was not revealed from Allah, then the falsehood of his assertion is manifest beyond doubt to anyone who reflects on what Muḥammad—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—brought and on what those before him brought; who studies his Book and the earlier scriptures; who examines the proofs of his prophethood and of theirs, and the laws of his religion alongside the laws of their religions. A detailed treatment of this issue is set out elsewhere; our concern here is merely to point to the main pillars of the reply.

These people have not produced a single proof to establish the veracity of the prophets they cite. If an opponent who rejects all of those prophets—whether a pagan or an atheist—were to debate them, nothing they mention would serve as evidence for their position, nor would it serve as evidence against the Muslims who already acknowledge those prophets. For the great majority of Muslims came to know the truthfulness of those earlier messengers only through Muḥammad’s own testimony that they were prophets; it is therefore impossible for them to accept the branch while casting aspersions on the root through which they learned of their authenticity.

Furthermore, the very path by which the prophethood of those messengers was established—namely, the verified miracles and reliable reports concerning them—applies a fortiori to Muḥammad, whose miracles and reports are even more firmly established. Accordingly, no Muslim can affirm the prophethood of any one of those earlier messengers while denying Muḥammad in a single statement he conveyed.