The Criterion for Religions — Page 26
26 Mi'yiirul Madhahib he stopped him and said, 'Do not call me good. ' How indeed could a person who accompanied Satan dare call himself good? What is certain is that Jesus, on ac- count of his own thinking and for other reasons, avoided calling himself good. Alas! today the Chris- tians not only declare him to be good but have raised the author of this ignorance and inequity to be a wise and righteous person. ' Similarly, many philosophers who are well-versed in the sciences, look down upon the Gospel with disdain, and have become disgusted with these unholy teachings,a since belief in them is a matter of great shame for area- sonable person. For instance, there is the false story of the father who is full of wrath and wants to destroy everyone, and then there is the son who is most benevolent and has averted the insane wrath of his father from the people by having himself drawn on the Cross. How can the poor European scholars bring themselves to believe in such absurd tales? Similar is the naivety of the Christians for having divided God into three persons: one who always retains the human form and whose name is the 'Son of God'; the second is the one who shall always retain the shape of the dove and whose name is the 'Holy Spirit'; and the third is He at Whose right hand the son has seated himself. How can a sensible person accept such Trinity? But the fact that Jesus accompanied Satan is no less ridiculous in the eyes of European philosophers. It is only after a great effort that they put forward the interpretations that these experiences were the product of Jesus' own mind. At the same time they also believe that such repulsive thoughts can- not be born of a sound and healthy mind. contd. . . a Note: The higher status a Christian attains in philosophy the more disillu- sioned he becomes with the Gospel and Christianity. So much so, that a Christian lady has recently published a pamphlet repudiating the Christian doctrine. The condition of Muslim philosophers, on the other hand, is quite the opposite. Avicenna-who is reputed to be the dean of philosophers, faithless and an apostate-writes at the end of his book lsharat that, al- though there is no philosophical evidence in favour of physical resurrection, and the reverse is the case, we still believe in it because the Truthful Messenger, i. e. , the Holy Prophetsa has affirmed it. !Author!