I didn't read the whole poem but stopped here:
We wonder! Was He pleased by what they did Him?
If yes, blessed be they, they achieved His pleasure,
But if He was discontented, this means their power has subjugated Him!
Sins such as the unjust murder of the Prophets for example Yahya :saws: (John the baptist) do not please Allah , the people who commit such sins are not blessed but rather draw upon themselves the wrath of Allah, and even though He is not contented by such flagrant crimes, Allah is in no way subjugated but rather the criminals failed the test and transgressed and so deserve the punishment of Allah which was already coming to them unless they sincerely repent to Allah and from their crimes.
152. To those who believe in Allah and His apostles and make no distinction between any of the apostles, we shall soon give their (due) rewards: for Allah is Oft- forgiving, Most Merciful.
153. The people of the Book ask thee to cause a book to descend to them from heaven: Indeed they asked Moses for an even greater (miracle), for they said: "Show us Allah in public," but they were dazed for their presumption, with thunder and lightning. Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority.
154. And for their covenant we raised over them (the towering height) of Mount (Sinai); and (on another occasion) we said: "Enter the gate with humility"; and (once again) we commanded them: "Transgress not in the matter of the sabbath." And we took from them a solemn covenant.
155. (They have incurred divine displeasure): In that they broke their covenant; that they rejected the signs of Allah. that they slew the Messengers in defiance of right; that they said, "Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve Allah.s Word; We need no more)";- Nay, Allah hath set the seal on their hearts for their blasphemy, and little is it they believe;-
156. That they rejected Faith; that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge;
157. That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
158. Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-
159. And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;-
From Quran, Chapter 4
I do not doubt brother ibn al Qayyim's sincerity or zeal for the truth but I assume his zeal for debate made him forget certain simple logic in this instance.
To those who claim that Jesus is Allah (na'oodhu bi Allah min dhaalik), I ask you to think clearly:
We know that God commands what us just so it is wrong to attempt to justify crimes and attempted crimes by saying Allah commanded us thus, since Allah never commands what is unjust.
The people of Rome were initially pagan and the leadership it appears has gone to great lengths to lay the blame upon the occupied people of jerusalem of the time, despite the fact that we know that the chief priest and his henchmen were under Roman subjugation and were tasked with keeping the people subdued under the status quo by pretending that acceptance of the corrupt status quo was what God wanted from them by misreading the what remained of the substantially edited book, we see the roman leadership's attempts at a cover-up when we come across statements such as "people didn't speak of him openly for fear of the jews", when the people who were afraid were actually "the jews", the gospel of barnabas tells us that it was actually a roman edict put up in the synagogues (a bit like the "prevent" strategy in england where people are careful of what they say for fear of the imams or moderators - when it's really the corrupt british government and it's spying trolls and goons).
The pagan roman leadership, after reluctantly accepting the faith after a huge amount of it's people had come to accept Jesus as the messiah, went on to put forward a pagan model of pure and innocent human sacrifice, including cannibalism and vampirism in effigy - in order to attempt to rationalise their attempted act which was thwarted and obscured by Allah, and it is an undeniable fact that such human sacrifice to the "gods" existed in pagan cultures - by misreading the command to fully absorb and exemplify the word of God since it is recorded that man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from God.
It is clear from the gospels that Jesus was demanding to know why they were trying to secretly kill him and was arguing against such a crime, and that debate was taking place within the leadership just as it had in pharaoh's court at the time of Moses.
It is therefore really a fallacy to claim that Jesus (pbum) willingly and happily offered up his soul to be murdered, and if he hadn't been saved by God (as he was) from such torture and buffeting with a crown of thorns in the flesh -anointed (maseeh)by the deceiver(dajjal)- at CRANIUM (golgotha), it would have been because of the sins of the people and not a human sacrifice as an atonement for their sins. One is compelled to ask: where is the good judgement of those who interpreted the events at the council of nicea? Since any worthy judge could easily read justice as justice and injustice as injustice.....
Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
It was narrated to us via Ibn Luhay‘ah from Qays ibn al-Hajjaj from someone who told him: When (Christian) Egypt was conquered, its people came to ‘Amr ibn al-‘As (may Allah be pleased with him) and said to him: O Ameer, this Nile of ours is used to something and cannot flow unless it is done. He said: What is that? They said: On the twelfth night of this month, we take a young girl from her parents, and we placate her parents, then we dress her in jewellery and the finest garments there can be, then we throw her into this Nile.
‘Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) said to them: This is something that cannot happen in Islam; Islam erases that which came before it (of bad customs).
So they stayed for a while, during which the Nile did not flow at all, neither a little nor a lot, until they thought of leaving. Then ‘Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) wrote to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), telling him about this. He wrote to him, saying: You did the right thing. I am sending you a piece of paper with my letter; throw it into the Nile.
When his letter came, ‘Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) took the piece of paper on which was written:
“From the slave of Allah ‘Umar, Ameer al-Mumineen, to the Nile of the people of Egypt.
To proceed: If you only flow on your own initiative, then do not flow, for we have no need of you. But if you only flow on the command of Allah, the One, the Subduer, and He is the One Who causes you to flow, then we ask Allah, may He be exalted, to make you flow.”
He threw the paper in the Nile and by Saturday morning, Allah had caused the Nile to flow (to a depth or width of) sixteen cubits in one night, and Allah put an end to this particular custom of the people of Egypt until today.
End quote from al-Bidayah wa’n-Nihayah, 7/114-115
Similar reports were also narrated by Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam in Futooh Misr, p. 165; al-Lalkai in Sharh I‘tiqad Ahl as-Sunnah, 6/463; Ibn ‘Asakir in Tareekh Dimashq, 44/336; Abu’sh-Shaykh in al-‘Azamah, 4/1424, via Ibn Luhay‘ah.
This is a da‘eef isnad (weak chain of narration) that is not saheeh, and this report cannot be proven with such an isnad. Ibn Luhay‘ah – whose full name was ‘Abdullah ibn Luhay‘ah ibn ‘Uqbah – is da ‘eef as he used to get mixed up, and in addition to that he is mudallis (one who narrates from someone he met something he did not hear). See at-Tahdheeb, 5/327-33; Mizan al-I‘tidaal, 2/475-484
Qays ibn al-Hajjaj is sadooq (trustworthy), from the sixth level of hadeeth narrators (tabaqah) according to al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar; they are the ones who it is not proven that they met any of the Sahabah/Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). See: Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb, 1/25
Sometimes he narrated it as a mursal (the link between the Successor and the Prophet is missing) report and sometimes he narrated it from the one who told him, but the one who told him is majhool and not known.
So the report is da‘eef (weak) and is not saheeh (sound)
If this story were true, everyone would know about it and it would be well known, and it would have been widely narrated through confirmed isnads, because it is an important and significant event, the like of which should not be ignored; rather an incident less significant than this would not be overlooked by historians and narrators.
And Allah knows best.