X

IS THE TEACHING OF ISLAM AS SUPERIOR TO THAT OF THE GOSPEL AS THE TEACHING OF THE GOSPEL IS TO THAT OF THE MOSAIC LAW?

FATAL as that which has already been advanced must appear to the pretension of Islam as the last and highest stage in the development of the true religion, the points we have still to consider would alone suffice to decide the question; for it is now our duty to examine the revelation or teaching of Islam itself, and to compare it with the revelation or teaching of the religion which it professes to supersede, in order to ascertain whether it really contains a new, a better, and higher revelation.

Every one knows that the value of an assertion depends entirely upon the solidity and strength of its proof. All reasonable men act upon this principle in matters of everyday life. If, e.g. a man were to assert that he had invented a new musket, so greatly perferable to all now in use, that those might be safely dispensed with as antiquated and unfit for retention side by side with the new invention, what would governments do whose desire it is to put the best weapons into the hands of their soldiers? Would they at once adopt the pretended new and superior one, on the claim of the inventor, and convert those they had forthwith into old iron? Certainly not. We all know that in such a case the

government would say, We must first examine your musket, and compare it with those now in use, to ascertain whether it is better or not. And such a course is the only reasonable one. Now, if they found on examination that the supposed new and superior weapon had indeed a beautifully carved shaft and a glittering barrel, but was only a flint matchlock after all, somewhat different from those formerly used indeed, but neither shooting as far nor as accurately as the present Enfield rifles, would they not say to the inventor, 'It is impossible for us to adopt your invention, for what we possess already is better than what you offer?' So, likewise, if it be asserted that Islam is a higher form of the true religion than Christianity, it is neither wise nor just at once to accept the assertion without proof. The first duty evidently is to examine whether the teaching of the Qur'an is really higher, nobler, and better than that of the Bible, and only if found to be so would it be right to give up Christianity and embrace Islam; but if it turned out the reverse were true, it would be as wrong to give up the gospel for the Qur'an, as it would be foolish in a soldier to exchange the efficient rifle of the present day for the matchlock of a century ago. But should any Muslims say, 'This argument does not exactly apply to our case, as it is not for us now to ask whether we ought to embrace Islam, having done so long ago,' such an objection has no force; for if it had been right