Hey Adrian, as usual a couple of questions for you. So they did not kill the true "him" the Spirit? Nor did they crucify that true Spirit. But, they did kill and crucify the flesh and blood body of Jesus? So how does the "made to resemble him" part fit into your metaphor?
The physical body of Jesus (that was crucified) would have resembled Jesus would it not? Yet the essence of Jeus was not His body but His Spirit. His Spirit ascended (resurrected) to heaven figuratively speaking.
So Islam takes a metaphorical verse from the Quran and takes it literally. But both Christians and Baha's take the verses that talk about the crucifixion literally? I mean all the verses? Matthew 27:52 has tombs being opened and the dead people came out and walked around Jerusalem? Mark 15:33 and Luke 23:44 has it get dark for three hours. Then, of course, all the gospels tells the story of Jesus coming to life again.
So some is literal and some is metaphor all mixed together? Muslims have it wrong? Christians have it wrong? And only Baha'is know when something is literal and when something is symbolic?
It would be correct to say that Muslims, Christians and Baha'is each have differing narratives regarding the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. However within each of these three faiths there is a variety of opinion. If we are to look at scholars of history, most would agree with the crucifixion of Christ but not the literal resurrection. This is the Baha'i position. There are of course atheists who deny Jesus existed at all. There are no atheist historians who support the literal resurrection and not the crucifixion for obvious reasons. The crucifixion of Christ is seen as being plausible history as Roman's were known for crucifying criminals. The resurrection has no support or evidence other than the account in the Gospels.