In the name of Allah the most compassionate the merciful.
All praise and adoration is due to Almighty Allah the sustainer and creator of mankind. We send blessing to the noblest and seal of all prophet Muhammad, his companions, household and entire ummah who follow his path till the day of reckoning.
It highly disheartning to see arrogant none muslims displaying and boasting about their ignorance. When they are totally ignorant about what they want to discuss.
This article is a response to the recent Christian apologetic video tag: *Who are the Doubters?* quoting Qur’an 4:157.
Without wasting much of our time, let delve into the point and claim laid and shatter their lies but lest we do that, it’s undeniable and wide accepted FACT! which muslims refers to as “Ijma” among the scholars that “JESUS WAS NOT KILLED NOR CRUCIFY”.
Any statement outside this “Ijma” Is false.
1. The translation used has input of (the resemblance of Iesa was put on another man)…
#Response: This is an apologetic lie, as the Qur’an never portray such. The Qur’an translation use was that of Mushin Khan and al Hilal. The phrase “the resemblance of Iesa was put on another man” never occurred in the Arabic text of the Qur’an, such translation is fabricated and it has no ground.
What Allah said was
“ﻭَﻟَٰﻜِﻦ ﺷُﺒِّﻪَ ﻟَﻬُﻢْ”
Meaning: “but it was made to appear (so) to them.”
But for the apologist confusionist, they prefer using the wrong translation, and thanks to Allah, we the arabic, so such lies can’t go unapprehended. And we have many translator who gave a correct translation of that phrase.
#2. It was allege claim that muslims using the argument as to how was Jesus crucify was self defeating, because it will mean that muslims have accepted that Jesus was crucify but as to how he was crucify is what is debated.
#Response: The argument wasn’t self refuting nor defeating, Allah said those who lay this claim are full of doubt i.e. they ain’t sure if Jesus was crucified or not.
So saying Jesus was “Killed and Hang” versus “Crucify” are two contradicting word, which means the one relating the story wasn’t even sure of what actually happend, if they are sure then we should have coherent and one claim without dispute.
#3. It was allege that the gospel writer are not in doubt concerning this, quoting Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
#Response: Let examine each of this quotation and see if the writer himself agree or the verse quote wasn’t contradicting other Gospel on same matter.
Matthew 27 : 35, this verse has numerous problem but let examine some of it.
I. Was Jesus the one who carried his cross to Golgotha? Lest been the one crucified.
As they were going out, they met a man from *Cyrene, named Simon,* and *they forced HIM TO CARRY THE CROSS.*
33. And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,
34. They gave *HIM* vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
35. And they crucified HIM, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them
it’s apparent using this verse that the one who carried the CROSS TO GOLGOTHA IS SIMEON, and he was the one, the subsequent verse keep referring to as *HIM* but hypocrisy of some bible translator, they replace the *HIM* with Jesus without even putting it in bracket just to deceive people that the verse said Jesus, rather the verse said *HIM* referring to one who bore the cross.
II. Gospel of John on the other hand omit the incident of Simon bearing the cross of Jesus to the place of Golgotha. Rather he said Jesus bore his own cross.
AND HE BEARING HIS CROSS went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew GOLGOTHA:
Apparently Gospel of John omit the incidence that Simeon of Cyrene was the one who bore Jesus Christ to Golgotha rather it plainly said: *HE BEARING HIS CROSS* referring to Jesus.
So, Matthew and John can’t even agree who bore the cross of Jesus to the place of Golgotha.
III. The Basilides are 2nd century Christian who also belief that Jesus wasn’t the one crucify rather it was Simeon of Cyrene.
Therefore, the notion, dispute and doubt that Jesus wasn’t the one crucify has been in vogue since the 2nd century of the Christian era, so it will be stupid enough to say muslims are the one in doubt. This seems reason why John won’t talk about Simeon of Cyrene bearing the cross of Jesus for he would have heard about the controversy that Jesus wasn’t the one crucify.
To buttress this St. Irenaeus a 2nd century church father wrote in his book “Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 24)” that:
He appeared, then, on earth as a man, to the nations of these powers, and wrought miracles.
Wherefore he did not himself suffer death, but Simon, a certain man of Cyrene, being compelled, bore the cross in his stead; so that this latter being transfigured by him, that he might be thought to be Jesus, was crucified, through ignorance and error, while Jesus himself received the form of Simon, and, standing by, laughed at them.
IV. According to the “Second Treaties of the Great Seth, it was a document dated to the 3rd century it read:
For my death, which they think happened, (happened) to them in their error and blindness, since THEY NAILED THEIR MAN UNTO THEIR DEATH…
It was another, their father, who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I.
They struck me with the reed; it was another, SIMEON, who bore the cross on his shoulder.
I[t] was another upon Whom they placed the crown of thorns… And I was laughing at their ignorance.
V. It’s matter of fact that this gospel wasn’t written by eye witness – This is a fact that is acknowledge by textual critic scholar like Bart Erhman etc.
As a matter fact the first two 1st century historian (Josephus Ben Matityahu (37 -100AD a Jewish historian and Tacitus a Roman historian (56-120AD) who wrote about CRUCIFIXION were not EYE WITNESS.
VI. Ignatius of Antioch was a 2nd century Apostolic Church Father He wrote against Christians called Docetists:
Jesus christ… who was TRULY born, and ate, and drank, was TRULY persecuted under Pontius pilate, and was TRULY crucified and died.
But if it be, as some godless men, that is unbeliever assert that he suffered in semblance; it is they who are semblance; why am I in bond? Why moreover do I pray that I may fight with the wild beast? Then I die for naught.
||source: Ignatius Epistle to the Tallian Chapter 9 & 10||
The fact that Ignatius bother to attack this doctrine shows that it is wide spread clearly shows that there large number of Christians who dispute and DOUBT the crucifixion of Jesus Christ even before the advent of Qur’an.
VII. The Apocalypse of Peter (Gospel of Peter) dated back by some scholar to around 2nd century said:
“But this one whose hands and feet they drive the nails in his fleshy part, WHICH IS THE SUBSTITUTE being put to shame, the one who came into being in his LIKENESS but look at him and me.
This book also point to the fact that some Christians believe that Jesus wasn’t crucify. In fact it shows MANY CHRISTIANS have held a belief that JESUS WAS NOT CRUCIFY.
Also the it shows in the Psalms as a prophecy that God will SAVE HIS MESSIAH.
Now I know that the Lord SAVES his ANOINTED (MESSIAH);
he WILL ANSWER HIM from his holy heaven with the saving might of his right hand. (The Hebrew word translated as anointed there is MESSIAH)
This points are enough to say that Jesus wasn’t crucify nor killed.
And this point are ENOUGH to say the Christians are in DOUBT about the crucifixion of Jesus, ranging from the early century of the Christian era. It was clear that MANY CHRISTIANS from the EARLY CENTURY belief that Jesus wasn’t crucify and it a WIDELY HELD BELIEFS among Christians that he wasn’t crucify while SOME others held the beliefs that he was crucify.
#4. It was allege in the video that among the evidence that Jesus wasn’t crucify was
And it was the THIRD HOUR when they crucified him.
#Response: It was absolute lie that Jesus was crucified at the 3rd hour, this clearly contradict what other Gospel says about when was Jesus crucify.
And it WAS the PREPARATION of the PASSOVER,
and ABOUT THE SIXTH HOUR: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!
But THEY CRIED out, Away with him, AWAY with him, CRUCIFY HIM.
Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away.
It was interesting that John made us to know that even AT THE SIXTH HOUR Jesus is still being judge as to be crucify or not, while Mark made us to know that he was ALREADY CRUCIFY AT THE THIRD HOUR.
This tells us, the Gospels writer can’t even agree when was Jesus crucify, and since scholarly works says they ain’t eye witness, it seems much to us that it all a guess work. Allah said they are in DOUBT.
#5. Also the video use Gospel of Luke 23:33 to allege that Luke was certain that Jesus was crucify.
#Response: This Allegation has two faults
Firstly, Luke wasn’t an eye witness to the account of crucifixion according to Luke 1:1-4.
If Luke wasn’t an eye witness how are we sure he was certain of what he wrote from the eye witness and who are this eye witness Luke wrote from?
Secondly, it quiet apparent that the story of Luke was contradicting other Gospel story.
Luke 23:39 reads:
ONE of the CRIMINALS who hung there hurled INSULTS at HIM: “Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!”
But this wasn’t what was reported by other Gospel writer.
And the ROBBERS who were crucified with him also REVILED him in the same way.
So we left in dilemma what happened at the allege crucifixion neither Luke or Matthew was at the crucifixion story yet both wrote a contradicting story.
This affirm what the Qur’an said that they are in DOUBT. It seems well that this are just hear – say fable with no sound fact hence the need for dispute.
The story got worse as we read downward,
And he said to him, “TRULY, I say to YOU, TODAY you will be with me in PARADISE.”
The gospel of Luke made us to know that Jesus promise one of the thieves paradise because he rebuke the other one abusing him although this was was a FRAUD as Gospel of Matthew made us to know that BOTH THIEVES INSULTS HIM, hence there won’t even be need to give one paradise.
On the other hand, Luke claim that Jesus promise one of the thieves that he will be with him in PARADISE THAT DAY.
unfortunately, we all know Jesus didn’t go to paradise that day.
So this another obvious lie according to the gospel of Luke, so how accurate is such false, made-up, incoherent, contradicting stories be used as evidence for crucifixion of Jesus?
#6 we also see that John 19:18 was used as evidence of crucifixion.
#Response: This has been debunk as no proof, because other Gospel made us to know Simeon of Cyrene bear Jesus cross and not that Jesus bear his own cross let alone of bringing him to the place of crucifixion.
#7. It was also allege that there different opinion among muslims scholar whether Jesus was crucify or not.
#Response: The Ijma among scholars was that He wasn’t killed not crucified. No single one from the salaf saliheen ever claim that he was killed or crucify.
#7. It was allege that Adnan Rashid an Islamic apologist was of the opinion that Jesus wasn’t killed nor crucify.
#Response: That’s the exact position of Qur’an and sahabah. He wasn’t killed nor crucify. All event that happen at the cross was was a matter of ijtihad among historians and not from the Qur’an or sunnah or Ijma of sahabah.
– It was allege that Shabir Ally, another Islamic apologist claim that Jesus was crucify but did not die at the cross.
#Response: This was was a wierd view and no single sahabah held this view and it against what Allah said.
Also Shabir said in that video that, this is was his own opinion. Thereby his own opinion wasn’t binding on the ijma of the ta’been and salaf saliheen.
And also he made it clear that the classical Islamic scholar stand was that “Jesus wasn’t crucify.
-Yasir Qahdi – it was allege that he had different opinion as to whether Jesus was crucify or not.
#Response: This was an absolute lie, Yasir made it clear that the stand of the Qur’an was that Jesus wasn’t KILLED NOT CRUCIFY.
Also is made it clear that the MAINSTREAM MUSLIM VIEWS was that Jesus wasn’t KILLED NOR CRUCIFY.
Then he said as for historians they claim that it was Judah was killed instead.
This is clear and open that Yasir Qahdi wasn’t in DOUBT at all. Rather he made it clear that what Qur’an, Tafsir and mainstream muslims believe is that JESUS WASN’T KILL NOR EVEN PLACE ON THE CROSS but God saved him.
-Zakir Hussein – It was allege that this Islamic apologist also was in doubt where Jesus was crucify or not.
#Response: This is another lie, Zakir was only quoting that it was made to known from historian that it was Simeon of Cyrene that was crucify.
This wasn’t Islamic stand, and the argument of this debate was that Jesus was not KILLED NOR CRUCIFY.
And we all know from Christians history cited above many Christians believe it was Simeon of Cyrene that was crucify.
Does this sound like muslim being in doubt? Or Christians from the 1st, 2nd, 3rd century battling and writing against their Christians fellow telling them Jesus was crucify.
This is a big DOUBT among the Christians of early century as to if Jesus was crucified or not.
But for muslims it is clear we say: Jesus was not KILLED NOR CRUCIFY.
“Subhanaka Allahumma Wa Bihamdika;
Ashhadu An Laa Ilah Ila Anta, Astagfiruka Wa Atoobu Ilayk”
Credit : Hassan Ali Ibn Maruphdeen