The fate of Jesus/Was Jesus Substituted?

[Ansar Al-Haq]

Was Jesus Substituted?

[sheik]

salaam,

calm down brother al-haq you will get a heart attack!

he was raised up into the heavens.

salaam

[Ansar Al-Haq]

But HOW! WHEN! WHY!

GOTTA RUN!

[sheik]

salaam,

i belive there was another thread already started on this

but the discussion was on one single arabic word, and scholars translate it as coming up to the heavens when others let christian influence sway their judement and interpret the word as death.

salaam

[Ansar Al-Haq]

Perhaps it would be beneficial to post relevant ayaat.

[Yaaraer]

Salam,

Verse 3:55

Yusuf Ali translates it as

Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.

And Muhammad Asad translates it differently,

Lo!God said:"O Jesus!Verily,I shall cause thee to die,and shall exalt thee unto Me,and cleanse thee of [the presence of] those who are bent on denying the truth;and I shall place those who follow thee [far] above those who are bent on denying the truth, unto the Day of Resurrection.In the end,unto Me you all must return, and I shall judge between you with regard to all on which you were wont to differ


Al-Qur'an, 003.055 (Aal-E-Imran [The Family of Imran])

(Text Copied from DivineIslam's Qur'an Viewer software v2.9)


I would like to know if there are any other scholars who think differently from the generally held Muslim view that Jesus(pbuh) was raised up,if anyone can tell me that is.

Peace.

[Yaaraer]

Also, these links might help you understand the view that Jesus(pbuh) died,
http://www.al-mawrid.org/Content/Vie...questionId=283
http://www.al-mawrid.org/Content/Vie...questionId=290

[lucas]

Salaam Yaaraer,

forgive me if i misunderstood you...but are you saying that it is your belief, according the Qur'an...that Jesus(peace and blessings be upon him) did die and was not raised up to heaven as a living being?

the three translations of 3:55 i have do not mention the word "die" in them at all...

Yusuf Ali you've already posted...

(And remember) when Allah said: O Jesus! Lo! I am gathering thee and causing thee to ascend unto Me, and am cleansing thee of those who disbelieve and am setting those who follow thee above those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then unto Me ye will (all) return, and I shall judge between you as to that wherein ye used to differ. [Pickthal]

And when Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed. [Shakir]

it is being shown that Allah had decided that Jesus'(peace and blessings be upon him) stay on earth was over with...it does not mention that he will die, but one could raise that question based on these chapters. it does not say one way or the other...however An-Nisa (ch.4) address this idea...his death.

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:- [Yusuf Ali]

And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. [Pickthal]

And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the messenger of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. [Shakir] 4:157

i would be interested in seeing how Muhammad Asad, translates this passage.

the Qur'an makes it clear that Jesus(peace and blessings be upon him) did not die at the hands of the Jews who sought to kill him. now, i read question 283 and it alluded to the idea that Jesus(peace and blessings be upon him) did die...but not by the hands of the Jews. is this what you are saying? that his cause of death was "natural" or by the cause and will of Allah? that he died in some other fashion than crucifixion?

i'd like to add...quite interestingly, even though it was left out of the Cannonization Barnabas had this to say in his Gospel:

When the soldiers with Judas drew near to the place where Jesus was, Jesus heard the approach of many people, wherefore in fear he withdrew into the house. And the eleven were sleeping. Then God, seeing the danger of his servant, commanded Gabriel;, Michael;, Rafael;, and Uriel, his ministers, to take Jesus out of the world. The holy angels came and took Jesus out by the window that looks toward the South;. They bare him and placed him in the third heaven in the company of angels blessing God for evermore.

Judas entered impetuously before all into the chamber whence Jesus had been taken up. And the disciples were sleeping. Whereupon the wonderful God acted wonderfully, insomuch that Judas was so changed in speech and in face to be like Jesus that we believed him to be Jesus. And he, having awakened us, was seeking where the Master was. Whereupon we marvelled, and answered: 'You, Lord, are our master; have you now forgotten us?'

And he, smiling, said: 'Now are you foolish, that know not me to be Judas Iscariot!' And as he was saying this the soldiery entered, and laid their hands upon Judas, because he was in every way like to Jesus. We having heard Judas' saying, and seeing the multitude of soldiers, fled as beside ourselves. And John, who was wrapped in a linen cloth, awoke and fled, and when a soldier seized him by the linen cloth he left the linen cloth and fled naked. For God heard the prayer of Jesus, and saved the eleven from evil. [Gospel of Barnabas 215-216]

to my knowledge this Gospel was written well before the Prophet(peace and blessings be upon him) recieved revelation...and was accepted widley among the Churches of Alexandria till 325 C.E.

just some food for thought...

[JoeChristian]

Lucas,

Regarding the so-called "Gospel of Barnabas", you should check out the link here:

Gospel of Barnabas

"The Gospel of Barnabas is not an authentic Gospel of Jesus. The author does not understand the language, history or geography of the 1st century A.D., and there is no ancient evidence for the book. The internal evidence of the book suggests it was written in the 14th century and there are Muslim scholars who agree with this dating. The book is a rewrite of the Biblical Gospel most likely by a Muslim who wanted to show that Jesus taught Islam and predicted the coming of Muhammad."

--Joe

[Yaaraer]

forgive me if i misunderstood you...but are you saying that it is your belief, according the Qur'an...that Jesus(peace and blessings be upon him) did die and was not raised up to heaven as a living being?

I am afraid I’ve got no view about this at the moment…undecided. I am sorry if I sounded vague to you. I always used to believe that Jesus did not die but was actually raised up. Then I encountered Muhammad Asad’s translation and read Al-Mawrid’s view too on this. And now I am actually a bit confused not actually being learned myself. Almost everyone around me believes that Jesus was actually raised up and that’s one of the reasons for my confusions. Why don’t the other scholars translate it as die? That’s something I would very much like to know. And what about the prophet’s(pbuh) contemporaries?What did they believe? Maybe that’s not available. As I said before, I actually have a very restricted knowledge of Islam.
Muhammad Asad translates An-Nisa:157 as,

and their boast, “Behold we have slain the Christ Jesus, son of Mary,[who claimed to be] an apostle of God!” However they did not slay him, and neither did they crucify him,but it only seemed to them[as if it had been] so; and, verily,those who hold conflicting views thereon are indeed confused,having no [real] knowledge thereof, and following mere conjecture.For, of a certainty,they did not slay him:

Verse 4: 158,the next verse is translated as,

Nay, God exalted him unto Himself – and God is indeed Almighty, Wise.

Muhammad Asad’s explanation to 4: 157 is,

Thus, the Qur'an categorically denies the story of the crucifixion of Jesus. There exist, among Muslims, many fanciful legends telling us that at the last moment God substituted for Jesus a person closely resembling him (according to some accounts, that person was Judas), who was subsequently crucified in his place. However, none of these LEGENDS finds the slightest support in the Qur'an or in authentic Traditions, and the stories produced in this connection by the classical commentators must be summarily rejected. They represent no more than confused attempts at "harmonizing" the Qur'anic statement that Jesus was not crucified with the graphic description, in the Gospels, of his crucifixion. The story of the crucifixion as such has been succinctly explained in the Qur'anic phrase wa-sakin shubbiha lahum, which I render as "but it only appeared to them as if it had been so" - implying that in the course of time, long after the time of Jesus, a legend had somehow grown up (possibly under the then-powerful influence of Mithraistic beliefs) to the effect that he had died on the cross in order to atone for the "original sin" with which mankind is allegedly burdened; and this legend became so firmly established among the latter-day followers of Jesus that even his enemies, the Jews, began to believe it - albeit in a derogatory sense (for crucifixion was, in those times, a heinous form of death-penalty reserved for the lowest of criminals). This, to my mind, is the only satisfactory explanation of the phrase wa-lakin shubbiha lahum, the more so as the expression shubbiha li is idiomatically synonymous with khuyyila li, "[a thing] became a fancied image to me", i.e., "in my mind" - in other words, "[it] seemed to me" (see Qamas, art. khayala, as well as Lane II, 833, and IV, 1500).

For verse 4:158 he says that the the exaltation refered to here is taken in the sense of honoring. I am copy/pasting his explanation from a site,

He(i.e. Muhammad Asad) rejects the theory of the bodily ascension of Jesus (a.s) and explains that the verb rafa'ahu (Lit. "he raised him" or "elevated him"), as in verses 4:158 and 3:55, "has always, whenever the act of raf ("elevating") a human being is attributed to God, the meaning of "honoring" or "exalting". Nowhere in the Holy Qur'an is there any warrant for the popular belief that God has "taken up" Jesus (a.s) bodily, in his life time, into Heaven. The expression "God exalted him unto Himself" in the above verse (4:158) denotes the elevation of Jesus (a.s) to the realm of God's Special Grace - a blessing in which all Prophets partake - as is evident from 19:57 where the verb rafa'nahu ("we exalted him") is used with regard to the Prophet Idris (a.s) (see also Muhammad Abdullah in Manar III, 316f and VI 20f)." That was Muhammad Asad commenting on the Qur'anic verses 4:157 and 4:158 in his "The Message of the Qur'an".

the Qur'an makes it clear that Jesus(peace and blessings be upon him) did not die at the hands of the Jews who sought to kill him. now, i read question 283 and it alluded to the idea that Jesus(peace and blessings be upon him) did die...but not by the hands of the Jews. is this what you are saying? that his cause of death was "natural" or by the cause and will of Allah? that he died in some other fashion than crucifixion?

That is not what I am saying. That is however, the other opinion regarding this issue.

As I said I am as yet unsure about the issue.

I do not know much about the gospel of Barnabas. However the passage you’ve quoted is intriguing.I am not much sure of it being unauthentic as I don’t know muchI would try to learn more about it including reading the link Joe has given. If you can provide more enlightenment I would be grateful.

Peace.

[Guest]

Salaam Yaaraer.

Thank u for your insight, it was an interesting read. Well i have a few humble points to make.

Firstly. If Jesus (as) died, then if he will be brought back, and die again, then that is twice that he will be brought through the realm of death and pain. What justice is this? What God would do that to one of His greatest followers? Allah knows that death hurts, oh yes, so why would He order the life of His beloved to be ripped out twice. I mean, even sinners only die once. So why the injustice?

Secondly. I have it from an Al-Mawrid representative that Jesus will not return, nor is there such a thing as the "Dajjal". He claimed that it, the Dajjal, was merely a manifestation in the world, not an actual lump of flesh, so to speak.

Thirdly. IF Jesus died, then why is it only implied in the Quran (and that only based on some scholarly views) and not spoken outright?

And lastly, regarding other scholars. I would say that the matter is one of choice. Your way to u, mine to me, his to him. That kinda thing. The person for the right way will have two rewards, one for being right and the second for his ijtihaad, whereas the incorrect will have only one, for his ijtihaad. I should point out, that matters such as these are decided via consensus of the Ijma, from different backgrounds and "sects", so conclusions are big achievements. I do recall a meeting of the scholars of England taking place in 1984 regarding the fiqh of lunar sightings and dates, so its just one of those things. In other words: believe what sits comfortably in your heart.

And Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala knows best.

[Hischam Khan]

May find the following interesting, regarding Barnabas:

http://www.monthly-renaissance.com/

[vdings]

No such gospel...as far as i know
was a middle age forgery...even mainstream muslims acknowledge that

[Yaaraer]

Salam Sheikh Haroon,

Firstly. If Jesus (as) died, then if he will be brought back, and die again, then that is twice that he will be brought through the realm of death and pain. What justice is this? What God would do that to one of His greatest followers? Allah knows that death hurts, oh yes, so why would He order the life of His beloved to be ripped out twice. I mean, even sinners only die once. So why the injustice?

As you have later said, al-Mawrid's view is that Jesus will not return and from what I know I think Muhammad Asad subscribes to the same view too so Jesus(pbuh) won't actually go through the processes of death twice.But I don't think I get your point fully.Blame my stupidity or whatever.

Regarding Dajjal,like if he's really gonna come(I am not sure about Dajjal either),I am rather inclined towards the view that he's gonna be a manifestation and not a lump of flesh in your words.

Hischam khan, that link leads me to the main site.

http://www.renaissance.com.pk/Junscrip2y4.html

this link too ,that I got from google, is not working for me at the moment..maybe it works for others...my connection speed is too slow..

Salam.

[Yahya Sulaiman]

http://www.freewebs.com/ziggyzag/christiandogma.htm

An article showing how, in different ways, numerous different inconsistencies in the Bible point to Judas Iscariot being substituted (who would deserve it more) while Jesus (P) was never crucified.

EDIT: By the way, while this fits what the Gospel of Barnabas says, the GoB is a forgery of medieval times. The biggest giveaway (apart from the use of the term "knights", which may be something in the translation for all I know) is the specific identifying as the forbidden fruit in Eden as an apple. Neither the Bible nor the Koran identifies the fruit (and in all likelihood, you'd think it's not one of the ones we eat today). But because apple trees were the only fruit trees which grew at the times of year on which plays depicting the (biblical) story of Adam (P) and Eve were put on in the middle ages, the fruit became associated with an apple from that point on. This is also, by the way, the origin of the term "Adam's apple", the idea (once again, I think it's medieval) being that Adam (P) got a piece of the apple stuck in his throat, never got it out and mysteriously passed it on through his genes. Go figure.