Refutation: The Imam Mahdi (as) Insulted Hadrat ‘Isa (as)

By Imam B. A. Rafiq

One objection that is raised against the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement is that he was disrespectful towards Hazrat Isa, peace be on him, and reviled him.

In this connection it should be clearly understood that one of the claims of the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, was that he was the like of Hazrat Isa. He claimed that he had perfect spiritual resemblance to the Messiah. Then how is it possible that a person who claims to be the like of another and his reflection should defame him or should be disrespectful towards him, for that would amount to defaming himself, as the reflection must correspond to the original. It is, therefore contrary to reason that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, should have said anything derogatory concerning the Messiah, As he has said:

Claiming as I do, that I am the Promised Messiah and that I bear a resemblance to Hazrat Isa, peace be on him, every one would understand that were I to revile him, I would not claim any resemblance to him, for by reviling him, I would confess that I myself was vicious. (Announcement of 27 December 1898)

In his books and writings, the Promised Messiah has repeatedly used expressions of honor, love and affection for Hazrat Isa. For instance he says:

  1. There is no doubt that Hazrat Masih, peace be on him, was a true Prophet. (Arbain, No.2)
  2. I call Allah, the Glorious, to witness that in the revelation vouchsafed to me He has dearly informed me that Hazrat Masih, peace be on him, was without a doubt, a human being, like other human beings; that he was a true Prophet of God and was His Messenger and His Elect. (Hujjatul Islam, p. 9)
  3. It is my belief that the Messiah was a true Prophet and Messenger and was beloved of God but was not God. (Hujjatu1 Islam, p. 3)
  4. Hazrat Isa, peace be on him, was, no doubt, a beloved Prophet of God and possessed the highest qualities. He was virtuous and a chosen one and had communion with God but was not God. (Announcement of 22 March 1877)
  5. I have been commissioned by God Almighty to profess that Hazrat Isa, peace be on him, was a true and pure and righteous Prophet of God and to believe in his prophethood. (Ayyamus Solh, first title page)
  6. The Messiah was an accepted one of God and was beloved of Him. Those who utter calumnies against him are wicked. (Ijaz Abmad, p.15)
  7. I state on oath that I bear that true love towards the Messiah which you do not possess and that you have not available to you the light with which I recognize him. There is no doubt that he was a dear and chosen Prophet of God. (Dawate Haq, attached to Haqeeqatul Wahi)

This puts it beyond doubt that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, believed that Hazrat Isa, peace be on him, was a dear and chosen Messenger of God and that he loved him sincerely. It was, therefore, not possible that he should have applied any derogatory terms to the Messiah.

Let us now examine the background which the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has employed certain harsh expressions concerning Jesus. In this connection it should be clearly understood that according to the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, the Isa of the Holy Quran and the Jesus of the Gospels are two different and distinct personalities. The Isa, son of Mary, peace be on him, mentioned in the Holy Quran was a Prophet of God and was loved by Him and was a chosen one, but the Jesus of the Gospels was a fictitious personality and from the accounts contained in the Gospels his life was stained and unmoral. The Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has explained this in the following terms:

I desire to make it clear to the readers that my faith in Hazrat Masih, peace be on him, is a very good faith. I believe sincerely that he was a true prophet of God and was loved by Him and I believe that, as indicated by the Holy Quran, he had, as a means of his salvation, perfect faith in our lord and master, Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. He was one of the sincere servants of the law of Moses. I respect him according to his station. But the Jesus who is presented by the Christians, who claimed to be God and condemned everyone else except himself, both those who had gone before and who were to come after, as accursed, as having been guilty of vices the recompense of which is a curse, is regarded by us as deprived of Divine mercy. The Holy Quran makes no reference to this impertinent and foul-mouthed Jesus. We are surprised at the conduct of one who considered that God was subject to death and himself claimed to be God and who reviled such righteous ones as were thousand times better than him. In our writings we have had this fictitious Jesus of the Christians in mind. The humble servant of God, Isa, son of Mary, who was a Prophet and is mentioned in the Holy Quran, is not the object of our harsh condemnations. We have had to adopt this method after having endured for forty years the abuse of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him, by the Christian missionaries. (Nurul Quran, No.2)

Again he has said:

It should be remembered that I hold this view concerning the Jesus who claimed to be God and held previous prophets to be thieves and robbers and has said nothing about the Khatamul Anbya, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, except that he, Jesus, would be followed by false prophets. Such a Jesus is nowhere mentioned in the Holy Quran. (Anjam Aatham, p.13)

At another place he states:

I have uttered no word of disrespect concerning the Messiah, it is all a calumny of my opponents. It is true, however, that as there has not in fact been a Messiah who claimed to be God and who held the Khatamul Anbya, who was to come, as an impostor and who called Moses a robber, I have as a matter of argument certainly stated concerning such a Jesus that he who might have expressed himself in this manner could not be held to be righteous. But I believe in the Messiah, son of Mary, who describes himself as a servant of God and Messenger and affirms the truth of the Khatamul Anbya. (Taryaqul Qulub, p.77)

These statements make it clear that wherever the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has employed any harsh expression concerning Jesus, it has reference to the fictitious Jesus of the Gospels and not to Isa, son of Mary, peace be on him, who is mentioned in the Holy Qpran and whose like and reflection he himself was.

It might be asked why did the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, write against the fictitious Jesus of the Gospels and employed harsh expressions with regard to him? The reason was that at the time of the advent of the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, and during a short period before his advent Christian missionaries had been in the habit of uttering vile abuse and making false charges against the blessed person of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, such as a sincere Muslim dare not even repeat. The Promised Messiah, peace be on him, as has been mentioned, had endured this torment for forty years. It was an unsupportable torture for him that anyone should be impertinent towards his lord and master, Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. His utter devotion to the Holy Prophet compelled him to adopt this method in defense of his master, in this manner, and thus to put an end to the vile attacks of the enemies. Such a refutation is a recognized method of defense to which recourse was held by previous divines and eminent personages in the faith, many instances of which are to be found in the history of Islam.

The Promised Messiah has explained:

I declare it with regret that we have had to issue this number of the Nurul Quran in answer to a person who, instead of adopting a civil method, has had recourse to vile abuse of our lord and master the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and out of his vileness he has uttered such calumnies against that Leader of the pure and Chief of the righteous, that the heart of a pious one trembles at hearing them. This reply is a refutation of the utterers of such abuse. We wish to declare that our belief concerning the Messiah, peace be upon him, is a very good belief and that we have sincere faith in that he Was a true Prophet of God and was loved by Him.(NuruI Quran, No.2)

He also states:

Padre Fateh Masih of Fateh Garh, District Gurdaspur, has addressed a vile letter to me in which he has charged our lord and master Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, with adultery and has, besides this, uttered vile abuse of him. I have, therefore, considered it necessary to reply to it and hence this booklet. I trust the Christian padres will study it carefully and will not be aggrieved at its language as the tone that has been adopted in it is in consequence of the harsh language and vile abuse employed by Mian Fateh Masih, Yet, it is necessary to uphold the holy station of the true Messiah, peace be on him. In reply to the harsh language of Fateh Masih, a fictitious Jesus has been portrayed and that also under great compulsion for this foolish one has abused the Holy Prophet peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, in a vile manner and has wounded our hearts. (Nurul Quran, No.2)

He further states:

We wish to record that we had no concern with the Jesus of the Christian missionaries and his conduct. Their purposeless abuse of our Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has provoked us that we should set forth somewhat of the circumstances of their Jesus. This vile and wicked Fateh Masih has in his letter that he has addressed to me called the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, an adulterer and has heaped other vile abuse on him. In the same way this dead and wicked sect that worships the dead has compelled us that we should set forth somewhat of the circumstances of their Jesus. The Muslims should remember that God Almighty has made no mention of Jesus in the Holy Quran as to who he was, but the Christian missionaries believe that Jesus was a person who claimed to be God and called Moses a thief and a robber and denied the coming of the Holy Prophet and said that he himself would be followed by prophets who will all be false. We cannot accept such a vile thinker and arrogant man and an enemy of the righteous as a good human being let alone that we should accept him as a prophet. These foolish missionaries would be well advised to abandon this method of abuse lest God’s jealousy be aroused. (Zameemah Anjam Aatham, p. 8)

The extracts cited above establish that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, under extreme provocation and out of his devoted love for the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was roused to silence the Christian missionaries with this refutation. To him alone is due the credit that he adopted a firm stand against falsehood and frustrated the mischievous plans and impostures of the Christian missionaries against the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, for which the Muslims should be grateful to him rather than stand up in opposition to him. After all, if he pulled down into the dust the fictitious Jesus of the Christian missionaries, was it because they had any personal enmity towards him? Indeed not. He had recourse to this method as the safeguarding of the honor and reputation of his lord and master was dear to him and for this purpose he was ready to make any sacrifice. He had declared in a Persian verse:

I am ready to lay down my life in the cause of the faith of Mustafa; this is my sincere purpose which I hope to achieve. Every fibers and muscle of my being is charged with his love. I am empty of my own self and am filled with anxiety on behalf of that beloved.

He states:

So many books full of vile abuse and defamation of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, have been printed and published the perusal of which makes one’s body tremble. Our heart is so much in tribulation that if these people were to slaughter our children before our eyes and were to cut to pieces our sincere and beloved friends and were to kill us with great humiliation and were to take possession of our belongings, we call God to witness that even in such case we would not suffer so much grief and our heart would not be so severely wounded as we have suffered and endured under this abuse and defamation which has been directed against the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him. (Ayena Kamalat-e-Islam, p. 51)

In short, the Promised Messiah, peace he on him, has not in the slightest degree defamed Hazrat Isa, peace be on him, who as a dear Prophet and Elect of God Almighty. He has only, by way of refutation, condemned the Christians on the basis of the Gospels. In doing this, his only purpose was that the Christian missionaries should refrain from abusing and defaming and uttering false charges against the Leader of the righteous, Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. It is a fact that his adoption of this method of refutation silenced the Christian missionaries forever and the missionaries who, till the adoption of this method of defense by the Promised Messiah, peace he on him, did not refrain from leveling utterly baseless charges at the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, thereafter confined themselves to their own defense and the stream of poison that had been issuing from their pens against the Holy Prophet was blocked, and the purpose of the Promised Messiah was achieved.

Another aspect of this question is: How far were the charges made by the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, against the Jesus of the Gospels in fact justified? For he would have been held guilty of abuse only if he had invented those charges himself. But if it is established that he merely repeated with reference to the Jesus of the Gospels that which is set out in the Gospels concerning him and which is admitted by the Christians, he cannot be blamed in any respect.

If we examine his writings for this purpose, we discover that there are three allegations which he made against the Jesus of the Gospels, namely:

  1. He pointed out that the Jesus of the Gospels indulged in liquor;
  2. That some of his grandmothers were guilty of adultery; and
  3. That his mother was charged with adultery by his enemies.

With regard to the first charge the Promised Messiah states:

The damage that liquor has done to the people of the West is due to the fact that Jesus indulged in liquor, possibly on account of some disease or on account of habit. (Kishti Nuh, p. 65)

In this connection it is worthy of note that the very first miracle of Jesus that is mentioned in the Gospels is that on the occasion of a wedding he converted water into wine and thus the drinking of wine is a part of the Christian faith. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Promised Messiah charged Jesus falsely. He attributed the drinking of wine to him according to the statements of the Gospels.

Secondly, during his time the drinking of liquor had not been forbidden. That is why among the Christians the drinking of wine on the occasion of the Last Supper is a religious ceremony which they imagine was initiated by Jesus.

Thus whatever way we look at it, the Promised Messiah did not make any false charge against Jesus in this respect. On the contrary, he stated, by way of extenuation that Jesus might have taken wine on account of some chronic disease.

The second objection is that the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has written that some of the grandmothers of Jesus were guilty of adultery.

The Christians have charged members of the holy family of the Holy Prophet with all sorts of faults. They contend that as the Holy Prophet was descended from Hagar, who according to the Christians was a slave of Abraham, peace be on him, and according to them the descendants of a female slave have no right of spiritual succession, therefore, the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, cannot be accepted as a Prophet. Christian writers have advanced several false charges against the Holy Prophet himself and the members of his family. In reply to all this. the Promised Messiah showed from the Bible that as

a bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation (Deut. 23:2)

the Jesus of the Gospels could not enter into the congregation of the Lord inasmuch as in his genealogy three women are mentioned who were guilty of adultery. These women were Tamar, Rachab and the wife of Uriah. Padre Imaduddin, in his commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, has observed:

This shows that Lord Jews did not disdain to he born in the chain of sinners.

Thus the Promised Messiah refuted from Christian sources the calumny that the ancestors of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, were not sinless people. There is no such allegation concerning him in any standard Islamic book or history, while the Bible contains statements to the effect that we have mentioned which are admitted by Christian scholars. Whatever the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, wrote about the Jesus of the Gospels was not from himself but was drawn from Christian sources which he cited. No objection can, therefore, be taken to whatever he wrote in this context.

The calumny against the mother of Jesus is well known. It is the Holy Quran that cleared her of it.

Source: The Truth About Ahmadiyya, Al Islam


15 thoughts on “Refutation: The Imam Mahdi (as) Insulted Hadrat ‘Isa (as)

  1. Actually he would let a sinner women do that only because he feels Ahmedis are wrong. If we say read Salat he will stop reading Salat. Is it not obvious already that he is just a hater who loses all intellectual capacity when trying to show Jamat Ahmadiyya as having fault. He will run jump skip hop topics.

  2. Tahir Iqbal

    simple question would you sit with immoral people? would allow immoral ladies wash your hair, and feet?

  3. not only that in ruhani khazaine volume 18 page220

    it says that God did not use husure حصور for Esa AS because the story (of adultrous and drunkard person) prohibited God form using such a word for Esa AS

    so according to ahmedi literature its not just bible but also Quran has disregarded Esa AS

    Can you justify this any way???

  4. @Tahir Iqbal:

    I have shown you that according to the Bible, Jesus (pbuh) was not averse to letting a sinful woman lay her hands on his body, in a way that no pious believer would agree to.

    Every Prophet of course had to meet sinners. But the Holy Prophet (s.a.) is not on record for having allowed a woman, whose sins were known to the public, wash any part of his body in that manner.

    However, in the post, the reference to adultery is not made about Jesus (pbuh) himself, but about three of his ANCESTORS. Did you read it carefully? Or did I miss something in this post? Please forgive me if I did.

    The Promised Messiah (a.s.) gave the references and the names of those ancestors of Jesus who were pronounced adulterers by the Bible itself.

  5. sorry to say but we are not at same page here

    you are trying to throw stones on other ppl glass house and assume to save your house by this practice (and that is not possible)

    you are giving wrong interpretations to bible and trying to put your own word in holy book of some one and think that helps Islamic cause, i do not think that is right way to talk about holy book of some one

    Muhammed pbuh never did so neither quran did that but ahmedia literature does it (and that is what i do not like about ahmedia)

    there is not a single verse in bible which says Jesus AS was a zani (adultror) or sharabi (drunkard) but ahmedia literature says him so

    Muhammed pbuh never called him so and never called Jesus AS of bible to be different person form the Jesus AS of Quran but ahmedi literature says so why?????

    how you think these two things are same??

    on top of all that you are trying to interpret bible in such a way that if christens start doing so with quran you will have no hiding place

    here is little example

    in quran it is stated give charity to God and if they take it to literal meaning it will mean God of Muslim is poor and want money (naousbillah) we know it is metaphore but you try this with bible by saying that when Jesus AS says take this is my blood and flesh you say he was regular drinkere and at that point he stopped doing so and you are not ready to accept a clear metahpore when it is in bible

    we know at the time of Muhammed pbuh hundreds of sahaba came to him and did repent of their sins (men and women) and lived in his company (that is why they are called sahaba) they included murderers, adulterers, mushrikeen and all sorts of sins but when it comes to Jesus AS you say because one women who was sinner came to him and lived few hours (may be) with him AS that makes Jesus AS to be zani (adultror) will you accept this logic if christens start saying so about Muhammed pbuh ????

    it is stated in quran do not go near to salaat when you are drunk by this verse will you take the meaning that Muhammed bpuh was regular drinker and his sahaba also that is why quran has asked them not to do so at the time of prayer??
    but for Jesus AS you use your logic to say he was regular drinker how that could be fair??

    you need to present a clear verse of bible to say that Jesus AS was zani or sharabi or stop saying so about him AS based on just your own logic and false interpertatoins ………………………..

  6. @Tahir Iqbal:
    Hey, you don’t realise that we’re on the same page here. The Imam Mahdi (a.s.) wanted to demonstrate to CHRISTIANS who were attacking his Master, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.), that their own Bible contains lies about Jesus, portraying him as a man with terrible morals – and that therefore they should be wiser than to throw stones at Islam from their glass house.

    The Imam Mahdi (a.s.) also explained that WHENEVER he showed Jesus in this poor Biblical light, he always meant the fictional character of Jesus, the Jesus who is far removed from reality that is presented by the authors of theGospels. He said that he NEVER meant the true ‘Eesa (a.s.) who is presented as a blessed prophet in the Qur’an.

    So, Tahir, why are you defending the false picture of Jesus painted by the Bible? The Bible denigrated Jesus and attacked his integrity. You too should be telling those Christians who launch shameless attacks on Muhammad (s.a.) that they should first go and see how badly their own Jesus is portrayed in their Bible, whereas he is highly respected by the Qur’an. This is what the Imam Mahdi (a.s.) showed them, in defence of the Noble Prophet Muhammad (s.a.).

  7. [deleted}

    if you read the verses carefully you will see that Jesus AS is telling them drink it is my blood and then he says i will not drink any more

    and your logic [deleted] that he used to drink (his own blood and wine as per your argument) and at that point said i will not drink any more

    how much further you can go to discredit a true prophet???

    then you present a hadith which says the person who makes or serves wine but before accusing any true prophet of any thing you need to find out what it was ?? and if you do carefully read what is stated in bible you will find at both occasions (at marriage and before supposed arrest) he served water and to this pure water he blessed and called the wine or blood

    no water becomes haram (wine) by blessing of a true prophet does it in your opinion??

    now lastly you say the sinner women was adulterous

    where did you got it ???

    sinner means the one who has committed sins and according to bible we all are sinner will you take it to mean that every person is called adulterous by bible ???

    how far will you go to accuse true prophet for nothing and by false interpretations????

  8. @Tahir Iqbal (Sorry for calling you Tariq earlier!):
    There was one portion of your objection that I had missed, and that was the bit about Jesus (pbuh) being an adulterer according to the Biblical text.

    The Holy Prophet (s.a.) said:

    “A person is judged according to the company he keeps. So beware of the company you keep.” (Abu Dawood, Hadith #: 4833, Narrated by Abu Hurayrah)

    Now, we see in the Gospels that Jesus (pbuh) is alleged to have accepted to be in the company of women of loose character. In one instance, he even allows one of them to wash his feet and wipe them with her hair. When the Bible speaks of a woman being a sinner, it means that she was a woman who was known for consorting freely with men.

    Thus in Luke 7:37-39, we find:

    37. And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, 38. And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. 39. Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, “This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.”

    Let alone a prophet of God, even a believer of the lowest level would refuse to be touched so intimately by any woman apart from his wife, and would recoil from a strange woman laying hands on him. Furthermore, if the ordinary believer knew she was a woman of loose morals, he would not allow her to even come near him, far less let her lay hands on his body. This Biblical passage indicates that Jesus (pbuh) was endowed with very low morals and that he did not protect his chastity (God forbid).

    This is far removed from the chaste picture of Jesus (pbuh) painted by the Holy Qur’an.

  9. @Tahir Iqbal

    Now you are being silly. Jesus AS clearly states “henceforth” he will no longer drink wine which clearly means he had drank it before. And he isn’t stopping because he considers it Haram either, more symbolically. Billions of Christians and hunderds of Christial scholars who have read the bible will say that Jesus AS drank wine from their readings so it clearly IS in the bible.


  10. @Tariq Iqbal:
    Jesus (pbuh) is reported to have said that he will “DRINK NO MORE”, which means that he USED to drink but as from this day he will not drink anymore.

    This shows that he did indeed drink wine prior to that statement.

    In John, it is mentioned that Jesus created wine and then had it served to those present. Now, according to the Hadith:

    Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith number 2776, Narrated by Anas ibn Malik (r.a.):

    “Allah’s Messenger cursed ten people in connection with wine: the wine-presser, the one who has it pressed, the one who drinks it, the one who conveys it, the one to whom it is conveyed, the one who serves it, the one who sells it, the one who benefits from the price paid for it, the one who buys it, and the one for whom it is bought.”

    ALL of the above fall under the same curse. The one who drinks it is equally cursed as the one who makes it or serves it. ALL are considered “sharabi” – which incidentally, is the adjective from “Sharab” and its wider meaning is “anything connected with beverage”. It does not only refer to a drunkard.

    Thus, these Biblical passages show that Jesus DID drink wine until some point in time, and that he, if one has to believe the Christian texts, fell under the curse (na’udhu billah) of making and serving wine to others which is equal to the curse that falls on a drunkard.

  11. peace4everynation

    the reference u provided from Mathews and mark clearly says Jesus AS did not drink instead said i will not drink until the day

    also in john there is no mention that he did drink wine

    but on other hand the book of ahmedia say he was a drunkard (regular drinker, word shartabi is used for a person who is regular drinker if u have different urdu understanding then please let me know whome u call the sharabi)

    also in bible there is no mention of him doing any adultrty (zani)

    if a adultrous women comes to a prophet and accepts islam that does not make the prophet to be zani does it???

  12. I would like to add that the Bible says (in very shocking terms, I might add) that Noah (as) had indulged in wine. (Genesis, 9:20-25) I can mention some other things which the Bible has said which would almost remove all the holiness from the line of the Prophets of God. The Holy Quran has cleared all of them (as) of these taints the Bible has put on them along with the ones which it has put on Jesus (as). If anyone reads the Bible they will see just how much they revile the Prophets (as). It is funny that some would take Masih-e-Maud’s (as) words out of context and misinterpret them in this issue but completely ignore the fact that Christians (at least a billions people in the world) believe in wierd stories about the Prophets which make one wonder about their purity.

    It makes you ask the question, why do some Muslims become enemies of Masih-e-Maud (as) who was trying to defend Islam and its righteous prophets, while the Christians revile them and are not even addressed as to their errors? And we are called the worst fitnah against Islam by Muslims? It’s such a waste of time on their part, it really makes on wonder. I just thought that this should be put out there to anyone who sees the problem with this sort of allegation in the first place.

  13. Turning water into wine at the wedding at Cana – In John 2:7-11:

    7Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.

    8And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.

    9When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,

    10And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

    11This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

    The communion wine – Matthew 26:27-29:

    27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

    28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

    29But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

    The communion wine – Mark 14:25:

    25Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

Join the Discussion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s