Was Jesus Really Crucified

[fallingblood]

No it's not. The stance of Islam is confusion on 4.127 and crucifixion. Fact: there's never been any orthodox view on this verse. Here's conflicting orthodox Muslims with conflicting opinions. However, in Christianity, orthodox Christians agree on the physical resurrection of Jesus.

The majority of those people you quoted (which really tells us nothing in general) lean towards the substitution idea. Other than that, we are just told that they acknowledge that something else may have happened, but that they lean to thinking that it was the substitution theory. So really, you just gave what I said credence.

Also, orthodox Christians do not all agree on the physical resurrection of Jesus. If you read some scholars on the subject, particularly some Catholic ones, you will see basically the same thing as you shown in your quote. That they acknowledge the other beliefs, but lean one way.

 

[Muffled]

Can you show that is the reason? The truth is, baptism was not used for that reason until later on.

And again, we are told that Jesus was human. That in the first place leads us to believe that he could have possibly sinned. We are told that he did not honor his mother by rejecting his immediate family. He disobeyed various laws which were considered sinful. There is little reason to believe he was sinless. And the baptism itself shines negative light on the idea even.

This is not so strange considering that some people think of God as evil.

Whoever told you that was telling a lie. The Bible never indicates that. The only verse that comes close could be interpreted many ways. My son learned the hard way that God comes first and family comes second. That is not an abridgement of the Law but simply a correct assessment of it.

This is a confused statement but if your implication is that a person can sin by keeping the law I would agree and that Jesus acted without sin by breaking the law.

Jesus said that He came to fulfill the law. That is reason enough.

It would be if you could prove that the motive of Jesus for being baptized was repentance, however the text does not support the inference.

 

[Muffled]

The majority of those people you quoted (which really tells us nothing in general) lean towards the substitution idea. Other than that, we are just told that they acknowledge that something else may have happened, but that they lean to thinking that it was the substitution theory. So really, you just gave what I said credence.

Also, orthodox Christians do not all agree on the physical resurrection of Jesus. If you read some scholars on the subject, particularly some Catholic ones, you will see basically the same thing as you shown in your quote. That they acknowledge the other beliefs, but lean one way.

The substitution theory comes from the Hadith. There is a whole group of Muslims that believe the Hadith is not the word of God and in many cases false. I would agree with that asessment of the Hadith. However there is a group of Muslims that considers it equal with the Qu'ran.

 

[fallingblood]

The substitution theory comes from the Hadith. There is a whole group of Muslims that believe the Hadith is not the word of God and in many cases false. I would agree with that asessment of the Hadith. However there is a group of Muslims that considers it equal with the Qu'ran.

The substitution theory may come from the Hadith, but it is inspired by the Quran. It isn't a stretch to see how the theory works in the Quran. We are given little information, but what is suggested is that Jesus did not die on the cross. That is what we are told in the Quran. And it isn't a surprise, as we see this being the case in some forms of ancient Christian sects.

 

[A Thousand Suns]

Jesus said that He came to fulfill the law. That is reason enough.

It would be if you could prove that the motive of Jesus for being baptized was repentance, however the text does not support the inference.

Where does in bible jesus(pbuh) say that

 

[fallingblood]

Whoever told you that was telling a lie. The Bible never indicates that. The only verse that comes close could be interpreted many ways. My son learned the hard way that God comes first and family comes second. That is not an abridgement of the Law but simply a correct assessment of it.

A correct assessment according to you. Plus, Jesus does, in one Gospel, basically dismiss his family. It may be interpreted many ways, but that is because people want to make Jesus look perfect. However, throughout the Gospels, we see him as a human. He gets angry. He gets sad. He shows human emotions, and thus the shows his humanity. It is only logical that he also sinned, and we do see it in various places.

This is a confused statement but if your implication is that a person can sin by keeping the law I would agree and that Jesus acted without sin by breaking the law.

I was saying that he was sinning by breaking the law. He was a Jew, that is what is important in this case. He broke the law, and thus sinned.

Jesus said that He came to fulfill the law. That is reason enough.

That is not reason at all. And if we look at what he said, in Matthew we are told that he did not come here to abolish the law. That one must obey the law more adherently than most Jews.

It would be if you could prove that the motive of Jesus for being baptized was repentance, however the text does not support the inference.

That really doesn't matter in this case. We have to look at why one would be baptized in Judaism. That reason shines negatively on the idea that Jesus was sinless.

 

[dogsgod]

Didn't they find the sign that said "king of the Jews" affixed to a crucifix and confirmed there was a Yeshua crucified by pilot? (swear I remember reading this from a credible, secular source)

Debating whether it was actually truly him or not is like debating the resurrection, no one will ever know because there is no concrete proof. It's a matter of purely faith, not facts.

Yes, and there are pieces of the cross in churches throughout Europe brought back from Jerusalem by crusaders.

 

[Starsoul]

If i may add a little, i hope I'm allowed to. Just wanted to tell what the Islamic concept about the crucifiction is.

According to what God says in the Quran, Jesus(pbuh) was not crucified, and that matter was handled by God Himself, in a way that Judas, the close aide of jesus who broke the promise of secrecy and informed the jews and romans about jesus's place(where he was with his disciples, praying to God), hence Judas was replaced with jesus and all people thought that it was Jesus who got crucified , inspite of the fact that God punished 'Judas' by letting him face the punishment of what he did.

And Jesus was lifted to the skies intact, and will InshAllah return again to rule the world ,once again.Then, at that time all believeing people will accept the true version of christianity that he actually taught. And he will tell people that he is a human being, and not a son of God, & that lie was fed to christianity by corrupt jews who wanted to take control of all the religions of the world by making changes in the original divine texts to suit to their own desires and justify their war against both christianty and Islam. Not to mention the fact, that all christians are called towards Islam so that They knew the conspiracy of jews against their religion.

That is the one of the biggest reasons that the final book of guidance was launched on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Then God promised that no-one will ever be able to change the text of Quran ever! That fact is seen today when the Quran is present in every Muslim's house in the same exact text ,as originally made by God, 1400 yrs ago. But sadly the bible and torah (the book of jews) all got corrupted by jews and hence we have, not one single original version of the rest of the books and they have many bibles and with texts that is questionable by even some of the well read priests of christianity.

 

[Bowman]

If i may add a little, i hope I'm allowed to. Just wanted to tell what the Islamic concept about the crucifiction is.

According to what God says in the Quran, Jesus(pbuh) was not crucified, and that matter was handled by God Himself, in a way that Judas, the close aide of jesus who broke the promise of secrecy and informed the jews and romans about jesus's place(where he was with his disciples, praying to God), hence Judas was replaced with jesus and all people thought that it was Jesus who got crucified , inspite of the fact that God punished 'Judas' by letting him face the punishment of what he did.

And Jesus was lifted to the skies intact, and will InshAllah return again to rule the world ,once again.Then, at that time all believeing people will accept the true version of christianity that he actually taught. And he will tell people that he is a human being, and not a son of God, & that lie was fed to christianity by corrupt jews who wanted to take control of all the religions of the world by making changes in the original divine texts to suit to their own desires and justify their war against both christianty and Islam. Not to mention the fact, that all christians are called towards Islam so that They knew the conspiracy of jews against their religion.

That is the one of the biggest reasons that the final book of guidance was launched on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Then God promised that no-one will ever be able to change the text of Quran ever! That fact is seen today when the Quran is present in every Muslim's house in the same exact text ,as originally made by God, 1400 yrs ago. But sadly the bible and torah (the book of jews) all got corrupted by jews and hence we have, not one single original version of the rest of the books and they have many bibles and with texts that is questionable by even some of the well read priests of christianity.

Spoken like a true follower of islam...same canned polemics...

 

[logician]

I think that the traditions regarding the crucifixion are very strong, and the denial of the resurrection is problematic for those of us who think that the Gospels contain material that was passed down orally.

History and tradition are 2 different things, tradition can be entirely mythical, history requires hard evidence.

 

[fallingblood]

Spoken like a true follower of islam...same canned polemics...

I don't think you are in any position to criticize here, not after looking at the same canned polemics that you give you Christianity.

 

[Starsoul]

@ Bowman

Its polemic only when jews and christians dont believe in Islam. Islam believes in both. Not Only that, It recognizes, respects and adresses to them. Can we say the same about judaism and the current day christianity? No!. The whole thread has texts taken from bible showing a slight disrespect to the christian's Prophet, isnt it ironic that Muslims respect Jesus more than his original followers?

Atleast we don't add fabricated tales to all the prophets and judge 'them' to be a sinners. Not saying that the christians themselves added stuff to the book, but inspite of being quite advanced in their beliefs in science, its strange that they cannot feel the discrepensies in their several texts of bible. Its a well known fact that Bible got re-written by Hand, by the orthododox jews, 70 years after He passed away (got lifted). And all his ardent followers ,which were not many at the time,probably in thousands, were killed because they highly opposed to the change in its texts.

You can find out about the history of all these things on your own. We have many bishops and priests revert to Islam and they reverted because they had seen the truth somewhere. peace

 

[Starsoul]

@ ahanu

Talk about picking up a piece of divine guidance and trying to making an attempt of selling the water to the sea : p . It is clearly written that jesus was Not crucified and yet he is going in long twisted self assumptions verifying his lack of intellect by misinterpreting the Quran. Misinterpretations presented by shallow derogatory ideas like these dont even go as far as the spit , what to talk about teaching Quran to the Muslims. It is for people like these that Allah says in the Quran

" they have eyes, and they do not see, they have ears and they do not hear, and they do not think inspite of having the capability to think'

 

[Starsoul]

@ ahanu

Talk about picking up a piece of divine guidance and trying to making an attempt of selling the water to the sea : p . It is clearly written that jesus was Not crucified and yet he is going in long twisted self assumptions verifying his lack of intellect by misinterpreting the Quran. Misinterpretations presented by shallow derogatory ideas like these dont even go as far as the spit , what to talk about teaching Quran to the Muslims. It is for people like these that Allah says in the Quran

" they have eyes, and they do not see, they have ears and they do not hear, and they do not think inspite of having the capability to think.'

 

[sojourner]

History and tradition are 2 different things, tradition can be entirely mythical, history requires hard evidence.

History and tradition are two different things for modern Westerners. for ancient Middle-Easterners, the two are more closely identified.

 

[Bowman]

@ Bowman

Its polemic only when jews and christians dont believe in Islam. Islam believes in both. Not Only that, It recognizes, respects and adresses to them. Can we say the same about judaism and the current day christianity? No!. The whole thread has texts taken from bible showing a slight disrespect to the christian's Prophet, isnt it ironic that Muslims respect Jesus more than his original followers?

Atleast we don't add fabricated tales to all the prophets and judge 'them' to be a sinners. Not saying that the christians themselves added stuff to the book, but inspite of being quite advanced in their beliefs in science, its strange that they cannot feel the discrepensies in their several texts of bible. Its a well known fact that Bible got re-written by Hand, by the orthododox jews, 70 years after He passed away (got lifted). And all his ardent followers ,which were not many at the time,probably in thousands, were killed because they highly opposed to the change in its texts.

You can find out about the history of all these things on your own. We have many bishops and priests revert to Islam and they reverted because they had seen the truth somewhere. peace

Brother...you are merely regurgitating mindless islamic mantra.

You all have the same exact training...and that is one of polemic.

The first words out of the very first Muslim that I ever met was...'did you know that your Bible was corrupted?'...

No difference in your training, either.

However, if you want to talk scripture, then we can put the tires to a little road test and see who has the best understanding of the texts at hand...

Up for that....or are you still on your islamic soapbox?

 

[Starsoul]

You actually did not have one significant thing to say as a christian about what is said in the Quran, all you were capable of saying was call me a name because it obviously irritates you that you cannot PROVE that bible was Not corrupted

And thank you, we don't keep soapboxes, its known to be kept by people who've got their whole religious text washed by incident? And replaced by creative ' Revised versions'. Dont condescend the christians so much, I hear they believe in the bible more than they ever believed in God.

 

[Bowman]

You actually did not have one significant thing to say as a christian about what is said in the Quran, all you were capable of saying was call me a name because it obviously irritates you that you cannot PROVE that bible was Not corrupted

And thank you, we don't keep soapboxes, its known to be kept by people who've got their whole religious text washed by incident? And replaced by creative ' Revised versions'. Dont condescend the christians so much, I hear they believe in the bible more than they ever believed in God.

Brother...

Show me where your Koran states that the Holy Bible is supposedly 'corrupted'.

Good luck...

 

[fallingblood]

Brother...

Show me where your Koran states that the Holy Bible is supposedly 'corrupted'.

Good luck...

Is scripture the only thing that can give evidence? It doesn't take much work to see that the Bible contradicts itself. I think that would qualify it as being corrupt.

 

[Bowman]

Is scripture the only thing that can give evidence?

Since you don't know any scripture whatsoever, why even bother to reply to a question directed towards another person..?

It doesn't take much work to see that the Bible contradicts itself. I think that would qualify it as being corrupt.

Another meritless assertion.

Your specialty.