Christ set out on his Ministry, convinced that his vocation was to save the world. But suppose he was wrong? I think he was right, because looking back I am inclined to say that if he was not the Messiah, then the world will have to do without one. His like has never been seen again. But suppose he was wrong: he himself doubted whether he was the Messiah during his temptations in the wilderness, and there is nothing wrong in our doing the same. In the greatest of all his speeches, Winston Churchill in June 1940 had the wisdom to stare the prospect of defeat in the face, and to spell out for us what it would mean in practice, as an incentive to make sure that it did not happen. So there is nothing wrong in our doing the same, and considering briefly the consequences for the world and mankind if by any chance Jesus was mistaken.
Mohammed regarded Jesus as a prophet; but took the view that Jesus’ revelation was incomplete, else there was no reason for him, Mohammed, to add to it. He disputed that the crucifixion occurred, which means disputing not only the accuracy of the Gospels, but also the purport of their message. This may have enabled Islam to be more successful initially; but did it store up trouble for the future? I find the reasoning of Goethe more persuasive. Goethe accepted the unique and majestic spirit of Jesus as revealed in the Gospels, but held the view that it is impossible for one man to reveal the Divine unfathomable mystery which is the Creator, which must include not only the mystery of Man, but also of Nature and of titanic World Events as well. Christianity tries to cope with the mystery of Nature, by calling Jesus the “Word” through whom all things were created. But what of world events, the clash of cultures and the clash of Empires? The Old Testament tried to account for these by treating them as God’s way of chastising the sin of Israel. Well, maybe, but I find Jung’s view that the phenomenon of Nazi Germany was the result of Hitler manipulating the collective unconscious of the German people, so that it became thoroughly evil and bent on War, distinctly more convincing. The Hebrew Prophets appear naïve in comparison; unable to see that human character must grow to have any hope of mastering contemporary evils, they appear to have been imprisoned in the spirituality of their own generation. But Jesus came to fulfil the Law and the Prophets. So how did he treat the clash of Empires?
Jesus dismissed the secular world, and did not concern himself with it. That undoubtedly disappointing fact may simply mean he accepted the tradition of his people that titanic world events all revolved round God’s punishing the backsliding of little Israel. I think it is more likely to be the other way round; that God was content that the backslidings of little Israel should fit in with titanic world events. Israel put the cart before the horse, as did Jesus. However that may be, Jesus’ attitude was perhaps acceptable in his own generation, when Rome ruled the known world; but it will not suffice in our generation, when evil so nearly triumphed in the Second World War. One would need to be mad to think we should ever be allowed such a narrow escape again. My own opinion is that you have to give the secular world its due; there are certain Rules of Creation, and if you disregard them, your secular society disintegrates into chaos. The basic Rule of creation may be love; but there are other Rules as well, which governments disregard at their peril. Nowadays for an individual to preach that Love solves all problems is irresponsibly naïve.
So Mohammed was right in thinking that Jesus had failed to take account of world events; and his response was to inaugurate a militant religion. So successful were the conquests of Islam in the hundred years following the Prophet’s death, that the Mediterranean ceased to be a Roman lake, and it must have looked doubtful if anyone could stop them. Although Islam was tolerant at that time, whereas Christianity was not; was this conquest achieved by forgetting one crucial message of the cross, that you should love your enemies?