Messianic Muslims/Seekers of Isa meet Messianic Jews/Students of Yeshua--Is it Real?

yedida · May 7, 2011

EasyG,
I know you said that there is a congregation that you attend and it has it's own rabbi. Have you thought of or been lead to take on a fellowship? You've got the wherewithal. You're very organized and easy to follow.
Do you handle, maybe a bible study/midrash? For what it's worth, I think you should pray about it. Many people could be greatly benefitted.

tm2cruz · May 7, 2011

Easy G (G²);55923277 said:
To those within the Messianic Jewish movement and all others concerned,

I was writing this due to how I was able to come across an article entitled Messianic Muslim Followers of Isa: A Closer Look at C5 Believers and Congregations---and I was curious as to what others may think on the issue.

Also, as it concerns another article I saw on the issue---as seen in the article known as Muslim Followers of Jesus? The Global Conversation(for a brief excerpt):
But can one really remain in a Muslim community and still be a follower of Jesus?

Case #1:
When Nabil had a life-transforming encounter with Jesus, he remained within the Muslim community, participating in Muslim prayers. As his love for Jesus became known to family and friends, some followed his example, but others actually attempted to murder him. After being imprisoned for his beliefs, he decided he no longer considered himself a Muslim. He saw Islam as the system responsible for persecuting him. Today Nabil considers himself a Christian. But some who followed him in faith still see themselves as Muslims. (emphasis added)

Case #2:
Ibrahim was a well-respected scholar of the Quran, a hafiz. When he decided to follow Jesus, he closely examined the Quranic verses commonly understood as denying the Trinity, denying Jesus divine Sonship, denying Jesus atoning death, and denying the textual integrity of the Bible. He concluded that each of these verses was open to alternate interpretations, and that he could therefore follow Jesus as a Muslim. Soon members of his family and community came to share his faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Ibrahim was also imprisoned for his faith, but unlike Nabil, Ibrahim still wanted to follow Jesus as a Muslim. Nonetheless, some whom he led to Jesus no longer see themselves as Muslims. Ibrahim and Nabil are friends and respect each other as brothers, though they disagree about their identity.

For Nabil, he soon realized that he couldnt be both: a practicing Muslim and a practicing follower of Jesus (But for those who followed his faith and remained in Muslim communities, I question their faith). How is such possible?

Ibrahim, on the other hand, sought to reinterpret and Christianize the Quran to achieve both: a practicising Muslim and a practicing follower of Jesus.

For more resources on the issue, one can go online/investigate the following:

"CONTEXTUALISATION OF THE GOSPEL AMONG MUSLIMS1"

"Pilgrims of Christ on the Muslim Road: Exploring a New Path Between Two Faiths"

Mission Frontiers: Can a Muslim be a Follower of Christ? The Arresting Story of a Devout Believer"

Additionally, for books which I've investigated/have considered on the issue, one can go online/look up the following:

There are a growing number of Muslims around the world who maintain their cultural identity as "Muslim" but choose to align themselves with the spiritual and moral teachings of Jesus, becoming HIS disciples while becoming what "Muslim" truly means: submitted to God. For some Christians who may find it to be disagreeable, some questions:

Is it theologically viable for a Muslim to refer to himself as a "follower of Jesus and still be a Muslim?

Is it culturally feasible for a Muslim to reman a Muslim and follow Jesus?

Is there a need to become a "Christian" in terminology in order to follow Jesus in both theological and cultural fashion?

On the issue, there was one apolegetist who tackled the issue of whether or not Jesus would require a Muslim to "convert" to Christianity..and in his view, Jesus never used the word "Christian". For that matter, neither did Paul. Peter did once, telling others they might be insulted for the name of Christ in I Peter 4:14-16.....and the term "Christian" appears one other time in the scriptures when referenced in Acts 11:26 that the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch (though that was originally used in a deragatory way).

His view, which I agree with, is that we're never commanded, exhorted, or encouraged to use the word "Christian"...for it is, after all, a word...and for that matter a loaded word, weighted with hidden meanings and historical grievances. Indeed, a much better phrase would be "follower of Jesus"...

The reason why I'm asking this question of Messianic Jews and bringing up this issue is because the first believers were Jews. Jews who continued to live as Jews and observe the Torah. And those law observant Jewish Christians continued to exist in one form or another for centuries. No one had a problem with them doing so (until the RCC declared them heretics in the 4th century) and in fact many modern day Messianic Jews do the same. In light of this, many feel that there too there should be no grief given to those Messianic Muslims who persist in observing some of the rites of their former religion they find spiritually edifying.

For a practical example, consider this Muslim prayer:

In the name of God, the infinitely Compassionate and Merciful.
Praise be to God, Lord of all the worlds.
The Compassionate, the Merciful. Ruler on the Day of Judgment.

You alone do we worship, and You alone do we ask for help.
Guide us on the straight path,
the path of those who have received your grace;
not the path of those who have brought down wrath, nor of those who wander astray.
Amen.

Is there anything in this which is contrary to Christian or Messianic Jewish belief? Personally, I don't think so....

To me, the Muslim issue is no different than it would be for the Jews of Jesus's day when it came to the Torah, Tanak and the Talmud. Many are not even aware of how even when many Rabbi's didn't agree that Christ was the Messiah, Jesus still REFERENCED them.

In example, to me, its interesting to see how many of the things Christ said in Matthew 23 were not really NEW......as much of what He said came DIRECYTY from the Pharisees own teachings. For the Talmud reveals that hypocrisy was not unknown among the Pharisees...as a famous passage in the Talmud denounces six types of hypocritical Pharisees (BT, Sotah, 22b), which speak of many of the same faults pointed out by Jesus. The Talmudic literature clearly condemns pretense and hypocrisy (JT, Berakoth f. ix, 7; 13 ), and from this there can be no doubt that these vices constituted special problems for Pharisees. This is an important point because the literature of the Pharisaic tradition in no way sanctions hypocrisy. It is, in fact, in agreement with Jesus...and we must not make the mistake that the early writers of the oral tradition were all corrupt and blind. For though there can be no doubt that hypocrisy existed among the Pharisees during the time of Jesus, the reality is that Jesus was not simply coming up with things OUT OF THE HAT when denouncing them.

For more info, one can go online and look up a source under the name of "Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sotah " ( //come-hear.iahushua.com/sotah/sotah_22.html ). As said there:
AND THE PLAGUE OF PHARISEES etc. Our Rabbis have taught: There are seven types of Pharisees: the shikmi Pharisee, the nikpi Pharisee, the kizai Pharisee, the 'pestle' Pharisee, the Pharisee [who constantly exclaims] 'What is my duty that I may perform it?', the Pharisee from love [of God] and the Pharisee from fear. The shikmi Pharisee he is one who performs the action of Shechem.4 The nikpi Pharisee he is one who knocks his feet together.5 The kizai Pharisee R. Nahman b. Isaac said: He is one who makes his blood to flow against walls.6 The 'pestle' Pharisee Rabbah b. Shila said: [His head] is bowed like [a pestle in] a mortar. The Pharisee [who constantly exclaims] 'What is my duty that I may perform it?' but that is a virtue! Nay, what he says is, 'What further duty is for me that I may perform it?'7 The Pharisee from love and the Pharisee from fear Abaye and Raba said to the tanna [who was reciting this passage], Do not mention 'the Pharisee from love8 and the Pharisee from fear'; for Rab Judah has said in the name of Rab: A man should always engage himself in Torah and the commandments even though it be not for their own sake,9 because from [engaging in them] not for their own sake, he will come [to engage in them] for their own sake. R. Nahman b. Isaac said: What is hidden is hidden, and what is revealed is revealed; the Great Tribunal will exact punishment from those who rub themselves against the walls.10

Notes:
4. Who was circumcised from an unworthy motive (Gen. XXXIV). The J. Talmud (Ber. 14b) explains: who carries his religious duties upon his shoulder (shekem), i.e., ostentatiously.

5. He walks with exaggerated humility. According to the J. Talmud: He says: Spare me a moment that I may perform a commandment.

6. In his anxiety to avoid looking upon a woman he dashes his face against the wall. The J. Talmud explains: calculating Pharisee, i.e., he performs a good deed and then a bad deed, setting one off against the other.

7. As though he had fulfilled every obligation.

8. [Abaye and Raba understood 'love' and 'fear' to denote love of the rewards promised for the fulfilment of precepts and fear of punishment for transgressing them. In J. Ber., however, they are both taken in reference to God i.e., love of God and fear of Him.]

If it was the case with Christ that He, being a Jew, could reference material from His own Jewish background and culture that also involved thoughts not directly supporting Him, how much more can one in any other cultural/religious system? For all truth is God's Truth

One example of people in action that can be considered is a Sufi Muslim known as Ibn Arabi, who was loved by many and hated by more. He was considered one of the greatest of all Muslim thinkers. He believed that Jesus was the Word, the Spirit and the Servant of God. Even God's mouthpiece. And as he said best, "The person who catched the disease of Christ can never be cured."

Its not a surprise to me to hear the man say that...for the Sufis have always had a particular fondness for him. The predecessors of the Sufis did have contact with the Christian Desert Fathers from whom they learned their ascetic ways....and with the Sufi Muslims, they were originally monks who lived seclusion from what they viewed as a widespread corruption of Islam. Many of them lived in intentional poverty, instead seeking nourishment spiritually and many of them were completely devoted to living according to the teachings of Jesus. The Sufis believed that to serve God was to love God, purely and simply. They rigorously expended themselves in songs and dances, in pure worship of this creator God who made them so that they could live in a love relationship with Him. As a side note, the Sufis were one of the first religious sects to recognize the equality of men and women. Women could be Sufis and also be teachers and leaders over men.

If Muslims are coming to Jesus we should rejoice no matter what they call themselves. Technically the name "Muslim" simply means someone who has submitted their will to God. Also, the Qur'an itself says that Jesus was a word and spirit from God and Jesus' prophetic title in Islam is "Ruh Allah", "Spirit of God". But while the two faiths have much more in common than not there is no way to completely reconcile the two.

Thoughts?

They believe in different Jesus, it's not Jesus of the bible. Their Quran attacks Christianity and Jews and do not believe in the Holy Bible. Jesus of their Quran is completely different to Jesus of the Bible. We can be friends with them but they cannot be saved because they believe in Jesus what their Quran described him.

Gxg (G²) · May 7, 2011

yedida said:
EasyG,
I know you said that there is a congregation that you attend and it has it's own rabbi. Have you thought of or been lead to take on a fellowship? You've got the wherewithal. You're very organized and easy to follow.
Do you handle, maybe a bible study/midrash? For what it's worth, I think you should pray about it. Many people could be greatly benefitted.

It has been on my heart to be involved in Christian Leadership..and I do that in differing capacities at my home fellowship/the small group Bible Study connected with the Messianic Congregation I attend when I can. But I would not want to be the head pastor of a congregation. Personally, where I stand, I feel like I'm more passionate in the areas that a teacher/professor would be in when it comes to simply sharing truth and spreading it to others. There was a great article elsewhere that described the issue of where I'm coming from here.

As they said best:

Rather than being my churchs messiah or your manager, I see myself as its docent- a tour guide in a museum or art gallery. Clergy showcase to the world the architecture and artistry of the Christian faith. We are tour guides, leading people from one gallery to another, shifting their attention from one work of God to the next. At times, we offer language to describe the unutterable: magnificence, awe, anguish. We are wordsmiths for lifes most muted moments.

Sometimes that moment demands explanation, and like a docent we offer information. We love when someone looks at a familiar passage of scripture in a fresh way, or unpacks some mystery of God in their life that transforms. Those are galleries that buzz with energy.

But other rooms we visit demand nothing but silence. We pause, speechless, when confronted by the mysteries of our liturgy: the breaking of bread, the lifting of a cup, the pouring of water. And there are times when our silence emerges from the ache and anguish of souls: the graveside of a loved one, a doctors diagnosis, or a future swirling with shadows. Our job in these moments may not be to speak but to stand. To let people know they are not alone in this gallery, and that someone has been there before.

We also know that our tours are temporary. It is a holy privilege to serve as pastor temporarily. Contemporary mobility ensures that our relationship is only for a season, so we cherish this time together.

This leads me to best thing about this metaphor: the docent never steals attention from the artist. I can tell you about some amazing works Ive seen: the Venus de Milo, the Mona Lisa, the Code of Hammurabi, and The Thinker. But I cant for the life of me remember the name of a single docent that explained them to me. Thats the way it should be.
Too many churches are served by pastors focused on their own celebrity. Congregations might swell in numbers as they gravitate toward these larger-than-life preachers and their personal charisma. Such a model is blasphemous and unbiblical. Pastoral docents merely point to the Artist, rather than becoming the art itself. We must decrease so that God might increase.

The docent image isnt perfect. Churches arent museums -- mere mausoleums of entities long deceased. People are drawn to churches that are committed movements, not to monuments.

Nevertheless, the idea of serving as docent energizes me and grounds me in my calling. I am neither messiah nor manager, and parishioners are much more than statistics. Together, we journey in awe through the splendor and artistry of the work of God in our lives and throughout the world.

Still praying/processing many things, however.....as I still wonder at times where I fully belong. I know someone once said that I should consider being a Rabbi...but I would never want to be stuck behind a pulpit. I feel more natural when I am on the road/able to travel and journey while gaining experiences I can share with others. Whatever God's Will is, though..

I'm glad to know, by the way, that the information presented has been very easy to follow and placed in a manner that is understandable.

YouTube - Hazakim's "Evangelism"

MysticalPsalmist · Oct 20, 2011

tm2cruz said:
They believe in different Jesus, it's not Jesus of the bible. Their Quran attacks Christianity and Jews and do not believe in the Holy Bible. Jesus of their Quran is completely different to Jesus of the Bible. We can be friends with them but they cannot be saved because they believe in Jesus what their Quran described him.

Bible Jesus and Quran Jesus meld alot.

Gxg (G²) · Oct 20, 2011

The Lord is truly complex in all he does..

There was actually a good discussion elsewhere on the issue, seen here

tm2cruz · Oct 21, 2011

MysticalPsalmist said:
Bible Jesus and Quran Jesus meld alot.

no i disagree. Double check it. Sure it sounds similar but it's radically different person. Like comparing 2 different people who lived the same way, have same language, same school, etc but the blood is not so they're still two individual, just same "descriptions"

Tm2Cruz said:
They believe in different Jesus, it's not Jesus of the bible. Their Quran attacks Christianity and Jews and do not believe in the Holy Bible. Jesus of their Quran is completely different to Jesus of the Bible. We can be friends with them but they cannot be saved because they believe in Jesus what their Quran described him.

Gxg (G²) · Oct 21, 2011

tm2cruz said:
no i disagree. Double check it. Sure it sounds similar but it's radically different person."

Like comparing 2 different people who lived the same way, have same language, same school, etc but the blood is not so they're still two individual, just same "descriptions

Never got to get to the comment you noted earlier..but in regards to what you stated previously (and here in this comment, for that matter), I'd respectfully disagree on a host of levels. Many of the claims of Jesus being RADICALLY different in the Quran from the Biblical Text (or cannons of differing camps within Christendom) are often exaggerated, from what I have studied over the years....and rarely is it the case that culture/context is even considered when it comes to seeing what is said within the Quran and the Bible.

I'm glad for others that point out the inconsistencies of the Quran in comparision to the Bible---though I'm also glad for others noting where the two already harmonize together on too many points to ignore. The example of folks such as the ministry of "Jesus in the Quran" and Generation Salaam come to mind immediately, as I'm glad for the ways that they take the time to examine All Qur’anic Passages about Jesus. There are many others besides them, of course, that've done excellent work in showing the many ways in which the Quran and Scripture actually renconcile rather easily when understanding the proper setting they were developed in---and for some examples, one can consider the work of others such as Mark D, Siljander ( as seen here)...or one can go either here , here and here. Do I agree with folks on all points? By no means..but where they line up with scripture/give backing, I'm down 100%.

When understanding the history and the culture of Christianity around the time when Islam developed, many of the things noted about the person of Christ make sense.

As sai elsewhere on the subject in #6

For in my view, studying one of the earliest critiques of St.John of Damascus is the best route to go with since his view was that Islam (when it was starting) was essentially a heresy within Christianity rather than something different at ALL points from Christianity. He called it the "Heresy of the Ishmaelites." John the Damascene was a saint and an early Church Father who experienced Islam during its infantile stages...

One good review on the issue can be found if going here...or at the following:

St John of Damascus on Islam | biblicalia

Of The Tractate of John of Damascus on Islam

The Way of the Fathers » St. John of Damascus on Islam

St. John of Damascus and the Ishmaelite Heresy « Marcio.ca

St. John of Damascus’s Critique of Islam - Orthodox Christian Information Center

Pilgrims of Christ on the Muslim Road: Exploring a New Path Between Two FaithsBy Paul-Gordon Chandler

Pilgrims of Christ on the Muslim Road: Exploring a New Path ... - Page 102

As others have often noted, the problem with Islam is that it stopped where Muhammad began. He had tried to call his people to worship God against pagan worship/idolatry..and reintroduced the Abrahamic faith into a pagan area. However, despite any positive gains, there were many others that were later developed into error as life went on---making him comparable to Solomon, the great teacher/king who ended his life doing exactly opposite of what he had initially preached and demonstrated. To judge from the subsequent nature of Islam, Christianity seems to have been particularly interesting to him, since Muhammad adopted and adapted quite a few Christian ideas...and IMHO, when studying the people who initially came into the land where Muhammad grew up in, it seems that much of the Disputes between the Eastern Orthodox Christians and the Roman Catholic papacy influenced Muhammad s understanding of Christianity on certain levels. Despite all of the ways that Muhammad did erroneous things, I'd tend to agree with others who feel that the man was partially a victim of Christianity/the evolution it went through.

From what I understand, Constantine legalized Christianity and made it the official religion of the Empire---and during the time when the Nicene Creed established orthodoxy, especially as it related to the Person of Christ, Expulsion of heresy occurred as a result of nationalized Christianity—many “Christians” with variant beliefs migrated/fled to the Arabian peninsula, which by the 6th century comprised a mixture of Jews, Hanifs, polytheistic Arab tribes, and “Christians” with varying beliefs.

In the context that Muhammad lived in, his influences were Arab polytheists, "heretic" Christians, Jews, and Abrahamic monotheists called Hanifs. The Qur’an addresses a number of heresies that had already been dealt with 300 years earlier during the age of great Christian councils, and we should learn to read it through the cultural lens of its time. Some examples of heresies it addressed were ones like saying that Jesus/God the Father and the Holy Spirit were "3 different gods" (as many Muslims often say "CHristians" say when failing to understand that Muhammad said not to support the ideology of 3 gods since other Christians were condeming such).For more on the subject, one can go online/investigate the article entitled The Trinity as radical monotheism or The Holy Trinity in the Qur'an « God Omnipotent & Antioch Believer!: What does the Quran say about Jesus death?

As another ministry said best on the subject:

A great deal of difficulty exists in concretely describing the indigenous religions of the Arab people during Muhammad’s time. While it is known that the Arabs indulged in a mixture of polytheism and animism, their exact level of adherence to these deities is uncertain

....
During this period, there were various Jewish, Zoroastrian, and Christian (largely outside the bounds of historic orthodoxy) settlements within Arabia. According to some scholars many of the known Christian settlements of the period were mostly comprised of Nestorians and Monophysites. The Nestorians taught that “… two persons as well as two natures in[dwelled within] Christ.” This would mean that “… when Christ sacrificed His life on the cross, it was not the person who is also divine, the Son of God, who died for us.” The Monophysites, on the other hand, denied that Christ possessed a fully human and a fully divine nature. This belief went against the orthodox teaching that the two natures existed alongside one another, undiminished and unmixed. According to some sources, these settlements held positions of influence, albeit to a small degree, on the Arabian Peninsula. As a result, their theological positions were known by at least some throughout the region.

Some scholars believe that the existence of such groups potentially impacted the development of Islamic theology, as well as Muhammad’s understanding of Christianity. However, in light of the Muslim understanding of the Qur’an’s origination, it would not matter who Muhammad came into contact with from within the outskirts of Christendom, because the Qur’an as Allah’s direct word by its very nature necessitates an accurate account of orthodox Christian belief entirely untarnished by Muhammad’s faulty understanding of Christian theology.

In addition to these Christian settlements, there were a number of Christian slaves living on the Arabian Peninsula. According to those who opposed Muhammad’s monotheism, the prophet received his information concerning Allah from these Christian slaves; however, this assertion cannot be concretely confirmed or rejected.

Regardless, Muslim tradition does preserve accounts, not inherently improbable, concerning several Meccan Arabs who possessed knowledge of Jewish and Christian scriptures, and these figures are generally accepted by Muslim opinion as having had close relations with Muhammad and even affected his spiritual development. Whether directly influenced by “Christian” heretics or by Muslims who received second-hand information pertaining to the biblical text, it is plausible that Muhammad’s conception was likely influenced by those acquainted with a variety of Christian theological positions. However, it must be pointed out that even if Muhammad’s understanding of Christian doctrine was delivered via second-hand information or through theologically sub-biblical positions, this does not provide an adequate explanation for the Qur’an’s misrepresentation of what orthodox Christians actually believe.

Click to expand...

Not a problem if you disagree. Of course, if you have any examples of where you feel the Quran differs on the person/work of Christ, you're welcome to share them

Shalom.

tm2cruz · Oct 22, 2011

Easy G (G²);58821147 said:
Never got to get to the comment you noted earlier..but in regards to what you stated previously (and here in this comment, for that matter), I'd respectfully disagree on a host of levels. Many of the claims of Jesus being RADICALLY different in the Quran from the Biblical Text (or cannons of differing camps within Christendom) are often exaggerated, from what I have studied over the years....and rarely is it the case that culture/context is even considered when it comes to seeing what is said within the Quran and the Bible.

I'm glad for others that point out the inconsistencies of the Quran in comparision to the Bible---though I'm also glad for others noting where the two already harmonize together on too many points to ignore. The example of folks such as the ministry of "Jesus in the Quran" and Generation Salaam come to mind immediately, as I'm glad for the ways that they take the time to examine All Quranic Passages about Jesus. There are many others besides them, of course, that've done excellent work in showing the many ways in which the Quran and Scripture actually renconcile rather easily when understanding the proper setting they were developed in---and for some examples, one can consider the work of others such as Mark D, Siljander ( as seen here)...or one can go either here , here and here. Do I agree with folks on all points? By no means..but where they line up with scripture/give backing, I'm down 100%.

When understanding the history and the culture of Christianity around the time when Islam developed, many of the things noted about the person of Christ make sense.

As sai elsewhere on the subject in #6 Not a problem if you disagree. Of course, if you have any examples of where you feel the Quran differs on the person/work of Christ, you're welcome to share them Shalom.

Thanks for sharing that. ^_^

But yeah, as expected, I disagree. That was I used to see/view also (not totally) about Islam before. My view of Islam changes along the way. You might heard of it but to summarize my view of Islam, I believe Islam is the anti-Christ religion prophesied in both "old" and "new" testament of the living Word of the Lord. So from there you might sum up, expand and/or understand the views I have from different books, blogs, research and/or videos that explains not just the Islamic view prophecy but also who is Islam in the eyes of the Lord (for what we believe it is). ^_^

One of the very common difference is Jesus/Yeshua died on the cross, Islam, especially Allah, opposes it. That's why I said if you accept Jesus of the Quran as your savior, you will not be saved because it's a different Jesus.
hope I'm kinda making sense

Gxg (G²) · Oct 22, 2011

tm2cruz said:
Thanks for sharing that. But yeah, as expected, I disagree. That was I used to see/view also (not totally) about Islam before. My view of Islam changes along the way. You might heard of it but to summarize my view of Islam, I believe Islam is the anti-Christ religion prophesied in both "old" and "new" testament of the living Word of the Lord. So from there you might sum up, expand and/or understand the views I have from different books, blogs, research and/or videos that explains not just the Islamic view prophecy but also who is Islam in the eyes of the Lord (for what we believe it is).

One of the very common difference is Jesus/Yeshua died on the cross, Islam, especially Allah, opposes it. That's why I said if you accept Jesus of the Quran as your savior, you will not be saved because it's a different Jesus.
hope I'm kinda making sense

More than understand

Of course, there are many that used to believe Islam itself was radically opposed to Christianity at all points and felt it is pure "anti-christ"--until, actually studying it itself historically and reading what it really says. Perception is always what makes the difference. I don't hold to the mindset of Islam in any way being the "anti-Christ" religion and don't see any real way of even trying to claim it as such. Many times, things are claimed..but not alot is given in the way of evidence. One of those things is the common claim of how Jesus and Yeshua died on the cross is something that is often claimed to be radically different in Islam, yet many times interpretation makes a big difference---and the Quran itself doesn't claim Allah was against the concept of Christ making redeemption via sacrifice.

As said best in one of the resources offered---entitled Did Jesus Die?:

What if we have misread what the Qur’an actually says about the death of Jesus? What if there were numerous of Arabic and Islamic scholars who believed that Jesus’ death and resurrection are compatible with the Qur’an?

Listen – Death of Jesus

Before we answer this question directly we need to make a statement. Since Jesus was crucified 2,000 years ago, the cross has done two things: define and divide. For those who believe – it defines. In every aspect of life – from sorrow to joy, from the mundane to the magnificent, from death to life – it defines. For those who don’t believe – it divides. It creates a chasm – a bitter offense. Paul explains it well: “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). Make no mistake; we as Generation Salaam fall into the first category. The cross defines us. We stake every ounce of our lives on the truth that Jesus Christ’s sacrifice paid the penalty for sin. Jesus’ sacrificial act ransomed our lives from eternal destruction. We make no concession or apology: trusting Jesus and his work on the cross is the only way to be saved.

Now, there is a great deal of division concerning the crucifixion of Jesus within Islam. In our experience we have found that Muslims quickly agree Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, that he is the Word of God, and even that he is the Messiah. They almost always object to the crucifixion. Many tell us that God only made it “appear” Jesus was crucified: he was taken from the cross at the last minute and replaced by Judas. We’ve even heard that Jesus fell asleep on the cross and as a result was taken down before his death. The explanations are endless. If you have ever entered this discussion with a Muslim you understand.

The main point we want to make in light of the cross defining and dividing for centuries is this: The controversy concerning the crucifixion of Jesus has more to do with our history books than the Holy Books. Let’s go back to the Qur’an to see what it actually says.

In the Qur’an there are four main passages that discuss the crucifixion of Christ (3:55, 4:157, 5:17, 19:33) and one that possibly alludes to it (5:75). We do not have time here to fully unpack each one of these references, but we will look at two – the clearest and the most controversial. This should give you a general sense of what the Qur’an communicates on the issue. If you are interested in further study, we highly recommend you check out the book Jesus in the Qur’an by Geoffrey Parrinder. He gives a detailed account of each of the five references.

In Surah 3:55 we read, “God said, ‘Jesus, I will make you die and raise you up to Me, and purify you from the disbelievers, and make your followers higher than the disbelievers until the Day of Resurrection. Then you will return to me and I will judge between you in matters about which you disagree.’” In most translations of the Qur’an this verse is not translated like this. You will often find the passage rendered: “Behold! Allah said: ‘O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme…’” (Y. Ali). Comparing these two translations it is clear that “I will make you die” and “I will take thee” are very different things. We offer both to show the diversity of translations. This verse is often used to make the claim that Jesus did not die. People reason that Jesus’ soul was taken and that he was not dead or that he was simply taken to God alive. These interpretations abound, but in order to find out what the passage is really communicating we must go back to the Arabic. The key Arabic word transliterated into Latin script is mutawaffeeka. It comes from the form of the verb tawaffaa, which means “to cause to die.” In the Qur’an we find this verb (or its participle) used 25 times. In 23 of the instances where it is used, it is translated ‘to cause to die’ but only in two places (3:55 and 5:117) it is translated otherwise. Ironically, those two occasions are in reference to Jesus. Why would putting the verb next to Jesus necessitate an alternate translation? The answer is found in our history books.

With the exception of a short period of time during the life of Muhammad, hostility, strife, and tension have marked Muslim and Christian relations. Wars have been fought with swords and semiautomatic weapons as well as pens and intellects. Both religions have vied for position. This is not the place to get into a lengthy discussion about which side is right or wrong. Both sides have been victim and both sides are perpetrators. In light of all this, it is difficult look at a passage for what it really is with 1,400 years of blood shed and bigotry standing in the way. By looking at the Arabic, as we did in the last paragraph, we see that this passage is a clear affirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus in the Qur’an.

If the previous passage was the clearest, the following is undoubtedly the most controversial. Surah 4:157 is translated as follows:

…And because of their saying, ‘We killed The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, God’s messenger,’ (though they did not kill him nor crucify him), but it seemed so to them. Truly those who differed about him are in doubt about him. They have no knowledge, but only follow what they think. They truly did not kill him.”

This passage clearly denies the crucifixion of Christ – or does it?

One of the main reasons this passage is so controversial is because the context is often ignored. When you begin reading in verse 4:155 you see that the “they” in this passage is the Jews. The Qur’an is claiming that the Jews did not crucify Jesus. Interestingly, the Bible confirms this truth as well (Matt 20:19, 27:26-35). Crucifixion was a Roman practice, not a Jewish one. The Jews executed by stoning. Furthermore, the very reason the priests brought Jesus to Pilate was because they did not have the authority to execute Jesus. And ultimately, neither the Jews nor the Romans killed him–remember that Jesus said, “No one takes it [my life] from me, I lay it down of my own accord” (John 10:18).

Parrinder quotes E. E. Elder to drive the point home:

The verse does not say that Jesus was not killed, nor was he crucified. It merely states that they (the Jews) did not kill or crucify him. This is true historically, although the responsibility was theirs, the Roman soldiers actually did the work… But there is another sense in which neither the Romans nor the Jews crucified Jesus. At Pilate’s judgment, Jesus answered… ‘Thou wouldst have no power against me, except it were given thee from above’ (John 19:11). (1965:119).

What was Jesus saying here? He was saying that God was ultimately responsible for his death – that it originated with God. The Jews are not to blame, God is.

Having examined these two Qur’anic passages, we can see that there is room for a real and actual crucifixion and death of Jesus within the Qur’an. Again, the controversy surrounding this issue has more to do with our history books than the Holy Books.

In a groundbreaking paper entitled, “Did Jesus Die on the Cross? – The History of Reflection on the End of His Earthly Life in Sunni and Tafsir Literature” written by Joseph Cumming, we find that even within the history of Islamic scholarship and commentary there have been a wide variety of interpretations concerning these passages. Cumming concludes by saying:

Throughout the centuries there has never been just one, single “correct” Islamic answer to the question of whether Jesus died on the cross… it is not just a simple “yes-or-no” question… I believe that there is much more room to find common ground with Christians than is generally supposed by either Muslims or Christians today.”

We find Cumming’s insight to be very practical for us today. Muslims and Christians do share a great deal of common ground – maybe even more than we realize.

We’d like to finish this narrative with a quote from Mark Siljander, a former politician who has spent a great deal of his life addressing relations between Muslims and Christians:

For centuries our cultures have been kept apart by our accounts of what happened or did not happen to Jesus on the cross. Perhaps it’s time we let ourselves be brought together by what he said on the cross. Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.(A Deadly Misunderstanding – Siljander 2008)

As said before, perception makes a world of difference--and it doesn't really do much in claiming the Quran Jesus is not the one of the Bible if not giving specific examples. Its why I said its often the case that the Jesus of the Quran and that of the Bible are not in two radically differing camps, when one understands the original setting..and there are plenty of other examples besides that

For something else, here's something from one of my brothers in Christ (who actively speaks out against many things in Islam). In his words:

There is no historical evidence that Jews boasted of killing Jesus. I have no idea where the author of the Qur'an got this idea

Technically it was the Romans who put Jesus to death. It was out of the hands of the Jews, but even the Romans did not have control over this situation.

Remember when Pilate said to Jesus, "Do you not know that I have power to crucify you, and power to release you?" and Jesus said, "You could have no power at all against me unless it had been given you from above." Do you see that Jesus meant that even the worst evil cannot escape the sovereignty of God and that Pilate had no real control? So the Jews "killed him not, nor crucified him" in that sense. But it "was made to appear to them" that the Jews killed Jesus and crucified Him, but they did not.

Let's look at Surah 4:158

Surah 4:158 says, "Nay Allah raised him up unto Himself, and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise."

And compare it to Surah 2:154

"And say not of those who are slain in the way of Allah: "They are dead." Nay, they are living, though ye perceive (it) not."

When we compare Surah 4:158 with Surah 2:154, we can understand what the Qur'an is saying in Surah 4:158.

You thought you could kill the Messiah, the messenger of God, but you failed because I raised Jesus after His body died and took Him to Myself. Jesus is not dead. Jesus is alive. Jesus is alive just as anyone who is slain in the way of God. They are living. They are not dead. You might not understand it, but it is so."

I don't believe that Surah 4:157 is denying the death of Jesus at all.

tm2cruz · Oct 22, 2011

Still disagree, try to ask the muslim about it and see what happens ^_^

like what i said, Allah is against it.

The author is just maybe trying to mingle the two religion, just like other people mingling different religions w/ Christianity and conclude salvation is not only in Jesus. Sura 4:157-158 does deny the crucifixion. The author sounds like changing his views to the real intention of the interpretation because it should agree to the "bible" and "historical records" or maybe that's his belief in the first place. In the bible, was Jews (in Jesus' days) never been claimed or accused of killing nor crucifying Jesus because Roman soldiers did it? But the bible does says they're responsible:

Acts 2:23(AMP) "This Jesus, when delivered up according to the definite and fixed purpose and settled plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and put out of the way [killing Him] by the hands of lawless and wicked men."

Allah really denied it. He claimed they never crucified Jesus on the cross.
Some people would agree w/ Quran and even believed (the one who call themselves "Christians") Jesus wasn't crucified on the cross. For me, the texts are clear, some people just became creative to interpret it the other way. Still salvation in the Quran is not through Jesus' death will save you, it's still a different Jesus.

yedida · Oct 22, 2011

tm2cruz said:
Still disagree, try to ask the muslim about it and see what happens
like what i said, Allah is against it.

The author is just maybe trying to mingle the two religion, just like other people mingling different religions w/ Christianity and conclude salvation is not only in Jesus. Sura 4:157-158 does deny the crucifixion. The author sounds like changing his views to the real intention of the interpretation because it should agree to the "bible" and "historical records" or maybe that's his belief in the first place. In the bible, was Jews (in Jesus' days) never been claimed or accused of killing nor crucifying Jesus because Roman soldiers did it? But the bible does says they're responsible:

Acts 2:23(AMP) "This Jesus, when delivered up according to the definite and fixed purpose and settled plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and put out of the way [killing Him] by the hands of lawless and wicked men."

Allah really denied it. He claimed they never crucified Jesus on the cross.
Some people would agree w/ Quran and even believed (the one who call themselves "Christians") Jesus wasn't crucified on the cross. For me, the texts are clear, some people just became creative to interpret it the other way. Still salvation in the Quran is not through Jesus' death will save you, it's still a different Jesus.

Well, maybe it could be agreed that it's the same Yeshua but with a newly decorated biography? They are looking to the right person but with a wrong understanding, and that wrong understanding could prove deadly.

aniello · Oct 22, 2011

At the mosque and the madrassa up in the city to our north, the Imams teach that God had, and still has, NO son, over and over and over.

Hardly seems compatible with our Bible.

What do y'all know and/or think about "Chrislam"?

tm2cruz · Oct 22, 2011

aniello said:
At the mosque and the madrassa up in the city to our north, the Imams teach that God had, and still has, NO son, over and over and over.

Hardly seems compatible with our Bible.

What do y'all know and/or think about "Chrislam"?

Yeah I heard that term too, it's a "Christian" doctrine that is similar to Islam's doctrine. And sadly they're spreading

Gxg (G²) · Oct 22, 2011

tm2cruz said:
Still disagree, try to ask the muslim about it and see what happens

Muslims have been asked about---(and some I've talked to before)---and as said before, others are always shocked whenever they hear of Muslims who shared how they believe that Jesus is the Messiah...that He was given up to atone for mankind and that He is the way to Salvation. For an excellent video on such, one can go here/see the testimony of some..

Plenty of other testimonies have been given besides that. Of course, if they do get brought up, its easier to act as if they're not there and haven't been asked on what happens---but it is what it is. As said before, it all depends on perspective

. And NOT every Muslim will answer the same automatically, nor do all even look alike anyhow. Really, its no different than asking a Christian what the Bible actually says about discipleship and then getting an entire list of responses on what it says.....even if/when it may not be what is said clearly. Others getting offended and saying that's not "Christian" has nothing to do with actually understanding what the Bible/Word and Judaic culture has actually said on an issue throughout the centuries--as many of the things done in the name of Christianity are done from a "cultural" perspective rather than Bibilical perspective. Its no different than asking Christians during the days of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade why they supported the institution and they said "The Bible says so!!!!", pointing to differing scriptures they felt supported the right to oppress others...even though they didn't do their homework. The same goes for a host of other issues (i.e sexual immorality, racism, genocide of indigenious groups, materialism, etc)--and sadly, many of those who are Biblical Christians get blasted due to others assuming that just because other Christians have interpreted something to a disaterous effect means that it is reflective of what the Bible says.

The same goes with the Quran, as many Muslims that're asked on what the Quran says don't actually READ what it says..and when many wrong things are done, people assume all Muslims are the same. They don't understand that Islamic Theology (i.e. The composite teachings of family, religious leaders, traditions, hadith, etc) is RADICALLY different from Qur’anic Theology (i.e. What the Qur’an actually says )---for if many Muslims did read what the Quran said, many of the things they've done/said counter to the Tanak/Bible would not be done anyhow. If they did, they'd already understand where their own book already points them to listen to others who are Christians/Jews---and they'd understand where their book already supports believing in Jesus as Messiah in the Qur’an

like what i said, Allah is against it.

Allah never said he was against the fact of Jesus making restitution as much as he was with Jesus remaining dead/being killed. It's the entire reason why Jesus did not STAY in the grave and death (As the Scriptures note) could not contain Him.

And with the Quran, I don't expect to give full details as much as the Biblical account does since it is really a shortened version of many things the Biblical account focused upon--and with the death of Christ, I believe it focused on ONE aspect of Christ in the atonement.....and that, IMHO, is the aspect of which part of Christ was unable to die/not something the Lord wanted to die anyhow. Some things were not given as fully as they could be, as Muhummad was not a scholar/heard many things from other Christians..trying to understand it as best as he could. But some of the general aspects of what was noted about CHRIST in the Quran are indeed in scripture.

Before going further, some scriptures on the subject of Christ dying:

Just as many were astonished at you, My people, So His appearance was marred more than any man, And His form more than the sons of men. (Isaiah 52:14)

Then he released Barabbas for them; but after having Jesus scourged, he delivered Him to be crucified. (Matthew 27:26)

And wishing to satisfy the multitude, Pilate released Barabbas for them, and after having Jesus scourged, he delivered Him to be crucified. (Mark 15:15)

and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will rise again." (Luke 18:33)

Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged Him. (John 19:1)

The soldiers therefore came, and broke the legs of the first man, and of the other man who was crucified with Him; (John 19:32)...but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs; but one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately there came out blood and water. (John 19:33-34)

The other disciples therefore were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I shall see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe." (John 20:25)

this Man [Jesus], delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. (Acts 2:23)

As it concerns the death of Christ, death is something entailing PERMANENT state.....and that is something that never occurred with Jesus. For His Spirit could NEVER die. Though he died in one sense, He truly lived on at the same time...

Some of this makes sense when considering the concept of Nestorianism and the dynamic of how the person of Christ was seen in the sense of duality. Of course, some may take issue the moment they hear the words "Nestorius" due to how they've often seen it in history...but as much as I often heard "Its wrong because its Nestorian and that denies the DEITY OF CHRIST!!!!", I was often perturbed because Nestorius never denied that Jesus was both fully God and FULLY man. He was very much for the mindset that the natures of man/god were united, but he also felt that there was a clear distinction. Alot of it, as it concerns Nestorian views, were never about trying to make it out as if Christ did not have union/oneness. What they were focused upon was the reality that the way oneness/union of Divinity and Humanity played out were not necessarily in the sense of "fusion." For them, Nestorianism (called dyophysitism) was simply for saying that two natures of Christ were united and yet they also remained seperated/distinct in order for the atonement to truly work. Never was that something that all in the Church ever had issue with---and there've been great discussions elsewhere on the issue. Additionally, one of best scholars around to consider on the issue is one known as Philip Jenkins. One of his works, entitled "Jesus Wars" goes into exceptional depth in giving careful attention to the construction of the mono/dual nature of Christ, whose "orthodoxy" was decided by successive vendettas, bribery, assault and slander, watching the fall of Nestorius in particular, a bishop who believed that Christ was both fully divine and fully human in the days of an orthodox declaration of the Christ of a single nature.. He was declared a heretic, and we've spoken of the Nestorian heresy to this day....even though it is anything but opposed to Christ. In the day when the church tended toward the Alexandrian Christology of Christ in one divine nature (physis), Nestorius came from Antioch, where they described Christ as having both divine and human nature eternally knit and one. The Alexandrians had already taken out one Antiochine Bishop in John Chrysostom....Cyril decided to repeat history with Nestorious.

I was glad Jenkins noted what he did with Nestorius and thankful others are catching on..especially in regards to how those of the Nestorius mindset may've been those whom Muhammad heard aspects from when it came to saying parts of Christ could never truly die. It is interesting to consider what occurred with the "two-natured Jesus" dynamic, as the Council of Chalcedon resolutely affirmed dyophysitism over monophysitism and miaphysitism, saying that Christ had two inseparable natures in one person...with his having a Divine Will (being God) and also having a Human side subject to limitations Jesus had to deal with (including learning, development, relying on the Spirit and choosing to submit his will to the Father's). Both of those things were united/had to come together. THere was at one time acceptance of that mindset. Much of that, however, changed in the 6th century when discussion occurred again in debate...and whereas some disagreed with the older stances, many felt they were still appropriate. On dyophysitism, much of it actually goes in support with one of the views within Church History known as Binitarianism.

With Nestorious ideology, many things make sense when it comes to the person of Christ.

If you believe that Jesus was truly able to be tempted with sin...and yet had to be a man in order to redeem mankind, then one believes in distinction. If one believes that the literal body of Jesus rested in the grave while the Spirit of Christ went to be with the Father in Paradise (as He claimed), then one truly does believe in a Nestorianism viewpoint.

Paul often expounded upon the role of the Holy Spirit in the Life of Christ and how dualistic it was, showing how Christ relied upon the Spirit for the Ministry and the Power of the HOLY Spirit to raise the Body of Christ from the Grave (as he noted in Acts 2:26-28, Acts 2:30-32, Acts 13:27-38, Romans 1:3-5 , Romans 8:10-12, Hebrews 9:13-15, etc )......with it being established that the Spirit of Christ was present with the Father...and this is said in light of what the Word says when Luke 23:46 ( Mt 27:50, Mk 15:37, Jn 19:30, etc) tells us that Christ gave up His SPirit...and while the Physical Body of Christ remained, the Spirit of Christ left...and scripture shows where His spirit would go: into the Father's hands.....just like Jesus told the thief on the cross when saying "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43), even though his Physical Body was still in the GRAVE...and very similar to how Stephen saw Jesus in heaven and asked Him to receive his spirit (Acts 7:55-60). The SPIRIT of Jesus is something that could NEVER be extinguished.....

1 Peter 3:18-19
"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit19through whom[a] also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water,

Other texts to consider are where he addressed the issue of Christ being God and yet explaining the reality of his coming with the emphasis on his being a man ( Phillippians 2, Hebrews 2:17, Hebrews 4:15, etc)--being perfected/living life as a Perfect man and experiencing growth/development as all men do in His PHYSICAL nature ( Hebrews 5:4-10, Luke 2:39-40, Luke 2:51-52, etc ) in order to aid us in our own growth of becoming like Him, both Co-Heirs with Him and "Sons of the Lord" ( Romans 6-8). For Christ's divine authority is meaningless unless, with respect to his humanity, he has been raised from the dead.....as only a Resurrected Lord can be our cohem gadol, interceding with the Father on our behalf (Romans 8:34, Matthew 4:14, etc), only a resurrected man can be the firstfruits of the resurrection promised to us (Romans 8:23-29, I Corinthians 15) and only a resurrected Messiah can come to rule in glory and fulfill the universal Jewish expectation of final deliverance for the nations of Israel.

If you're aware of people such as Dr.Myles Munroe, he actually discussed his views on the issue of the Messiah's Two natures (Body and Spirit) knit together for a Divine purpose....as seen in his books such as "Rediscovering the Kingdom" and "Understanding the Purpose/Power of Prayer" (or as seen here in one of his 20 part video series teachings when it came to his discussing his views on the dual natures of Christ united for one purpose ).

Gxg (G²) · Oct 22, 2011

tm2cruz said:
like what i said, Allah is against it.

The author is just maybe trying to mingle the two religion, just like other people mingling different religions w/ Christianity and conclude salvation is not only in Jesus.

Easy G (G²);58827568 said:

As it concerns the death of Christ, death is something entailing PERMANENT state.....and that is something that never occurred with Jesus. For His Spirit could NEVER die. Though he died in one sense, He truly lived on at the same time...

Some of this makes sense when considering the concept of Nestorianism and the dynamic of how the person of Christ was seen in the sense of duality.

Click to expand...

On what was noted before, for the sake of clarity as to not make confusion, the Lord made clear that He would indeed raise His own body from the grave when the religious leaders of his day took issue with him. Additionally, on the issue of John 2:19, what others often forget is the reality that Christ indeed raised His Body....and the MEANS/Methodology that He went about in accomplishing that was in His REVERENT submission to the Father/the Power of the Holy Spirit, who aided Him in doing so. Nothing was done apart from/outside of them in UNISION.

Something to consider---in light of John 2:19:

Acts 2:25-32

25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:

27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.

29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

The Biblical record seems to indicate that there was a degree in which Jesus WAS helpless in his situation, and it was Father who righteously resurrected Him AND Glorified him....even though it was Christ who freely chose to lay down his life/yield Himself to Death ( John 10:16-18, John 12:26-28 )--and it was not an easy thing to do. For even the Son of Man dreaded what was in front of him, to the point where even the Lord had moments of doubt....and was OVERWHELMED with Sorrow/Great emptiness, to the point of death ( Matthew 26:37-39, Mark 14:33-35, Luke 22:39-48 , Hebrews 12:1-3, etc ).

Other scriptures apart from the one y brought up in John 2, now that I think of it:

Acts 3:14-16
You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.

Acts 5:29-31
The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the deadwhom you had killed by hanging him on a tree.

Acts 10:39-41
but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen.

Acts 13:29-31
But God raised him from the dead,

Acts 13:33-35
32"We tell you the good news: What God promised our fathers 33he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:
" 'You are my Son;
today I have become your Father.[a]'

The fact that God raised him from the dead, never to decay, is stated in these words: " 'I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David.'

36"For when David had served God's purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his fathers and his body decayed. 37But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay. 38"Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you.

Romans 4:23-25
but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousnessfor us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.

Romans 6:3-5
We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

Romans 10:9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Romans 8:1
11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

Galatians 1:1-3
Paul, an apostlesent not from men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead

Ephesians 1
That power is like the working of his mighty strength, 20which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms,

Colossians 2:11
11In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature,[a] not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

1 Peter 1:20-22
Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

1 Peter 3:17-19
For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit,

__________________

There is a sense in which God could die...and yet, as the scriptures also make clear, God could NEVER DIE in ALL ASPECTS since He is God..and it is the latter aspect which the Quran focuses on in the death of Christ.

Death should have no fear nor terror for us, and the reason is because there is the death conqueror. And that wonderful verse in John 14:19, where Jesus said, "Because I live, you too shall live also," is what takes the sting out of death. It was none other than the Lord Jesus Christ who rescues us from the fear of the grave. He is the one destroyed death. He has removed death's sting, conquered its terror, and caused us to look at death not as a disaster, but as a friend, who ushers us into the presence of God and into eternal glory.

In the tenth chapter of John, verse 17, Jesus said, "For this reason, the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from me, but I lay it down on my own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from my Father." There was nothing of the element of surprise in the death of Jesus. No one took His life from him, not even God. God asked of Him, that he would give His life, and He willingly agreed. ...and thus, the scriptures where the apostles/others said "you killed him" need to be considered in their full context. For no one had the RIGHT or the ABILITY to "kill Jesus" (As the Quran notes)---and even if it seemed like they killed him, Jesus could never die in all senses. He chose to stop breathing physically---but His SPIRIT lived on regardless...

When Jesus therefore had received the sour wine, He said, 'It is finished,' and he bowed His head and gave up His spirit." He cried those marvelous words, "It is finished," one word in the Greek Tetelestai, shouting for all men to hear through all the ages, that the work of redemption had been done.

Death had tried for Him on many other occasions. Satan had tried to kill Him numerous times throughout His life, even at the very time of His birth, with the massacre of the babies in Bethlehem, and it never really relented through His whole life. But always unsuccessfully, Satan attempted that, because the death of Jesus was in His own control. He would not die until it was His hour to die, until everything had been accomplished...and even then, He'd live at the same time.

Something else to consider, as mentioned before, is the entire concept of how "death" has many differing dynamics..and to many, it doesn't automatically equate to one being "gone" forever. Some of this was discussed elsewhere in #12 /#13 when it came to the subject of how death was seen scripturally. For being "asleep" doesn't mean being without a conscious state of being...as it simply means being in a temporary state of rest---and discussing the reality of how there's a duality of life/death inherent in life is vital. Even when people die, they still live...but they may be in a different state than how it'll be when there's a resurrection. John 11:13-15 shows Jesus making plain that Lazarus is dead, yet he was able to raise Him to life....and prior to Jesus saying plainly to his disciples that Lazarus was dead, he said in John 11:10-12 that Lazarus had fallen asleep. Thus, the concept of death was still present...but it was given a context. The same goes for the little girl who Jesus rose from the grave--for Jesus noted that she had been "asleep" ( Mark 5:38-40 ) rather than "Dead" in the sense of forever lost/diminished. Same thing goes for Acts 7:59-60 when Stephen was killed and it was described as him falling asleep.

This is something that many Muslims have had difficulty understanding when it comes to how they interpret "death"---for they focus on the aspect of death that means one's existence ends fully..and thus, for many, its no surprise that they don't believe Jesus could die. Of course, they have a good bit correct on that

The author sounds like changing his views to the real intention of the interpretation because it should agree to the "bible" and "historical records" or maybe that's his belief in the first place. In the bible, was Jews (in Jesus' days) never been claimed or accused of killing nor crucifying Jesus because Roman soldiers did it? But the bible does says they're responsible:

Acts 2:23(AMP) "This Jesus, when delivered up according to the definite and fixed purpose and settled plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and put out of the way [killing Him] by the hands of lawless and wicked men."

Allah really denied it. He claimed they never crucified Jesus on the cross.

Much of what the author quoted noted is not something that is new in what was said...in light of how many in history have come to the same conclusions (including Muslims) when they actually took time to study the Quran and the Bible to see where it either differs or disagrees. As said before, more was said beside what Allah said on the issue of crucifixtion. Moreover, as the scriptures also declare, Jesus also noted where He himself laid down his own life and NO one could TAKE it from Him. Context, again, makes a significant difference..

Acts 3:12-19

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go. 14 You disowned the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you. 15 You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead.

Acts 4:26-28

27 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. 28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

Acts 13:27-29

27 The people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus, yet in condemning him they fulfilled the words of the prophets that are read every Sabbath. 28 Though they found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. 29 When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the cross and laid him in a tomb.

The Jews claimed at the time to have killed Jesus...but the Romans did the work in carrying it out. One can sum that to semantical factors, like one debating over whether they thank the surgeon or the one making medical tools available for saving a life. The Jews were afraid to kill Jesus themselves , and after Christ rose there was disagreement among the Jews as to whether Jesus had really been killed. Reports of His empty tomb and of His appearing alive spawned a mixture of explanations which left the Jews in doubt as to whether He had really died, some even bribing to keep things secret like the religious leaders did when discovering He rose ( Matthew 28:11-13 ). Certainly, the Jews did not kill him in a primary sense...for firstly, it was the Romans who did (but the Jews are still responsible).

But above that, the Lord is no longer dead

Gxg (G²) · Oct 22, 2011

tm2cruz said:
The author is just maybe trying to mingle the two religion, just like other people mingling different religions w/ Christianity and conclude salvation is not only in Jesus.

As the author (nor those whom he quotes) deny Jesus is the way to salvation, it'd wouldn't be accurate to try claiming that there's attempt to merge religions. For recognizing where things intersect (or have been misunderstood) is not the same as saying all aspects in another religion are automatically approved. By that logic, not even Paul Himself would be good in what he did when acknowledging where the Greeks in Athens (Acts 17) had it correct when it came to his example with the Unknown God and quoting their own poets to support the things he believed about Jesus as revealed in the Hebraic culture.

Even others cautious about noting connections between Islam and Christianity have shared the same sentiment. As one individual noted best:

... early Christian witness appears to appeal to the deities of the pagan world as a starting point for gospel proclamation. I do not think that this means that the early church affirmed pagan worship as sufficient, nor salvific. But it may be correct that there was some pagan worship that was correct in its assumptions, or some deities that correctly reflect, to some degree, the true God. But I emphasize may be!

There's a balance to things..and it can be overreacting whenever trying to assume the worse just because an intersection in two differing camps is seen. I'd go with those in the early church, who never saw Islam as an entirely differing religion anyhow--but rather, as a heresy within the Church since the core aspects of Jesus as the Messiah were still there. Most today don't really study that, nor are they really aware of it...so I don't get surprised whenever people assume "Oh, that just can't be true!!!!!"

Sura 4:157-158 does deny the crucifixion

Disagree, as there was more surrounding the context behind it...and though many Muslims (and Christians) try to say the Quran denies Christ dying, there are far too many Muslims who've read the Quran and have noted (for centuries) that the book NEVER was intended to even remotely mean that Jesus didn't die for others.

There are various ways of interpreting Surah 4:157-158. One of them would be to remember the Jews’ attitude toward Christ. When Jesus was taken to the Roman governor, they did not believe He was the Messiah. They wanted to get rid of Him. By saying, “They killed him not knowingly,” the Qur’an simply states that they killed Jesus without knowing He was the Messiah.

Another possible way to interpret the passage (Surah 4:157-158) is that the unbelieving Jews intended by the crucifixion of Jesus to shame Him in the eyes of the world. The death He would suffer would then destroy and invalidate His mission in the eyes of the world. However, the Jews failed to accomplish their goal. In fact, by the crucifixion, Jesus was glorified when God raised Him up to be with Him. He became the key figure of human history. Throughout the years countless people have turned to Jesus Christ. Jews, Arabs, Asians, Europeans and people from all other nationalities and classes of society have experienced the life changing power of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection.

There are various ways of interpreting Surah 4:157-158. One of them would be to remember the Jews’ attitude toward Christ. When Jesus was taken to the Roman governor, they did not believe He was the Messiah. They wanted to get rid of Him. By saying, “They killed him not knowingly,” the Qur’an simply states that they killed Jesus without knowing He was the Messiah.

Another possible way to interpret the passage (Surah 4:157-158) is that the unbelieving Jews intended by the crucifixion of Jesus to shame Him in the eyes of the world. The death He would suffer would then destroy and invalidate His mission in the eyes of the world. However, the Jews failed to accomplish their goal. In fact, by the crucifixion, Jesus was glorified when God raised Him up to be with Him. For He became the key figure of human history. ..as throughout the years countless people have turned to Jesus Christ.

Others may disagree...but IMHO, it is not possible – despite what people usually think – to reach a definite conclusion based on this single and ambiguous verse….and as other Muslims /Christians have long noted, any conclusion from Surah 4:157-158 asserting that Jesus did not die involves speculation and theory to a high degree. Moreover, to focus in on the issue of crucifixtion and trying to make an issue out of it is akin to discussing whether or not surgery occurred with a patient because someone did not use the words “cutting open” when discussing how another was going to get an organ transplant . For trying to make a case that the Quran denies Jesus died because of ambiguity on the “crucifixtion” factor ignores where there are other verses in the Qur’an which say Jesus was killed.

For another one to consider, I'm reminded of Surah Maryam 19:33. In this verse, Jesus is reported to say:

“Peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)!” (Qur’an, Surah Maryam 19:33).

Muslim scholars, who believe that Jesus did not die, find themselves in a dilemma at verses like this one. Many of them attempt to respond by saying that this is a future event. Jesus will come back to this world some day to do many great and wonderful things, and then He will die.

However, we read almost an identical passage in Surah Maryam 19:15 about Yahya (John the Baptist):

“So Peace on him [Yahya] the day he was born, the day that he dies, and the day that he will be raised up to life (again)!”

Muslims recognize the fact that Yahya died and was buried. Abdullah Yusuf Ali comments on this passage: “This is spoken as in the lifetime of Yahya. Peace of Allah’s blessings were on him when he was born; they continue when he is about to die an unjust death at the hands of the tyrant; and they will be especially manifest at the Day of Judgement.” I don’t know of any Muslim who would shift the death of Yahya (John the Baptist) to the future....as All know that Yahya died. Thus, following the plain meaning of the parallel verse, no one should shift the death of Jesus to the future. In fact there isn’t a single verse in the Qur’an showing that Jesus will return to die. For if remembering Yahya who died, the parallel statement clearly shows that Jesus also died.

Another Qur’anic passage that speaks of the death of Jesus is Surah Al-Imran 3:55:

“Behold! Allah said: ‘O Jesus! I will take thee to Me [Arabic: mutawaffeeka, meaning ‘I will cause you to die’] 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.’”

إِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَىٰ إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَجَاعِلُ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوكَ فَوْق الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ۖ ثُمَّ إِلَيَّ مَرْجِعُكُمْ فَأَحْكُمُ بَيْنَكُمْ فِيمَا كُنتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ.

Still another is:

“I (Son of Mary) was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up [Arabic: tawaffaitani, meaning, ‘caused me to die’] Thou wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things.” (Qur’an, Surah Al-Maida 5: 117).

فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ وَأَنتَ عَلَىٰ كُلّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيد

The Arabic expression tawaffaitani (translated: take me up) is explained by Dr. Mahmud Shaltut, one of the previous presidents of Al-Azhar University:

“(It) is entitled in this verse to bear the meaning of ordinary death … there is no way to interpret ‘death’ as occurring after his [Jesus] return from heaven…because the verse very clearly limits the connection of Jesus … to his own people of his own day and the connection is not with the people living at the time when he returns.” (Muslim World , xxxiv, pp. 214 ff; as quoted by Parrinder. Geoffery, Jesus in the Qur'an, pp.115-116; Sheldon Press, London, 1965. )

These Qur’anic texts show that Christ died, even though they do not discuss how His death took place. Were the Biblical and other historic records of Jesus’ crucifixion untrue, we would expect the Qur’an to have many verses stating that Jesus did not die on the cross. The truth is that, in more than 6,000 Qur’anic verses, there is not a single one that clearly refutes Jesus’ crucifixion. .

Some people would agree w/ Quran and even believed (the one who call themselves "Christians") Jesus wasn't crucified on the cross. For me, the texts are clear, some people just became creative to interpret it the other way. Still salvation in the Quran is not through Jesus' death will save you, it's still a different Jesus.

I actually believe that most people trying to make it out as if the Quran denies the death of Christ have to be more creative than most when missing what the text of scripture and the Quran says plainly...though when one's precommitted to not supporting something, its not difficult to see the worse even if no one's looking for it. Salvation in the Quran is always through Jesus and Jesus alone---and there's nothing in the Quran that denies Jesus is the way to salvation

Jesus, as declared in the Scriptures, is also seen as the Messiah dozens of times within the Quran as well. In the Qur’an we see that Jesus receives the title “Messiah” 11 times. Here is one example: “The angels said, “Mary, God gives you good news of a word from him, whose name will be The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, [he will be] highly exalted in this world and the next, and brought near [to God].” (3:45).

The term Messiah comes from the Hebrew masiach and it literally means ‘anointed.’ In the Old Testament the term occurs 39 times. We see it used when Samuel anointed Saul (1 Sa. 10:1) and David (16:13), as well as in many other places. When the Hebrew text was translated into the Greek (this translation is known as the Septuagint and often abbreviated as LXX) the term was rendered ‘khristos.’ We can easily see how this word became “Christ” when it was brought into English. Furthermore, Christ is one of the great titles given to Jesus. Today these two terms–‘Christ’ and ‘Messiah’–are often used interchangeably. Now, when we return to the Qur’an and look at the 11 passages describing Jesus in this way, we will likely run across either the term. They mean the same thing. Interestingly, however, the term Messiah is not described or defined in any depth within the Qur’an itself. It is a term that most Muslims today will not have spent a great deal of time considering.

Second, the term in the Christian tradition has come to mean a whole host of things that are certainly true of Jesus but may or may not be in the Biblical meaning of that term. Simply put, the Messiah promised by the prophets and awaited by the Jews was the true king, God’s chosen servant, who would redeem Israel from her exile and inaugurate the age of His forgiveness of sins. Within 50 years before and after the life of Jesus, there were several aspiring “Messiahs” who tried to take up this role of warrior king and tried to lead a revolt against the Gentile Roman Empire. But only One was the true Messiah, the true King.

For a few resources for further study:

Parrinder, Geoffrey. 1995 Jesus in the Qur’an. New York: Oxford University Press.

Robinson, Neal. 1991 Christ in Islam and Christianity. New York: Suny Press.

Moucarry, Chawkat. 2002 The Prophet and the Messiah: An Arab Christian’s Perspective on Islam and Christianity. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

As said before, there are many others who have spoken in-depth on the issue. Some good places for review would be sites such as Exploring Our Matrix: A Muslim Who Loves Jesus (Part Of A ... For others, one of the, know as Craig Lock, has shared many solid things on those who're both Muslims and Followers/disciples of Jesus. Carl Medearis, who wrote one of the of the books referenced earlier, has also spoken on it (even though others may sharply disagree, which is their right). For another, Mark Siljander (who was brought up before) is an excellent example of such--and some of his videos:

Mark Siljander on TBN Oct 09 Part 1

Mark Siljander on TBN Oct 09 Part 2

Gxg (G²) · Oct 22, 2011

aniello said:
At the mosque and the madrassa up in the city to our north, the Imams teach that God had, and still has, NO son, over and over and over.

Hardly seems compatible with our Bible.

What do y'all know and/or think about "Chrislam"?

There are many mosques that do not think God can have no son--though many have noted the reason why they think so (as noted earlier in discussion) is because they consider God having a son in the sense that men have children via sexual relations. And on that, it is understandable....

As it concerns Chrislam, heard of it before (as it caused quite a stir in the world of Christendom, especially on TBN when others stepped down due to their seeing it supported)--and on it, I'm not really in favor of it...though I'm glad for others noting that just because one's a Messianic Muslim doesn't automatically mean they're in the camp of Chrislam (even though it can go there if one's not careful).

This came up recently in regards to Rick Warren when he was accussed of Chrislam simply for his stances on forming relationships/dialouges. Most folks looked at Rick Warren as well as others and seem to be for what's known as Islamaphobia..and they really do an injustice to other believers who've lived in Islamic controlled nations/have had to know how to live out Titus 3 in working with others...knowing how to form RELATIONSHIPS with others rather than ignore those who may be lost. The actions of believers in the early church toward the lost were FAR more extreme than what Rick and others have done---and I'm glad Rick has been seeking to do as he did.

For more info, one can go online/look up the following under the respective titles:

The term "Chrislam" itself, also called "The Will of God Mission, The True Message of God Mission" or Oke-Tude which means The Mountain of Loosing Bondage in Yoruba, is a Nigerian syncretic religion which mixes elements of both Christianity and Islam. That is something that often gets lost in discussion whenever it comes to contexualizing the Gospel within Islamic contexts....and it's no different than assuming the folks at Westboro Baptist (who hate homosexuals/protest their funerals) happen to be believers/representives of Christ simply because they're said to be within the camp of Christianity.

When people take what happened in Nigeria (which I vehemently disagree with) and procedd to say all aspects of Islam itself can never be agreed to/acknowledged as verifying Biblical truth, that's an issue...for that's not the same as saying that all aspects of Islam are the same as Christianity or that the Quran itself is fully inspired as the Bible (as Chrislam does). Those saying Rick Warren supports Chrislam simply because he seeks to love Muslims really don't know what the term entails and they use it incorrectly...and slander in the process. As Rick Warren said in his defense:

As an evangelist, I spend much of my time speaking to non-Christian groups. You cannot win your enemies to Christ; only your friends, so we must build bridges of friendship and love to those who believe differently so Jesus can walk across that bridge into their hearts. Besides, it is not a sin, but rather COMMANDED by Jesus that we love our enemies.

For those having a heart with evangelism or friendships with others outside of their own camp, it's really not something that should scare others. But many often get scared whenever anything comes up in regards to inter-faith dialouges/interactions.

For others saying it's wrong to work with others in Islam (as was noted with the accusations against people like Rick Warren), where I disagree is that people never go the entire way with it/seperate themselves from ALL people in existence who do not believe as they do or hold their values. I followed up with the accusations made on Rick Warren--and not surprisingly, alot of the fuss seemed to be over-exaggerated since all he was coming from was that we live next to others/need to know how to interact, just as we are to do with all people. I Peter 2 makes EXPLICITLY clear that we're to honor all men, including the Emperor...and for Peter to say that in a time where persecution was high/ignited by an emeperor who HATED Christians is kkey.

Also, I Corinthians 5 speaks on that matter when Paul notes how he never commanded others to disconnect from all in the world, lest they'd have to leave entirely. And the Biblical example is NOT one where believers demand others believe as they do in order to work alongside of them. Jesus lived life/worked with others who denied His Divinity as well as did not follow the Lord---and yet he existed. And yet he still did as he commanded others in loving His enemies/doing good to those harming him...being a Peace Maker in his actions.

43 You have heard the law that says, Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. 44 But I say, love your enemies![c] Pray for those who persecute you! 45 In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. 46 If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much.

If Luke 6:27-36 and Matthew 5:43-46 are true, then we have to live that out to the fullest. And part of loving others is being in community/relationship with them, just as I'm in relationship with the people in my neighborhood.

Some of it, is similar to what occurred when Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire and other empires had similar dynamics, with it being the case that others were not trying to take away the right of others to practice/believe/declare their religious views as they wish....but more so about letting others do as they do so long as belief in God/Jesus was dominant while the believers had freedom to do as they wished.

By default, anyone practicing a religion other than one devoted to Christ "pushes" their view, be it in passive ways or aggressive, since their choosing not to follow Christ places them in the category of saying that he's somehow wrong/not worth following....but there's a way to go about it thankfully when it comes to living alongside others worshipping other gods just as we live alongside people in our neighborhoods down the street---all of whom have differing beliefs, interesting perspectives and stories to tell of how they see the world. Hearing of it should not always be a threat to believers...

When it comes to contexualizing faith in Yeshua within a Islamic or Muslim worldview, there are grades/variations, just as it is with those who are Messianic Jews and how there's the potential for many claiming to be "Messianic Jewish"/loving Judaic worldviews to ending up in either full blown Rabbinical Judaism..or camps in Judaism that deny Jesus is the Messiah/go into odd practices (like with Kabbalah). One poster discussed the issue more so here (even though he disagrees with insider movements in general)--and I'm glad for the work of others such as Joseph Cumming when it comes to the ways they've clarified the varities that can occur when doing evangelism, as noted here.

As it concerns Islam, Christianity will ALWAYS be superior and what anything of Islam needs to point back to---and does, if studying the Quran/seeing where the book already claimed others needed to do so. And with those who are Messianic Muslims, their identity is focused solely on the person of Yeshua (or Isa). Where the Quran agrees with/supports that, they'll go with that...but where it differs/tells others to go against the fuller revelation of the Biblical account, they'll walk away...for their main issue is suppporting and appreciating those aspects of Islam that were always meant to point back to Isa as the Messiah while being able to reflect the Lord within the context they grew up in...just as it'd be with others who are either Native American, Asian or from differing cultures and practicing expressing the Gospel in ways they understood. What also comes to mind are the experiences of Indian Jews in their practices/experiences within Indian culture (as discussed here and in the thread entitled "Cochin & Hindu Hebrews: Are most Messianic Jews familar with Indian Jewish Believers?" ( ) )--and some of what's being discussed is similar to dynamics occurring within either Crypto-Christianity (as discussed here in #28, #94 and #96 ) or inculturation of the Gospel within differing cultural worldviews (As discussed here in #32 , #41 /#17 /#12 /#11 #6 ).

anisavta · Oct 22, 2011

What do y'all know and/or think about "Chrislam"?

One more way the adversary is using to twist the Truth.

Gxg (G²) · Oct 22, 2011

yedida said:
Well, maybe it could be agreed that it's the same Yeshua but with a newly decorated biography? They are looking to the right person but with a wrong understanding, and that wrong understanding could prove deadly.

Seeing how Muhammad himself was not really a scholar on all points and was heavily influenced by the accounts of Christ he may've heard from other believers in Christ, it is not surprising to me to see the many ways in which some of the things he notes are not fully accurate..or as well expounded upon as in the very Bible which the Quran encourages all to actually study. Its always interesting to see the many accounts of believers in Christ who noted that they grew up studying the Quran--and yet, grew from that into reading the scriptures when they noticed how the Quran instructed them to do so...and thus, they ended up reading the scriptures/gaining a fuller view of what the Quran only saw to a limited degree...

Some of it's akin to the dynamic of folk or tale tales and real biographies, as the former deal with unbelievable elements, related as if it were true and factual, even thoug there are many true aspects it was built around while other things are exaggerations. Some stories are exaggerations of actual historical/biographical eventS (i.e. Davey Crocket and the Alamo, John Henry, etc), for example fish stories ('the fish that got away') such as, "that fish was so big, why I tell ya', it nearly sank the boat when I pulled it in!"---but compared to an actual biography, one will get fuller details that describe an event in its fullness and give clarity on one aspect that wasn't understood as fully.

For a practical example of this within the Quran, one can consider the example of where it was noted that the Lord made clay pigeons come to life. In the Quran, it notes that "Jesus could make birds out of clay and create life for the amusement of his playmates with "Allah's" permission. He would make clay birds into which he breathed and they were transformed, by the Lord's permission into real birds that could fly. i.e. duplication of the process of CREATION, by God's permission. Seeing that, one must ask 'what purpose was there in allowing 'Jesus' to make birds out of clay what could fly (with Allah's permission) further God's purpose? For God doesn't do things without a purpose.

That fact that 'Jesus' could do this tells us that as a child 'Jesus' could create life. And who creates life, but God Himself? In the final analysis, perhaps the Qur'an is demonstrating that 'Jesus' is the Creator. For notice according to the Qur'an "Allah" creates through His Word---and Jesus/Isa is considered the Word and Spirit of God. Perhaps the author of the Qur'an didn't realize what this all meant...as he repeated Christian folklore and made a huge mistake in repeating it without understanding the full implications.

From an historical perspective, some of the stories in the Quran must have been circulating around Arabian caravan routes where Muhammad may have heard them when he was in the employ of his wife Khadija. If interested, the following 7-minute video explains a few of them.

Is the Quran Corrupted? Biblical Characters in the Quran

With Eastern Christianity (in some circles), similar things have often come up...as there's one account somewhere I remember learning of where the 18yrs of the life was Christ (between when he was 12 and when he went into ministry) involved Him traveling to India, making playful miracles and learning. In the Quran itself, those specific folklore stories are from the second century and older. Some of the material in the Ahadith is actually taken verbatim from the Gospel of Thomas. The story of Jesus talking to Mary in the Cradle, as it appears in the Quran in Surah 3:38-48, has always interested me. For the story was most likely being told in the times of Muhammad when considering the pseudepigrapha accounts of the same. --and for more, one can go here or here, in light of how many other scholars have been noting the same for sometime now. Apparently Muhammad heard them told verbally and thought they were true, when in fact, they are folklore. He couldn't tell the difference, as one who wasn't educated. They include Jesus talking as an infant and making clay birds that could fly, plus others.

On the issue of folklore within the Quran, something else that may be worth noting is that many of the things that could be folk stories learned from other Christians still have much they can convey. In example, concerning the clay pigeon example, Christ did some pretty radical miracles that may've been VERY CRAZY to see---such as spitting in mud/placing it in someone's eyes ( John 9:5-7 ) or touching one's tongue and spitting before they were healed--as in Mark 7:32-34 --and the same with Mark 8:22-24 where he spit in a man's eyes. John 2 where he turned water into wine and helped keep a party going is another famous (and hilarious ) instance that I'm reminded of. ...and much of it seems odd. Nonetheless, that doesn't mean that because it seems odd to us automatically makes it something to suspect would not further God's purpose. In the wilderness experience in Matthew 4, if God commanded Jesus to turn stones into bread, that would have not been a problem. For God made food and Jesus being God could have done so. But his purpose in the wilderness was to fast...and had He turned stones to bread without first being One with the Father in reflecting His Will, He would have been acting without proper authority. What Satan tried to do with Jesus was to get Him to use His powers to satisfy His own desires rather than trusting God to supply all that He needed during His temptation...which Jesus responded to by reminding the enemy what the people of Israel should have learned in the wilderness (Deuteronomy 8:3).

Likewise, with clay pigeons, I don't think it'd be a good example for one to use if trying to show where Islam may miss it with stories of Christ. For even if/when it may not be a true story, it still does show the dynamic of what Scripture testifies to when saying that Jesus obeyed as a man, as the representive for all who believe so as to "fulfill all righteousness" ( Matthew 3:15, Hebrews 2:5-18, Hebrews 5:1-10, etc).

The same dynamics, IMHO, would also apply to things such as the Talmud and Rabbinical sources which are often quoted as authoritative, even if many weren't expressely mentioned in the Torah--for although some have aspects to them which are not really accurate according to the Torah and some things can be speculative, they can still offer valuable insights which can be benefical when having a Hebraic perspective on who the Messiah is.

Just some thoughts. Shalom

tm2cruz · Oct 23, 2011

Yup, I also talked to Muslims too and sadly the one interpreted in your posts are completely different. Like what I said, they interpreted it that way and expand on it so it's no difference. There are a lot of Muslims also got saved because of Jesus but they later realized that the Quran was corrupted. It was after they received Jesus then they discovered but that doesn't mean it's the same. God will use some common words depends on each person to guide them to the real truth but that doesn't mean the one where they came from are the same. That's the danger of some interpreting and mingling it w/ the Bible. There are cults have mingled in the truth of the bible, same thing like the Islam and bible, and have a lot of interpretations they have to say it's the same but it's not, it's a deception. They didn't know but they based it on their understanding. I saw that in my lifetime back to my country. I also saw Muslims interpret Jesus making Jihad (there are former Christians who converts to Islam). They interpret Jesus as saying He came w/ a "sword" and, as a Christian, you knew what He meant but Muslim interpret it that way because of they so called "context". You can research it for sure and you can understand why they interpret it that way. It really looks like He really does encourage jihad. Another one is deception, it's ok to deceive in the bible and yet we, as a Christian, knew it's not the real interpretation but based on what they read in our bible that deceiving people for the sake of "gospel" is ok. Check it out, you can see that yourself. You just need to research it and understand all these from people getting deceived. You might know all these but you just need to understand what's going on behind it, not just knowledge behind it.
Sorry eh? I really disagree on it, even though I read all those interpretation and explanations you had, i see something else in there.

Messianic Muslims/Seekers of Isa meet Messianic Jews/Students of Yeshua--Is it Real?

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Jesus Freak - Yeshua is my Best Friend

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Newbie

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Jesus Freak - Yeshua is my Best Friend

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Jesus Freak - Yeshua is my Best Friend

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Jesus Freak - Yeshua is my Best Friend

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

aniello

Guest

Jesus Freak - Yeshua is my Best Friend

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Never Forget!

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Jesus Freak - Yeshua is my Best Friend

Similar threads