Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth — Page 727
ATTEMPTS TO PHILOSOPHICALLY JUSTIFY. THE FINALITY OF NON-LAW-BEARING PROPHETHOOD otherwise its cessation could not have been claimed to be a blessing. This appears to be more in line with the thinking of St. Paul, who branded the law of the Torah as a curse and believed Jesus to be the redeemer because he did away with that law. If there were no law to be broken, argued St. . Paul, there would be no sin to be committed. . The aery Maudoodi philosophy however, does not seem to originate from. St. Paul alone. It also resurrects the image of. Bahaullah. What the Messiah had done by rejecting the law of the Torah, according to St. . Paul, Bahaullah claimed to have done to the Quranic law. Thus he pronounced himself to be the liberator of. ST. PAUL. MAUDOODI. Abbasi mankind from the bondage of the Quran. Nonetheless he did not imitate St. Paul entirely because St. Paul had never claimed a role of God personified for himself. He assigned this role of godhead entirely to Jesus. Jesus to him, was in fact a liberator who had undone the blunder committed by 'God the Father' against mankind. The very promulgation of Divine law was tantamount to the creation of sin. Hence, by cancelling the Divine law, what Jesus actually achieved was to have destroyed the very soil from which sin sprouted. By the same act of redeeming mankind he appears to have simultaneously redeemed 'God the father' from the folly of creating sin. . Bahāullah applied this philosophy only partially and argued that the Quranic law being too heavy and cumbersome had lost its relevance to the people of the modern age. So by liberating mankind from this exacting 685