Trinitarian Monotheism?

[Gxg (G²)]

I think this is a bit of wishful thinking. The Quran views Jesus as a Prophet and doesn't make a distinction between them in the sense of giving Jesus a higher rank.
."

Outside of actually addressing what the Quran says, it's personal incredulity (IMHO) if attempting to claim Jesus was merely a Prophet in the Quran .....and yet ignoring where the Quran has repeatedly noted Jesus to be more than a Prophet - and actually addressing what the Quran says point for point. Doing ministry in regards to Muslims and those who actually grew up in Islam (and my grandmother herself grew up with it as well ), it really doesn't take much to show the Quran properly presenting the Lord - if others actually read rather than go based on assumptions.

If one's aware of those who are Muslim Background Believers (MBB), some of what is shared may make more sense. For more, one can go online here and here to An Interview with an Imam - Secret Believers - Podbean where Al Janssen talks with a MBB from Indonesia. ..with the Imam sharing his heart on how he came to know the Messiah and how he now shares Christ/Isa with other Muslims.

The ministry of "Answering Islam" is one of the most amazing ministries I've ever come across - been very helpful in showing the many ways Islam itself was always incomplete when it comes to the Gospel because of the background Mohammad came from their article entitled The Quran and the Unlettered Prophet: Jesus or Muhammad? and The Quran on Jesus as the Preexistent Spirit of Allah and Is Muhammad the Last Prophet?


Additionally, there's actually an excellent book on the issue entitled The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the World of Islam by Sidney H. Griffith

• The Cross Under the
• Crescent - Article | First Things
• The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque - Hamline Law
• Review: Sidney Griffith, the Church in the Shadow of the Mosque
• The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims

​

As another noted best (for brief excerpt):

Griffith is concerned to show how the terms of discourse were basically set by the Islamic attacks on Christianity. For example, the list of topics found in popular genres of Christian apologetics in Syriac and Arabic in the early Islamic period are “distinctively Islamic” (97). Christian kalam is basically a borrowing of the “Islamic style of religious discourse in Arabic” (89)....Our author is also concerned to point out that although the characters are often fictional or symbolic in the popular apologetic genres that depicted dialogue between Christians and Muslims, these texts nevertheless shed light on real historical circumstances of open dialogue between Muslims and Christians (102-103). Griffin also shows a concern to demonstrate that Christians made use of the authority of the Qur’an to validate their Christian doctrines to the Muslims (168-70). Finally, Griffith thinks that Christianity should not discount the churches that were considered as “dissident churches” by the exclusive Roman imperial authority (129). Latin Christians in particular, Griffith thinks, have wrongly considered Christians of the Orient as heretical and schismatic.

​

That said, It is safe to say that a large majority of Muslims agree that Jesus (Prophet Isa) is going to return, which automatically contradicts the idea that Allah will not send mankind another messenger. The one verse in the Quran that many Islamic leaders cling to is that Muhammad( pbuh) is the "Seal of the Prophets."(33:40) - though many have thankfully sought to address what it means to be the "Seal of the Prophets?" ...and noted that it means many things but one thing it does not mean is that Allah will never send guidance for a long time afterward.

There was no general agreement among early Muslims that the phrase 'Seal of the Prophets' meant that there would be no prophets after Muhammad - for it is thought that the doctrine of Muhammad being the final prophet was adopted as official Islamic doctrine in the early years of the 4th Islamic century(late 10th century AD) mainly as a counter to the numerous revolts that had occurred and were still occurring against the caliphate in the name of various persons claiming to be prophets.

Technically, the word 'Seal'(khatam) can mean ornament, signet ring or a seal ring which is worn (like to seal a document) - and as many Muslims have noted, the phrase 'Seal of the Prophets' means Allah giving Muhammad his seal of approval or regarding Muhammad as an ornament among the prophets of Allah. Additionally, some commentators also state that khatam an-nabiyyin means the 'Sealer of the Prophets' in the sense that Muhammad is the one who gives the seal of approval to the proceeding prophets.......something that directly goes in support of Isa (Jesus) being the Messiah since even Muhammad - exposed to it when seeing Christianity in His time - noted others needed to follow Him. For others trying to argue Muhammad was saying he was the final prophet, He did not say at any point he is the Final Messenger, which the Quran makes a clear distinction between (nabi and rasul).

The reality of partial truth being revealed even if/when the Quran is inconsistent on various parts because of incomplete information...

Many Muslims/others from Muslim background have noted this when sharing plainly on the ways Isa was always meant to be superior to Muhammad - with many noting that others need to follow what Christians have noted when it comes to acknowledging that the Messiah is truly the Son of God sent to redeem mankind....even though their brothers/sisters may've not had the best understanding on all points. For them, During the daily salat, they refrain from saying the shahadah unless they omit the second phrase, "and Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah" and instead insert "and Isa (Jesus) is the Eternal Word of Allah" or "and Isa (Jesus) is the Sovereign Lord." They acknowledge that only the Bible is the Word of God and that the Qur'an, while containing beautiful Arabic and important insights into Arab culture, has no authority over the Bible.

And others have noted repeatdly why it is wise for all Muslims to study the life of Jesus in the Bible. For not only is the Bible an accurate historical record, but it is a text that Muhammad encouraged Muslims to study (Sura 10:94; 2:136; 4:163; 5:56; 5:68; 35:31). Muhammad believed the Bible in the sixth century AD was accurate - but we have many ancient New Testaments that predate the sixth century.

There are a lot of other areas where it often seems that Muslims and Christians have A LOT of misunderstanding.

I think we need to emphasize the monotheism of Christianity in the sense that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are One. IMHO, I think that God as a relationship of Three Persons is overemphasized while God as One Being is underemphasized. Jesus says, "I and my Father are One

Indeed, it's not an "Either Or" where you have to focus on relationship or see God in a sense of Oneness/Unity. And when it comes to spiritual realities, it's already a lost battle if trying to describe the Trinity in human formulas as if they could alone sum up what has been present in Eternity. We're finite beings dealing with comprehending infinite realities...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The visitation of the three angels is an early vision/experience of the revelation of the Holy Trinity; the angels are not the Godhead itself.

True....

 

[steve_bakr]

Outside of actually addressing what the Quran says, it's personal incredulity (IMHO) if attempting to claim Jesus was merely a Prophet in the Quran .....and yet ignoring where the Quran has repeatedly noted Jesus to be more than a Prophet - and actually addressing what the Quran says point for point. Doing ministry in regards to Muslims and those who actually grew up in Islam (and my grandmother herself grew up with it as well ), it really doesn't take much to show the Quran properly presenting the Lord - if others actually read rather than go based on assumptions.

If one's aware of those who are Muslim Background Believers (MBB), some of what is shared may make more sense. For more, one can go online here and here to An Interview with an Imam - Secret Believers - Podbean where Al Janssen talks with a MBB from Indonesia. ..with the Imam sharing his heart on how he came to know the Messiah and how he now shares Christ/Isa with other Muslims.

The ministry of "Answering Islam" is one of the most amazing ministries I've ever come across - been very helpful in showing the many ways Islam itself was always incomplete when it comes to the Gospel because of the background Mohammad came from their article entitled The Quran and the Unlettered Prophet: Jesus or Muhammad? and The Quran on Jesus as the Preexistent Spirit of Allah and Is Muhammad the Last Prophet?

Additionally, there's actually an excellent book on the issue entitled The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the World of Islam by Sidney H. Griffith


[*]The Cross Under the
[*]Crescent - Article | First Things
[*]The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque - Hamline Law
[*]Review: Sidney Griffith, the Church in the Shadow of the Mosque
[*]The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims
http://books.google.com/books?id=-p...ans and Muslims in the World of Islam&f=false

As another noted best (for brief excerpt):
Griffith is concerned to show how the terms of discourse were basically set by the Islamic attacks on Christianity. For example, the list of topics found in popular genres of Christian apologetics in Syriac and Arabic in the early Islamic period are “distinctively Islamic” (97). Christian kalam is basically a borrowing of the “Islamic style of religious discourse in Arabic” (89)....Our author is also concerned to point out that although the characters are often fictional or symbolic in the popular apologetic genres that depicted dialogue between Christians and Muslims, these texts nevertheless shed light on real historical circumstances of open dialogue between Muslims and Christians (102-103). Griffin also shows a concern to demonstrate that Christians made use of the authority of the Qur’an to validate their Christian doctrines to the Muslims (168-70). Finally, Griffith thinks that Christianity should not discount the churches that were considered as “dissident churches” by the exclusive Roman imperial authority (129). Latin Christians in particular, Griffith thinks, have wrongly considered Christians of the Orient as heretical and schismatic.



That said, It is safe to say that a large majority of Muslims agree that Jesus (Prophet Isa) is going to return, which automatically contradicts the idea that Allah will not send mankind another messenger. The one verse in the Quran that many Islamic leaders cling to is that Muhammad( pbuh) is the "Seal of the Prophets."(33:40) - though many have thankfully sought to address what it means to be the "Seal of the Prophets?" ...and noted that it means many things but one thing it does not mean is that Allah will never send guidance for a long time afterward.

There was no general agreement among early Muslims that the phrase 'Seal of the Prophets' meant that there would be no prophets after Muhammad - for it is thought that the doctrine of Muhammad being the final prophet was adopted as official Islamic doctrine in the early years of the 4th Islamic century(late 10th century AD) mainly as a counter to the numerous revolts that had occurred and were still occurring against the caliphate in the name of various persons claiming to be prophets.

Technically, the word 'Seal'(khatam) can mean ornament, signet ring or a seal ring which is worn (like to seal a document) - and as many Muslims have noted, the phrase 'Seal of the Prophets' means Allah giving Muhammad his seal of approval or regarding Muhammad as an ornament among the prophets of Allah. Additionally, some commentators also state that khatam an-nabiyyin means the 'Sealer of the Prophets' in the sense that Muhammad is the one who gives the seal of approval to the proceeding prophets.......something that directly goes in support of Isa (Jesus) being the Messiah since even Muhammad - exposed to it when seeing Christianity in His time - noted others needed to follow Him. For others trying to argue Muhammad was saying he was the final prophet, He did not say at any point he is the Final Messenger, which the Quran makes a clear distinction between (nabi and rasul).

The reality of partial truth being revealed even if/when the Quran is inconsistent on various parts because of incomplete information...

Many Muslims/others from Muslim background have noted this when sharing plainly on the ways Isa was always meant to be superior to Muhammad - with many noting that others need to follow what Christians have noted when it comes to acknowledging that the Messiah is truly the Son of God sent to redeem mankind....even though their brothers/sisters may've not had the best understanding on all points. For them, During the daily salat, they refrain from saying the shahadah unless they omit the second phrase, "and Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah" and instead insert "and Isa (Jesus) is the Eternal Word of Allah" or "and Isa (Jesus) is the Sovereign Lord." They acknowledge that only the Bible is the Word of God and that the Qur'an, while containing beautiful Arabic and important insights into Arab culture, has no authority over the Bible.

And others have noted repeatdly why it is wise for all Muslims to study the life of Jesus in the Bible. For not only is the Bible an accurate historical record, but it is a text that Muhammad encouraged Muslims to study (Sura 10:94; 2:136; 4:163; 5:56; 5:68; 35:31). Muhammad believed the Bible in the sixth century AD was accurate - but we have many ancient New Testaments that predate the sixth century.

There are a lot of other areas where it often seems that Muslims and Christians have A LOT of misunderstanding.
Indeed, it's not an "Either Or" where you have to focus on relationship or see God in a sense of Oneness/Unity. And when it comes to spiritual realities, it's already a lost battle if trying to describe the Trinity in human formulas as if they could alone sum up what has been present in Eternity. We're finite beings dealing with comprehending infinite realities...

I'm not opposed to having the second part of the Shahada replaced with Isa. I am simply stating that the Quran does not teach that Jesus is the Son of God. It does not teach that the Messiah died for the sins of mankind. It does not teach that Jesus died on the Cross, but escaped crucifixion instead. The Message of the Quran is the radical Unity of God. I'm just saying that as a reality check.

OTOH, I am all for finding commonalities between Christianity and the Quran. And I am all for Muslims accepting God's grace in the Messiah.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I'm not opposed to having the second part of the Shahada replaced with Isa. I am simply stating that the Quran does not teach that Jesus is the Son of God. .It does not teach that the Messiah died for the sins of mankind. It does not teach that Jesus died on the Cross, but escaped crucifixion instead. The Message of the Quran is the radical Unity of God. I'm just saying that as a reality check.



OTOH, I am all for finding commonalities between Christianity and the Quran. And I am all for Muslims accepting God's grace in the Messiah.

I more than understand the sentiments - and on the issue, of course finding commonalities between Christians and the Quran is something many don't have issue with...as well as Muslims coming to faith in the Messiah. Nonetheless, part of that occurring is intimately tied to actually addressing what the Quran says...and unfortunately, many end up supporting the aforementioned concepts of commonality or grace for Muslims while still saying things that are not what's actually present in the Quran - and many have noted that for centuries when it comes to actually understanding how Christ was the Son of God.

Again, people who don't read the Quran or actually understand the language used in the culture tend to do that from an outside perspective..

And if we're going to talk on what the Quran actually says, we need to actually deal with what the Quran itself says - not make claims of it that don't deal with the reality of what the Book notes.

Again, In the Qur’an, Jesus is twice referred to as the “Word of God,” a title that many consider to be the highest title given to any person in the book. While describing Jesus’ miraculous conception, the Qur’an states:

“The angels said, “Mary, God gives you good news of a word from him [God]…’” (Surah 3:45).​

The second passage brings this truth to greater light:

“People of the book, don’t exaggerate in your religion, and only say the truth about God. Truly the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, is God’s messenger and his word which he sent down on Mary, and a spirit from him. So believe in God and his messengers and do not say three. Stop it. It is better for you. God is one God. Far be it from him to have a boy. He owns what is in the heavens and the earth. God is a sufficient trustee.” (4:171).​

When one is coming from a perspective in Christianity that doesn't read the Quran (and yet assumes the context), there are several statements in the verse that appear to contradict the biblical account. Let’s look at them in more detail:

1. Do not say three. We must remember that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all monotheistic religions. Though many casual Christian conversations or prayers might imply otherwise, the Bible is clear: there is only one God. We must remember that Moses (Dt. 6:4-5), Jesus (Mk. 12:29-30), and Paul (1 Co. 8:4) affirmed monotheism in the strongest terms. Each would have fiercely denied any notion of multiple gods. To be sure, the Scripture reveals that God’s nature mysteriously comprises himself, His eternal Word and His Spirit. But during the time of the Qur’an’s appearance, there were many heretical Christian sects in the Arabian peninsula who had misconstrued ideas about God and the divine nature of Jesus, and in this passage the Qur’an warns its readers to avoid the (heretical) “Christian” statement that there are “three” gods.

2. (no more than) Many translations of the Qur’an to English actually include : “Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a Messenger of God and His Word…” (Yusuf Ali). The parenthetical statement ‘no more than’ or similar is often added, but it is not a statement made in the Arabic text itself. The Arabic construction at that point actually draws attention to the fact that he is a messenger rather than implying he was only a messenger and nothing more. Quranic translators often include parenthetical statements such as these to aid the reader in his/her understanding of the Qur’an, but more often than not they reflect theological bias against Christianity.


3. far be it from him to have a boy. Geoffrey Parrinder points out in his foundational work Jesus in the Qur’an that “this verse seems to be directed against certain Christian heresies, and particularly against the crude notion that God had carnally begotten Jesus upon Mary. In contrast to this it is declared that Jesus is born by the divine will and word” (1965:46). Parrinder is referring to the idea that God had sex with Mary in order to conceive Jesus, an idea that is often evoked when a Muslim hears the phrase “son of God.”​

In the Arabic, ibn is the word that means “son of,” and when it is used it means “the product of sexual relations between a man and woman.” Therefore, the term “Son of God” (Ar. ibn Allah) implies this kind of conception involving God and Mary. This is clearly heresy — no Bible-reading believer would ever associate God with this kind of relationship. To do so would be blasphemous.

What many Muslims feel on Jesus as the "Son of God" is a matter of context. For them, to say "Jesus isn't the Son of God" is said in the sense that they don't believe He's the "Son of God" in the sense that the Greek Gods had sexual relations with humans - and as Christians don't believe in that either, it often leads to a lot of misunderstanding because many don't know where the other is coming from and how to clarify when something is said to give the wrong impression.....and for more review, one can go to CAUTIONS REGARDING “SON OF GOD” IN MUSLIM-IDIOM TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE: SEEKING SENSIBLE BALANCE.

The Qur’an clearly communicates that Jesus was of divine origin. The Qur’an states that Jesus was the ‘Kalima’ of God–the Word of God. In fact this honorific title does not appear with any other prophet–Jesus is the only one known as the Word of God...and this is important to remember since Muslims already have within their own Book a profound understanding of the nature of Jesus..as He Jesus is the Word of God. The passage reminds us that we need to develop an understanding of Muhammad’s teachings in the Qur’an before we confront or accuse a Muslim antagonistically about what they do or do not believe. Furthermore, understanding that Jesus is seen as the Word of God in the Qur’an shows us how much of our perception of Islam is based on cultural stereotypes and fear rather than the actual content of the Qur’an.

And with Jesus (or Isa), there is no escaping the fact that Muhammad did believe that Jesus was the Messiah. In the Qur’an we see that Jesus receives the title “Messiah” 11 times. Again:

“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].” (Surah 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.

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 since 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.

Of course Muslims are not complete in their foundation - but that's no different than what occurred with other Biblical groups. Many have often equated the Muslims with Samaritans in many ways, more discussed here at Frontier Missions..


Most, if not ALL of Islam is based on non-canonical Jewish sources that existed amongst the illiterate Jews of western Arabia and which were told by storytellers in the public market places of mainly Mecca. And the same goes for stories told by many of the Christians who were exiled from the Eastern empire due to their views being herectical/not accepted by the Orthodoxy of the day.

When understanding the background of how the Quran developed, some things tend to make more sense as to how it developed as it did.

Studying one of the earliest critiques of St.John of Damascus is amongst the best routes 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 /here and here. 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).


To give a different perspective on why so much within the Qur'an is similar to what is found in Christianity and why Mohommad knew that, it was once noted that what was noted in the Qura'an on Christ was indeed the same Yeshua but with a newly decorated biography---with the essentially looking to the right person but with an incomplete understanding that could lead to bad consequences.

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.

For more reference, one can go to Answering Islam: Did Muhammad Deny the Trinity or Paganism? ...and as said there:

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​

 

[Gxg (G²)]

It does not teach that the Messiah died for the sins of mankind. It does not teach that Jesus died on the Cross, but escaped crucifixion instead. The Message of the Quran is the radical Unity of God. I'm just saying that as a reality check..

As said before...

If one is going to make claims on what the Quran says, one should deal with showing what the Quran says - and it at no point says in any manner that Christ did not die on the Cross, nor does it say that Christ was not the Messiah sent to save mankind/redeem them.


According to the Quran, for those who read it, Isa was the Savior sent by the Lord to save mankind....announced by angels in his coming and being the Son of Mary as well as the very Spirit of God. And there can be no escaping where Muslims have said that he was the Spirit of God in the flesh.

Sadly, people RARELY read the Quran when speaking against it and thus they don't really know what they talk about.

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.

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.

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

Sadly, be it with radicals trying to argue that Christ wasn't the Savior who died or with zealous believers using anything they can to argue against the Quran on Jesus, people have often tried to use Sura 4:157-158 in claiming that the Quran denies the crucifixion.


However, 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. .

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I am simply stating that the Quran does not teach that Jesus is the Son of God. It does not teach that the Messiah died for the sins of mankind. It does not teach that Jesus died on the Cross, but escaped crucifixion instead.

Obvious is the fact that 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 that God only made it “appear” Jesus was crucified: he was taken from the cross at the last minute and replaced by Judas. It has also been said 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.


But The controversy concerning the crucifixion of Jesus has more to do with our history books than the Holy Books

On what the Qur’an actually says.....

In the Qur’an there are four main passages[/URL] 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, I'd 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. 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, 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.”[/FONT]
​

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).[/COLOR]

Parrinder quotes E. E. Elder to drive the point home:[/COLOR]

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.”

For more, one can go to Jesus in Islam and Christianity: Discussing the Similarities AND the Differences

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 has also spoken on it (even though others may sharply disagree, which is their right). For another, one can investigate Must-Read: Mark Siljander's "A Deadly Misunderstanding"

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

As it is, 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. It's "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."

Surah 4:157 was NEVER about denying the death of Jesus at all..


And historically, this is something that has been well understood for centuries.

Islamic tradition - as it concerns what's often seen today in many places - does deny Christ was crucified. Although the time period makes a difference in light of how tradition will vary based on the age one lives in.....and what's understood based on a tradition will vary as well. How others understood a majority view to be in the times of the Early Body of Christ when Islam was developing (as in the time of St. John of Damascus) is different than how many in the majority understand a text/concept to be - and in the time of the Early Church, it was never the case that Islamic tradition was understood in the majority to mean that Christ was never crucified. They knew what the language of the Quran was about and didn't respond as many camps today do...

There was an excellent article on the issue I'd highly recommend entitled The Crucifixion in Shi'a Isma'ili Islam - The Matheson Trust | For and Antioch Believer!: What does the Quran say about Jesus death?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I'm not opposed to having the second part of the Shahada replaced with Isa. I am simply stating that the Quran does not teach that Jesus is the Son of God. .It does not teach that the Messiah died for the sins of mankind. It does not teach that Jesus died on the Cross, but escaped crucifixion instead. The Message of the Quran is the radical Unity of God. I'm just saying that as a reality check.

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. It's "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."

Surah 4:157 was NEVER about denying the death of Jesus at all..

For reference..

The Quran itself nor Muslims universally have rejected the Crucifixtion - and there's a reason why. 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.

The book "Jesus Wars" by Philip Jenkins is indeed an amazing one .....very AMAZING read on a host of levels in light of how Philip Jenkins is able to communicate complex ideas and complicated concepts in a manner that preserves their integrity to a wide audience and at the same time renders them as a fascinating..

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.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I'm not opposed to having the second part of the Shahada replaced with Isa. I am simply stating that the Quran does not teach that Jesus is the Son of God. .It does not teach that the Messiah died for the sins of mankind. It does not teach that Jesus died on the Cross, but escaped crucifixion instead. The Message of the Quran is the radical Unity of God. I'm just saying that as a reality check.

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...

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 dead—whom 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 righteousness—for 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 apostle—sent 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.

And moreover, for others saying that Islam is wrong to say that Christ was not "killed", 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)]

.... never has the Father nor the Holy Spirit carried a similar title nor have been known to reveal themselves to mankind as angels. Thus, the appearance to Abraham recorded in the icon cannot be said to be of the Holy Trinity, but a revealed typos of the revelation of the Holy Trinity.

I always took it as a revelation of the Angel of the Lord (Pre-Incarnate Christ with two angels) that occurred in Genesis 18.

Hazakim - Theophanies - YouTube

 

[godenver1]

Yeesh. Neither?

Late pagan philosophy tended to see all the gods as aspects of Zeus, so that slightly pushes it in the direction of Trinitarianism, but that's still a form of modalism.

Blegh. I don't think comparative religion is really helpful for understanding the Trinity. It is incomparable.

To be honest, at times inconceivable

1 Timothy 3:16
16 Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He[a] was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

 

[steve_bakr]

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 dead—whom 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 righteousness—for 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 apostle—sent 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.

And moreover, for others saying that Islam is wrong to say that Christ was not "killed", 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

As far as the Christian Message is concerned, you are preaching to the Choir here. And I appreciate what you are doing with the Quran. I have some experience with the Quran and I don't read everything into it that you have done, but I shouldn't splash cold water on it either.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

As far as the Christian Message is concerned, you are preaching to the Choir here. And I appreciate what you are doing with the Quran. I have some experience with the Quran and I don't read everything into it that you have done, but I shouldn't splash cold water on it either.

With the Quran, glad that others working with it are appreciated. As it is, no one really has to read anything into the Quran, truthfully, when it comes to addressing what it actually says point for point and noting what other Muslims have actually done when it comes to reading it for what it is (as some things can never be dismissed out of personal incredulity when people go past what's said plainly and saying that because one finds something difficult to understand that it's therefore not true) - as it pertains to dealing with the ways others who are Muslim-Background Believers grew up.

Some things are ultimately a matter of reading past what it says more so than reading into it - generally due to not seeing how Islam began, how those in the Early Church addressed it and dealing with what Muslims have actually said on their own text.

Having grown up with family who were in a sect/camp of Islam and seeing it in action (more in #207/#208 and #210 ), you had to address the Quran directly - so it'll always be taken seriously with what it says. And it will always be a matter of addressing the Quran for what it actually says....and seeing what Muslims actually do.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Would you say that Christian Trinitarianism is more like Pagan Polytheism (e.g. the Greek Twelve Olympians Pantheon) or more like Islamic Monotheism (Tawheed)?

There was a good article on the issue which may be of help for your question - as seen in Islamic Monotheism and the Trinity - University of Waterlo and Trinity and the Qur’an | True Islam: True Devotion

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Ceridwen

Can you see it now? I changed the image to which the address is directed.
​

Actually, what you've said is incorrect. Rublev's icon "Trinity" is not the same as the icon "Hospitality of Abraham." It is true that "Trinity" is based on "Hospitality of Abraham." However, Rublev removed the figures of Abraham and Sarah from the scene, and through a subtle use of composition and symbolism changed the subject to focus on the Mystery of the Trinity. "The figures of Abraham and Sarah, always in previous icons of this sacred event, are removed by St. Andrei to emphasize the transcendent revelation to Mankind of the Infinite yet ever-present One Triune Godhead."

https://www.skete.com/index.cfm?fuse...product_id=524

The differences can be seen when you compare the icons one after the other:

​

Fascinating icons... I wonder if there is a correlation with the depictions here and with John 20:12:

And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

... and with the ark of the testimony, and the altars that you often see in traditional churches. Whatever the case, iconography fascinates me.

Anyways, I don't think you're correct to say that something was changed to bear significance regarding the Trinity.
The significance is made evident by the text itself.

If is so significantly evidenced by the text, why such a big controversy within Christianity on the matter of the "Trinity"?


Some Funny Clips - They Call Me Trinity - YouTube


.

 

[Nanopants]

If is so significantly evidenced by the text, why such a big controversy within Christianity on the matter of the "Trinity"?


Some Funny Clips - They Call Me Trinity - YouTube


.

Heh. Well I didn't mean it was clearly explained. I meant, that which is made evident by the text (including other Trinitarian scripture), is that it is significant w.r.t. the Trinity.

 

[Skybringr]

Would you say that Christian Trinitarianism is more like Pagan Polytheism (e.g. the Greek Twelve Olympians Pantheon) or more like Islamic Monotheism (Tawheed)?

The Trinity is a unique form of monotheism. Each side, or hypotenuse, of the triangle represents the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, altogether being a single logic or principle of the cosmos.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Ceridwen

Would you say that Christian Trinitarianism is more like Pagan Polytheism (e.g. the Greek Twelve Olympians Pantheon) or more like Islamic Monotheism (Tawheed)?
​

The Trinity is a unique form of monotheism.
Each side, or hypotenuse, of the triangle represents the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, altogether being a single logic or principle of the cosmos.

Try explaining that to a non-Christian apostate monotheistic Jew or Muslim



.

 

[Skybringr]

Try explaining that to a non-Christian apostate monotheistic Jew or Muslim

Denial is an ironclad armor.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Zech 14:9

And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.



Revelation 3:12

and I will write upon him my new name.

 

[steve_bakr]

With the Quran, glad that others working with it are appreciated. As it is, no one really has to read anything into the Quran, truthfully, when it comes to addressing what it actually says point for point and noting what other Muslims have actually done when it comes to reading it for what it is (as some things can never be dismissed out of personal incredulity when people go past what's said plainly and saying that because one finds something difficult to understand that it's therefore not true) - as it pertains to dealing with the ways others who are Muslim-Background Believers grew up.

Some things are ultimately a matter of reading past what it says more so than reading into it - generally due to not seeing how Islam began, how those in the Early Church addressed it and dealing with what Muslims have actually said on their own text.

Having grown up with family who were in a sect/camp of Islam and seeing it in action (more in #207/#208 and #210 ), you had to address the Quran directly - so it'll always be taken seriously with what it says. And it will always be a matter of addressing the Quran for what it actually says....and seeing what Muslims actually do.

There are many commentaries on the Quran. One commentator said that each aya has seven meanings. You are saying that your interpretation or reading of the Quran is objective and correct to the exclusion of the other readings.

I respect your knowledge, but I think your view represents a strong Christian bias, and that's fine. It's good to concentrate on the Quranic passages about Jesus. Whatever can be found in common between the Quran and the biblical testimony is very positive.