Harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an

[أبو سليمان عمر]

Greenvile
63. And when 'Iesa (Jesus) came with (Our) clear Proofs, he said: "I have come to you with Al-Hikmah (Prophethood), and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) in which you differ, therefore fear Allâh and obey me,
64. "Verily, Allâh! He is my Lord (God) and your Lord (God). So worship Him (Alone). This is the (only) Straight Path (i.e. Allâh's religion of true Islâmic Monotheism)."
SO God is one and only on Isa pbuh Worshiped and told ppl to worship God Alone then look at the next verse
65. But the sects from among themselves differed. So woe to those who do wrong (by ascribing things to 'Iesa (Jesus) that are not true) from the torment of a painful Day (i.e. the Day of Resurrection)!
Woe is a valley in Hell so Woe to those who ascribing things to 'Iesa (Jesus) that are not true) and there is what torment of a painful Day (i.e. the Day of Resurrection)! the above ayat are from
Quran 43 63 - 65

 

[Grace Seeker]

because it says what it means and means what it says (Jesus never ever been put on a cross)... let alone be killed.

Why? Because it says that they crucified him not? Does that have to mean that he was never put on the cross? Or can it not simply mean that the act of hanging him on the cross did not result in his crucifixion?

If he died even for five minutes then death had won on that day.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that point of view. It isn't central to the question I am asking anyway.

Which Jesus?
If the physical ,then death had defeated him that day he died on the cross.

Yes, if you focus on that day alone. But taking the longer view, what appeared to be a defeat and death was in fact not defeat at all, but the means to an even greater victory in that the power of death to seperate us from God was totally destroyed by Christ's resurrection.

If the spiritual ,death never defeated the spiritual Jesus neither any other spiritual being.

And don't we always have to look at spiritual realities as much as we do the physical world?

I'm sure I understand your post ... you try to render the meaning of the verse as:

"And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they killed his spirit not nor crucified his spirit .

Not quite. I'm suggesting that in the case where a person is sentenced to by hung by his neck until dead, that if the execution is proceeded with, the rope put around his neck and he is dropped through the floor, but the process then goes awry and he lives. Some might technically say that he was hung (however briefly), but it would also be true that another could write of the event, they thought they had hung him, but in only appeared so to them, for the hung him not. So, my question is about whether or not a similar sort of rendering might be an equally appropriate rending of 4:157?

Does that make any sense? (My question, not my conclusion.)

 

[Walter]

Dear Imam:

You are gravely mistaken if you believe that the Bible can be used to prove anything. The juveniles who have never read it in its entirety may misinterpret it, but anyone who has read it in its entirety and with a fair degree of common sense can see where the juveniles have erred.

I see that you are comparing 19:15 (John) with 19:33 (Jesus). This is a valid comparison. According to the Bible, John was born, died, but was not raised to life. Therefore, if 19:15 is to be in harmony with the Bible, then we must interpret it as you have; namely that John will be raised at the ressurection.

Again, according to the Bible, Jesus was born and He died (like John, while He was on the Earth) on the cross. Also, according to the Bible, Jesus was ressurected on the 3rd day.

So Imam we have a choice. We can either interpret the verse that Jesus did not die, which is not a good comparison with 19:15, or we can interpret it to be in harmony with the Bible. I choose the latter.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Walter]

Dear Umar:

Where are these unfounded accusations coming from? Let me ask you Umar:

1. Where have I denied that we are to submit to One God?

2. Where have I denied that Jesus is anything but what the Qur'an teaches Him to be?

I await your responses.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[GreyKode]

So Imam we have a choice. We can either interpret the verse that Jesus did not die, which is not a good comparison with 19:15, or we can interpret it to be in harmony with the Bible. I choose the latter.

How about choosing the interpretation to be in harmony with the Quran alone, I would rather choose that, which is the interpretation that he didn't die.

 

[GreyKode]

2. Where have I denied that Jesus is anything but what the Qur'an teaches Him to be?

alright grenville say this " I bear witness that Jesus(pbuh) is a slave and messenger of ALLAH(swt)"

 

[syilla]

alright grenville say this " I bear witness that Jesus(pbuh) is a slave and messenger of ALLAH(swt)"

MashaAllah :statisfie

 

[sacredagent]

Assalamualaikum,

In my opinion, if we are to see to harmony between Bible and Qur'an, one of the best way is to read Brandon Toropov's Beyond Mere Christianity. In that book, Mr. Toropov focused on the so-called Quelle (Q) verses of the Bible, said to be the most reliable of Jesus' sayings. There, we'll find some paralel between what the Qur'an and the Bible command. After reading the books, I came to the conclusion that those verses (Quelle and Qur'an) come from the same source.

Allah knows best.

 

[Walter]

Hi Grey Kode:

alright grenville say this " I bear witness that Jesus(pbuh) is a slave and messenger of ALLAH(swt)"

Kode, I have repeatedly stated that both the Bible and the Qur’an explicitly teach that Jesus is:
• a Servant and Prophet of God; (Bible: Matthew 12:15–18, 13:57/ Qur’an: 19:30, 34)
• born of the virgin Mary; (Luke 1:30–35/3:45–47)
• led by the Holy Spirit; (Luke 4:18–19/2:87)
• a Preacher of the Gospel; (Mark 1:14–15/5:46)
• a Healer who healed the sick and raised the dead; (Matthew 4:23, John 12:1/ 5:110) and
• the Christ or Messiah. (John 4:25–26/3:45)

Your description of "slave and messenger" would be included in the first item "Servant and Prophet of God", which is in harmony with both the Bible and the Qur'an.

Kode, I noticed that when given a choice to interpret the Qur'an so that it is in harmony with the Bible, or in conflict with the Bible, that you are eager to choose the latter. Why Kode, why?

Regards,
Grenville

 

[جوري]

Where are you going with this?
You can't be the messenger of God and God at the same time, perhaps that is why not only Kode but the rest of us are for the 'latter'!

all the best

 

[Walter]

Hi Sacredagent:

In my opinion, if we are to see to harmony between Bible and Qur'an, one of the best way is to read Brandon Toropov's Beyond Mere Christianity. In that book, Mr. Toropov focused on the so-called Quelle (Q) verses of the Bible, said to be the most reliable of Jesus' sayings. There, we'll find some paralel between what the Qur'an and the Bible command. After reading the books, I came to the conclusion that those verses (Quelle and Qur'an) come from the same source.

I am familiar with studies that assume that the Bible and the Qur'an have been translated incorrectly. Therefore, these scholars use other source documents and try to re-translate the Bible and the Qur'an in order to force harmony. This is not true with Brothers Kept Apart.

Brothers Kept Apart assumes that any typical English translation of the Bible and the Qur'an can be used, because while some minor details may change, the central message in both books remain. The study assumed both the Bible and the Qur'an were correct, and then found harmony between the principal teachings of both without damaging the integrity of the verses in either.

The great misconception that I have found among those reacting to the book without actually reading it, is that they have assumed that the book has found harmony between the Qur'an and Christian religious tradition, which it has not.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Walter]

Dear Gossamer:

Where are you going with this?
You can't be the messenger of God and God at the same time, perhaps that is why not only Kode but the rest of us are for the 'latter'!

We have not yet started to discuss the contentious matter of Jesus' divinity as yet. Yet these unsupported accusations of what the study has revealed continue to be made? Why not either read the study, or rationally discuss the matter to learn of the results. Why continue to confidently assert what it found without even taking the time to read it?

Regards,
Grenville

 

[جوري]

Dear Gossamer:



We have not yet started to discuss the contentious matter of Jesus' divinity as yet. Yet these unsupported accusations of what the study has revealed continue to be made? Why not either read the study, or rationally discuss the matter to learn of the results. Why continue to confidently assert what it found without even taking the time to read it?

Regards,
Grenville

You haven't defined for us the actual nidus of your study and I am certain that one exists.. or is this casual banter for the sake of it?

all the best

 

[alcurad]

but Grenville, his divinity is the main issue here, atleast for muslims,,
otherwise:
• a Servant and Prophet of God
• born of the virgin Mary
• led by the Holy Spirit
• a Preacher of the Gospel
• a Healer who healed the sick and raised the dead
• the Christ or Messiah

these points would be better discussed with our christian 'cousins' rather than with Muslims, since all Muslims do agree with those already.

 

[Imam]

Why? Because it says that they crucified him not? Does that have to mean that he was never put on the cross? Or can it not simply mean that the act of hanging him on the cross did not result in his crucifixion?

It does have to mean he was never put on the cross

the verse has 2 verbs:

(Katala) ,to kill

(Salaba) ,to put on a cross.

They neither (katalo) Jesus nor (salabo) Jesus.....

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that point of view. It isn't central to the question I am asking anyway.

we would find out soon that such point (the significance of the death of Jesus?) to be the only central point of our discussion and all what we do now is discussing the trivial point (was Jesus crucified?)!!

Don't be surprised (and most Muslim readers of the thread too)....soon I will explain what I mean............

death was in fact not defeat at all, but the means to an even greater victory in that the power of death to seperate us from God was totally destroyed by Christ's resurrection..

Now you shift the focus on the resurrection which you call a victory,I have to disagree with that...

If a resurrection by the power of the father totally destroy what you call(The power of death) then I can argue that one of the list of those been resurrected from the dead in both the Old and New Testament before Jesus did the Job instead....

more to be mentioned in that crucial point later...............

And don't we always have to look at spiritual realities as much as we do the physical world?

They are spiritual but are they realities?

that is the question.

Some might technically say that he was hung (however briefly), but it would also be true that another could write of the event, they thought they had hung him, but in only appeared so to them, for the hung him not. So, my question is about whether or not a similar sort of rendering might be an equally appropriate rending of 4:157?

That is another rendering which we can call (swoon theory)

He was put on the cross but didn't die and escaped injured!!..

the weakness of such speculation is what I mentioned before
(The verse says literally that they didn't put Jesus on a cross)...

why would I ignore the literal obvious meaning and resort to speculations without proofs instead?!!

my next post for greenvile later when I have time inshaAllah

peace

 

[Walter]

Hi Alcurad:

but Grenville, his divinity is the main issue here, atleast for muslims,,
otherwise:
• a Servant and Prophet of God
• born of the virgin Mary
• led by the Holy Spirit
• a Preacher of the Gospel
• a Healer who healed the sick and raised the dead
• the Christ or Messiah
these points would be better discussed with our christian 'cousins' rather than with Muslims, since all Muslims do agree with those already.

Finally! So now that we have established an area of harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an, let us go forward carefully so that we can identify the point of divergence.

Now let us try a little exercise. Let us imagine that we are each holding up two corners of a square table. Let us also imagine that we have finally got a marble to balance on the suspended table. As we go forward, let us try to keep the marble balanced as much as we are able.

Therefore, if a verse in the Qur'an can be interpreted to be in harmony with the Bible, without damaging the integrity of the verse in the Qur'an, then for this exercise, let us just try it. Agreed?

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Imam]

Dear:Grenville

I see that you are comparing 19:15 (John) with 19:33 (Jesus). This is a valid comparison.

No ,hold on

I was Not comparing John with Jesus(Person vs person ) I was showing you that there is a verse with a similar structure refers to future resurrection in the day of judgment.......


If you treat the John of 19:15 with the Jesus of 19:33 as identical then:

1- both of them died natural death (not killed,as the fact one of them mentioned not to be killed and you assume them to be typical then the other necessarily not killed too) in peace.

2-they both will be resurrected from the dead in the day of Judgment.

so you see, even if you understand it this way the problem remains!...

According to the Bible, John was born, died, but was not raised to life. Therefore, if 19:15 is to be in harmony with the Bible, then we must interpret it as you have; namely that John will be raised at the resurrection.

Dear Grenville

plz.... I have one condition for this peaceful discussion to go on.

is to respect the subject matter.......our current subject matter is the Quran and only the Quran......I think it is fair before comparing the Quran with the Bible.....is to finish understanding all what the Quran says regarding the topic under discussion....

We can either interpret the verse that Jesus did not die, which is not a good comparison with 19:15

well,
If you interpret the verse that Jesus did die you have to
1-provide me soon the Quranic text that his death was due to crucification or killing.
2-That the resurrection of 19:15 is different from the resurrection of 19:33

in other words provide a Quranic verse claims that Jesus was resurrected from
the dead................


I hope this time you won't resort to the Bible and focus on the Quran......

In other words, the Quran tells clearly

(Jesus neither been killed nor been crucified) why don't you believe what it means? Don't you believe that the Quran negates that Jesus was crucified? if not why not?

I hope you answer that specific question before we go ahead...


peace

 

[Walter]

Dear Imam:

(Jesus neither been killed nor been crucified) why don't you believe what it means? Don't you believe that the Quran negates that Jesus was crucified? if not why not?

I hope you answer that specific question before we go ahead...

I do believe what the Qur’an says about Jesus. While you are claiming that Jesus was not killed or crucified, I do not believe that this is what the Qur’an appears to teach.

As previously explained, the verse 19:33 can be interpreted as you have and as I have. If it is interpreted as you have, then to maintain the integrity of 4:157, you would then have to interpret “they killed him not, nor crucified him” as no one killed Him nor crucified Him. This interpretation damages the integrity of the verse since “they” cannot be equated with “no one”.

That they said, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God"; 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 knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:—Nay, God raised him up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise; (4:157–158)​

If 19:33 is interpreted as I have, which is that Jesus was crucified and killed, then 4:157 would have to be interpreted as the Jews (“they”) killed him not, nor crucified him, which is exactly what the verse states. Therefore, the interpretation that Jesus was crucified and killed, not by the Jews as the Qur’an accurately states, but by the Romans as the Bible and recorded history confirms, is both possible and likely.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[aadil77]

no one interprets that verse that way. Allah refers explicitly to his socalled crucifixion and death, saying that it did not happen at all, not that it did not happen by the jews.

If you read the other verses referring to this, you will read that he was raised and will descend near the end of time, showing that he did not die and will come to live the rest of his life on earth later on

So there's clearly no harmony with this one

 

[Grace Seeker]

Where are you going with this?
You can't be the messenger of God and God at the same time, perhaps that is why not only Kode but the rest of us are for the 'latter'!

Why can't one be in both roles at the same time? The two are not necessarily inherently inconsistent with one another. So, why say that one cannot be both at the same time?