Christianity is Paganism

Share

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 IS PAGANISM
Allah tells us in His Qur’an 9:30 that the Christian Son of God belief is an imitation of paganism: “and the Christians say: The Messiah (Jesus) is the son of Allah. These are the words of their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before.”1
To which Muhammad Ali notes that Paul “introduced the pagan doctrine of sonship of God into the Christian religion, so that it might become more acceptable to the pagans.”
And research has proven the truth of this Qur’anic revelation.
Maurice Bucaille states in his book The Bible, The Qur’an, And Science:

“As far as the decades following Jesus’s mission are concerned, it must be understood that events did not at all happen in the way they have been said to have taken place and that Peter’s arrival in Rome no way laid the foundations for the Church. On the contrary, from the time Jesus left earth to the second half of the Second century, there was a struggle between two factions. One was what one might call Pauline Christianity and the other Judeo-Christianity;”
and
“PAUL IS THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL FIGURE IN CHRISTIANITY. HE WAS CONSIDERED TO BE A TRAITOR TO JESUS’S THOUGHT BY THE LATTER’S FAMILY AND BY THE APOSTLES WHO HAD STAYED IN JERUSALEM IN THE CIRCLE AROUND JAMES. PAUL CREATED CHRISTIANITY AT THE EXPENSE OF THOSE WHOM JESUS HAD GATHERED AROUND HIM TO SPREAD HIS TEACHINGS.(While others ‘combated’ Paul’s writings) PAUL’S STYLE OF CHRISTIANITY WON THROUGH DEFINITIVELY, AND CREATED ITS OWN COLLECTION OF OFFICIAL TEXTS. THESE TEXTS CONSTITUTED THE ‘CANON’ WHICH CONDEMNED AND EXCLUDED AS UNORTHODOX ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT WERE NOT SUITED TO THE LINE ADOPTED BY THE CHURCH.” 2

“It is unlikely that he ever met Jesus. In Jerusalem, however, he learned enough about Jesus to regard him as a menace to Pharisaic Judaism, for Paul first appears on the scene of history as a persecutor of the Christian Church. In the Judgment of Paul the Pharisee, Jesus had broken the Law and taught others to break it and had been justly condemned under the curse that the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy pronounces on law-breakers.”3

Reza Aslan –a Muslim who had converted to Christianity and reverted to Islam after researching Jesus– has shown in his book Zealot, The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth (pp.133-134; 165; 177-178) that:
“the gospels are not about a man known as Jesus of Nazareth who lived two thousand years ago; they are about a messiah whom the gospel writers viewed as an eternal being sitting at the right hand of God;”
“Despite two millennia of Christian apologetics, the fact is that belief in a dying and rising messiah simply did not exist in Judaism.”
“In the entire history of Jewish thought there is not a single line of scripture that says the messiah is to suffer, die, and rise again on the third day….To the Jews, a crucified messiah was nothing less than a contradiction in terms. The very fact of Jesus’s crucifixion annulled his messianic claims.”

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din has detailed the pagan sources of Christianity in his book The Sources of Christianity, from which the following excerpts are taken. (The Sources of Christianity may be obtained from www.muslim.org).

“If we study the Gospel without reference to the writings of  St. Paul, the words of Jesus do not substantiate the teaching of his Church to-day.”
“The Jesus of the Bible and the Jesus of St. Paul are two different entities, and irreconcilable to each other. So they have appeared to many thoughtful people. Count Tolstoy among them. He would not accept Jesus and Paul together, so he rejected the latter absolutely, and thus cut the knot. No doubt, the Apostle to the Gentiles had suffered much for the cause of the Church that he made, and was a martyr. But the reason is obvious. He had gone too far to go back, and could not avoid the consequences.  The deliberators of the Cambridge Conference of 1918 came to the same conclusion. They could not see the hand of Jesus in the superstructure of the Church so erected by St. Paul and his followers. ” (pp. 15-16).

“The idea of the man-God was not strange to the Gentiles. Their mythologies were teeming with God Incarnate. His suffering for human salvation, his resurrection, human sin and its expiation through God’s sacrifice, were things rampant in Greek and Roman literature. The gentiles of the days of St. Paul could easily see in Jesus, as portrayed by Paul, a reflection of their own God and accept him as representative of the class that were believed to have visited the earth in the olden days (as is for example, the opinion of Gibbon), and participated with them in human affairs. The vigilant eye of St. Paul and of the monks who were really the builders of the Church, could easily see that side of human psychology. They, therefore, clothed Jesus with Divinity, and saturated their writings with phraseology current in Pagan and other philosophic literature of the days, as I will show later on.” (p. 17).

“The Modernist Church, after arriving at the conclusion mentioned above, at Cambridge, could not accept the son of Mary as their God, and were bound, therefore, to explain their conception of the Divinity of Jesus. This they did, in 1921, when they met at Oxford in a representative conference comprising many bishops and other Church dignitaries.”
(KK goes on to note the views/observations of participants that:
“Jesus did not claim Divinity for himself;”
“Jesus was in the fullest sense a man;”
“The virgin birth, if it could be historically proved, would be no demonstration of Christ’s Divinity”;
“He claimed to be God’s son in a normal sense, in the sense in which all human beings are sons of God”). (pp. 17-18).

“At the appearance of Jesus there were temples without end dedicated to gods like Apollo or Dionysius among the Greeks, Hercules among the Romans, Mithra among the Persians, Adonis and Attis in Syria and Phrygia; Osiris, Isis and Horus in Egypt; Baal and Astarte among the Babylonians and Carthaginians, and so forth.
All these Deities were sun-gods, and of all or mostly all of them, as Edward Carpenter says, it was believed that:–

(1) They were born on or very near Christmas Day.
(2) They were born of a Virgin Mother.
(3) And in a cave or underground chamber.
(4) They led a life of toil for mankind.
(5) They were called by the names of Light-Bringer, Healer, Mediator, Saviour and Deliverer.
(6) They were, however, vanquished by the Power of Darkness.
(7) They descended into Hell or the Underworld.
(8) They rose again from the dead, and became the pioneers of mankind to the Heavenly World.
(9) They founded Communions of Saints and Churches, to which disciples were received by baptism.
(10) They were commemorated by Eucharistic meals.” (pp. 29-30).

“Mithraism came from Persia, where it seems to have been flourishing for about six hundred years, the cult reaching Rome about 70 B.C. It spread through the Empire, and extended to Great Britain. Remains of Mithraic monuments have been discovered at York, Chester and other places. Mithra was believed to be a great Mediator between God and man. His birth took place in a cave on December 25th. He was born of a virgin. He traveled far and wide; he had twelve disciples; he died in the service of humanity. He was buried, but rose again from the tomb. His resurrection was celebrated with great rejoicing.4 His great festivals were the Winter Solstice and the Vernal Equinox –Christmas and Easter. He was called Saviour, and sometimes figured as a Lamb. People were initiated into his cult through baptism. Sacramental feasts were held in his remembrance. These statements may excite surprise in the mind of the reader of to-day; he may be disposed to doubt their genuineness, as while on one side he reads the story of the Jesus of the Church, in the legend of Mithra on the other Mithraism has left no traces in the world, although it was so powerful in the third century A.D. that, had it not been suppressed in Rome and Alexandria by the Christians with physical force, as has been admitted by St. Jerome, it would have left no chance for the flourishing of Christianity; and that it died only when most of its legends became incorporated in the simple faith of Jesus,5 and the Church lore fully saturated with Mithraic colours, so much so that Tertullian had to admit the fact, though in a way befitting his position. He says that the learned in his days considered Mithra-ism and Christianity identical in all but name.”  St. Jerome and other Early Fathers became puzzled at the similarity existing between the two faiths, but their ingenuity ascribed it to the machinations of the Devil to mock their faith.”

It will not be out of place if I quote certain of the observations made by these Early Fathers on the subject. They leave no room for any doubt or conjecture; they, on the other hand, conclusively prove the case. The following is from Tertullian:–

“The Devil, whose business is to prevent the truth, mimicks the exact circumstances of the Divine Sacraments in the Mysteries of Idols. He himself baptizes come, that is to say, his believers and followers; he promises forgiveness of sins from the sacred fount, and thereby initiates them into the religion of Mithra. Thus he marks the foreheads of his own soldiers, thus he celebrates the oblation of bread; he brings in the symbol of resurrection, and wins the crown with the sword. He limits his chief priest to a single marriage, he even has his virgins and ascetics.” (Our Sun-God, p.179. Italics are KK’s).

Justin Martyr says:–
“The apostles, in the commentaries written by themselves which we call Gospels, have delivered down to us how that Jesus thus commanded them: ‘He having taken bread, after that he had given thanks, said: Do this in commemoration of Me; this is My body; also having taken the cup and returned thanks, He said: This is My blood, and delivered it unto them alone; which things the evil spirit have taught to be done out of memory in the mysteries and ministrations of Mithra…..For that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.” (Justin Martyr, Apol.II)

Cortez, the explorer of Mexico, also complained that the Devil had positively taught to the Mexicans the same things which God taught to the Christians.
St. Jerome admits that Mithra and Baal were the same, and called sons of the Lord. He says: “The Sun whom the heathen worship under the names of Lord Sun (Baal Samus) and Son of the Lord (Bor Belus.” (pp. 30-32).
(KK. points out that there is no proof that Jesus was born on the 25th of December –that no one knows when Jesus was born. Which date, “within a day or two, is the date of the supposed birth of many of the sun-gods.”
KK also states: “There are some other dates as well, in the Catholic Calendar, that give rise to the same presumption, that sky-scriptures, and not Sacred Scriptures, are to be searched for their origin. Such are the Assumption of the Virgin; her Nativity, Annunciation and Purification, the birthday of John the Baptist, Candlemas and Lent.” And KK explains their relation to the Zodiac).

“We read nothing of the Madonna and the Child, either in the evangelical record or in the writings of Paul and other apostles. The conception, most assuredly, came from Alexandria to the Western world, where the Mother Goddess with the Child Redeemer Horus had been honoured centuries before the Christian Era, and worshipped under the names of “Our Lady,” “Queen of Heaven,” “Mother Goddess” and so forth –words that were afterwards used in reference to Mary, the Mother Goddess.
Isis was not the only Virgin Mother worshipped in the olden days.  Osiris had also been believed to be born of Neith, the Virgin of the World…The sacred groves of Germany exhibited the image of the Goddess Hertha, a Virgin with a Child in her arms, in the old Teutonic days. She also gave birth to a child that was of Immaculate conception. She was impregnated by the Heavenly Spirit.
Frigga conceived of the All-father, Odin, bore a son, Balder of Scandinavia, called the Healer and Saviour of mankind.”6

The force of Cortez’s remark quoted elsewhere becomes significant when we read the following in Kingsborough’s famous book, Antiquities of Mexico:–
An ambassador was sent from heaven on an embassy to a Virgin of Tulan, called Chimalman…. announcing that it was the will of God that she should conceive a son without connection with man, and having delivered her the message, he rose and left the house; and as soon as he had left it, she conceived a son, without connection with man, who was called Quetzalcoatle, who, they say, is the God of air. Further, it is explained that Quetzalcoatle sacrificed himself, drawing forth his own blood with thorns, and that the word Quetzalcoatle means “our well-beloved son.”7 (p.p. 35-36).

“.The Virgin Mother suckling her Child is a common figure on the Mithraic monuments. So are other legends of these gods being born in a cave, which have been reported from Guatemala, the Antilles and other places in Central America.8

The Chinese had also a Mother Goddess Virgin, with a child in her arms.9 The ancient Etruscans had the same.10 In this connection Justin Martyr again comes with the same interesting apology when writing to the Emperor Adrian, the Devil being the only prop on which he could lay hands to strengthen him in his beliefs. He says:–

“It having reached the Devil’s ears that the prophets had foretold the coming of Christ (the Son of God) he set the heathen poets to bring forward a great many who should be called the sons of Jove. The Devil laying his scheme in this, to get man to imagine that the true history of Christ was of the same character as the prodigious fables related of the sons of Jove….By declaring the Logos, the first begotten of God, Our Master Jesus, to be born of a virgin, with-out any human mixture, WE (Christians) SAY NO MORE IN THIS THAN WHAT YOU (Pagans) SAY OF THOSE WHOM YOU STYLE THE SONS OF JOVE. For you need not be told what a parcel of sons the writers most in vogue among you assign to Jove. (Just as the Bible assigns a legion of sons to God)….As  to the Son of God, called Jesus, SHOULD WE ALLOW HIM TO BE NO MORE THAN MAN (note well, it is Christians who “allow” Jesus to be “more than man”), yet the title of the son of God is very justifiable upon ACCOUNT OF HIS WISDOM (not upon any “ETERNAL RELATIONSHIP;” this “wisdom“ should make Einstein super son of God), considering that you (Pagans) have your Mercury in worship under the title of the Word, a messenger of God….As to his (Jesus) being born of a virgin, you have your Perseus to balance that ….if Jupiter could send a parcel of sons out of VIRGIN mothers; the Father in heaven assured-ly could do the same at least in our case.””11 (True He could, but He did not). .

“The ancient literature of India also speaks of Virgin Mothers and their sons being worshipped.
The Gospel of St. Matthew no doubt makes the birth of Jesus a fulfillment of a prophecy by Isaiah (7:14) which it quotes in the following words: “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us” (Matthew 1:23). But the oldest manuscripts of Isaiah do not read “virgin,” but “young woman.” And the original is not “shall conceive,” but “is with child” –i.e. had already conceived. Moreover, it does not state that “they shall call” his name Emmanuel or Immanuel, but “thou shalt,” it being a command to King Ahaz so to call a child about to be born; which child, as an encouragement to the King, Isaiah prophesied would be a boy, and therefore a sign of good luck. And the Child was called –Jesus.
“The fact that in the later versions of the Hebrew, such as the Septuagint and Vulgate, the word used for ‘young woman’ has been altered into ‘virgin’ is very significant. The misrepresentation of Isaiah’s reference to a young woman, who, at the time the prophet spoke, was about to bear a child…is clear evidence of an attempt to connect a presumably real Jesus with the Sun-God,” all of whose other incarnations came from a Virgin Mother.” (p. 36-38).

“Osiris was born on December 29th. He was a great traveller. He tamed people by gentleness and not by force. He discovered corn and wine. He was betrayed by Typhen, slain and dismembered. He was interred, but came again to life. In the mysteries of Osiris, his Image was placed in a box and brought forth before the worshippers with cries of “Osiris is risen.”
Adonis, the Syrian God, born of a Virgin, was killed and rose again in the spring. Every year the maidens wept for Adonis (Ezekiel 8: 14), and then rejoiced over his resurrection. Attis, the Phrygian God, was also born of a Virgin named Nana. He was bled to death at the foot of a pine tree. His blood renewed the fertility of the earth, and thus brought a new life to humanity. He also rose from the dead ….In celebrating his death and resurrection, his image was fastened to a pine-tree on March 24th, and the day was called the “Day of blood”…The image was then laid in a tomb with wailing and mourning, but the coming night changed sorrow to joy. The tomb was found to be empty on the next day, when the festival of the resurrection was celebrated. These mysteries seem to have included sacra-mental meal and a baptism of blood.12

Quetzalcoatle, the Mexican Saviour, was born of a Virgin, Chimalman. The Virgin Mother received the message of being the Mother of a Son without any connection with man, through an embassy from heaven. She conceived. Quetzalcoatle –the word in that language means “our beloved son”– also fasted forty days, and was tempted. He was crucified, when the sun was darkened and withheld its light. His second coming was looked for so eagerly that when Cortez appeared the Mexicans greeted him as the returning God.13    .

Bacchus, sometimes called Dionysius, was born of a virgin named Demeter on December 25th. Her other name was Semele.
Evil having spread over the earth, the God of Gods was begged to save mankind. Jupiter hearkened to the prayer, and declared that his son will redeem the world from its misery. He promised a Liberator to the earth, and Bacchus came as Saviour. He was called the only begotten son. “It is I,” so says the Lord Bacchus to mankind, “who guide you; it is I who protect you, and who save you; I who am Alpha and Omega.”14 He was also a great traveler, and brought the gift of wine to mankind. It will remind the reader of the first miracle of Jesus when he converted water to wine. ”Suffering was common to all the sons of Jove,” as Justin Martyr says, and for this reason they were called “The Slain Ones,” “Saviours,” and “Redeemers.” Bacchus was also slain for redeeming humanity, and was therefore called “The Slain One,” “The Sin Bearer,” “The Redeemer.” His death, followed by resurrection, was celebrated with festivities of a horrible nature.  Then was celebrated the representation of the passion of Bacchus, dead, descended into hell and rearisen.” (pp. 39-41).

“The story of the Lord of Christianity is not the first of its kind. The passion play of Baal, the Babylonian Sun-God, was in existence centuries before the birth of Jesus. It was acted as a popular mystery drama. The Jews were taken as prisoners by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon, where they remained for generations. They saw the mystery drama acted every year in the beginning of spring on Easter Day. The captives, on their return, brought with them many traditions of sun-worship which one can easily trace in Jewish literature….The main features of the play have recently been deciphered from some tablets discovered from Babylonian ruins. There are two Babylonian tablets, says the Quest, belonging to the cuneiform documents which were discovered by the German excavators in 1903-1904 at Kalah Shargat, the site of the ancient Assur. They belonged to the library of Assur, formed in the ninth century B.C. or even earlier…The tablets disclose astounding facts…The two are one and the same. It therefore not only deprives the evangelical records of the claim to be genuine; it makes them complete plagiarism.”

(Quoting from the “January 1922 issue of the Quest,” Khwaja lists, side by side, fourteen (14) features of Jesus’ passion that are identical with the passion of Baal. The following is a brief entry of these fourteen features, in revised format):

       1. Baal is taken prisoner

       Jesus is taken prisoner.

      2. Baal is tried.

       Jesus is tried.

      3. Baal is wounded.

       Jesus is scourged.

      4. Baal is led away to the Mount.

       Jesus is led away to Golgotha.

      5. Along with Baal two malefactors are charged–one is executed, the other is set free.

Along with Jesus, two malefactors are put to death, and one, Barabbas, is set free.

6. After Baal is gone to the Mount, the city breaks out into tumult, and fighting takes place in it.

At the death of Jesus, there is destruction in the city. (Temple’s veil is rent, graves are opened etc; Matt. 27:50-52).

7. Baal’s clothes are carried away.

Jesus’ robe is divided among the soldiers (Matt. 27:35; John cp. Psalm 22:18).

8. Baal is wounded by a weapon. Woman wipes away the heart’s blood.

Jesus is wounded by a lance (John 19:34). Mary Magdalene and two other women wash Jesus for embalming (Mark and Luke).

9. Baal goes down into the Mount away from sun and light, disappears from life, and is held fast in the Mount as in a prison.

Jesus, in the grave, in the rock tomb (Matt. 27:60), goes down into the realm of the dead (1 Peter 3:19; Matt. 12:40; Acts 2:21; Romans 10:17, “descent into hell” dogma).

10. Baal is watched over by guards.

Jesus is watched over by guards (Matt. 27:64-66).

11. A goddess sits with Baal; she comes to tend him. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary sit before Jesus’ tomb (Matt. 28:1).

12. People seek for Baal at the Mount. In particular a weeping woman seeks him at the “Gate of Burial.” When Baal is being carried away she lamented “O my brother! O, my brother.”

In the case of Jesus. Women, in particular Mary Magdalene came to the tomb to seek for Jesus where he is behind the door of the tomb. Mary stands weeping before the empty tomb because they have taken her Lord away. (John 20:15-16).

                        13. Baal is again brought back to life (as    the sun of spring), he comes again out of the Mount.

Jesus is restored to life, rising from the grave (on a Sunday morning).

14. Baal’s chief feast, the Babylonian New Year’s festival in March at the time of the spring equinox, is celebrated also as his triumph over the powers of darkness (cp. The creation hymn “Once when on high” as the New Year’s festival hymn.

Jesus’ festival, approximately at the spring equinox, is also celebrated as his triumph over the powers of darkness.

Is not the Biblical story a recast of the story of Bēl (Baal)? Apart from the similarity of the details, the very occurrence of the crucifixion in the way narrated in the Bible seems now to be fictitious. The Qur’an denies the event in the clearest terms. It would, indeed, seem to lack independent evidence. We owe all our knowledge of Jesus to the Bible, before the revelation of the Holy Qur’an; there are, however, two other pieces of evidence: first, a reference to the crucifixion in the history of Josephus, a contemporary of Jesus; and secondly, a letter alleged to have been written by Pilate to the Roman Emperor, speaking of the crucifixion. This letter exists in the archives of the Vatican, but both these testimonies seem to be inadmissible. The original MS. of Josephus does not contain the page referring to Jesus, which is admitted to be a subsequent insertion; the letter of Pilate, with the signature on it as well, is now considered a pious fraud. Thus we are left no other course than to rely on the Bible and the Holy Qur’an. The last Book of God totally denies the event, and the Bible story is only a remoulding of the Babylonian legend, which is decidedly a myth of the Sun-worship. Apart from the verdict of the Holy Qur’an, could any person accept the Gospel story as original, in the name of honesty and truth, after reading the contents of the said tablet? Besides, the multiplicity of the various events recorded to complete the Gospel story, makes it a physical impossibility. From the Last Supper, up to the Crucifixion, all events have been recorded in one night –the agony in the Garden, the betrayal by Judas, Jesus brought before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, and then to the Hall of Judgment, the intermediate visit to Herod and coming again to Pilate, who speaks and washes his hands; the scourging, the mocking of Jesus arrayed in purple, and the crown of thorns, the preparation of a cross, and the painful journey to Golgotha.

Events with characters coming out of the “green room” or on the film, may receive their full development within a few hours, but when they actually occur they must take some reasonable time; and it is a matter of surprise, as Edward Carpenter thinks, to find the trial of Jesus in the middle of the night, as courts do not generally sit to try malefactors at that hour of the night. But if the story was taken from the Babylonian mystery play, the multiplicity of the events within the short space of night, and the time of night chosen for their occurrence, afford us an explanation. The date of the crucifixion is another stumbling block. in the way of a seeker after truth, because he finds the date of Good Friday to correspond closely with the dates of the Passions of the various deities, and so it is with the time of the resurrection. No doubt we find its mention in the Gospel as occurring near the date of the Passover Feast. But it was a time-honoured date in the Pagan world.

The movable nature of the Church Easter, occurring as it does in March or April, according to the moon phases, makes it still more doubtful. The date, had it any connection with such a remarkable event as the Resurrection, must have been fixed. But if the festival arose from the rise of the vegetation depending upon certain phases and seasons of the luminaries –as both the Sun and the Moon play great part in this phenomenon– the reasons for the festival occurring on changing dates is obvious. It must occur after the full Moon.

Easter (Anglo-Saxon, Eostre, O.H.G. Ostera) was the goddess of Light and Spring in whose honour the festival was celebrated everywhere at the said dates. Hot cross-buns and eggs were distributed and eaten in Egypt and Ireland, in the same way as it is done now in Christendom, at the time of Easter, This, again, shows the descent of the Church Easter from the olden days, The whole of Nature is risen again at Easter time, and a new life is coming to humanity. Do we not find the same story in the Church-covering –Easter Sunday being the resurrection of the Lord that brought new life to the human race? Some of the Western writers are of opinion that the Passover Feast of the Jews besides being held to commemorate the crossing of the Red Sea, was taken from the Sun-worship festival celebrated on the day when the sun crosses the Equator.

The presumption becomes stronger, when many other things in the Jewish traditions are traced to Sun-worship.
The sun was the Dying God of the ancient world. After his birth on December 25th the young deity increases every day in his power and strength, and defies the demon of darkness in the struggle, till the final week in the March comes, when his progress is retarded and he becomes stationary. The struggle between the two seems to have come to a climax, and the devil appears to be going to have the better of the conflict. Therefore it is a time of great anxiety and apprehension –a day of mourning and weeping for the maidens of Adonis; the suffering God undergoing his last ordeal; Hercules gone into Hades; Attis nailed down to a pine trunk– in short, the dead God is interred in the tomb, but two days after, all sorrow and weeping change into merriment, the Sun-God overcoming the forces of darkness (the Rubicon, i.e the Equator, passed); Hercules ascending from the underworld; their respective tombs. The date of the Dying God and that of the Rising God, therefore, become great events, and are attended respectively with mourning and rejoicing –just as find on Good Friday and Easter Sunday.” (pp. 44 -49).

“The sign of the Cross also is not of Christian origin. It does not date from the crucifixion. Clement, in his list of Christian symbols, does not make mention of it. Constantine saw the Cross in his vision, as he says, and took it as a symbol of the faith. But what he saw in the vision he must have seen also in a normal condition with his waking eye, for the Cross was the sign of life in the Pagan symbolism I saw an ancient Egyptian cross in July when I visited Alexandria, in the Municipal Museum in the town. Curiously enough, the cross in Christendom signifies the same as did the Egyptian cross –the sign of new life brought by the crucifixion. In Ireland a similar cross has been discovered, with a crucified effigy, but it is the effigy of a Persian prince and not that of the Nazarene, as the head of the crucified bears a Parthian coronet, and not the crown of thorns; which identifies it with the Mithraic cult, originally from Persia. It left many other signs in Ireland and Cheshire. (p. 50).

“Read the history of the Early Fathers, and you are more and more convinced that while the Church was using sword and fire in destroying every trace and memory of Sun-worship in its original form –as in the burning of the Alexandrian Library and the killing of Hypatia–the great teacher of the Sun-worship cult– it was taking everything and anything of the heathen days into its own teachings and traditions in order to make the new faith popular. Fish was taken as a Christian symbol be-fore the introduction of the Cross….The Gospel cannot explain the why and how of the Fish symbol, excepting that Jesus often ate fish. But the sun-scripture is the real explanation. The sun passes the Zodiacal sign Pisces –the Fish– in February, and if the date of the Epiphany is in February, Christ, as a Sun-God, must be symbolized by the Fish.

The evidence that the Church, as built by the priests of the dark mediaeval days, owes everything to the Pagan world, and not in the sacred name under which it passes, is so over-whelmingly preponderating in nature that one becomes compelled to say with full justification, in the words of the Archbishop of York, that the Church repels. If the laity has realized that in their worship in the Church they are worshipping only the Sun-God, and keeping up the tradition of the Pagan cult, will they not resent it? No wonder the pews have be-come empty, and the clergy have no chance but to address empty benches.” (pp.51-52).

“The Sabbath of Jesus was the Sabbath of the Jews. He was a Jewish Rabbi and Teacher among them, as admitted by Dean Inge in the paper read to the Modernist Conference at Cambridge in 1917. Jesus would refer his disciple to the scribes for the religious lore. He was averse to any schism or innovation in the faith. He would have heaven and earth pass away but not allow a jot or title of change in the faith and its observances. Saturday was the day of Sabbath, and not Sunday, which was the day of the worship of Apollo the Sun-God. How and why the sacred day of the God of the Israelites, to be observed as one of the Ten Commandments, gave way to the day of the Pagan God –perhaps through St. Paul’s or Constantine’s instrumentality– is a mystery, but open enough to admit of easy explanation in the light of the multitude of facts, some of which have already been dealt with.” (p. 54).

“The Emperor Hadrian intended to build a temple to the Christ and to rank him in the number of the gods (Lampridius I.43). This intention was carried out by his successor, Constantine, whose patron God was Apollo. He retained Apollo’s figure upon his seal, even after establishing Christianity as the State religion –a representative of the sun, with the inscription “To the Invincible Sun, my Companion.” The conversion of Constantine to Christianity was more a political adventure than a search for truth. His murder of his nephew, and despotic disposition as a ruler, could not find favour with his equals, the senators. He had to go to the plebeians, most of whom were Christians. But he could not go against the popular faith to which he himself was so tenaciously attached. He, however, solved the problem in a most diplomatic way. He took the name of Jesus as a figure-head, and recognized the title “Christ” as but another name for the Sun-God; in all other respects he kept the Pagan Church intact in all its traditions, ritual and mode of worship. Sunday was the day of the worship of the Sun –the Roman Dies Soli. To respect the religious susceptibilities of the Roman Sun-worshipper, Constantine could not do better than to keep the same day as the day of the Christian Sabbath. An average Roman Catholic Cathedral, with its altar facing towards the east, the monks and nuns with the tonsure, the acolytes, the choir and the rest of the paraphernalia, carries us at once to the temples of the Pagan world.”(p. 55).

“The institution of monks and nuns can also be traced to the same origin. Jesus neither advocated nor recommended celibacy. The single life of Jesus –though his first miracle took place on an occasion of marriage, and his participation in it give sanctity to the marital institution– might encourage monasticism, but how are we to explain the tonsure (circle shaved on the top of the head)?  Even Paul, with all his tendency to use most of the older cult as material for the Church he built, is silent on the question. Sun-worship alone can explain it. Mithraism had its monks and nuns, as Tertullian admits, with the tonsure in honour of the disc of the Sun. To be shorn of hair is, doubtless, a sign of asceticism; but it is the form of the tonsure –the round bare place on the head of the Romish priests and monks, formed by shaving the hair, that bears resemblance to the disc of the Sun. Does it not show that, as Apollo came to supplant Mithra, so the place of the former was given to Christ, while everything of their religion was kept intact with all its legends, festivals and forms of worship?” (p. 57).

“The Holy Communion also represents the ancient Eucharistic Ceremony, which was observed from Persia to Peru, in every Sun-worship country. The idea of Sin and Expiation is also an ancient idea. The sacrificed animal represented the Dying Deity, as Lord Krishna says in the Bhagwat Gita, “I am the oblation, I am the sacrifice, I am the ancestral offering.” “In the truly orthodox conception of sacrifice, says Elie Reclus, “the consecrated offering, be it man, woman or virgin, lamb or heifer, cock or dove, represents  the deity himself.” (Primitive Folk, ch. vi.).

The person, whose sacrifice was represented, was believed to be actually present at the time of the sacrifice, and his flesh, eaten by the worshippers, made the latter at one with the former. The flesh of the god entering into the body of man created a sort of holy communion between the deity and the votary. It is not I who make this assertion; the Early Fathers have said the same. Do they not say that the Mithraic Eucharist was identified with the Lord’s Supper? Ponder over the words of the Lord Krishna quoted above. The same idea had been working in the minds of the ancients everywhere –the atoning personality becoming God, and the belief that to eat anything taken out of the sacrifice, or from meals prepared in celebrating the ceremony, purifies the body of the eater and brings him into union with God. I admit that Jesus has been represented as saying something on this point, but it scarcely seems to convey the idea and beliefs that underlie the Church conception of the communion –the at-one-ment of the votary with the Lord by his participation in the supper. The idea is pagan, pure and simple, in its origin as well as in its conception.” (pp. 57-58).

“Be the memory of Muhammad glorified and remain evergreen! To keep his religion free from all pagan ideas and rituals, he would not allow his followers to say any prayer at the time when the sun assumes a conspicuous phase in his diurnal course. We Muslims have been enjoined to say our prayers five times a day. But we have been forbidden to say any prayer just exactly at the time when the sun rises, or at the time when it sets, or at the time when it passes the meridian, so that the Muslim Prayer may not become identified with Sun-worship. Islam is the only religion which did not need any incorporation of the existing ideas. It stood rather against them, if they were wrong, and tried to demolish them; yet the religion prevailed and purged the world of its polytheistic rituals and practices –those of Sun-worship– among them while the religion of Jesus, through hands unworthy of the name of the Master, became absolutely metamorphosed into the pagan cult. They retained the name of Jesus, no doubt, but so did the worshippers of Apollo when he became the favorite deity after Mithra. The Mithraic cult flourished centuries before the Apollo-worship, but the two faiths are one and the same, the difference being in name. Apollo had to represent Mithra in the whole cult, and so Jesus was taken as a substitute for Apollo in Rome, but the cult was in all other respects the same –the same birthday, the same Virgin-birth, and Immaculate conception, the same baptism, the same Eucharist, the same Passion Story, the same descent into hell, the same resurrection and ascension into heaven, the same Easter-day merriments, the same sign of the Lamb, the same hot-cross buns, the same eggs, the same Sunday –the Roman Dies Solis– the Day of the Sun, the Lord’s day, and the same phraseology and philosophy, as I will show in the ensuing chapter, apart from several festivals of the Catholic Calendar, which have been traced to the sky-scriptures.” (pp.59-60).

“The scholar may attempt to explain away the palpable similitude, as suggested by the early Fathers, but “the Pagans had their Christ everywhere, including India. The miraculous birth, the Immaculate   conception, the birthplace, the star, the song of the heavenly host at the birth, the child God presented with gifts, the slaughter of the innocent, the temptations, the fast of forty days, the Crucifixion and the death to redeem mankind, the descent into Hell and ascension; the Second Coming, the anointed as Judge of the dead, the Alpha and Omega, the Trinity, in different accents and stress, are the same.

The learned author of Bible Myths lucidly draws some analogies between Jesus and Buddha. It should not be forgotten that not only does there exist remarkable similarity in the teachings of the two, but some of the parables and precepts that we find in the Gospels had been given, word by word by Buddha, some five hundred years before Jesus. The records of Buddha are not entirely unapocryphal, or altogether consistent, but the main features are the same everywhere.” (pp. 60-62).
(On pp. 62-70 Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes from T.W. Doane, Bible Myths, forty-eight(48) similarities between Jesus and Buddha, such as their

  • “virgin” birth;
  • descent of the “Holy Ghost,” upon their “virgin” mothers; ●announcement of their birth by an “asterism” “called the Messianic Star;””
  • their temptation by the Devil; transfiguration; performance of miracles;
  • their return in the latter days to restore the world to order and happiness [this should be a doozy, considering that Jesus taught Resurrection and Judgment whereas Buddhism teach karma and reincarnation];
  • both of them being the “Alpha and Omega, without beginning or end, “the Supreme Being, the Eternal One;””
  • “Buddha is represented as saying: “Let all the sins that were committed in this world fall on me, that the world may be delivered.””

Whereas “Jesus is represented as the Saviour of mankind, and all sins that are committed in this world may fall on him, that the world may be delivered” (Who copied from whom?)

“Mystery and philosophy are the only two ingredients of the Pauline faith. One speaks of certain events in the life of the chief Personality in the religion, and of belief in them as the only requisite to secure salvation. The other –the philosophic part– describes and explains the locus standi of that personality, and the function he performs in the uplifting of humanity.

This part of Christian theology did not occur to the first three evangelists. The opening verses of the Gospel of John introduce it for the first time; but the writer did not dare go beyond the bare statement of it. No doubt we read a verse or two in that Gospel about the Holy Trinity, but it was found to be an after-insertion and a forged addition to the original text, as found by the translators of the Bible under James I.

…..The term word, used in St. John, which stands for the Greek word Logos, is an inadequate rendering. In all his writings Philo speaks of Logos,–a philosophic conception of later growth and a development of the “Idea of Plato,” in his theory of Emanation. It does not mean Word; it conveys “Thought as well as expression.” Plato, when dealing with the subject, spoke of something –as the first thing in creation that may be styled “Reason or Wisdom”– the first product of Herbert Spencer’s “First Intelligent Cause.” (Notably, the Jewish philosopher, Philo, “lived and wrote all this one hundred years before the writers, whosoever they may be, of that Gospel).

“In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was Life; and the Life was the Light of men. And the Light shineth in the Darkness; and the Darkness comprehendeth it not”–John 1:1-5).
There is not a single idea or expression these verses that cannot be traced directly to Philo.” (p.75-77). (See Jesus-Trinity).

“St. Paul also introduced new Philosophy and logic into Christian theology, and expressed them in new phraseology –which till to-day graces all Church orations. Religious sermons are besprinkled with phrases like the following which Paul and a few others were the first to use in Christian literature;

“God’s First-Begotten Son, the Intermediary between God and man”;
“The Intercessor with the Father”;
“The Good Shepherd”;
“The Image of God”;
“The Foundation of the Universe”;
“The Bread of Life”;
“The Sinless”;
“The Price of Sin”;
“The Gift of God to man to ransom his sins”;
“The High Priest”;
“The Second God”;
“The Interpreter of God to man”;
“The Giver of the Water of Everlasting Life”;
“Seated next to God”;
“The Physician and healer of Souls”;
“No one worthy of God but he who follows the Son”;
“The human heart the only shrine of God”;
“God of Triune nature and the Son to take the second place in the Holy Trinity”;
“Actions without faith of no value.”

Everything sounds new, charming and graceful too; something certainly not known to the other disciples –nay, not even taught by the Master; and it was left, therefore, for the Holy Ghost to “fill” someone and for that someone to reveal it to the world; and why, therefore, should not St. Paul be accepted as having been filled with the Spirit, when sprinkling such gems of philosophy and theology on those who believe, with a force that could exert, for the coming two thousand years, more influence on his following than the Lord of Christianity himself? St. Paul undoubtedly could have been taken as the founder of this theology, speaking as if filled with the Holy Ghost, by the rest of the world too, as he is accepted by the majority of the Christian Church, had his inspiration not been traced to the following passages that exist in the writings of Philo:

  • “His Word which is his Interpreter;”15
  • “To his Word he gave this especial gift that He should stand as an Intercessor between the Creator and the created;”16
  • “We maintain that by the High Priest is meant the Word Who is free from all transgression, being of heavenly parentage”;17
  • “The Word of God is the Physician and Healer of all our evils”;18
  • “The heavenly food….is the Divine Word”;19
  • “The Image of God is His Eternal Word”;20
  • “The High Priest is His Divine Word hence His head is anointed”;21
  • “The Shepherd of His holy flocks”;22
  • “What man is, there of true judgment who, when he sees the deeds of most men, is not ready to call out aloud to God, the Great Saviour, that He would be pleased to take off this load of sin, and, by appointing a price and ransom for the soul, restore it to its original liberty?”;23
  • “He, therefore, exhorts every person who is able to exert himself in the race which he is to run, to bend his course without remission to the Divine Word above, who is the Fountain Head of all wisdom, that by drinking of this sacred spring, he, instead of death, may receive the reward of everlasting life”;24
  • “Being the Image of God and the First-Born of all intelligent creatures, He is seated immediately next to the One God without any interval of separation”;25
  • “Even if no one is as yet worthy to be called a Son of God, one shall nevertheless labour earnestly to be adorned like unto His First-Born Son, The Word”;26
  • “God, by the same Word by whom He made all things, will raise the good man from the things of this world and exalt him near unto Himself”;27
  • “God, escorted on each side by personages from on high, whose attributes were goodness and power, the Divinity in the middle being in union with the other two, impressed a threefold appearance upon the soul of Abraham who beheld them.”28

Are we not accustomed to hear these, word by word, from the pulpit of the Christian churches? Do not these quotations from Philo sound like the writing of Paul? Thus we trace the source of Pauline inspiration. It is the human brain, and not the Spirit of the Lord. St. Paul is not filled with the Spirit, in the fulfillment of the prophecy (St. John 16:13), to say “all truth” in all that he has ingrafted on the virgin soil of Christianity and thus affected the whole Church teaching after him. In his philosophy he is the disciple of Philo and Plato, and not of Jesus; and if these two great men had nothing to do with the Master, one belonging to Judaism and the other to a pagan cult, St Paul deserves no claim on the allegiance of those who wish and ought to be in the footsteps of Jesus.

…What an irony of fate that he who declared “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or title shall in nowise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled,” should be followed –nay, superseded– by him who declared the Law a curse and not a blessing from God, and that only to win favor with those with whom the Master would have nothing to do –the Greeks and the Romans. But the reason is not far to seek. St. Paul could not claim any respect from his own people. At first an implacable enemy of Jesus and persecutor of his followers, then a renegade from Judaism and therefore hated by the Jews –so much so that his very presence in the synagogue, where he came to explain his schism to Judaism at the request of the other apostles, excited such contempt and hatred of the people as to drive him, an exile from his home. He could not, moreover, work with the other apostles, who would take him to task for ignoring the Law. He, therefore, had sufficient reason to make the gentile lands the field of his future work. He must work somewhere, and that was his last resort. The Gentiles were not the people of the Law. Actions in observance of the Law could not carry any weight with them; Law was a burden and a gate to sin if not observed, and hence a curse. `
Thus begins the philosophy of his epistles to the Gentiles; they were a sinful tribe, like others. They were visited by calamities, as others were. They ascribed it to their mis-deeds. But sacrifice only, and not repentance and reclamation, could please the angered Deity, in their belief. Sin and sacrifice was the basic principle of their creed
.…No action, but bare belief in the story, was sufficient for salvation.” (pp. 78-82).

“Jesus was the last of the series, brought on the pagan altar to popularize Christianity amongst the pagan world. The period of God-Incarnate is over. Christianity has proved the last chapter in the history of the Mystery cult. But a very poor one. The former cults had the beauty of originality in conception, the nicety of the flight of imagination. But the Church aped the old cult most slavishly and boorishly. She went so far as to steal word by word the whole pagan terminology. Almost all the names given to Jesus in the Church theology have been taken from the same source–(some of these names are noted above: “God’s First Begotten Son, the Intermediary between God and man;” “The Good Shepherd”).

The Alpha and Omega of Bacchus was put into the mouth of Jesus to suit the theory of Logos –another piece of literary larceny from Philo and others of the Alexandrian philosophy. The Qur’an exposed it at a time when no other suspected it. It said: “The Christian says the Messiah is the son of God; these are the words of their mouth; they imitate the sayings of those who were pagan before; Allah destroyed them, now they are turned away” (Qur’an 9:30). Yes, God destroyed paganism through His Messengers, of whom Jesus was one, but it lived again through his followers; and lo! those who gave the name “heathens” to others became the same themselves.”29

“To-day it is an establish verity that Church theology was only an assimilation of Paganism: what an irony of fate that those who called others heathens should have turned out to be heathens themselves in their beliefs!”30

(It is hardly any surprise then that):
“The last Conference of Modernism (August, 1925) has dealt its final blow to the Church dogmas in rejecting the theory of “sin in nature,” inasmuch as the doctrine of “sin by heritage” is the very bed-rock of the Church faith, and if it is rejected, its sequel–the Doctrine of Atonement, the Grace of the Blood, the Divinity of Jesus –must, ipso facto, go too. And in this respect….here again Islam was the first to deny the Christian doctrine, when it said that every child, when born, comes into the world with a pure and untainted nature.
They must be on a fool’s errand who seek to induce us to accept things rejected by their best men, and to reject those doctrines now accepted by their intellectually advanced people.
This all reminds me of Canon Gairdner’s remark:  “Islam is the only one (religion) that definitely claimed to correct, complete and supersede Christianity.””31 (This is not only a “claim,” it is proven fact!)

As there is no inherited sin and thus no vicarious atonement then ipso facto the entire edifice of Christianity crumbles into a heap of rubbish.

“And say:
The Truth has come and falsehood vanished.
Surely falsehood is ever bound to vanish.”
(Qur’an 17:81)

(The Sources of Christianity may be obtained from www.muslim.org).


I have had the odd Christian tell me that Mohammad was an “impostor.” I would say that if he can prove that Mohammad was an “impostor” I would follow what he follows, no ifs ands or buts; and as he cannot prove that Mohammad was an “impostor” then he is to follow what I follow –Islam. So far I have had no takers.

Christians also charge that Mohammad wrote the Qur’an. Fine. So Mohammad wrote the Qur’an. Who wrote the Bible –Old and New Testaments; prove that God revealed or gave inspiration to the writers of the Bible. And Paul, who Christians really follow, was a self-admitted liar and forger (see Allāh and Jesus or Paul. Christians are to be more correctly called Churchians or Paulians and their religion Churchianity or Paulianity).

Fact is, Christians do not know who Jesus is and what they follow. Whereas Muslims know who Jesus is –a messenger of Allāh God sent to the Children of Israel– and know who God is. On the contrary. After two thousand years since Jesus’ arrival and departure, Christians are still groping in the field of darkness and misunderstanding and confusion as to who God is and as to who Jesus is:

–whereas some Christians hold that Jesus is God, some say he is only Son of God. (Whose belief is correct? And Jesus is only “called” son of God, and God has a legion of sons and daughters; and as there is no literal “son of God” to die for literal “inherited” sin then the entire edifice of Christianity crumbles into a heap of rubbish. If Jesus is God and if Father (God) Son (Jesus) and Holy Ghost are one, and as Mary “conceived” Jesus through the agency of the Holy Ghost”-Matthew 1:18-20- then JESUS EFFECTED HIS OWN CONCEPTION; and WITH HIS MOTHER);

–whereas some Christians believe in Trinity, some hold Trinity as a “senseless God-dishonoring doctrine.” (Whose belief is correct? Notably, the pagan Romans had Trinity –Juno, Jupiter and Minerva. And Hindus have Trinity –Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. And the Romans and Hindu Trinity pre-date the Christian Trinity. In which event it may be advanced that Christians copied the Pagan Romans and/or Hindu Trinity. The assertion gains full traction considering that the tree of Christian theology is firmly rooted in the soil of ancient mythology (see Jesus-1000-year rule).

–whereas some Christians say Christ died for inherited sin, some say he died for committed sin. (Whose belief is correct? Whether inherited sin or committed sin, the God that puts one person’s sin onto others and even have the innocent killed for the guilty is not worthy of adoration. Not even honest humans suffer the innocent for the guilty).

–whereas some Christians believe Jesus was killed, buried, and raised, “some of the early Christian sects did not believe that Christ was killed on the cross. The Basilidans believed that some one else was substituted for him. The Docetae held that Christ never had a real physical or natural body, but only an apparent or phantom body, and that his Crucifixion was only apparent, not real. The Marcionite Gospel (about A.D. 138) denied that Jesus was born, and merely said that he appeared in human form.”–(Yusuf Ali, Qur’anic comm; #663). And these are the cardinal doctrines of their religion. (Whose belief is correct?)
These cardinal doctrines of Christianity are NOT Divine Revelations -they are not clearly expressed in the Bible- these doctrines are assumptions.
Trinity was invented by the Church 300 years after Christ; and inherited sin and vicarious atonement were devised by St. (?) Paul.

In summary. Christianity is:
  Trinity –God growing in the womb, coming out the vagina and getting circumcised; and needing to eat butter and honey “that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good”-(Isaiah 7:14-15)
  Son of God –attributing the animal function of sex to God; as “fatherhood” requires the union of sperm and ovum; (and Jesus is only “CALLED” son of God-Luke 1:35); and needing to eat butter and honey “that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good”-(Isaiah 7:14-15)
  Inherited sin –God loading a man’s (Adam’s) sin onto innocent, helpless and morally and mentally non-competent babies -and worldwide and for more than 5,000 years now and will continue to do so to the Resurrection 
  Vicarious atonement –God having a blameless man (Jesus) killed for the sin of others.
Which are gruesome, unGodly monstrosities!

What kind of God and son of God are Christians following that need to eat butter and honey in order to differentiate between good and evil?
What kind of God are Christians following that lived in the belly of a woman and came out her vagina and circumcised?
What kind of God are Christians following that puts one man’s sin onto innocent, helpless, and morally and mentally non-competent babies?
What kind of God are Christians following that had a blameless man killed for the sins of others?
This is the insanity that Christians have hundreds of thousands of missionaries plying the world and blowing billions of dollars (which could be utilized to eradicate/alleviate world poverty) for Muslims and others to nail our intelligence to the “cross” of lunacy and blind faith and follow.

Incidentally, Jesus is noted as saying: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature” (which would include the baboon)–(Mark 16:15; though this verse is a “forgery” in the Bible), and, regarding “the end of the world” Jesus says: “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and THEN SHALL THE END COME”–(Matthew 24:3, 14. Thus, if any nation(s) should ban the Gospel from its land the “end” shall NEVER COME).
Bluntly put, Christianity -Trinity, inherited sin and vicarious atonement- is not only lies,, falsehood and blasphemy, Christianity is nonsense.      

Even Hinduism is superior to Christianity. Whereas both religions reduce God to “son” of a woman and make woman “mother” of God by placing God in the body of a woman and bring Him out her genital. Unlike Christianity which attributes injustice to God and makes God complicit in murder by shifting Adam’s sin around onto every person and then onto Jesus and having him murdered, Hinduism, does not attribute injustice to God and make Him complicit in murder; Hinduism gives to man an equal and opposite reaction to his action; though this renders God as being mercy-less, see Karma & Reincarnation.
Also, whereas Jesus/Christianity regards non-Jews as “dogs” and “swine” and preached in “parables” so these metaphorical “dogs” and “swine” would not understand and be saved, Hinduism does not regard non-Jews or non-Hindus as “dogs” and “swine” or preached in parables so they would not understand. The God or son of God or prophet that regards one sector of humanity as “:dogs” and “swine” and even preach so they would not understand and be saved is the God/son of God/prophet not worthy of honor much less of adoration and worship. Even humans fight against racism and bigotry.   

Christians are also divided as to whether Jesus’ birth was “virginal” or “mechanical.” Paul, who knows more than Christians and whom Christians follow, taught that Jesus had a human father; that Jesus was born from “seed” “according to the flesh” (“seed” and “according to the flesh” is sexual intercourse)–(Acts 2:30; Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8).

Given the humanness of the Bible and the clouds of conjectures surrounding the existence of Jesus, but for the Qur’an/Islam/Mohammad Jesus may have long since been relegated to the bin of myths and legends.
It is the Qur’an/Islam/Mohammad that is keeping Jesus alive; and not only keeping him alive but has cleansed him and his mother, Mary, of the calumnies of “bastard” and “adulteress,” respectively, hurled on them by Jewish Fathers, and appareled them in rubious robes of righteousness, and have secured for them today the unflagging allegiance of some one-and-one-half billion Muslims. And counting as Islam spirits on. Inexorably! Invincibly! Impregnably! As Divinely decreed! To prevail over all religions!

  “He it is Who sent His Messenger
  (Mohammad) with guidance and
    the Religion of Truth, 
  that He may cause it to
  prevail over all religions,
  though the polytheists are averse”
  (Qur’an 9:32-33; 48:28; 61:8-9).
 Allāh God truly is Great! 
   Subhāna Rabbayyal A’lā! 
 Allāho Akbar!
*


                      NOTES

  1. Qur’an 9:30 reads in full: “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allāh; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allāh. These are the words of their mouths.a They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before.b Allāh’s curse be on them! How they are turned away!” And Muhammad Ali comments:
    30a. “That there was a sect among the Jews who raised Ezra to the dignity of godhead, or son of God, is shown by Muslim historians. Qastalani says, in the Kitab al-Nikah, that there was a party of Jews who held this belief. Nor did the Jews deny this allegation. The Qur’an, too, mentions it only here in connection with the Christian doctrine, never blaming the Jews directly in the many controversies with them in the earlier chapters, and this shows that the Jewish nation as a whole was not guilty of entertaining this belief. Another explanation of the statement made here is the free use of the word son. Elsewhere the Qur’an says of the Jews and the Christians that they call themselves the sons of Allah and His beloved ones (5:18), the meaning only being that they considered themselves special favourites of the Divine Being. Hence the belief regarding Ezra may be interpreted in the same light, for there is clear evidence that the Talmudists used very exaggerated language concerning him. Among the prophets of Israel, Ezra was specially honoured. In Rabbinical literature Ezra was considered “worthy of being the vehicle of the law, had it not been already given through Moses”. “He is regarded and quoted as the type of person most competent and learned in the law. The Rabbis associate his name with several important institutions” (Jewish Encyclopaedia).
    30b. We are here told that the Christian doctrine that Jesus Christ was the son of God was borrowed from earlier pagan people. Recent research has established the fact beyond all doubt. In fact, when St. Paul saw that the Jews would on no account accept Jesus Christ as a messenger of God, he introduced the pagan doctrine of sonship of God into the Christian religion, so that it might become more acceptable to the pagans.”
  2. Bucaille, Maurice, The Bible The Qur’an And Science, pp. 52-53. Caps, emphasis added).
  3. Ency. Britannica, 15th Edn, Vol. 13, Paul the Apostle, Saint, p. 1090.
  4. Robertson, Pagan Christs, p.338.
  5. Ibid. p. 350.
  6. 6. R.P. Knight, Ancient Art and Mythology, p. 22.
  7. Antiquities of Mexico, vol. vi. P.176.
  8. Ethnogrup, Amerika, Leipzig, 1867,vol. 1. p. 758.
  9. Rev. J. B. Gross, Heathen Religion, p. 60.
  10. Inman, Pagan and Christian Symbolism, p. 27.
  11. 11. Adol, I. Ch. xxii.
  12. Dr. Frazer, The Golden Bough, iv. p. 229.
  13. 13. Prescott, Conquest of Mexico, vol. 1. p. 60.
  14. 14. See Beausobre, also Higgin’s Anacalypsis, vol. 1. p. 322.
  15. De Legis Allegor, iii. 73.
  16. 16. Quis Rerum Divin. Heres. i. 501.
  17. De Profugis, i. 562, 13.
  18. De Leg. Alleg, i. 122, 17.
  19. De Deler, Potiori Infid., i. 213. 45.
  20. De Confu., Ling., i. 427.
  21. 21. (Christos) De Somniis, i. 653.
  22. De Agric., i. 308, 27.
  23. De Confus., Ling., i. 418.
  24. De Profugis, i. 560, 31.
  25. De Profugis, i. 561, 16.
  26. De Confu., Ling., i. 427.
  27. 27. De Sacrificis, i. 165, 5.
  28. 28. Ibid; i. 173, 12.
  29. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Open Letters To The Bishops Of Salisbury & London, pp. 25-26.
  30. Kamal-ud-Din, Khwaja, Open Letters to the Bishops of Salisbury & London, p. 15.
  31. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Open Letters to the Bishops of Salisbury & London p. 16.
Share