In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms
JESUS–INHERITED SIN, CRUCIFIXION, ASCENSION
Like their sibling, Trinity, the inseparable twin, inherited sin and vicarious atonement, are also of human birth.
Christians claim, because Adam sinned by eating from the forbidden tree, mankind inherited this sin from Adam (through our father); and to free the world of this “inherited sin” God sent Jesus who was sinless (because he was of “virgin” birth and therefore did not inherit sin from a father) to die for this “inherited sin”
Whereas Jesus unambiguously, categorically and emphatically declared that God sent him wholly and solely only for Jews, and he considered non-Jews (which includes you unless you are Jewish) as “dogs” and ‘swine” and preached in parables to keep them out of heaven; and taught that eternal life lies in observance of the Mosaic Law (The Ten Commandments) until the coming of the Comforter who will guide into “all truth’ and will “abide for ever.”
Christians toss these clear teachings of Jesus into the trash bin and claim that man was made to live forever; that we inherited sin from Adam and that God sent Jesus to die to free us from this sin. (And as David was earthly king, they baptized Jesus heavenly king, mediator between God and man and ruler of future world for 1000-years based on ancient Indo-Iranian mythology).
That we are born with sin is saying that we are criminals by nature: that we come into this world with two little horns on our forehead and a barbed tail on our behind –devil!
(And that CHARM –sprinkling water on the baby accompanied by the farcical phrase “In the name of the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit/Ghost”– exorcises this sin/devil from the child. It is farcical phrase because Matthew 28:19 as well as Mark 16:9-20 are known “forgeries” in the Bible, (shown later)
Even a fool knows it is the crest of cruelty and injustice to knowingly pin Pete’s sin onto Gus and to even execute Gus for Pete’s sin.
Even a fool knows that no one can take food and drink and medication to relieve him of hunger, thirst, and illness; and that his doctor chopping off his head will not cure him of his headache. Much less can someone else die for him.
This presentation is divided into eight parts:
(1) God made man to live forever
(2) Jesus of virgin birth
(3) Inherited sin
(4) Vicarious atonement
(6) Passion Play of Christ
(1) GOD MADE MAN TO LIVE FOREVER:
Paul –NOT God or Jesus– states: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned,” “For the wages of sin is death”–(Romans 5:12; 6:23).
The Bible says God created Adam and Eve, the first humans–(Gen. 1:26-27; 2:18-23). And their first children were Cain and Abel–(Gen. 4:1-2). After Cain killed Abel “Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain KNEW HIS WIFE; and she conceived”–(Genesis 4:16-17).
Since Adam and Eve were the first humans and they did not have any other children till later–(Genesis 4:25), there must have been other humans in the land of Nod who were NOT descended from Adam and Eve for Cain to have taken a wife.
And since Christians say “death” came because Eve and Adam ate from the forbidden tree then the people of Nod, NOT descended from Adam and Eve, would have been FREE from “death.” In which event the people of Nod are still living and WILL LIVE FOREVER.
(Perhaps researchers can invest some effort to find at least one of these Nodites who should be at least 5,000 years old and have him/her carbon-dated for antiquity. In fact, Nodites should be easy to find considering that they did not descend from Adam and Eve and thus are free from the “wage of sin” and therefore free from “death” earth should have more “immortal” Nodites than the seven billion “mortal” Adamites).
In Genesis 2:16-17, God instructed Adam that he can eat of “every tree” of the garden, “But of the tree of KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”
After Adam and Eve had eaten from the forbidden tree: “And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to KNOW GOOD AND EVIL: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and TAKE ALSO OF THE TREE OF LIFE, and eat, AND LIVE FOR EVER: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden.”–Genesis 3:22-23).
The tree that Adam and Eve ate from was the “tree of the knowledge of GOOD AND EVIL” NOT the tree of eternal life. As stated in the verse, God sent away Adam and Eve BEFORE they could eat from the “tree of life” and “live for ever.”
That this “death” referred to in Genesis 2:16-17 above is NOT physical death but SPIRITUAL death is gleaned from the fact that Adam did not die “in the day” he ate from the forbidden tree; he lived hundreds of years afterwards to the age of 930 years–(Genesis 5:5).
But Adam and Eve DID “surely die” a SPIRITUAL death –he and Eve were cut off from Divine grace– on the very day they ate from the forbidden tree as they were then cast out from the Garden of Eden:
“And unto Adam He (God) said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree…Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden”–(Genesis 3:17-23).
Allāh God did not make man to live forever. Allāh created life and death as a trial for us: “Blessed is He in Whose hand is the Kingdom, and He is Possessor of power over all things, Who created death and life that He might try you—which of you is best in deeds. And He is the Mighty, the Forgiving”–(Qur’an 67:2).
The “wages of sin” is NOT death; the “wages of sin” is Hell-Fire!
(For more see Christianity-man made to live forever).
(2) JESUS OF VIRGIN BIRTH:
Christians claim, because Adam sinned by eating from the forbidden tree, mankind inherited this sin from Adam (through our father); and to free the world of this “inherited sin” God sent Jesus who was sinless (because he was of “virgin” birth and therefore did not inherit sin from a father) to die for this “inherited sin”
Apart from the fact that there is no record in the Gospels of Jesus using “virgin” birth to support his status or mission. Paul, who knows more than Christians, states that Jesus had a human father:
(a) “Therefore (David) being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the FRUIT OF HIS LOINS, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne”–(Acts 2:30);
(b) “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ…which was made of the SEED OF DAVID ACCORDING TO THE FLESH”–(Romans 1:3);
(c) “Remember that Jesus Christ of the SEED OF DAVID”–(2 Timothy 2:8).
And “seed” is sperm, and “according to the flesh” is male-female union: sexual intercourse.
Even if Jesus was of “Virgin birth” this does not free him from “original sin.” As woman is the ‘transgressor’ and thus the actual vehicle of the transmission of sin, Jesus would have received sin through his mother, Mary (who would have received it from her mother/father). (1Tim. 2:14; 2 Cor. 11:3; Gen. 3:6, 12).
That Jesus was the only “sinless” and “perfect” man is belied by the Bible which says:
- “Enoch WALKED WITH GOD; and he was NOT (dead); for GOD TOOK HIM”–(Genesis 5:24; Hebrews 11:5). One who walked with God could not have sin.
- “Noah was a JUST man and PERFECT in his generations, and Noah WALKED WITH GOD” –(Genesis 6:9). One who has “sin:” could not be “perfect” and to have “walked with God.”
- “Zacharias…and his wife…were both RIGHTEOUS, walking in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord BLAMELESS”–(Luke 1:5-6). One who has “sin” could not be ‘righteous” and blameless.
- “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained WITNESS (from God) that he was RIGHTEOUS, GOD testifying of his gifts”–(Hebrews 11:4). It is doubtful that God would “testify” to one who has “sin” as being “righteous.”
- Mary, mother of Jesus (and even “mother of God” as some Christians say) was “highly favoured” by God, and “blessed” among women–(Luke 1:28). One who has “sin” could not be a “highly favored” of God and “blessed” among women.
- John the Baptist was “great in the sight of the Lord”–(Luke 1:15). One who has “sin” could not be crowned (by God) as being “great in the sight of the Lord.”
- Jesus says:
“I am not come to call the righteous, but SINNERS to REPENTANCE” (not to vicarious atonement)–(Matthew 9:13).
If Jesus was the only sinless man how are there “righteous” people that he did not come to call to repentance? Surely these “righteous” had to be sinless for Jesus to not “call” them to “repentance;” as Jesus declared he only came to call “SINNERS.”
- Even John the Baptist was greater than Jesus, as Jesus himself declared: “Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist”–(Matthew 11:11).Jesus also was born of a woman.
- Jesus says only God is good: “Why callest thou me good? there is NONE good but one, that is, GOD”–(Matt. 19:17).
Thus no one, including Jesus, is good; one who is not good cannot be “perfect” or “sinless” (and such a one cannot be God or son of God or vicarious atoner).
Evidently, Jesus was NOT the only “sinless” and “perfect” man.
As Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud B.D. –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Roman Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– notes
“More than sixteen Ecumenical Councils have been summoned to define the religion of Christianity, only to be discovered by the Synod of the Vatican in the nineteenth century that the mysteries of the “Infallibility” and the “Immaculate Conception” were two of the principal dogmas, both unknown to the Apostle Peter and the Blessed Virgin Mary! Any faith or religion dependent upon the deliberations and decisions of General Synods –holy or heretical– is artificial and human. The religion of Islam is the belief in one Allāh and absolute resignation to His will, and this faith is professed by the angels in heaven and by the Muslims on earth. It is the religion of sanctification and of enlightenment, and an impregnable bulwark against idolatry.”1
(Virgin birth is a forgery in the Bible, see Jesus-birth miracle or mechanix?)
(3) INHERITED SIN:
Like their sibling, Trinity, the inseparable twin, inherited sin and vicarious atonement, are also of human birth. Conceived by the man Christians crowned with sainthood, Paul, a “renegade from Judaism” who was a self-admitted liar and forger of his own gospel; and who grafted paganism onto Jesus’ head and made himself into a human chameleon to snare people into worshipping his pagan Son of God.
Let the scholars tell the story about inherited sin as noted at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin
“The doctrine of ancestral fault (προγονικὸν ἁμάρτημα progonikon hamartema), i.e. the sins of the forefathers leading to punishment of their descendants, was presented as a tradition of immemorial antiquity in ancient Greek religion by Celsus in his True Doctrine, a polemic attacking Christianity. Celsus is quoted as attributing to “a priest of Apollo or of Zeus” the saying that “the mills of the gods grind slowly, even to children’s children, and to those who are born after them”. The idea of divine justice taking the form of collective punishment is also ubiquitous in the Hebrew Bible.
St Paul’s idea of redemption hinged upon the contrast between the sin of Adam and the death and resurrection of Jesus. “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.” “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” Up till then the transgression in the Garden of Eden had not been given great significance. As the Jesus scholar, Geza Vermes has said:
Paul believed that Adam’s transgression in a mysterious way affected the nature of the human race. The primeval sin, a Pauline creation with no biblical or post-biblical Jewish precedent, was irreparable by ordinary human effort.
The formalized Christian doctrine of original sin was first developed in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyon, in his struggle against Gnosticism. Irenaeus contrasted their doctrine with the view that the Fall was a step in the wrong direction by Adam, with whom, Irenaeus believed, his descendants had some solidarity or identity. Irenaeus believed that Adam’s sin had grave consequences for humanity, that it is the source of human sinfulness, mortality and enslavement to sin, and that all human beings participate in his sin and share his guilt.
The Greek Fathers emphasized the cosmic dimension of the Fall, namely that since Adam human beings are born into a fallen world, but held fast to belief that man, though fallen, is free.They thus did not teach that human beings are deprived of free will and involved in total depravity, which is one understanding of original sin. During this period the doctrines of human depravity and the inherently sinful nature of human flesh were taught by Gnostics, and orthodox Christian writers took great pains to counter them. Christian apologists insisted that God’s future judgment of humanity implied humanity must have the ability to live righteously.
Historian Robin Lane Fox argues that the foundation of the doctrine of original sin as accepted by the Church was ultimately based on a mistranslation of Paul the Apostle‘s Epistle to the Romans (Romans 5:12–21) by Augustine, in his On the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin”.”
Now you know!
Ask the Christian God to explain –rather than have Christians do the bush-dance with torches looking for Divine answers– why He could not have forgiven Adam and you (before giving you birth) and send you to earth with a pure nature; as the Muslim God, Allāh, did on both counts–(Qur’an 2:37; 95:4).
And if we inherited Adam’s sin how is it He said that Abel and Enoch and Zacharias among others who came AFTER Adam were righteous/sinless? (shown later); and He even had Enoch translated so he should not see death; and took Elijah to heaven in a whirlwind and chariot of fire:
“And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven”–(2 Kings 2:11).
Heaven lies in following Divine revelation; not in following human invention and assumption.
As they delineate between Heaven and Hell, cardinal doctrines of a religion are to be clearly expressed in Scripture. These decisive doctrines are not to be left to be devised by deficient devotees.
Jesus belies inherited sin; he taught we are born sinless: “Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven;” “Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God”–(Matt. 18:3; Luke 18:16-17).
If children inherited sin the kingdom of God would be sinful. A person born with sin is not innocent or pure. That we are born sinful is to say we are criminal by nature –that we are born with two little horns on our foreheads and a barbed tail on our behinds (devils).
God says: “The father shall NOT die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but EVERY MAN SHALL DIE FOR HIS OWN SIN”–(Deuteronomy 24:16; Ezekiel 18:20; 2 Chronicles 25:4).
God “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me” is not analogous to “inherited sin;” then it would not have been limited to “third and fourth generation.” This is about those who engage in false worship and hate God. Exodus 20:5.
Further Deuteronomy 24:16; Ezekiel 18:20; 2 Chronicles 25:4 are speaking about dying for “sin” whereas Exodus 20:5 is speaking about “hatred” of God.
David saying in Psalm 51:5: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” could not be about inherited sin when there is no such sin to begin with. David believed he was of illegitimate birth.
According to the Internet, David’s father, Jesse, believing his marriage to David’s mother, Nitzevet, was a “forbidden” union avoided marital relation with her.
Later, Jesse, desiring a child of unquestionable ancestry, proposed to his “Canaanite maidservant” to have a child with her. The servant informed Nitzevet about Jesse’s proposal.
The two women decided to secretly switch places in Jesse’s bed (much as Rachel and Leah were switched to trick Jacob into mating with Leah–Genesis 29:16-25). From this union with Jesse, Nitzevet became pregnant with David.
Nitzevet, not wanting to disclose the “switch” to Jesse, was viewed as “adulterous” and her child, David, as being “illegitimate.” In this Psalm (51:5) David, lamenting his own adultery with Bathsheba, is recounting his mother’s assumed “adultery;” that he was shapen/conceived in “sin”/ “adultery.”
If man inherited sin from Adam and if Christ died for this sin Christians should not die.
“Sin is an acquisition, and not a heritage.”
Sin is not a physical factor or a biological/genetic factor, as some diseases are, that can be transmitted from one person to another. Sin is a defect in the spirit acquired through committing an unGodly act.
If sin is a voluntary transgression of a known law of God by a morally responsible person, where is the voluntary transgression of the new-born for sin to be loaded onto his and her head?
Allāh God forgives all sins, As He revealed to the Prophet Mohammad to convey to mankind:
“Say, O My servants who have sinned against their souls, despair not of the mercy of Allāh; surely Allāh forgives all sins. Verily, He is Most Forgiving, Ever Merciful.”–(Qur’an 39:53).
Imagine the expanse of love and mercy and compassion of Allāh Who needs nothing from us to implore us in such loving compassionate terms to forgive us our sins. And without need for having someone killed in “satisfaction.”
(4) VICARIOUS ATONEMENT
As shown in “Inherited sin” there is/was no Divine doctrine as “inherited sin”. Thus, as there is no “inherited sin” then ipso facto there is no “vicarious atonement.”
However to entertain Christians.
Regarding Paul’s statement: “For we see Jesus, who was made a LITTLE LOWER than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for EVERY MAN”–(Hebrews 2:9).
If Jesus tasted death for EVERY man then man should not die. Since “inherited sin” is not selective, “vicarious atonement” cannot be selective but is to free all men, believers in God or not.
God made “LOWER” than the angels?
The Gospel of John (or whoever this “anonymous writer is) stating in chapter 3 verse 16: “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” is NOT about Jesus dying for sins.
When taken in its context, from verses 2-15, it shows that Jesus was having a conversation with Nicodemus who concluded that from his miracles Jesus could only be a man from God.
Jesus answered that man must undergo spiritual birth before he can see the kingdom of God. Jesus then compared himself to the brass serpent Moses lifted up in the wilderness; which serpent had the power to preserve the life of those bitten by a snake–(Num. 21:9), for “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the son of man be lifted up” –the allusion being, as the serpent had power to preserve life of the afflicted on account of their belief on it, likewise, Jews who believed in his (Jesus’) miracles and accept him as a prophet from God–(John 8:28)– would also be saved: “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life”–(John 3:14-15).
Then came the verse of John 3:16 which, when expressed in the context of this discussion would convey the full meaning of:
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son the power to perform miracles that whosoever believeth in him to be from God through these works of miracles should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Miracles were necessary because the people believed only in miracles: “Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe” –(John 4:48).
Apart from the fact that your doctor chopping off his head cannot cure you of your headache. To infer that John 3:16 is about crucifixion is to inject a meaning that is alien to the subject.
That Jesus is saying God “gave” him to be “crucified” for sinners and for him to pray pitifully to be spared from this glory and to indict God as having “forsaken” him –“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)– this must be the blackest degree of disgrace exampled by a son of God (and “God”) in Scriptural history.
Jesus contradicts vicarious atonement. He taught forgiveness, repentance and that heaven lies in righteousness and following the Commandments brought by Moses (until the coming of the Comforter who will guide into “all truth” and abide “for ever”):
- “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you”–(Matthew 6:12, 14; 18:21-22).
- “I am not come to call the righteous,but sinners to REPENTANCE” (NOT to belief in inherited sin and vicarious atonement/crucifixion)–Matthew 9:13. This is how Jesus [and all prophets] saved his people from their sin, by calling them to repentance);
- “I say unto you, there is JOY in the presence of the angels of God over one SINNER that REPENTETH”–(Luke 15:10).
- For I say unto you, that except your RIGHTEOUSNESS shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, YE SHALL IN NO CASE ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN”–(Matthew 5:20. And the Mosaic law does not teach inherited sin and vicarious atonement).
- “If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments”–(Matthew 19:16-19);
- “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: ALL therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do”–(Matthew 23:2. Scribes and Pharisees do not teach inherited sin, vicarious atonement, and crucifixion).
More proofs that Inherited sin and vicarious atonement were invented by Christians. M.A. Faruqui notes in his book The Crumbling of the Cross:
“The Christian Church had caused a General Council of the Church dignitaries to be appointed in A.D. 325 in which certain doctrines were made to be the foundation of the Christian Church, and belief therein was made essential for one to be Christian. This is known as the Nicene Creed. Under this, the confirmed doctrine of Atonement may be explained as follows:
(i) Adam (and Eve) committed a Sin, and this Sin was inherited by their descendants.
(ii) The attribute of “Justice” in God demanded that a sin must be punished, for the wage of Sin is death.
(iii) God sent his son Jesus Christ to this world, so that he may die on the Cross an “accursed” death, and after spending some time in Hell, atone for the Sins of the human race, and then be resurrected again.” (pp. 109-110).
If God sent His “Son” (though Jesus is only “CALLED” Son of God) to be “Justice” for “inherited sin” why are babies yet born with “sin”?
Paramountly, Jesus is NOT son of God. Jesus is only CALLED son of God: “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee (Mary)…the holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be CALLED the Son of God”–(Luke 1:35. God has a legion of sons and daughters; see JESUS-SON OF GOD).
As Jesus is only “CALLED” son of God there is no vicarious atonement seeing that vicarious atonement is dependent upon the existence of a son of God and there is/was NO son of God!
That Son of God is only an epithet of honor is made clear in this statement by God: “the Lord came unto Nathan, saying, Go and tell my servant David….I will be HIS FATHER, and he shall be MY SON”–(2 Samuel 7:4, 5,14). And
The METAPHORICAL son (Jesus)
cannot die for LITERAL sins.
Even the inherited-sin and vicarious-atonement invention is lopsided. The Bible says: “Adam was NOT deceived BUT THE WOMAN BEING DECEIVED WAS IN THE TRANSGRESSION”–(1Timothy 2:14; Genesis 3:6, 12).
Since Eve/woman was the transgressor how is it that “sin” is “inherited” through Adam’s/man’s sperm and not through the transgressor Eve’s/woman’s ovum? More so, as Christians view woman as “the devil’s gate-way”:
““Do you know,” says Tertullian, when addressing Women, “that you are each Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age; the guilt, of necessity, must live too. You are the devil’s gate-way; you are the unsealer of that tree; you are the first deserter of the Divine Law; you destroyed as easily God’s image.”…She is “the organ of the devil,” “a scorpion ever ready to sting,” “the poisonous asp,” “the malice of the dragon.” These are some of the blessings that Woman received from persons of exalted position in the Church, such as St. Bernard, St. Anthony, St. Jerome, St. Cyprian, and St. Paul.”2
The Christian’s God should have sent His “only begotten” daughter to die for sins.
Vicarious atonement is unjust, illogical, and unGodly.
The God that takes the life of the sinless for the sinners could not be praised as wise, just, or loving. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes:
(Like monkery and Holy Communion) “The idea of Sin and Expiation is also an ancient idea. The sacrificed animal represented the Dying Deity, as the 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.”3
The God that forgives sins without the need for “blood” sacrifice is the God that “loves” us –Allāh!
At the last Supper Jesus gave bread and wine to his disciples saying the bread is his body and the wine is his blood: “Take, eat; this is my body…This is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many”–(Mark 14: 22-24).
This eating of the “body” and drinking the “mythical” blood of Jesus Christ can be construed as SPIRITUAL CANNIBALISM.
God commanded: “Thou shalt not kill,” and “I desired mercy and not sacrifice”–(Exodus 20:13; Hosea 6:6).
And Jesus explained God desiring mercy and not sacrifice to mean, “I (Jesus) am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to REPENTANCE” (NOT vicarious atonement) –(Matthew 9:13).
It is rather strange for Jesus who came to die willingly for the sins of the world to tell his disciples that “they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ”–(Matthew 16:20); for him to hide from his executioners–(John 11:54); to rebuke the Jews “why go ye about to kill me?”–(John 7:19); and to beseech God to be spared from death–(Matthew 26:39).
Jesus was so terrified of the Jews, fearing for his own head, that after he learnt of the beheading of John the Baptist he rushed off to Bethsaida–(Matthew 14:10-13; Luke 9:9-10).
If Jesus had come to die for the sins of mankind, he should have come forward joyously into the hands of his executors; and Judas, the “betrayer,” should be blessed and not cursed; and the Jews should not be blamed but praised for fulfilling the prophecy of “crucifying” Jesus.
Neither should Jesus have prayed: “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do”–(Luke 23:34). There was no need to “forgive them” if they were fulfilling Scripture.
(Notably, whereas Jesus gave others power to remit/forgive sins he is here asking God to remit/forgive the sins of those who put him on the cross –John 20:23).
Allāh God says about Jesus: “they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them”–(Qur’an 4:157). Jesus only seemed dead. This is how God answered his prayers and saved him. In those days no one checked for pulses, if you’re limp you’re dead.
The Bible supports the Qur’an that Jesus was not killed/crucified:
- prayers of the righteous are always answered–(James 5:16; Psalm 22:24; 34:15-19; John 9:31; Matthew 7:8-9);
- God always answered Jesus’ prayers–(John 11:41-42).
- Jesus prayed to be spared from death: “Then saith he (Jesus) unto them (disciples), My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me. And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt;” “and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground”–(Matthew 26:38-39; Luke 22:44);
- Jesus prayers to be spared death were answered: “(Jesus) Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared”-(Hebrews 5:7).
Allāh God says about Jesus: “they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them”–(Qur’an 4:157). Jesus only seemed dead. This is how God answered Jesus’ prayers and saved him. Obviously Jesus went into a coma. In those days no one checked for pulses, if you’re limp you’re dead.
- Jesus said his sign would be like Jonas, as Jonas wasalive in the whale’s belly so he shall be–(Matt. 12:39-40; Jonah 1:17; 2:1-10; if Jesus came to die for sins there was no need for his sign to be like Jonas’); if Jesus was killed/crucified his sign would not have been like Jonas’.
Even if we take Jesus’ sign to refer to time (three days and three nights) rather than to status (that he would be alive) he is unlike Jonas. Jesus’ alleged crucifixion was on Friday afternoon and alleged resurrection on Sunday morning (Jewish Sabbath is on Saturdays); this would put Jesus in the earth two nights and one and a half days –Friday and Saturday nights, and half-a-day Friday and all day Saturday.
Jesus told the thief on the cross beside him, “To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise”–Luke 23:43. If Jesus went to Paradise “To day” (the day of his alleged crucifixion) he could not have gone into the earth: Paradise is not in the earth!.
- After the alleged crucifixion and resurrection Jesus had his disciples examine him to verify he was not spirit, as the resurrected is, but was of flesh and bones: a mortal–(Luke 24:38-39). The resurrected “are (spiritualized) as the angels”–(Matthew 22:23-30. Luke 20:34-36). Jesus had flesh and bones: he was HUMAN.
- The Apostles treated the news of Jesus’ resurrection as “idle tales”–(Luke 24:11. If the crucifixion and resurrection were prophecies, it is doubtful the Apostles would have treated the resurrection as “idle tales”).
So who is wrong/lying, Christians and the so-called historians and authors, or Jesus?
If Christians and the so-called historians and authors are right that Jesus died on the cross, the Christians Son of God and God is wrong that he did NOT die on the cross.
So who will you believe and follow the “inspired” word of God and Jesus or Christians and their entourage of ectopic experts?
If Jesus came to die for sins why the cow-dance, speaking in parables so only Jews would understand and be saved:
After relating the parable of the sower to the people Jesus said to them:
“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear;” and, afterwards, when he (Jesus) was alone with the Israelite they asked him about the meaning of the parable:
“And he said unto them, Unto you (who have God) it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them (non-Jews) that are without (God), all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them”–(Mark 4:9-12).
The Good News Bible put it even more clearly:
“You have been given the secret of the Kingdom of God,” Jesus answered. “But the others, who are on the outside, hear all things by means of parables, so that, ‘They may look and look, yet not see; they may listen and listen, yet not understand. For if they did, they would turn to God, and he would forgive them.’”
What a ghastly, horribly sickening thing for God/Son of God and who came to “die” for sinners to do. And to refer to people as “dogs” and “swine,” which are scavengers, is the worst of denigration.
That Jesus did not die on the cross is supported by Christian source. M. A. Faruqui has taken “Extracts from the book Jesus Nicht am Kreuz Gestorben (Jesus Did not Die on the Cross) by Kurt Berna of Stuttgart, Germany).
(After Jesus was taken down from the cross he was covered with a cloth, this sheet is known as the Shroud of Turin). In his book The Crumbling of the Cross M. A. Faruqui notes: “There is a German Research Convent about the Holy Shroud in Stuttgart, W. Germany, and Kurt Berna is the Catholic author and Secretary, in charge of Business of the German Convent.”
(M.A. Faruqui notes that after receiving permission from the Vatican to carry out tests on photographs of the Shroud of Turin) the committee’s conclusion about the body that was in the Shroud was submitted to the Vatican). “But the Vatican made all sorts of excuses; as apparently its publication would seriously embarrass the Catholic Church and undermine its established doctrines.”
(M.A. Faruqui notes the following which was translated from German and sent by the German research Convent of Stuttgart, W. Germany to the Vatican. I quote in part):
“In the past twenty-four months several specialists of the German Universities have tried in vain to refute these extraordinary discoveries, but their efforts bore no fruit. These critics would have very easily refuted the results of our investigations with their scientific knowledge, had they not retreated quietly in the background. On the other hand, they have acknowledged and admitted the validity and soundness of this important research for both Christians as well as the Jewish religions…
According to the real facts which could not be challenged by anyone, the Convent is convinced that the results are an open challenge to the whole world.
The Holy Shroud so zealously kept and carefully preserved at the Turin Church has been regarded as an esteemed relic by many Popes who have declared it as the original Shroud of Christ.
It has been proved beyond any doubt that Jesus Christ, after the crucifixion and after the removal of the crown of thorns from his head, had been laid in this Shroud.
According to the existing proofs it is further established that the body of the crucified person at that time was placed in this shroud and it remained there for some time. In the medical sense it is proved that it was not a dead body, because at that time a free movement of the heart was traceable. The existence of the flowing of blood, its position and its nature which is found on the Holy Shroud furnishes a clear scientific and medical proof that the so-called execution was legally not complete.
According to the present discovery the present as well as the past teachings of Christianity are incorrect.” (Just as Allāh revealed, that Christ was not killed–Qur’an 4:157).
(The committee suggested certain tests be carried out in order to refute their findings, and continued). “The aforementioned results of the investigation by the German research Convent and by some other agencies, can only be refuted if the suggested scientific tests are applied…We can safely say that no one and nothing on this earth can refute these discoveries. This is an open challenge by the Research Convent.” (pp. 98-100. Color added. Italics are M.A. Faruqui’s).
Regarding John 19:34 where it is stated that when the soldier thrusted his lance at Jesus “forthwith came there out blood and water”:
“Since the flow of blood indicates a person still alive, the Christian historians and leaders have gone to considerable pains to prove that the point of the spear must have pricked that inside chamber of the heart where some liquid blood was still accumulated; and it was that blood that flowed out. But Jesus, they claim, had been dead already for some two hours past. Kurt Berna has proved that the heart was not pierced by the spear at all and that the flow of blood could only be due to the beating of the heart (however slow) of a person still alive.” (Ibid. p. 108).
M.A. Faruqui notes further that while the writers of the original Gospels did not use the word “death” for Jesus but used words “which could be translated to mean Jesus gave up his ghost to the keeping of God,” later translators “translated the passage to mean that he died or expired while still on the Cross. But after careful inspection of the imprints on the Holy Shroud, Pope Pius XII took up a position in between the two, that is Jesus had neither died nor was he alive.
However, it is obvious that “death” as such only occurs when the heart-beating and circulation of blood in the body has completely and finally stopped and deterioration in the body cells has already started. But since in the case of Jesus, fresh blood still flowed after he was taken down from the Cross, hence he could not have been dead. It may also be borne in mind that, in the time of Jesus, nobody knew about the nature and essentials of blood circulation in the body. To them, when breathing stopped, a person was taken to be dead.” (p. 109).
“St. Paul had thought of and adopted the doctrine of Jesus Christ having died on the Cross and being resurrected afterwards, and this became the confirmed doctrine of the Christian Church. But the investigations made about the imprints of Christ’s body on the Shroud put the Church in difficulties. Pope John XXIII had made a proclamation on 30 June 1960, which was printed in an issue of the Vatican newspaper, Osservator Romano dated 2nd July 1960, under the title “Complete Salvation through the Blood of Jesus Christ,” in which the Pope informed and directed all the Catholic Bishops to believe and to propagate that the complete salvation of the human race lies through the blood of Jesus Christ, and that the death of Jesus Christ is not essential for this purpose.” (p. 109).
This is Papal’s verbal gymnastics. How can salvation be through the “blood” of Christ when there was no “blood” of Jesus Christ? and Christianity stands on the foundation of the “blood” of Jesus Christ –of “inherited sin” and vicarious atonement; and Christians are preaching to the world that Jesus Christ “died” for sin inherited from Adam?
Note well, that “salvation of the human race lies through the blood of Jesus Christ” is the Pope’s (Christian’s) teaching; it is NOT God’s teaching; it is NOT Jesus’ teaching.
What more proof is needed that CHRISTIANITY IS A FAKE RELIGION?
How can salvation lie through the “blood” of Jesus Christ when Jesus Christ, the Christian’s God and Son of God, taught that “salvation” lies in following the Mosaic Law [till the coming of the Comforter who will bring “all truth” and “abide forever”?
And as salvation lies in following the Mosaic Law THERE IS NO NEED FOR INHERITED SIN!
RANSOM: Jesus says that he came to “give his life a ransom for many,” and urged his disciples to “Take, eat; this is my body…this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins”–(Matthew.20:28; 26:28).
That Jesus was “ransom” and remitter of sins only for his disciples/apostles is clearly stated in Luke 22:14-20, 30: “This cup is the new testament in my blood which is shed for YOU (his apostles) ….That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Apart from the fact that Jesus’ dying for the remission of his disciples’ sin is a contradiction of his teaching that eternal life lies in observing the Mosaic law, until the coming of the Comforter who will then guide into all truth’ and ‘abide for ever”.
For which “sin” did Jesus die (though as shown he did not die on the cross).
No one knows!
Thus we have the Christian cow-dance: some saying Christ died for inherited sin and some saying Christ died for committed sin -arguing, rightly, that your father being a millionaire does not make you a millionaire.
But as shown, there is/was no “inherited sin” no “vicarious atonement” and no “crucifixion.”
There is yet another proof that Jesus was no “ransom” and no remitter of sins. Since God did not say that mankind inherited sin from Adam or that He sent Jesus to be killed for sin, but since (according to the Gospels) Jesus says he is a “ransom for sin” and that his blood “is shed for many for the remission of sins,” who is to be believed God or Jesus?
God says in the Bible that if the thing that a prophet says does not come true then God did not say that thing:
“And if thou say in thins heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord HATH NOT SPOKEN, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: THOU SHALT NOT BE AFRAID OF HIM”–(Deut. 18:21-22).
Did Jesus’ saying that he would be killed so he could be a “ransom” for sin come to pass?
NO! IT DID NOT COME TO PASS!
As noted, the Bible shows Jesus was NOT killed; Jesus said he was NOT killed; and investigative evidence by Christians showed Jesus was NOT killed on the cross/pole.
That Jesus was sought by Jews to be killed because of his condemnation of Jewish authorities and NOT for fulfilling scripture is noted by Biblical scholars. The ‘Bible Dictionary’ notes as part of its explanation of the term ‘scribe’:
“Their familiarity with the law allowed the scribes to take on a role of growing importance in Jewish society –teaching in the synagogues, serving as judges, and becoming members of the Sanhedrin. Jesus refused to accept the mass of detail and the superficial technicalities which they affixed to the law, and He accused them of hypocritical interpretations of the law. For these reasons they opposed His teachings and were one of the groups, as were the Pharisees, that helped to plot His death–(Matt. 5:20; 21:15; Mark 10:33; 14:53; Luke 11:44; 20:46; John 8:3; Acts 4:5; 6:12).”4
Jesus was taken captive not for prophecies or redemption of sins, but because Jewish hierarchy “opposed His teachings.”
There is NO inherited sin.
NO vicarious atonement.
NO “ransom” for sin.
Given Paul’s “lie” “crafty(ness)” and “guile” it is not surprising that he should write: “And if Christ be not raised, YOUR FAITH IS VAIN; ye are yet in your sins”–(1 Corinthians 15:17).
Why is “your faith is vain” when you are following God and Jesus THAT JESUS WAS NOT KILLED?
If God had sent Jesus to be “ransom” for sins there would have been no need for the Christian Fathers to convene and invent the doctrines of inherited sin and vicarious atonement.
As stated, if Jesus came to die for the sins of the world and for him to pray to be spared this ”glory” and to blaspheme that God had “forsaken” him (which is tantamount to disbelief in God), this must be the blackest degree of disgrace ever exampled by a “Son of God” in scriptural history. (If Jesus is God then God prayed to Himself and “forsaken” Himself–(Matt. 26:38-42; 27:46).
The Christian doctrines of Divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement are NOT Divine Revelations; they are Christian fabrications.
“And say: The Truth has come and falsehood vanished. Surely falsehood is ever bound to vanish”-(Qur’an 17:81).
(6) PASSION PLAY OF CHRIST
Like Son of God the Christian Passion Play of Jesus Christ is a blueprint of the Passion Play of the pagan god, Bēl (Baal), who preceded Jesus by centuries. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din lists, side by side, fourteen (14) features of Jesus’ passion that are identical with the passion of Baal. In brief:
- Baal is taken prisoner
Jesus is taken prisoner.
- Baal is tried.
Jesus is tried.
- Baal is wounded.
Jesus is scourged.
- Baal is led away to the Mount.
Jesus is led away to Golgotha.
- 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.
- 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; Matthew 27:50-52).
- Baal’s clothes are carried away.
Jesus’ robe is divided among the soldiers (Matthew 27:35; John cp. Psalm 22:18).
- 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).
- 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).
- Baal is watched over by guards.
Jesus is watched over by guards (Matt. 27:64-66).
- A goddess sits with Baal; she comes to tend him.
Mary Magdalene and the other Mary sit before Jesus’ tomb (Matt. 28:1).
- 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).
- 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).
- 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.”
“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.” (For an in-depth account of this topic see Christianity is Paganism pp 44-50).
As there was no crucifixion there was no resurrection.
It was Paul who taught that Jesus was resurrected: “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead ACCORDING TO MY GOSPEL”–(2 Timothy 2:8; Galatians 1:6).
Paul forged his own gospel. Who will you believe Allāh and Jesus or Paul?
“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.”5
The men in white garments at Jesus’ tomb “have always remained a mystery” to Christians, thus they “described them as angels.” The Qur’an refers to these helpers of Jesus as “hawariyyoon”–(Qur’an 3:51). These helpers could not be the “so-called disciples of Jesus who were always “wondering” and “doubting” and were running away from Jesus whenever he was in adversity. The word hawariyyoon is a plural of hawari,which is from the root hoor (meaning: simple whiteness). The word hawari, therefore, means “one who whitens his clothes or garments by washing and beating them” Lane opines that for this reason the word hawariyyoon is applied to the companions (not the disciples) of Jesus. The Holy Qur’an is very exact in its terminology and it described the helpers of Jesus by their distinctive dress–white garments).” (K. Nazir Ahmad, Jesus in Heaven on Earth, p. 221).
These helpers of Jesus, notably Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea–John 19:38-39– must have been members of the “Essenes Order”.
Matthew 27:57-61 say that Joseph of Arimathea was given possession of Jesus’ body, which he placed in a tomb. Mary Magdalene was also there.
As noted, Kurt Berna says that the person who was placed in the Shroud “was not a dead body.”
Jesus was alive. Joseph, upon claiming Jesus’ body must have known this. This is why Mary took materials to anoint Jesus the next day –Jews do not anoint the dead, Ahmed Deedat points out.
Joseph, along with member(s) of the “Essenes Order” –“a secret brotherhood which was opposed to the Pharisees and Sadducees,” as Khwaja Nazir Ahmad says– to which John the Baptist, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea may have belong, must have gone back to the tomb that night, when it was safe to do so, and took Jesus away to nurse him back to health. These members of the Essenes must have been the ones (the angels) at the tomb who told the people that Jesus was taken away/risen, so as not to draw attention to the fact that Jesus was alive and in hiding.
Khwaja Nazir Ahmad quotes Celsus that:
“The angels referred to by the Gospels in connection with the Resurrection (and may I add Ascension) were colleagues of Jesus, who were unknown to the disciples of Jesus, and must have been two members of the Essenes Order who according to the peculiar features of this sect wore white robes.” (Jesus in Heaven on Earth, pp. 218, 221, resp.)
The Christian’s God and son of God, Jesus, says: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved …and IF THEY DRINK ANY DEADLY THING, IT SHALL NOT HURT THEM…”–(Mark 16:16-18).
Would Christians like to drink some “deadly thing”?
Christians claim that the Bible is “all” “Word of God” and that Jesus is the Son of God. If Christians believe in their “Word of God” and Son of God they will have no reluctance or hesitancy to drink this “deadly thing.” Surely to demonstrate their “Word of God” and trust in their “Son of God” is the highest of “moral standards.” Don’t Christians trust their God and son of God?
It is scandalous that Christians are not clamoring to honor this “truth” of Jesus. After all, if this “deadly thing” does not hurt them they can boast that Jesus spoke the truth. And if they die, well, they will get to sit with Jesus sooner “on the right hand of God”–(Mark 16:19).
(We would not recommend that Christians drink deadly things to test this saying of Jesus. For the reason see Christians-drinking deadly thing).
(8) ASCENSION OF CHRIST
Ahmed Deedat notes in his booklet Is The Bible God’s Word? that the Ascension–(Mark 16:9-20)–was expunged from the Bible but restored.
Matthew and John have nothing to say about this momentous event. Mark had Jesus ascend from inside a house–(Mark 16:14-20); Luke took him in the open air at Bethany–(Luke 24:50-51).
In Luke 23:43 Jesus says he would ascend on the day of “CRUCIFIXION,” he told the thief: “Verily I say unto thee, TODAY shalt thou be with me in paradise,”
but Luke conveys that the ascension took place on the DAY OF “RESURRECTION”–(Luke ch. 24);
John had Jesus hanging around at least EIGHT DAYS AFTER the “resurrection”–(John 20-26);
the Acts said Jesus ascended FORTY DAYS AFTER the “resurrection”–(Acts 1:3, 9);
And Paul claims Jesus visited him on the road to Damascus, which was more than forty days after the alleged resurrection–(Acts 9:3-5).
Thus, either Jesus did not know when and where he will be going or Jesus must have been busy shuttling up and down between “heaven and earth.”
As noted Ahmed Deedat points out that the Ascension–(Mark 16:9-20)– was expunged from the Bible but restored.
The claim that after the make-believe resurrection and before his alleged ascension Jesus changed his mind and said to preach the Gospels to all nations not only shows that Jesus was uncertain of his mission but these verses are “forgeries” in the Bible. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din points out in his book Open Letters To The Bishops of Salisbury & London, (pp. 31-32):
“The concluding eleven verses of St. Mark-(16:9-20) and the well-known verse of St. Matthew -(28:19), speaking of the Son and the Father and the Holy Ghost, are forgeries, an admitted addition to the ancient MSS (manuscripts). The fact was discovered by the first translator of the Bible into English and they made a marginal note in their version of the Bible which continued for some time. But we do not find the said note in any of the copies now published by the said society(Foreign Mission Society). Is it fair and honest to keep others in darkness as to the true value of the contents of the Bible? The reader must know that the concluding portion of St. Mark and the verse in St. Matthew are spurious and a subsequent addition. But I am afraid the Foreign Mission would not allow the correction. It would tell against their very Mission, if they eliminate the verse from St. Matthew; they lose the only pillar that supports the structure of the Trinity. No other verse in the whole Scripture speaks of it. The said eleven verses of St. Mark are the only justification for the existence of the Foreign Mission. You, as well as I, know, my Lord, that the call to Jesus came solely and wholly from Judaism. He came only to gather the scattered sheep and would not give the children’s bread to the dogs, the world beyond the Israelites. The Foreign Mission is a mere trespass on lands forbidden by the Master. It transcends the limit marked by Jesus. Throughout his life the Gentiles and others did not concern him: they were the swine. Then came the make-believe Resurrection, and they say the Master changed his mind as to his mission and ordered it to be carried to the four corners of the world (indicating that he was unsure of his mission), but this all depends upon the questionable verses of St. Mark, and hence their retention in the Bible. St. Matthew is no authority on this point. The word “nations” there is a mistranslation and a wrong substitute for “the tribes”–the rest of the Jewish tribes scattered all over the world. This being the case, the Mission cannot afford to eliminate the verses from their version, nor will they put marginal notes, as did the old versions, to show the true nature of the verses. It would weaken the cause and show the futility of their status, since in carrying on evangelical work in the non-Christian world they are acting against the express admonition of the Master. It may that reasons other than religion are at the back of it all, and goading their activities, but decency, if not religion, assuredly demands the publishing of things as they are.”
(Such is Christian’s deception and desperation to have the world eat the body and drink the mythical blood of Jesus Christ and eat his body –SPIRITUAL CANNIBALISM. This must be the lowest depth of spiritual depravity).
Even if Jesus had said to teach the Gospels to all nations, yet this would not make Jesus God/Trinity or vicarious atoner.
Whereas Jesus was only a messenger of God sent to the Israelite to call them to “repentance” and “forgiveness”, Christians consigned Jesus to the bed of celibacy, crowned him with Divinity and made him scapegoat for non-existent inherited sin; and ruler of future world (see Jesus-1000-year rule).
- Muhammad in the Bible, pp. 191-192. Emphasis added.
- Kamal-ud-Din, Khwaja, Open Letters to the Bishops of Salisbury & London, p. 73.
- Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, The Sources Of Christianity, pp. 57-59. The Sources of Christianity may be obtained from www.muslim.org.
- Self-Pronouncing Edition, The World Publishing Company, Cleveland 2, Ohio, p. 77. (Emphasis/color added).
- Maurice Bucaille, The Bible The Qur’an And Science, pp. 52-53. Caps, highlight added).