Traditional Belief:
Pontius Pilate crucified Jesus Christ. He died for the sins of mankind and thus became the Redeemer for all.
Contemporary View:
Jesus was put on the cross; he went into coma but did not die. He regained consciousness after three days and came out of the tomb where he met with his disciples.
Although the doctrine of Crucifixion has survived a long span of two thousand years, the developments in the last two centuries have shaken the traditional understanding of the matter. When we take a look at all the narratives of the Passion incidence mentioned in the four Gospels in the light of other sayings in the New and Old Testament, we come to the conclusion that Jesus fulfilled all the Biblical prophecies to the letter, including his survival from the cross.
Why is it that people still cling to this belief of crucifixion? A whole host of reasons have been presented by scholars. One of the main reasons the Christian clergy would like to continue their strong control and evangelists continue their stand is because of economics. If the truth were revealed, the institutions would cease to exist and people would not need mediators to establish their relationship directly with the Creator, the very reason for which Jesus’ advent took place.
Before I embark on the journey of revisiting the Passion narratives, I would like to summarize how the tide turned in the last two centuries and who may be credited with providing this new convincing evidence that Jesus did not die on the cross. Let us then scan the work of scholars of the last two centuries.
Karl Freidrich Bahrdt (1741-1792) Considered the forerunner of German rationalists, Bahrdt expressed his doubts about the traditional view of Jesus’ death on the cross. In one of his books, he writes:
“... Jesus has been put to death: he had suffered all tortures of an evil-doer, all pains of death, but he also survived them.”
In Bahrt’s opinion Jesus was saved with the help of Luke the Physician and Joseph of Arimathea, who resuscitated him. Bahrt, however, fails to present any compelling proof for his hypothesis.
Karl Heinrich George Venturini (1768-1849). Venturini also shared Bahrt’s hypothesis that Jesus somehow survived crucifixion. He points out that one of the members of the Essene brotherhood scared the guards away and went into the tomb to retrieve Jesus, who later met with his disciples for forty days and then disappeared. He published this hypothesis in his book translated in English entitled Natural History of the Great Prophet of Nazareth (1806).
Heinrich Eberhardt G. Paulus (1761-1851). Paulus essentially expanded on Bahrdt’s ideology, referring to the state of Jesus on the cross as that of a dwindling consciousness:
The dense fumes preceded the earthquake (Matt 27:51). These fumes caused difficulties in breathing. Jesus, according to Paulus, was in a state of unconsciousness. The spear was pierced not to kill Jesus but to test the feelings of Jesus who appeared dead. Paulus was convinced that Jesus did not only move when taken down from the cross, but was not simply dead.”
In the 1830s, F.E.D. Schirmacher also endorsed the notion that Jesus survived crucifixion. None of these scholars, however, provided any solid evidence, although they certainly deduced their arguments from the passion narratives.
Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908). As a devout follower of Islam, Hadhrat Ahmad already believed that Jesus did not die on the cross as has been declared in the Holy Qur’an. He, however, did extensive research and produced a series of manuscripts that included the following:
1. Biblical testimonies regarding Jesus’ survival from the cross
2. Medical evidence as covered in the passion narratives
3. Evidence from Buddhist literature
4. Historic/geographic/anthropologic evidence
5. Evidence from the Holy Qur’an
6. Discovery of the tomb of Jesus
Hadhrat Ahmad wrote many books to identify the errors pertaining to the life and death of Jesus committed by both Christians and Muslims. He verified the truths mentioned in the Holy Qur’an and Bible proving the following:
1. Jesus is a beloved of God, a great Prophet for Israelites.
2. He was born of the virgin Mary.
3. He showed many miracles (e.g., awakening the dead, healing the lepers, etc.) that were of a spiritual nature possessing sublime value; by taking literal meaning to these miracles people have idolized them.
4. Jesus was put on the cross, but he survived; after gaining consciousness, he met with his disciples and then traveled to find the lost tribes of Israel. His travels took him to Kashmir, where he lived to a ripe age of 120. He died in Kashmir and is buried in Srinagar, Kashmir.
The following books cover these topics:
Izala Auham...—Removal of Doubts
Masih Hindustan Main....Jesus in India
Raz-i-Haqueeqat.....—Revealing the Truth
His book Jesus in India might be considered a summa theology about Jesus’ life and death, covering a variety of evidence from the Bible, Qur’an, Buddhist literature, and historical literature as well as the geographical route of Jesus from Jerusalem to Kashmir, the habits and habitat of the lost tribes of Israelites who migrated to this area, and finally the actual tomb of Jesus in Srinagar, Kashmir. Several Christian scholars of modern age have cited this book as a source of information. Several scholars have written reviews of Hadhrat Ahmad’s book. The following is a partial list of these scholars as well and one representative scholarly excerpt.
Dr. Paul C. Pappas, United States
Dr. James Deardorff, United States
Per Beskew, Norway
Michael Baigent, England
Robert M. Price, United States
Holger Kersten, Germany
Aziz Kashmiri, India
Dr. James Deardorff, in his recent book entitled Jesus in India writes:
“The Ahmadiyya’s most valuable research in my opinion has been in pointing out numerous clues indicating that Jesus, his mother Mary, and one or two others traveled through Syria and on East to Kashmir and India, and that Jesus’ final grave is in Kashmir.”
The passion narrative contains numerous testimonies that point out that Jesus survived the crucifixion. Following the sequence of Hadhrat Ahmad’s book, we present below details from each testimony as well as corroborative scholarly evidence derived from the texts of the passion narratives.
Testimony One
One of the most convincing testimonies we gather from the New Testament is Jesus’ narrative about the need to show a sign for his veracity. We read in Matthew:
"Then certain of the scribes and Pharisees answered saying, Master we would see a sign from thee.But he answered and said unto them, ‘An evil and adulterous generation seeketh a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of Prophet Jonas. For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of earth.’”
To clarify the sign further, let us review the Book of Jonah. We read:
“Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly and said, ‘I cried by reason of my affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice’… And the Lord spake unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land.”
From the foregoing verse, it follows that:
Jesus will show the Sign of Prophet Jonas.
The sign of Prophet Jonas was that he was swallowed by a whale and he remained in its belly for three days and three nights alive.
Jonas prayed to God from the whale’s belly confirming that he was alive in the whale’s belly. God heard his prayers and ordered the fish to vomit Jonas upon a dry land.
The fish vomited Jonah upon a dry land; hence he came alive from the whale’s belly.
Afterwards, he traveled to his nation and preached God’s words.
His people accepted him as the Prophet of God.
Hadhrat Ahmad, citing the above mentioned testimony from Matthew, writes:
“Matthew (Chapter 12 verse 40) says that just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of fish, so the son of Man shall be three days and three nights in the bowels of the earth. Now it is clear that Jonah did not die in the belly of the fish; the utmost that happened that he was in a swoon for a fit of fainting. The holy books of God bear witness that Jonah, by the Grace of God, remained alive in the belly of fish, and came out alive, and his people ultimately accepted him. If then Jesus had died in the belly of fish, what resemblance could there be between a dead man and the one who was alive, and how could a living be compared with one dead?”
Modern scholars have also reviewed this sign and have arrived at the same conclusion as has been deduced by Hadhrat Ahmad in his book.
German theologian Holger Kersten, in his book Jesus Lived In India, affirms that Jesus survived the crucifixion ordeal and traveled to India in search of the lost tribes of Israelites. About the sign of Jonah, he writes:
“One or two passages of the Gospels seem also to confirm Jesus’ survival of the Crucifixion. Jesus made a statement comparing himself to Jonah, who had survived being ingested into the belly of whale and had then reappeared. If Jesus had been lying dead in his sepulcher, there would be no parallels to be drawn between the two.For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of earth. (Mat. 12:39-40).”
Dr. James Deardorff, Professor Emeritus at Oregon State University, interprets the Sign of Jonah to be a clear proof that Jesus survived crucifixion. He writes:
“Jesus’ mention of the sign of Jonah is said to have survived three days and nights inside the ‘big fish’. He did not die therein and then undergo resurrection. It must be noted that if the present interpretation is correct, and if clear quotations from Jesus on this existed within a source document, the later would have been edited or redacted as necessary to remove any offensive or heretical statements. It is then quite plausible that Jesus had spoken more clearly as to the meaning of the Sign of Jonah than what endures within the Gospels, and that he had alluded to Jonah having survived three days and nights in the belly of fish and then having emerged alive.”
Dr. James Deardorff studied the document The Talmud of Immanuel, which was discovered in 1963 from Jerusalem and is still in its original Aramaic language. It has been translated into German and English and has been compared with the King James Version (KJV) of Matthew. James Deardorff proves that the current version of Matthew is derived from the original Aramaic documents. In the English translation of this Talmud, Matthew 16:5 has been compared with the KJV of Matthew 16:5. The comparison as described by James Deardorff is presented below:
Mt 16:4 “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed.
Talmud 18:5 “This wicked and unfaithful generation is seeking a sign; no sign shall be given to it except for the sign of Jonah, who disappeared alive into the belly of the fish, dwelled alive in its belly and emerged alive again into the light.”
Matthew’s lack of any explanation here about the sign of Jonah is not very plausible unless the questioners were the very same ones as in Mt 12:38 when they supposedly asked the same question and did receive an answer. If this was the case, however, it does not seem tenable for the questioners to repeat the same question. But in the Talmudic version, the sign of Jonah is explained. The emphasis is upon Jonah staying alive, there being no mention of the duration of three days and nights. Indeed, the fact that Jonah survived his ordeal within the “big fish” is the most remarkable thing about it; the length of his ordeal is secondary. The Talmudic version’s prophecy of three days and nights in the tomb occurs in two places, one having a faint Matthean cognate (Mt 21:39).
This explanation shows that the discovered Aramaic scrolls carried broader details of the sign of Jonah and its real import than has been recorded by Matthew. The 1963-discovered scrolls, therefore, support the arguments presented above for Jesus’ survival from the cross.
Mark Mason, a Christian concerned with the intellectual trauma faced by Christianity, agrees with Kersten’s view of Jesus traveling to India after crucifixion. In his book In Search of the Loving God, he remarks:
“It is also worth noting that Jesus said that there would be no miraculous sign to demonstrate his authority, except the sign of Prophet Jonah: ‘For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (Matt. 12:40)’. And Jonah did not die inside his fish before he emerged. Jesus may have visited India, and he may even have returned there after his Crucifixion.”
Dr. Paul C. Pappas, Professor of History at Virginia Institute of Technology, reviewed Hadhrat Ahmad’s book Jesus in India and agreed with a number of arguments presented therein. Commenting on the Sign of Jonah as the argument for Jesus’ survival from the Cross, he writes:
“The Ahmadis have relied on western biblical scholarship and on eastern tradition, not just divine revelation, to prove that Jesus undoubtedly survived the cross, recovered from his wounds, and went on to the East to settle in Kashmir in northern India. Since they accept Jesus as prophet, as all Muslims do, they indicate that Jesus prophesied in Matthew (12:38-40) to the Scribes and Pharisees, who asked for a sign from him, that there would be no sign, but that, just as the prophet Jonas spent three days and nights in whale’s belly, so would the Son of man be for three days and three nights in the hearth of the earth. The Ahmadis interpret this to mean that Jesus would enter the earth alive and come out alive. He would not die. Therefore, they assert that Jesus, who remained crucified for only three to six hours at the most, could not have died. They correctly assert that, in the past, individuals remained on the Cross for as long as six days before dying from the exposure of the weather, exhaustion and suffocation, thirstand hunger, and attacks of wild beast and world of prey.”
Testimony Two
God bestows the power of prayer to His divine messengers. It is traditionally understood that the prayers of divine messengers are always accepted by God. Before the event of the crucifixion, Jesus, too, indulged in prayers, and according to scriptures, his prayers were accepted by God. Hadhrat Ahmad references Jesus’ prayers on the cross as proof of Jesus’ survival from the cross. He writes:
“Among the testimonies which show that Jesus was saved from the Cross is the one narrated in Matthew 26 verses 36-46, which relate that after getting information, through revelation, of his impending arrest, Jesus prayed to God all night on his face, and in tears, and such prayers offered with such humility, and for which Jesus had ample time, could not go unaccepted; for the cry of an elect of God, addressed at a time of distress, is never turned down. How was it then, that the prayers of Jesus which he had addressed all night with a painful heart and in a state of distress was rejected?”
Jesus’ prayers were certainly accepted, and God saved him from this shameful death on the cross. This has also been cited as a positive argument for Jesus’ survival from the Cross by various scholars. A few examples are presented below:
Robert M. Price, Professor at the Center for Inquiry Institute, Johannic Coleman Theological Seminary, is a reputed lecturer and debater at the Campus Free Thought alliance. In his recent work The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, he cites Hadhrat Ahmad’s view about Jesus’ survival from crucifixion and references the special prayers of Jesus. He writes:
“The most modest of these held that Jesus had been crucified but survived it and lived to teach again, outside Israel, a doctrine taught by the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam.6 Is there any possible basis for such a view in Gospels? I believe there is.”
The author then continues to explore the clues and cites the prayers of Jesus at Gethsemane as an important clue that points out to the fact that Jesus must have survived the Cross. He writes:
“The Gethsemane prayer of Jesus is a request for God to allow Jesus to avoid the Socratic cup of martyrdom, reminding God (and the reader) that God is not bound to any plan; all things are possible for him. The fact that Jesus is humbly willing to accede to God’s will, even should it entail death, does not need to mean that Jesus will necessarily die after all. In fact, it might well be intended as evidence of the very filial piety of Jesus that persuaded the Father to grant his request, even as Heb 5:7 says: ‘In the days of his flesh, he offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard for his Godly fear.’ It had been the same with Abraham; once he had proven his obedient willingness to kill his son. God rescinded the order that he do so.”
In short, the ardent prayers of Jesus to save himself from the cross were favorably heard, and God designed the events to take such a shape as would result in Jesus’s survival from the Cross.
Testimony Three
Among the various proofs cited to suggest Jesus’ survival from crucifixion was his short duration on the cross. Crucifixion was a long and arduous process. The victim would spend at least three days nailed to the cross without food or water. If the victim would still survive, his legs would be broken, and excessive bleeding would result in death. No strangulation or head chopping was involved in the process of crucifixion. In case of Jesus, his stay on the cross was no more than three hours and his legs were not broken, a clear sign of survival on the cross. Hadhrat Ahmad explains this phenomenon thus:
“Reading the Gospel with care will show that Jesus did not remain on the Cross for three days, he did not have to suffer hunger or thirst for three days, nor were his bones broken. On the other hand, he remained on the Cross only for two hours, and the grace and mercy of God managed to bring about the crucifixion in the later part of the day, which was a Friday, only a little time before sunset, the next day being the Sabbath, the feast of the Jews. According to Jewish custom, it was unlawful and a punishable crime to let anyone remain on the cross on the Sabbath Day, or during the night previous to it.”
Many scholars have expressed similar thoughts pertaining to Jesus’ short duration on the Cross as an indication of survival rather than death. The following excerpts are representative:
Frederick Strauss, in his book Life of Jesus (1835), asserts:
“The short time that Jesus hung on the Cross, together with the otherwise ascertained tardiness of death by Crucifixion, and the uncertain nature of the wound from the spear, appeared to render the reality of death doubtful.”
William Stroud, in his book The Physical Cause of Death of Christ and its Relations to the Principles and Practices of Christianity (1871), writes:
“A fact of importance to be known, but which has not been sufficiently regarded, is that crucifixion was a very lingering punishment, and proved fatal not so much by loss of blood, since the wounds in the hands and feet did not lacerate any large vessels, and were nearly closed by the nails which produced them, by the slow process of nervous irritation and exhaustion… but for persons to live two or more days on the cross was a common occurrence, and there are even instances of some who, having been taken down in time and really treated, recovered and survived.”
Ernest Renan echoes similar thoughts in his book The Life of Jesus (1898) thus:
“It is evident, in fact, that doubts arose as to the reality of the death of Jesus. A few hours of suspension on the cross appeared to those accustomed to see crucifixion entirely insufficient to bring about such a result. They cited many instances of persons crucified, who had been removed in time and bring about such a result.”
William Hannah, in his book The Life of Christ (1928), suggests:
“A victim almost always survived the first day, lived generally over the second day and occasionally even up to the fifth or sixth day.”
Paul C. Pappas commented on Hadhrat Ahmad’s thesis thus:
“Therefore they (Ahmedis) assert that Jesus, who remained crucified for only 3-6 hours at the most, could not have died. They correctly assert that, in the past, individuals remained on the cross for as long as six days before dyeing from exposure to the weather, exhaustion and suffocation, thirst and hunger, and attacks of wild beasts and birds of prey.”
Testimony Four
In John 19:34, we read:
“But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was dead already, they broke not his legs; but one of the soldiers pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.”
When Jesus’ side was pierced, blood and water gushed out; this could only take place when the heart is still pumping. In a dead man, blood coagulates and cannot gush out or come forthwith, but rather must seep out. Jesus’ heart must have been still pumping after he was removed from the cross; as such, he must have been alive after he was removed from the cross. Hadhrat Ahmad points out this medical fact, which has in turn been verified and endorsed by many esteemed doctors and scholars. A few representative excerpts follow:
Dr. Hugo Toll, an eminent medical authority in Sweden, states:
“If Jesus had been dead, no blood would have come.”
Holger Kersten remarks:
“This special emphasis so evidently put on testifying to the blood and water from Jesus’ side is actually intended to make it clear that Jesus was still alive.”
Andrea Faber Kaiser writes:
“If Jesus had been dead, only thick drops of blood would have passed from the wound”.
Hugh Schonfield, in his bestseller The Passover Plot, writes:
“The reported emission of blood shows at least that life was still in him.”
Dr. W.B. Primrose, Senior Anesthesiologist of the Glasgow Royal Infirmary, says:
“Judged by purely medical evidence provided in the Gospel accounts, it would appear that such evidence is not sufficient to pronounce (in the light of modern medical knowledge) with absolute certainty that Jesus was actually dead when his body was removed from the cross.This may seem to be a negative conclusion but it is of great importance in any interpretation of Resurrection appearances.”
Dr. Trevor Davies, former personal physician to the Queen of England and devout Christian, published his expert medical opinion in the Journal of the Royal College of Physicians. In this issue, Dr. Davies categorically concludes that Jesus could not have died while he was on the cross. Jesus was mistaken to have died because he lost his consciousness due to diminished blood supply to the brain. An excerpted portion of the article is below:
“At his crucifixion, Jesus was in shock and hypotensive, and lost consciousness because of diminished blood supply to the brain. His ashen skin and immobility were mistaken for death and there is no doubt that the bystanders believed he was dead. The cry (and there is little agreement about what may have been said) may not have been any more than a loud expiration preceding syncope. Oxygen supply to the brain remained minimal, but above a critical level, until the circulation was restored when he was taken down from the cross and laid on the ground. As Jesus showed signs of life he was not placed in a tomb (which may have been the intention to avoid burial rites on the Sabbath) but taken away and tended [to]…...
The abuse meted out to Jesus in the Praetorium led to his collapse and early removal from the Cross, and to resuscitation. Individual and corporate suggestibility among the disciples and the women explains the reports of subsequent appearance. This hypothesis accepts the historical events surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus but explains what happened in the light of modern knowledge. Faith does not require the abandonment of thoughts or assent to the concepts not scientifically acceptable. The church will be stronger if it accommodates proven knowledge with its creeds. If it does not, all that is left is blind belief, far beyond the credulity of most people.”
Dr. Davies’s remarks are representative of the continuing suggestion among some devout Christians that Jesus survived crucifixion.
Testimony Five
Reading the four Gospels together as the Passion Narrative, it becomes obvious that Governor Pilate believed Jesus to be innocent and wanted to protect him from the agony of crucifixion; for this reason he devised a conscious plan that would ensure Jesus’ release. Hadhrat Ahmad presented this hypothesis in Jesus in India thus:
“The gospels point out clearly that Pilate had several times resolved to let Jesus go, but the Jews said that if he would let him go he would be destroyed to Caesar; they also said that Jesus was a rebel who wished to be king. And the dream which Pilate’s wife had further prompted the freeing of Jesus; otherwise, Pilate and his wife themselves would have been exposed to disaster. But as the Jews were a mischievous people, ready even secretly to inform the Caesar of Pilate’s action, Pilate made use of a device to rescue Jesus, first he fixed Friday for the crucifixion, only a few hours before sunset, and the night of great Sabbath was about to fall… Pilate knew very well that the Jews, in accordance with the commandments of their law, could keep Jesus on the cross only till the evening, and after that it was unlawful to keep anybody on the cross. Accordingly, it all happened in this very manner and Jesus was taken down from the cross before it was evening.”
In the above passage, Hadhrat Ahmad deduced the following:
a. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus was favorable, and Pilate wanted to release him.
b. The dream of Pilate’s wife also strengthened Pilate’s view about releasing Jesus.
c. Pilate devised a strategy to undertake this objective by fixing Friday afternoon for the execution, as it would ensure a very short stay on the cross, quite insufficient for anyone’s death.
d. Jesus was taken down from the cross before it was evening.
e. As the thieves remained alive, and as the duration of their stay on the cross was the same as Jesus’, Jesus must have also stayed alive on the cross.
Several western scholars have also independently made the same deductions from the Bible. A few of their excerpts are presented below:
Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln in their international bestseller express the same view about Pilate and about the short interval of Jesus on the cross. They write:
“Whatever his motivation, there is in any case, no question that Pilate is somehow intimately involved in the affair. He acknowledges Jesus’ claim as ‘King of the Jews.’ He also expresses, or feigns to express, surprise that Jesus’ death occurs as quickly as it apparently does. And most important of all, he grants Jesus’ body to Joseph of Arimathea. According to Roman law at the time a crucified man was denied all burial. Indeed, guards were customarily posted to prevent relatives or friends from removing the bodies of the dead. The victim would simply be left on the cross, at the mercy of elements and carrion birds. Yet Pilate, in a flagrant breach of procedure, readily grants Jesus’ body to Joseph of Arimathea. This clearly attests to some complicity on Pilate’s part. And it may attest to other things as well.”
Ernest Renan, in his book Life of Jesus Christ, shares this view:
“Pilate then would have liked to save Jesus… According to a tradition, Jesus found a supporter in the wife of the Procurator himself… and the idea that blood of this beautiful young man was about to be spilt, weighed upon her mind. Certain it is that Jesus found Pilate prepossessed in his favor. The Governor questioned him with kindness, and with the desire to find an excuse for sending him away pardoned.”
Andrea Faber-Kaiser, in his book Jesus Died in Kashmir, includes a copy of Pilate’s letter to Tiberius and confirms Hadhrat Ahmad’s argument that Pilate wanted to save Jesus. He writes:
“An interesting light on Pilate’s opinions about Christ is provided by a letter that he wrote to Tiberius Caesar in 32 A.D… A young man appeared in Galilee, in the name of God who sent him, preached a new law, humility. At first I thought that his intention was to stir up a revolt among the people against the Romans. My suspicions were soon dispelled. Jesus of Nazareth spoke more as friend of the Romans than as the friend of the Jews.”
He further asserts:
“... his [Pilate] only option was to carry out the execution in such a way that Jesus might survive it, unknown to his enemies. In this context it is particularly interesting that he arranged the crucifixion for shortly before the commencement of Jewish Sabbath—sunset on Friday—as, under the Jewish law, criminals could not be left hanging after the Sabbath had begun.”
Testimony Six
After Jesus’ removal from the Cross, he was put in a sepulcher and was attended by Joseph of Aramithea and a physician named Nicodemus. This medical help is also recorded in the Bible. A special ointment was prepared for the treatment of Jesus’ wounds later referred to as the “Ointment of Jesus.” Hadhrat Ahmad describes at length the historical origin and various ingredients of this ointment in a separate chapter in Jesus in India. This product is still continuously used by many as a daily prescription in herbal medicines. Some western scholars have also discussed the use of the ointment.
Holger Kersten, in the chapter entitled ‘The Mysterious Aromatic Substances’ in his book Jesus Lived in India, writes:
“Both substances aloes and Myrrh, were commonly used in the treatment of large areas of injured tissue because they could easily be compounded as ointments and tinctures. Some specialists claim that the Jews often mixed Myrrh with ladanum, the resin of the rock rose (Cistus species, not to be confused with the opiate ladanum). This was specially used for plasters and bandages. It is evident that such mixtures represented the universally trusted means of achieving the most rapid and effective healing of wounds, combined with the greatest possible protection against infection at the time of Jesus. There can be no doubt that Nicodemus procured a truly amazing quantity of highly specific medicinal herbs for the sole purpose of treating the wounds of Jesus’ body. Such spices could have had no other function.”
An eyewitness report narrates the following:
“After this they hurried to the cross, and, according to the prescriptions of medical art, they slowly untied his hands, drew the spikes out of his hands, and with great care laid him on the ground. Thereupon, Nicodemus spread strong spices and healing salves on long pieces of ‘byssus’ which he had brought, and whose use was known only in our order… These spices and salves had great healing powers, and were used by our Esseene Brethren who knew the rules of medical science for the restoration to consciousness of those in a state of death-like fainting. And even as Joseph and Nicodemus were bending over his face their tears fell upon him, they blew into him their own breath, and warmed his temples.”
Hugh Schonfield describes this entire story of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus as part of a well-planned strategy to save Jesus. He writes:
“Two things, however, were indispensable to the success of a rescue operation. The first was to administer a drug to Jesus on the Cross to give the impression of premature death, and the second was to obtain the speedy delivery of the body to Joseph… If we allow that the story of Joseph going to Pilate is trustworthy, then with the help of common factors in traditions we can attempt to reconstruct what happened. Considerations of safety and secrecy have dictated that as few people as possible should be in the know or involved, and these would not have included any of the apostles, to whom Jesus never seems to have confided his plans as we have already noticed on several occasions… The first stage of the present action was the cross. We are told that there were bystanders there, and that one of them saturated a sponge with vinegar, impaled it on a cane and put it to the mouth of Jesus… Mark gives no reason for his action, but the Fourth Gospel says that Jesus called out, ‘I am thirsty,’ which could have been a signal. There was nothing unusual for a vessel containing a refreshing liquid to be at the place of purposes he was a dead man. Directly it was seen that the drug had worked. The man hastened to Joseph who was anxiously waiting for the news. At once he sought an audience with Pilate, to whom he would have ready access as a member of the Sanhedrin, and requested to have the body of Jesus. Pilate was greatly astonished, as well he might be, to hear that Jesus was already dead, and being on his guard in view of all that had happened, he sent for the Centurion in charge of the execution to obtain confirmation. When this was forthcoming, he readily gave the necessary permission. It has been noted by scholars that Joseph asked for the body (soma) of Jesus, which could indicate that he did not think of him as dead. It is only Pilate who refers to the corpse (ptoma). execution, and it presented no problem to doctor the drink that was offered to Jesus. The plan may indeed have been suggested to Jesus by the prophetic words, ‘They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.’ If what he received had been the normal wine vinegar diluted with water the affect would have been stimulating. In this case it was exactly opposite. Jesus lapsed quickly into complete unconsciousness. His body sagged. His head lolled on his breast, and to all intents and Joseph hurried to Golgotha with clean linen and spices. The Fourth Gospel says he was accompanied by Nicodemus… The reported emission of blood shows at least that life was still in him. As arranged, Jesus was conveyed carefully to the nearby tomb… Jesus lay in the tomb over the Sabbath. He would not regain consciousness for many hours, and in the meantime the spices and linen bandages provided the best dressing for his injuries.”
Testimony Seven
What happened to Jesus after he regained his consciousness? This has also been clouded by the tales of resurrection and physical ascension.As has been proved, Jesus survived the ordeal of crucifixion. Consistent with the Sign of Jonah, it becomes evident that Jesus would proceed to his nation and complete his mission. He himself declared his mission in these words: “I have been sent to the lost sheep of Israelites.” These tribes were scattered in the northeastern areas towards Afghanistan and India. Hadhrat Ahmad has captured the words of Jesus and traced his journey east. He writes:
“There is a statement of Jesus: ‘But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee’ (Matt 26:32). This verse clearly shows that Jesus, after he had come out of the tomb, went to Galilee and not to heaven… The gospel of St. Mark says that after coming out of the tomb he was seen going on the road to Galilee, and ultimately he met 11 disciples when they were at their meal; he showed them his hands and feet which were wounded and they thought that he was perhaps a spirit. Then he said to them: ‘Behold my hands and feet, that I am myself, handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.’ He took from them boiled fish and a piece of honeycomb and ate in their presence. These verses show that it is certain that Jesus never went to heaven; rather coming out of the tomb, he went to Galilee; like an ordinary man, in normal clothes, with a human body. If he had been resurrected after death, how was it that this body of spirit could still have borne wounds inflicted upon him on the cross? What need had he to eat? And if he required food then, he must be in need of food now.”
Several scholars, including historians, anthropologists, archeologists, and scientists, have studied post-crucifixion appearances and concluded that Jesus, after coming out of the tomb and staying abrief period with his disciples, underwent long journeys in search of the lost tribes of Israelites. A few excerpts of these findings are presented below:
Andrea Faber-Kaiser writes:
“Jesus then set out on a sixty mile journey to Galilee. Subsequently, on a number of occasions, he appeared to his disciples; but he always did so in a place where they were not likely to be observed. All this suggests that Jesus continued as a human being, and that he took pains to avoid discovery and arrest. What other evidence is there that Jesus had not become a spirit? The clearest indication is provided by Luke 24:36-39, ‘And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and said unto them, Peace be upon you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, ‘Why are ye trouble and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands, and my feet that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit hath no flesh and bones as ye see me have.’ Two verses further on, Jesus suddenly shows himself to be hungry—...something quite inconceivable in a Divine or spiritual being.”
Holger Kersten commenting on the same verses, Luke 24:38-43, writes:
“Jesus is keen to demonstrate to his followers that his body is quite earthly in nature, just it had been before. He stresses his physical presence by allowing them to touch him, and by eating food, and tells them plainly that he is no ghost. To prove that his body has not been ‘transformed’ in any way, he also shows the marks of his wounds and even asks doubting Thomas to touch the wound in his side with his hand. Later he revealed himself to the eleven as they were sitting at the table, and criticized their lack of faith and their obduracy in not believing those who had seen him after his rising again (Mark 16:14). That Jesus was there in person was the result of no administrative error, no trickery, no illusion; his body is as human as theirs, neither transfigured, nor that an astral projection or ghost that is the message he tries to get the disciples to take in.”
Ernest B. Docker, in his book If Jesus Did Not Die on the Cross, writes:
“If it is true that he asked Thomas to put his finger in the print of his nails; if it is true that he said to his doubting disciples, ‘Behold my hands and my feet, that its I myself, handle me, and see; for a spirit hath no flesh and bones as ye see me have; if it is true that he ate in presence of disciples; if it is true that he disguised himself as a Gardner after leaving the sepulcher; if it is true that he walked the whole distance from Jerusalem to Galilee on foot; it follows clearly as day follows the night that the statement that he appeared suddenly in rooms whose doors were shut is not true in its literal sense and that his body was not an astral body, but a body made up of flesh and bones.”
James Deardorff, in his book Jesus in India, also affirms this line of reasoning. He writes:
“In the Lucan account, Jesus is portrayed as being hungry and eating a piece of fish in front of the disciples (Luke 24:4-43). This behavior is not suggestive of a resurrected body whose cells are no longer subject to growth, subdivision, aging and death.”
Testimony Eight
Coming back to Jesus’ journey post-crucifixion, Hadhrat Ahmad writes:
“In the parable he had also hinted he would come out of the bowels of earth and then would join the people and like Jonah, would be honored by them. So this prophecy too was fulfilled, for Jesus coming out of the bowels of the earth, went to his tribes who lived in the eastern countries, Kashmir and Tibet etc., Viz. the ten tribes of Israelites who 721 years before Jesus, had been taken prisoner from Samaria by Shalmeneser, King of Assur, and had been taken away by him. Ultimately these tribes came to India and settled in various parts of that country. Jesus, at all events must have made this Journey, for the Divine object underlying his advent was that he should meet the lost Jews who had settled in different parts of India; the reason being that these in fact were the lost sheep of Israel who had given up even their ancestral faith in these countries, and most of whom had adopted Buddhism, relapsing gradually to idolatry. Dr. Bernier, on the authority of a number of learned people states in his travels, that the Kashmiris in reality are Jews who in the time of dispersal in the days of King of Assur had migrated to this county.”
From this passage, Jesus traveled to those countries where the ten lost tribes had their abode. The Kashmiris appear to be a part of those lost tribes pushed out beyond the Euphrates in the eighth century. This has been validated by modern research.
Grant R. Jefferey, in his book Apocalypse, quotes a Rabbi who points out the identity of the ten lost tribes of Israel thus:
“Rabbi Eliahu Amihail, in his book The Ten lost Tribes in Assyria, discussed in detail his research into the origins of the Pathan tribes of Afghanistan and Western Pakistan. These tribes are locally known as Pathans. While surrounded by diverse Asiatic peoples, they differ markedly in their characteristics from their Turkish, Mongolian, Persian and IndoIranian neighbors. Incredibly these thirteen million Pathan tribesmen call themselves the Sons of Israel”. Rabbi Avihail claims that these Pathans have both oral traditions and genealogical scrolls reaching back thousands of years that verify their connection with the ten tribes of Israel who were taken as captives to Assyria in 721 B.C”.
The Wall Street Journal (May 11, 1998) includes the following headline and excerpt:
“Seeking Lost tribes of Israel in India, Using DNA Testing; Messers Parfitt and Branman, with Q tips and Polaroid’s, Lure the Men of Alibag.” (Writer: Jonathan Karp)
“… South Asia is potential lost tribe heaven, Muslim Pathans in Afghanistan and Pakistan claim to be the descendents of King Saul and practice certain Jewish traditions, such as circumcising the newborn boys on the 8th day. Further east some Kashmiris believe Jesus died in the Himalayas while searching for the wandering Israelites.”
Sir Thomas Haddish, in his book The Gates of India, writes:
“But there is one important people (of whom there is much more to be said) who call themselves Bani Israel, who claim a descent from Cush and Ham, who have adopted a strange mixture of Mosaic law in ordinances in their moral code, who (sometimes at least) keep a feast which strongly accords with the Passover, who hate the Yahudi (Jew) with a traditional hatred, and for whom no one yet has been able to suggest any other origin than the one they claim, and claim with a determined force, and these people are the overwhelming inhabitants of Afghanistan and Kashmir.”
Regarding the travels of Jesus Christ and his mother Mary towards Asia, two Western scholars have quoted a Qur’anic verse and expressed its veracity through their own findings.
In Jesus in India, Holger Kersten writes:
“The Koran also does not neglect to provide an answer to the question of where Jesus went after the Crucifixion: We made son of Mary and his mother a sign to mankind and gave them shelter on a peaceful hillside watered by a fresh spring’ (Koran 23:51). How well this description of the place of refuge applies to Kashmir is absolutely astonishing. In another translation, the place in the mountains is even called a ‘green valley.’
”James W. Deardorff, in his book Jesus in India, writes:
“There is a tradition preserved within the Qur’an that also is consistent with Mary, along with Jesus, having made it as far as the mountainous regions of northern Afghanistan and Pakistan, if not Kashmir. Surah 23:50 reads: ‘And we made the son of Maryam (Mary) and his mother a sign, and We gave them a shelter on a lofty ground having meadows and springs.’ Although the context of this saying is not clear, nor what the sign may have been, it clearly does pertain to Isa (Jesus) and implies a location well removed from Israel, which is not noted for lofty ground with meadows and springs. Thus it implies an alpine scene experienced some time after crucifixion.”
Ahmadiyya Muslim Belief
The Holy Qur’an declared that Jesus did not die on the Cross. Jews did not accept Jesus as the true Messenger and wanted to crucify him because it was written in the Old Testament that whosoever is killed on the cross is accursed. Jews, by so doing, wanted to prove that Jesus was accursed. On the contrary, God saved Jesus from this accursed death. Jesus was certainly placed on the cross, but he fainted. The Romans assumed he was dead and put him in sepulcher, where he was treated for his wounds and treated by a physician. He regained consciousness and came out of sepulcher and secretly met with his disciples, ate with
them, and then took a long journey in search of the lost tribes of Israel. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, in his book Jesus in India, has showed the entire route of his journey from Jerusalem to Kashmir. In his book Izaala Auhaam (“Removal of Doubts and Myths”), Hadhrat Ahmad cites some thirty Qur’anic verses to prove that Jesus survived the crucifixion and died a natural death in Kashmir. One verse is quoted below:
“And their saying, ‘We did kill the Messiah, Jesus Son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah’; whereas they slew him not, nor crucified him, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified; and those who differ therein are certainly in a state of doubt about it; they have no definite knowledge thereof, but only follow a conjecture; and they did not convert this conjecture into a certainty. On the contrary, Allah exalted him to Himself. And Allah is Mighty, Wise” (4:158-159).
This verse clearly explains the Ahmadiyya Muslim belief. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad presented the final resting place of Jesus as evidence of Jesus’ survival from the cross and his journey to India.
Conclusion
The foregoing analysis has attempted to illustrate how independent Western scholars have arrived at the same conclusions made by Hadhrat Ahmad in his book Jesus in India written in 1889. As the excerpts quoted above suggest, some of the scholars have endorsed outright Hadhrat Ahmad’s conclusions; others have only verified and extended them, while still others have only acknowledged them as illustrative of the Eastern tradition.
In addition to the discovery of the tomb of Jesus, many new discoveries have been made including the Dead Sea Scrolls and Shroud of Turin as well as attempts made to perform DNA testing from the graves of Mary and Jesus.
