is no knowledge at all; so do not speak about Allah without knowledge.
And if they actually know that it is false, they are even more obliged not to utter it.
Most Christians are misguided: they have no certainty that what they say is true; rather, they speak about Allah without knowledge.
The point is that their discourse contains a great deal of falsehood—such as their statement:
(fa-huwa bi-tawḥīdi dhālika al-qiwāmi al-wāḥid—qiwāmun li-kalimatillāhi al-khāliqa) (meaning: “Thus, by unifying that single subsistence, he becomes the subsistence of Allah’s creative Word”).
In their view, “the Messiah” is a name that embraces both lahūt (divinity) and nasūt (humanity), a name that includes both the Creator and the creature, the two being united as one. Hence, by uniting that single subsistence he becomes, in their terminology, the subsistence of Allah’s creative Word.
Whether they mean that the humanity and the divinity together constitute the subsistence of the divinity, or that the humanity alone constitutes the subsistence of the divinity—and they illustrate this with the analogy of spirit and body, or of fire and iron—the matter would then be as though someone said: “The body and the spirit, or the body by itself, are the subsistence of the spirit; or fire and iron, or the iron by itself, are the subsistence of fire.”
So it may be asked: The eternal Creator, who has always been and will always be—can the originated, created being be His subsistence? Would the manufactured, contingent creature, which depends on Allah in every respect, become the subsistence of the Creator, who is independent of it in every respect? Is this not the clearest case of a reciprocal dependence that reason declares impossible?
For it is self-evident to sound intellect, and agreed upon by all rational people, that the creature