Introduction
In Chapter 3 of the Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light’s narrative, the Third Covenant with Abraham is discussed, linking the judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah to a broader moral and theological framework. The chapter recounts various atrocities and injustices that took place in Sodom, portraying them as part of a cycle of divine retribution. While this account does have some resonance with the biblical story of Sodom’s destruction, there are several key theological and interpretative issues that require a biblical response. This chapter aims to highlight the theological missteps of the Third Covenant, drawing from Scripture to refute the claims made in this narrative.
As we consider the broader implications of the Ahmadi perspective on the Third Covenant, it becomes evident that the narrative is not only a theological divergence from the biblical account, but it also represents a misunderstanding of key biblical principles. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah, often regarded as a symbol of divine wrath against immorality, serves a central role in the narrative of human sinfulness and God’s justice. The aim of this chapter is to show that while there may be superficial similarities between the Ahmadi interpretation and the biblical account, their differences highlight significant theological errors that must be addressed.
The Biblical Account of Sodom and Gomorrah
The account of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction is most famously detailed in Genesis 19. According to the Bible, these cities were destroyed because of their pervasive sin, which included sexual immorality, violence, and injustice. The biblical narrative focuses on the iniquity of the inhabitants and the rejection of God’s moral order as the root cause of their downfall. Specifically, the people of Sodom are described as engaging in wicked practices, such as the attempted gang rape of the two angels (who appeared as men) sent by God to warn Lot (Genesis 19:4-11). This sin is portrayed as an abomination in the eyes of God (Genesis 18:20).
However, the biblical story of Sodom’s destruction cannot be confined merely to the sexual immorality of its inhabitants. A more nuanced reading of the narrative reveals the city’s failure to uphold justice, demonstrate hospitality, or care for the poor and needy. It is this totality of wickedness that brought about the divine judgement. It is essential to understand that God’s judgement was not arbitrary, but a righteous response to the utter abandonment of moral law and justice. Sodom’s sin was both communal and individual, and it resulted from a pervasive culture of corruption, cruelty, and pride.
In contrast to the narrative presented in the Third Covenant, which places emphasis on the moral decay of the cities but adds additional elements (such as bizarre judicial practices and extreme cruelty), the Bible focuses on the depravity of the people and their rejection of hospitality, justice, and God’s righteousness. The key biblical lesson from Sodom’s destruction is that God’s judgement is both just and merciful, given that Lot and his family were spared because of their righteousness.
The Perils of Misinterpreting Divine Justice
The key issue with the Ahmadi narrative of the Third Covenant lies in its misinterpretation of divine justice. While it is clear that Sodom was a city deeply entrenched in sin, it is equally important to understand the nature of God’s judgement. The Bible repeatedly teaches that God’s wrath is not exercised capriciously or without reason. In fact, the destruction of Sodom serves as an ultimate reminder that sin, when left unchecked, leads to catastrophic consequences, but it also serves as a call to repentance and righteousness.
Sodom’s destruction is not simply an exercise of divine wrath, but a demonstration of the absolute necessity of upholding justice, mercy, and holiness. The Ahmadi narrative, however, seems to present the destruction of Sodom in a manner that exaggerates the cruelty and corruption, missing the deeper theological lessons about repentance, salvation, and divine mercy. The Bible’s portrayal of God’s justice is always framed within the context of His mercy—an aspect largely absent in the Ahmadi retelling.
The Third Covenant and Theological Discrepancies
The Third Covenant narrative expands upon the Sodom and Gomorrah story by including more graphic depictions of cruelty and social decay. While the Bible does recognise the sinfulness of Sodom, including the inhospitality of the city (Genesis 19:9-10), it does not suggest that the entire population was involved in widespread robbery or malicious judicial practices as described in this narrative.
- Exaggeration of Sodom’s Injustice
The narrative in Chapter 3 presents Sodom’s judicial system as perverse, with judges described as “Liars,” “Arch-deceivers,” and “Falsifiers.” While the Bible does critique the moral decay of these cities, it does not ascribe such specific titles to the judges. Instead, the Bible focuses on the people’s rejection of divine righteousness and their vile acts of immorality (Genesis 18:20; Ezekiel 16:49-50).
The portrayal of the Sodomites’ cruelty and the specific judicial actions described in the Third Covenant is a significant embellishment, which strays from the scriptural account. The Bible’s judgement of Sodom is primarily concerned with their lack of righteousness and their rejection of God’s message, rather than offering a detailed account of how the judicial system was inherently corrupt.
It is important to note that the biblical text does critique the corruption of the societal structures in places like Sodom, but it does not provide the same kind of detailed moral indictment of the judicial system that the Third Covenant suggests. Instead, the Bible’s critique focuses on the cities’ lack of justice for the poor and oppressed (Ezekiel 16:49). The Bible’s message is not one that highlights a corrupted judicial system as the central reason for Sodom’s downfall, but rather the pervasive rejection of God’s holiness.
- Misinterpretation of Lot’s Actions
Lot’s actions in Genesis 19:1-11 have been controversial because, in an attempt to protect his guests, he offers his daughters to the mob outside. While this act is morally troubling, it is important to note that the Bible does not commend this action; instead, it highlights Lot’s distress in trying to protect his guests. The biblical text stresses that God spared Lot due to his relative righteousness (Genesis 19:29).
In the Third Covenant narrative, Lot’s willingness to offer his daughters is discussed, but the moral degradation of the Sodomites is exaggerated beyond the biblical account. The angels’ intervention is emphasised, but no additional commentary is given on Lot’s character or his motivations, which could mislead the reader into misjudging the complexities of this story.
In fact, the moral failure of Lot’s actions should serve as a poignant reminder of the reality of human frailty and the complex nature of the moral decisions we face in times of crisis. The Bible does not present Lot as a perfect figure, but rather a man who, despite his faults, is still counted as righteous by God’s grace. The Third Covenant’s account fails to recognise the nuance of this story, instead portraying it as merely another example of Sodom’s depravity.
- Theological Misrepresentation of Divine Justice
The Third Covenant narrative presents Sodom’s destruction as a result of extreme cruelty and a series of complex, morally reprehensible actions, such as forcing strangers to suffer and die, participating in violent judicial actions, and stealing from one another. While such actions may indeed reflect the immorality of the cities, the Bible presents these behaviours as symptoms of deeper spiritual decay — a disregard for God’s laws of justice, love, and holiness.
Ezekiel 16:49-50 provides a succinct explanation for the downfall of Sodom:
“Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.”
The biblical understanding of Sodom’s sin is clear: they were not only guilty of gross immorality but also of ignoring the call for justice and compassion for the needy. This presents a different theological framework than the Third Covenant, which, while describing cruelty, misses the central spiritual issue of repentance and obedience to God’s law.
The Ahmadi narrative also places great emphasis on the moral decline of the judicial system, which could be seen as a commentary on the broader societal failings in Sodom. However, it is essential to note that while the judicial system in Sodom may have been corrupt, it is their rejection of divine law and the failure to practice justice and mercy that led to their ultimate downfall. The Bible’s primary focus is not the failures of human legal systems, but the moral and spiritual failures of the people.
Conclusion
The narrative of the Third Covenant with Abraham presented in Chapter 3 diverges significantly from the biblical account of Sodom’s destruction. While there is no doubt that Sodom was a city of great sin and that God judged it for its immorality, the additional details about judicial corruption and the exaggerated cruelty described in the Third Covenant are not found in Scripture.
The Bible teaches that the ultimate reason for Sodom’s destruction was their rejection of God’s righteousness, their indulgence in gross sin, and their failure to uphold justice and compassion. The focus in the Bible is on God’s mercy in sparing Lot and his family, while the larger population’s sinfulness led to their destruction. Therefore, while the Third Covenant’s narrative adds a layer of moral complexity to the story of Sodom, it does so in a way that strays from the biblical understanding of sin, judgement, and mercy.
Biblically, the focus remains on the need for repentance, righteousness, and humility before God — themes that the Third Covenant fails to adequately address. As such, its interpretation of the Third Covenant with Abraham cannot be harmonised with the biblical text and should be critically examined in light of Scripture’s clear teachings on divine justice and mercy.