“Of definitely Modernist bodies within Islam, there are two only, one of which is an offshoot of the other. The heterodox Ahmadiyya sect was founded in 1839 [sic; 1889] by one Mirza Ghulam Ahmad [as], who was born in the village of Qadian, in the Punjab. The original sect still has its headquarters at Qadian, but its more enterprising offshoot is established in Lahore.
“Both conduct proselytising activities in Europe and the United States of America, and particularly in the latter country, boast a considerable number of converts. They have established centres at Woking and Chicago; the Qadian body publishes a quarterly magazine in the latter city known as Moslem Sunrise, while, at Woking, the Lahore community publishes an English monthly known as the Islamic Review.
“These two Modernist sects translate the Quran into other tongues than the sacred Arabic; they assert that Christ did not expire on the cross, but only swooned and that he revived after being anointed with an ointment called ‘marham-i-Isa’ by Joseph of Arimathea. After these events, it is related that he travelled to Kashmir and died in Srinagar, where his tomb is pointed out today.
“The aim of this sect is not to reconcile Christianity with Islam but to teach that Islam is the development from, and supplanter of, Christ’s teaching and that Jesus is the looked-for Mahdi who will come in the last days to guide the world aright.
“This movement, containing many Indian scholars well-versed in Christian cultures and learning, makes a definite intellectual appeal and disallows the use of force.
“It is noteworthy that several of its adherents have suffered death for their beliefs recently in Afghanistan.”
Church Assembly report on Islamic expansion
The Commission appointed by the Church Assembly, in their report entitled “The Call from the Moslem World,” says:
“Indian sects such as the Ahmadiyya have carried their propaganda across three continents and are seeking the conversion of England to Islam through Moslem missions at Woking and Putney.
“Moslem literature from India is to be found in bookshops all over the world, and Moslem missionaries have established mosques in Trinidad and Lagos, in Peking and other centres in China […]”
“Few people realise the extent of the organised efforts of Islam today to capture the world. In South Africa, we are told that there are signs of a great struggle commencing between Islam and Christianity for the souls of the Bantu races. In Cape Town, there are now 23 mosques, and Islam is becoming an increasingly serious competitor with Christianity in the whole Dominion.
“A Mohammedan writer in The Review of Religions for June 1925 says:
“‘Our mission on the Gold Coast is progressing very steadily. Our brethren are building mosques and schools in different parts of the country […]’
“The nationality movements in Islam have created a ferment that has changed the outlook of the people, altered their beliefs in many respects, opened their minds to new and non-Moslem impressions, and overthrown much that was viewed but a few years ago as a permanent element in Islam.
“Out of it is arising, among the educated classes, a new Islam which aims at the adaptation of the Moslem faith to modern requirements. This new type is represented by the Moslems of Woking and Putney in England, and Moslems of similar views are to be found in many parts of the Islamic world.”
Critique by Reverend Arthur Jeffery
The Reverend Arthur Jeffery, MA, Professor, School of Oriental Studies, American University, Cairo, says:
“The Baháʼís have taken over into their system the concept of incarnation, and their attitude on the question is that, while Jesus was certainly the incarnate word, God manifest in the flesh, he was a manifestation only for his own day. Incarnation did not stop with him, and in our day, Baha‘ullah was the divine essence manifested in human form.
“One might have expected a similar claim to have been made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad [as] of Qadian, who founded the Ahmadiyya Community; but, while he claimed to be the Messiah and to come in the spirit and power of Jesus, he has only ridicule for the divine sonship and the Trinity. On the latter, indeed, he [wrote] in The Review of Religions, Vol. 1, p. 280:
“‘The manner is very amusing in which the three persons of the Trinity shifted the responsibility of the reformation of mankind from one to the other. There was the Father, who, having a certain superiority in name if not in reality, thought of restoring man to his original state – one should think it means the savage state, for the human progress has been gradual from a lower to a higher stage – but he found his hands tied by the strong manacles of Justice. Out of filial reverence, the son offered himself, but when he came into the world, he went away with the empty consolation that the third partner shall come and teach them all truths and guide them into all truth. The third person, being only a pigeon, found himself unable to undertake the teaching of truths, but thought he had done his duty by teaching the apostles a few dialects, which they were thus able to speak stammeringly.’”
Clarification on the nature of Islam Ahmadiyyat
We must point out that the Ahmadiyya Movement is not in any sense a national movement. It is, on the other hand, above politics and all-comprehensive. It does not recognise any distinction of caste, colour or country. It is pure Islam in its original form.
Response to Reverend A Jeffery’s remarks
The Reverend A Jeffery seems to be a bit overbold and overconfident. Seeing the slavish imitation of the Christian ideas on the part of Mirza Husam Ali, he would expect the same from the divinely inspired Messenger [as] of the latter days. He seems to be offended, however, at the exposure of the Pauline dogmas. He should remember that the most devout Christians of today are themselves ashamed of these doctrines, and many a time have they ridiculed them in the Press.
Prophet Ahmad [as] is above ridicule, and exposing a falsehood is not ridiculing in any sense.
(Transcribed and edited by Al Hakam from the original English, published in the March 1926 issue of The Review of Religions)