speaking God’s speech alone; the bush itself possessed no speech whatsoever, in any respect. If the analogy were really sound, then the One who addressed people from the Messiah’s human nature would have been the divine nature alone.

Yet everyone knows—from the Gospel and from other explicit passages—that it was the human nature that did the speaking, and those texts make the difference between the two situations perfectly clear.

Twelfth Point:
The One who called to Moses from the bush spoke solely with the words of Lordship, saying:
“Indeed, I—yes, I—am Allah, Lord of all worlds.” ⦗Al-Qasas 28:30⦘

and:
“Truly I—yes, I—am Allah; there is no deity but Me. So worship Me and establish prayer for My remembrance. The Hour is coming—I almost keep it hidden—so that every soul may be repaid for what it strives for. Therefore let none who does not believe in it and who follows his own desire turn you away from it, lest you perish.” ⦗Ta-Ha 20:14-16⦘

Everything else He said likewise affirms that it was the speech of the Lord of all worlds. By contrast, the speaker on the tongue of the Messiah never uttered a single word of that sort; on the contrary, his words contain open admissions that he is a messenger, a created and needy being, the son of man, and other statements that in every respect contradict the words of the One who called to Moses from the bush. Whoever equates the two has, in effect, equated the Lord of all worlds with a mere human being