Jesus' Crucifixion

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

From the Christian sources I have read it will vary with which denomination you belong to.
It seem that a large number of denominations say the Jew's condemned him for Blasphemy by him saying he was the Son of God.
Some denominations say that he was condemned for proclaiming he was the King of the Jews and that he was attempting to overthrow the government.

i think denominations don't vary here, because they use the same source. Simply both "charges" can be found in Gospels.
n.

format_quote Originally Posted by doodlebug

I'm sorry...did someone answer my question on why they wanted to kill Jesus in the first place? And if it was because they thought he said he was God, why didn't he just refute it, if it wasn't true?

From this thread:

format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

Matthew 23:37 tells us that the Jews stoned and killed other Prophets that were sent to them:
Jesus says, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the
prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee...

Jesus claimed to be a prophet and recieved the same treatment, just as Prophet Muhammad pbuh was met by a barrage of stones when he conveyed his prophethood to the tribe of Thaqîf. The prophets never claimed to be god but they were stoned.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr

The Christian scriptures indicate that Christ was crucified for His claims to be the Son of God, and in fact He claimed to be the "I AM" encountered by Moses. The claim was so clear to His audience that the crowd picked up stones to kill Him for blasphemy.

Jn 10:29 "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. 30 "I and My Father are one." 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, "Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?" 33 The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God."

Read the next few verses!!! Why did you OMIT Jesus's defense to their allegation?

“Jesus answered them, ‘Is it not written in your law, “I (God) said, ‘You are gods’?* If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the son of God’?” (John 10:34-36).
*Psalm 82:6

This passage shows that Jesus defended himself saying, "But in your own scripture (Psalm 82:6), mere judges are called Gods! What then of someone who came with revelation from God? Surely the title 'god' is more fitting for him!"

This passage is an in-your-face-screaming-reference to metaphorical use of the word 'god'. Why does Jesus compare calling Jesus god to calling humans god if the former is to be taken literally and the latter metaphorically?

Please feel free to continue the discussion in the other thread,
Regards

Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr

I've never seen any writings outside the Quran that says Muhammed is a prophet either.

Perhaps you can refer to the authentic Sunnah? And also, Muhammad (peace be upon him) was mentioned in previous scriptures, though I think we would be going beyond the scope of this thread if we were to delve into it. Perhaps there is already a thread out there somewhere .

Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr

In fact, I would expect if any writings were found that claimed to be part of the Sunnah and yet denyed Muhammed's prophet status, they would be considered fabrications.

Well these writings are not authenticated by their content, but rather by their way of transmission. So the question would be who narrated this saying - which would be impossible to be proven an authentic one, since it is outright disbelief.

I have seen postings claiming references to Muhammed in other scriptures, but none of the scriptures mention him by name.

Perhaps it seems this way if one is using the translated versions. When we turn to the original languages, however, we may find it.

format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr

I would not consider the Sunnah to be valid testimony because it was written by followers of Muhammed. In fact, I would expect if any writings were found that claimed to be part of the Sunnah and yet denyed Muhammed's prophet status, they would be considered fabrications.

I have seen postings claiming references to Muhammed in other scriptures, but none of the scriptures mention him by name.

Prophet Mohammed is mentioned by name... it was lost to you in the translation
References to the Holy Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) are made in the Bible although very few Christians know where these references actually are as they turn the pages. In the original scriptures the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) is actually mentioned by name; as you are probably aware the Old Testament was written in Hebrew and the New Testament in Greek. In the Old Testament in the Song of Solomon v5, Ch 16 in the Hebrew language it reads (phonetically)

"hi’kko ma mitha’kimm vi kullo mohammadim zehdudi vi zeherehi baynat yerushalem"

The word mohammadim is Mohammed with ‘im’ – ‘im’ is a plural of respect in Hebrew.
Latinised Language: Further examples: Jesus was the Messiah (Hebrew word), in Arabic Massih, in English ‘Christ’. How does this happen? The Hebrew it means to anoint, to rub over. As Muslims when we do ablutions for prayer (Wudu) we rub water over our head and this is called ‘Massah’ every Muslim does that – it stems from the Hebrew and Arabic to rub, wipe or anoint. Messiah in Greek means ‘Christos’, this was turned into Christ in English. Jesus was not his name; it was Yeheshua in classical Hebrew or (Isa, Isoh, Iesu in Arabic or Hebrew). Westerners have a habit of adding J’s – Yusuf becomes Joseph, Yohanna becomes John, Yakub becomes Jacob. Where there is no ‘J’, a ‘J’ is added. It is akin to a sickness or literary 'J'-walking

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

We do not know for certain at which point the change took place. I can see the logic that it would make sense for the change to have taken place before the torture. There is no actually verification as to who was crucified, except that it was not I'sa(a.s.). I've heard speculation that it may have been Judas.

I agree that God(swt) will not deceive us. So in my mind it must have been some condition in which the people actually deceived themselves. I was not there so I can not say how God(swt) did this without it being deceit by him. I can only trust in Allah(swt) and if there is ever any reason I truly have a need to know I will learn it, Inshallah.

Well it is interesting to note that the people who was present wanted to see Jesus get crucified, are also the people who already rejected the message of Jesus (deaf,dumb and blind). They where the one abided theire mocking what they "percieved" to be Jesus.

They sealed thier own doom with their own hand but failed to achieve what they had set out to do.

format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr

That's the reason why I used a Jewish site. They obviously feel Christ was crucified.

this is not obvious to me at all. the quotes are addressing the political reasons that pontius pilate was white washed in the new testament.
here's your originial post.
From JewishVirtualLibrary.org:

format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr

"Concerning Jesus' executioner, Pontius Pilate, we have a considerable body of data that contradicts the largely sympathetic portrayal of him in the New Testament. Even among the long line of cruel procurators who ruled Judea, Pilate stood out as a notoriously vicious man. He eventually was replaced after murdering a group of Samaritans: The Romans realized that keeping him in power would only provoke continual rebellions. The gentle, kindhearted Pilate of the New Testament—who in his "heart of hearts" really did not want to harm Jesus is fictional. Like most fictions, the story was created with a purpose. When the New Testament was written, Christianity was banned by Roman law. The Romans, well aware that they had executed Christianity's founder—indeed the reference to Jesus' crucifixion by the Roman historian Tacitus is among the earliest allusions to him outside the New Testament—had no reason to rescind their anti-Christian legislation. Christianity's only hope for gaining legitimacy was to "prove" to Rome that its crucifixion of Jesus had been a terrible error, and had only come about because the Jews forced Pilate to do it. Thus, the New Testament depicts Pilate as wishing to spare Jesus from punishment, only to be stymied by a large Jewish mob yelling, "Crucify him." The account ignores one simple fact. Pilate's power in Judea was absolute. Had he wanted to absolve Jesus, he would have done so: He certainly would not have allowed a mob of Jews, whom he detested, to force him into killing someone whom he admired."

From Tacitus Annals:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."

It is interesting that neither of these articles deny Christ's crucifixion. It therefore would hardly seem to be a fable.

format_quote Originally Posted by Jayda

Mary was present and so were some of the disciples they did not want him to be crucified.

Hello Jayda

They watched from a distance, according to Matthew there was Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons. (Mark adds “Salome” to the list)

format_quote Originally Posted by Skillganon

Hello Jayda

They watched from a distance, according to Matthew there was Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons. (Mark adds “Salome” to the list)

Mark doesnt say what distance, John says its close enough for Jesus to talk to Mary. So she Mary Magdalene and at least one disciple were there. On top of that after his resurrection he spoke to his disciples, they recognized him, and he showed Thomas (who doubted) the holes in his arms. So we know Jesus was the one who was crucified.

format_quote Originally Posted by Jayda

Mark doesnt say what distance, John says its close enough for Jesus to talk to Mary. So she Mary Magdalene and at least one disciple were there. On top of that after his resurrection he spoke to his disciples, they recognized him, and he showed Thomas (who doubted) the holes in his arms. So we know Jesus was the one who was crucified.

Hola Jayda

Ok. Don't worry I will check. Don't wan't to argue, but discussion will be nice. Can you pm me the passage please. .

Here's is an article I researched and wrote, first time appearing here in LI forum. This is an unedited, and rushed version. Please tell me what you think, any comment is appreciated. Tell me if it is any good.

Crucifixion of Jesus.

by Musa.

Un-edited version.

1.0 Introduction:

Christianity holds that Jesus got crucified on the cross for the redemption of the sin of mankind through shedding of his blood.
The Nicene Creed makes it an article of faith to believe in the crucifixion of Jesus:
“For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures;”[Nicene creed]

Islam holds that Jesus did not get crucified.

The purpose of this article is to reveals interesting fact concerning the crucifixion professed by these two faiths.

2.0. Crucifixion of Jesus according to the Bible

2.1. Leading up to the crucifixion:

Leading before the arrest of Jesus, Judas betrays him for money and all the disciples desert him and fled.
Gospel according to Luke describe Jesus being blasphemy by admitting His the son of God, when accused at the presence of the council of elders (Luke 22:70-71).
The next early morning the chief priests, with the elders, the teachers of the law and the whole Sanhedrin, reached a decision. They bound Jesus, led him away and handed him over to Pilate.
However in front of Pilate Jesus is accused of subverting the nation and opposing the payment of taxes as well as calling himself of Christ, King and stirring up the people of Judea (Luke 23: 1-2). Although Pilate seems to acknowledge there is no basis for the charge brought on nor did Herod whom Jesus was sent onto. The narration goes onto say Pilate opposed the crucifixion of Jesus but with the consent insistence of the Jews present he finally releases him to their will.
According Matthew narrates that Pilate has Jesus flogged before handing him over to them.

2.2 The Crucifixion:

The scripture according to Luke describes as Jesus was led away to be crucified with two other criminals and Simon from cyrene (the father of Alexander and Rufus according to Mark 15:21) was made to carry the cross behind Jesus. They crucified Jesus along with the two criminals one on his left and the other on his right. The people cast lots to decide who will divide his clothes. The people watched him and Rulers sneered at him. Soldiers mocked him to save himself and offered him wine vinegar.
Jesus died when “It was now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour, for the sun stopped shining…”(Luke 23:44-45)
All the people who gathered there to watch left but the women who followed from Galilee from a distance watch the spectacle. However according to Matthew Many women where watching from the distance who had followed from Galilee, amongst them Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons. (Mark adds “Salome” to the list)
However Gospel according to John that Jesus mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene stood by the Cross of Jesus and was indeed witness to the event. (John19:25)

The short account provided above, of the crucifixion, is according to the gospels that Christiana generally believe in.

3.0 Jesus Crucifixion according to the Quran:

According to the Quran Jesus did not get crucified but it was made to appear to them. This is provided in the Yusuf Ali translation of the Quran:

“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:-“ (Quran 4:157)

The Quran does not allude to how it was made to appear to them, i.e. whether it was someone else, an illusion e.t.c.

4.0 Jesus Crucifixion according to other early Christian writing:

We have seen the position of the bible teaching on the death of Jesus, which did take place, and we have seen the Quran position on the Jesus Crucifixion, which Jesus did not get crucified but it was made to appear to them.

Coming away from the bible, and looking elsewhere we find interesting statements in a collection of thirteen ancient codices containing over fifty texts that seems to have survived, discovered in 1945 Egypt, when once thought to be destroyed during early Christian struggle to define “Orthodoxy”

4.1. The Second Treaties of the Great Seth:

According to “ The Second Treatise of the Great Seth” it describes Jesus not succumbing to the plan they devised for him. That he did not die in reality but appeared to them so, according to their sight and thought he was suffered and succumbed to fear.
“…For my death, which they think happened, (happened) to them in their error and blindness, since they nailed their man unto their death”[1]
It goes onto say that indeed they saw they where punishing him but it was another, their own man they nailed onto the cross and who drank the Vinegar, (possibly Simon of cyrene) that they were deaf and blind and he, Jesus, was laughing at their ignorance.

4.2. The Acts of John:

The Act of John describes that John seeing that suffering of Jesus did not abide but fled unto the Mount of Olives, where he went to weep. Than Jesus appears in the midst of the cave and says:
“…John, unto the multitude below in Jerusalem I am being crucified and pierced with lances and reeds, and gall and vinegar is given me to drink….”[2] Jesus put it into the John’s mind for him to come up to this mountain so he can hear what Jesus has to say.

Jesus goes unto say “...Nothing, therefore, of the things which they will say of me have I suffered: nay, that suffering also which I showed unto thee and the rest in the dance…”[2]

That what you hear, did not happen to him, but was made to appear so, to the people present there.

“… Thou hearest that I suffered, yet did I not suffer; that I suffered not, yet did I suffer; that I was pierced, yet I was not smitten; hanged, and I was not hanged; that blood flowed from me, and it flowed not; and, in a word, what they say of me, that befell me not, but what they say not, that did I suffer…”[2]

After Jesus was taken up, and no one in the multitude beheld him.

4.3 Coptic The Apocalypse of Peter:

The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter reveals an interesting conversation between Peter and Jesus, where Peter sees they are taking Jesus, asks “who is the one glad and laughing on the tree, and is it another whom the feet and hand they are striking?”[3]
Jesus replies that the one on the tree is the living Jesus, but the one that peter sees is the substitute that came to being in his likeness.

“...He whom you saw on the tree, glad and laughing, this is the living Jesus. But this one into whose hands and feet they drive the nails is his fleshly part, which is the substitute being put to shame, the one who came into being in his likeness. But look at him and me…”[3]

The narration goes onto say that Jesus, comes and tell that the one they crucified is a stony vessel where the demon resides, but the one standing near him is the real Jesus whom the arrested and released. Jesus laughs at their perception, knowing they are born blind.

4.4 The (First) Apocalypse of James:

According to the Apocalypse of James that when James heard of His suffering he went to the mountain called Gaugelan with his disciples where he prayed and waited for a sign of him. Jesus appears and John stops he’s prayer, embraces Jesus and kisses him, and say’s:
"Rabbi, I have found you! I have heard of your sufferings, which you endured. And I have been much distressed. My compassion you know. Therefore, on reflection, I was wishing that I would not see this people. They must be judged for these things that they have done. For these things that they have done are contrary to what is fitting."[4]

Jesus replied "...James, do not be concerned for me or for this people...” and that he did not undergo any suffering contrary to what James heard. Jesus say’s:

“...Never have I suffered in any way, nor have I been distressed. And this people has done me no harm...”[4]

5.0 Conclusion:

In conclusion this studies reveals an interesting fact concerning Jesus crucifixion whether was he crucified or not is contested before and still is now. It also sheds some light that Jesus crucifixion was not so readily believed amongst the followers and was not a common dogma during the period of early Christian faith.
What should be noted that all these scriptures reveals and agrees that it appeared to the multitude (i.e. they saw) that Jesus did get crucified and was killed on the stake (cross). However with the exception of the bible it was not Jesus who in reality got crucified.
This does not change what is in the bible or the Christian belief, nor does it change what is in the Quran or the Muslim belief.

Peace.

Ref:

[1] Translated by Roger A. Bullard and Joseph A. Gibbons, The Second Treatise of the Great Seth, Selection made from James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, revised edition. HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1990.

[2] The Acts of John (verse 97-103).

[3] Translated by James Brashler and Roger A. Bullard, (Coptic) The Apocalypse of Peter, The Nag Hammadi Library.

[4] Translated by William R. Schoedel, The (First) Apocalypse of James, Selection made from James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, revised edition. HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1990.

any comments on how I can improve it?

format_quote Originally Posted by `Abd al-Azeez

Masha'Allah, very good article . I'm working on one right now, which uses the Bible to prove that Jesus (peace be upon him) didn't die on the cross, along with quotes from scholars.

[MAD]NOTE TO EVERYONE: [/MAD]

Assalamu alaikum

Brother I may have made blunders on the article. Especially on the quote from the Translation of the Quran (which is translation), thus mistake on any commentary made from it.

According to the Quran Jesus did not get crucified but it was made to appear to them. This is provided in the Yusuf Ali translation of the Quran:

“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:-“ (Quran 4:157)

The Quran does not allude to how it was made to appear to them, i.e. whether it was someone else, an illusion e.t.c

Read this. http://users4.ev1.net/~nami/Another_..._Meherally.htm

So I am not sure on that issue, arabic is not my expertise but you can try out the link "which is actually a refutation to someone else".

So please do not draw any conclusion that Quran say's it is "simon of cyrene," or anything else other than what is stated in the Quran(especiall in arabic) because I don't wan't to cause any fitnah.

Also to note I provided my finding from some presumebly gnostic text, and their is much miss-information in their. So be carefull not to go into where they went. I hope that is sufficient warning enough.