By Mig Hayworth | UK Apologetics Library
At the very heart of The Seventh Covenant with Ahmed Al-Hassan lies an aggressive and totalitarian vision of religion—not one of unity through truth, but one of militant suppression of religious identity under the pretence of spiritual renewal. The authors of the text are open in their contempt for traditional religious authority and make deeply inflammatory accusations against all religious scholars—Muslim, Christian, and Jewish. The following quotation captures the aggressive posture of this cult’s core theology:
“Unfortunately, the sons of Satan that are on the Earth have taken religion as a means of controlling and oppressing people and have taken religion as a means to separate people and cause wars in the name of God. Due to the corruption of the teachings and words of the Prophets and Messengers, the sons of Satan, led by their non-working scholars, will fight the Qaim/Riser on his mission to unite humanity.” (p. 110)
This sweeping condemnation of all religious scholarship is not simply rhetorical. It undergirds a proposed eschatological battle against anyone who resists the movement’s theocratic dominion. The claim that Ahmed Al-Hassan is the Qaim (or “Riser”) leads directly into a theological justification for violence against dissenters:
“When Imam Mahdi emerges he shall not have a more clear enemy than the religious scholars… if it were not for the sword, the religious scholars would have issued decrees that he be killed, but God makes him appear with the sword and with generosity and kindness so that they may obey him and fear him and accept his judgment without believing in it, rather they hold within their hearts the opposite of belief.” (Yanabi’ Al-Mawadda, Vol. 3, p. 215)
Here, obedience to the “Mahdi” is enforced not by persuasion or spiritual conviction, but through fear and compulsion—a direct contradiction to the biblical gospel of salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8–9) and the New Testament’s call to proclaim, not impose, the truth in love (2 Cor. 5:11, 14).
This cult’s totalitarianism is further revealed in a tradition they cite:
“If the Riser/Qaim emerges there shall not be between him and the Arabs and the Persians except for the sword.” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 52, p. 389)
It is clear from the context that the supposed mission to “unify all religions” is nothing short of a militarised purge of any form of dissent—whether religious, ethnic, or cultural. This is not a peaceful unification, but a theocratic coercion. Even followers of Ahmed Al-Hassan himself are not safe:
“The Qaim goes forth judging cases which some of his companions… reject… so the Riser/Qaim brings forth the men who objected and strikes their necks… and then he judges a third case… and it is the judgment of Abraham… then he judges a fourth case and it is by the judgment of Mohammed and none shall reject it.” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 52, p. 389)
This explicit endorsement of execution for disagreement, including followers who merely question his decrees, reveals a tyrannical and cultic spirit that is utterly contrary to biblical models of leadership and grace. Jesus Christ, by contrast, never forced people to follow Him at sword-point (John 6:66–69). His kingdom is “not of this world” (John 18:36).
While at first glance this chapter appears to condemn religious division and promote unity, the type of unity promoted here is not biblical unity grounded in truth, but rather an engineered unity under the banner of the so-called “Seventh Covenant” and submission to Ahmed Al-Hassan as a divine ruler. This is a dangerous redefinition of unity, subtly cloaked in spiritual language. The author, Abdullah Hashem Aba Al-Sadiq, critiques division and separation within religions, yet he cleverly rebrands unity as allegiance to a new messianic figure—thereby weaponising the term unity to serve his own cultic agenda. The danger lies not only in the redefinition itself but in the emotional and rhetorical pressure applied to those who desire peace or who are weary of religious conflict. Followers are subtly manipulated into thinking that questioning or resisting this new form of unity is tantamount to resisting God’s will. In reality, biblical unity is always grounded in sound doctrine (Eph. 4:3–6; John 17:17), not in conformity to the personality or teachings of a self-appointed divine ruler. When unity is used as a euphemism for control and spiritual deception, it becomes a tool of enslavement, not reconciliation. This false unity masks authoritarianism beneath a veneer of spiritual harmony—therefore, it must be exposed and resisted.
5.1 The “New Matter” and Invented Religion of the Seventh Covenant
Ahmed Al-Hassan’s movement boldly proclaims that the religion he brings is not Islam in continuity with Muhammad, but something entirely new. As recorded in their own citations:
“The Qaim/Riser shall rise with a new matter, and a new book, and a new jurisprudence/rule which will be hard for the Arabs… He will come with a new religion which is difficult for the Arabs (to accept).” (Kitab Al-Ghayba, Vol. 1, p. 236)
This assertion fundamentally undermines Islamic orthodoxy itself, which affirms the finality of the Qur’an as the last revealed book. If Ahmed Al-Hassan introduces a new book, a new shariah, and a new religion, then by Islamic standards, he is an apostate. Even Imam Al-Baqir is quoted in the text saying:
“If the Riser/Qaim rises… he shall destroy everything that came before him, just as the Prophet of Allah did, and he shall establish a new Islam.” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 52)
This is theological innovation at its peak—tantamount to a self-declared prophet abrogating all previous revelations, including the Qur’an and the Shariah of Muhammad. For Christians, this is a warning: this movement does not simply oppose Christian theology; it dismantles and rewrites all sacred history, including the message of Christ, Moses, Abraham, and even Muhammad.
5.2 Anti-Jewish and Anti-Arabic Rhetoric Masquerading as “Unity”
The movement claims to be “uniting” all world religions, yet contradicts itself by blaming Jews, Arabs, Persians, and Hindus for not accepting their leader. Consider this passage:
“The racism and ignorance of most of the Arabs and Persians and their hatred of the Jews will make them take the Riser/Qaim as an enemy… The racism and ignorance of some of the Pakistani Muslims and their hatred of Hindus and Indians will make them take the Riser/Qaim as an enemy…” (p. 111)
Here, accusatory slurs are used in place of theological argument. The text constantly contradicts itself: on the one hand, claiming to revive all prophetic religions from Adam to today, and on the other, labelling all non-followers—including prior prophets’ followers—as racists or Satanic scholars.
Moreover, Ahmed Al-Hassan’s use of the Star of David and Hebrew language is leveraged not for unity, but to provoke outrage, as if criticism of these choices validates his role as a persecuted prophet:
“Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan started the Seventh Covenant by using the Star of David… the Arab and Muslim world’s reaction… they have accused their own Mahdi… of being an Israeli agent… This is due to their ignorance of Prophetic traditions.” (p. 111)
No evidence is provided that any Islamic tradition equates the Mahdi with the use of Jewish symbolism or Hebrew invocations. Instead, this is an intentional provocation, designed to produce outrage and thus “prove” that Ahmed Al-Hassan is the prophesied outcast.
5.3 A Theology of Apostasy and the Death of Religious Freedom
Perhaps the most dangerous claim in this entire chapter is that this new movement will invalidate all existing religions, laws, and covenants, and that only the “righteous souls” will be included in the new spiritual regime:
“This Seventh Covenant now is no longer based on physical ancestry… it is a Covenant between God and the souls instead, the righteous souls.” (p. 112)
But who determines what constitutes a “righteous soul”? The answer is clear from previous quotes: only those who submit to Ahmed Al-Hassan without question, under penalty of death. This is not salvation by grace, or even submission to divine law. It is blind obedience to a self-proclaimed ruler who intends to judge by Adam, David, and Muhammad, while simultaneously denouncing all those traditions.
This new religion is neither Jewish, Christian, nor Islamic. It is cultic messianism cloaked in the language of Abrahamic tradition. The Christian reader is reminded that Jesus warned of false prophets who would come in His name and deceive many (Matt. 24:5). He also warned that some would claim to bring peace and unity, but would be “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Matt. 7:15).
“Seventh Covenant” and the Destruction of Holy Sites
In what can only be described as one of the most aggressive and heretical rejections of traditional Abrahamic worship, the cult of Ahmed Al-Hassan — masquerading under the title of the “Seventh Covenant” — launches a theological war not just against Christianity, but also against the foundations of Islamic belief. At the heart of this extremist doctrine lies a shocking proposal: to obliterate the very symbols of historic monotheism and replace them with the self-serving narrative of a self-declared messianic figure.
The Planned Destruction of the Kaaba and Medina
Ahmed Al-Hassan and his followers teach that their so-called “Qaim” or “Riser” will destroy the most sacred Islamic site — the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, including the Kaaba itself. This is not a metaphorical or spiritual interpretation. The text is shockingly literal:
“He demolishes the Masjid Al-Haram (the mosque complex of Mecca that surrounds and encompasses the Kaaba), until he returns it to its origin and moves the Maqam to the place that it was really at, and he cuts off the hands of the Bani-Sheyba and hangs it on the door of the Kaaba and writes on it: ‘These are the thieves of the Kaaba.’” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 52, p. 338)
Not content with desecrating Mecca, the supposed “Riser” then heads to Medina to destroy the tomb of Muhammad:
“If the Riser/Qaim approaches the wall on the tomb intending to break it, God will then send extreme winds and lightning and thunder until the people say, ‘Verily this is because of that’ and his companions will run away from him until there does not remain with him a single person. The Riser/Qaim will then take the axe, and he is the first one to strike with the axe, and when his companions see him striking with the axe, they run back to him and their rank that day will be determined by how fast they run back to him.” (Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 52, p. 386)
This is not a theological correction of past misguidance — it is the violent erasure of Islamic tradition, and ironically, it is carried out by someone who claims to be the rightful heir to its prophetic legacy.
The Rejection of the Kaaba as a Holy Site
The radical teachings of Ahmed Al-Hassan go even further by completely denying the current Kaaba’s legitimacy, claiming that it is a false structure built by Quraysh in the wrong location:
“The house of the Kaaba that people know is not the real Kaaba, the real Kaaba has been completely destroyed… The original Kaaba of Quraysh was demolished and this is a new Kaaba that they recently built.”
“The truth is that Abraham didn’t actually build the Kaaba, but rather he reconstructed it, but now there is no longer a trace of it… The real Kaaba is located in Al-Sham (Levant) and not in Al-Hijaz and particularly in Jordan… The Imam further clarified that the exact location of the true original Kaaba is Petra, Jordan.”
(The Seventh Covenant with Ahmed Al-Hassan, pp. 114–115)
This revisionist history does not merely challenge Islamic orthodoxy — it attempts to rewrite the entire geographical and religious legacy of Abraham and Muhammad.
Replacing the Hajj with Social Charity
In one instance, a follower asked if it was still permissible to go on pilgrimage (Hajj) to Mecca under the current Saudi regime. Rather than offering spiritual advice, Ahmed Al-Hassan dismissed the entire concept of pilgrimage, effectively nullifying one of the Five Pillars of Islam:
“Instead of going to do pilgrimage (Hajj) you should go and give the money you would be spending on Hajj to the poor people that are dying of starvation around the world. I swear by God that would equate with God a hundred thousand pilgrimages.”
When pressed further about the contradiction between Qur’anic command and his directive, he replied:
“This time and this month is not even the month of Hajj… and the Kaaba which you know is not even the one that is called ‘The Holy Sanctuary of God.’ I know perhaps many people shall call me a disbeliever, but that is not important…”
(The Seventh Covenant with Ahmed Al-Hassan, p. 115)
This shows not only contempt for traditional Islamic practice but also a profound theological arrogance, claiming to know the times and seasons better than those allegedly inspired by God in the Qur’an.
Rewriting the Islamic Calendar
One of the most bizarre claims of this cult involves replacing the Islamic lunar calendar with a fabricated solar version, allegedly closer to the “true” calendar of the Quraysh. The reasoning? Because spring months are still called “Rabi” (spring), Ahmed Al-Hassan concludes that the calendar must have originally been solar — ignoring over a thousand years of calendar history:
“This time and this month is not even the month of Hajj… I would like to increase you with another piece of information… The so-called lunar calendar or Hijri calendar which the Muslims use today originally used to be a solar calendar.”
(The Seventh Covenant with Ahmed Al-Hassan, p. 115)
Here is the cult’s revised month mapping:
| Gregorian Month | “Correct” Hijri Month |
|---|---|
| January | Jamadi the First |
| February | Jamadi the Last |
| March | Rabi the First |
| April | Rabi the Second |
| May | Safar |
| June | Muharram |
| July | Shawwal |
| August | Dhu Al-Qadah |
| September | Dhu Al-Hijjah |
| October | Sha’ban |
| November | Rajab |
| December | Ramadan |
The Seventh Covenant: Women’s Veil and Prayer
Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan asserts that the veil, or hijab, is not obligatory but merely a “sunnah” (a recommended practice), arguing that it was introduced by Abdul-Muttalib and not by the Prophet Muhammad. He maintains that modern interpretations of the veil, as a religious duty, are cultural practices rather than divinely mandated. This interpretation, as presented in the Seventh Covenant, calls into question the role of modesty and the application of divine commandments in everyday life.
Biblical Refutation:
The concept of modesty and the covering of a woman’s head in worship is deeply rooted in biblical teaching. 1 Corinthians 11:5-6 addresses this issue explicitly, reinforcing that the act of covering one’s head is not merely a cultural practice but a divine command during prayer and worship:
“But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn; but if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.”
This passage indicates that a woman’s head covering during prayer is a sign of respect and order within the Christian community. The covering serves as an outward symbol of submission to God’s created order, where the head covering represents the woman’s relationship to her husband, and both men and women are to express humility and honor before God.
In contrast, the Seventh Covenant’s view that the veil is optional undermines the biblical principle of modesty and obedience to God’s commands regarding worship. The veil, as part of God’s law in 1 Corinthians 11, is not simply a societal custom; it represents a commandment that upholds God’s created structure in marriage and worship. For Christians, it remains an essential practice to observe, not as a mere cultural expression, but as a divine directive that maintains the dignity of both women and men in the presence of God.
The Restoration of the True Prayer
Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan claims that true prayer is not simply the physical acts of bowing and prostrating, but the “prostration of the heart.” He also presents the five daily prayers, as outlined in the Qur’an, not as obligations in their current form, but as symbolic representations of the reign of the Mahdi (the divinely appointed ruler). This, according to him, is the real essence of prayer—a form of submission and acknowledgment of the Mahdi’s authority rather than the traditional practice of physical postures during prayer.
Biblical Refutation:
From a biblical perspective, prayer is more than just an inner disposition; it involves both the heart and the outward expression of that heart through physical actions. While the heart must be sincere in prayer, the Bible does not teach that prayer can be separated from its physical expression. Jesus Himself instructed His disciples on the importance of specific, physical acts in prayer, as seen in Matthew 6:6:
“But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.”
This passage illustrates that prayer involves both an inward attitude (praying in secret, humbling oneself before God) and an outward expression (entering a place of quiet and closing the door). Prayer is not just about the heart; it involves action—whether that be bowing, kneeling, or standing—in order to show reverence to God. Thus, the physical act of bowing and prostrating during prayer remains a biblical practice.
Further, in Luke 22:41, Jesus is described as kneeling and praying in the Garden of Gethsemane:
“And He was withdrawn from them about a stone’s throw, and He knelt down and prayed.”
The physical posture of kneeling in prayer underscores the importance of submission and reverence before God. The notion that prayer is merely metaphorical or symbolic, as suggested by Imam Al-Hassan, dismisses the biblical teaching on the bodily act of submission through prayer. The Bible teaches that sincere prayer is not only an inner devotion but is also expressed through physical posture and ritual, reflecting the fullness of worship.
Loans and Interest (Riba)
Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan argues that charging interest (Riba) on loans is prohibited, citing its harmful effects on society. He further argues that the prohibition of Riba is not merely an Islamic teaching but an ethical mandate aimed at curbing social inequities. He suggests that it causes lasting damage, not only to individuals but also to their descendants, and that this practice was misunderstood in later Islamic traditions.
Biblical Refutation:
While the Bible does caution against exploiting the poor or charging excessive interest, it does not universally forbid the practice of charging interest in all circumstances. In the Old Testament, we find clear prohibitions against charging interest to fellow Israelites, particularly to the poor (Exodus 22:25), but these laws were context-specific:
“If you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you, you shall not be like a moneylender to him; you shall not charge him interest.”
However, the Bible also provides instances where the charging of interest is not inherently wrong. In Deuteronomy 23:20-21, it is permitted to charge interest to foreigners, implying that interest is not inherently sinful:
“To a foreigner you may charge interest, but to your brother you shall not charge interest.”
This establishes that the prohibition against interest is specifically for fellow believers, highlighting a concern for compassion and fairness toward those in need. Moreover, in the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:27), Jesus condemns the lazy servant for not earning interest on his master’s money:
“You should have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest.”
This implies that, in some circumstances, charging interest is a responsible and prudent financial practice. The blanket prohibition of interest, as claimed in the Seventh Covenant, goes beyond the biblical view, which allows for such practices under certain conditions, provided they do not harm the poor or exploit others.
Capital Punishment
Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan asserts that certain forms of corporal punishment, such as the cutting off of a thief’s hand (as mentioned in the Qur’an), are no longer applicable and have been corrupted over time. He argues that these punishments are outdated and that God’s mercy should prevail over rigid legalistic punishments.
Biblical Refutation:
The Bible indeed contains laws that prescribe capital punishment for specific crimes, such as theft (Exodus 22:1-3), but these laws must be understood in their historical and redemptive context. In the Old Testament, God’s law aimed to preserve justice and societal order, but the New Testament brings a shift in focus toward mercy and reconciliation.
In John 8:7, when Jesus was confronted with the woman caught in adultery and about to be stoned, He said:
“He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.”
This statement is significant because it shifts the focus from rigid adherence to the law to a focus on repentance and mercy. Jesus does not dismiss the law but rather calls for justice to be tempered with mercy. Thus, while capital punishment was once part of God’s legal code, the New Testament emphasizes forgiveness and grace, urging believers to consider the mercy of God over strict judgment.
The complete abolition of corporal punishment, as proposed by Imam Al-Hassan, ignores this biblical tension between justice and mercy. The Bible allows for punishment, but it insists that mercy, repentance, and restoration be integral to the process, as seen in the teachings of Christ.
Drinking Wine & Alcohol
In the Seventh Covenant, Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan asserts that alcohol was prohibited as a temporary measure and that in paradise, alcohol will be allowed again. He bases this argument on the belief that the prohibition of alcohol is a social measure, not a divine mandate, and that it was implemented to prevent societal harm.
Biblical Refutation:
The Bible presents a more nuanced view of alcohol. It is not alcohol itself that is condemned, but rather drunkenness. In Ephesians 5:18, the apostle Paul writes:
“Do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit.”
Drunkenness is considered a sin because it leads to destructive behavior and loss of self-control. However, the Bible does not prohibit the consumption of wine in moderation. In Psalm 104:14-15, wine is seen as a blessing from God:
“He causes the grass to grow for the cattle, and vegetation for the service of man, that he may bring forth food from the earth, and wine that makes glad the heart of man…”
Moreover, in 1 Timothy 5:23, Paul advises Timothy to drink wine for health reasons:
“No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your frequent infirmities.”
Thus, the Bible teaches moderation in all things, and while drunkenness is clearly condemned, alcohol in and of itself is not forbidden. The claim that alcohol will be permitted again in paradise, as Imam Al-Hassan suggests, is not supported by the Bible, which promotes temperance and self-control in earthly life.
1. The “Magnificent Refuge” and the Faithful Believer’s Store of Good Deeds
The passage opens with a description of the “magnificent refuge” as the faithful believer’s “store of good deeds,” which is described as belonging to the believer by virtue of his purity and total achievement of his desires within the bounds of faith.
From a biblical perspective, the notion of accumulating good deeds as a “store” or refuge in the afterlife contradicts the foundational Christian doctrine of justification by faith alone (Romans 5:1; Ephesians 2:8-9). Christianity teaches that salvation and standing before God are not based on the believer’s deeds or any accumulation of righteousness they may achieve, but on the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 3:22-24; 2 Corinthians 5:21).
In contrast, the idea that one’s “desires” can be fully achieved by adhering to purity and good deeds is problematic in that it aligns more with a works-based salvation, something the Bible expressly refutes (Galatians 2:16). This principle is not just heretical in the context of salvation, but it also diverts believers from the truth that Christ alone is the refuge for believers (Matthew 11:28-30), and the good deeds of believers are the fruit of faith, not the means of salvation (James 2:17).
2. Destruction of Longstanding Religious Structures
The passage asserts that the Seventh Covenant will require the destruction of major religious structures like the Kaaba, the lunar calendar, and ritual prayer because they have become “idolatrous” and impure over the past 1,400 years. The argument further suggests that this destruction is necessary to expose the “idolatry” and “impurities” of previous religious practices.
From a biblical standpoint, this claim is deeply troubling and reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of God’s sovereignty over human history and religious practices. The Bible does not support the idea that physical structures or traditions, such as the Kaaba or the ritual prayers, inherently possess “idolatrous” qualities in and of themselves, especially when used in a manner that seeks to honor God. While Scripture certainly condemns idolatry and false worship (Exodus 20:3-5), the physical destruction of religious practices as a means of “cleansing” them is unscriptural.
Instead, the Bible teaches that God’s true worshippers worship Him in spirit and truth (John 4:24), not through the destruction of physical temples or rituals but through the purification of the heart (Matthew 15:18-20). Jesus Christ, as the ultimate high priest and the fulfillment of the Law, has already brought an end to the need for temple worship and rituals associated with it (Matthew 27:51; Hebrews 9:11-12). The biblical church does not require the physical destruction of places of worship but calls for the transformation of hearts through the Gospel (Romans 12:1-2).
3. Prophetic Fulfillment and the Coming of the “Riser/Qaim”
The passage claims that the Seventh Covenant represents the fulfillment of numerous prophecies, with the “Riser/Qaim” from the Family of Mohammed coming to obliterate misguidance and bring a new order. The figure of the Qaim is presented as a Messianic figure whose arrival will purify the earth from falsehood.
The Bible, however, teaches that Jesus Christ is the only fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies regarding the Messiah. The New Testament consistently affirms that Christ is the anointed one, the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5:17), and the only Savior of the world (John 14:6; Acts 4:12). There is no biblical basis for the introduction of a new, later Messiah or divine figure, as the Bible teaches that Christ’s first coming accomplished all that was necessary for salvation and the restoration of God’s kingdom on earth.
Furthermore, the Bible speaks clearly against any additional messianic figures or self-proclaimed divinely appointed leaders who rise to establish a new religious order (Matthew 24:23-26). Jesus Himself warned about false messiahs who would deceive many, a warning that applies directly to the figure of the Qaim presented here (Matthew 24:5, 24).
4. Destruction of Houses of Worship and Idolatry
The claim that houses of worship, including mosques, which have supposedly become “houses of misguidance, idolatry, and hypocrisy,” must be destroyed, is a severe distortion of biblical teaching. According to the Bible, worship is not bound to physical structures but is a matter of the heart. Jesus, when speaking to the Samaritan woman at the well, clarified that true worship does not depend on a specific location but on the worship of God in spirit and truth (John 4:21-24).
In fact, the Bible does not promote the physical destruction of places of worship, but rather calls for the purification of hearts through the gospel of peace (Romans 10:15). The destruction of religious buildings would be a misguided attempt to solve a spiritual problem with a physical solution, something that contrasts with the message of redemption offered through Christ alone. Instead of calling for the destruction of buildings, the Bible teaches that all believers should seek to worship God in a way that honors Him, not by the destruction of religious structures but by the renewal of the heart (Romans 12:1-2).
5. Islam’s Return to Strangeness and the “Blessed” Strangers
The text refers to the famous hadith where Prophet Mohammed states that Islam will return to being strange and thus “blessed are the strangers.” The book applies this to those who accept the teachings of the Seventh Covenant, framing them as part of a “blessed” remnant.
The strangeness spoken of in the Bible is not about a new revelation but about the radical nature of the Gospel message itself. Jesus warned His followers that they would be hated for His sake and that they would be considered strangers or outcasts (John 15:18-20). The Bible does not speak of a new or additional revelation that would restore some ancient lost truth; instead, it speaks of a gospel of grace that transcends all cultures, calling all to salvation in Christ alone (Mark 16:15-16).
Moreover, the idea of a new “blessed” group receiving exclusive revelations that replace or overrule the established truth of God’s Word is contradictory to the biblical understanding of the finality of Christ’s work (Hebrews 1:1-2). The strangers in the Bible are those who embrace the Gospel of Christ and live as aliens in a world that rejects God, not those who follow new or unbiblical revelations.
6. Changes in Jurisprudence and the Unfolding of the Seventh Covenant
The claim that there will be future jurisprudential revelations and changes in religious law under the Seventh Covenant presents a theological problem. The Bible explicitly teaches that the law of Christ, the new covenant, has been revealed once and for all through Jesus Christ and that believers are to live under the law of grace, not the Mosaic Law or any new set of regulations (Romans 6:14; Galatians 3:24-25). The finality of Christ’s work means there is no need for a new set of laws or a revised covenant to supersede the gospel of grace already provided.
Conclusion
The teachings in The Seventh Covenant with Ahmed Al-Hassan deviate significantly from biblical doctrine. They promote a works-based salvation, the destruction of established religious practices without justification, the arrival of a new messianic figure, and the creation of a new religious order. Each of these elements contradicts the biblical gospel of grace through faith alone in Jesus Christ, the finality of Christ’s work, and the call for believers to worship God in spirit and truth. Thus, these teachings must be rejected as heretical and unbiblical, as they undermine the sufficiency and finality of Christ’s sacrifice for sin.