Concerning the Islamic Conception of Jesus

[Sundance]

I’ve encountered many different perspectives on Jesus and the Gospel, from the beauty of the Bahá’ís (which is rather close, in my opinion, to the NT), to the mind-blowing conception of certain Hindus as an expansion or plenary portion of God (namely, Krishna or Vishnu) in the material world, to others as another rising-and-dying deity worshipped alongside their own as followers of indigenous religions do, to others as a holy man or a renegade. No sweat here.

(By religion, I myself am no Christian, merely sympathetic to it.)

Yet, concerning Islam, my anger has been kindled. Why, you may ask? Well, they not only differ with the New Testament (which, again, is perfectly fine. Understandable.), but they claim that the Christians have it all wrong about Jesus, Jesus didn’t say what He’s recorded as having said about who He was and what He would do. He said something different from what they believe He said.

My question here is this: if Muslims say that Jesus was a prophet, would a prophet lie about his identity and his message?


Jesus in the New Testament claims to be the Son of God, many times referring to God as “[My] Father”. Those around Him understood that He made such claims. Why do Muslims ignore these passages? Additionally, He had foretold his own death (by crucifixion), and the New Testament makes it abundantly clear this is what became of Jesus, not to speak a word to His Resurrection from the dead and eventual return. Yet, Muslims claim that it was fabricated. He was not crucified, but was taken up to Heaven. Why, when both scripture and history confirm the Crucifixion of Jesus as having taken place?

I invite my Muslim friends to read His Words from themselves and evaluate whether or not He was a liar. If you’re willing to concede that He was telling the truth, logically speaking, it would nullify your religion’s claims, would it not?

 

[RabbiO]

@Mauricius Modestus -

You make no sense.

You acknowledge that Muslims believe that much of Christian scripture is fabricated/corrupted. Yet you then expect Muslims to simply read and accept what you say are Jesus’ words, even though you know that Muslims believe that what is written in Christian scripture is not accurate.

 

[Lyndon]

Jesus said Our Father which art in heaven, not my father which is in heaven

 

[Dawnofhope]

I’ve encountered many different perspectives on Jesus and the Gospel, from the beauty of the Bahá’ís (which is rather close, in my opinion, to the NT), to the mind-blowing conception of certain Hindus as an expansion or plenary portion of God (namely, Krishna or Vishnu) in the material world, to others as another rising-and-dying deity worshipped alongside their own as followers of indigenous religions do, to others as a holy man or a renegade. No sweat here.

(By religion, I myself am no Christian, merely sympathetic to it.)

Yet, concerning Islam, my anger has been kindled. Why, you may ask? Well, they not only differ with the New Testament (which, again, is perfectly fine. Understandable.), but they claim that the Christians have it all wrong about Jesus, Jesus didn’t say what He’s recorded as having said about who He was and what He would do. He said something different from what they believe He said.

My question here is this: if Muslims say that Jesus was a prophet, would a prophet lie about his identity and his message?


Jesus in the New Testament claims to be the Son of God, many times referring to God as “[My] Father”. Those around Him understood that He made such claims. Why do Muslims ignore these passages? Additionally, He had foretold his own death (by crucifixion), and the New Testament makes it abundantly clear this is what became of Jesus, not to speak a word to His Resurrection from the dead and eventual return. Yet, Muslims claim that it was fabricated. He was not crucified, but was taken up to Heaven. Why, when both scripture and history confirm the Crucifixion of Jesus as having taken place?

I invite my Muslim friends to read His Words from themselves and evaluate whether or not He was a liar. If you’re willing to concede that He was telling the truth, logically speaking, it would nullify your religion’s claims, would it not?

Its relevant to consider a Baha’i approach as it seeks to reconcile the Hebrew Bible, New Testament and the Quran with its own sacred writings. I would agree with your assertion a Baha’i view is close to the New Testament. It certainly has important similarities such as Jesus being the Son of God and the crucifixion of Christ.

The Quran mentions the crucifixion of Jesus:

And [We cursed them] for their breaking of the covenant and their disbelief in the signs of Allah and their killing of the prophets without right and their saying, "Our hearts are wrapped". Rather, Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.
And [We cursed them] for their disbelief and their saying against Mary a great slander,
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.
Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

Surah An-Nisa [4:155-158]

These verses are taken metaphorically by Baha’is. In essence they crucified Him but didn’t kill His Spirit. OTOH the verses are taken literally by many Muslims who believe the body of Jesus was substituted and another crucified in His place. As you may appreciate Muslims believe the Quran is the unerring word of God (as Baha’is do) but take a literal approach to these particular verses.

Interestingly some early Muslim scholars saw the verse metaphorically rather than literally true.

Ja'far ibn Mansur al-Yaman (d. 347 AH/958 CE), Abu Hatim Ahmad ibn Hamdan al-Razi (d. 322 AH/935 CE), Abu Yaqub al-Sijistani (d. 358 AH/971 CE), Mu'ayyad fi'l-Din al-Shirazi (d. 470 AH/1078 CE ) and the group Ikhwan al-Safa also affirm the historicity of the Crucifixion, reporting Jesus was crucified and not substituted by another man as maintained by many other popular Qur'anic commentators and Tafsir.

In reference to the Quranic quote "We have surely killed Jesus the Christ, son of Mary, the apostle of God", Muslim scholar Mahmoud Ayoub asserts this boast not as the repeating of a historical lie or the perpetuating of a false report, but an example of human arrogance and folly with an attitude of contempt towards God and His messenger(s). Ayoub furthers what modern scholars of Islam interpret regarding the historical death of Jesus, the man, as man's inability to kill off God's Word and the Spirit of God, which the Quran testifies were embodied in Jesus Christ. Ayoub continues highlighting the denial of the killing of Jesus as God denying men such power to vanquish and destroy the divine Word. The words, "they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him" speaks to the profound events of ephemeral human history, exposing mankind's heart and conscience towards God's will. The claim of humanity to have this power against God is illusory. "They did not slay him...but it seemed so to them" speaks to the imaginations of mankind, not the denial of the actual event of Jesus dying physically on the cross.

Islamic views on Jesus' death - Wikipedia

 

[metis]

Yet, concerning Islam, my anger has been kindled. Why, you may ask? Well, they not only differ with the New Testament (which, again, is perfectly fine. Understandable.), but they claim that the Christians have it all wrong about Jesus, Jesus didn’t say what He’s recorded as having said about who He was and what He would do. He said something different from what they believe He said.

There is literally no way to establish right or wrong on this since all scripture is subjective, thus not objective.

 

[Fool]

Jesus said Our Father which art in heaven, not my father which is in heaven

comme ci comme ça

 

[David1967]

I’ve encountered many different perspectives on Jesus and the Gospel, from the beauty of the Bahá’ís (which is rather close, in my opinion, to the NT), to the mind-blowing conception of certain Hindus as an expansion or plenary portion of God (namely, Krishna or Vishnu) in the material world, to others as another rising-and-dying deity worshipped alongside their own as followers of indigenous religions do, to others as a holy man or a renegade. No sweat here.

(By religion, I myself am no Christian, merely sympathetic to it.)

Yet, concerning Islam, my anger has been kindled. Why, you may ask? Well, they not only differ with the New Testament (which, again, is perfectly fine. Understandable.), but they claim that the Christians have it all wrong about Jesus, Jesus didn’t say what He’s recorded as having said about who He was and what He would do. He said something different from what they believe He said.

My question here is this: if Muslims say that Jesus was a prophet, would a prophet lie about his identity and his message?


Jesus in the New Testament claims to be the Son of God, many times referring to God as “[My] Father”. Those around Him understood that He made such claims. Why do Muslims ignore these passages? Additionally, He had foretold his own death (by crucifixion), and the New Testament makes it abundantly clear this is what became of Jesus, not to speak a word to His Resurrection from the dead and eventual return. Yet, Muslims claim that it was fabricated. He was not crucified, but was taken up to Heaven. Why, when both scripture and history confirm the Crucifixion of Jesus as having taken place?

I invite my Muslim friends to read His Words from themselves and evaluate whether or not He was a liar. If you’re willing to concede that He was telling the truth, logically speaking, it would nullify your religion’s claims, would it not?

To be fair here, even the various "Christian" denominations can't agree on this.

 

[exchemist]

I’ve encountered many different perspectives on Jesus and the Gospel, from the beauty of the Bahá’ís (which is rather close, in my opinion, to the NT), to the mind-blowing conception of certain Hindus as an expansion or plenary portion of God (namely, Krishna or Vishnu) in the material world, to others as another rising-and-dying deity worshipped alongside their own as followers of indigenous religions do, to others as a holy man or a renegade. No sweat here.

(By religion, I myself am no Christian, merely sympathetic to it.)

Yet, concerning Islam, my anger has been kindled. Why, you may ask? Well, they not only differ with the New Testament (which, again, is perfectly fine. Understandable.), but they claim that the Christians have it all wrong about Jesus, Jesus didn’t say what He’s recorded as having said about who He was and what He would do. He said something different from what they believe He said.

My question here is this: if Muslims say that Jesus was a prophet, would a prophet lie about his identity and his message?


Jesus in the New Testament claims to be the Son of God, many times referring to God as “[My] Father”. Those around Him understood that He made such claims. Why do Muslims ignore these passages? Additionally, He had foretold his own death (by crucifixion), and the New Testament makes it abundantly clear this is what became of Jesus, not to speak a word to His Resurrection from the dead and eventual return. Yet, Muslims claim that it was fabricated. He was not crucified, but was taken up to Heaven. Why, when both scripture and history confirm the Crucifixion of Jesus as having taken place?

I invite my Muslim friends to read His Words from themselves and evaluate whether or not He was a liar. If you’re willing to concede that He was telling the truth, logically speaking, it would nullify your religion’s claims, would it not?

Jesus wrote nothing himself that is known to us. The NT contains four accounts by people claiming to report his life and teaching. So we do not know what his words actually were, with any certainty.

I'm no biblical scholar but my impression is that references to Jesus as the son of God - and other theological ideas that became part of Christianity - are mostly in St John's Gospel, rather than the synoptic gospels. Most scholars seem to agree St John's Gospel was written later than the others. So there has to be at least the possibility of some retrofitting of theology to the narrative.

I'm not aware of any historical record, apart from the gospels, that independently says Jesus was crucified. Do you have something in mind?

 

[Sundance]

@Mauricius Modestus -

You make no sense.

You acknowledge that Muslims believe that much of Christian scripture is fabricated/corrupted. Yet you then expect Muslims to simply read and accept what you say are Jesus’ words, even though you know that Muslims believe that what is written in Christian scripture is not accurate.

Yes absolutely, Rabbi. The reason being is that Muslims say that the Christian scriptures that exists today are not the same ones given to Jesus, yet they make attempts at trying to prove Islamic doctrine through those same scriptures. Muslims do the very same with your Bible. My point in that is to ask them to check what they believe the New Testament teaches against what it actually teaches, so there is no confusion. It is one thing to disagree with what any particular religion or set of scriptures teaches (which is fine. Again, understandable), but it is something different to claim that that religion or scripture teaches something that it plainly does not, or that it does not teach what is plainly taught.

 

[exchemist]

Yes absolutely, Rabbi. The reason being is that Muslims say that the Christian scriptures that exists today are not the same ones given to Jesus, yet they make attempts at trying to prove Islamic doctrine through those same scriptures. Muslims do the very same with your Bible.

What are these scriptures that you say were given to Jesus?

And what doctrines do Muslims have that rely upon the OT or NT - or what they say were earlier versions of them?

 

[paarsurrey]

I’ve encountered many different perspectives on Jesus and the Gospel, from the beauty of the Bahá’ís (which is rather close, in my opinion, to the NT), to the mind-blowing conception of certain Hindus as an expansion or plenary portion of God (namely, Krishna or Vishnu) in the material world, to others as another rising-and-dying deity worshipped alongside their own as followers of indigenous religions do, to others as a holy man or a renegade. No sweat here.

(By religion, I myself am no Christian, merely sympathetic to it.)

Yet, concerning Islam, my anger has been kindled. Why, you may ask? Well, they not only differ with the New Testament (which, again, is perfectly fine. Understandable.), but they claim that the Christians have it all wrong about Jesus, Jesus didn’t say what He’s recorded as having said about who He was and what He would do. He said something different from what they believe He said.

My question here is this: if Muslims say that Jesus was a prophet, would a prophet lie about his identity and his message?


Jesus in the New Testament claims to be the Son of God, many times referring to God as “[My] Father”. Those around Him understood that He made such claims. Why do Muslims ignore these passages? Additionally, He had foretold his own death (by crucifixion), and the New Testament makes it abundantly clear this is what became of Jesus, not to speak a word to His Resurrection from the dead and eventual return. Yet, Muslims claim that it was fabricated. He was not crucified, but was taken up to Heaven. Why, when both scripture and history confirm the Crucifixion of Jesus as having taken place?

I invite my Muslim friends to read His Words from themselves and evaluate whether or not He was a liar. If you’re willing to concede that He was telling the truth, logically speaking, it would nullify your religion’s claims, would it not?

"He (Jesus) was a liar"

Quran does not say that Jesus was a liar. Right, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Quran, please?
Right,please?

Regards

 

[Sundance]

What are these scriptures that you say were given to Jesus?

And what doctrines do Muslims have that rely upon the OT or NT - or what they say were earlier versions of them?

Muslims teach that the Injil (The Gospel) was given to Jesus. That say that Jesus, in the original Injil, claimed to be a prophet or a messenger from God, but not the son of God. They say that the Christians corrupted and changed the text.

 

[paarsurrey]

"He (Jesus) was a liar"

Quran does not say that Jesus was a liar. Right, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Quran, please?
Right,please?

I am an Ahmadiyya peaceful Muslim. I will make it easier to understand the issue.

1. Jesus was son of Mary from mother side. Muslim and Christian both believe it. Right, please?
2. From fathers side Jesus was son of Man as per Gospels. I will quote from NT if one has not seen it. We Muslims also believe it. Right, please?
3. Jesus did not die on the Cross as G-d had told him. G-d saved Jesus.And it is reasonable. Right, please?

One should be happy to know this as it is a good news and Gospel as I understand means good news. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Sundance]

"He (Jesus) was a liar"

Quran does not say that Jesus was a liar. Right, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Quran, please?
Right,please?

Regards

You as a Muslim say that Jesus never claimed that He was the son of God, yes? The Qur’an denies Him this, yes?

This is surah 5, verse 116:

“And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.”


However, in the Book of Matthew chapter 16 verses 13 through 20, it is recorded that Jesus asks His Disciples who they say that He is. Peter replies, “You are the Christ. The Son of the Living God.” Jesus answers, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but My Father who is in Heaven.”

 

[Sundance]

Jesus wrote nothing himself that is known to us. The NT contains four accounts by people claiming to report his life and teaching. So we do not know what his words actually were, with any certainty.

I'm no biblical scholar but my impression is that references to Jesus as the son of God - and other theological ideas that became part of Christianity - are mostly in St John's Gospel, rather than the synoptic gospels. Most scholars seem to agree St John's Gospel was written later than the others. So there has to be at least the possibility of some retrofitting of theology to the narrative.

I'm not aware of any historical record, apart from the gospels, that independently says Jesus was crucified. Do you have something in mind?

That we do not have any direct quotations from Jesus Himself is true. However, we do have testimonies of people who were close associates of the Apostles who were there with Him.

As to the chronology, you’re probably right. Though, the retrofitting of the theology to fit the narrative, I wouldn’t bank on it.


The first reference which crosses my mind is the writing of Roman historian Tacitus in Annals regarding the crucifixion of Jesus by Pontius Pilate:

“But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.”

 

[Sundance]

To be fair here, even the various "Christian" denominations can't agree on this.

The vast majority of Christian denominations teach that Jesus was the Son of God, crucified and risen after three days, with the exception of a few groups.

 

[Sundance]

Jesus said Our Father which art in heaven, not my father which is in heaven

He also says, “In my Father’s house, there are many mansions. If it were not so, I would not have told you.”

 

[Sundance]

There is literally no way to establish right or wrong on this since all scripture is subjective, thus not objective.

We do have 5,800 Greek complete or fragmented manuscripts of the New Testament available today, so I would argue that it is perfectly possible to establish what it taught originally.

 

[Sundance]

Jesus wrote nothing himself that is known to us. The NT contains four accounts by people claiming to report his life and teaching. So we do not know what his words actually were, with any certainty.

I'm no biblical scholar but my impression is that references to Jesus as the son of God - and other theological ideas that became part of Christianity - are mostly in St John's Gospel, rather than the synoptic gospels. Most scholars seem to agree St John's Gospel was written later than the others. So there has to be at least the possibility of some retrofitting of theology to the narrative.

I'm not aware of any historical record, apart from the gospels, that independently says Jesus was crucified. Do you have something in mind?

I almost forgot this in my earlier reply to you, @exchemist. I’m no New Testament scholar myself, but the retrofitting wouldn’t hold up, on account that either Mark’s Gospel or Matthew’s was written first; these had already established Jesus as the Son of God, a miracle-worker, crucified and resurrected.

 

[Lyndon]

You're going to be really pxssed about this but when Jesus comes back, in addition to a few Christians is going to have billions of Muslim followers who are waiting for him to return just like Christians are, I'm sure Jesus wouldn't be stupid enough to try and take sides in some big Muslim/Christian divide.