There are so many reasons for this. I have spoken on this many a time before. You know, you look at it from any angle, historical evidence or just the rationale of it, and also from the historical perspective, history before him, and also from the New Testament, and the Old Testament. All these fingers point that he never died in the first instance on the cross. So when he never died, if that is proved, then there is no question of rising from the dead. And I can speak for hours from different angles, but I shall try to be brief. In this subject, it is difficult to be brief rather than to be lengthy.
For instance, when we read in the New Testament, there are three periods which are distinct. Pre-crucifixion period, and the crucifixion itself, and the post-crucifixion period. These are the three important periods. So let’s start at the beginning. In the pre-crucifixion period, we notice Christ as praying to God, and with such earnestness, as apparently it’s impossible for the prayer to be rejected. Also, he is known to have referred to two very important things. One, that he is going to the lost sheep of Israel. Second, that no miracle would be shown unto the people of this earth, I mean, this age, except the sign of Jonah, the prophet of the wave. Now, these two things are very significant and important as to what was to happen.
They are in fact leaders in that direction. He was to leave the two tribes of Israel, which were found there at that time, and go to the ten tribes of Israel which had migrated from the mainland previously. I mean, this is a historical fact and nobody debates this. So when he says that he is going to the lost tribe of Israel, or he has come for the lost tribe of Israel, the tribe which was before him, the two tribes, they were not the lost tribe, but in fact those were the lost tribes who had lost touch with the main body of Israelites, who had been expelled from the mainland previously in various invasions by some other invaders. I mean, different time of history, they had migrated gradually from the mainland.
So we believe that it was an indicator that he was to leave them and go in search of the tribe of Israel which were no longer there, and his ministry could not be fulfilled unless he had finished this job of addressing all the tribes of Israel. The second indicator according to us is more obvious, even more obvious than this one. People wanted some sign, and he said you will be shown only the sign of Jonah, the prophet of the wave. Now what was the sign which he showed? It was not a resurrection from the dead. It was a sign that under apparently impossible condition, he remained in the belly of the whale for three nights and three days, and came out alive, while no ordinary human being could have survived that ordeal.
So the simile is complete only when you believe that Jesus Christ also, peace be upon him, went through the same or even severer ordeal. Apparently he should have died, but with the grace of Allah he never died, and he came out alive. Again referring to the Old Testament, we draw the same conclusion because in the Old Testament it was said that whoever claims to be from God, and he is a liar and imposter, he would be hanged from the cross. The word cross is not used, but the implication is obvious and everybody agrees that what is said is this, that he would be hanged from the cross till death. So this was the interpretation as understood by all the scholars of the time, and Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, never disagreed with it.
So when he claimed to be from God, if he were to be crucified, that is to say that crucifixion would have reached its logical conclusion, that is death. In that case he would be counted among those, according to the Bible, who are accursed. And this is exactly why some scholars had to agree to this, unfortunately for them. They loved Jesus Christ on the one hand, and on the other they agreed that he was an accursed person, though they justified this curse under the plea that he did it on his own accord for our sake. But that is proved to be wrong when you look at the second phase, that is, the phase of crucifixion. There too, the act of crucifixion also is very significant in many ways. For instance, number one, Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, at the last moment is known to have said, Eli Eli, le masha bakthani, O my Lord, why have you abandoned me? That is significant because if he was not told beforehand by God that he would be delivered from the cross, he could not have expected it. There was no question of God abandoning him.
If this was decreed for him, and he knew that this was decreed, that he must give up his ghost upon the cross, then he should have said, you have not abandoned me, you are fulfilling your word. But that was something very different from, I mean, what he said was very different from that situation. He was expecting God to save him from crucifixion. And then it is said that he gave up the ghost. Now, the recent scholars have agreed, I mean, the scholars of the century, that this version of gave up the ghost and ascension is not trustworthy and it was added into the Bible later on. So, in the revised version, American version, which was published a few years ago, there’s some very great, important scholars of Christian world got together and investigated the whole thing and they took out the entire chapter of ascension. And they said this was added later on and it has no ground, no root in fact. And also, they agree that this gave up the ghost is also an added factor. Some commentator has added this. And moreover, nobody could see giving up the ghost.
Even in ordinary circumstances, when the death overtakes someone, people normally have to call a doctor to declare that such and such person is dead. And for that he has to go through some search, he has to find and search for some certain definite indications. But to see someone upon cross who hangs his head suddenly after a cry, it does not positively indicate that such a person has given up the ghost. On the contrary, there are indications that he could not have given up the ghost, instead he might have sooned.
Now, that again, the fact of crucifixion tells us that the crucifixion did not take as long as normally it does, according to the custom of the time. Or normally it did according to the custom of the time. Much less than that in fact. According to some scholars, he was hardly allowed to remain upon the cross for three or some hours. Because when they took him in a procession towards the place where he was to be crucified, it took him quite some time, and in the meanwhile the procession was mobbed and people jeered and they had many threats and hindrances on the way. So, most people believe that it was in the afternoon that he was put on cross. And it was a winter afternoon with shortened days. And before the sunset of that very afternoon, he was taken down. That is to say, he was hardly permitted to stay on cross more than three hours. That is a rough estimate.
While normally it took three days and three nights for the cross to kill someone positively. And even there are instances where after three days people came out alive. Because this was a means of slow, torturous death. Not of a quick killing. It was a merciless way of killing through prolonged torture. And this is why the main arteries were avoided when the nails were driven through the palm of the hand or wrist. Either case is debatable. But now they believe that it was not the palm, it was the wrist where the nail was driven. Anyway, the point is, normally people took three days and three nights for a slow, torturous death. And it is rather strange for Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, to die within a very short time of three hours. Again, another fact is very significant. Why did Pilate chose that particular hour, that particular day?
We have evidence from the Bible that Pilate was very hesitant in submitting to the Jews’ demand, because he knew he was innocent. Whatever doubt was left was removed by the dream of his own wife, which was sent to him while he was sitting in the jury. And then he said, I wash my hands of the blood of this innocent man. So, we know that Joseph Amita, who was a close, not exactly disciple, but a very great admirer of Jesus Christ, and perhaps he had faith in him, but didn’t want to disclose it to others. He was also a great friend of Pilate. It was arranged between them, in fact, that to save him from crucifixion, this was the best possible way, to have him put to cross on Friday, when Sabbath would begin in a very short time. And according to the Jewish custom, no person was permitted to hang on Sabbath, that is, on the sunset of Friday. So, that seems to be an organized affair.
Moreover, his legs were not broken. This is also very significant, because in that short while, the legs must have been broken, while the two thieves who were hanged along, their legs were broken and his legs were not broken. Again, it’s very important that when his side was pierced, according to the evidence of Bible, the blood gushed out, and in some translations they say rushed out, it’s the one and the same thing. Now, gushing and rushing of blood is not a passive phenomena. This active phenomena can only take place if the heart is beating, because if some blood is collected somewhere and that is coagulated after death, you can’t describe the phenomena which is oozing as gushing out, ooze passively perhaps.
So, this is again an indicator that he was alive. Then in the post-crucifixion period, we come to learn of his disciples applying some balm on his body, some ointment, which was prepared in advance. And according to the evidence, there were 12 ingredients of that ointment, in the name of, for which each apostle had contributed, and that recipe is still preserved in many books, Eastern as well as Western. And according to that formula, one can clearly understand that that recipe is used for healing wounds, for fighting infection, for removing pain, and all that is required after somebody is wounded, to heal him as quickly as possible.
So, what is the significance of applying that ointment on a dead body, while it was not even the custom of the Jews? Had it been a customary thing, then one could extend one’s belief to the point that perhaps just because of that they did it. So, Saint John had to add this in his version, when he said that that ointment was applied according to the Jewish custom. Now, this one sentence has proved to be a tell-tale sentence against Saint John’s claim that he was of Jewish origin, because the recent scholars, I mean, the contemporary scholars of study of Bible have now agreed on this point, that this sentence could not have been said by Saint John, if he himself had been of Jewish origin, because it was not a Jewish custom to anoint the dead bodies, and it was completely something new to the Jewish.
So, that had a significance. He was wounded, and it was for healing him that all this was gone through all this trouble. Now, when he is removed, he is kept secretly in a place which is called a grave, sepulchre, or grave in the north, but as you want to know that, it was a small room-like cave in which people also sat along, and I mean, it’s not just a grave like the Muslims bury their dead nowadays, it’s a quite a spacious place, and it was in that cave that his body was kept, but secretly. Now, the second thing we hear, after the disappearance of his body, which was again speaking of connivance between Joseph and Pylons, because he went to him and reported it, and the answer was in a counter-question. Already dead?
That is what he said. And he knew better than anybody else, because he had been sending so many people to crucifixion, that normally people don’t take so short a time to die. The second thing we hear is that the Jews are after his body, and they fail to find. And they not only complain, generally speaking, but they go to Pylons and register this complaint. According to the New Testament, they said, he was a very cunning man, we must have his body to assure ourselves that he’s dead.
Otherwise he may not have died, he may reappear and claim that he has risen from the dead. That is exactly the suspicion of the people of the time, that normally people don’t die so soon, and perhaps this is what is going to happen. And that is exactly what happened. Then when he’s seen walking out, he’s known to have visited his people, his followers, disciples, and in one instance we know that they got scared. They thought he was a ghost, as someone else earlier has mentioned in the New Testament, that he gave up the ghost. So if he gave up the ghost, he should be a ghost, seen by the people. So when they are afraid and want to run away, Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, calls them back. And this is what he says, I am not a ghost. So whom would you believe? If an observer, a distant observer, who was himself scared of what was happening, when he saw Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, hang his head, his version is, he gave up the ghost. And Jesus Christ himself contradicts that. He says, I am not a ghost. Come and touch me. Look at this. These are the wounds which I suffered upon cross. And then he, to further reassure them, tells them that he feels hungry. Have they got anything to eat? And they said, yes, some fish and bread. He said, give me some of this. And then the analyst tells us that he partook of that.
So that shows he was not revived from the dead. That shows he was never dead at all. And leaving aside, casting aside all the prejudices with which a generation is born, having heard from his fathers and forefathers and parents, parents and forefathers about something which might have happened, the generation grows with it and never challenges the truth, normally speaking. Now if you leave that aside and try to rethink over the issue as a neutral observer from outside, if the same facts are quoted to you, that somebody was hanged or attempted to be hanged to death, is taken down much earlier than normal, when his side is pierced, the wound bleeds profusely, then he’s taken quietly to some place, then he reappears before some people, his wounds are healed by some ointment, or at least an ointment is applied, what would be the conclusion of the jury of the modern time, if that jury is not prejudiced?
They would obviously say that this man never died. And then he himself says, I’m not a ghost. So all this is so obvious and clear to us that there is not a shadow of doubt left, as we observe it, because we were not born with this concept of crucifixion, with which most people in the Western world are born, unfortunately. So again he hides himself from the Jewish eye, he avoids it. If it was a miracle of the nature that Christian scholars would have us believe, then he should have appeared bravely, gloriously, before the people who had attempted to kill him. There shouldn’t have been no escape from the public eye. In fact, that was the time to prove to them that they had been defeated, and here is the victorious person who came out of the dead. But not, that did not happen. Why? The constant behaviour of the followers and Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, after the crucifixion, tells of one thing, that he’s migrating from that place, he’s hiding from the public eye, he appears at night, and he reassures them that he never died.
Now, after he leaves, some tales are left behind, and those are the tales which ultimately gave birth to the modern Christianity. Those tales could not be otherwise, unfortunately. There was a necessity urging them to present the matter in a different light to the people of the time. Now, if they had begun to claim that the Jews had failed in their attempt, and he proved to be a righteous person and a holy prophet, who never died upon the cross, then immediately they would have been treated as accomplices after fact. According to the law of the land, if somebody sees a criminal escape punishment, and knows it, and does not help the government re-arrest him, he is called in the legal term accessory after fact.
So, in the Roman Empire, anybody who claimed that Jesus never died upon cross, and he bore witness to it, that we saw him alive and he never did die in the first instance, he would immediately be reported to the government, and he would be acted against for being an accessory in crime. Yet, to believe that he died, and just say that, would be the negation of his truth, of his Messiahhood. So, this was the via media adopted by the people perforce. They started saying that, yes, he died, but not as a liar. He was not less than a man, he was more than a man, because we saw him after death, and he was revived. So, this is how they defeated, according to their own clever device, they defeated both the enemies, the government as well as the Jews.
But unfortunately, they also defeated the spirit of Christianity. And that is what was inherited later on. That distorted form of Christianity took birth in this situation of compulsion, but it would have been much better if they had chosen to be otherwise, either not to keep to themselves and be patient, whatever they might have said about Jesus Christ, they should have suffered. Or at least they should have the bravery to say, no, he escaped your clutches, and do whatever you please to us. I am quite sure they could not have been crucified, but some punishment might have been given them. So, he was migrating at that time, and he was going to the lost tribe of Israel. And when we reconstruct the story later on, then we can see that the lost tribe of Israel had migrated to the eastern and some southern regions. I mean, keeping the geographical situation of Palestine, they migrated perhaps to first slightly north towards Syria, then to Iraq, and then travelled downwards and eastward to Afghanistan, and then to Kashmir.
Now, there is a perhaps, when I say that, but the historians now are agreed that this is exactly where the Israelites are found. The tribes of Afghanistan, the people of Kashmir, do not belong to the subcontinent and that region. They have distinct features, distinct nomenclature of their tribes, distinct habits, and the anthropologists and the students of tribal histories and migrations, etc., agree that they were the same people as once were found in the mainlands under the title, Children of Israel. So, if they are the lost tribe, and he was a true prophet, he was making a prophecy that he would leave this land and go to the lost tribe of Israel, then it is there that he should be searched for. And it is exactly there that now we find evidence of his going.
As far as the Ahmadiyya theology is concerned, we were all the time convinced, because from our point of view, it was quite enough, that Israelites are found there, and Bible is pointing a finger in that direction by telling us that he should have gone to the lost tribe of Israel. So, wherever that lost tribe is found, you should search for him. But that is a long distance, spread all over a thousand some miles, perhaps about two thousand miles. Now, when we read the Holy Qur’an, another finger is pointing from a different direction, but to the same place, in fact. The Holy Qur’an says, We sheltered, or we gave shelter, not only to Jesus Christ, peace be upon him, but also to his mother. And we took them away to a place of safety, which had certain characteristics. It was a Plato-like place, Rabwatim, a raised ground, or Plato is called Rabwatim. And also, it had many natural springs and fountains. Also, it had peace about it, an atmosphere of peace.
So, if you search wherever Israelites had migrated earlier, and try to find these three features, Kashmir is the right place. Kashmir, in fact, is the only place upon which all these three features can be applied correctly. It is full of natural springs and fountains. It is a peaceful region of th
