The Bahai interpretation of Jesus, the crucifixion, and him in the Qur'an

[Dawnofhope]

From the beginning of the gospel stories to the end, they are filled with "extraordinary" events. A star that moves until it reaches where the baby Jesus is, then it stops? God speaking from heaven and saying that this is my beloved son. Bringing people back to life. Turning water into wine. Feeding 5000 with some bread and a few fish. Walking on water and having Peter also walk on water. He stopped a storm. Then, all the healings that he did? Have you seen or know of a healing where leprosy disappeared? Or, a blind eye made to see again? If they are real, and God does miraculously heal people, and if he created life out of nothing, then why couldn't God bring Jesus back to life?

Or, are all the claims of miracle healings are all fake? And God doesn't do those kinds of things, even though, theoretically, he could? Either way, just because the oral traditions got passed down that Jesus did these healings and walked on water and rose from the dead, doesn't mean they really happened. His followers could have easily made up those stories. And same with the Jewish Bible... All those things could have been easily made up. But, what's strange, is the spiritual and social laws Baha'is believe that those are real and came from God? Why? Why not the whole thing just a made up thing? Made up Gods, made up demons, made up laws, made up everything?

But no, Baha'is don't say that and don't believe that. In this case the Baha'i Faith says that Jesus was indeed crucified, so that is what the truth is... no matter what the Quran says. Baha'is then find the easiest explanation to reconcile the contradiction... It was talking about the spirit of Jesus didn't die. Like I said, that is not very profound. Who's spirit dies when their body dies? And that's my problem with the Baha'i Faith... it makes the Bible, and now the Quran too, true and God's Word when it agrees with them, but "symbolic" when it contradicts them.

The Muslim belief that Jesus was not crucified or killed has interesting parallels to the Christian belief in the resurrection. Both beliefs are based on a very literal interpretation of religious scripture and both beliefs are completely contrary to all the available evidence beyond sacred scriptures. Beyond the Bible there is not a shred of evidence that Jesus literally rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. Beyond the Quran there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest Jesus was not crucified as history so clearly records. The Christian belief relies on an obsolete cosmology that runs contrary to all science. The Muslim belief essentially tries to rewrite history when there is clear and compelling evidence Jesus was crucified. As this thread has clearly demonstrated, it is an exercise in frustration and futility trying to convince Muslims that their scripture means anything other than what they believe. For most it is a fixed belief, immutable and can not be changed through discussion on a forum such as this, not that I wish to change anyone's belief. It is an opportunity for each of us to examine afresh the evidence and draw our own conclusions. Beyond that, I have little more to add today.

 

[firedragon]

Beyond the Quran there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest Jesus was not crucified

Well. You have not provided that he indeed was crucified other than refer to Josephus's miracle worker verses that are known forgeries. You will claim something, but never respond.

You never gave any manuscripts of Josephus. Why?

In this post you have blatantly said that Quran is evidence to suggest that Jesus was crucified. But of course you won't accept what you yourself just said.

Try and respond to this post with some objective evidences.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

3. He did not die. God took Him physically up. He is alive.

This is not my view. It is the Exalted's revealed truth....which I accept, without reservation.

So, as a Bahai - and self-proclaimed believer in the Qur'an - what, in your view, happened to Yeshua?

1. Was He killed?
2. The Exalted caused Him to die, as a natural death?
3. He did not die. The Exalted took Him physically up. He is alive.

I am just curious. Which one is it?

Jesus was crucified and martyred.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well. You have not provided that he indeed was crucified other than refer to Josephus's miracle worker verses that are known forgeries. You will claim something, but never respond.

You never gave any manuscripts of Josephus. Why?

We both know what is in the fragments of the manuscripts of Josephus that refer to Jesus. We know the arguments in regards the fragment that refers to the crucifixion. We come to different conclusions about the fragment in question.

The manuscript of Josephus is but one of many pieces of evidence that support's the crucifixion of Jesus. We could examine Tacitus, Mara-Bar Seripian's letter and the Babylonian Talmud. There are the four Gospel accounts. There are other NT references such as Paul's reference in his first epistle to Corinthians.

Almost all reputable historians of antiquity agree Jesus was crucified.

In this post you have blatantly said that Quran is evidence to suggest that Jesus was crucified. But of course you won't accept what you yourself just said.

No. I have said the way 4:157 reads gives room for either a literal or metaphorical interpretation. I have referenced Quranic commentators who have provided a metaphorical interpretation.

Try and respond to this post with some objective evidences.

As above.

The evidence you have provided is your insistence that 4:157 has to be taken literally and the mainstream Quranic commentators who are unequivocal in their conviction as to the literal interpretation as you are. That's not evidence at all for me, but it sure has you convinced.

The best way forward is for us to respectfully agree to disagree. What do you think?

 

[Niblo]

Jesus was crucified and martyred.

Very good.

Please would you now produce your evidence, taken only from the Qur'an (since only the Qur'an is mentioned in the title of this thread).

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Very good.

Please would you now produce your evidence, taken only from the Qur'an (since only the Qur'an is mentioned in the title of this thread).

I think we really did provide evidences from the Quran in this thread. But I give a quick summary here.

In Quran there are two kind of verses. Muhkamaat and Mutishabihat. This is stated in verse 3:7.

In my view, verse 4:157 is one of those Mutiahabihat verses.
Because, according to NT, Jesus was crucified. And NT, in my view is what the Quran confirms as the Gospel.
So, 4:157 must have an interpretation other than its apparent literal meaning.

Well-known Muslim Imams, have said, one who does not follow Mutishabihat verses, and refers Mutishabihat of Quran to its Muhkamaat is guided.

Here we must refer this verse to the verse 2:154, for this verse is a clear verse and makes the matter clear:

"Never say that those martyred in the cause of Allah are dead—in fact, they are alive! But you do not perceive it." 2:154


So, verse 2:154 tells me, there is something else other than the physical body who matters, and stays alive even if they martyr and kill the physical body.

As Jesus was Martyred and killed for the cause of God, it cannot be said they really killed Him. He is alive but we do not perceive it. That is what verse 4:157 is saying in my view.

 

[firedragon]

We both know what is in the fragments of the manuscripts of Josephus that refer to Jesus. We know the arguments in regards the fragment that refers to the crucifixion. We come to different conclusions about the fragment in question.

The manuscript of Josephus is but one of many pieces of evidence that support's the crucifixion of Jesus. We could examine Tacitus, Mara-Bar Seripian's letter and the Babylonian Talmud. There are the four Gospel accounts. There are other NT references such as Paul's reference in his first epistle to Corinthians.

Almost all reputable historians of antiquity agree Jesus was crucified.

What is the dating of these "fragments of manuscripts" you speak of?

No. I have said the way 4:157 reads gives room for either a literal or metaphorical interpretation.

Not at all. There is no "room" for some metaphorical interpretation. It is a simple direct statement that says "he was not killed, nor crucified". How could that be metaphorical?

As above.

The evidence you have provided is your insistence that 4:157 has to be taken literally and the mainstream Quranic commentators who are unequivocal in their conviction as to the literal interpretation as you are. That's not evidence at all for me, but it sure has you convinced.

This is simple language. And either you accept the Quran, or reject it. Either way is fine with me because it is your belief, but you can't have the cake and eat it. Hope you understand.

And please dont make it about "mainstream Quran commentators" because you did not present any kind of commentators. They were Ishmaili proselytisers and some group no one knows who, what or when in Ur. This simple statement in the Quran does not need any commentary, it is plain and simple.

See, if you dont know what Quran commentators do, dont make things up for an absolutely bogus argument.

Of course we can agree to disagree, but be honest and dont present dishonest arguments about Quran commentators etc etc. Unbelievable.

Have a great day.

 

[Niblo]

I think we really did provide evidences from the Quran in this thread. But I give a quick summary here.

In Quran there are two kind of verses. Muhkamaat and Mutishabihat. This is stated in verse 3:7.

In my view, verse 4:157 is one of those Mutiahabihat verses.
Because, according to NT, Jesus was crucified. And NT, in my view is what the Quran confirms as the Gospel.
So, 4:157 must have an interpretation other than its apparent literal meaning.

Well-known Muslim Imams, have said, one who does not follow Mutishabihat verses, and refers Mutishabihat of Quran to its Muhkamaat is guided.

Here we must refer this verse to the verse 2:154, for this verse is a clear verse and makes the matter clear:

"Never say that those martyred in the cause of Allah are dead—in fact, they are alive! But you do not perceive it." 2:154


So, verse 2:154 tells me, there is something else other than the physical body who matters, and stays alive even if they martyr and kill the physical body.

As Jesus was Martyred and killed for the cause of God, it cannot be said they really killed Him. He is alive but we do not perceive it. That is what verse 4:157 is saying in my view.

Where in the text of the Qur'an does it state that Yeshua was crucified? Where does it say that he was martyred? Where does it identify him as one of those: '....martyred in the cause of Allah...'?

 

[firedragon]

Where in the text of the Qur'an does it state that Yeshua was crucified? Where does it say that he was martyred? Where does it identify him as one of those: '....martyred in the cause of Allah...'?

This dishonest claim about martyrs is a clouding tactic.

This thread is not about martyrdom or the death of Jesus. This is about "crucifixion".

They pretend not to understand it.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Where in the text of the Qur'an does it state that Yeshua was crucified? Where does it say that he was martyred? Where does it identify him as one of those: '....martyred in the cause of Allah...'?

The fact that, Allah confirms Gospel which was with the people of the Book, tells me, the Quran confirms the crucifixion of Jesus.

"Say, ‘People of the Book, you have no true basis [for your religion] unless you uphold the Torah, the Gospel, and that which has been sent down to you from your Lord,’ but what has been sent down to you [Prophet] from your Lord is sure to increase many of them in their insolence and defiance: do not worry about those who defy [God]." 5:68

The Gospel in this verse is the New Testament. Christians and specially eastern Christians call the whole NT, the Gospel (aka Injil). The Quran speaks in the language of the people who were present in the Arabic Land where Muhammad appeared. So, Quran uses the same terms and names as understood by those people. Those people called the whole NT, the Gospel, and this is what Quran is asking them, that they need to uphold the Gospel. In another words the view of Quran is that the Gospel or NT is a legitimate Book.
If one was to think that, in view of the Quran, the true and legitimate Gospel was non-existent, then how could people uphold them?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@Niblo

And here is an allusion that the Jews, killed Jesus:


"We made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel and We sent unto them messengers. As often as a messenger came unto them with that which their souls desired not (they became rebellious). Some (of them) they denied and some they slew." 5:70


Based on the above verse, there must have been more than One Messenger who was killed by Israelites.

Who were these Messengers, according to recorded traditions and Religious Texts?

The key in this verse is also, Messengers(Rasools) were killed, not just Prophets (Nabi).

There are certain things in the Quran mentioned in the form of allusions which can be farther known its details from other religious recorded traditions and Texts.

 

[Dawnofhope]

What is the dating of these "fragments of manuscripts" you speak of?

We both know the answer to that question. How about providing contemporaneous historical sources that support the Muslim view that Jesus wasn’t crucified?

Not at all. There is no "room" for some metaphorical interpretation. It is a simple direct statement that says "he was not killed, nor crucified". How could that be metaphorical?

You are selecting one part of the verse out of context with the rest of the verse. Taken in context there is plenty of room for a metaphorical interpretation.

This is simple language. And either you accept the Quran, or reject it. Either way is fine with me because it is your belief, but you can't have the cake and eat it. Hope you understand.

One thing we agree on is that the language of Quran is straightforward. That is why one only needs to read the verse in context to see it can have a metaphorical as well as a literal meaning. The Quranic verse is sufficient evidence on its own. There are of course many scholars who have viewed the verse in exactly the same manner.

And please dont make it about "mainstream Quran commentators" because you did not present any kind of commentators. They were Ishmaili proselytisers and some group no one knows who, what or when in Ur. This simple statement in the Quran does not need any commentary, it is plain and simple.

As above. It is valuable to view different strands of thoughts. Ismaïlia was one of the largest and most significant groups within Shi’a Islam. They recognise the first six Imams of Twelver Islam, which is certainly legitimate.

See, if you dont know what Quran commentators do, dont make things up for an absolutely bogus argument.

I’m simply elaborating on what is recorded in Wikipedia. There’s plenty of other starting points of course such as Ayoub.

Of course we can agree to disagree, but be honest and dont present dishonest arguments about Quran commentators etc etc. Unbelievable.

Have a great day.

Dismissing and disparaging those who hold alternative viewpoints isn’t agreeing to disagree. Apparently the crucifixion of Christ is an emotive and highly charged topic between Christians and Muslims. You’ve certainly provided some insight as to why that is.

Do you subscribe to substitution theories? What do you think happened to Christ if He wasn’t crucified?

 

[firedragon]

We both know the answer to that question. How about providing contemporaneous historical sources that support the Muslim view that Jesus wasn’t crucified?

Thats a hypocritical response because you have no response and you know that you have no valid argument or sources.

Ill take you to the OP and ask you to read again. Maybe I will remind you the dilemma you are posed with in the OP which you cannot answer so you are resorting to a Tu Quoque fallacy.

The Quran says "He was not crucified".
You believe "the Quran is Gods revelation".
You also believe He was crucified.

Its an oxymoron. Thats the question. If you dont have answers, and if your responses about Josephus etc are all quick searches without any proper information, just admit it. This is logically fallacious.

I’m simply elaborating on what is recorded in Wikipedia. There’s plenty of other starting points of course such as Ayoub.

But see, Ayoub is modern day, your claim was "Early Quran Commentators". I know maybe you are trying desperately to ignore what you yourself said and couldn't substantiate or accept your own false statements that some Ishmaili proselytisers and a "secret group in Iraq" were "Early Commentators". But please dont think other people are that stupid to forget your claim when you cleverly try to change your claim to something else.

But only to honour you I have given you some of the earliest Quran commentators. Of course, you wouldn't care about them since it doesnt serve your purpose. I did that only to honour your own need of bringing in early Quran commentators, which is irrelevant to this thread. This thread is not about what Muslims, Ishmailis, Quran commentators or some Iraqi secret group believed, this is about the "QURAN" and what the simple text says.

Dismissing and disparaging those who hold alternative viewpoints isn’t agreeing to disagree.

Hypocrisy should be exposed. Intellectual dishonesty is as clear as brilliant white in this thread. So dont turn this into some hypocrisy. Act your talk Adrian.

• The Quran says Jesus was not crucified.
• You believe he was.
• You believe Quran was Gods revelation.

You will never be able to reconcile this intellectually. Thats why even a person who acts gentlemanly like you is resorting to all kinds of fallacies and duplicities.

Peace.

 

[firedragon]

In my view, verse 4:157 is one of those Mutiahabihat verses.

It says clearly "He was not crucified". There is nothing Muthasabih about it. Bogus argument. "YOUR VIEW" is irrelevant. The text is relevant.

 

[firedragon]

The fact that, Allah confirms Gospel which was with the people of the Book, tells me, the Quran confirms the crucifixion of Jesus.

As usual the Bahai's bring in an argument for another thread in order to derail this. Its a very common tactic. I just hope people dont fall for these.

 

[firedragon]

Since the Bahai's insist on derailing every thread with something new, here is one of the topics you brought in in this thread to derail this. You can engage here. Prove the Quran is speaking about the New Testament when it says "Gospel".

Bahai's say: Quran is speaking about "the Gospel" which is the "New Testament"

@InvestigateTruth @adrian009 @Trailblazer

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It says clearly "He was not crucified". There is nothing Muthasabih about it. Bogus argument. "YOUR VIEW" is irrelevant. The text is relevant.

It says clearly "He was not crucified". There is nothing Muthasabih about it. Bogus argument. "YOUR VIEW" is irrelevant. The text is relevant.

Before everything I suggest we think, why the Quran according to verse 3:7 contains certain verses which are Mutiahabihat, and no one knows their interpretation except God? Why didn't God say everything clear, and easy to interpret?

If we go by verse 3:7, it says, some verses are Mutishabihat. It does not say, necessarily only a word or expression in a verse is Mutishabihat. So, I am saying the entire verse 4:157 is Mutishabih. One way to know is, when a literal meaning of a verse conflicts with established scientific facts, or with other clear verses of the Book of God.


How realistic is it, to think God took Jesus physically to Himself? Why would He do that, when God says He let Israelites kill some of the Messengers of God?
You see, correct interpretation of a verse is to be able to find answers to the questions such as above.

 

[firedragon]

Before everything I suggest we think, why the Quran according to verse 3:7 contains certain verses which are Mutiahabihat, and no one knows their interpretation except God? Why didn't God say everything clear, and easy to interpret?

If we go by verse 3:7, it says, some verses are Mutishabihat. It does not say, necessarily only a word or expression in a verse is Mutishabihat. So, I am saying the entire verse 4:157 is Mutishabih. One way to know is, when a literal meaning of a verse conflicts with established scientific facts, or with other clear verses of the Book of God.


How realistic is it, to think God took Jesus physically to Himself? Why would He do that, when God says He let Israelites kill some of the Messengers of God?
You see, correct interpretation of a verse is to be able to find answers to the questions such as above.

Open a new thread to discuss that.

This thread is about clear text. Just simple text. obviously you wish to divert it since you have no answer.

No interpretation can translate "he was not crucified" into "he was crucified'. So your attempt of course is false.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Open a new thread to discuss that.

This thread is about clear text. Just simple text. obviously you wish to divert it since you have no answer.

No interpretation can translate "he was not crucified" into "he was crucified'. So your attempt of course is false.

That is exactly what I am trying to say. In my view, understanding Quranic verses is not just simplified to reading the "text" and its literal meaning or the traces of letters. In our view Book of God has a spirit in it. It is not description of just physical literal events. In many cases they are spiritual realities rather than description of physical events, as a normal history book.

 

[firedragon]

In my view,

Yeah. Your view is irrelevant. The text is relevant.