JESUS-TRINITY, WORD OF GOD | No God But ALLAH

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
*

JESUS-TRINITY
As they delineate between Hell and Heaven, cardinal doctrines of a religion are to be clearly expressed in Divine Scripture; they are not to be left to the function of interpretation.
Unlike the cardinal doctrines of Islam –Unity/Purity of God, Prayer, Zakaat/Charity, Fasting and Hajj– that are clearly expressed in the Qur’an and conducive to reason and observed by Prophet Mohammad.
The cardinal doctrines of Christianity –Trinity, original/ inherited sin and vicarious atonement– are not expressed in the Bible or conducive to reason or observed by Jesus. These doctrines are assumptions.

Regarding the verse of 1 John 5:7 which states: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one”. These are NOT the words of Jesus. Significantly, of what do they “bear record”; and where does God say this?

As noted on the Internet, 1 John 5:7 was conceived hundreds of years AFTER Christ and is now aborted from some Bibles, while some Bible is said to have a footnote stating that the verse is not found in the earliest manuscripts. You can read about this on Wikipedia.org, article An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture.
The Gideons New American Standard Bible, 1985, and the Good News Bible do not carry this verse of 1 John 5:7.

Even if there was Trinity, Jesus would NOT be part of it; as noted Jesus is only “CALLED” son of God –“Son” would have to be an actual son of God, and may even be Satan–(Genesis 6:1-2; Job 1:6; 38:7). Also, for 9 months and 33 years, at least, Jesus was in his mother’s belly and preaching on earth and lying in a tomb rather than being in heaven “bear(ing) record”.

As noted above, Jesus was wholly and solely a Jewish tribal prophet. How then did Jesus become one in a Trinity and dying to free the world of Adam’s sin?
Aside from the fact that Hindus, Romans and Africans have Trinity which predate Christian Trinity. The Christian Trinity was invented by the Church 324 years AFTER Christ. Encyclopaedia Britannica explains:

“Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Sheema of the Old Testament: “Hear. O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deut. 6:4). The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presence and power of God among them –i.e. the Holy spirit whose coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were associated in such New Testament passages as the Great Commission: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19. As shown later Matthew 28:19 is a forgery in the Bible-NGBA) and in the apostolic benediction: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (II Corinthians. 13:14. Corinthians is the word of PAUL not word of God or Jesus-NGBA). Thus, the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of Trinity. (Note: it is the New Testament that “established the basis” for Trinity, not Jesus or God-NGBA).

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. Initially, both the requirements of monotheism inherited from the Old Testament and the implications of the need to interpret the biblical teaching to Greco-Roman paganism seemed to demand that the divine in Christ as the Word, or Logos, be interpreted as subordinate to the Supreme Being. An alternative solution was to interpret Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three modes of the self-disclosure of the one God but not as distinct within the being of God itself. The first tendency recognized the distinctness among the three, but at the cost of their equality and hence of their unity (subordinationism); the second came to terms with their unity, but at the cost of their distinctness as “persons” (modalism). It was not until the 4th. century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.

The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same essence [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th. Century….the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since”–(15th Ed; Vol. X, art; Trinity, p. 126. Emphasis/color added).

Trinity and original/inherited sin and vicarious atonement are diametrically opposed to the teachings of Christ.
In trying to explain Trinity Christians are trying to explain the non-existent. In trying to Divinize Trinity Christians are trying to legitimize profanity.

Since Trinity needs a “Son” of God and as there is NO actual “son” of God then ipso facto THERE IS NO TRINITY!
As “son” of God is needed to die for Adam’s (or original /inherited) sin, and as there is NO son of God THERE IS NO VICARIOUS ATONEMENT!

(For John 1:1-5 which says: “In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”, this is said to have been taken from Philo who lived and wrote a hundred years before the writer of this Gospel whoever he was (no one knows who John is), this is dealt with next).

Regarding the Gospel of John, chapter 3 verse 16, as noted above, the word “begotten” (as it implies sexual intercourse between God and Mary) has been, rightly, excised from the RSV Bible. This verse which is the bedrock of the edifice of Christianity is found only in John. The other Gospel writers are quiet as Church mice on this pivotal Christian headstone. Luke, who claims to have “perfect understanding of ALL things from the VERY FIRST” (Luke 1:3) is as dead as a door nail on it.

John 3:16 states: “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.”
Christians hail this verse as proof of Jesus coming to die for the sin(s) of the world. (How Christians come to this conclusion is stupefying).
Having a man, and an innocent man, beaten/scourged, fixed to a “cross”, “lanced” and killed/murdered for the sinner is not “love”, it is crass cruelty and gross injustice (which are expected of tyrants and sadists. It is a gruesome sense of “love”).

John 3:16, when taken in its context from verse one shows Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus about miracles and alluding himself to the brass serpent in Moses’ time which serpent God gave/instilled power to preserve life–(Numbers 21:9). Giving the proper meaning of John 3:16 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).

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 in the Garden of Gethsemane to be spared from this glory and to indict God as having “forsaken” him–(Matthew 26:36-44; 27:46), this must be the blackest degree of disgrace and blasphemy exampled by a son of God in Scriptural history. (If Jesus is God, God prayed to and “forsaken” Himself).
Also, Jesus praying to be spared from death also obliterates Christians’ claim that Jesus gave his life willingly.

As noted God gave/instilled power in the brass serpent to preserve life–Numbers 21:9.
-God also gave/instilled power to the pool of Bethesda to cure (John 5:2-4);
-power to the river Jordan which healed Namaan-(2 Kings 5:9-14);
-power to Elisha’s dead bones which brought a dead man back to life-2 Kings 13:20-21);
-power to Balaam’s ass to speak to Balaam-(Numbers 22:28, 30).
Thus, God giving power to Jesus to perform miracles is not unique.
Whereas Jesus, performed miracles through the power of God–(Luke 11:20; John 8:28, 11:42; Acts 2:22; Qur’an 3:48). Others also performed miracles:
-Moses transformed a stick into a serpent; Moses parted the river–(Exodus 7:10; 14:21)
-Elijah resurrected a child; and divided the river Jordan–(1 Kings 17:17-23; 2 Kings 2:7-8)
-Elisha parted the river Jordan; and resurrected a child–(2 Kings 2:12-14; 2 Kings 4:32-36
-Joshua made the sun and the moon stand still–(Joshua 10:12-13)’
A prophet performing miracles or making prophecies does not make him God or son of God; nor make him greater than other prophets. Such miracles and prophecies would reflect the greatness of Allāh God, through Whose power the prophet was able to perform the miracles and make the predictions.

As noted in the above quote from Britannica, Trinity is based on Jesus telling his followers to preach in the “name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”–(Matthew 28:19) but this verse as well as Mark 16:9-20, have been shown to be “forgeries” in the Bible.
About a hundred years ago Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din exposed it in his 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 concluding portion of St. Mark and the verse in St. Matthew are spurious and a subsequent addition.” (Emphasis/color added).

That Matthew 28:19 is a forgery is shown even on the face of it. Jesus’ mission was only to Jews and to the extent that he regards non-Jews “dogs” and “swine” not worthy of the Israelite “bread” and “pearl” and he even preached in parables to keep these “dogs” and “swine” ignorant and out of heaven.
The claim that after the make-believe resurrection Jesus changed his mind and said to preach the gospel to all nations. This claim is far-fetched.
For Jesus to declare that God sent him only to Jews, that he prayed only for Jews and that heaven lies in observance of the Mosaic Law until the arrival of the Comforter who will then guide into “all truth,” and then for Jesus to turn around and say to preach to all nations the doctrines of Trinity and original/inherited sin and vicarious atonement, this is not only a contradiction but an indictment that Jesus was not only grossly ignorant of his mission but that Jesus taught un-Godly doctrines (Trinity and original/ inherited sin and vicarious atonement).

Even if Matthew 28:19 was not a forgery then Jesus’ teaching to “all nations” is that eternal life lies in following the Mosaic Law until the arrival of the Comforter who will then guide into “all truth” and will “abide for ever.”

About Mark 16:9-20 which states that Jesus says to preach the Gospel to the world. The Gideon’s, American New Standard Bible (1985) states in footnote: “Some of the oldest mss. omit from verse 9-20…” (mss. stands for manuscripts).
And the Good News Bible (1976) footnoted to chapter 16: “Some manuscripts and ancient translations do not have this ending to the Gospel (verses 9-20).

Revealingly. In the verses of Mark 16:19-20 Jesus tells his followers: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.…They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them”–(Mark 16:16-18).
Even if these verses were not “forgeries” it is doubtful sensible Christians (“baptized” or not) would take up (un-milked) venomous snakes or drink a lethal dose of deadly poison to substantiate this assurance of their God/son of God, Jesus.
If taking up serpents and drinking deadly thing is metaphorical, as one Christian apologist tried to whitewash, then those “that believeth and is baptized” must also be metaphorical. What is a metaphorical “deadly thing” that one drinks?

To restate:
As noted Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:9-20 are “forgeries”. And that Mark 1:1 referring to Jesus as “the Son of God”, the Gideons New American Standard Bible, 1985, and Good News Bibles say, respectively, in footnote: “Many mss. omit, the Son of God,” and “Some manuscripts do not have the Son of God”.
Isn’t it telling a lie on God that He revealed/inspired the forged words? Isn’t it telling a lie on Jesus that he uttered the forged words? What manner of devotee(s) would make forgeries in his Book of God?

Instead of footnotes, dignity and maturity dictate that these misleading materials be removed from the Bible.
Perhaps Christian authorities are loathed to remove these alien materials because this would mean recalling the hundreds of thousands of Christian missionaries around the world who are trying to lure unschooled natives into worshipping Jesus Christ as God/Son of God and vicarious atoner. The Christian Foreign Mission is a contradiction of the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Will Christians take the Divine route and remove these additions from the Bible and let the world know the true nature and mission of Jesus Christ?

JESUS-WORD OF GOD
WHAT KIND OF “WORD” IS JESUS?
The Gospel of John 1:1-5 states: “In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (There is NO mention of the third party of the Trinity, the “Holy Ghost”).
That the Word was “with God” and the Word “was God” is the same as saying God was with God. This is senseless. The word could not be with God and yet be God.
(No wonder some Christians view Trinity as a “senseless God-dishonoring doctrine” that “could have originated only in one mind, and that the mind of Satan the Devil.”

Christians claim that “Word” in this statement of John 1:1-5 is Jesus. Apart from the fact that these are NOT the words of Jesus, NO ONE KNOWS WHO WROTE THE GOSPEL OF JOHN:
“The Gospel of John is anonymous. Traditionally, Christians have identified the author as “the Disciple whom Jesus loved” mentioned in John 21:24,^[15]who is understood to be John son of Zebedee, one of Jesus’ Twelve Apostles. These identifications, however, are rejected by many modern biblical scholars.^{[1][16][Notes 5]} Nevertheless, the author of the fourth Gospel is sometimes called John the Evangelist, often out of convenience since the definitive name of the author is still debated.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John
Such is Christianity: Christians build their belief on anonymity of authorship and “forgeries” and crown it with Divine authority. And they feed these human-baked bits as Divine delicacy to an uneducated world.

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes:
“The term word, used in St. John, which stands for the Greek word Logos, is an in-adequate 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, Philo “lived and wrote all this one hundred years before the writers, whosoever they may be, of that Gospel.” (The Sources of Christianity, pp. 76-77).

Allāh God tells us in his Qur’an: “When the angels said: O Mary, surely Allah gives thee good news with A WORD from Him (of one) whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, worthy of regard in this world and the Hereafter, and of those who are drawn nigh (to Allah)”–(Qur’an 3:45).
As emphasized Jesus is “a” word, NOT “the” word, from Allāh. Jesus as “word” means “promise,” as Allāh promised Mary a son–(Qur’an 3:45; Luke 1:26-32).
That Jesus is “word” of God is not unique to Jesus. There are others also who are “word” of God:

ISHMAEL is “word” of God to Abraham. The childless Abraham wanted Eliezer to be his heir but God tells him:
“And, behold, the WORD of the Lord came unto him (Abraham), saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of tine own bowels shall be thine heir”–(Genesis 15:1-4. And Ishmael was the one who first came out of Abraham’s “bowels.” God also sent angel to Ishmael’s mother, Hagar:
“And the angel of the Lord said unto her (Hagar), Behold, thou art with child, and SHALT BEAR A SON, AND SHALT CALL HIS NAME ISHMAEL”-(
Genesis 16:7-12). Thus, contrary to Jewish and Christian’s claim that Ishmael was of illegitimate birth, Ishmael was born through Divine decree. Comp. Qur’an 37:100-111).

ISAAC is “word” of God. After Ishmael was born God promised to give Abraham a son of his barren wife, Sarah:
“And God said unto Abraham, as for Sarai (Sarah) thy wife…I will bless her, and give thee a son ALSO of her”–(Gen. 17:15-16. This “ALSO” shows that Ishmael was the heir in lieu of Eliezer. Compare Qur’an 37:112-113).

JOHN THE BAPTIST is “word” of God. In answer to Zacharias’ prayer for an heir, an angel appeared to him in the temple:
“Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elizabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John”–(Luke 1:11-13. Comp. Qur’an 3:38-39; 19:1-9).
The COMFORTER foretold by Jesus is a “word” of God–(John14:16; 16:13; Qur’an 61:6).
The PROPHET “like unto me” foretold by Moses is a “word” of God–(Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19).
The SHILOH foretold by Jacob is a “word” of God–(Genesis 49: 10).
The PROPHET MOHAMMAD foretold by all the prophets of the world since the world began is a “word” of God–(Acts 3:21-22; Qur’an 3:81; 26:192-197).

In fact, whereas God sent angel with word to Mary, God actually visited Hannah and gave her children; the Bible says that after Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife so they would have children: “And the Lord VISITED Hannah, so that she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters”–(1 Samuel 2:20-21).
Whatever form this “visit” took, whether God actually went or just made them fruitful, there was no intermediary –no angels– between God and Hannah as there was in the case of Mary and Jesus.
Thus, contrary to Christian’s belief that Jesus being “word” places him above others, it may be advanced that the births of Hannah’s children were of a higher honor than Jesus’.

“Word” is not exclusive to Jesus/humans.
The words of Allāh are so numerous that if all the trees were pens, and the sea with seven more seas added to it were ink, to write the words of Allāh, they would all be exhausted before the words of Allah would be exhausted

“Say: If the sea were ink for the WORDS of my Lord, the sea would surely be exhausted before the WORDS of my Lord were exhausted, though We brought the like of it to add (thereto);” “And if all the trees in the earth were pens, and the sea with seven more seas added to it (were ink), the WORDS of Allāh would not be exhausted. Surely Allāh is Mighty, Wise”–(Qur’an 18:109; 31:27).
“And there is none to change the WORDS of Allāh”–(Qur’an 6:34).
“There is no changing the WORDS of Allāh”–(Qur’an 10:64).
“And Mary, the daughter of Amran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into him of Our inspiration, and she accepted the truth of the WORDS of her Lord and His Books, and she was of the obedient ones”–(Qur’an 66:12).

Thus everything created must be a “word” of Allāh; the Bible also teaches this where God decreed creation by saying “Let there be…”–(Gen. 1:3-25).

Jesus made it clear he is not God: “Why callest thou me good? there is NONE good but one, that is GOD”–(Matthew19:17; Mark 10:18). Jesus not only denies he is God, he denies he is good.
If Jesus is God:

God is sitting on his right hand–(Mark 16:19).
God ascended to himself–(John 20:17).
God led himself to be tempted by the devil–(Matthew 4:1).
God sent himself to Jews–(John 6:38; 17:3).
God would have known the day and hour of future events–(Mark 13:32).
God is made into a “curse”–(Galatians 3:13; Deuteronomy 21:23).
God prayed to himself; “forsaken,” thanked, heard and worshipped himself–(Matthew 26:39; 27: 46; Luke 10:21; John 11:41; 4:22. Whereas Jesus prayed to and worshipped God, Christians pray to and worship Jesus.
If Jesus is son of God because he is termed “word” of God, as one Christian asserts, then even a baboon is “son of God.”

To restate. The Gospel of John 1:1-5 states: “In the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (There is NO mention of the third party of the Trinity, the “Holy Ghost”). Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din notes in his revealing book The Sources of Christianity:

“…..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).

“St. Paul also introduced new Philosophy and logic into Christian theology, and expressed them in new phraseology –which till today 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;”
“To his Word he gave this especial gift that He should stand as an Intercessor between the Creator and the created;”
“We maintain that by the High Priest is meant the Word Who is free from all transgression, being of heavenly parentage”;
“The Word of God is the Physician and Healer of all our evils”;
“The heavenly food….is the Divine Word”;
“The Image of God is His Eternal Word”;
“The High Priest is His Divine Word hence His head is anointed”;
“The Shepherd of His holy flocks”;
“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?”;
“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”;
“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”;
“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”;
“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”;
“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.”

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 in The Sources of Christianity: “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.” (Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Open Letters To The Bishops Of Salisbury & London, pp. 25-26).

“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! But the Qur’an was the first to point it out to the world when it said “….And the Christians say : The Messsiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths. they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; Allah destroyed them; how they are turned away-Qur’an 9:30.
…To-day, the Christian world has begun to realize that Jesus was only a man and one of the Chosen Ones of God who, from time to time have exhibited the Divine influence in the mould of their character; and the Qur’an said the same some thirteen hundred years (now 1400 years) ago: “The Messiah, son of Mary, is but an apostle; apostles before him have passed away-(Qur’an 5:75).”
(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.”” (This is not only a “claim,” it is proven fact!) (Ibid; pp. 15-16. Color added).