Christianity-universal brotherhood

In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
DEDICATED TO
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
AND TO
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.
*

   CHRISTIANITY–UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD
We often hear such musical Christian claims that Christianity is “universal” brotherhood, love, spirit, values, teachings, tolerance, mercy, forgiveness and egalitarianism.
This is mere Christian lip talk and claptrap! Belief is not to be confused with facts.

The religion that stamps others as “dogs” and “swine”, enslaves heathen, views woman as transgressor, subjugates wife and sees her as an object of carnal release, relegates daughters into bondage, vilifies opposers as enemies, commands that enemies be slain, speaks in parables to prevent others from knowing God “lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them” and sends “fire” and “sword” and “division” on earth (and in the family) is on no moral or spiritual throne to make such lofty claims–(Matthew 7:6; 15:26; Leviticus 25:44; 1 Timothy 2:11-14; Genesis. 3:16 & 1 Corinthians 7:1-2; Exodus 21:7.; Luke 19:27; Matthew 12:30; Mark 4:9-12; Luke 12:51:53; 14:26). (See Jesus-only for Jews; Jesus and Mohammad-cures & warChristianity-women).

Regarding this belief that Jesus has given to the world the doctrine of “universal brotherhood,” Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din points out:
“A Prophet solely and wholly interested in the “lost sheep” could not be expected even to think of matters of universal bearing.” “In his own lifetime he did not concern himself with people other than those of the house of Jacob, and the contrary report of St. Mark is decidedly spurious.” And that:

“The quotation reminds me of the oft-repeated phrases – “Christian spirit,” “Christian morals,” “Christian teachings,” etc.– which always come to the aid of the adherents of Christianity when they seek to claim such of these things for themselves as appeal to them for the time being, though they fail to find them in their Scriptures. Jesus was a Prophet, and can be believed to have possessed good and noble qualities and to have taught those things. But it is, after all, a belief, and should not be confused with facts. His teachings, as narrated in the Bible, cannot be taken as supplying a complete religion. Moreover, he himself admits that he did not give the whole truth–(St John xvi). On the other hand, if the Christian spirit is that which can be inferred from the spirit of Christ’s Church, it is not such as to do credit to that Church’s founder. The beautiful of yesterday is the ugly of to-day; which things being so, it is hard to define the Christian spirit. The phrase, as used from time to time, seems to be sufficiently plastic to accord with any and every condition. Whatever appears to be desir­able for the time being is at once claimed under one or other of these convenient phrases. The spirit of Christ may be taken to comprehend everything: but his own Church, though filled with the Holy Ghost, as they believe, has ever remained too dense to appreciate it. Her spirit has, throughout the ages, been anything but meekness, mercy and long-suffering. For about seventeen centuries the Creed of Saint Athanasius has been sung and said on the Holy Feasts, under the authority of the Church. Does that Creed reflect the spirit of Christ, when it evinces a universal, damnatory spirit at its very outset, where it says: “without doubt he shall perish everlastingly”? To-day the laity come forward to denounce it and demand its elimination from the Book of Common Prayer. The new house of laity of the Church of England met recent-ly at Church House, Westminster, to conclude its delibe-rations on the proposed measure for the revision of the Prayer Book. Among other things­–

­“Mr. C. Marston moved an amendment to leave out the words ‘which faith, except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlasting-ly,’ from the Athanasian Creed. He said he did not pro-pose to eliminate the Creed altogether, but he wanted to take out of it the most terrible sentence which he believed had ever appeared in all history–and this in a book which pretended to supply the gospel of salvation of sinners. The Athanasian Creed was com­posed in an age that was comparatively reckless of human life; and it was put into our Prayer Book in its present form at a time when recklessness of human life was still very much to the front.

“Sir George King said he thought most of the members in charge considered that it was no business of the House to alter the creeds. There was a great deal to be said by way of explanation on matters which apparently were misunderstood by some people.

“Sir Edward Clarke said the Athanasian Creed had spoiled the happiness of services for him on the great festivals of the Church for years and years. ‘I have never said it,’ he added, ‘and would never dream of saying it. It has been a distress to me to hear choirs singing at the top of their voices these awful words, which I do not believe, and which I am sure ought not to be in our service.’

“Sir Robert Williams said he thought it was quite time the laity ­made their protest against the use of these damnatory clauses.

“Mr. Marston’s amendment was carried. The question, however, remains open, and will come up before the House for final approval.”

The damnatory clause is doomed now, seeing that the protest against it comes from influential quarters among the laity. Similar protests got rid of a certain notorious psalm in the days of the war. But is it the spirit of Christ, or the spirit of modern civilization, that cries out against such cruel expressions? If it is the former, it has remain-ed dormant for centuries, and its revival is simply to pamper the spirit of all-sufficiency. Candidly speaking, there is very little in the teachings of Jesus to meet the ups and downs of life. To make it elastic to suit every-thing and anything is simply to fish out authority for our deeds, no matter what their merits may be. But for such free interpretations the world would have been saved from the countless cruelties committed by the Church in the name of Jesus.

In fact, nothing could in decency be claimed as Christian verity if it be not laid down in clear terms in the sayings of Jesus. If the offending phrase in the Athanasian Creed has been allowed to remain for centuries in the Book of Common Prayer, is not a man of inde­pendent views justified in classing the spirit of Christ as identical with that of indifference to human life? (Open Letters to the Bishops of Salisbury and London, pp. 84-86, footnote).
(See also Jesus-loves us, God is loveJesus-Prince of peace).