[Pooya/Ali Commentary 17:59] Aqa Mahdi Puya says: The infidels did not demand the miraculous signs (also mentioned in several verses of Al An-am and Al Furqan) to remove their doubts but to challenge the Holy Prophet in order to side-track the issue of worshipping only Allah and rejecting their false gods. In the same manner the ancient people (refer to the verses of Al Araf and Hud pertaining to Nuh, Shu-ayb, Salih and Musa) showed their aversion to the true teachings of their messengers and challenged them to bring down the wrath of Allah on them. They were punished and destroyed. The Holy Prophet's mission was universal. It was not confined to any particular community, place and time. Allah did not want to inflict perdition in response to the challenge of a few ignorant people on the whole human race. So the Holy Prophet did not resort to such a destructive course during his ministry except at the time of mubahilah when Allah commanded him to take the decisive step, but the Christians declined to accept the challenge (see commentary of Ali Imran: 61). The Quran clearly says that threats cannot be like the convincing signs with which every messenger of Allah was sent among his people to prove his divine messengership. To prove that the interpretation of ayat (signs) as communication or message exclusively is not true, the example of she-camel, sent to the Thamud in the days of prophet Salih, has been given (see commentary of Araf: 73 to 79). See the commentary of al Baqarah: 118 and 243 to know that it is a malicious attempt to deny the powers of the Holy Prophet when some translators interpret the verse as "We have not given you the power" .