Jean translates him(it) simply by "Enseignant". — Jn 20:16.
[11] Or, divinity or god.
[12] And by exentension, among the other numerous peoples.
[13] Bible. Ps. 82 6; 58 2; I. 10 34.
[14] Bible. Eg: 7 1. In Eg: 4 16: (…) And you will be his(her) god, that is " he will be ( Aaron) your spokesman ", as a seer is door God's word (to compare Jr. 1 9). (V. Bible. TOB). See also another variant in the Bible of the Samaritans.
[15] Or, we gave to this term a wide sense(direction). In our language: god. 1. In the polytheistic religions, be superhuman liked and supposed to preside over certain categories of phenomena. The gods of the Olympe. In March, god of the War. Fig., fam. Promise, swear his(her) big gods: assert with big oaths. Make his(her) god of qqn, dedicate him(her) a deep worship. Be beautiful as a god, very beautiful. Ski as a god, in the perfection. 2. (With a capital letter and always in the sing.) In the different monotheist religions, the supreme, creative and conservative Being of the universe. The fear of God. Loc. Catholic dogma: the good God: the usual host, the money. Carry(wear) the good God to a patient. - Loc. fam. We would give him(her) the good God ( the religious community) without confession: says himself of a person of appearance deceitfully innocent. Loc. yard. God me on guard! To God pleases!: can it not arrive, occur. - (resting(supporting) a demand, a prayer instante.) Make him(it), for God's love, in the name of God. - (resting(supporting) what we assert or what we deny.) God knows if we wished this moment! God knows that I am set against it! - (expressing the uncertainty, the doubt.) he will arrive God knows when. Only God knows now when he is. ( Exclamatif) God! My God! Big God! - (swearwords) God's Name! But good God! Thus pay attention! (V. © Hachette Livre, 1997).
   We shall note that at people of the Gospel, " Name of good God d ", appears as a sort of blasphemous or unrefined expression, term, curse used until our days, to swear.
[16] We said: during the IIth or IIIth century of n. è., the scribes killed(abolished) Tétragramme as well in the Seventy as in the Christian Greek Writings, substituting him(her) Kurios "Lord", or Theo "God". We saw that the word " Ichoua ", means: Lord.
[17] Dens.
[18] Bible. 1 Corn. 8 4-6.
[19] Concerning the notion of redemption, in R. Ambelain to write: Victor Hugo very well raised the problem: “ the Redemption, it is God-just man, making God-innocent suffer, to calm God-check … ”
   Little as if an indulgent professor, tired to punish for impertinent and turbulent raises(brings up), and saddened therefore, administered in front of them a masterful correction in only one raises(brings up) respectful and docile, to be then able to raise all the punishments of the bad, hilarious lots in front of this spectacle.
   But, will say the believing reader, it is a God himself who, in his infinite love, substitutes himself for the man, sacrifices himself, and suffers on his place. Or, we shall admit. It will thus be to himself(itself) that the good-humoured professor will administer the correction, under eyes and big enjoyment of the bad lots, suffocating(suppressing) due to laughing.
   To raise the problem, it is to underline the unlikelinesses.
   The notion of decay of souls, and that of their ascent towards the First Source, was ignored by the classic Judaism, especially the Sadducéens. It is a notion appropriate(clean) there for the alexandrine Gnosis, and that seems to have leaked out, afterward, at Esséniens.
   This ascent towards Plérôme, through sphéres and in spite of Archontes, depended on a rituélie with théurgique shape, and on an ascèse. It was the work of the very soul, assisted by the body certainly, but by way of her only. On no account, a bloody human sacrifice could free(release) the human community in its totality. It had been despicable of the Supreme God that to require(demand) an act so barbaric, and it had been inequitable excessively that to free(release) those who had made nothing for it, and besides, cared about it hardly little.
   As well, the seers of Israel had very well expressed this notion. That we judge it.
   Here is at first an extract of Deutéronome, resulting from orders(deposits) given by very God to Moses, at the top of the Sinai, according to the tradition of the Former(Ancient) Will. It seems to us extravagant to deny to him(her) a major importance. Enter speaking God, as it is said to us, to Moses, and the extrapolations of Paul in his epistles, and engaging(opening) only himself, is a considerable margin. Here is this passage:
   “ The fathers will not be put to death for the sons(threads), nor the sons(threads) for the fathers. Each will die only for his own sin ” (Deutéronome: XXIV, 16).
   And to the author to quote still different biblical passages: Jér. 31 30; 32 19; Ez. 18). And to add:
   As for the New Will, we shall observe that, Patrologie itself admits it, the original sin, which is not the Symbol says Apostles, so suspect itself of inauthenticity, was taught by the Fathers only verbally, and not in their papers. We shall may look for him(it) in Gospel, we shall not find him(it) there. Jesus came only to save the men(people) of their own sins, and it is of those only that they have to redeem themselves. The only passage which saint Augustine finds to quote in all the Gospel in favour of his personal opinion on the subject (cf. "Contre Julianum”), it is Luc's verse, very ambiguous and very ambigü:
   “ The son of the man came to look and to save those who were lost ” (Luc: XIX, 10).
   We do not clarify us the motive for this perdition, nor its individual or collective nature.
   Now, what we ignore too often, it is that Jesus has never claimed himself the opposite. Never he(it) appeared as the object of a holocaust expiatoire stricto sense(direction). Never he declared that his painful death would have the effect of freeing(releasing) the souls of the influence of the devil. That the reader gives the punishment(effort) to read again attentively all the words lent to Jesus by the unknown persons writers of the fourth century, and he can notice this fact in a absolute way.
   … But never Jesus will associate this end to the notion of sacrifice liberator of the human race. As far as he is determinedly a racist, and is interested only only in the only children of Israel. During Writings, his(her,its) own words are formal, we quoted them and shall not return there.
   And it will be at least fifteen years after its execution, that a man who has never known him(it) in his lifetime, one named(appointed) Saul, later Paul, will imagine to associate symbolically this death to those of the animal victims sacrificed every day on the altar of the Temple of Jerusalem.
   … So thus, the notion of a Jesus calming by its sufferings, freely accepted, the wrath of his(her) heavenly Father (that is of himself(itself), because it is him(her) consubstanciel and coeternal), appeared in time, and was imperative(led) thanks to this last one, as an accomplished fact, in spite of its totally irrational character, and theologically indefensible.
   Deprived by any logic, she(it) is moreover contradictory to the neo-testamentary Writings, which assert us that he(it) freed(released) at one time the totality of souls, past, present, or to come. But, besides, each of these souls has to realize, herself, his(her,its) own individual safety, hardly to be damned. A little as if a mutinous regiment benefited from a general amnesty, and as if at the same time, each of the soldiers the constituent had to appear in front of a court-martial to be individually judged there again. (Op. cit.).
   We shall say: according to the commentators of the Koran, it was allowed that a son dies for his father. It is Abraham's coming, seer who will see the abolition of this law. From there, we understand badly the attitude of people of the Gospel concerning Adam, the seer and the father of the humanity. A seer would not know how to die, indeed, for a seer. No more for people who listened to, certainly, but then broke. ( The Koran IV 46 ).
   For us, and contrary to the biblical world, the human being, the human race are cursed by no means by divine Creator.
[20] Dogma of the original sin. Dogma not recognized by the traditional Islam. We said on this subject: original sin, fault committed by Adam and Ève in the ground Paradise (Eden). The Genesis tells that they ate the fruit of the tree of the science of the good and the evil, so breaking God's ban, which hunted(chased away) them. This sin committed by the man, from its origin, soiled all the humanity, according to the Judaism and the Christianity. (Op. cit.).
[21] According to the author of " the Demonstration of the Truth ": Mosheim says (Hist. flight(theft). 1): " Ebionites, sect of the ler century, believed that Jesus was a simple mortal, arisen from Marie and from the carpenter Joseph, that the law Mosaic was compulsory, not only for the Jews, but for all the men(people), and that this law was essential in the safety; they had the biggest contempt for Paul, who fought(disputed) them on this point ". Lardner says (flight(theft). 11, p. 376): " we know by the former(ancient) writers that Ebionites threw back(rejected) the authority of Paul and its epistles ". Bell says by speaking about this sect: " Ebionites admitted of the Former(Ancient) Will only Pentateuque and had the biggest disdain for David, Salomon, Jérémie, Ezéchiel, etc. Of all the books of the New Will, they admitted only the Gospel of Matthieu, with the exception of the first two chapters ". The same Bell says about Marcionites: " This sect believed that there were two supreme principles, the one check and the other bad, than Pentateuque and all other books of the Former(Ancient) Will were inspired by the bad principle and than they are any opposite to the New Will; she also believed that Jesus had come down(fallen) after his death to the hell and had removed Caïn from it and the inhabitants of Sodom, but that he had left in the eternal punishments(efforts) the souls of Abel, Noé, Abraham and all the patriarches, because they were of the party of the bad principle; they believed, besides, that the Creator of the world was not the one who had sent Jesus and, for this motive, they did not believe in the inspiration of the Old Will, and of the New they admitted only Luc's Gospel, with the exception of the first two chapters; they also admitted ten only Paul's epistles, subject to the passages which contradicted their opinions ". Lardner (flight(theft). 111) Bring back(report) these words of Holy Augustine on the Manicheans: " this sect believes that it is the devil who spoke to Moses and dictated him(her) Pentateuque; it is also the devil, according to them, who spoke to the Hebrew seers; they admit the books(pounds) of the New Will, but with modifications corresponding to their principles, they also have works Apocrypha to which they attribute(award) an authority superior to that of the canonical books(pounds) ".
[22] For the traditional Subdued world, it is the double of the son of Marie that the Judaized will make ( the Koran IV 157 ) die. As for the Messiah, the son of Marie (on him the Peace!), he(it) will be raised(brought up), body and soul, safe, in the divine Paradise. He(it) will so stay there until the exit(release) of the Forgery-messiah on earth(ground). It is then that will come down again on earth(ground) to kill him(it) in the door of Lodd, in Jerusalem.
   Quant the son of Marie will really die, he will then be buried in Medina, next to the seer Mohammad (on him Prayer and Peace!). And God is more Learned!
[23] Or, Ya' cob. Who(which) has and had two names: Ya' cob and Israel.
[24] Bible. Eg: 4 22-23.
[25] Psautier, a Book revealed to David (on him the Peace!)? For people of the Synagogue by no means. It would be the work at least of ten persons other one than David! Let us remind that for them, David and Salamon were kings in Israel, not seers. Always according to them, king cannot indeed occupy such a function(office). For people of the Gospel, Psautier is a Book which we often read during the prayers. A Reference book and worshipped. Let us not forget that for them, the Messiah is a son of David.
[26] Or under the divine inspiration.
[27] Bible. Ps. 82 6.
[28] Bible. I. 20 17.
[29] Bible. 6 35-36.
[30] Bible. 1 I. 5 1.
[31] Important remark.
[32] Certain Churches.
[33] In Arabic, qis. In our language and at people of the Gospel: Monseigneur. 1. Honorary title, which is not any more given today than to the archbishops and to the bishops, as well as to the princes of a sovereign family. (Abrév.: Mgr.). Plural. Messeigneurs; nosseigneurs (abrév.: NN. S). 2. Prince-monseigneur. (Op. cit.). For the Pope: his(her,its) holiness. In other churches: his(her,its) bliss, etc. Certain fathers made the wish of celibacy, on the other hand, for their Lord, they missed him(her) respect.
   To David, the seer, he will be revealed to him(her) on behalf of his Lord:
   « Then teach the people of Israel, that there will be no relationship between Myself and My creatures. »
   The Lord said: « I am the One who does not need an association. »
   According to Abou Horairah, the messenger of God (on him Prayer and Peace!) said:
   « God [that He is glorified and glorified] said: « of all the Associates? I am par excellence the One who does without any association. From there whoever associated quite other that I in her act, this one not Mrs concerns not, and will be paid his(its) (M ’) associating. »
   Also:
   « God (that he(it) is excited!) said: « the son of Adam to make me insult and it is unacceptable in the part! He accuses Me of lying and it is unacceptable in the part! His(her,its) insult, it is to say that I had a child and his(her,its) charge of lie, it is to say: « he(it) not Mrs will call back not the life as He called me there first time »
And also:
   « God (that He(It) is glorified and glorified!) said: « the son of Adam Mrs deals with liar without any right, and He(It) to make me insult without any right! He(it) Mrs makes lie by saying: « he will not call back me the life as He called me there previously ». « Now his(her,its) first creation was not more difficult for Me than will not be it its resurrection » (the Koran XVII 4). As for his(her,its) insult in My respect, it is its word: « God took a child »? While I am the One, the Immaterial, I do not engender, I was not engendered, and I have no equal. » (The Koran CXII 1-4).
[34] Bible. Ps. 103 13.
[35] The Messiah.
[36] Bible. I. 1 12.