Atonement contradicts the law of nature


It is doctrine that I focus on. Our doctrine states: وَ مَنۡ یّعَۡمَلۡ مِثۡقَالَ ذَرَّۃٍ خَيْرًا یَّرَہٗ (Then whoso does an atom’s weight of good will see it). Now you may conclude for yourself what effect such a concept would bring about. Man will feel the need for action and endeavour to perform good deeds.


Contrary to this, when it is asserted that man cannot attain salvation through his deeds, such a belief will weaken the resolve and effort of a person and will make them helpless out of despair. This also demonstrates that the concept of atonement abuses the human faculties, because Allah the Exalted has vested the human faculties with a nature inclined to progress, but the concept of atonement prevents the human faculties from advancing.

I have just stated that we observe freedom and lack of restraint among those who believe in the doctrine of atonement, and it is due to this very concept that people engage in illicit relations, as though they were dogs. Acts of indecency are committed openly in London’s Hyde Park and illegitimate children are born. Hence, we must not confine ourselves to mere words and statements, but rather, we must give importance to deeds.

An individual who sees no benefit in deeds is immensely short-sighted and ignorant. Within the law of nature there are examples of actions which result in outcomes, but there is no example of anything that resembles the Atonement.

For example, if someone is hungry, their hunger is satisfied after eating; or if someone is thirsty, their thirst is quenched with water. This demonstrates that the final outcome of eating or drinking is that one’s thirst and hunger are satisfied. But never does it occur that one person’s hunger is satisfied if someone else eats bread on their behalf.

If there was any such precedent in the law of nature, then perhaps there might have been room to accept the concept of atonement. However, when no such parallel exists in the law of nature, how can man, who is accustomed to accepting things through the observance of parallels, give credence to such a concept? There is no such precedent even in man-made laws. We have never witnessed that one person should commit murder and someone else is executed in their stead. Therefore, this concept of atonement is one which has no parallel.

(Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Malfuzat, Vol. 1, pp. 184-185)

No posts to display


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here