Harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an

[Bowman]

Hi Kelp:

I am also trying to reason with Muslims.

Regarding Jesus’ crucifixion, the Qur’an does not state that Jesus was not crucified, only that He was not crucified by the Jews. This is consistent with the Bible, the historical record, and the rest of the Qur’an.

Regards.

Hi brother,

Your book contains numerous flaws which could have been easily avoided had you debated the material prior to publishing a book.

That Jesus was crucified until death upon the cross by Jews is indeed recorded in the Holy Bible and later was copied into the Koranic opus.

[RBerman]

Hi brother,

Your book contains numerous flaws which could have been easily avoided had you debated the material prior to publishing a book.

That Jesus was crucified until death upon the cross by Jews is indeed recorded in the Holy Bible and later was copied into the Koranic opus.

He hasn't visited this site in over a year.

[Bowman]

He hasn't visited this site in over a year.

Perhaps he will come back now that this thread has been re-activated.

[BrotherSka]

Hi Bowman and Berman:

I have not visited because there were no posts for me to respond to.

Bowma, you wrote:

"Hi brother, Your book contains numerous flaws which could have been easily avoided had you debated the material prior to publishing a book."

Please be advised that I had debated and discussed the material with Christians and Muslims for 7 years prior to publishing it. I have also provided sufficient evidence i the book to test the assumptions that others used when interpreting quranic verses. Please specifically explain these numerouf flaws. What evidence are you disputing?

Regards.

[Bowman]

Hi Bowman and Berman:

I have not visited because there were no posts for me to respond to.

Bowma, you wrote:
Please be advised that I had debated and discussed the material with Christians and Muslims for 7 years prior to publishing it. I have also provided sufficient evidence i the book to test the assumptions that others used when interpreting quranic verses. Please specifically explain these numerouf flaws. What evidence are you disputing?

Regards.

Hi Walter,

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I would like to start by having you defend your use of the following rendering from your book, as thus…

That they said, “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God”; 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 knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for a surety they killed him not: (4:157) page 26.

In particular, what Arabic word(s) are you using to render Jesus’ crucifixion event in the negative?

Thanks…

[BrotherSka]

Hi Bowman:

I addressed this in post 106 on page 8. I shall repeat the relevant section below for your convenience. However, it is important to note that the specific offence and issue being addressed is the Jews boasting about killing Jesus. Let us repeat the contentious verses:

That they said, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God"; 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 knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:—Nay, God raised him up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise; (4:157–158)

Let us analyze the verses to see whether a common sense interpretation can be made that satisfies the criteria of:
• not damaging the integrity of the verse;
• harmony with the verse’s context;
• harmony with the rest of the Qur’an;
• harmony with the Gospels; and
• harmony with recorded history.

That they said, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God";

The followers of Moses are accused of boasting about killing Jesus.

but they killed him not, nor crucified him

For this verse to be in harmony with the Gospels, recorded history, the contextual verses, and the rest of the Qur’an, and to maintain the integrity of the verse which states that “they killed him not”, we would need to conclude that it was not the followers of Moses who crucified Jesus, but the Romans.

but so it was made to appear to them

The “it” in the above verse can either be the boast, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God", or the response, “but they killed him not, nor crucified him.” Regardless of which option is chosen, they both support the interpretation that since the Jews delivered Jesus to the Romans, then it would appear to them as if they had killed Jesus.

and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not: (4:157)

These statements also support the interpretation that Jesus was crucified by the Romans and not by the Jews. However, to avoid damaging the integrity of this verse, we must assume that the knowledge of Jesus’ crucifixion was common knowledge in the region, which is verifiable.

Nay, God raised him up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise; (4:158)

This is compatible with the Gospel record that Jesus died and was raised from the dead. It should be noted that the verse 4:157 does not state that Jesus was not crucified. It states that Jesus was not crucified by the Jews. This can imply that Jesus was crucified, but by others.

Ibn Ishaq, who wrote a biography of Mohammed, recorded Mohammed’s words about Jesus’ death and resurrection.

Then He tells them – refuting what they assert of the Jews in regard to his crucifixion – how He took him up and purified him from them and says: ‘When God said, O Jesus I am about to cause thee to die and to exalt thee to Myself and to purify thee from those who disbelieve’ when they purposed as they did, ‘and am setting those who follow thee above those who disbelieve until the day of resurrection.’ (Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, translated by A Guillaume (Oxford University Press, 1955), p.276.)

According to the Biblical account, the Jews’ assertion is that Jesus was crucified, but was not resurrected.

Now while they were going, behold, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all the things that had happened. When they had assembled with the elders and consulted together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, saying, “Tell them, ‘His disciples came at night and stole Him away while we slept.’ And if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will appease him and make you secure.” So they took the money and did as they were instructed; and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day. (Matthew 28:11–15)

When the Qur’an disagrees with a popular Christian traditional belief, then that particular issue is normally mentioned repeatedly throughout the Qur’an. Denying the crucifixion would certainly qualify as a major disagreement. However, no other verse in the Qur’an states or implies that Jesus was not crucified; rather, there are references to Jesus’ death and resurrection in the Qur’an.

He said: "I am indeed a servant of God: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet; And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live; hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable; So 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"! Such Jesus the son of Mary: a statement of truth, about which they dispute. (19:30–34)

Therefore, an honest examination of the Qur'an reveals harmony with the principal teachings of the Bible without compromising any teaching or damaging the integrity of any verse in either book. The entire scientific comparison is provided in 'Brothers Kept Apart'.

Regards.
Walter

[harlan]

That they said, “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God”; 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 knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for a surety they killed him not: (4:157) page 26.

In the book of John, Jesus said that He came from Heaven. The Jews replied that they knew that He came from Nazareth. Obviously Jesus was not talking about His physical body, but rather His true reality. The physical body could be killed, but not the Christ which came from heaven. By killing the body of Jesus, it appeared that they had killed Him. But if the real Christ came down from heaven, then the Romans and Jews would have been powerless to harm Him. Most Muslims do not understand this in the same way that most Christians are not familiar with the deeper meanings of the scripture.

Harlan

[Bowman]

Hi Walter,

It appears that you are doing the very same thing that author Nick is doing in an adjacent thread. When asked specifically about the original languages in the premise verses for your argument, you avoid the question altogether and simply post the same canned answers as found in your book, as a reply.

Like brother Nick, it seems that you too are unwilling to wander outside of the comfort zone of your book, as if you have too much riding on what you have placed into print. (How about a second edition?)

You don’t address any original languages in your book, nor did you do so in this reply.

However, let’s review what you were able to repost from your book…

Hi Bowman:

I addressed this in post 106 on page 8. I shall repeat the relevant section below for your convenience. However, it is important to note that the specific offence and issue being addressed is the Jews boasting about killing Jesus. Let us repeat the contentious verses:

That they said, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God"; 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 knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:—Nay, God raised him up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise; (4:157–158)

‘Boasting’ brother?

Where does the Arabic ever make mention of ‘boasting’?

This ayah is making a statement as fact. There is no emotion involved. It is a direct quote of what the Jews said.

Let us analyze the verses to see whether a common sense interpretation can be made that satisfies the criteria of:
• not damaging the integrity of the verse;
• harmony with the verse’s context;
• harmony with the rest of the Qur’an;
• harmony with the Gospels; and
• harmony with recorded history.

That they said, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God";

The followers of Moses are accused of boasting about killing Jesus.

Again….there is no ‘boasting’ or accusation in this portion of the ayah. It is a direct quote of what the Jews said…of which, is a positive affirmation and acknowledgement that they killed Jesus.

but they killed him not, nor crucified him

For this verse to be in harmony with the Gospels, recorded history, the contextual verses, and the rest of the Qur’an, and to maintain the integrity of the verse which states that “they killed him not”, we would need to conclude that it was not the followers of Moses who crucified Jesus, but the Romans.

No.

This gets back to our original question….what is the Arabic word(s) you are using as a negative in this ayah?

Your repeated avoidance of this direct question tells us that you are not the least bit familiar with the Arabic upon which you are basing the assertions in your book.

You are just going under the assumption that it is negative without even so much as considering the Arabic source words.

This is a fatal flaw in your argument and one that sets in motion the wrong path which you have followed.

The question has never been who killed Jesus…i.e. the Romans or the Jews.

The NT section, from which this ayah was paraphrased, clearly informs the reader that the Jews are to blame for the murder of Jesus.

but so it was made to appear to them

The “it” in the above verse can either be the boast, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God", or the response, “but they killed him not, nor crucified him.” Regardless of which option is chosen, they both support the interpretation that since the Jews delivered Jesus to the Romans, then it would appear to them as if they had killed Jesus.

Please show us the phrase… “but so it was made to appear to them”…

وقولهم إنا قتلنا المسيح عيسى ابن مريم رسول

الله وما قتلوه وما صلبوه ولكن شبه لهم وإن

الذين اختلفوا فيه لفي شك منه ما لهم به من علم

إلا اتباع الظن وما قتلوه يقينا

and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not: (4:157)

These statements also support the interpretation that Jesus was crucified by the Romans and not by the Jews. However, to avoid damaging the integrity of this verse, we must assume that the knowledge of Jesus’ crucifixion was common knowledge in the region, which is verifiable.

Where is the term ‘Romans’ even mentioned in this verse, Walter?

Nay, God raised him up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise; (4:158)

This is compatible with the Gospel record that Jesus died and was raised from the dead. It should be noted that the verse 4:157 does not state that Jesus was not crucified. It states that Jesus was not crucified by the Jews. This can imply that Jesus was crucified, but by others.

No.

The Jews هادواare mentioned before and after 4.157, Walter.

Contextually, and grammatically, the account is regarding the Jews’ actions…specifically, the Jews actions against Jesus Christ.

[Bowman]

In the book of John, Jesus said that He came from Heaven. The Jews replied that they knew that He came from Nazareth. Obviously Jesus was not talking about His physical body, but rather His true reality. The physical body could be killed, but not the Christ which came from heaven. By killing the body of Jesus, it appeared that they had killed Him. But if the real Christ came down from heaven, then the Romans and Jews would have been powerless to harm Him. Most Muslims do not understand this in the same way that most Christians are not familiar with the deeper meanings of the scripture.

Harlan

Hi Harlan,

That's why the most correct rendering of this ayah should be as thus...

وقولهم إنا قتلنا المسيح عيسى ابن مريم رسول

الله وما قتلوه وما صلبوه ولكن شبه لهم وإن

الذين اختلفوا فيه لفي شك منه ما لهم به من علم

إلا اتباع الظن وما قتلوه يقينا

Waqawlihim inna qatalna almaseeha AAeesa ibna maryama rasoola Allahi wama qataloohu wama salaboohu walakin shubbiha lahum wa-inna allatheena ikhtalafoo feehi lafee shakkin minhu ma lahum bihi min AAilmin illa ittibaAAa alththanni wama qataloohu yaqeenan

4.157 And their saying: "Truly we killed The Messiah, Jesus, Mary's son, “allah's” messenger”, and that they killed him, and that they crucified him, and certainly they alike, and truly whom they differed in Him, certainly they (are) not in doubt from Him, on account of Him, from knowledge, except to follow the belief, and that they surely killed him.

[smaneck]

Hi brother,

Your book contains numerous flaws which could have been easily avoided had you debated the material prior to publishing a book.

That Jesus was crucified until death upon the cross by Jews is indeed recorded in the Holy Bible and later was copied into the Koranic opus.

The Qur'an very explicitly denies that the Jews crucified Christ, and the Bible records that the Romans crucified Him, though it tends to lay the blame on the Jews.

[smaneck]

In particular, what Arabic word(s) are you using to render Jesus’ crucifixion event in the negative?

Thanks…

The word which puts this in the negative is "ma" mim alif.

[smaneck]

Hi Harlan,

That's why the most correct rendering of this ayah should be as thus...

Nonsense. Harlan is right in his interpretation but your translation turns the meaning of this passage on its head. You conveniently ignored the mim alif in this passage.

[Bowman]

The Qur'an very explicitly denies that the Jews crucified Christ,

No, it does not.

The Jews are mentioned in this sura, both before, and after the ayah in question.

Contextually, the Jews are the ones who killed Jesus, same as told in the Holy Bible.

and the Bible records that the Romans crucified Him, though it tends to lay the blame on the Jews.

No, it does not.

You don't know your NT material very well, sister.

[Bowman]

The word which puts this in the negative is "ma" mim alif.

No, it does not.

You previously admitted to not knowing any Arabic at all.

Let brother Walter reply, as this is a question directed towards him.

[smaneck]

No, it does not.

The Jews are mentioned in this sura, both before, and after the ayah in question.

I didn't say the Jews weren't mentioned. I said the Qur'an explicitly denies they crucified Jesus. You have to mention them to make that assertion.