A Question about Jesus being God

[YusufNoor]

Of course, we have to be careful in interpreting what Matthew said. Given that Nicodemus was a member of the ruling council (John 3:1) and that he accompanied Joseph of Arimathea, who was also a prominent member of the council (Mark 15:43 & Luke 23:50), in claiming the body of Jesus for burial (John 19:38-40), I find it unlikely that they actually plotted to put Jesus to death. So,we are left with either a contradiction between Matthew and other gospel writers, or understanding that Matthew might have been speaking in hyperbole.


Also, I hardly think that Pilate's washing of his hands actually clears him of anything. He gave the order, he had the power to ignore everyone had he so desired. He chose to be influenced by them. He can claim that those big bad Jews made him do it, but I don't buy it for a second. His hand washing just makes him look like the weak ineffectual governor that Rome considered him to be. It doesn't absolve him of anything.

Peace be unto those who follow guidance

& Greetings Gene!

me thinks that Pilates job was to keep the peace. some agitators of the "locals" convince him that in order to do that, he had to give the order. after all, at festival time in Judea emotions ring high and it's a powderkeg in the making!

HOWEVER, i, being a Muslim via "Herecy" via Roman Catholicism, would like to see where in History the romans crucified someone and then took him down THAT DAY! :?

 

[Walter]

Hi Grace Seeker:

1. Nicodemus

You noted:

Of course, we have to be careful in interpreting what Matthew said. Given that Nicodemus was a member of the ruling council (John 3:1) and that he accompanied Joseph of Arimathea, who was also a prominent member of the council (Mark 15:43 & Luke 23:50), in claiming the body of Jesus for burial (John 19:38-40), I find it unlikely that they actually plotted to put Jesus to death. So,we are left with either a contradiction between Matthew and other gospel writers, or understanding that Matthew might have been speaking in hyperbole.

I agree that we must be careful in our interpretations. Regarding Nicodemus, there is another possibility. We can assume that:

1. Nicodemus, while a member of the ruling council, was not a chief priest; and
2. after witnessing the beating that Jesus received at the order of the chief priests, Nicodemus succumbed to peer pressure and denied Jesus, just like Peter did.

There is scriptural support for both of these assumptions.
a) Nicodemus is not referred to as a chief priest.
b) Nicodemus came to Jesus secretly.
c) Nicodemus had already been rebuked by the chief priests and Pharisees.

2. Pilate

You also noted:

Also, I hardly think that Pilate's washing of his hands actually clears him of anything. He gave the order, he had the power to ignore everyone had he so desired. He chose to be influenced by them. He can claim that those big bad Jews made him do it, but I don't buy it for a second. His hand washing just makes him look like the weak ineffectual governor that Rome considered him to be. It doesn't absolve him of anything.

You did not present the critical component. The instruction from his wife which was accompanied by a claim of suffering. Do you really want to debate the magnitude of a wife’s influence when supported by a claim of her suffering? Let me clarify that. Do you want to be on the side of the debate that argues that her influence in this regard is not great. From the moment he read her message, Pilate had little choice in the matter.

Matt 27:19-20 - While Pilate was sitting on the judge's seat, his wife sent him this message: "Don't have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him." But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed.

3. Anti-Semitism

Now I feel compelled to respond to cooloonka, don532, Keltoi and yourself on this distancing yourselves from any claim of anti-Semitism in response to Rav’s post. There has been no accusation in this thread by anyone that any person alive today had anything to do with or bears any responsibility whatsoever for anything that happened 2,000 years ago. I do not understand this over sensitivity in this matter? Did I miss something? Has someone offended Rav in the past in this Forum which that has resulted in this rally to “baby” him? Perhaps someone can explain it to me so that I can better understand and phrase my posts accordingly.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Keltoi]

Peace be unto those who follow guidance

& Greetings Gene!

me thinks that Pilates job was to keep the peace. some agitators of the "locals" convince him that in order to do that, he had to give the order. after all, at festival time in Judea emotions ring high and it's a powderkeg in the making!

HOWEVER, i, being a Muslim via "Herecy" via Roman Catholicism, would like to see where in History the romans crucified someone and then took him down THAT DAY! :?

From my understanding, Pilate didn't want Christ's body to be on display, as it would inflame His followers. Pilate's main concern was avoiding unrest and uprising.

 

[- Qatada -]

Hi Grenville.

1) Looking at what i quoted earlier, it becomes apparent that it was the Jews who actually tried to 'kill him.'

John
Chapter 19


[...]

The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar."6 So they took Jesus, 17 and carrying the cross himself 7 he went out to what is called the Place of the Skull, in Hebrew, Golgotha.

18 Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your king?" 16 Then he [Pilate] handed him over to them (the jews) to be crucified. There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, with Jesus in the middle.


​

If you disagree, then you disagree with your own religious scripture.



2) I quoted this verse previously;

And because of their (Jews) disbelief and uttering against Maryam (Mary ا ) a grave false charge (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse);


وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينا

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:-


Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.


And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him [(Jesus), son of (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his [(Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he [(Jesus)] will be a witness against them.



[Qur'an 4: 155-159]

​

Looking from the part in red; "they said (in boast)" - then clarifies that even if (for arguments sake) they never directly 'killed him' - the verse still doesn't contradict that. Since it isn't stated in the verse that they killed him. [However, in your own scripture it does.] In ours it only states that they boasted about 'killing him.'




3) If an army defeated their enemy, and the General was there supporting the troops. Would you agree that the General also was victorious?


Would this General then say - "We won! We defeated the enemy!!" ?


Did the general fight? No.

Was the General the cause for winning the battle? (i.e. controlling his troops) - Yes.


Can we see the similarities in the two situations which are presented i.e. of the General and of the Jews who attempted to kill Jesus son of Mary.

Yes.
​

So whether they directly 'killed him' or indirectly 'killed him' i.e. through the Romans, the same principles apply.



And just to clarify again, we as Muslims don't believe Jesus son of Mary, the servant, Messenger, and Messiah of Allaah to be dead, he wasn't killed, nor was he crucified. Rather Allaah raised him to Himself, and he will return again near the end times.




And Allaah knows best.





Peace.

 

[Walter]

Hi Qatada:

In the interest of accuracy, and so as not to offend Rav, instead of saying that “it was the Jews”, perhaps you can say “it was the corrupt Jewish leaders and those whom they deceived”.

To respond to each of your points.

1. John 19

You seemed to have missed out all of the verses that state that the Romans crucified Jesus.

John 19:16-23 - Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). Here they crucified him, and with him two others—one on each side and Jesus in the middle.

Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek. The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, "Do not write 'The King of the Jews,' but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews." Pilate answered, "What I have written, I have written."

When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom.

Therefore it is clear and beyond refutation that the Romans and not the Jewish leaders and multitude crucified Jesus.

2. Qu’ran 4:157-159

Your interpretation of this verse depends on their claim of killing Jesus being accurate. As shown in item 1, the Bible declares their claim to be false and Qu’ran rightly confirms this. The Jews did not kill Jesus.

3. Your Analogy

The analogy is not applicable. It would be if you had said: two generals had one enemy. The first general killed the enemy but the second general boastfully claimed victory. The second general’s boastful claim is false.

4. Your Assertion

You asserted:

And just to clarify again, we as Muslims don't believe Jesus son of Mary, the servant, Messenger, and Messiah of Allaah to be dead, he wasn't killed, nor was he crucified. Rather Allaah raised him to Himself, and he will return again near the end times.

We are in agreement except “he wasn't killed, nor was he crucified.” This belief is not supported by the Books that came before, by the historical record, or, as shown in these recent posts, by the Qu’ran.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[- Qatada -]

Hi Qatada:

In the interest of accuracy, and so as not to offend Rav, instead of saying that “it was the Jews”, perhaps you can say “it was the corrupt Jewish leaders and those whom they deceived”.

Sure, i don't mind.

To respond to each of your points.

1. John 19

You seemed to have missed out all of the verses that state that the Romans crucified Jesus.

John 19:16-23 - Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). Here they crucified him, and with him two others—one on each side and Jesus in the middle.

Thank you. I've re-checked it again and it does state that.

2. Qu’ran 4:157-159

Your interpretation of this verse depends on their claim of killing Jesus being accurate. As shown in item 1, the Bible declares their claim to be false and Qu’ran rightly confirms this. The Jews did not kill Jesus.

Whether they 'killed' Jesus or not isn't really a problem for us, since it's stated in the Qur'an that the Jews boasted about killing him. It isn't stated that they killed him. So even if the Romans 'killed' him, then it wouldn't really be a problem for us to believe that they would attempt that.


There are also similar verses in regard to some Jews (of Arabia) saying that Uzair/Ezra is the son of Allaah, although they may not have believed in it. It was explicitly stated in the verse that they SAID it with their mouths.

If anyones unsure of what i mean, they can refer to this link; (this topic won't be discussed further within this thread):
http://www.islamicboard.com/304721-post23.html

3. Your Analogy

The analogy is not applicable. It would be if you had said: two generals had one enemy. The first general killed the enemy but the second general boastfully claimed victory. The second general’s boastful claim is false.

No, my analogy makes total sense. Because whether the General fought or not, he would still count himself as victorious. Even though he never got involved within the actual combat. Since in the actual situation of the event - the Jews and the Romans were both on the same side.

4. Your Assertion

You asserted:


We are in agreement except “he wasn't killed, nor was he crucified.” This belief is not supported by the Books that came before, by the historical record, or, as shown in these recent posts, by the Qu’ran.

It's stated in the Qur'an that he wasn't killed, nor was he crucified. If you interpret it one way, know that millions of other muslims disagree with your opinion.





Regards.

 

[ummzayd]

From my understanding, Pilate didn't want Christ's body to be on display, as it would inflame His followers. Pilate's main concern was avoiding unrest and uprising.

from where do you derive 'your understanding'? any actual source?

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

Now I feel compelled to respond to cooloonka, don532, Keltoi and yourself on this distancing yourselves from any claim of anti-Semitism in response to Rav’s post. There has been no accusation in this thread by anyone that any person alive today had anything to do with or bears any responsibility whatsoever for anything that happened 2,000 years ago. I do not understand this over sensitivity in this matter? Did I miss something? Has someone offended Rav in the past in this Forum which that has resulted in this rally to “baby” him? Perhaps someone can explain it to me so that I can better understand and phrase my posts accordingly.

Rally to "baby"?????

I'm not sure what rallying you speak of. And I don't know about any distancing from claims of anti-semitism either. Has someone accused a person of being anti-Semitic?

All I know is that through the years I have heard (in my opinion, not entirely founded and yet not entirely unfounded) two different views with regard to the crucifixion of Jesus.
1) That the Gospels present the Jews as being soliciting the execution of Jesus, and thus in the opinion of some justifying the statement that the Jews are responsible for the killing of Jesus. Over the course of centuries this view has been expressed by many, but in the USA most notably by the KKK.
2) I have also heard a very strong reaction to this view. The reaction holds that the Gospels themselves are anti-Semitic because they say things that people like the KKK can use to develop their views, so it must be that the Gospels have that viewpoint themselves. In recent years I have heard this opinion expressed by groups as widely diverse as the Jewish anti-defamation league to the ACLU.

I don't think either group has a case. And my response was to simply tell my story and what I grew up with as my childhood understanding in reaction to those who might think that either of these views has any merit or is typical of teaching in the Christian church today.

 

[don532]

Now I feel compelled to respond to cooloonka, don532, Keltoi and yourself on this distancing yourselves from any claim of anti-Semitism in response to Rav’s post. There has been no accusation in this thread by anyone that any person alive today had anything to do with or bears any responsibility whatsoever for anything that happened 2,000 years ago. I do not understand this over sensitivity in this matter? Did I miss something? Has someone offended Rav in the past in this Forum which that has resulted in this rally to “baby” him? Perhaps someone can explain it to me so that I can better understand and phrase my posts accordingly.

No offense taken and no such response necessary, in my opinion. I wouldn't be concerned. Simply telling what I know on the subject.

 

[Grace Seeker]

from where do you derive 'your understanding'? any actual source?

peace

These links An Archaeological Note on Crucifixion and Science replays crucifixion will fill you in on some of the varying aspects of crucifixion as practiced by the Romans. They used more than one method for it, and the results would vary considerably depending on the method used, the amount of torture preceeding it, and the general health of the individual. Sometimes crucifixion could last for days, and sometimes it could be over in hours. But once done, the usual Roman response was to simply leave the bodies to rot in place. There were exceptions to this, however. The first century Jewish historian Josephus wrote of receiving permission to rescue two of his friends from the cross after they had already been crucified. One of them nevertheless still died, but one of them survived.

Another of those exceptions was in practice at the time that Jesus was executed. The Jews who had been persuasive in having Jesus executed would not have wanted either his or any of the other bodies left on their crosses over the Jewish holiday of Passover. So there would be as much social pressure on the Romans to remove them from the crosses as there was to have Jesus crucified, something we see that Pilate was more than willing to acquiesce to. This is the reason we see given in the gospel accounts for the breaking of the legs of the other men, in order to hasten their death so that they could be removed from their crosses before the beginning of the Sabbath at nightfall. Most likely the Romans would have just thrown their bodies in the garbage heap. However, again Josephus fills us in on other customs, that the Jews practiced burial of their dead, even of the condemned, as this was Jewish law, "they took down those that were condemned and crucified, and buried them before the going down of the sun." (Source - Josephus, Autobiography, ch. 75; "Wars of the Jews", IV, v.2)

 

[Walter]

Hi Qatada:

You wrote:

Whether they 'killed' Jesus or not isn't really a problem for us, since it's stated in the Qur'an that the Jews boasted about killing him. It isn't stated that they killed him. So even if the Romans 'killed' him, then it wouldn't really be a problem for us to believe that they would attempt that.

The Qu’ran does state rather explicitly that the corrupt Jewish leaders did not kill Jesus: “but they killed him not, nor crucified him”. Therefore if the corrupt Jewish leaders did not crucify Jesus as the Qu’ran has stated, then there is no basis for interpreting the verse to claim that Jesus was not crucified at all. The likely interpretation of the verse is that the Jewish claim of killing the Muslim’s Messiah is baseless.

This interpretation is consistent with recorded history and the Books that came before and the Qu’ran. Of course the millions that you referred to are free to believe, without question, the religious Islamic tradition that may teach otherwise. However, it is much more beneficial to try to determine what is true.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[rav]

Now I feel compelled to respond to cooloonka, don532, Keltoi and yourself on this distancing yourselves from any claim of anti-Semitism in response to Rav’s post. There has been no accusation in this thread by anyone that any person alive today had anything to do with or bears any responsibility whatsoever for anything that happened 2,000 years ago. I do not understand this over sensitivity in this matter? Did I miss something? Has someone offended Rav in the past in this Forum which that has resulted in this rally to “baby” him? Perhaps someone can explain it to me so that I can better understand and phrase my posts accordingly.

Shalom (Peace),

I require no one to 'baby me' at all. All I did was post an article that spoke on the topic about Judaism, Christianity, and the politics of the time when the Gospels were written. I'm afraid that nothing of any sort has happened on this forum. I would love a truthful answer towards Christians views of Jews in this regard though, especially since thousands of years of persecution of Jews by Christians has been done particularly by people who claim we as Jews are 'Jesus killers'. Consequently, I can understand why someone would desire to distance themselves from such a sadistic and hazardous ideology.

 

[- Qatada -]

Okay then grenville, let's see what it says after “but they killed him not, nor crucified him”.

وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينا


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:-

Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.


And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him [(Jesus), son of (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his [(Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he [(Jesus)] will be a witness against them.


[Qur'an 4: 155-159]


​

This then proves that it did appear to them as if he was killed or crucified, although it isn't mentioned whether it was them who did this act (i.e. the Jews putting the penalty into practise.)


Some scholars have stated that there may have been another who was crucified, who resembled him in looks [it's stated in the verse that 'it was made to appear to them.'] Infact, the Gospel of Barnabas states that it was Juda who betrayed Jesus, and therefore this punishment would be befitting for him. However, if you don't accept this view, then it's simply an opinion by some scholars based on other evidences. So it doesn't mean that this opinion is authentic.



So like i've stated earlier, even if the Jews didn't 'kill him' - the Romans could have, and there is no contradiction in our texts in regard to that. I also explained that them Jews who got involved in trying to crucify him - even if they never performed the punishment - they were on the side of the Romans, and therefore would count themselves as the 'crucifiers' of Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him.)


Even if them Jews boasted about 'killing him' - that still doesn't mean they did it. They could have said something with their mouths, although they never really meant it, and i've given the example of them (the Jews in the Arabian peninsula at that time in history) saying with their mouths that Ezra is the son of Allaah. Although this isn't mentioned within the OT.





Regards.

 

[Keltoi]

Shalom (Peace),

I require no one to 'baby me' at all. All I did was post an article that spoke on the topic about Judaism, Christianity, and the politics of the time when the Gospels were written. I'm afraid that nothing of any sort has happened on this forum. I would love a truthful answer towards Christians views of Jews in this regard though, especially since thousands of years of persecution of Jews by Christians has been done particularly by people who claim we as Jews are 'Jesus killers'. Consequently, I can understand why someone would desire to distance themselves from such a sadistic and hazardous ideology.

I can only speak in terms of what I was taught and the Christianity I've been exposed to. Never have I heard a pastor, preacher, minister, etc blame Jews for the death of Christ. I'm well aware of the history between Christianity and European Jews, and the effect of Passion Plays on the Christian population. There is no way to avoid the obvious connection between European anti-semitism and Christianity. However, people who wish to hate will use religion to justify it, we know this from modern events. I suppose Christians and Jews can take some solace in the fact that this problem, while not eradicated, has been drastically improved.

 

[snakelegs]

good book. fat, but very readable.
written by a born and practicing catholic.
constantine's sword: the church and the jews
by james carroll

since the holocaust i think there has been some effort on the part of many christians to address this issue.

 

[Walter]

Hi Qatada:

Let us examine this issue in its proper context.

From 4:153 to 4:157, the Israelites’ unfaithfulness to God in the past is presented. Then the Qu’ran accuses the Jews of continuing this behaviour during the time of Mohammed.

4:156 - That they rejected Faith;

4:156 - that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge;

4:157 - That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";

In each instance, they are accused of doing something wrong. However, since the reader would be clearly confused by the charge in 4:157, since it would seem to conflict with the Books that came before and with recorded history, it is provided with an explanation.

4:157 - 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:-

The explanation is provided by stating “they killed him not”. Then what is the purpose of stating “but so it was made to appear to them”? This provided a basis for their boast otherwise the boast would not make any sense, for it is a historical fact that Jesus was crucified.

You wrote:

So like i've stated earlier, even if the Jews didn't 'kill him' - the Romans could have, and there is no contradiction in our texts in regard to that. I also explained that them Jews who got involved in trying to crucify him - even if they never performed the punishment - they were on the side of the Romans, and therefore would count themselves as the 'crucifiers' of Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him.)

This supports what I am writing. This is how “it was made to appear to them”.

Now as said previously, you are free to interpret this either to conflict with historical facts, or to be in harmony with those facts.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Grace Seeker]

Shalom (Peace),

I require no one to 'baby me' at all. All I did was post an article that spoke on the topic about Judaism, Christianity, and the politics of the time when the Gospels were written. I'm afraid that nothing of any sort has happened on this forum. I would love a truthful answer towards Christians views of Jews in this regard though, especially since thousands of years of persecution of Jews by Christians has been done particularly by people who claim we as Jews are 'Jesus killers'. Consequently, I can understand why someone would desire to distance themselves from such a sadistic and hazardous ideology.

You don't think you received a "truthful answer" from Don, Keltoi, and myself? I admit I really wasn't aware of a question so I wasn't trying to provide an answer. But what I wrote was certainly truthful with regard to my views toward Jews of Jesus' day with regard to his crucifixion, and I think the others have as well. Can you form an actual question for me if you feel that the issue hasn't been addressed in appropriate enough, full enough, or specific enough ways?

 

[dpartlow]

I was born and raised a strict Catholic, the church always taught that Jesus (pbuh), God and the Holy Spirit were all one in the same. Later in life, for whatever reason, I often found myself contemplating whether or not I shared the views of Christians around the world. I have recently been reading into Islam and I find that the main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Islam believes you only have 1 God, you only pray to 1 God or in other words, you should practice true monotheism. Christianity also claims to practice monotheism, in that the holy trinity is only one being (God), but here is my question if Jesus (pbuh) were God, then why would he have said on the cross "My God, Why have you forsaken me?" and why would he have prayed, and why would the devil have tempted him during his forty days in the desert with no food or water? And if Jesus was in fact not God, but the Messiah, as the bible says he is, then why would people of the Christian faith say prayers to Jesus, to me that is worshipping more than one God. Furthermore, why, if Christianity is a monotheist religion, do Catholics have the prayer "Hail Mary", and why patronize saints, and say prayers to them for small things, like say Saint Anthony for a parking spot or safe travel? Hopefully I can get some answers here, I am also posting this on a Christian site as well to see what kind of answers I will get there.

Here is the anwer to the question about what He said on the cross
He was quoting a Psalm which prophesied the persecution of the Christ.
This 1000 year old prophesy had just been fulfilled. Here is my poetic rendition of the prophesy and fulfillment(the part you reference is about half way through):

Seven Words Seven Echos:

Father forgive them, they know not what they do...

He that is without sin among you, Let him cast the first round.
And again he stooped down, And wrote upon the ground.

And they which heard it, convicted by conscience, Went out one by one, beginning at the eldest,
Even unto the last: until Jesus was left alone, And the woman was still standing in his midst.

Woman, where are your accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?
No man, Lord…. Neither do I condemn you, Go, and from your sins be free.

A gift of happy life: His law is for the people, Not the other way around.
Yea, the law is not nullified, but in repentance He cuts us free from the ropes of sin which bound.

Truly, Today You will be with me in paradise...

Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? What is written in the law? What there do you find?
You shall love the Lord your God With all your heart, soul, strength, and mind.

And also, Love your neighbor as yourself…. You have answered right, do this and you shall live.
And your neighbors are everywhere, whatever you give even unto the least of them, to me you also give.

The kingdom of heaven is like a tiny grain of mustard seed,
A man took it, and sowed it in his field. The mustard seed is the least of all indeed.

But when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becomes a mighty tree, the biggest and the best
So that the birds of the air may rest and lodge in the Branches thereof, make their home, their eternal nest

Mother behold thy son. Son, behold thy mother...

Blessed are your ears, for they hear and blessed are your eyes, for they see.
Truly, Many prophets and righteous men have desired to hear and see as do thee.

But many have not yet seen nor heard. Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
That you may find fertile soil in the hearts of men as the grower, reaper, and mower.

He that despises you, despises me and in despising me and the Father, earns reflexive shun.
For, I am the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the Father except by the Son.

For God so loved the world, he gave his only Son that all who believe in him should never perish
For God sent not him into the world not to condemn, but to love and save and cherish.

I thirst...

They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he rejected.
They crucified him, parted his garments, and cast lots: fulfilled as the prophets had projected.

They part my garments among them, and upon my vesture they cast lots
And from the sixth until the ninth hour a darkness covers the whole land and out the sunlight blots

And at the ninth hour… My God, my God, Why hast thou forsaken me? So far from helping and hearing my words of my roaring, Art ye.

O my God, They cried unto you, and were delivered: they trusted in you, deliverance you have bourn.
But I am a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn:

They shoot out the lip, shake the head, He trusted on the Lord to be delivered: let the Lord decide his rest.
But thou art he that took me from the womb and did make me hope when I was upon my mother's breast.

I was cast upon you from the womb: you art my God from my mother's belly.
Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to apply the soothing Gilead jelly.

Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion, as a rabid hound.

I am poured out like water, all my bones are out of joint: my heart like wax melted and sunk to my bowels.
My strength dried up like a potsherd; I’m brought to the dust of death, my tongue cleaveth to my jowls.

Dogs compass me, the assembly of the wicked have enclosed piercing hands and feet. My blood now clots.
I see all my bones: looking back and staring at me. They part my garments and for my vesture casting lots.

But be not thou far from me, O Lord my strength, hasten to my aid. For when the afflicted cried you heard.
The meek shall be satisfied: they that seek shall praise the Lord and heart shall live for ever with his Word.

All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord. All kindreds of the nations shall bow down
They shall worship you. For the kingdom is the Lord's. He is the governor of all nation, land, and town.

A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation, this grain of corn.
They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born.

And, behold, upon his final word the veil of the temple was rent from the top to the bottom in pieces twain,
And the earth quaked, the rocks rent; open broke the grave, and a reprieve for us did he obtain.

Death and the grave have been conquered, forever vanquished:
Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit... It is finished.

 

[- Qatada -]

Hi Grenville.


I think you don't see which perspective i'm coming from, so i'll place it into perspective insha Allah (God willing.)

4:156 - That they rejected Faith;

4:156 - that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge;

​

From that verse, we see that it's stated that they really did them acts. I.e. they rejected faith [while rejecting Allaah's Messengers'], and that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge.

Those two points are real, and there is no confusion for me or you over that. Since it's clearly stated that they did them acts.




Then, the verse after;

4:157 - That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";

​

I explained to you earlier about the analogy of the General claiming victory, even though he never fought in the battle (rather his troops did.) What did the General do when sending his troops to fight? He encouraged them to fight and kill. Although he himself never fought.

Why did i use this analogy? To show that the Jews boasted about killing him, although they may not have been involved in the direct crucifixion. They did encourage the crucifixion, therefore claimed themselves to be the killers (at the time of Prophet Muhammad - peace be upon him), while boasting about it in pride.




Let's look at the account from the 'Gospel of John':

John
Chapter 19


5 So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple cloak. And he said to them, "Behold, the man!" 6 When the chief priests and the guards saw him they cried out, "Crucify him, crucify him!"


​

This account tells us that these Jewish chief priests told the Roman soldiers to "Crucify him!" repeatedly.



You then quoted me what the Romans did;

John 19:16-23 - Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). Here they crucified him, and with him two others—one on each side and Jesus in the middle.


​

From there, we see that the Jewish priests encouraged the crucifixion, and then the Romans performed the crucifixion. Agreed?





Then the verse continues;

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:-


​

The Romans who performed the crucifixion, and the Jewish priests who saw the event take place actually believed that it was really Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him) being crucified. I don't doubt that, since it's stated in the verse; "..it was made to appear to them..."


What does this mean? This mean's that when the crucifixion took place, it wasn't Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him) being crucified.

Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

​

Then i've explained that there may have been another man who was crucified, who had similar looks to Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him) caste over him. It could have been a traitor, i.e. Juda (mentioned in the Gospel of Barnabas.)




So to summarise; Even if it's mentioned in historical records that Jesus son of Mary was crucified, we do not believe this. Although it may have seemed this way to the Romans and the Jewish priests. [They may have thought this due to Jesus's image being caste over someone else, i.e. Juda.]



Why couldn't Jesus son of Mary be killed?

1) Jesus has to return since he is the Messiah/Christ, and once someone dies, they do not return to this world. So Jesus has not faced death yet, and he will only face it once he returns to the earth after he has fulfilled his mission. I.e. the true battle between truth and falsehood, belief vs disbelief etc.

2) Jesus was not God, and i've explained that here;
http://www.islamicboard.com/794662-post4.html

To believe he is God and that 'god died' is a false and evil belief.

​

And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him [(Jesus), son of (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his [(Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he [(Jesus)] will be a witness against them.

[Qur'an 4: 155-159]

​

It is not for a human [prophet] that Allah should give him the Scripture and authority and prophethood and then he would say to the people, "Be servants to me rather than Allah ," but [instead, he would say], "Be pious scholars of the Lord because of what you have taught of the Scripture and because of what you have studied."

Nor would he instruct you to take angels and prophets for Lords and patrons. What! would he bid you to unbelief after ye have bowed your will (To Allah in Islam)?


[Qur'an 3: 79-80]
​

 

[Walter]

Hi Qatada:

Thank you for clarifying your perspective on this matter. Your interpretation is logical and is supported by the contextual verses. However, it is in conflict with the Books that came before and with recorded history.

If you want to assume that someone else was crucified in Jesus’ place, then you must provide some credible evidence of that claim. Are there other verses in the Qu’ran that support that claim? Are there any verses in the Codex Sinaiticus, or any other Bible that would have been easily available to Mohammed, that support that claim? Have any historians made that claim? If not, then it would be prudent to interpret the verse in a way that is consistent with the historical facts - if this can be done without being intellectually dishonest. Fortunately, the verse can be interpreted in accordance with recorded history while maintaining the integrity of the verse.

In support of Jesus not being crucified, you quoted:

Jesus has to return since he is the Messiah/Christ, and once someone dies, they do not return to this world.

Since you used this argument to support your view that Jesus could not have been crucified, please provide some evidence of this belief. Please note that at the Transfiguration, Moses and Elijah returned to the Earth and talked with Jesus before He died.

Have a great weekend everyone.
Grenville