| 95 |
THE MOHAMMEDAN CONTROVERSY
|
|
|
narrow ground; it seemed, therefore, sufficient to reply only to them"
(pp. 605-607).
|
|
Ali Hassan does not treat the Dîn Haqq with so much respect even as
the Mîzân-ul-Haqq.
|
Know, says he, that whatever
grounds of reasonable dispute,—such as they are,—the Christians have
against the Moslems, are (along with much unreasonable matter) contained in
the Mîzân-ul-Haqq. Now, as to the other treatise,—the Dîn
Haqq ki tahqîq, wherever in some little measure it is the shadow of
certain portions of the Mîzân-ul-Haqq, it is upon the whole
reasonable. But the remaining, and by far the greatest, portion is much more
unreasonable than the unreasonable portions of this Mizân.
|
|
A single instance will suffice. The Dîn Haqq, after quoting the
Prophets, and also secular writers, Jewish Christian and Roman, in respect of
Christ's death, proceeds to say that if Mohammed had possessed the slightest
acquaintance with history, he would never have written of the crucifixion as
in the Coran he has. The Maulvi denies the prophecies, and then proceeds:—
|
The Padre does not perceive that the Coran itself admits, nay expressly
asserts, the fact that both Jews and Christians hold the crucifixion of
Jesus; and yet he writes, that the author of the Coran was unacquainted with
this historical fact! Such a babbler shall have his answer from the Lord.
Reflect for a moment, and hide thy face with confusion. Say;—What
advantage could he who gave forth the Coran have had in view when he
asserted in opposition to vast and influential multitudes that Jesus was not
slain, but had ascended to heaven in his mortal body! Had he made his
assertion to accord with the views of these immense multitudes, then indeed
he had gained an object, viz., the lessening of their opposition, and he had
obtained likewise an argument to strengthen his opposition to the Divinity
of Christ, that, namely, drawn from the fact of his mortality (p. 637).
|
|
He then goes on to say that the Gospel is perfectly correct, because the
semblance of Christ was actually taken and crucified; "but there is no
replying, to the argument you bring against us, viz., that where we agree with
the Bible, it is plagiarism—where we disagree, it is false!"1
No less than eighteen pages are devoted
|
|
