Many fine scholars are currently publishing books and articles about Qur'anic Text and Commentary. This Fall and Winter I would like to describe some of the articles I am reading, and to focus particular issues for discussion. I invite you to interact with these articles as well, and to freely post your thoughts below each blog. If you wish to subscribe to these weblogs and access all archived weblobs, select the following RSS feed: http://www.quranandinjil.org/blog/feed
How can so many Christians be wrong?
Submitted by gnickel on Mon, 2010-05-17 14:46
Qur'anic Commentary on the death of Jesus has generally asserted that Jesus did not die. This judgment is usually related to an understanding of the meaning of Q 4.156-159, especially verse 157. In England in September, I met scholars who have published interesting articles on this subject. This Fall I would like to describe several of these articles, focus one or two of the key issues for discussion, and invite your comments.
In April 2008, Martin Whittingham published an article on the role of "tawatur" in Muslim interpretation of Q 4.157 in the journal Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. Martin defines "tawatur" as "recurrent transmission of reports," and explains that in Muslim scholarship this is the highest degree of trustworthiness which can be given to a report of a particular event. The concept of "tawatur" actually developed in Muslim writing on the principles of jurisprudence, but Martin brings it into the sphere of the study of Muslim-Christian interaction.
Most Muslim scholars have understood that when a large group of reporters transmits information about the same event, it should be considered seriously for tawatur status. What then of Christian reports about the crucifixion of Jesus? Martin investigates the views of two famous Muslim scholars, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.
Briefly, al-Ghazali decided that the Christian report that Jesus died was an error of sense perception, because Q 4.157 states "it was made to seem so to them" [a notoriously difficult Arabic expression to comprehend]. Al-Ghazali supported the popular Muslim theory that another person was made to look like Jesus and was crucified instead. Al-Razi, however, wrote that this theory leads to 'sophistry' and would undermine the entire concept of tawatur. He concluded, rather, that the original report of the Christians came from a small number of people, and it is possible that these few people agreed on a lie.
Martin cleverly titled his article, "How Could So Many Christians Be Wrong?" Does this medieval material hold any potential for authentic Christian-Muslim engagement today? Martin offers a wide-ranging, perceptive and interesting analysis, from which I will pull just a couple of questions.
First, can the case be made that the Gospel reports about the death of Jesus fulfill the requirements of "tawatur"? Secondly, is there any point in appealing to the Gospel reports of the death of Jesus if Muslims understand the Qur'an to deny Jesus' death?
Gordon, I recently listened
Gordon,
I recently listened to an evening presentation by a man named Carl Medearis. He spent twelve years doing ministry in Lebanon and has a website where he details information on his ministry philosophy and positions on several contentious issues within Muslim Christian relations. During the talk he seems to suggest that some popular understanding of the Sura's under question implies that Jesus did not die but that most of the early Islamic scholars were undecided on the issue due to the notorious difficulty in interpreting the Arabic.
What are your thoughts?
Jeff Thomas
As far as "How Could So Many
As far as "How Could So Many Christians Be Wrong" is concerned, the Qur'an states "..it was made to appear so".. If it was made to appear like that, then it is of course possible that those people (whatever the number be) simply thought Jesus (pbuh) died.
Luke 24:39-40 states:
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself : handle me and see; for A SPIRIT has no flesh and bones, as you see me have. .. . And he showed them his hands and his feet."
What is Jesus trying to prove by showing his hands and feet?... That he was not a spirit. If he died, then he would have been a resurrected spirit at that time. But he was not, and that leads to the question whether he actually died or not.
Friend, it seems as though
Friend, it seems as though your argument rests on the idea that there is no resurrection with a physical body. You seem to argue that because Jesus had a physical body after the crucifixion than it is logical to assume that He never died. I have difficulties with this.
Firstly, It ignores that fact that the long-standing Jewish belief in the resurrection understood the resurrection as a physical and bodily resurrection. Much of the early literature and Biblical evidence supports the idea that the Jews believed that there is no life without a physical body and so the resurrected person would have a physical body - albeit one with different qualities than the one possessed before death.
Secondly, I was under the impression that even Islamic doctrine supposed the reality of the physical in the resurrected body. Note the descriptions of Paradise, much of the language implies a physical afterlife. If so, than according to Islamic teaching the presence of a physical body is no proof against Jesus crucifixion.
Respectfully,
Hi there, I was wondering
Hi there, I was wondering whether you offered any advertising possibilities on your website? I have a friend who is looking to promote his new website.
I've just bought Todd
I've just bought Todd Lawson's book 'The Crucifixion and the Qur'an'. He mentions that certain Isma'ilis believed that Jesus was really crucified. Ja'far Ibn al-Yaman of the Isma'ili explicitly accepted Jesus' crucifixion.So did another Isma'ili, al-Sijistani.Lawson doesn't mention al-Ghazali's belief in a substitute; he implies Ghazali believed in Jesus' crucifixion and affirmed it in his al-Radd al-Jamil. But the latter is a Muslim work intended to convince Christians that Jesus is not God.So maybe Ghazali said different things to differnt audiences! It is possible to interpret the Qur'anic passage as either meaning it wasn't the Jews who ultimately killed Jesus as it was God's plan ultimately, or that the Jews could harm Jesus body but couldn't harm the inner man, or His Divinity within.There seems to be room for differenet interpretations of the Qur'anic passage 4.157.[I posted this reply as a new subject as well by mistake, as I'm new to the internet.Doh!]
Post new comment