a disbeliever. Thus, if (1) his father was a disbeliever, his son could also be a disbeliever; mere lineage therefore confers no virtue.

This is one of the arguments they use to deny that Noah’s son was a disbeliever: because he was the son of a prophet, they refuse to regard him as a disbeliever while affirming that he was his son. They also say that Abū Tālib was a believer. Some of them say that his name was Imrān and that he is the one mentioned in the words of Allah Most High:

“Indeed, Allah chose Adam, Noah, the family of Abraham, and the family of Imrān above all peoples.” [Surah Āl Imrān: 33]

What they have done, besides involving fabrication and calumny, plainly entails (2) contradiction and fails to achieve their intended purpose. This is because the fact that a man’s father (3) or son is a disbeliever does not diminish his standing before Allah in the least [on that account] (4), for Allah brings forth the living from the dead and brings forth the dead from the living.

It is well known that the Companions were superior to their fathers, even though their fathers were disbelievers. This is unlike a man’s being the husband of a prostitute [a whore] (5), for this is among the gravest things for which a man may be condemned and reproached, since its harm affects him personally—unlike the disbelief of his father or son.

Furthermore, if a believer could father only a believer, all the children of Adam would have been believers. Yet Allah Most High said:

“Recite to them in truth the account of Adam’s two sons, when they each offered a sacrifice and it was accepted from