62 |
THE MOHAMMEDAN CONTROVERSY
|
|
and afterwards asserting that absolute metaphysical unity would land its
professor in the Sufie error of regarding the Divinity as a mere existence,
and all creation his attributes. He distinctly denies that they or any other
Mussulmans look upon the Deity as a rigid metaphysical unity,but as a being
endowed with attributes and perfections, although absolutely one in person and
individuality.
|
Pfander's most important and concluding chapter he treats with contempt, and
allots but six pages to its reply. The knowledge of God can be obtained only
in accordance with reason and revelation, both of which he affirms point to
unity and not to trinity. That the salvation of man is dependent upon these
doctrines, he ridicules as the height of absurdity, because we hold that
Christ actually descended into Hell, a shocking blasphemy which no
other people ever dared to affirm of their prophet.1 The
all-important doctrine of Christ's vicarious suffering he treats with scorn,
and applies to us the proverb
|
"They flee for refuge from the rain,
And stand for shelter 'neath the drain,"
|
that is, in seeking to escape
from a slight misfortune, viz. the punishment of our sins, we run
into the greater danger of charging God with injustice by inflicting the
punishment of the guilty upon the innocent. Having thus abandoned the
atonement, he satisfies himself with saying that the faith in Christ, to
which pardon is promised, is nothing more nor less than the faith and
obedience which every prophet has insisted upon, and in return for which he
has promised the same blessings.
|
Upon the whole, there is nothing to discourage us in this production. The
fallacy of the greater part of the reasoning must be recognised by the majority
of thinking Mussulmans if they choose to reflect with impartiality; and though
it may for a time throw dust unto the eyes of the lass candid and intelligent
portion of the community, still, as Pfander's entire2 work is
|
|