The seven great errors of the Church

Syed Mir Mahmood Ahmad Nasir

Jesus^as of Nazareth was a noble prophet and messenger of God Almighty. As a prophet subordinate to Moses^as, he presented the Mosaic Law in its true form to the Children of Israel and endeavoured to guide them to the right path. Although the Israelites of Palestine generally rejected him, he migrated from Palestine, travelling through Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan, eventually arriving in the Indian subcontinent. He preached to all the Jewish tribes who had migrated to these regions due to the invasions of Shalmaneser and the calamities of Babylon. Ultimately, he passed away in Kashmir, where his tomb is still present today in Khanyar, Srinagar.

However, as many Christian scholars have also been compelled to admit, after his migration, Paul began to corrupt his teachings. Although the original Christian community in Palestine, which operated under the supervision of Peter and James, the brother of Jesus^as, outright rejected Paul and his teachings, Paul found success among the Greeks and other nations to whom Jesus^as was not even sent. He distorted the original Christianity, which was based on the Mosaic Law and adhered to the true teachings of Jesus^as. This corruption culminated in seven fundamental changes to Christianity.

The first change

Jesus^as repeatedly taught the lesson of Tauhid (the Oneness of God). He believed in and preached One God. Although the current New Testament is plagued by alterations, contradictions, and discrepancies, there is still no mention of the Trinity anywhere within it, nor does the word “Trinity” even appear, which is defined as the belief that there are three hypostases in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are absolutely equal in their knowledge, will, status, and authority. Yet, there is a real distinction between them: he who is the Father is not the Son, he who is the Son is not the Father, and the Holy Spirit is entirely separate from the Father and the Son. Despite this, God is not three, but one.

However, neither the word “Trinity” nor this explanation of it can be found in the words of Jesus^as.

Due to connections with India and Greece, their Trinitarian concepts entered Christianity. As the Holy Quran states concerning these beliefs:

يُضَٰهِـُٔونَ قَوۡلَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مِن قَبۡلُ

“They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before them.” (Surah at-Taubah, Ch.9: V.30).

Insha-Allah, we will present a detailed article to our readers refuting the Trinity, but for now, we will briefly present some statements of Jesus^as of Nazareth in which Jesus^as clearly affirmed pure monotheism and which refute the doctrine of the Trinity.

In the Gospel of Mark, chapter 12, verse 29, it is written:

“And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.”¹

In Mark, chapter 10, verses 17-18, it is written:

“And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.”²

In Luke, chapter 18, verses 18-19, it is written:

“And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”³

In John, chapter 5, verse 44, Jesus^as, addressing his opponents, said:

“How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?”⁴

In John, chapter 17, verse 3, it is written:

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”⁵

The Church claims that Jesus^as taught the Trinity. We say that Jesus^as never used the word “Trinity,” nor did he provide the explanation that forms the Church’s doctrine. Instead, Jesus^as repeatedly affirmed that God is One and acknowledged the One God.

The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, the Promised Messiah^as, states:

“The doctrine of Trinity is also rather peculiar. Has anyone ever heard of something being permanently and perfectly ‘three’ and ‘one’ at the same time? Or that one God should be as perfect as three Gods?”⁶

The second change

The second change the Christian Church made to the teachings of Jesus^as of Nazareth was to declare Jesus^as of Nazareth – who was in every respect, from every angle, and in every aspect a human being – to be God, despite him being human. They presented the teaching that Jesus^as of Nazareth, while being fully human in every respect and possessing all the limitations found in human beings, was also, in every respect, from every angle, and in every aspect God.

As far as the sayings and statements of Jesus^as are concerned, he never taught this conundrum. Rather, everywhere and always, he referred to himself as the “Son of Man.” The Greek expression used for this in the New Testament is:

Greek	τὸν	υἱὸν	τοῦ	ἀνθρώπου
Transliteration	ton	huion	tou	anthropou
Translation	the	Son	of the	man

Although Urdu translations attempt to obscure this by rendering it as Ibn-e-Adam (the son of Adam), the reality is that Jesus^as never uttered a single word about his own divinity. Everywhere, he described himself as one sent by the Father and one who obeys the Father’s words.

If the Church’s conundrum is accepted, one must concede that:

• Jesus^as possessed complete knowledge of the unseen because he was God, yet he had no knowledge of the unseen at all because he was human.
• Jesus^as was the possessor of complete power, authority, and might because he was God, yet as a weak human, he possessed all human weaknesses within himself.
• Jesus^as was entirely free from eating, drinking, sleeping, waking, and suffering pain and affliction, yet as a weak human, he ate, drank, slept, woke, and suffered pain and affliction.
• As God, Jesus^as was free from every kind of sin, yet as a descendant of Adam, he was inherently sinful like all other humans.
• As God, he was a perfect knower of all knowledge, yet as a human, he did not even know what or who was behind his back.

The reality is that not only did Jesus^as never claim his own divinity, but he vehemently refuted the very accusation the Church now levels against him – that being a man, he claimed to be God. Insha-Allah, we will present a detailed article on this topic. For now, we will suffice with one argument presented by the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat. He writes:

“It is clear that before the Messiah^as, the Jews, the Children of Israel, used to believe in God Almighty in a simple, straightforward manner, and they were very satisfied in believing in Him thus. Every heart sought to convey that God is True; He is the Creator of the earth and the heavens and the true Creator of all things. He is One and has no partner, and no one had any doubt identifying God. Then, when the Messiah^as came, they heard the statements of His Most Eminent Holiness [Jesus], peace be upon him, and they became alarmed as to which God this person was presenting. There was certainly no mention of any God like this in the Torah. Then, the Messiah^as, who was a true Prophet of God Almighty and His Beloved and Chosen One, to remove this false concept which had become entrenched in the hearts of the Jews due to their shortsightedness, laid before them those blessed words of his that are present in John 10:29-30.⁷ So that excerpt is being written down exactly in what follows, and all attendees should listen to these words of the Messiahas with great care and attention because it delivers the full and complete verdict between us and the Christians, and that excerpt is:

“‘My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself, God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law that I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?’

“Now, every just and devout person can understand that, upon hearing the word father, and that I and my Father are one, the Jews thought that this person is proclaiming himself to be the real and actual Son of God, and accordingly raised this objection. So in reply to this, the Messiah^as said in absolutely clear words that there is nothing extraordinary about him, and asked them to see that even the title of god had been applied in their favour. Now, it is obvious that had the Messiah^as understood himself as having been born of Allah in reality and actually considered himself to be the Son of God Almighty, then at this moment of debate and misunderstanding when the Jews had accused him, he should have come forth bravely and declared clearly, manifestly, and openly that I am in reality born of Allah and in actuality the Son of God. What strange reply was this, that if I declare myself to be the Son, then you have also been called God? On the contrary, he had been given an opportunity upon this occasion to emphatically present the proofs in support of his claim, and he should have presented to them all those prophecies that were written down by Deputy Athim in his reply of yesterday as well as the entire list he submitted. And on this occasion, he should have said, You are incensed at my trivial statement that I am the Son of God. In actuality, I am also God according to these statements of your Books, and according to such and such prophecies, I am also the All-Powerful God and the Equal of God too. What attribute of God is there that is not found in me? In short, this is the passage of the Holy Gospel that resolves all its passages and all prophecies of the Bible and serves as a commentary and explanation of them – but for him who fears Allah Almighty.”⁸

“The Messiah^as states very clearly in (John 10:30-37) that there is no distinction or peculiarity in me and other saintly and holy people, insofar as the applicability of the words ‘son of Allah’ or ‘god’ that has been frequently applied in the Bible for Prophets and the like. This matter needs to be pondered upon for a while, that when the Jews heard the Messiah^as declaring himself to be the son of God, they accused him of blasphemy and labelled him a blasphemer and for this crime, they desired to stone him, and they became very angry. Now, it is evident that upon such an occasion the Messiah^as was regarded in the eyes of the Jews to be a blasphemer for having called himself the son of Allah, and the Jews wanted to stone him; so when the moment to prove his innocence or establish his claim presented itself, what was the duty of the Messiah^as? Every wise person can understand that in this situation when he had been declared a blasphemer and had been attacked, and people had decided to stone him, the Messiah had to choose one of two things. First, if the Messiah^as was in reality, truly the Son of God, then he should have replied to them saying, This, my claim, is indeed true, and I am truly the Son of God, and to prove this claim I have two proofs. Firstly, in your Books it is written regarding me that the Messiah is the Son of God – nay, in fact, he is God Himself, the Omnipotent, the Knower of the Unseen and He does what He wills – and if you have any doubt, then bring forth your Books, I will show you proof of my being God from these Books. This is your misunderstanding and lack of attention to your own scriptures that you accuse me of being a blasphemer; your very own Books themselves make me God and say that I am Omnipotent, then how can I be a blasphemer? In fact, what is required very much is that you should now begin to worship and idolize me because I am God!

“Then the second proof he should have given should have been to say that Come and see the Signs of God in me, and just as God Almighty has made the sun, the moon, the planets, and earth, etc. a portion of the earth, or some star, or some other such thing has also been created by me, and I can even now demonstrate such power of creation, and that I possess far greater power and strength than manifested in the ordinary miracles of the Prophets. And it would have been appropriate for him to present to them a detailed list highlighting that he had done this and this godly thing up till today. Has any Prophet – from Moses to any other later Prophet – ever done any such things similar to this? Had he presented such proofs, the Jews would have been silenced and all the Pharisees and scribes would have immediately fallen in prostration before him, saying, Yes, O Lord! You are indeed God…we had forgotten. You have – in comparison to the sun which is there since eternity, shining and making the day bright, and in comparison to the moon which rises in the night with its beautiful light and brightens the night – created a sun and a moon yourself, and shown to us; and you have also presented proofs of your claim to Divinity from our accepted and recognized Books. How can we now dare not to call you our God? Where God has manifested His refulgence with His powers, what can a humble man do? But the Messiah^as did not present anything from these two proofs. And what he did present are these sentences that he advanced, do listen:

“‘Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?’

“Now the fair-minded people should ponder if – in order to have the allegation of blasphemy removed, and to establish the truth of his being the actual Son of God – this was indeed the answer, to say that If I call myself the son, what harm is there in that, since your holy people have also been called gods? Deputy Abdullah Atham seems to suggest here as if the Messiah^as became afraid, terrified by the riot, and concealed the true answer, adopting taqiyyah [concealing one’s faith out of fear], but I proclaim: Can this be the act of Prophets who remain ever committed to sacrifice their lives in the way of Allah, the Lord of Glory? In the Noble Quran Allah, the Lord of Glory, states:

ٱلَّذِينَ يُبَلِّغُونَ رِسَٰلَٰتِ ٱللَّهِ وَيَخۡشَوۡنَهُۥ وَلَا يَخۡشَوۡنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا ٱللَّهَ⁹

“Meaning that the True Messengers of Allah Almighty, who deliver His messages, fear no one in the task of delivering the Message, so how could it be that the Messiah – claiming to be the All-Powerful – became intimidated by the weak Jews?

“Now, it is manifestly clear from this that the Messiah, peace be upon him, never claimed to be the actual Son of God or God. Instead, he declared that he was like all the others (who have been called sons of God) and that his claim is just like their claim. So, this being the case, how can the prophecies that Deputy Abdullah Atham has presented be accepted to be correct in accordance with the stipulated conditions? It should not be the case that: مدعی سست اور گواہ چست [While a witness shows great enthusiasm, the plaintiff remains silent]. To save himself from the accusations of blasphemy, the Messiah presents only this excuse that the word ‘son’ has been spoken concerning me in the very same way that it was spoken concerning your elders. In other words, he was trying to say that he would have been blameworthy and guilty of blasphemy if he had claimed to be the Son of God distinctively. Your Books are filled with references to people being called the sons of God and God – go and take a look!”¹⁰

In an attempt to make a meaningless objection, Rev. Abdullah Athim says:

“Mirza [Ghulam Ahmad^as] sahib says that why did Christ not give this or that type of proof when, after accusing him of blasphemy, they wanted to stone him so it would become clear that in reality, he is Allah? Hearing this I recall a story. Once a man said to me that it is extremely shortsighted of God Almighty to have affixed just two eyes below the forehead; why did He not affix one on the head so he could safeguard himself from the calamities above and another in the back so he could see from behind? The bewildering thing here is that over a thing meriting no wrangling or altercation is it permissible to carry out so much questioning why and wherefore. It is unreasonable to say why this or that was not done, but it is reasonable to question what was done. We ask, was it not the allegation of the Jews that being a man you claim to be God and this is blasphemous? And the reply given was that even being a man I can call myself the son of Allah and this is not blasphemous because the Prophets also were human beings and they were called Allah. Thus, where, in all this was there any question regarding his Divinity?

“THE SECOND matter that Mirza sahib speaks about is that Christ asked the disciples to pray for him. This is not true; you should look at the reference. It is written that Jesus told them that you should pray for yourselves so that you do not suffer any trial.”¹¹

Commenting on the meaningless response given by Rev. Abdullah Athim to this objection, the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat, the Promised Messiah^as, states:

“You presented the excuse regarding the Messiah that he only said, ‘Is it not written in your law, regarding your prophets, that they are gods?’ so that he could extinguish the anger of the Jews. Furthermore, you also stated there that the Messiah gave such an answer by virtue of his human dimension. This statement of yours merits the attention and consideration of fair-minded people. It is clear that the Jews had asked this question citing the statement of the Messiah that, I am the Son of God Almighty, as blasphemy, and deeming him to have – God forbid – committed blasphemy. And in reply to this question, it was, without doubt, the responsibility of the Messiah that if he believed himself to be the Son of God Almighty – not due to his human self, but due to his Divinity – then he should have openly and fully presented his claim, and given them proof of his being the Son of Allah, because at that moment all they wished for was some evidence. But the Messiah did not turn his attention to this and likening himself to other prophets, gave the excuse, and did not fulfil his responsibility which a true preacher and teacher always desires to fulfil.”¹²

The third change

The third change made to the teaching and practice of Jesus^as was that, while Jesus^as adhered to the Mosaic Law with full intensity and observance and taught the same to his disciples, making adherence to the commandments of the Mosaic Law essential for salvation, later, as a result of Paul’s teachings, Christians gradually abandoned the practice of the Mosaic Law. Paul declared the Law to be a curse. Subsequently, the Church adopted the doctrine that for salvation, it is not necessary to act upon the Law; it is only necessary to believe that Jesus^as suffered on the cross for our sins and accepted death on the cross.

Jesus^as never gave this teaching. You may read the four Gospels, and you will nowhere find this teaching from Jesus^as – that there is no longer a need to follow the Mosaic Law and that to attain salvation, one must believe in his death on the cross. A separate, detailed article will also be presented on this subject. In this brief article, we present references from Jesus^as that show he considered it mandatory to act upon the Mosaic Law.

In Matthew, chapter 5, verses 17-20, it is written:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 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.”¹³

Then, in Matthew, chapter 19, verses 16-21, it is written:

“And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”¹⁴

Then, in Matthew, chapter 22, verses 35-40, it is written:

“Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”¹⁵

Then, in Matthew, chapter 23, it is written:

“Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.”¹⁶

Then, to validate his teachings, Jesus^as states in Matthew, chapter 7, verse 12:

“[…] for this is the law and the prophets.”¹⁷

If Jesus^as had taught the abandonment of the Mosaic Law and, as Paul wrote, declared the Mosaic Law a curse, then why did Jesus^as present this very point to strengthen his teachings?

If, according to Jesus^as, the Law was a curse, as it was for Paul, then what is the reason that Jesus^as repeatedly quoted the Old Testament to support his position? For instance, the statement Jesus^as made to those buying and selling in the temple, as he overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves, was:

“It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.”¹⁸

When the chief priests and scribes said, “Hearest thou what these say?”, Jesus^as replied:

“Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?”¹⁹

When the tempter came to him and said:

“If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread,”

Jesus^as answered and said:

“It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”²⁰

In Luke, chapter 16, verse 17, Jesus^as says:

“And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.”²¹

In John, chapter 10, verses 34-35, it is written:

“Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken”.²²

All these references make it abundantly clear that Jesus^as considered the Mosaic Law to be the word of God, and the New Testament explicitly shows that Jesus^as deemed the Mosaic Law to be binding. However, after Jesus^as, the Christian Church did not consider the Mosaic Law to be binding, and as is evident from the books of the New Testament that follow the Gospels, this was the result of Paul’s teachings.

The fourth change

This change is a continuation and completion of the third change. As has been stated, Jesus^as considered the Old Testament to be his holy book; he read it and acted upon it. However, after the event of the crucifixion of Jesus^as and the Church’s alleged view of his ascension to heaven, the Gospels and epistles of the New Testament were gradually, over several centuries, given the status of God’s word and holy scripture. Everyone knows that the Gospels and epistles of the New Testament were written after Jesus^as. Their authors had no inkling that they were composing a holy book. Every Christian is aware that Jesus^as neither read nor saw these books, nor did he declare them to be holy scripture, nor did he call them the word of God. The reality is that even the authors of these books did not declare their own works to be the word of God. Christian scholars are well aware that these books contain contradictions, discrepancies, interpolations, and omissions. For example, the entire story of the woman caught in adultery was added later to the Gospel of John. At the end of the Gospel of Mark, a passage was added to send Jesus^as to heaven. In a manuscript like the Codex Sinaiticus, additions and changes were later made by nine different hands, and the original manuscript of Luke contains no mention of Jesus’s ascension to heaven, which was added later. There are thousands upon thousands of variations in the manuscripts of the New Testament. Despite all this, this book is called the holy word of God.

The fifth change

Among the changes made to the teachings and actions of Jesus^as after his time is the doctrine that salvation is attained by believing in the crucifixion of Jesus^as, instead of considering faith and the grace to perform good deeds, through God’s favour, as the means of salvation. We respectfully ask our Christian friends: during his life, in the teachings and preaching he carried out in Judea and Galilee, did Jesus^as ever state that the means of salvation was that he would die on the cross and that they would be saved by believing in his death on the cross? Can you produce even a single statement of Jesus^as to this effect?

In the Gospel of Mark, it is written:

“And as he went forth into the way, a certain man ran to him, and kneeling before him, asked him, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.”²³

Pray tell, Christian friends, did Jesus^as even allude to this alleged atonement, which you now hold as the means of salvation and eternal life?

Today’s Christian preachers, especially in the Indian subcontinent, in emphasising the Christian atonement, present the following points, which are entirely incorrect. They say:

• Adam sinned. However, if one carefully reads the Book of Genesis, it is not proven that Adam committed a sin. At most, it can be said that Adam had a misunderstanding.
• These preachers say that Adam’s sin spread to his descendants, and Adam’s progeny inherited sin. However, the concept that the sin of Zaid is passed on to his children is completely flawed. Sin is the personal act of every individual. The Bible itself declares the descendants of Adam to be free from sin.
• These preachers say that although Jesus^as was a descendant of Adam, he did not become a sinner because he was born without a father. However, if Adam sinned, then according to the Book of Genesis, Eve was more sinful. And if Jesus^as was not a descendant of Adam, he was a descendant of Eve, who was more sinful. From this, God forbid, it would mean Jesus^as, being only the child of his mother, was not more sinful.
• Christian preachers in the Indian subcontinent used to say that the atonement is necessary because God’s attribute of justice demands that the guilty be punished, and His attribute of mercy demands that the guilty be forgiven. Through the atonement, both these demands were met: punishment was administered, and forgiveness was granted. However, in saying this, they forget that as a result of the atonement, both these demands turned into injustice, because as a result of the atonement, the one who was innocent and sinless was punished, and the one who was a sinner was saved from punishment. Thus, neither justice nor mercy remained.

In the Book of Genesis, it is written that when Adam and his wife sinned, this was the punishment pronounced upon the man and woman by God:

“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; […] In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread.”²⁴

Now, if sins are forgiven as a result of believing in the atonement, then it must be accepted that women who believe in the atonement give birth to children without the pains of labour, and people who believe in the atonement do not earn their bread through toil and the sweat of their brow. If this is not the case, then it is clear that the atonement is not the cause of salvation. If sin has been forgiven through the atonement, then its punishment should also be forgiven. Is it not so that the sin has been forgiven, but its punishment has not?

(A brief discussion on the atonement has been presented here. You may request our detailed article on this subject.)²⁵

The sixth change

The sixth change that the Church made after Jesus^as is the belief that Jesus^as died on the cross. However, even a cursory study of the Gospels makes it clear that although it was thought that Jesus^as had died on the cross, after this, he is seen walking, eating, drinking, meeting his disciples, and cautiously trying to avoid his enemies.

The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, the Promised Messiah^as, has proven with very solid scholarly and rational arguments that Jesus^as of Nazareth was saved from death on the cross. If you wish to obtain these arguments, they can be gladly provided to you.

For the sake of brevity, we will state here that according to the Bible’s statement, death on the cross is a cursed death, as is clear from the Book of Numbers and the Epistle to the Galatians. Since Jesus^as of Nazareth was a beloved servant of God, it is necessary that God Almighty saved him from death on the cross, just as Jesus^as himself prophesied that the people of that age would be given a sign like that of the Prophet Jonah. And every student of the Bible knows that the sign of the Prophet Jonah was that despite all the causes of death being present, Jonah was not only saved from death, but after that, a region accepted the truth upon his preaching. And Jonah went into the belly of the fish alive, remained alive in its belly, and came out of its belly alive. This same miracle occurred to Jesus^as of Nazareth. At the time of the event of the crucifixion, he went alive into the belly of the earth, i.e., the tomb which was like a chamber, remained alive in it, and came out of it alive.

The seventh change

The seventh change made to the teachings of Jesus^as after his time was that after the event of the crucifixion, Jesus^as was raised to heaven and will at some time descend from heaven.

The belief of Jesus’s ascension to heaven is entirely fabricated. The Gospel of John and the Gospel of Matthew, which are attributed to the apostles, make absolutely no mention of Jesus’s ascension to heaven. Rather, they clearly state that some days after the event of the crucifixion, Jesus^as went to Galilee, and there he met with his disciples. And it has been proven concerning the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Luke that the mention of Jesus’s ascension to heaven in them is entirely an interpolation and a later addition. All serious biblical scholars understand and accept this fact well.

As for the question of Jesus’s second coming from heaven, it is sufficient to state that in the New Testament, in Paul’s letter, 1 Thessalonians, chapter 4, verses 15-17, it is written:

“For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”²⁶

Pray tell, reverend sirs, your wait for Jesus^as to descend from heaven is in vain. According to your holy book, which you call the word of God, the second coming of Jesus^as was to occur in the time of Paul and the Christians of his era. It did not happen. Therefore, this entire doctrine is of your own making. Jesus^as of Nazareth gave no such teaching. He neither went to heaven with his physical body nor did he die on the cross. Rather, as it is written, his prayer saved him from death on the cross.

In Hebrews, chapter 5, verse 7, it is written:

“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.”²⁷

Endnotes

1.  Mark 12:29-30.

2.  Mark 10:17-18.

3.  Luke 18:18-19.

4.  John 5:44.

5.  John 17:3.

6.  Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad^as_, Chashma-e-Masihi, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 20, p. 348.

7.  In the King James Version these verses are John 10:29-36. [Publisher]

8.  Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad^as_, Jang-e-Muqaddas, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 6, pp. 116-118.

9.  Surah al-Ahzab, Ch. 33: V. 40. [Publisher]

10.  Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad^as_, Jang-e-Muqaddas, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 6, pp. 133-135.

11.  Ibid., pp. 149-150.

12.  Ibid., pp. 151-152.

13.  Matthew 5:17-20.

14.  Matthew 19:16-21.

15.  Matthew 22:35-40.

16.  Matthew 23:1-3.

17.  Matthew 7:12.

18.  Matthew 21:13.

19.  Matthew 21:16.

20.  Matthew 4:3-4.

21.  Luke 16:17.

22.  John 10:34-35.

23.  Mark 10:17-21.

24.  Genesis 3:16-19.

25.  Note by the publishers of Muwazna-e-Madhahib

26.  1 Thessalonians 4:15-17.

27.  Hebrews 5:7.

(Originally published in Urdu in Muwazna-e-Madhahib, Vol. 1, no. 2, January 2012, pp. 43-61. Translated by Iftekhar Ahmed, Ahmadiyya Archive & Research Centre)