and Isaiah, Habakkuk, Malachi, Amos, and Daniel were prophets, while the Messiah—Jesus, son of Mary—was not a prophet; such a statement is internally inconsistent and patently false. Indeed, those whose prophethood he has denied are more entitled to that rank and enjoy a more perfect prophethood than the one for whom he affirms it, and the evidences for the superior prophet’s mission are far stronger. How, then, can it be acceptable to confirm prophethood for the lesser prophet while denying it to the greater? This would be like someone claiming that Zufar, Ibn al-Qasim, and al-Muzani