The Quranic narrative about Jesus's crucifixion, what is said in the text??

[firedragon]

That most of the Jews rejected their King is another prophecy in the Tanakh which the Jews do not accept.
Then God brought the destruction of the Temple again and their exile again and they still do not understand why. Jesus is cursed in Judaism.
It would have been OK if things had gone on like that but Satan is out to confuse people as much as possible with misleading religions and brings others to muddy the waters even more. This has happened with many many religions claiming to be the real Christianity and have the return of Christ as their prophet and etc etc.
It is not just in the area of religion that the waters have been muddied. These days people even deny that Jesus existed etc etc.
This is the view I get from the inside anyway.

Why did jews never ever interpret any prophecy like you? Thats the question. Their scripture

 

[Brian2]

Why did jews never ever interpret any prophecy like you? Thats the question. Their scripture

It is not that there have not been interpretations similar to Christian interpretations in the Talmud etc. There have been similar interpretations.
The gospel stories say that the Jewish leadership at the time of Jesus was against Jesus not only to the point of killing Him but also to the point of spreading lies about the resurrection. Some Jews believed the apostle's story and others sided with the Jewish establishment and there was a bitter anti Christian sentiment especially when the gospel started to be spread to the Gentiles and the requirements for being a Christian did not include obeying the law.
Christianity slowly became more gentile in number and diverged further from Judaism and Jesus became anathema to the Jews and was seen as God coming from the gentiles into Judaism instead of the Jewish Messiah who was kicked out of Judaism even if the Christian interpretations of the Hebrew scriptures could be legitimately seen to be the right ones. But that legitimacy it seems is only seen when a Jew accepts Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.

 

[firedragon]

It is not that there have not been interpretations similar to Christian interpretations in the Talmud etc. There have been similar interpretations.

Do they point to Jesus, the son of Mary? Who and where?

 

[Brian2]

Do they point to Jesus, the son of Mary? Who and where?

There are definitely passages which point to Jesus, son of Mary but not have been interpreted by Jewish Rabbis as Messianic. (eg Gen 3:15, Isa 3:14, Micah 5:2 and many more that have been noted in the gospels also)
I cannot remember all the passages I have seen which have been interpreted as Messianic in Jewish writings even thought they are not now interpreted that way usually.
Isa 53 is one and the prophecy about the child in Isa 9:1-7.
Isa 53 is usually interpreted to be about Israel the nation (which it can be in a limited way) and the child in Isa 9:1-7 is usually interpreted to be about King Hezekiah of Judah, but again this can only be in a limited way when we read what the prophecy actually says. It mentions Galilee and seems to be related to the virgin/maiden passage of Isa 7:14 and the context includes up to Isa 12.
This site has information about the history of interpretation of Isa 53 by the Jews.
Isaiah 53 - The forbidden chapter - ONE FOR ISRAEL Ministry
And another couple of sites which no doubt say similar things.
Who's the Subject of Isaiah 53? You Decide!
The Rabbis' Dilemma: A Look at Isaiah 53
Here is a site about the Isa 9 prophecy in which you will find (in the first few paragraphs) some reference to previous interpretations and that the prophecy is Messianic.
The Messiah would be the Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father and Prince of Peace
Psalm 2 is also Messianic according to many even if it may have originally been about David and many Jews may prefer to see it as about David. It is another one where the literal contents of the Psalm mean that it could only apply to David in a limited way.
Is Psalm 2 considered messianic by the rabbis and Jewish sages?
This Psalm of course opens up all the places where Christians see David as a type of the Messiah and interpret many passages which are seemingly about David as about the Messiah, just as Isa 53 opens up other places where Israel is the type of the Messiah according to Christians and shows justification for this typology.

 

[firedragon]

There are definitely passages which point to Jesus, son of Mary but not have been interpreted by Jewish Rabbis as Messianic. (eg Gen 3:15, Isa 3:14, Micah 5:2 and many more that have been noted in the gospels also)
I cannot remember all the passages I have seen which have been interpreted as Messianic in Jewish writings even thought they are not now interpreted that way usually.
Isa 53 is one and the prophecy about the child in Isa 9:1-7.
Isa 53 is usually interpreted to be about Israel the nation (which it can be in a limited way) and the child in Isa 9:1-7 is usually interpreted to be about King Hezekiah of Judah, but again this can only be in a limited way when we read what the prophecy actually says. It mentions Galilee and seems to be related to the virgin/maiden passage of Isa 7:14 and the context includes up to Isa 12.
This site has information about the history of interpretation of Isa 53 by the Jews.
Isaiah 53 - The forbidden chapter - ONE FOR ISRAEL Ministry
And another couple of sites which no doubt say similar things.
Who's the Subject of Isaiah 53? You Decide!
The Rabbis' Dilemma: A Look at Isaiah 53
Here is a site about the Isa 9 prophecy in which you will find (in the first few paragraphs) some reference to previous interpretations and that the prophecy is Messianic.
The Messiah would be the Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father and Prince of Peace
Psalm 2 is also Messianic according to many even if it may have originally been about David and many Jews may prefer to see it as about David. It is another one where the literal contents of the Psalm mean that it could only apply to David in a limited way.
Is Psalm 2 considered messianic by the rabbis and Jewish sages?
This Psalm of course opens up all the places where Christians see David as a type of the Messiah and interpret many passages which are seemingly about David as about the Messiah, just as Isa 53 opens up other places where Israel is the type of the Messiah according to Christians and shows justification for this typology.

Your comment was "It is not that there have not been interpretations similar to Christian interpretations in the Talmud etc. T"

So which part of the Talmud speaks specifically of Jesus the son of Mary as prophecies in the Tanakh?

 

[Shakeel]

There is a hadith that says he asked one of his disciples to die in his place.

 

[firedragon]

There is a hadith that says he asked one of his disciples to die in his place.

Its more of an exegesis or a thafseer attempt. Its in Jami al bayaan fi thaweel al Quran by At tabari among others.

 

[Shakeel]

Its more of an exegesis or a thafseer attempt. Its in Jami al bayaan fi thaweel al Quran by At tabari among others.

It's a Sahih hadith.

 

[firedragon]

It's a Sahih hadith.

Brother. This is off topic. The thread is about the Quran and the bahai understanding that harmonises with Christianity but defy's the Quran.

Anyway, you should know that you are repeating "Sahih Hadith". There are nine different narrations of Sahih Hadith only for Serge being the substitute and two other completely different narrations of Sahih Hadith only for the random voluntary substitution. Do you understand. There are many, many ahadith on this matter.

Peace.

 

[Shakeel]

Brother. This is off topic. The thread is about the Quran and the bahai understanding that harmonises with Christianity but defy's the Quran.

Anyway, you should know that you are repeating "Sahih Hadith". There are nine different narrations of Sahih Hadith only for Serge being the substitute and two other completely different narrations of Sahih Hadith only for the random voluntary substitution. Do you understand. There are many, many ahadith on this matter.

Peace.

I understand you think you're better at interpreting the Qur'an than all those scholars who did it before you.

 

[rational experiences]

There is a verse in the Quran which clearly states that Jesus the Messiah was not crucified. It specifically goes like this.

Chapter 4. Verse 153 onwards or somewhere there about.

1. It is addressing the ahlul kithab or the people of the book.
2. It speaks of some breaking the covenant, and killing prophets and specifically "rejectors" are rebuked. Except the ones who did not transgress.
3. Refers to them saying a "great falsehood" about Mary.
4. Then in the verse 157 it says that some claimed they killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, Messenger of God.
5. And it says clearly that "they had not killed him, nor crucified him".
6. follows with the statement "it was only made to appear as if they had".

Note the last statement. Number 6 above. It was made to appear so. This "Appear" when written in English can be perceived as "visually appear". Well, it doesnt mean that. The English word Appear is appropriate because it does not mean a visual appearance. But some could easily take it a visual appearance as if God intentionally made it visually appear as if Jesus was crucified. But the funny thing is, very few seem to notice that it doesnt specify who made it appear so. And the word there is Shubbiha which means "something that seems like something" if you understand what that means. The word "Appear" is the easiest one word I suppose to replace that sentence.

Let's say someone cooks up a controversy. A story cooked up to put wool over peoples eyes. That could exactly be what this verse means. Thus it could very well be that people started telling this story that Jesus was crucified, and others believed it. So in a nutshell, people claimed they had killed Jesus, but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but was made to appear as if they had indeed killed him or/and crucified him.

This post is made purely from a linguistic point of view. Purely textual. Nothing with an Islamic, theological-belief's point of view. This thread is opened because this particular fact about "appearance" was discussed in another thread and I thought it is best to open a new one for this topic if anyone needs to say something or has any clarification. Linguistically.

Peace.

Healer medical genesis statement.

Health body of God O cell function.
Movement of spirit recreating cell life.
O G spiral of O splitting into D back to O.

The baby holy formation.

Talking about it after sex. So sex is not in the subject of sperm changing ovary. As subject of the discuss.

That would be a sacrifice attack yet God O the cell function survived as human babies had.

Yet life mutated babies not born would be proof of changes to life health. As wasn't the healer medical knowledge humans sciences highest wisdom?

 

[firedragon]

I understand you think you're better at interpreting the Qur'an than all those scholars who did it before you.

Which interpretation are you speaking of?

Can you show me that the majority of the Islamic scholars interpreted the Quran to mean "Jesus himself was crucified"?

Thanks.

 

[Shakeel]

Which interpretation are you speaking of?

Can you show me that the majority of the Islamic scholars interpreted the Quran to mean "Jesus himself was crucified"?

Thanks.

there's not enough time to waste it on your derailing and dodging. No straight answer can be received from you, as far as I know. Therefore discussion is pointless.

 

[firedragon]

there's not enough time to waste it on your derailing and dodging. No straight answer can be received from you, as far as I know.

Alright. So what is the question you asked which I didnt answer? Please state your question. Maybe I didnt answer you. I will try and give you a straight answer.

 

[Shakeel]

Alright. So what is the question you asked which I didnt answer? Please state your question. Maybe I didnt answer you. I will try and give you a straight answer.

I didn't ask a question. An answer doesn't have to be preceded by a question. Just pointing out for others the side of the story you're not telling them so maybe they won't be misguided and confused by you.

 

[firedragon]

I didn't ask a question. An answer doesn't have to be preceded by a question. Just pointing out for others the side of the story you're not telling them so maybe they won't be misguided and confused by you.

Okay. So you didnt ask a question, but you are accusing me of not answering. No problem.

So which side of the story are you speaking of? That there were ahadith that said Jesus was substituted by another in crucifixion? So please point out where this was denied. Please go ahead and show that.

Thanks.

 

[Shakeel]

That there were ahadith that said Jesus was substituted by another in crucifixion? So please point out where this was denied.

You said so in the OP.

 

[firedragon]

You said so in the OP.

Did I say there was no hadith or belief that Jesus was substituted in the OP?

Can you please point to that sentence?

 

[WonderingWorrier]

if anyone needs to say something or has any clarification. Linguistically.

I think it's like how some people hear Moses went into the desert.
But he did not. It was just made to appear that he did.

The words have different meaning. Spiritual meaning.


This is where I think Moses went:

Earth - Level 1 - Level 2 - Level 3
Egypt - Desert - Wilderness - Mount.

Four directions (Cross): Iron - Brass - Silver - Gold.


There is, in their stories, instruction for men endued with understanding. It is not a tale invented, but a confirmation of what went before it,- a detailed exposition of all things, and a guide and a mercy to any such as believe. Quran 12:111


But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians 2:14



But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 1 Corinthians 1:23

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 1 Corinthians 1:17

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 1 Corinthians 1:18



And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 1 Corinthians 2:4

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 1 Corinthians 2:13


And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Revelation 11:8



So I do agree with the verse of the Quran:

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. 4:157


As it is said:
Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. John 8:43

 

[firedragon]

I think it's like how some people hear Moses went into the desert.
But he did not. It was just made to appear that he did.

Which verse says that "It was just made to appear that he did"?