Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Chapter 6: The History of the New Testament

Christian scholars believe that Jesus Christ has not left behind any divine book; rather, it was his disciples who, some time after his death, decided to do this job. At last they wrote treatises concerning the deeds and words of Christ. But unfortunately from the very beginning these writings became for a period of 100 years subject to alterations, omissions and additions by the blood-thirsty Roman emperors, who had no other aim but destroy the very foundations of Christianity and encourage superstition and idolatry.

During the long period, the policy of the emperors left a deep impression on the foundations of real Christianity:

Religious leaders were either killed or detained; religious books were burned; heretics infiltrated into seminaries beginning to spread false teachings in the Church of that time; religious societies were disbanded; cloisters and convents were destroyed and razed to the ground.

Through their activities during that long 300-year period, the emperors had in effect ruined the basic foundations of Christianity, inflicting irreparable damages upon it. As a result, considering these events, no one can trustfully be optimistic towards the Bible including the Gospels.

To make our point more clear, we shall presently offer the case histories of some these emperors; Trajanus After he came to power in 98 AD, his policy dictated him to remove Christianity in a systematic program. He fabricated and instituted some regulations concerning Christianity. These laws were in force for a long time.

The judge generally tried to encourage Christians to deny Jesus Christ and worship non-Christian gods. Had Christians remained faithful to their belief, they would be killed.

The situation reached a point when in 155 A.D Polycarpe, who was one of the most famous founding members of the Church, was burnt at the stake in the city of Izmir.16 Marcus Aurelius He decided to exterminate Christianity by inflicting cruelty and violence. To this end, he killed many Christians in Africa and in many other provinces of the Empire. Tempest, plague, famine, foreign invasion and other calamities, which came to afflict the people during the reign of this emperor, instigated them more and more against Christians.

Each day a group of Christians were arrested. As a result, the best people of the churches of Lyon and Vienna and other church founders were arrested. Metellus, son of Attalos, who was in fact a great champion in the theological affairs and reinforcing aspects of the Church, was subjected to torture and persecution and finally died a tragic death.17

Decius

According to Miller, the Christian scholar, the measures taken by Decius to destroy the Christian Church was more effective than those carried out by previous Roman Emperors. Since he launched his cruel and aggressive campaign quite unexpectedly, many Christians who were caught by surprise, generally disowned their faith.18

Valerianus

After he succeeded Decius as the emperor, he threatened to kill all the archbishops who did not agree with him. He beheaded the archbishop of Carthage, Cyprian. During the second year of his rule, he ordered that all priests to be killed, Christian nobles to be dispossessed of their properties and positions and be killed if they persisted in their faith.19

Deuclocian

When he came to throne, paganism had been revived. Pagan writers had roused the general public against the Christians. Galerius who had nearly come to succeed the emperor, encouraged Deuclocian to issue an order to remove any trace of the Church. To this effect, all cloisters were destroyed, Christian books were set afire, and all those Christians who did not offer sacrificial tokens to the emperor were either tortured or killed.

Although this oppression did not last l9ng on the Western part of the Empire, it continued for nine years in the Eastern Empire, and was the severest persecution and harassment that the Christians had so far suffered from.20 Considering these disasters, how could one believe that the New Testament had not been destroyed or subject to alterations during those epochs?

Constantine the Wicked

Following all these crimes and aggressions committed against the very basis of Christianity, in 312 AD, Constantine became the Emperor of Rome. He put an end to the Roman persecution and oppression, but through his constant interference into religious affairs, adoption of the title of the head of the Church, and establishment of the Oecumenical Council of Nicea, he dealt a mortal blow at the already injured Christianity.21

Apart from being a wicked man and committing a number of abhorrent and disgraceful acts, he did not totally sever ties with polytheism and even forced Christians to conform to him in both thought and practice. He did not pay any attention to objections and criticism of archbishops who had gathered in Oecumenical Council of Nicea from all parts of the Roman Empire (an item of their criticism has likely been the problem of the New Testament textual confusions). Instead of studying them, he ordered to burn their notes of criticism.22

Did the rule and supervision of such a wicked man, whose faith was a matter of doubt, help to settle the problems of Christianity or had otherwise landed more credence to the arguments and evidence pointing to the lack of credit of what has remained?

In order to achieve his political objective, Constantine would force the Christians into a compulsory unity and prevent them from expressing their thoughts and opinions.

He was emphatic on whatever he had in mind. Thus it is unclear what he had done to the New Testament including the Gospels.

Did this wicked man of dubious faith, who had no goal other than furthering his own ambitions, instituted the heresies and alterations of the Roman polytheists or destroyed them? There is no room for doubt that as far as his relation with polytheism was concerned, he could not have kept Christianity unsoiled by them. At any rate,

all current versions of the New Testament available to Christians belong to the early or middle fourth century (325-350 AD) and there is no trace of the complete manuscripts belonging to the pre- Constantine era. Nor is it clear what has occurred to them through various upheavals and political games.23

Considering this situation, could the veracity of the Gospels and tenets of Christianity be trusted and should what is known currently as the Holy Bible be recognized as the original works of the Disciples or should their veracity and authenticity be doubted by any fair-minded person?

A living witness to the fact that whatever is known today as the New Testament is not trustworthy and authentic is that portions of the discovered manuscripts belonging to the early days of Christianity are wholly different from some of present Gospels. Dr. John Alder, the famous American missionary in Iran, has written in his book called "Archaeology of the Holy Scripture": "In the ruins of Exir Hincus, two papyrus scrolls have been discovered consisting of words attributed to Jesus

Christ, but most of them differ from what we read in the New Testament." The discovery of the scrolls containing Gospels' old text clearly demonstrates that the present Gospels are altered and have taken the present forms later in the hands of the Popes and a number of holy fathers.

In short, it must be said that the New Testament that has been constantly at the mercy of events and mysterious manipulations is in no way reliable and trustworthy and could not be considered the work of the Disciples of Jesus.

Chapter 7: The Prophecies of the Gospels

There may be few people who could imagine that there are sentences in the Holy Scripture of the Christians that is the New Testament, which clearly and expressly prophesy the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (P.B.U.H).24 Although the holy fathers had made their best to either omit or revise the sentences dealing with the prophet of Islam, yet in the pages of the present Gospels one can come across sentences whose implicit meanings clearly attest to the coming of the great prophet of Islam.

Here are but few examples of such prophecies:

Prophet of Islam, the Comforter The Gospel of John says: "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever." (John 14:16) "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send to you from the Father, even the spirit of truth, which proceeded from the Father, he shall testify for me." (John 15:26)

"Nevertheless I tell you the Truth. It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you, but if I depart, I will send him unto you." (John 16:7)

The Comforter is not the Holy Spirit

Should it be said that by the Comforter it is meant the Holy Spirit' one must say that there are evidences contrary to this notion, some of which are briefly outlined here.

The sections quoted above give the prophecy of the advent of an individual after Christ and state that his coming depends on the departure of Jesus. His great spiritual personality is so much superior to that of Jesus that Christ's departure in order to make possible the coming of that glaring sun is a very great advantage to humanity.

These descriptions do not fit the Holy Spirit, for he is an angel carrying the divine revelation to the prophets. He used to come to prophets during their divine appointment inspiring them with heavenly messages and verses and his coming down did not depend on Christ's departure. Furthermore, the existence of the Holy Spirit is no more beneficial to humanity than that of Jesus and his going away is more beneficial.

In the "Presentation of Truth", there is a quotation made from the "Quintessence of Histories" written by a Christian. It says: At the time of Muhammad, both Jews and Christians were awaiting the promised messenger. This favorable background was of great advantage to Muhammad to claim that "25 Of course the declaration of the prophet of Islam was thoroughly based on facts, for the signs given both in Torah and the Gospels describing the last of prophets, Muhammad, completely fitted him and hence a large number of fair and truth-seeking Jews and Christians come to profess faith in Muhammad.

Nejashi, the Abyssinian King, upon receiving the letter of the prophet of Islam, said: "By God, he is the same prophet whom the followers of the Book are awaiting."

All of what have been noted so far is based upon the Persian version of the Gospel, but studying the various Gospel translations and comparing them with the Hebrew version of the Bible make the fact clear that the Persian and the Arabic versions of the Gospel were not translated from the original text. The Hebrew version of Elz Evir Gospel had been translated from the Latin version belonging to 1624 AD,

wherein it had used Pericles meaning Ahmad - the Illustrious or Praiseworthy instead of Paraclete which means the comforter. The Christian priests and holy fathers made alterations in the Greek version and changed Pericles into Paraclete, which in turn has been translated as the Comforter in the Arabic and Persian versions, 50 that the people would not find out that this promise is about the great prophet of Islam.

But truth shall always prevail at the end, and it would eventually become known that the one who, was promised by Jesus, to come, was Ahmad - the most praiseworthy -that is, the prophet of Islam. The Holy Qur'an says: "And then Jesus, son of Mary, said: O Children of Israel, surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of Torah and giving good news of a messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad." (The Holy Qur'an 61:6)

The Prophet of Islam is the Spirit of Truth

The Gospel of John says: "I have got many things to say unto you, but you 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 show you things to come." (John 16:12-13)

The "Spirit of Truth" is an epithet given to him, which indicates to the Comforter, who, as we have already come to know, is the prophet of Islam, Muhammad. Another point learnt from the quoted section, is the incompleteness of the religion of Jesus, for he says: "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of Truth, is come, he will guide you to all truth..."

This show that Jesus had not brought all the truth and had left the task to the Prophet, who would succeed him and whose Holy Religion is complete and all laws therein conform to the requirements of mankind.

Who is the Prince of the World?

"Hereafter I will not talk much with you, for the prince of this world cometh, and has nothing in me." (John 14:30)

The Prince of the world is the prophet who comes after Jesus, for the humanity is religiously and spiritually led by great divine prophets, who are God's appointed guardians and representatives upon earth. Moreover, the prince of the world is not Lord himself, for in the afore-mentioned quotation Jesus prophesies that the prince of the world will come later.

Priest Fender, a German clergyman, who has failed to identify the term "Prince of the World" with the Holy Spirit or even Christ himself, has succumbed to idle talk saying: "The Gospel commentators (that is, those who have altered the original Gospel) unanimously say that the Prince of the world is the Devil, who is the Prince of the Sinners and the Misguided."

One does not need to think long to conclude that this very justified is the work of Satan himself who through the narrow - mindedness of the Gospel commentators has called himself the prince of the world and made the pretence of being the Periclete promised by the Gospel. The fact is that the Prince of the world is a divine agent. The verse 8, chapter 16 of the Gospel according to John has called him a divine agent who would force the world towards righteousness and judgment.

From what has been said so far we would clearly understand that the prophecies of the Bible deal with a Prophet whose status is higher than that of Christ and who would complete his religious law, hold the spiritual and eternal leadership over humanity and would bring majesty and greatness to Christ. That person is none other than Muhammad (P.B.U.H.), the Prophet of Islam.

Chapter 8: What the holy fathers have done

A youth who is in touch with Christians and constantly reads their missionary books, has made some points on Christianity, some of which you have already read in Chapter 5. Now, here are the rest of his observations:

"It is convenient here to point out to the abhorrent acts of a group of holy fathers who have toyed with the destiny of many scientists, so that all those who have never had the opportunity to read about the details of those crimes, may know what sort of crimes these holy fathers have committed in the name of Jesus Christ, the innocent prophet of God."

"Yes! It was these holy fathers who killed Ramus the Philosopher. It was the holy fathers who first cut off the tongue of the Italian philosopher, Vanini, then choked him to death and later burned his body at the stake."26

"Were the perpetrators of these inhuman tragic crimes other than the holy fathers, these shepherds and sheep of God? It was they who sold forgiveness in order to squeeze money out of people, who in return for money would forgive all the sins of a person and give him, a signed deed of ownership over a section of paradise. In your opinion, what could these acts be termed except demagogy?"

"Even if someone raised his voice in protest, he would immediately be executed. Even those who way of thinking was in opposition to this ominous method were tortured under Inquisition and after making confessions were sentenced to severest punishments. It is impossible for me to understand why these churchmen who have committed such crimes still insist on introducing themselves as patrons of science and humanitarians.

"In 'Two Faiths' written by Marcel Cauchon we read:

During this period, five million people were either hanged or kept in dark and damp dungeons because of freethinking and violation of Papal order. Only between 1481 and 1499, i.e. a period of 18 years, 10220 people were burned at the stake; 6810 were slaughtered and 97023 died under torture upon the orders of the Inquisition."

"Were these the result of Jesus Christ's teachings or the whim of the holy fathers who under the disguise of faith and in order to achieve both power and wealth had committed all these murders, and who nonetheless are offering sympathy towards or shedding crocodile tears for the people in Africa and Asia?"

"The clergy and holy fathers prescribe celibacy, and apparently practice it themselves. But they are unaware that this is not right and that it would have grave consequences. The facts show the tragic effects of their shameful sexual relations."

"A typical description of these practices is to be found in Boccaccio's' "Decameron" or in Jean Jacques Rousseau's "Confessions". Nothing is wrong with satisfying sexual desires in a natural and legitimate way enjoined by Islam. Then what has made these people deviate from it and commit these obscene Epicurean sexual acts?"

The young man continued: "Let us leave this subject and return to the subject "God" presented by the clergy. Well, is it not ridiculous in the space - age and the epoch of science and knowledge that their transformed Bible should declare that God is composed of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and that God sent 'His only Son' to live among us? In the Gospel of John we read: "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God...

And the word was made Flesh, and dwelt among us. And we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Fathers! (John 1:1 - 14). 'For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son...' (John 3:16)."

"These holy fathers," continued the young man, "have gone so far as to make everyday new revisions in the Gospels to suit their own desires or the expediencies of the time. Nevertheless, through Western governments, they charge people with 'Church tax' to translate and print these Gospels into every language without pausing for a moment to think about the consequences thereof or at least make a revision in the concept of the Trinity."

"I have recently read in a periodical that new manuscripts have been discovered which somewhat differ from the existing texts of the Bible, but that the holy fathers have ignored them."

"According to a London Times report from Tel Aviv: "Researchers at Hebrew University in Jerusalem have asked for a new scientific review and reassessment to be carried out concerning the advent of Christianity in. the light of new written scrolls, belonging to a Christian sect,

dating from 1500 years ago. This sect believed that they were the successors of the very Disciples of Christ. These scrolls show the life - style of the early Christians who lived in Jerusalem, who considered Jesus the messenger (and not the Son) of God and who were strict in observing the injunctions of Torah…"

"These manuscripts have inconsistencies with the New Testament and according to Times' report, they would seriously confirm that Judas of Iscariot may have carefully selected someone to be crucified in place of Jesus.'27 The young man also said: "It is not clear why the Christian authorities did not act in accordance with the advice of Hebrew University and refused to carry out a review of the Christian teachings in the light of these newly - discovered manuscripts."

"However, whether or not the Christian authorities and holy fathers accept to scrutinize the newly - discovered manuscripts, one thing has become clear for the researches: the teachings of Jesus Christ have been altered by his followers and we could never be confident of the authenticity of the present Bible and the teachings thereof, since the numerous Bible versions available along with the inconsistencies therein prevent us from gaining any such confidence at all." In conclusion the youth added: "O great Lord! Guide the misguided wherever and whoever they are. Show them the correct and right path, so that they, too, may find salvation."

Chapter 9: Forgiving of Sins & Heaven sold off!?

All divine religions and faiths try to prevent their followers from committing sins. But unfortunately, the religious teachings and books of the Christians, which are the inventions of the Church, unlike those of other religions, draw people towards committing sins.

The reason for the departure of Christianity from the rest of the divine religions in this respect is that Christian bishops and cardinals, though apparently associated with Jesus Christ, in effect bear no such relationship whatsoever,

and are not aware of his behavior and deeds, having thus miscomprehended his real goal. Christ had but One God; his so-called followers have "created" three gods to worship. Jesus forbade people from evil deeds; these persons encourage people to commit them through their letters of forgiveness and forgive committed sins in exchange for money!28 Judging from history it becomes obvious that the root of all these deviations and fallacies could be traced back to a certain man called "Paul."

Formerly a Jew, Paul was instrumental in altering the truth of the original Gospel revealed to Jesus by God, replacing it by the superstition and delusions of the Roman and Greek polytheists.

Paul's writings are available today under the name "The Epistles of Paul the Apostle" and are considered one of the religious books of the Christians. Paul has written in his Epistles: "Jesus is the Son of God and has inherited the Divinity from His Father! And the Son was ordered by His Father to come upon the earth to live among people and know the human condition.

But later the Jewish servants rose against the Son of God and crucified him in the worst manner. The Lord, because of the hardship and sufferings inflicted upon and occurred to His Son, showed mercy and forgave the sins of all His servants and abolished all the obligations of His servants, and people were only obliged to have faith in Jesus, the Son of God, and love him, for whoever loveth Jesus with his whole heart would have all his sins forgiven." (1)

Where did the thoughts of Paul originate from? The idea that a person could wash away the guilt's of his people through his death or by his blood is an ancient belief existing since the time immemorial. The peoples of Egypt, Asia Minor and Greece believed for a long time in gods such as Osiris, Athena and Dionysos, who came in human shape down to the earth to save humanity and who died in order to have the sins of people forgiven.29

A group of Buddhists believe the same thing about Buddha. In their opinion, God descended upon the earth for the ninth time and took the guise of Buddha to save mankind from errors and sins.30

Adopting the ideas of Roman and Greek polytheists, Paul transformed the monotheism of Jesus and Moses into polytheism and introduced God as the Father, and Jesus, who was simply a Prophet of God, as the one borne out of the Essence of God. The people of that time, who were already familiar with polytheistic ideas, accepted these superstitious concepts and really came to believe in Jesus as the Son of God and as the one who had been crucified in order to absolve the sins of people.

In fact one should say that following the Crucifixion of God's only begotten Son, there is no need to observe the Divine precepts mentioned in Torah, for a Christian is absolved of all responsibilities since the blood of Christ is the ransom paid for the sins of Christians!

All of us, however, know that God never had a son, for having a son is confined to those who are finite and possess physical bodies, so that a part of their bodies may be detached from them to grow into a child. On the other hand, the infinite Lord, who is free and pure from any restriction and incarnation, could never be imagined to have a son. Thus the Holy Qur'an considers God a truth not born and not likely to bear a child: "He begets none, nor is He begotten".

Christians and their followers had never given a moment of thought that if God had wanted to forgive His servants, He would not have needed to resort to such an absurd act of putting an immaculate person into trouble or on the Cross for a few days as a sacrificial ransom for recompensing the human sins.

Instead, out of His boundless mercy, He would have ignored the wrong- doings of some evil4oers and forgiven them, and would, owing to an act of justice, have punished others since their sins would afflict their very own selves.31

The Buying and selling of Paradise and the Letters of Forgiveness

The paying of ransom for crimes committed, while being a relevantly simple and straightforward issue during Paul's time, later on gained a new aspect under the Church authorities and Holy Fathers.

In Paul's creed, only the Father and the Son were recognized. The Holy Fathers, however, added yet another god -Holy Spirit- and thus made them three. Also according to Paul, with Jesus being crucified, all sins of mankind were automatically forgiven, but the Holy Fathers fabricated new rules governing the absolution from sins. According to these rules, it was necessary for a sinner to first confess to his sins to the priest, then offer some cash or credit to His Holiness the Pope so as to have his sins forgiven. It was thought that when the priest utters the words: "I forgive thee", God will have no alternative but forgive and absolve.32

Some church authorities have not insisted on penance, confession and supplication and left the purchaser free to interpret the letter of forgiveness as the certificate of exemption from anything -penance, confession, forgiveness and paying ransom for sins- and let them consider it related merely to the amount of money he pays.

About 1450, the Dean of Oxford University, Thomas Gascagne complained: "Today the sinners say: 'I have no fear of God on the account of sins and misdeeds I commit, for I would be absolved of all guilt's and sins when confessing and asking forgiveness from the priest and buying papal letter of forgiveness'…"33

We read in the book "Exposition of Christian Teachings": "Only the Catholic Church has the power to forgive sins and no outside means of absolution from sins could be found beyond this power." It adds: "It is necessary for us sinners to confess to all our sins before the priest,

for one who withholds even one Sin from the priest will not be cleared from other sins, because he has also committed a great sin of hypocrisy. It is also incumbent upon us to confess to the number of sins committed and say, for instance, that we have committed such and such a sin ten times."34

By fabricating such superstitions, Christianity has prevented many people from achieving moral perfection and spiritual virtues and caused them to plunge into crimes and backwardness. However, based upon nature, the Holy Qur'an forbids mankind from committing evil deeds and calls them towards spiritual perfection. Without resorting to superstition, it encourages the wrongdoers to repent, and thus gives them the hope that whoever "does evil or wrongs his soul, and then asks forgiveness of Allah, he will find Allah forgiving and merciful" (Holy Qur'an, 5:110).

The Qur'an considers the forgiveness of sins the sole right of the Almighty Lord: "To Allah belongs the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth. He forgives whom He pleases and cherishes whom He pleases. And Allah is forgiving and merciful." (Holy Qur'an 48:17).

Chapter 10: The Authors of the New Testament

Why should we know The Authors?

Everyday you are confronted with various reports and hear various news. But among them, you only find one that is reliable and noteworthy, one, which has been said by a reliable and virtuous person. For, if the announcer or the writer is not correct and truthful, his words will not be convincing and trustworthy. Thus whenever we ask for correct news, we must call on truthful speakers or authors to inform us of the real conducts and attitudes of people who have lived before us.

In order to find out about the attitude and pleasing words of Jesus Christ, who lived many centuries before us, any interested person is inevitably forced to consider the reliability of the authors of the New Testament, in order to see whether or not they were qualified for such a thing, for one cannot blindly accept anything written or said as being the attitude and words of Christ himself.

Unfortunately when we embark on a sound, scientific investigation to know the writers of the Scriptures, we discover that they were either unknown or unbelieving, deviant and sinful elements, who could not generally be trusted. For more explanation and in order to see what has just been stated is an irrefutable truth, let us quote a few words about the writers of the New Testament from their very own writings which are currently available.

The biography of the Authors of the New Testament The New Testament is made up of twenty-seven books by eight writers: Peter, John, Matthew, Judas (who were apostles of Christ), Mark, Luke, Jacob and Paul.

Peter

He is the author of two books in the New Testament, who furnishes a source for the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. According to the Bible Dictionary, it is highly suspected that in writing his own Gospel, Mark has relied on information furnished by Peter. Matthew and Luke have referred to Gospel of Mark and some other texts as their information source.35

Peter is the same person to whom Jesus had expressed his dislike. As we read in the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 16, when Jesus was prophesying his own death to his disciples, Peter, taking hold of him, began to reproach him, saying:

"Be it far from thee, lord. This shall not be unto thee." Turning to Peter, Jesus said: "Get thee behind me, Satan. Thou art an offence unto me. For thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men." (Matt. 16:21- 23). Thus is it possible to say that Peter has deserved to be followed by Matthew, Mark and Luke and that his words should constitute an information source for these writers?

The Disobedience of Peter and John

The evening on which Jesus was succumbing to exceeding sorrow, and was betrayed to his enemies, he told his disciples:

"Tarry ye here, and watch with me." But the disciples, instead of taking care of Christ in such a time, abandoned him and went to bed. When Jesus saw them sleeping, he admonished them and said to Peter: "What, could you not watch with me one hour?" He went the second time and prayed, saying unto the disciples to be with him. But again he found them in sleep, obviously having placed their own comfort above obeying his command. (Extracts from Matt. 26, and Mark 14).

Would the people who did not attach any importance to Jesus' simple request in those critical hours, have respected and valued his injunctions in other times? As a result, how could one rely and trust the Gospel, Revelations, books of John or other writings belonging to Peter or to others influenced by him?

How the Disciples Abandoned Jesus and Fled?

The night on which Jesus was to be captured by his enemies, he told his disciples: "All of you shall be offended because of me this night." All his disciples expressed their dislikes of this offence and Peter said: "Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.

" Suddenly Judas, one of the twelve ones, appeared and with him a great multitude carrying swords and sticks. They had been sent by chief Jewish priests and elders. Coming forward they put hands on Jesus and took him away. It was then that all his disciples forsook him and fled.36 What saddened Jesus more than their escape was the arrival of Peter among the enemies!

As Miller, the famous Christian missionary, writes: "How distressed and sad Jesus must have been upon looking at the crowd, seeing Peter warming himself beside fire with other people! Such a negligence and lapse on the part of his most outstanding disciple must have been upsetting.37 Were such irresolute persons firm in face of the bitter events of the early Christian era and the whim of the Roman emperors?

Author's Lack of Faith

Although during his lifetime Jesus had told his disciples that he would "… be

killed, and be raised again the third day",38 whoever told the disciples on that day that 'Jesus has risen', they would not believe him, until Jesus himself appeared to them and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart."39 When the disciples of Jesus act like this, what is to be expected from the writers who had followed them?

Mark

Mark was Barnabas' cousin40 and was a friend to Paul, Barnabas and Peter. Quite possibly he had been taught Christian beliefs by Peter; for Peter addresses him as his son. His association with and devotion to Paul and Peter who were both dishonest is a living witness that he was misled; for in order to know people, the best means is to know their masters and friends. Furthermore, Floyd Philson writes:

"Peter imagined that Mark was not firm in serving Jesus."41 Hence it becomes clear that Mark was not even trusted by Peter.

Luke

He is an unknown man who was in the same footing with misled and misguided Paul. The Persian Bible Dictionary writes: "His personal history, before and after meeting Paul, is either unknown or based upon ambiguous unidentifiable stories."

Jacob, the Brother of Jesus

He was the same person who in response to the people's inclination hatched a conspiracy aimed at instilling the necessity of rejecting the Mosaic Law and openly declared: "…My sentence is that we should trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God." By this statement, he trampled all but few of the Torah's injunctions. Although Jesus had said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heavens and earth pass, one jot or one tottle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matt. 5:17-18)

Paul

There is no evidence available for knowing him except the writings of his friend and colleague, Mark. Moreover, he has committed certain acts each of which is enough by itself as an adequate proof and concrete evidence of his deviations, such as the conspiracy he staged for abolishing the need of observing the Torah; for Paul was one of the supporters of such action and a member of that Cabal. What has been said so far clearly demonstrates that should we ignore the events that had taken place in the early Christian era, we still cannot be optimistic about the New Testament and consider it as being reliable, for the authors thereof had not been qualified and trustworthy.

More startling is the fact that despite their contradictory and superstitious statements, the Christians introduce these authors as inspired by the divine revelation and the Holy Spirit, even though they have no proof supporting this idea except the assertions of these pretty unknown or notorious authors themselves.

Let us hope for the day when the Christian intellectuals would turn back against all these superstitious beliefs, and become unanimous with us so that together, and under the prospering standard of Islam, we would achieve real truths. Amen!

Chapter 11: What is The Eucharist?

Fighting for its very own survival, and since it lacks correct and encompassing teachings that would attract intellectuals, Christianity tries to keep for itself, through "False" rituals, the gullible and fanatic people, whose number, unfortunately, is not few. The thought and deeds which the holy fathers teach for this purpose are generally unsubstantiated and the product of their own delusions.

Unconscious of this fact, the church followers do not ask for proof and blindly follow the fathers. Now the holy fathers discuss the concept of The Trinity, then they stage a Eucharist ceremony, imagining that thus they create a thrill of excitement in the hearts of Christians. They are unaware that these rites would deliver yet another blow to the foundations of Christianity. They (the holy fathers) say that it would be good to kill two birds with one stone, by mixing fun and revelry, with a so-called religious action.

Presently we would explain the fact behind this "holy deed" to you, dear reader:

The Eucharist, or the Wine and Breed Ritual On Christmas Eve, the Christians make the following ceremony in the churches:

The Archbishop orders his acolytes to make dough from good flour, bake a loaf of unlived bread and bring it to him. Then the Holy Father takes the loaf of bread and wine to the church and after tolling the bell, prepares the Christians for performing the great ceremony. They all file in one rank and the priest pours the wine into a silver bowl and wraps the bread in a beautiful kerchief. Then he passes the rank of Christians and faces the East, reciting incantations and prayers while holding the loaf of bread. Following the supplication, he prostrates before the bread, then all those present would do the same for they believe that after the supplication, the dough of the bread transforms into the flesh of Jesus.42

The Wine Grail

The Holy Father then holds the cup of wine and addresses the congregation saying: "Our (lord and savior) Jesus, before death took the Grail of wine and gave it to his disciples saying: "this is my blood." (Mark 14:24) Having said this, the priest himself bows before the cup and those in attendance must also follow suit.

Then, while saying prayers, he breaks the bread and holds it in his hand, while another priest brings the Grail of wine. Then one by one, those present come forward; and the holy father still reciting prayers places in their mouths a piece of that bread which they swallow immediately without biting into it, for if they bite into it the flesh of Jesus would be harmed. One must ask why the flesh of Jesus, i.e. the unlived bread, is not harmed when they tear it to pieces. Then all take a sip of wine, and by eating bread and drinking wine, all of them become the Father and the Son. And all their sins are forgiven. Whoever wants to repent must do this, and this is currently the standard practice in all Roman Catholic Churches.

This is but a sample of the ideas and deeds of Christianity, a faith whose practitioners believe that beatitude solely lies in the light of its teachings. Moreover, as a part of the ceremony, all unanimously call Jesus the Lord, the only Son of God and begotten by The Father; and confess that he is not a creature but sharing the same essence with the Father.

Unlivened Bread and the Flesh of Jesus

Now in order to better explain this decadent idea and this act, take note of the following:

1) How then Jesus, who according to these gentlemen had been crucified about two millennia ago, can be turn to pieces in thousands of churches, and up in the bellies of millions of Christians and thereby make them all Gods? What sort of scientific discipline proves that this bread and this wine are transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus and what sort of connection exists between Christ and this physical food?

2) If each of those pieces of bread that a Christian eats were a whole Jesus, then it would be necessary for the Lord to create each year several million Jesus in the form of unlivened bread so as to feed the Christians. Moreover, during his lifetime, each Christian, depending upon his age must have eaten 50, 60, 80 or even 100 whole Jesus... Is such a statement believable?

And if they say that they tear Jesus to pieces and eat him, no doubt the crime of the holy fathers would be no less severe than that of Judas Iscariot who betrayed Jesus to the Jews, for they tear Jesus to pieces every year.

Strange Statement

By saying the unlivened bread is digested, the Christians have made a great insult to Jesus, for they are forced to say that it goes through the same stages as other foods, but if they say that it is not digested and absorbed then one must say that every Christian, who has lived for hundred years, must harbor hundred Jesus in his stomach. Truly how much space is there in one's stomach to take in hundred Jesus with earthly bodies?

The superstitious nature of The Eucharist became such a widely spoken topic among Europeans and other people, that in 1551 AD the Roman Catholic Church was forced to make a revision in it but still it could not thoroughly abandon the Eucharist superstitions.

By what stated so far, the superstitious nature of The Eucharist comes into light, for it does not conform to any laws of natural or rational sciences; rather it directly opposes them. In this ritual, drinking of wine, which by the assertion of medical scientists and The Holy Bible itself, is a dangerous fluid that disrupts both mind and body, has been incorporated into the Christian faith as a sacred act by which the Christians become both the Father and the Son.

More specifically, if it is said that unlivened bread is not digested and remains in body forever, this foolish statement make not only the natural scientist, but also even any child, to laugh at it. Furthermore, the present gospels do not approve this act. John Alder, a Christian scholar writes:

"Protestants dispute with Catholics about two subjects:

I-That the Eucharist and other sacred rites have been taught by Jesus, for there are many arguments against it, but none to support it. II-That these holy rituals are means and modes of salvation, Whereas the New Testament strongly emphasizes that we are saved through faith "and not by performing rituals. (Therefore there is no salvation in the acts, rites and ceremonies of the Eucharist). May God guide all of us to the right path?"