The Qur'an and Jesus on the Cross

  • Thread starter Thread starter SedesDomi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Angelos said:
Where is your evidence to prove all these allegations? I have read the Koran 100 times, but cannot find any data or a single narrative to support your thesis. The Gospels, on the other hand, make it clear that Jesus died and rose on the third day! Thus, you have neither the Bible nor your scipture on your side. 😉
Click to expand...
“You can’t rewrite the Koran on air on Al Jazeera.” - Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Bar Ilan University

Neither can you rewrite the Qur’an off the air, here at CA.
 
planten said:
Sorry angelos, your argument has no real force. The Quran is not just that one verse under discussion. It is a highly relaiable voluminous book. It is not just that one verse you are questiong or just one word of the verse.

You should have better ideas. That verse is well understood by the Muslims even though some one tried to mislead them. But by the Grace of Allah, they have preserved the right meaning.

The Jews and the Christians claimed that they killed jesus son of Maryam… But they killed him not and could not kill him on the cross . But it was made to appear to them as such (as if he was dead)…

It was Jesus on the cross alright. But he was brought down from the cross within few hours. His legs were not broken. He was not buried nor any burial rites were performed. He was laid in a spacious room (tomb) and looked after (treated). He got up after two days and walked away.

The more you ask such things the more will be exlained to you. Matter is being discussed so I had to present the Islamic / Quranic version. Please take it as such. But you can believe what you like.
Click to expand...
So, if I understand you well, there is not a single chance that what that verse would mean has nothing to do with Jesus having been crucified and having died there. I thought the stress would be more on “THEY didn’t kill him”, meaning, “they are not the ones that killed Jesus”, since he died because of AND in atonement for the sins of all mankind. One can receive the message and tell it in the exact words which he received and still misinterpret their meaning! It can happen to very holy people since THEY still were living on earth, among us…
 
Sister_Amy said:
Hi Ralph, if you can bear with me to the end, perhaps you can better understand the Muslim P.O.V.

What if he didn’t say that–but someone said he did?

What if they didn’t say that, but someone said they did?

What if she didn’t say that, but someone said she did?

Or perhaps one liar just made it all up?

Maybe someone else made it look like that.

Could someone just be lying about God?

My questions allow the possibility of only one liar… more likely, considering the variables. Don’t you think so?
Click to expand...
So you are personally convinced that Jesus was not crucified and didn’t die on a cross? You believe the 4 Gospel accounts of Jesus having been crucified, died and was buried, and then resurrected on the third day is a big lie? You then believe our Christian faith is just a big lie?
Now, in the words of that verse, the most important part in Muhammad’s eyes seemed to have been: "NO, they didn’t kill him. As a child, I was taught that Jesus was crucified by my sins and the sins of all mankind, the sins did “kill” him… hence my interpretation of the verse…
Now, I think I can see what would be the reason for a Muslim not to accept this one interpretation: Jesus would then have to be the Son of God, a divine person, since only God can forgive the sins… and, as it is, the Muslims simply don’t believe in Jesus being the actual Son of God as a divine person.
As to this belief of the Church being a lie, I guess in the end of times all will be informed as to the “true truth”.
 
Sister_Amy said:
A few things…

4:157 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:-

Waqawlihim inna qatalna almaseeha AAeesa ibna maryama rasoola Allahi **wama qataloohu wama salaboohu **walakin shubbiha lahum wa-inna allatheena ikhtalafoo feehi lafee shakkin minhu ma lahum bihi min AAilmin illa ittibaAAa alththanni wama qataloohu yaqeenan

The jibberish is the transliteration of the Arabic. The part in bold–wa ma qataloohu means “they didn’t kill him.” And wa ma salaboohu means “and they didn’t crucify him.”

The fact that both verbs are used is significant–it doesn’t just say, “they didn’t kill him” nor does it only say “they didn’t crucify him.” It says both these things–so neither happened.

What did happen?–that’s everyone’s question, and there is not a clear answer.
Click to expand...
You said, Sister Amy, that what was significant was that both these things: “THEY didn’t kill him” and “THEY didn’t crucify him”. I know the emhassis on “they” is mine, but still, that’s how the wording is even in Arabic, isn’t it?
 
planten said:
3:157 And for their saying: We have
killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of
Mary, the messenger of Allåh, and
they killed him not, nor did they
cause his death on the cross,a but he was made to appear to them as such.b
And certainly those who differ therein
are in doubt about it. They have no
knowledge about it, but only follow a
conjecture, and they killed him not
for certain:

Ralph, it was not any difficult matter to understand. It was made to appear to them as dead is like “He appeared to them as such.” That is all. The translation given above is quite well. It tell about the boast of the Jews that they killed Jesus son of Mary. Christians are not involved in that killing beause there were no christians then. And why would they kill Jesus?

But because the christians of the later centuries fell a victim to the claim of the Jews that Jesus was killed on the cross, the christians also adopted that bad belief not realising that it was a cursed death. Then they turned his death into some sacrifice and built a fort of original sin and a need for the slain Jesus.

They (christians) also took part in the belief seriously for different reason and Jews and christians, both parties, believed that Jesus was killed on the cross. But the Jews did not agree with the christians that jesus had died and taken away the sins. These were the disagreements between them.

Quran has solved the matter. Jesus did not die on the cross. He was saved miraculously. That was a miracle that he was saved from a sure death. When brought down from the cross he appeared to the people as dead.
Click to expand...
By that logic, God is capable of deception. God cannot lie. Is God able to lie in the Qur’an?
 
Lapell said:
You said, Sister Amy, that what was significant was that both these things: “THEY didn’t kill him” and “THEY didn’t crucify him”. I know the emhassis on “they” is mine, but still, that’s how the wording is even in Arabic, isn’t it?
Click to expand...
no in Arabic you do not have to write “they” in order to understand that it is “they”. Ma Qataluhu, the “lu” refers to “them”, when the author could have inserted the “hum” (they) ma qataluhu, if the “hum” (they) is the emphasis. That’s for 1. For 2, the turning point is not about who did it but rather here : neither killed…nor crucified …BUT…it is this “but” that Muslims are unwilling to explain because althou the author denies something BUT he affirms something else, something that Muslims will not like that is why they do not explain.
 
ralphinal said:
By that logic, God is capable of deception. God cannot lie. Is God able to lie in the Qur’an?
Click to expand...
if God says His words are like pure old that will stand forever, and Muslims say no this is not true, what are they calling God?
 
inJESUS said:
if God says His words are like pure old that will stand forever, and Muslims say no this is not true, what are they calling God?
Click to expand...
Why do I keep ending up at this same point? I am fine discussing the theological aspects of our two faiths, but somehow I keep landing on this one little point.

God is Truth. God cannot be wrong. God cannot be tricked. God can neither deceive nor be deceived.

Am I missing something?
 
ralphinal said:
Why do I keep ending up at this same point? I am fine discussing the theological aspects of our two faiths, but somehow I keep landing on this one little point.

because “corruption” is the mantra of Islam so whatever you discuss, this mantra will show up as the best answer when the Quran contradicts God’s words.
Click to expand...
 
inJESUS said:
ralphinal;3812841:
anything that contradicts the Quran *must *
Click to expand...
be corrupt. Whether God says otherwise in the OT and NT is irrelevant to them.

I know. I am saying that perhaps they see the wrong book as corrupt. The Qur’an makes God the lier. The Bible makes it Satan.
Click to expand...
 
inJESUS said:
no in Arabic you do not have to write “they” in order to understand that it is “they”. Ma Qataluhu, the “lu” refers to “them”, when the author could have inserted the “hum” (they) ma qataluhu, if the “hum” (they) is the emphasis. That’s for 1. For 2, the turning point is not about who did it but rather here : neither killed…nor crucified …BUT…it is this “but” that Muslims are unwilling to explain because althou the author denies something BUT he affirms something else, something that Muslims will not like that is why they do not explain.
Click to expand...
All right, you are the expert in Arabic. Still, in the way that verse 157 was originally written, is any emphasis put anywhere? With or without emphasis, any chance at all the text could have meant IN ITSELF what I thought possible, or is that 100% impossible? This is what I want to know.
 
Lapell said:
All right, you are the expert in Arabic. Still, in the way that verse 157 was originally written, is any emphasis put anywhere? With or without emphasis, any chance at all the text could have meant IN ITSELF what I thought possible, or is that 100% impossible? This is what I want to know.
Click to expand...
the emphasis you’re looking for is not there for the simple reason that the author is not denying that “they” did it simply because later he AFFIRMS something else all the while refering to “they” as well…so the emphasis is not on who did it…muslims put the emphasis on NEITHER…NOR and stop…yet the verse does not stop there 😉 the climax is BUT IT APPEARED AS SUCH. In other words, the author is AFFIRMING that something “appeared” 🙂 so either it appeared it was Jesus but it was someone else OR a crucifixion appeared but it was not real;) both of which make absolutely no sense and Muslims just refuse to even speculate because no matter how they turn, they’re stuck so the best answer to get out of this dilema is : it’s not crucial to my faith! 😉
 
inJESUS said:
the emphasis you’re looking for is not there for the simple reason that the author is not denying that “they” did it simply because later he AFFIRMS something else all the while refering to “they” as well…so the emphasis is not on who did it…muslims put the emphasis on NEITHER…NOR and stop…yet the verse does not stop there 😉 the climax is BUT IT APPEARED AS SUCH. In other words, the author is AFFIRMING that something “appeared” 🙂 so either it appeared it was Jesus but it was someone else OR a crucifixion appeared but it was not real;) both of which make absolutely no sense and Muslims just refuse to even speculate because no matter how they turn, they’re stuck so the best answer to get out of this dilema is : it’s not crucial to my faith! 😉
Click to expand...
Excuse me for maybe looking so stubborn, but I am still waiting for an answer to the last part of my question: even if there were no emphasis at all, is it 100 % impossible from the actual wording of the original text of the verse 157 as it is that one who come with the interpretation I attempted, that they did not crucify him nor kill him because it was the sins of all mankind that were responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion and death right there on the cross? Can someone give me a sure answer to THIS ONE question? Thank you! God bless you!
 
I would not say this question is so “crucial” to MY faith, but I still think it important enough… Maybe it’s one of those unanswerable questions, even though my name is not that of composer Charles Ives (“The Unanswered Question”)…😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top