to be worshipped as a means of exacting vengeance upon others, unlike idols, which are stones. If they are subjected to torment to demonstrate that they are not gods and to exact vengeance upon those who worshipped them, this serves a beneficial purpose without punishing anyone who ought not to be punished.

For this reason, Allah Most High said:

“And when the son of Mary was presented as an example” [al-Zukhruf: 57]

That is, they made him an example against which to compare their gods. Such is the case of someone who challenges a revealed statement with a faulty analogy. This is also the case of those who challenge divine texts with their faulty analogies, saying:

“If He possessed knowledge, power, mercy, and speech, and were established above His Throne, He would necessarily resemble a created being that possesses knowledge, power, mercy, and speech and is established above a throne. If He resembled a created being, it would follow that He could have come into existence; and if He could have come into existence, His necessary existence and beginninglessness would be impossible.”

This is the same kind of objection as that of Ibn al-Zibaʿrā, who compared what Allah had spoken of to something else unlike it, despite a distinction between them. The distinction between Allah and His creatures is greater than that between Christ and idols, for both are creations of Allah Most High.

As for comparing the Creator to the creature, and saying, “If He possessed attributes and acts subsisting in Him, He would resemble a created being possessing attributes and acts subsisting in it”—this is utterly unsound. Two things being similar in certain respects does not entail their being alike in every respect. Thus, if Christ resembles their gods in countless respects—such as the fact that the one was once nonexistent and the other was once nonexistent, that the one was brought into being and is contingent and the other was brought into being and is contingent, and that the one is dependent on