I would like to know whether Ahmad Deedat's views on how Isa (AS) was saved are acceptable to the Muslim Ulama.
To summarize, Deedat held that Isa (AS) was physically put on the cross, but his enemies took him down too fast, thus unable to kill him. He quotes the Bible extensively, of course, but I would like to know if such a view is acceptable to any of the scholars of Islam, past or present.
I would like to know whether Ahmad Deedat's views on how Isa (AS) was saved are acceptable to the Muslim Ulama.
To summarize, Deedat held that Isa (AS) was physically put on the cross, but his enemies took him down too fast, thus unable to kill him. He quotes the Bible extensively, of course, but I would like to know if such a view is acceptable to any of the scholars of Islam, past or present.
Ahmad deedat was is not exactly a scholar of Islam, he was a scholar on comparitive religion, mainly christianity (bible). He may have made errors.
Now to answer you question, the answer is no. No scholars I know of holds that view.
The issue is that I asked one student of knowledge (not exactly a student, but he is well-acquanted with different positions), and he told me that some Muslim scholars had held that Isa (AS) did die and will be resurrected later on for his second coming.
So I am also wondering about Ahmad Deedat's views and Muslim scholars. Of course, since Deedat used the Bible, then he was bound to make conclusions from there mostly, as anyone who has read his works knows.
The issue is that I asked one student of knowledge (not exactly a student, but he is well-acquanted with different positions), and he told me that some Muslim scholars had held that Isa (AS) did die and will be resurrected later on for his second coming.
So I am also wondering about Ahmad Deedat's views and Muslim scholars. Of course, since Deedat used the Bible, then he was bound to make conclusions from there mostly, as anyone who has read his works knows.
Well, I don't know what some other scholars said, they will have a hard time affirming that the prophet Isa died.
Firstly it is clear from the Quran he was not cruficied nor killed. He was taken up.
Secondly their are hadith that say's Isa bin maryam was taken up alive and he will come back alive during the time of dajjal. He will do his job than die, and will be resurrected on the day of Judgement
Last edited by Skillganon; 02-23-2007 at 10:25 AM.
I would like to know whether Ahmad Deedat's views on how Isa (AS) was saved are acceptable to the Muslim Ulama.
To summarize, Deedat held that Isa (AS) was physically put on the cross, but his enemies took him down too fast, thus unable to kill him. He quotes the Bible extensively, of course, but I would like to know if such a view is acceptable to any of the scholars of Islam, past or present.
Bro ae you sure he said that? can you give me evidence?
As far as I know his belief was that Isa bin maryam did not die nor killed but was raised up alive.
Bro ae you sure he said that? can you give me evidence?
As far as I know his belief was that Isa bin maryam did not die nor killed but was raised up alive.
It is in the Sheikh Deedat's book The Choice, Volume 2. However, he mentions that Nabi Isa did not die, instead he fell unconscious because of the trauma (of being crucified and nailed to the cross) and when the soldiers believed he was dead, they took his body down and had his companions bury him. Then, the prophet recovered, injured but alive.
Some scholars agree to his theory, but others opt for the substitution theory instead (that Isa alayhi salaam was taken up and somebody else was made to appear as him).
Last edited by Muslim Knight; 02-23-2007 at 10:34 AM.
It is in the Sheikh Deedat's book The Choice, Volume 2. However, he mentions that Nabi Isa did not die, instead he fell unconscious because of the trauma (of being crucified and nailed to the cross) and when the soldiers believed he was dead, they took his body down and had his companions bury it. Then, the prophet recovered, injured but alive.
Some scholars agree to his theory, but others opt for the substitution theory instead (that Isa alayhi salaam was taken up and somebody else was made to appear as him).
Bro, the intial question was Jesus dying and being ressurected. Which is not true. Read the third post.
Secondly their is not evidence from the Quran and the sunnah that Jesus lost concious,that he was buried but was alive and recovered.
b) Shaykh Ahmed Deedat (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
They did not crucify him or kill him, but it seemed to them that they had done so, but they did not crucify or kill the Messiah, because it is certain that they did not kill him. This is how the Muslims understand the confusion about the crucifixion and killing of the Messiah, which is that they did not kill him but this is what they thought and believed that they had done.
Jesus – God, man or myth? (p. 112).
(c) And he (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
The one who was crucified was another person who resembled him. The Gospel of Barnabas confirms the view which says that another person was killed instead of him on the cross. This is in accordance with our view, the Muslims. The confusion arose because they killed another person who resembled him.
Bro, the intial question was Jesus dying and being ressurected. Which is not true. Read the third post.
Secondly their is not evidence from the Quran and the sunnah that Jesus lost concious,that he was buried but was alive and recovered.
Bro, I am more inclined to believe that the prophet was taken up alive and someone else was substituted in his stead. This is because the Quranic notion is that he was never crucified to begin with;
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:- (Surah an-Nisaa', 4:157)
Bro, the intial question was Jesus dying and being ressurected. Which is not true. Read the third post.
Secondly their is not evidence from the Quran and the sunnah that Jesus lost concious,that he was buried but was alive and recovered.
Lol, brother, the intial question was not whether Jesus died, but whether the view held by Ahmed deedat was ok. I.e. that HE was on the cross but didnt die.
The path is long but I hope we meet,
After the grave and the Day, in paradise in bliss upon a reclined seat.
A traveler traveling - travelled from shirk to tawheed,
If I'm remembered for anything - let it be the Mercy I seek.
Actually based on that verse alone it would seem that either opinion could go. What other supporting evidence is there to suggest he wasn't anywhere near the cross?
Bro, I am more inclined to believe that the prophet was taken up alive and someone else was substituted in his stead. This is because the Quranic notion is that he was never crucified to begin with;
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:- (Surah an-Nisaa', 4:157)
Maybe someone can explain better.
EDIT: (Spelling correction, incase some people get the wrong idea)
you beat me to it.
Last edited by Skillganon; 02-23-2007 at 10:54 AM.
Lol, brother, the intial question was not whether Jesus died, but whether the view held by Ahmed deedat was ok. I.e. that HE was on the cross but didnt die.
^Actually based on that verse alone it would seem that either opinion could go. What other supporting evidence is there to suggest he wasn't anywhere near the cross?
Actually based on that verse alone it would seem that either opinion could go. What other supporting evidence is there to suggest he wasn't anywhere near the cross?
I think theres a hadith but I dont know the authenticity of it.
The path is long but I hope we meet,
After the grave and the Day, in paradise in bliss upon a reclined seat.
A traveler traveling - travelled from shirk to tawheed,
If I'm remembered for anything - let it be the Mercy I seek.
I think theres a hadith but I dont know the authenticity of it.
their is no supporting hadith, but based on the Quran.
He was not crucified nor killed but it appeared to them.
The Quran say, he was not crucified than it is a clear indication he was not put on the cross, nor was he killed in that matter. However it appeared(resemble) to them he was.
Last edited by Skillganon; 02-23-2007 at 11:13 AM.
Actually based on that verse alone it would seem that either opinion could go. What other supporting evidence is there to suggest he wasn't anywhere near the cross?
How so? Do you think the verse shouldn't be taken literally?
I don't know any other supporting evidence. If you could enlighten more on this, well, jazakallah.
their is no supporting hadith, but based on the Quran.
He was not crucified nor killed but it appeared to them.
The Quran say, he was not crucified than it is a clear indication he was not put on the cross, nor was he killed in that matter. However it appeared(resemble) to them he was.
Akhi, you telling me that you know for a fact that there is no supporting hadith.
Am confused as "supporting of what" we are talking about. lol.
The path is long but I hope we meet,
After the grave and the Day, in paradise in bliss upon a reclined seat.
A traveler traveling - travelled from shirk to tawheed,
If I'm remembered for anything - let it be the Mercy I seek.
This is how scholars have explained it to me, the ones who thought they crucified Isa AS later also found out they didnt. The reason being, the person they crucified thinking it was Isa AS was a look a like, a person among the ones who planned this, later that person was no where to be found, until they realised they had crucified one of their own and not Isa AS. Its clear from Holy Quran and scholars Isa AS was no where near their crucification ritual, he was raised before they could do that.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Re: Were Ahmad Deedat's views acceptable?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks