Quran 4:157 and the literalist hypothesis

[danieldemol]

...
"Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him"...
Look at the part I highlighted in red. When they said we killed Jesus peace be upon him were they speaking metaphorically? In the Arabic language if you go on to say something and than denied it, than you are denying all which has come before unless you specify which is true. I mean the Quraan states that they wanted to kill him (of course not metaphorically) and than the Quraan says that didn't happen (they did not kill him). This means they did not kill him literally.

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

Well I would have to say I would have to agree, there could not be any other conclusion. If any one chooses to provide an alternate answer, that will be of interest.

Peace be with you

 

[Dawnofhope]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

In addition the misinterpretation of this one verse dismisses most the NT books that either give an account of Christ's crucifixion or allude to it. It also discards what historians generally agree about the historic Jesus.

Historical Jesus - Wikipedia

 

[Augustus]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

This article might be of interest.


The Muslim Jesus: Dead or alive?

Gabriel Said Reynolds

Bulletin of SOAS, 72, 2 (2009), 237–258

Abstract

According to most classical Muslim commentators the Quran teaches that Jesus did not die. On the day of the crucifixion another person – whether his disciple or his betrayer – was miraculously transformed and assumed the appearance of Jesus. He was taken away, crucified, and killed, while Jesus was assumed body and soul into heaven. Most critical scholars accept that this is indeed the Quran’s teaching, even if the Quran states explicitly only that the Jews did not kill Jesus. In the present paper I con- tend that the Quran rather accepts that Jesus died, and indeed alludes to his role as a witness against his murderers in the apocalypse. The paper begins with an analysis of the Quran’s references to the death of Jesus, continues with a description of classical Muslim exegesis of those references, and concludes with a presentation of the Quran’s conversation with Jewish and Christian tradition on the matter of Jesus’ death.



https://www3.nd.edu/~reynolds/index_files/jesus dead or alive.pdf

 

[Ellen Brown]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)[/QUOTE


I wonder if the fact that Quranic Arabic is no longer spoken is important? Of Course the interpreter is Yusuf Ali, and his interpretation is almost universally approved of.

4:34 is another passage where there is wide disagreement about what it means.

But, Muslim old works do not have the corner on problem scripture. In Christianity, 1 Cor 11 is largely seen as abrogated, and that with other ignored scripture undermines my confidence in much of it.

 

[sun rise]

There is a legend in India that Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to India. That makes sense to me if one considers death is just the dropping of a physical body. It makes Jesus' sacrifice voluntarily suffering for us.

This is not of course what the OP outlines but is yet another legend.

 

[Ellen Brown]

There is a legend in India that Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to India. That makes sense to me if one considers death is just the dropping of a physical body. It makes Jesus' sacrifice voluntarily suffering for us.

This is not of course what the OP outlines but is yet another legend.

I have heard this story also. Sadly a large part of Christianity depends upon The Atonement for our myriad sins, and that often. It sickens and repulses me that some spend so much time wailing and panting in worship over sins that occurred perhaps long ago, and forgiveness has be sought how many dozens of times?

Yes, Thomas is said to have gone to India, and later to the Malibar Coast in India around 72 BC, where he was eventually murdered. Was there an early Christian church?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is a legend in India that Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to India. That makes sense to me if one considers death is just the dropping of a physical body. It makes Jesus' sacrifice voluntarily suffering for us.

This is not of course what the OP outlines but is yet another legend.

What is not considered is that Christ is all the Mesengers. The Death of Jesus on the Cross does not Kill Christ, but the body of jesus did not walk this earth after. That event, released a power of Spirit into this world that gave capacity to all humanity to be born again.

This infusion of Spirit is picked up by all peoples and it is only the Purity of our Heart that can distinguish between what is from our own selves and what was from Christ.

This is also true of Muhammad. Muhammad was again the Christ Spirit, to which we choose to see or veil.

Peace be with you.

 

[CG Didymus]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

Is there such a thing as a "consistent" application when dealing with religious Scripture? Christians say Jesus came back to life and ascended into heaven. That is the hope and belief that Christians live and die for. Baha'is say his body is dead and buried, and that he is spiritually alive and only in a spiritual sense rose from the dead. But that is not what the NT says.

Muslims say a body double was crucified in his place, and that Jesus then ascended into heaven. So why is it that Baha'is need Jesus to be physically dead? If he is dead, then why didn't Muhammad say so? And, if you think that Jesus being "spiritually" alive is what Muhammad meant, then why didn't the Christian gospel writers say so? But, then again, what's so special about Jesus if, like everybody else, he died physically but is alive spiritually?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Is there such a thing as a "consistent" application when dealing with religious Scripture? Christians say Jesus came back to life and ascended into heaven. That is the hope and belief that Christians live and die for. Baha'is say his body is dead and buried, and that he is spiritually alive and only in a spiritual sense rose from the dead. But that is not what the NT says.

Muslims say a body double was crucified in his place, and that Jesus then ascended into heaven. So why is it that Baha'is need Jesus to be physically dead? If he is dead, then why didn't Muhammad say so? And, if you think that Jesus being "spiritually" alive is what Muhammad meant, then why didn't the Christian gospel writers say so? But, then again, what's so special about Jesus if, like everybody else, he died physically but is alive spiritually?

That is fair and I personally see a consistent application has been given.

Some simple truths, some a little harder to fathom and then some that require us to look deep into our soul.

I am thankful that we can make those choices.

Peace be with you.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Regarding your question relative to Surih 4, 156 of the 'Qur'an' in which Muhammad says that the Jews did not crucify Jesus, the Christ, but one like Him; what is meant by this passage is that although the Jews succeeded in destroying the physical body of Jesus, yet they were impotent to destroy the divine reality in Him."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, March 19, 1938)

 

[loverofhumanity]

Is there such a thing as a "consistent" application when dealing with religious Scripture? Christians say Jesus came back to life and ascended into heaven. That is the hope and belief that Christians live and die for. Baha'is say his body is dead and buried, and that he is spiritually alive and only in a spiritual sense rose from the dead. But that is not what the NT says.

Muslims say a body double was crucified in his place, and that Jesus then ascended into heaven. So why is it that Baha'is need Jesus to be physically dead? If he is dead, then why didn't Muhammad say so? And, if you think that Jesus being "spiritually" alive is what Muhammad meant, then why didn't the Christian gospel writers say so? But, then again, what's so special about Jesus if, like everybody else, he died physically but is alive spiritually?

We Baha’is believe in science too and that religion needs to be understood in the context of science and reason. Otherwise it becomes superstition. All these statements in both the Bible and Quran can very easily be fully understood reasonably and rationally without resorting to superstitious interpretations.

But the problem here is ego as Christians don’t want to accept that Jesus was just a man physically and died like any other person but want to weave superstitions around Him in order to claim that He is superior to every other Prophet and Messenger. This is likely more an interpretation promoted by the self interested clergy than the truth of the matter.

According to the Baha’i teachings Jesus was a man like Muhammad or Baha’u’llah and died just like them. But His Spirit was the Manifestation of God for His time. There are many other reasonable and rational explanations for the resurrection such as He appeared to the disciples in visions and dreams as Moses did on Mount Tabor.

The problem is that of ego and superiority which the clergy are want to claim and totally obsessed with as it maintains the membership. Because of these mythical interpretations by the clergy, Christians have been misled and been led to deny three subsequent Manifestations of God - Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah because they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing that Christ is superior to all of Them.

How far from the true spirit of Christianity this assertion is considering Jesus was renowned for His complete humility and freedom from ego.

 

[firedragon]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

1. Brother, this "way of Allah" or "Fee Sabeelillah" has been misunderstood as "fighting to spread islam" or some nonsense like that. It maybe intentionally interpreted this way to entice those people who call themselves Jihadists. It simply means "in Gods way" which means righteously. In Gods way. So its just a man who died in the righteous or gods way.

2. Check the verse before it and after, at least, there is nothing about some kind of Jihad as you perceive or some martyr. And the part about being 'not dead', is for you to know that death of a righteous man is not a death, it is a journey. So don't consider it a death.
See 2:154, 8:24, 36:26-27, 16:32, 22:58, 44:56,

 

[Ellen Brown]

1. Brother, this "way of Allah" or "Fee Sabeelillah" has been misunderstood as "fighting to spread islam" or some nonsense like that. It maybe intentionally interpreted this way to entice those people who call themselves Jihadists. It simply means "in Gods way" which means righteously. In Gods way. So its just a man who died in the righteous or gods way.

2. Check the verse before it and after, at least, there is nothing about some kind of Jihad as you perceive or some martyr. And the part about being 'not dead', is for you to know that death of a righteous man is not a death, it is a journey. So don't consider it a death.
See 2:154, 8:24, 36:26-27, 16:32, 22:58, 44:56,

As Salaam Alaikum: I was never taught that Jihad was anything but the inner search. To me, those who say that Jihad is the making of war are not Muslims, and I stay away from them.

 

[Firemorphic]

As Salaam Alaikum: I was never taught that Jihad was anything but the inner search. To me, those who say that Jihad is the making of war are not Muslims, and I stay away from them.

True, Jihad is not, nor should it ever be conflated with Qital.

 

[SugarOcean]

This article might be of interest.


The Muslim Jesus: Dead or alive?

Gabriel Said Reynolds

Bulletin of SOAS, 72, 2 (2009), 237–258

Abstract

According to most classical Muslim commentators the Quran teaches that Jesus did not die. On the day of the crucifixion another person – whether his disciple or his betrayer – was miraculously transformed and assumed the appearance of Jesus. He was taken away, crucified, and killed, while Jesus was assumed body and soul into heaven. Most critical scholars accept that this is indeed the Quran’s teaching, even if the Quran states explicitly only that the Jews did not kill Jesus. In the present paper I con- tend that the Quran rather accepts that Jesus died, and indeed alludes to his role as a witness against his murderers in the apocalypse. The paper begins with an analysis of the Quran’s references to the death of Jesus, continues with a description of classical Muslim exegesis of those references, and concludes with a presentation of the Quran’s conversation with Jewish and Christian tradition on the matter of Jesus’ death.



https://www3.nd.edu/~reynolds/index_files/jesus dead or alive.pdf

If that narrative concerning the crucifixion were true it would mean that Jesus did not die on the cross taking the sins of the world upon himself there so as to be savior of the world.
Perhaps, in retrospect of that hypothesis, that was the intention. To deny the Savior complex concerning the way of holiness that Jesus taught.
There is no salvation construct in Islam.There is in Christianity. If Islam deemed by the most classical Muslim commentators concerning the Qur'an arrive at an agreement that Jesus didn't himself die as thought, it invalidates the Salvation principle of Christianity.
That principle makes the faith unique among what are traditionally held as the three Abrahamic traditions. And as such such an invalidation of the Salvation principle would then insure Christianity is not unique in relative comparison to Islam's ideology.

 

[Firemorphic]

If that narrative concerning the crucifixion were true it would mean that Jesus did not die on the cross taking the sins of the world upon himself there so as to be savior of the world.

Interesting view, it's a lot like a more heavily dogmatized version of Vaishnavism except less interesting.

There is no salvation construct in Islam.There is in Christianity.

As much as you want to be the special one, there is only God. No need for the sins of the world to be projected onto a scapegoat, Islam puts everything back onto the accountability of the individual and their salvation through not only faith but growth in knowledge and experience of God. Not idlely adhering to an ideology like Christianity.

If Islam deemed by the most classical Muslim commentators concerning the Qur'an arrive at an agreement that Jesus didn't himself die as thought, it invalidates the Salvation principle of Christianity.

This is a problem with Christianity, as it places everything on a single person's death and onto expectations which have never been fulfilled. It produces the illusion of being "saved" without providing any methods or disciplines for concurring the self, resulting in the belief of being saved but lack of any actual spiritual growth. I speak particularly of institutionalized Christianity and not the teachings of the historical Jesus, which should never be conflated.

 

[Ellen Brown]

True, Jihad is not, nor should it ever be conflated with Qital.

In my opinion, War can never be holy, ever. It is a sin against one's own soul.

 

[firedragon]

As Salaam Alaikum: I was never taught that Jihad was anything but the inner search. To me, those who say that Jihad is the making of war are not Muslims, and I stay away from them.

If you read the Quran, Jihad is a simple word that means "try" or "work towards".

 

[Limo]

This hypothesis that if someone says they killed physically and it is denied then it is denying a physical killing is testable against other verses of the Quran.

For example consider;
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." 1

This verse is clearly revealed to those Muslims who said of the martyrs "They are dead". Applying your hypothesis here, it has been said they are dead (of course not metaphorically) and then the Quran denies this (they are living) this means (according to a consistent application of your hypothesis) they are literally alive. But we know they are literally (ie physically) not alive. Hence your hypothesis is clearly and thoroughly debunked.

Kind regards,
Dan

(1 The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

The verse of Martyrs is not metaphorically, it's real life. Let me explain.
Anyone dies, his sole is kept in grave till Alqyama day, accounting day, last day
Except for martyrs. Their sole is in a bird on Aljanna one he died.
So, they're alive but not in Donya.
So, it's not metaphoric.

Verse of Almasseh, is also not a metaphoric but real.
Allah told that he wasn't even crucifixed, and consequently didn't die. Allah has pulled him up to sky fully with full body and sole. He's alive till date and will come down again.

This is the Islamic belief in simple words.
Allah didn't tell in Quran or Hadeeth about betryment/treason by Judas or any body else.