Last Updated on 1st January 2021
The very first brick of religion is to recognise God. Until that foundation is well-placed, how can other deeds be pure? The Christians raise countless allegations against the inner-purity of others and they raise these objections whilst believing in a morally damaging concept such as atonement.
I cannot understand how there can be any fear of accountability before Allah the Almighty if one believes in the concept of atonement. Do the Christians not believe that the Messiah was tormented to repay for our sins to the extent that he was deemed accursed and remained in hell for three days? If, with this concept, there is punishment for sin, then what purpose does the Atonement serve?
The very doctrine of atonement encourages sin. It is a matter of principle that the doctrine to which a person subscribes has a deep effect on them. One may observe that in the estimation of the Hindus, the cow is immensely holy and sacred. The effect of this among the Hindus is to such an extent that even the urine and dung of a cow is deemed pure and used for purification. Their passion for the cow exceeds all bounds and this is the very reason that they have made this concept a part of their fundamental belief.
Remember that fundamental beliefs are like a mother and deeds are the resulting offspring. When the Messiah serves as an atonement and he has taken upon himself the sins of those who believe, what reason is left for people to refrain from sin? It is astonishing that when Christians speak of the concept of atonement, they begin their discourse from the mercy and justice of God Almighty. But I would ask, if one person is hung for the crime of another, then what justice and mercy remains?
If it is proclaimed as doctrine that Christ has taken upon himself the burden of all sins – even those sins which are yet to be committed – then what reason is there for anyone to abstain from sin? If the teaching was that this atonement was limited to the Christians of that era, then this would have been another matter; but when it is accepted that Christ has taken with him the burden of the sins of even those who shall be born until the Day of Resurrection, and he accepted punishment for this purpose, then how unjust is it to seize a sinner?
In fact, to punish an innocent person in the place of a sinner is injustice in the first place. But further still, the second injustice is to first place the burden of sin on Christ and give sinners the good news that he has shouldered their sins, yet punishing those who then commit sin. This is some strange deception, which the Christians will never be able to explain.
(Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Malfuzat, Vol. 1, pp. 181-182)