The core problem of the Quran is the denial of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 15 12"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith. 15In that case, we are also exposed as false witnesses about God. For we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead, but He did not raise Him if in fact the dead are not raised.
16For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19If our hope in Christ is for this life alone, we are to be pitied more than all men.
20But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him."
Before I answer you, i would appreciate honest replies...so far a lot of christians tend to deliberately ignore what i say because true words are too hard to take and because i start going into details on other topics, it becomes a bigger topic.
So...you realise that islamic doctrine, our core theology, does not deal with this topic? it is a matter of opinion/interpretation. Think about this....in the entire hadith (vast body of work), not a single mention of the crucifixion?
So you will never get an official 'doctrine' on this. So we go to opinion.
Historically christians have lived amongst muslims but in small communities and if there ever was historical dialogue between us on these issues,was it always written? if it was, what language, what context? it is never enough for me to just read something from the past and to glorify it and take it as truth. I can only judge historical views based on a larger understanding of related topics.
Example
See those verses I quoted, they clearly confirm the validity/authenticity of the Bible. No question whatsoever, not only do they speak in past tense but also present tense ie meaning whatever they posessed in their hand at that time, was the 'truth' 'a guidance and a light'.
YET
Muslims always say the bible is altered/corrupt. Why?
it's because of this verse
(1) Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah," to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby.
(سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #79)
there is a hadith connected to this too. The problem here is obvious, contradiction? or? is the bible valid or not?
Basically what has happened is ignorance has prevailed..and it is just like the prophet SAW said
(4) Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "(Religious) knowledge will be taken away (by the death of religious scholars) ignorance (in religion) and afflictions will appear; and Harj will increase." It was asked, "What is Harj, O Allah's Apostle?" He replied by beckoning with his hand indicating "killing." (Fateh-al-Bari Page 192, Vol. 1) (Book #3, Hadith #85)
See muslims have been blindsided by post-colonial attitudes and have also reacted to the lies told by christian missionaries against islam, so it's become tit for tat, both sides will bend the truth to create entirely different arguments. These narratives told in the english language, are then shared through books and media. Another thing muslims can easily do is search for similar views from the past and magnify those ie mass printing once again, translating into the english language, creating an illusion of some historical muslim consensus that in truth was never there.
If it was, it would be crystal clear in the hadith.
Going back to the topic of whether or not the bible is corrupt, context matters...
it doesn't say the book is changed but that the people who write the book, lie, ie the scribes...just like
(6) Narrated Abu Huraira: The people of the Scripture (Jews) used to recite the torah in Hebrew and they used to explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. On that Allah's Apostle said, "Do not believe the people of the Scripture or disbelieve them, but say:-- "We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us." (2.136) (Book #60, Hadith #12)
and just like
Jeremiah 8:8
"How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie.
is the bible here, condemning itself? or is it condemning the scribes/rabbis who used to misinterpret it?
this context is made crystal clear in the following hadith
(6) Narrated AbuHurayrah: (This is Ma'mar's version which is more accurate.) A man and a woman of the Jews committed fornication. Some of them said to the others: Let us go to this Prophet, for he has been sent with an easy law. If he gives a judgment lighter than stoning, we shall accept it, and argue about it with Allah, saying: It is a judgment of one of your prophets. So they came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) who was sitting in the mosque among his companions. They said: AbulQasim, what do you think about a man and a woman who committed fornication? He did not speak to them a word till he went to their school. He stood at the gate and said: I adjure you by Allah Who revealed the torah to Moses, what (punishment) do you find in the torah for a person who commits fornication, if he is married? They said: He shall be blackened with charcoal, taken round a donkey among the people, and flogged. A young man among them kept silent. When the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) emphatically adjured him, he said: By Allah, since you have adjured us (we inform you that) we find stoning in the torah (is the punishment for fornication). The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: So when did you lessen the severity of Allah's command? He said: A relative of one of our kings had committed fornication, but his stoning was suspended. Then a man of a family of common people committed fornication. He was to have been stoned, but his people intervened and said: Our man shall not be stoned until you bring your man and stone him. So they made a compromise on this punishment between them. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: So I decide in accordance with what the torah says. He then commanded regarding them and they were stoned to death. Az-Zuhri said: We have been informed that this verse was revealed about them: "It was We Who revealed the Law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophet who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will. (Book #38, Hadith #4435)
get it? they had the law of God in the Torah but they chose not to follow it, instead misinterpreting it...
so they would say things/give meaning to parts of the bible...that suited their own agendas/dominant narratives of the age...
(5) Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar: A group of Jews came and invited the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) to Quff. So he visited them in their school. They said: AbulQasim, one of our men has committed fornication with a woman; so pronounce judgment upon them. They placed a cushion for the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) who sat on it and said: Bring the torah. It was then brought. He then withdrew the cushion from beneath him and placed the torah on it saying: I believed in thee and in Him Who revealed thee. He then said: Bring me one who is learned among you. Then a young man was brought. The transmitter then mentioned the rest of the tradition of stoning similar to the one transmitted by Malik from Nafi'(No. 4431). (Book #38, Hadith #4434)
again prophet Mohammad here confirmed the truth of the Torah and believed in it.
Most muslims today inc on this forum are happy to say the bible is corrupt/altered, so be it, i know what I believe in is consistent and overall carries more weight. Doesn't matter if 1billion muslims don't share my view...the dominant consensus is not the one to follow when
ignorance (in religion) and afflictions will appear; and Harj will increase.
Now on the topic of the crucifixion, clearly, since the quran confirms the authenticity of the bible, then verse 4:157 cannot contradict the bible.
Most think it does, i think it doesn't.
why?
two translations
(1) And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor
crucified him, but it appeared so to them [the resemblance of 'Îsa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man)], and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) عليهما السلام]:
(سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #157)
Mohsin Khan translation
(1) And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor
crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
(سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #157)
Pikthall translation
remember what i highlighted before, about how the jews 'wrote the book with their own hands' meaning they altered the meaning
this is precisely what Mohsin khan did, read how he inserted his personal narratives into the translation [like this].
How many muslims do you think have read this and then it's influenced their own narrative?
So quite literally many muslims believe another man (judas) was given the likeness of Jesus and then put on the cross.
BUT where did this idea come from?
the irony of ironies is, muslims have misinterpreted a gnostic christian text
If you look at the gnostic apocalypse of peter
it says this
The Savior said to me, "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."
but in the actual context, the 'substitute' was not another person but referring to the physical body
that he whom they crucified is the first-born, and the home of demons, and the stony vessel in which they dwell, of Elohim, of the cross, which is under the Law. But he who stands near him is the living Savior, the first in him, whom they seized and released, who stands joyfully looking at those who did him violence, while they are divided among themselves. Therefore he laughs at their lack of perception, knowing that they are born blind. So then the one susceptible to suffering shall come, since the body is the substitute. But what they released was my incorporeal body. But I am the intellectual Spirit filled with radiant light. He whom you saw coming to me is our intellectual Pleroma, which unites the perfect light with my Holy Spirit."
(i will get back to this in a bit).
Also a major mistake muslims make is
the verse 4:157 does not only say
they slew him not nor
crucified him, but it appeared so unto them;
it says a lot more...
(1) And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them
this matters a great deal if you give it some thought
which group of jews were responsible for the crucifixion?
see the pharisees were like modern day sufis, corruption was their number one thing...just like in this era most sufi/sheikhs/pirs are liars and con artists..that is what the pharisees were in that time...the pharisees rejected Jesus but only because he exposed them for what they were. He exposed their character but not their beliefs. Fundamentally they did not disagree with his views, they knew he spoke the truth, but they hated that he exposed him. They often challenged him to test him but found he was correct, so they invented accusations like 'he takes out demons in the name of baal'.
The sadducees on the otherhand hated him entirely. The sadducees were like, modern salafi/wahabis....quick to declare just about anyone a kafir/disbeliever and order his death. The sadducees were worse, they did not believe in life after death...
get it? these contexts then influence their opinion that THEY killed Jesus.
that he was done for, finished, never to be seen or heard from again.
so basically, they didnt kill or crucify Jesus...it only appeared so
what could this mean?
consider this too
(4) Think not of those, who are slain in the way of Allah, as dead. Nay, they are living. With their Lord they have provision.
(سورة آل عمران, Aal-i-Imraan, Chapter #3, Verse #169)
this topic relies heavily on belief in the hereafter..
Jesus being killed was entirely about the belief the sadducees held that he could be put to death and proven wrong.
Have you ever read the book of Wisdom, the first 3 chapters? see a few incredibly biased christians ive spoken to have refused point blank to even read it when ive asked them to,
think about that, clearly im touching a nerve here, clearly there's something too much for them to really contemplate here?
even though im trying to make them more aware of the very topic that defines their own faith, they are rejecting something because 'it isn't canonical' The book of wisdom is apocryphal, but one thing is certain, it was written a few centuries before Jesus..and the first 3 chapters are prophetical but also cover this topic, the nature of death itself. a very relevant theme given how Jesus came to conquer sin and death which are both tied to the sin of Adam and Eve...
Wisdom, accurately foretold his 'death', the sadducee plot against him and also the whole topic of the resurrection/nature of death. so it is a must read text.
The argument that it isn't canonlical is stupid since, what defines canon is subjective anyway.
The criteria the jews used was 'is this important for US, for judaism?' if yes, then it's included...even if it is otherwise pointless..
Song of Songs for example, pointless, doesn't carry much in it of spiritual importance, but it supposedly symbolises God's relationship to his bride, israel. So it is there.
I think it was floss who said i was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. He doesn't understand that truth is far more complex and there are differept angles when dealing with a topic.
Basically it's like this
The way we perceive death is what? it's when we see the body, lifeless.
In reality, this is not death, this is passing away from this life.
Death really occurs in the underworld/hades/sheol/barzakh. When the soul is bound to the earth according to the extent of our attachments to this world..do you get this? To die for 'the sake of Allah' =life in the hereafter, no death... this is martydom. There are many diff ways to die a martyr, this even inc dying of a long lasting/suffering disease whilst keeping faith.
So Jesus 'dying' is in itself, misunderstood....so it is better for me to say he was martyred and passed away from this world and was ressurected, than to believe he 'died'.
Peter 2 says 'death had no hold on him'
it arrives at the same truth,....the Psalm 49 which Peter was referring to says
But God will redeem me from the realm of the dead; he will surely take me to himself.
here's the link to Wisdom 1
http://www.usccb.org/bible/wisdom/1
yes it's on a catholic site, that doesnt mean the text is not worth reading.
if you have doubts regarding my answer, i think it's the only one that is consistent with all sides and it isn't one that ive just tried forcefully to fit into some theory...the reality is i used to also think Jesus didnt die and I read the bible in order to 'prove them wrong' but realised later an entirely different way of thinking.
Now imagine my thoughts when after realising i was wrong, ir ead the Quran for clarity and found God confirming that the bible is the truth (verses i have already quoted)...
but why the contradictions then? right? obvious qs
God tells me
(1) To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #48)
one thing i know is that the truth of the matter is right in front of us. it's a question of who can actually be open enough to receive it....
Example
Deuteronomy 18:18
when i was young a book written based on the ideas of Sheikh Ahmad Deedat, was saying this verse foretold the coming of prophet Mohammad SAW, that the word 'bretheren' meant 'ismaelites, since ismael was the brother of isaac'
yet if you listen to or read the hebrew, the word used for bretheren was ummati...this is an arabic word too and it means 'belonging to the community/nation'
Sheikh Ahmad Deedat, if you're familiar with him you'd know, was a very very intelligent man, he didnt miss a drop when he debated christians, he used to find holes in their argument and was very convincing, but also....in every way a sincere man.
he used to also read the transliterations, interpretations, he had some knowledge of language...better than me because he spoke several languages more than I. YET he missed this basic part about the word ummati?
Now when such things exist in books and videos and websites, surely its going to influence many more people right? so suddenly you'll think it is the official islamic opinion. Then, in order to corroborate their position, muslims might search for the needle in the haystack and findi t....some historical text written by ibn joe bloggs of medieval times....sounds credible enough,translate it, mass print and share online, make youtube videos....
Show everyone the official islamic consensus...
but what of the Quran? do we pay attention or ignore it? are we the new jews? do we write the book with our own hands
we def do man, like i shown before Mohsin khan's translation literally contains his own biased narratives, this is so wrong...
the Quran says
(2) "And behold! I inspired the disciples to have faith in Me and Mine Messenger: they said, 'We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims'".
(سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #111)
it's a matter of faith isn't it? if God Himself inspired Peter to have faith...
then is it plausible to believe that such an inspired man, would fall under satan's deception so soon after Jesus left him?
if you're a cynical person then maybe,but where does that leave faith?
the Quran also tells us about and has an entire chapter based on the 7 sleepers, 3rd century christian saints.
If peter was led astray by the devil...then how could there be christian saints 2 centuries later? there would be no christianity to follow, it would mean the religion died with Jesus..and this is the view a lot of muslims have been led to believe.
sorry one final point
islam is far more diverse than people think. these topics depend on a person's level too.
it's just the most common narratives you have heard are what they are and you judged islam based on that, rather than tried to find the diversity in islam in many areas.
the Jesus topic i guess is monopolised by a few...