an attribute that can never be a self-subsistent essence capable of creating, even when it is not united with the nāsūt (human nature). Moreover, for such an attribute to unite with the nāsūt apart from the very Essence it qualifies would be impossible even if union itself were conceivable—so how much more impossible when union is, in fact, inconceivable!

Thus it has become clear from several angles that the kalima (Word) cannot be the Creator.

If, however, the Creator is the Essence endowed with speech, then that is Allah, the Creator of all things, Lord of the worlds—whom they call “the Father.” Yet the Messiah, according to them, is not the Father; therefore he cannot be the Creator of everything. The Quran plainly states that Allah is the One who granted the Messiah permission so that he fashioned, from clay, something like the form of a bird. It is therefore evident that the one who molded from clay a likeness of a bird is neither Allah Himself nor one of His attributes. The Messiah, then, is not Allah, nor an eternal, pre-existent Son of Allah; rather, he is His servant, acting by His leave.

Seventh argument:
They claim that by “the Creator” the text alludes to the Word of Allah united with the nāsūt taken from Mary, basing this on what they say David the Prophet declared:

“By the Word of Allah the heavens and the earth were created.”

We reply to them:
This statement from David is a proof against you, just as the Torah, the Quran, and everything authentically transmitted from the prophets is a proof against you. For David, peace be upon him, said:

“By the Word of Allah the heavens and the earth were created,”

but he did not say, “The Word of Allah is the Creator,” as you claim when you assert that he referred by “the Creator” to the Word of Allah.

The distinction between the Creator of the heavens and the earth and the Word through which the heavens and the earth were created is perfectly clear and well-known—like the difference between the one who possesses power