The answer to this allegation will start with a statement of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas himself. He states:
“We inform our readers that our belief concerning Jesus is extremely noble. We most sincerely believe that he was a true prophet of Allah, and He loved him. As the Holy Qur’an tells us, we hold firm faith that he most sincerely believed in our lord and master prophet Muhammad Mustafa (may peace and blessings of Allah be on him) for his salvation, and that he was one of the hundreds of obedient servants of the Law of Moses. Therefore, we hold a great esteem for him in accordance with his exalted status.” (Nur-ul-Qur’an, Part 2, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 9, p. 374)
It is important to note that during the 1800’s, the Christians were spreading their teachings at an extremely high rate. Muslims were apostating day by day, and this did not only include ordinary Muslims, but even the known scholars of Islam during that time. Islam was being mocked by the Christians on a regular basis.The Muslims had no reply to the attacks of the Christians. The Muslims in reply to these attacks against the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw, learned and observed that the description and lifestyle of Isaas mentioned in the Qur’an in comparison to the bible is completely different and describes two different people. The Muslim scholars therefore decided to make the Jesus mentioned in the gospels a fairytale and decided to use what it says about him in response to the attacks. This was not only what Ahmadas did rather many famous scholars who will now be quoted. The bible is full of false statements against the Messiah which one cannot accept.
Maulawi Rahmatullah Muhajir Mecci, who was a learned scholar of the Sunni Muslims wrote in his book called Izalah Auham: “Most of the miracles attributed to Jesus cannot be considered as miracles because magicians could also perform such feats. That is why the Jews do not accept him as a prophet and they consider his miracles as those of a magician (This is from Izala Auham of Maualwi Rahmatullah Muhajir Mecci on page 129)
The same author states: The Messiahas himself affirms that John, peace be upon him, neither ate bread, nor did he consume wine (Luke 7:33), and that John, Peace be upon him, lived in the wilderness(Mark 1:4) But Jesus was accompanied in his journeys by several women(Matthew 27:55-57, and Luke 8:1-3) who used to provide for him out of their earnings(Luke 8:3); prostitutes used to kiss his feet (John 11:5); Martha and Mary (Magdalene) were his friends (John 11:5); and he drank wine and offered it to others (John 2: 1-11) (Page 370 of the same book quoted above)
And: And…Judah committed adultery with the wife of his son, consequently she became pregnant and gave birth to Perez who was among the forefathers of David, Solomon, and Jesus Peace be upon them (Page 404, quoted with Genesis 38:12:29 and Matthew 1:2-6)
Furthermore, Maulvi Al-e-Hassan writes:
“And reflect a bit on your own pathetic condition. God forbid! In the geneology of the mother of Jesus you yourself admit of acts of adultery on two occasions (page 73 of Istifsar quoted with Genesis 38:12-29, Mathew 1:3-4, Samual chapters 11 and 12)
“Secondly Jesus used to call his opponents dogs (Matthew 7:6). Therefore, if we call his opponents dogs, it would not be against moral civility; in doing so we shall be exactly following Jesus” (page 98)
“Jesus at last left this world, having lived a miserable life here” (page 336)
“Jesus said that foxes have holes and birds have nests but for him there is no place to lay his head (Matthew 8:20). Now this is a poetic exaggeration. It is extremely deplorable to complain of hardships of mundane life (page 349)
“The religion and faith of them (Christian Padres) is that God, having become a fetus in the wom of Mary, nourished himself for months with menstrual blood, then he grew into a shapeless lump from the clot of blood, later from this shapeless lump, he grew into flesh and bones. Then he came out of her vaginal tract, excreted urine and faces. On becoming of age he became a disciple of his own servant (John the Baptist) and at the end he remained in hell for three days having been cursed by God” (pages 350-351)
“In chapter eleven verse nineteen of first Gospel (Matthew) it is written (That Jesus) was a glutton and a wine drinker (page 353, see Matthew 11:18-19 for the verse)
The founder of the Barelwi firqha of the Sunni Muslims, Maulana Maulawi Shah Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi, who is respected worldwide stated:
“Yes, yes! The God of the Christians, after getting killed by those he had created, went to his father, but he threw him into hell—and that is how he bestowed on him and showed appreciation for his suffering and sinlessness. In place of others (who have committed sins), he roasted him (his innocent son) for three days in hell. (Jesus is a god) who eats bread and meat and on his return from his journey, having got his feet washed, he rests under a tree- the tree is higher and he is lower. (God the father) is such that his son invests majesty in him. The mother of the god of Aryas (which is a Hindu sect) used to protect the life of her son, but the son of god of Christians bestows honour on his father—and why not sons are meant to be gracious to their fathers! How unjust and ungrateful is the father, who in spite of everything throws his son, without any fault of his, into hell. The Christian god is treacherous and regretful. He has two consorts who are both confirmed adulterous and inveterate prostitutes. He is a god for whom the earnings from adultery and expenditure of a prostitute are perfectly sanctified and pure (i.e to him the money prostitutes earn and spend on him his pure) (Al-‘Ataya An-Nabawiyyah Fil-Fatawa Ar-Radwiyyah’, Vol. 1, Pages 740-741 Kitabul Taharah Babu Al-tayammum, Publisher: Sheikh Ghulam Ali & Sons, Lahore.)
Now it is clear that many Muslim scholars have used this technique and that these quotations are all of the descriptions Jesus is given from the bible, but are not in reality true according to us as Muslims.Ahmadas who was the latter day Messiah and Mahdi was commissioned by the Holy Prophetsaw to break the cross and this is exactly what he did. He told the scholars not to mock and to bring fourth good arguments which they were not able to do.
“I have always held the opinion that we should refute those who attack us in a mild, civilized reasonable and rational manner; and should get rid of the thought that the esteemed government be asked to punish any sect. Those who defend religion must demonstrate their moral rectitude. Religion is defamed if we lose our temper on every occasion (our faith is attacked). (Al-Balagh, page 34 Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 13, page 402)
And he also told the government:
“To stop publication of offensive writings, the esteemed Government should adopt one of the two proposals: either each party should be asked that when it wants to raise an objection against another religious group, it must not do so without providing references from the authentic books of the other group, or on no account any follower of a religion should attack religious beliefs of the followers of other religions, and should only put forward good points of his own religion.”(Al-Balagh, pp. 34-35 Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 13, pp. 402,403)
Ahmadas wrote many speeches where he clearly destroyed the teachings of Christianity through using evidence from the Qur’an, the ahadith, the old and new testaments, history, logic, rational arguments, and shockingly even medicine.He destroyed Christianity from every perspective possible. The Christians were torn into pieces and were defeated. Since the Christians were defeated they started to say Ahmadas has insulted Isaas which sadly Muslims also use today which shows they have become like the Christians. Ahmadasreplied to such allegations saying:
“You say that I have, as if, insulted Hadrat Masih(the Messiah) to some extent by using an abusive word with reference to him. This is a misunderstanding of yours. I believe Hadrat Masihas to be a true prophet, a chosen one and beloved servant of God. What I said in retaliation was in keeping with your own faith. Hence it is you, not me, who stand accused of the accusation that you level at me.”(Jang-e-Muqaddas Page 88, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 6, page 170)
He also states:
“When we are deeply hurt and unjustified attacks of all kinds are made on our Holy Prophetsaw, only then, as a warning, we retaliate in kind on the basis of their (Christians’) own authentic books. … they aught to point out in my writings any thing which I have written as a retaliatory response and it is not found in the Gospels. After all it is not possible for me, that on hearing the insult of the Holy Prophetsaw, I remain silent.” (Malfuzat, Vol. 9, page 479, edition 1961)
Then in response to some mullahs also who sadly joined the Christians and were going against Islam, Ahmadas stated:
“Everywhere in my writing I (referring to Christ) have meant suppostitious Jesus of Christians; and the humble servant of God, ‘Isaas bin Maryam, who was a prophet of God and who is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an is certainly never intended in my harsh comments. I adopted this path after constantly listening to the abuses of padres for the last forty years. Some ignorant mullahs—who should better be called blind and sightless— excuse the padres and say that they, the poor, helpless fellows, do not utter a word (against the Holy Prophetsaw, nor are they in the least disrespectful to him. But it must be borne in mind that in reality it is the padres who are in the forefront in displaying contempt, hurling insults and shouting abuses. I have a stockpile of books by those padres who have filled their writings with hundreds of abuses. Any mullah who wishes should come and see for himself. And let it be remembered that if in future any padre, shunning the ways of abuse, speaks politely, I, too, shall be polite with him. At present they themselves are responsible for the attacks on their Jesus for under no circumstances they refrain from abuse and vituperation. We are sick of listening to them.” (Nur-ul-Qur’an, Part 2, Ruhani Khazain, Volume 9, Page 375)
Now the foolish mullahs present some out of context statements to suggest that Ahmadas insulted Jesusas and denied his high status, God forbid. They quote:
“The righteousness of the messiah cannot be proven to be greater than of other righteous persons of his time. The Prophet John (the Baptist) is rather better than him in one respect. He did not drink wine, and it is never heard that any prostitute anointed his hair with precious oil that she purchased with her income and touched his body with her hands or hair, or any young unrelated woman remained in his service. That’s why the Quran God gave Yahyaas the name “Hasur” but did not give this name to the Messiah because such stories did not permit to give this name to him (Isaas). And then Hadhrat Isaas made remission of his sins through baptism administered by Yahyaas – who is called John by the Christians and who was later made to be Elijah. Thus he became a special disciple of Yahya. This clearly proves Yahyas superiority because it is not evidence that Yahya ever repented on anyone’s hand”(Dafi‘ul-Bala, p.4, footnote, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 18, p.220)
It is quite sad that the mullahs have raised such allegations against Ahmadasand have ignored all of the attacks made on the Holy Prophetsaw and why Ahmadas had shown such a biblical portrayal of Jesus which was obviously not his true image. The Prophet Isaas mentioned in the Qur’an is never portrayed in the way the bible does. The words Isa or Messiah being used do not matter since the story shows us Ahmadas was referring to the messiah’s portrayal in the bible. Now the second part of the allegation is against the word “hasur” metioned by Ahmadas. In the Qur’an this is the name given to Yahyaas. The significance of it is explained by Ahmadas while a comparison is shown from the Gospels between Jesus and his cousin Yahya. The same exact is written in Tafsir Ibn Jarir, Tafsir Jamiul Bayan, Tafsir Kamalain and Tafsir Tarjamanul Qur’an. In all of these commentaries, the translation of Hasur is the one who does not go near women. The gospels do have stories that Jesus was with women bt never any story of Yahya is mentioned. We have already quotred the non Ahmadi Muslim scholars also using the word Messiah in their writings but are in reality referring to the portrayal of Isaas according to the bible. The same applies to Ahmadas and what makes this sad is that the mullahs were ready to mock Ahmadas and woke up to do this, but were asleep when Ahmadas was defending his mastersaw day and night.
“The readers should keep it in mind that with reference to Christian religion it was necessary for me to argue in the same manner as they (the Christians) adopt in confrontation with us. In fact, Christians do not believe in that ‘Isaasof ours who claimed about himself that he was only a servant (of God) and a prophet, acknowledged that earlier prophets were righteous and sincerely and truly believed in the prophet to come—The Holy Prophetsaw. He prophesied about the advent of the Holy Prophetsaw .Rather they believe in a man by the name of Jesus of whom there is no mention in the Qur’an and say that that person claimed to be God and called earlier prophets robbers etc. They also say that this man was a staunch disbeliever of our Holy Prophetsaw and that he prophesied that he would be followed only by false claimants. And you know very well that the glorious Qur’an has not taught us to believe in such a man. Rather the Qur’an, with reference to such people, has categorically stated that if anyone, being a human, claims to be God, God will throw him into hell. It is for this reason that whenever I have mentioned the Jesus of Christians I have not observed such reverence for him as one should observe with respect to truthful and righteous person. Were such a man not blind, he would never have said that he would be followed only by false claimants; and were he pious and faithful, he would not have claimed to be God. The readers (of my writings) should keep it in mind that some harsh words that I have used do not apply to Hadrat ‘Isaas.On the contrary they are used for Jesus of whom we find no mention whatsoever in the Qur’an or Hadith. (Majmu‘ah Ishtiharat, Vol. 2, pp. 295, 296)
“The Messiah is one of the most beloved and righteous servants of God. He is among those who are chosen by God. He belongs to those whom God purifies with his own Hand and whom he keeps under the shelter of His light. But he is not God—as is presumed. Yes, he is close to God and is among those perfect ones who are the few.”( Tohfa-e-Qaisariyyah, pp.20, 21 Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 12, pp. 272, 273)
“And how can I, in response to the padres, be harsh in my attack. For as they are bound to believe in the eminence and honour of Hadrat ‘Isaas so I—apart from confining the station of Godhead to God alone—am under the obligation to acknowledge that Hadrat ‘Isaas was truthful and righteous and deserved all respect which is due to a true prophet of God.”( Kitabul-Bariyyah, pp.135, 136 Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 13, pp.153, 154)
Ahmadas also states in Kashti-e-Nuh:
“I greatly esteem the Messiah son of Mary because in Islam I am spiritually the Khatamul Khulafa (Seal of the caliphs) as the Messiah son of Mary was the Khatamul Khulafa’ in the dispensation of Bani Isra’il. In the dispensation of Moses(as), the son of Mary was the Promised Messiahas, and in the dispensation of Muhammadsaw, I am the Promised Messiahas. So, I respect him whose name I share. And that person is wicked and a liar who says that I do not respect the Messiah, son of Maryas.Not only the Messiahas I also respect his four brothers because all five are of the same mother. Not only that, I also consider the two real sisters of the Messiahas as blessed.( Kashti-e- Nuh, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 19, pp.17, 18)
“Hadrat ‘Isaas is an exalted Prophet of God. Without any doubt, ‘Isa the Messiahas is a beloved of God, a Chosen one, Light for the world, a Sun of guidance, a dear one to God, placed closed to His Throne. Millions of people who love him truly and follow his exhortations correctly shall be saved from hell.”(Damimah Risalah Government Angrezi Aur Jihad”, p. 4. Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 17, p. 26)
It is also stated in Malfuzat:
“I consider him as a brother of mine, and I have seen him several times (in visions). Once the Messiahas and I ate beef together out of one bowl. Thus, he and I are two portions of the same gem.”( Malfuζat, Vol. 3, p. 330, edition 1961)
And another statement is as follows:
“It is revealed to this humble one that in my meekness, humility, trust, sacrifice, signs and blessings I am the model of the first manifestation of Messiah. My nature has close affinity to that of the Messiah, as if we were two portions of the same gem or two fruits of a single tree. We are so closely bonded together that only a spiritually-gifted eye can detect the fine difference that exists between us. Moreover, there is a manifest resemblance between us. For the Messiah was the subordinate to a perfect prophet of great grandeur i.e. Moses and was the servant of the religion (of Moses) and his Gospel is a branch of Torah. And this humble one too is one of the most humble servants of that Prophet(sa) of great eminence who is the Master of all prophets and the Crown of all Messengers. If they praise their Lord, he extolled Him in the highest possible way in such a manner that no one can compete with him or excel him in his praise of his Lord: if they (the prophets) deserve praise, he is the only one who deserves the highest possible praise—his Lord (Allah) praised Him as He praised no one.”( Brahin-e-Ahmadiyyah, pp. 593, 594, marginal notes within margin No.3, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 1)
“I have seen ‘Isaas several times in my dreams, and many a time I met him in visions. And he had indeed eaten with me the same food. Once I asked him about the state (of idolatry and sin) into which his people have plunged themselves. He was gripped with the fear and awe of God. He proclaimed the Greatness of God and began glorifying and extolling Him. Then he pointed towards the earth and said: ‘I am only a speck of dust and am innocent of all that they say about me’. Then I realized that he was one of those who are meek and humble.”( Nur-ul-Haq, Part one, pp. 56-57 Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 8)
Now one important thing to note is that if Ahmadas did consider Isaas to be a bad person why would he claim that he is the second coming of Jesusas and that Allah named him Jesus? If a Muslim hates the Abu Jahl would he name his son Abu Jahl? One only names his children after one whom he loves. The people who raise this allegation have not read the works of Ahmadas. Ahmadasshowed the Christians that you people agree that the Injeel is the word of God, but look at what it says about the Messiah showing that this book is not completely from God. The Christians would have have two choices left. If they want to accept Jesus they cannot accept the Injeel completely as it mocks at him and if they want to accept the Injeel completely, they cannot acccept Jesus because of what it says about him. This would make them turn to the Qur’an which shows that Isaas was a true prophet. This scared the Christians and caused them to stop mocking Islam at the rate they were before.
This is called an Ilzami Jawab. There are many examples. Once Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlvi was asked by a Christian Padre that Shah Sahib did Allah love your Prophet? The Padre said did your Prophets prayers get accepted? He then asked when your Prophet’s grandson died in Karbala was he not hurt? Did he not pray to Allah to save him? The Muslim, Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlvi replied with yes he did pray but do you know how Allah answered him? The Christian asked what? The Muslim said when the Prophetsaw asked for prayers in regards to Karbala Allah replied by saying “Oh Prophet be quiet! These people are extremely evil! They killed my only son on the cross I couldn’t save him how can I save your grandson?” This caused the Christian to be dumbfounded completely.