Syed Mir Mahmood Ahmad Nasir
This article examines the ethical teachings of the New Testament and presents four fundamental objections raised by the Promised Messiahas: that these teachings are incomplete, not unique, contradict divine attributes in nature and were not fully practiced by Jesusas himself. The article demonstrates how the Quran presents comprehensive guidance for all humanity across time, while the New Testament was limited to the Israelites for a specific period. [Translator]
If the revealed status of the New Testament is viewed in terms of its contents, no sense of its greatness is instilled. Western scholars who have bid farewell to the traditional Christian doctrines of the Trinity, Atonement, and the divinity of Christ still seem to be impressed by the personality of Jesusas and the ethical teachings of the New Testament. We will address some points regarding the personality of Jesusas in response to Reverend Wherry’s objection. As for the ethical teachings of the Gospels, they have long been described as unique and unparalleled.
The Breaker of the Cross, the Promised Messiahas, raised four fundamental objections to these teachings:
- This teaching is flawed and incomplete because it nurtures only one branch of the human tree, leaving the other branches to wither.
- This teaching is not unique and unparalleled; rather, it was commonly found before the New Testament and exists verbatim in the Old Testament, the Talmud, and other books of the Israelites.
- This teaching does not accord with the manifestation of God Almighty’s attributes in the book of nature and the law of divine power (qanun-e-qudrat).
- Jesus, to whom this teaching is attributed, did not himself act upon it as a moral teacher.
The Promised Messiahas states:
“The teachings of the Gospels emphasise only the human faculties of forbearance and forgiveness, and discard the rest. Everyone can understand that nothing which has been given to mankind by Divine Omnipotence is without a purpose, and every human faculty has a function. Just as forgiveness and forbearance is considered a great virtue at certain times and occasions, so is retaliation, revenge and retribution considered a commendable moral quality at other times and on other occasions. Neither forgiveness, nor punishment is always desirable. This is what Allah teaches us in the Holy Quran:
جَزَـٰٓؤُاْ سَيِّئَةٖ سَيِّئَةٞ مِّثۡلُهَا ۖ فَمَنۡ عَفَا وَأَصۡلَحَ فَأَجۡرُهُۥ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ
‘The recompense of an injury is an injury the like thereof; but whoso forgives and his act brings about reformation,1 his reward is with Allah.’ [Surah as-Shura, Ch.42: V.41] This is the teaching of the Holy Quran. The Gospel, on the other hand, teaches unconditional forgiveness at all times, and thus tramples upon all sense of expediency on which the social structure is based. It only emphasises the growth of one branch of the ‘tree’ of human ethics, and completely disregards all the others. But, strangely enough, Jesusas did not act upon his own moral teachings. He cursed the fig tree when he found it to be barren, while he exhorted others to pray. And while he taught others not to call anyone a fool, he himself went to the extent of calling the Jewish elders misbegotten, hurling abuses at them in every sermon and calling them foul names. A teacher of morals must first exhibit those morals in himself. Could such a flawed teaching, which Jesusas himself did not follow, be from God? The only pure and perfect teaching is that of the Holy Quran, which nourishes all human faculties. It does not emphasise any one aspect, rather it teaches a judicious exercise of both forgiveness and chastisement. In truth, the Holy Quran is a reflection of the Divine law of nature which we witness all around us. It stands to reason that there should be harmony between God’s word and action. The action of God, as we see it in this world, must necessarily be the basis for the word of God contained in His True Book – not that His Action should point to one thing and His word to another. With regard to His action, we observe that forgiveness is by no means the rule, and that He also inflicts upon the wrongdoers various kinds of punishments, which have been mentioned in earlier scriptures as well. Our God is not only Forbearing, but He is also most severe in His wrath. The True Book, therefore, is the one which conforms to His law of nature, and the true Divine Word is that which does not contradict His action. We have never observed God to be continually forbearing and forgiving towards His creatures and never punishing them. Even today God has warned the wicked people through me and has told of a powerful and terrible earthquake which will destroy them; and the plague has not yet subsided either. Do you not remember what happened to the people of Noahas and what befell the nation of Lotas? Do understand that the essence of the Shariah is تَخَلُّق بِاَخْلٓاقِ اللّٰه, which means to adopt the attributes of the Exalted and Glorious God. This is the highest perfection a soul can attain. The desire to acquire morals greater than God’s, is sheer blasphemy, and amounts to an attack on His holy attributes.”2
The well-known biblical scholar Geddes MacGregor writes regarding the ethical teachings of Jesusas:
“His ethical teaching was in no way radically different from the loftiest traditions of the Judaism into which he was born. This is plain from a careful reading of the Old Testament itself; the recently discovered Dead Sea Scrolls corroborate the already well established fact that as an ethical teacher Jesus gave his hearers a message which, however powerfully presented and convincingly demonstrated, was not so distinctive as to be accounted novel. In his ethical teaching Jesus was in many ways highly conservative. True, he emphasized certain elements in the now rich Jewish tradition and disapproved of certain tendencies he noted in its development; but this would be true of any teacher worth listening to. He drew attention to elements that many people found it convenient to forget, so that his ethical teaching would be often uncomfortable to many. But not only would this be true of the teaching of other rabbis of his day; it is in some sense true of every good sermon in any age.”3
The well-known American religious figure Reverend Charles Francis Potter writes:
“Moreover, it is extremely embarrassing to read the best part of the Sermon on the Mount, for instance, in the Enochan and other similar Essene writings, such as Jubilees, the Psalm of Solomon, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, when we have found actual pre-Christian manuscripts of them in Cave 4”.4
Reverend Wherry considers his books to be the Word of God and, God forbid, deems the Holy Quran to be a fabrication. He forgets that the scope of these books, according to his own writings, is limited to the Israelites, not to the entire world, nor for all time. And their teachings too can only be practicable for a limited period and within a limited sphere; it is impossible to act upon them for all time and for the whole world.
The Breaker of the Cross, the Promised Messiahas, states:
“Moreover, another great proof of the need for the existence of the Holy Quran is that all the previous books, from the book of Moses, the Torah, to the Gospel, address a specific nation, i.e., the Israelites. And they say in clear and explicit terms that their guidance is not for general benefit but is limited to the existence of the Israelites only. But the objective of the Holy Quran is the reformation of the entire world.”5
He further states:
“Christian scholars also concede that, according to his religion, a Christian cannot live in human society nor engage in commerce because the Gospel forbids becoming rich and worrying about tomorrow. Similarly, no true Christian can join the army because there is a command to love the enemy. Likewise, if he is a perfect Christian, he is also forbidden to marry. All these things show that the Gospel was like a law specific to a time and a people, which the Christians, by making it universal, have caused hundreds of objections to be raised against it.”6
Regarding the Old Testament, Christians themselves admit that its message and teachings were limited to the Israelites. But the New Testament also reveals that, contrary to later Christian thought, Jesusas himself considered his mission to be limited to a specific time and only for one nation. Thus, Jesusas states:
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.”7
“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.”8
Jesusas instructed his twelve disciples:
“Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”9
The writer of the Gospel of Matthew writes:
“Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.”10
Does Reverend Wherry, even in the presence of his own scriptures, still not feel the need for the Holy Quran, whose message is:
قُلۡ يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ إِنِّي رَسُولُ ٱللَّهِ إِلَيۡكُمۡ جَمِيعًا
[“Say, ‘O mankind! truly I am a Messenger to you all’”. (Surah al-A‘raf, Ch.7: V.159)]
Regarding the question raised by Reverend Wherry about the Holy Quran supposedly providing testimony of its own fabrication, we conclude our answer to this question with the point that the Holy Quran claims to be a miracle in itself and a perfect book, but none of the four Gospels make such a claim about themselves. The Breaker of the Cross, the Promised Messiahas, addressing Deputy Abdullah Athim in the debate of Amritsar, states:
“This is the Quran’s claim about its teachings which it asserts itself, and then—going forward—it will itself provide its proof also. However, since the time now remaining is short, that proof shall be documented in the reply to the response. At present, I request Deputy Abdullah Athim to similarly present the claims of the Holy Bible in this very manner and this very majesty, adhering to the rules previously documented by me, for every equitable one knows that it can never be that, [as the adage goes:] مدعی سست اور گواہ چست [While the witness shows great enthusiasm, the plaintiff remains silent]. This must be especially so in the case of Allah, the Lord of Glory, who is Mighty and Omnipotent and possesses the most extensive knowledge of the highest possible degree. Whichever Book we ascribe to Him, that Book should sustain itself on its own. It should be pure and free of all human weaknesses; for, if it needs the support of someone else for its claim or is found wanting in providing the proofs of its claims, then it can never be the Word of God. Again, it should be kept in mind that our only purpose at this moment is that when the Noble Quran has made the claim of comprehensiveness and completeness for its teachings, this very claim must also be asserted by that part of the Gospel which is ascribed to the Messiah, peace be upon him. Or, at the very least, it should be that the Messiahas declares his teaching to be final and complete and not leave us waiting upon some occasion in the future.”11
In response to this question, the references presented by Deputy Abdullah Athim from the New Testament contain no claim of the New Testament or its books being comprehensive, perfect, and unparalleled. Rather, they claim that the teaching of Jesus is to be obeyed. The question was whether, like the Holy Quran, the New Testament or any of its books has claimed to be unparalleled, comprehensive, and perfect. No such claim exists in these books.
Among the references presented by Deputy Abdullah Athim, only one from the four Gospels, taken from John, chapter 12, verses 44 to 50, was presented, the words of which are:
“Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.”12
In this passage, there is no hint of a claim that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John are comprehensive, perfect, and unparalleled books. Nor did these books exist at the time Jesusas uttered these phrases, nor did Jesusas have any knowledge of these books. Here, Jesusas is presenting the claim of being worthy of obedience and of being sent by God. We are in complete agreement that Jesus was not God, but was sent by God, i.e., His messenger, and for those before whom he was saying these phrases, he was worthy of obedience. There is not even a remote mention here of the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, Mark, or John being perfect, unparalleled, and comprehensive.
Now, we request Reverend Wherry that before levelling the accusation of fabrication against a holy book like the Holy Quran, he should examine his own scriptures in light of the following eight aspects. It is hoped that he will then not find the courage to level accusations against any other inspired book.
First: What have been and are the two Christian beliefs regarding the New Testament being a revealed book, and what are their implications?
Second: Has the New Testament been considered a sacred scripture from the very beginning, or is it the result of a long process of human thoughts, debates, and opinions? And what were the motives that resulted in the New Testament being declared a sacred scripture?
Third: Does a specific, accepted version of the New Testament exist in its original language, or is it in the form of manuscripts of different styles written in different centuries, among which there are 300,000 mutual differences? And after the invention of the printing press, is the New Testament compiled from these manuscripts according to one’s own opinion?
Fourth: Were the books of the New Testament written by the authors to whom they are attributed, or were they written in their names after them?
Fifth: Do the books of the New Testament, especially the four Gospels, consist of contradictions in fundamental matters?
Sixth: Have passages from ancient books been twisted and distorted in the books of the New Testament to create prophecies, and have these fabricated prophecies then been applied to Jesus of Nazareth?
Seventh: Is the ethical teaching of the New Testament, on which much pride is taken, original or plagiarism?
Eighth: Did the prophecies of the New Testament turn out to be true, or did some turn out to be definitively false?
(Contd.)
Endnotes
1. “The Holy Quran does not approve of that forgiveness which serves no good purpose, for it only corrupts human morals and creates disorder in society. The Holy Quran only sanctions that forgiveness which results in reformation. [Author]” [Original footnote]
2. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Chashma-e-Masihi, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 20, pp. 345-347.
3. Geddes MacGregor, The Bible in the Making (University Press of America, 1983), p. 34.
4. Rev. Dr. Charles Francis Potter, The Lost Years of Jesus Revealed, p. 75.
5. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Kitab-ul-Bariyyah, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 13, p. 85.
6. Ibid., p. 93.
7. John 16:12-13.
8. Matthew 5:17-20.
9. Matthew 10:5-6.
10. Matthew 15:21-28.
11. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Jang-e-Muqaddas, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 6, pp. 87-88.
12. John 12:44-50.
(Originally published in Urdu in Muwazna-e-Madhahib, Vol. 1, no. 2, January 2012, pp. 33-42. Translated by Iftekhar Ahmed, Ahmadiyya Archive & Research Centre)