The False Jesus of Christianity

Part One

Written by Abdullah Smith

 

 

The Islamic perspective of Jesus is clear. There are no false descriptions, no confusion and question, the Holy Quran represents the truth about Jesus. He is the Servant of God, he did not have female breasts, nor was he bisexual. The Bible vilifies Jesus beyond comprehension, the gospels hidden by the Church are worse:

 

“…Another apocryphal work of interest is the Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ, which dates from no later than the second century and possibly from before. In this book Jesus is portrayed as a brilliant but eminently human child. All too human perhaps – for he is violent and unruly, prone to shocking displays of temper and a rather irresponsible exercise of his powers. Indeed, on one occasion he strikes dead another child who offends him. A similar fate is visited upon an autocratic mentor. Such incidents are undoubtedly spurious, but they attest to the way in which, at the time, Jesus had to be depicted if he were to attain divine status amongst his following.  (Michael Baigent, Holy Blood, Holy Grail, p. 390)

 

Jesus claimed to be the Messiah according to the original Jewish definition, the title ‘Christ” was distorted by the Catholic Church to justify the pagan doctrine of incarnation, which later developed into the trinity. According to history, the Council of Nicea deified Jesus and changed his status. The veneration of the Holy Spirit was necessary to produce the mysterious doctrine. The Old Testament does not deify the Holy Spirit to the status as God, yet Christians desperately cite verses that seem to deify the Spirit, an agent created by God to deliver His Revelations. Christians of antiquity never baptized “in the name of the Holy Spirit” because the Bible exempted the Spirit (Acts 2:38, 10:48, 19:5, 22:1).

 

The early Jewish Christians refused to believe Jesus was divine; they were persecuted by the Pauline Church to accept the divinity of Christ, who never claimed to be God.

 

The early Christians opposed the tendency to regard Jesus as divine. They laid great stress on the Unity of God as expressed in the original teachings of Jesus and asserted that although he was a prophet, he was essentially a man like other men, even if highly favoured by his Lord. The same faith was held by the Churches which had sprung up in North Africa and West Asia. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition, p. 10)

 

The Nazarenes never considered Jesus to be divine (i.e. God the Son) but that he was given the messiahship after his baptism by John. The Nazarenes never accepted the teachings and writings of Paul. In fact, they looked upon Paul as an apostate who was not of pure Jewish blood.   (1)

According to the ancient Church historian, Irenaeus (c. 185 CE), the Ebionites believed in one God, the Creator, taught that Jesus was the Messiah, used only the Gospel According to Matthew, and rejected Paul as an apostate from the Jewish Law… Ebionites were known to still exist in the 4th century. Some had left Palestine and settled in Transjordan and Syria and were later known to be in Asia Minor, Egypt and Rome.  (2)

The Hebrew scriptures of the Jewish Christians were destroyed and burned to ashes; the true followers of Jesus were persecuted just because they worshipped the One True God, and rejected the “deity” of Jesus.

 

History is witness to the Arian revolution that determined to destroy the superstition of Jesus’ divinity, and destroy the Catholic Church based in Rome, but unfortunately the darkness prevailed, the falsehood of Christianity triumphed. The fake disciples of Jesus today (i.e. Christians) worship God as “three separate Persons”, which is sheer idolatry, the Spirit is not God, Jesus is not God, only Yahweh is God alone!

 

“…This shift of emphasis from Jesus as a man to the new image of Christ, who was divine, enabled the intellectuals in Greece and Rome to assimilate into their own philosophy what Paul and those who followed him were preaching. Their view of existence was a tripartite one, and, with the Pauline Church’s talk of “God the Father” and the “Son of God”, it only needed the inclusion of the “Holy Ghost” to have a Trinity which matched theirs. With the passage of time, these two pictures merged into one, and the doctrine of Trinity was born. Not only the philosophical ideas prevalent in Greece at that time coloured the teaching, but also the very language of Greece itself influenced the expression of the teaching, trapping and limiting its meaning. Greek could contain the philosophy of the Greeks, but was neither vast nor supple enough to carry what Jesus had said. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition, p 70)

 

Paul’s use of the term ‘Christ’ (the Greek term for the Hebrew ‘Messiah’) as a divine title has thus no precedent in Judaism, and would be felt by any Jew to be a complete departure from Jewish thinking about the Messiah. Further, the idea of ‘being in Christ’, which occurs frequently in Paul’s letters, is entirely without parallel in Jewish literature, whether of the Pharisees or of any other sects. (Hyam Maccoby, The Myth Maker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity, p. 63)

 

Muslims are the true followers of Jesus because they assert Jesus was the Messiah and not “God the Messiah”, the title ‘Christ’ does not mean divine, Cyrus the pagan was also called Christ (Isaiah 45:1). The Islamic portrait of Jesus is superior, because it’s supported by the Bible itself (Ps. 20:6, Al-Quran 4:157). The verses quoted by Christians to support the divinity are subject to scholarly interpretations. Christians worship God based on false conviction and misunderstanding of Jesus’ true mission. The purpose of Jesus was to preach the Jewish Law (Matt. 5:17-20) and the Gospel (Luke 19:10), the crucifixion was never his purpose (Mark 1:38, Luke 4:43). Moreover, the Bible rejects the “atonement” (Deu. 24:16, Ps. 40:6, Mic. 6:7-8, Hos. 6:6).

 

Christianity has abandoned the Gospel; instead they follow the Gospel of Paul, the features of Jesus “dying for the sins” and “rising three days later” were not part of Jesus’ story but was added later by pagan influence. We don’t need scholars to back our claim; the Christians are living proofs of sun-worshippers. The Gospel of Jesus was pure Islam; it never included the “sacrifice and redemption”. The Gospel was corrupted after Jesus’ departure.

"It is well known that the primitive Christian Gospel was initially transmitted by word of mouth and that this oral tradition resulted in variant reporting of word and deed. It is equally true that when the Christian record was committed to writing it continued to be the subject of verbal variation. Involuntary and intentional, at the hands of scribes and editors"  [Peake's Commentary on the Bible, p. 633]

"Hard sayings are frequently softened in the process of transmission to adapt them to the conditions of daily living...Variations in difficult saying often betray the struggle of the early Christian community to interpret or adapt sayings to its own situations... All the evidence indicates that the words of Jesus were authoritative in the Church from the first, and this makes it the more remarkable that such scanty attention is paid to the words or works of Jesus in the earliest Christian writings, Paul's letters, the later Epistles, Hebrews, Revelation, and even Acts have little to report about them. (Robert W. Funk, The Five Gospels, p. 295)

"Many thousands of the variants which are found in the MSS of the NT were put there deliberately. They are not merely the result of error or of careless handling of the text. Many were created for theological or dogmatic reasons (even though they may not affect the substance of Christian dogma). It is because the books of the NT are religious books, sacred books, canonical books, that they were changed to conform to what the copyist believed to be the true reading. [George Arthur Buttrick (Ed.), The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible, Volume 4, 1962 (1996 Print), Abingdon Press, Nashville, pp. 594-595 (Under Text, NT).] 

You have now our answer to the Antitheses compendiously indicated by us.  I pass on to give a proof of the Gospel  —not, to be sure, of Jewry, but of Pontus—having become meanwhile  adulterated; and this shall indicate the order by which we proceed. (Tertullian Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, (Source)

The argument is simple: the Torah and the Gospel were originally Revelations from God Almighty; however, certain groups have changed and altered these books for whatever reasons. Due to this fact, their purity and status as the unadulterated Word of God has diminished. (Faisal Siddiqui, The Bible’s Last Prophet, p. 7)

Islam preaches the Gospel in a fresh Revelation called the Holy Quran, where the true picture of Jesus is preserved. He was not crucified, nor was he the “son of God” in today’s modern sense, he was never “God incarnate”, and the Holy Spirit was created by God. All of these bogus ideas were developed by the foolish Church fathers, who destroyed the Wisdom of ancient civilization, and thousands of books consigned to the fire. Yet the Church fathers were former- pagans, so it was quite easy for them to accept Christianity.

The early Church confessed to the parallels between Christianity and paganism. The famous apologist Justin Martyr (d. 150 CE) said the Eucharist was practiced before Christianity existed. 

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated [it] in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (online Source)

There are many confessions by the Church fathers; even Christian scholars cannot deny the testimonies. We have provided the quotations below, and the sources confirm it.

Examine carefully the sacrilegious beauties of your Lentuli and Hostii; now, is it the players or your gods who become the objects of your mirth in their tricks and jokes? Then, again, with what pleasure do you take up the literature of the stage, which describes all the foul conduct of the gods! Their majesty is defiled in your presence in some unchaste body. The mask of some deity, at your will, covers some infamous paltry head. The Sun mourns for the death of his son by a lightning-flash amid your rude rejoicing. (Tertullian of Carthage, Ad Nationes, (online Source)

Be well assured, then, Trypho, that I am established in the knowledge of and faith in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which he who is called the devil is said to have performed among the Greeks; just as some were wrought by the Magi in Egypt, and others by the false prophets in Elijah's days. For when they tell that Bacchus, son of Jupiter, was begotten by intercourse with Semele, and that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, AND HAVING DIED, HE ROSE AGAIN, AND ASCENDED TO HEAVEN; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that the devil has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses? And when they tell that Hercules was strong, and traveled over all the world, and was begotten by Jove of Alcmene, and ascended to heaven when he died, do I not perceive that the Scripture which speaks of Christ, 'strong as a giant to run his race,' has been in like manner imitated? And when the devil brings forward Asclepius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? . . . And when those who record the mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah's words?  (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho (online Source)

"When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." [First Apology, ch. Xxi, online Source)

Others, with greater regard to good manners, it must be confessed, suppose that the sun is the god of the Christians, because it is a well-known fact that we pray towards the east, or because we make Sunday a day of festivity. What then? Do you do less than this? Do not many among you, with an affectation of sometimes worshipping the heavenly bodies likewise, move your lips in the direction of the sunrise? (Tertullian of Carthage, Ad Nationes, (online Source)

Tertullian condemns the Western Christians for worshipping towards the East, and praying on Sunday, or Sun-day. The Church leader Polycarp (d. 159 CE) rejected the celebration of Easter on Sunday, because he knew it was pagan. Constantine changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday to commemorate the day of the sun-god (325 CE). The doctrine of trinity was also developed at this time.

 

In fact, Constantine borrowed the trinity from the pagans. The Romans, the Egyptians, and the Hindus believed in ‘trinity’ before Christianity existed.

 When the Council of Nicea took place, the Emperor Constantine  

-       Declared the Roman Sun-day to be the Christian Sabbath

-       Adopted the traditional birthday of the Sun-god, and the twenty-fifth of December, as the birthday of Jesus;

-       Borrowed the emblem of the Sun-god, the cross of light, to be the emblem of Christianity;

-       And, although the statue of Jesus replaced the idol of the Sun-god, decided to incorporate all the ceremonies which were performed at the Sub-gods birthday celebrations into their own ceremonies.

      (Jesus, The Prophet of Islam, Muhammad Rahim, pp.101)

 

Islam has destroyed the false charges brought against Jesus, and cleaned his image. The Jews regard him as a false prophet, Christians over-praise him as the “Son of God”, yet the Islamic version of Jesus is absolutely true.  Muslims believe that Jesus was a Prophet and Messenger of God, the Christ, but he was not “God-incarnate” or the “Son of God”.

 

The scholar Kersey Graves exposes the pagan title “son of God”, which originated from the pagan cults.

The various deific titles applied to Jesus Christ in the New Testament are regarded by some Christian writers as presumptive evidence of his divinity. But the argument proves too much for the case; as we find the proof in history that many other beings, whom Christians regard as men, were honored and addressed by the same titles, such as God, Lord, Savior, Redeemer, Mediator, Messiah, etc.

The Hindoo Chrishna, more than two thousand years ago, was prayerfully worshiped as "God the Most High." His disciple Amarca once addressed him thus: "Thou art the Lord of all things, the God of the universe, the emblem of mercy, the bestower of salvation. Be propitious O most High God," etc. Here he is addressed both as Lord and God. He is also styled "God of Gods."

Adonis of Greece was addressed as "God Supreme," and Osiris of Egypt as "the Lord of Life." In Phrygia, it was "Lord Atys," as Christians say, "Lord Jesus Christ." Narayan of Bermuda was styled the " Holy Living God."

The title "Son of God" was so common in nearly all religious countries as to excite but little awe or attention.

St. Basil says, "Every uncommonly good man was called ,the Son of God.'" The "Asiatic Research" says, "The Tamulese adored a divine Son of God," and Thor of the Scandinavians was denominated "the first-born Son of God;" and so was Chrishna of India, and other demigods.

It requires, therefore, a wide stretch of faith to believe that Jesus Christ was in any peculiar sense "the Son of God," because so denominated, or "the only begotten Son of God," when so many others are reported in history bearing that title. (Kersey Graves, The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors, (online Source)

Throughout the Gospels, Jesus identifies himself as the Son of Man, and not any divine person sent from Heaven. IF Jesus was divine, he should have literally descended from Heaven like the Hindu gods. Yet, Jesus was conceived in the womb of Mary, he was miraculously born by God’ power, he passed through childhood into maturity. After his departure, the Church altered the gospels and fabricated thousands of others.

 

We have compiled the evidence to prove the fraudulency of the early Church. The following quotations are derived from scholarly works.

For we, brethren, receive both Peter and the rest of the apostles as Christ Himself. But those writings which are falsely inscribed with their name, we as experienced persons reject, knowing that no such writings have been handed down to us. (St. Serapion190-211)  [1]

 

"Whether a Church which stands convicted of having forged its Creed, would have any scruple of forging its Gospels, is a problem that the reader will solve according to the influence of prejudice or probability on his mind." (Rev. Robert Taylor, The Diegesis p. 10) [2]

"And yet these are veritable fables, which have led to the invention of such stories concerning a man whom they regarded as possessing greater wisdom and power than the multitude, and as having received the beginning of his corporeal substance from better and diviner elements than others, because they thought that this was appropriate to persons who were too great to be human beings. (Origen, 254 CE) [3]

 

"It is clear to me that the writings of the christians are a lie, and that your fables are not well-enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction: I have even heard that some of your interpreters, as if they had just come out of a tavern, are onto the inconsistencies and, pen in hand, alter the originals writings, three, four and several more times over in order to be able to deny the contradictions in the face of criticism." (Celsus 178 CE) [4]

 

"Orthodox theologians were tempted, by the assurance of impunity, to compose fictions, which must be stigmatized with the epithets of fraud and forgery. They ascribed their own polemical works to the most venerable names of Christian antiquity." (Edward Gibbon, History of Christianity, p. 598)

We know already to what degree imposture and credulity went hand in hand in the primitive times of the Christian Church, the last being as ready to receive as the first was to forge books…This evil grew afterwards not only greater when the Monks were the sole transcribers and the sole keepers of all books good or bad, but in process of time it became almost absolutely impossible to distinguish history from fable, or truth from error as to the beginning and original monuments of Christianity… 

How immediate successors of the Apostles could so grossly confound the genuine teaching of their masters with such as were falsely attributed to them? Or since they were in the dark about these matters so early how came such as followed them by a better light? And observing that such Apocryphal books were often put upon the same footing with the canonical books by the Fathers, and the first cited as Divine Scriptures no less than the last, or sometimes, when such as we reckon divine were disallowed by them. I propose these two other questions: Why all the books cited as genuine by Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian and the rest of such writers should not be accounted equally authentic? And what stress should be laid on the testimony of those Fathers who not only contradict one another but are also often inconsistent with themselves in their relations of the very same facts? (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, pp. 74-75)

The Church fathers promoted lies and deception, and encouraged forgery and fraud to compete with the Jews. The dubious Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (d. 340 CE) is reported to have said: 'It is an act of virtue to deceive and lie, when by such means the interests of the church might be promoted ¹.

 

Jerome, the 4^th century Latin scholar also said: “Great is the force of deceit! provided it is not excited by a treacherous intention” ² . Today, Christian missionaries follow the example of these foolish, ignorant, and evil-spirited Church fathers, who promoted the destruction of knowledge and learning by burning the wisdom of ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome! Even the anti-Christ Paul, the founder of Christianity, used deception to “win converts”. 

 

Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. (1 Corinthians 9:19-21)

 

To the utter shock and dismay of our spiritual virtues and morals, Paul wrote the shocking statement:

"For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. (1 Corinthians 1:25)

IF that is not shocking enough, Paul admitted to LYING, and even CURSED Jesus Christ!

 

For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (Romans 3:7)

 

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: (Galatians 3:13)

What more evidence do we need? Christianity betrays the true Jesus Christ as portrayed in the Holy Quran, and there is no other alternative but to accept the true Jesus as described in the Quran! The only perfect Revelation of God that does not degrade Jesus is the Quran. All other Scriptures must be abrogated in favor of the Quran’s guidance alone.