Thoughts on Incarnation

[Ahanu]

Let me just say:

1. The "Moslem" variant is on the face of it no issue but as you know, it is often used by white supremacists, neo-nazis and K.T. romanticisers to signal that one isn't well disposed to Muslims. This is common knowledge, if you didn't know it before then please understand the connotations now. I didn't even realise the connotations until it was told to me via mainstream press. Beats me why it is so , but it is so, l'm afraid.

Not 100% sure what "the 'Moslem' variant" refers to here.

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

Not 100% sure what "the 'Moslem' variant" refers to here.

Notice how almost everybody uses the noun "Muslim". A minority of people spell it "Moslem". This has actually come to have dark significance. I'm on the fence about it, l don't want to micromanage a person's writing style but yeah, it does have dark meanings at the moment with the rise of some far / alt-right groups.

Edit: I'm also aware that the Irish have this orthography as standard, and l have recently come to understand that Thomas is Irish so whatever, you know? I'm happy to leaave it at that.

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

@Thomas, please understand that the main division of Muslims - the Orthodox - do not have any doubts about Jesus.
Please disabuse yourself that we are in disarray over this!!! I mean this nicely. Please take this from a either myself or any other Sunni (the mainstream of my religion).
It would be remiss to avoid Muslim sources and instead to rely on Wikipedia on this subject. Always go direct to Muslim sources for Muslim dogma.
Always get straight what the Orthodox Muslim view is first, as that is by far the mainstream view.
Please NEVER make Wikipedia your first port of call when it comes to Islam. I can say from hard experience that time and again, it distorts and sends everything to hell. Go to a mainstream Islamic source first and foremost.


I will now take apart this long post of yours but l won't be able to continue beyond this due to time constraints but at least allow me the right to defend my views from this substantial onslaught of yours:

It seems that Moslem commentaries on the Incarnation have always been dogged by contradiction.
See the discussion at length here

No there is no contradiction in the mainstream view, the orthodox view. In fact the Qur'an states that those prior to Islam quite wildly disagreed:

Qur'an 4:157: "And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain."

However, some modern Muslim scholars believe that Jesus did indeed die, and references to his survival are angogical.

I'm not sure what you mean by anagogical (sp.) in this context but:
1. What modern scholars say Jesus died?
2. Why do they say he died?
3. What does it matter what they say?
4. What is the point in being a scholar of Islam if one contradicts what the Qur'an actually said?

You are really reaching Thomas. Reach and you will find.

Disagreement and confusion on the nature of Jesus' death is found within the Islamic canon itself, with the earliest Hadith quoting the companions of Muhammad saying that Jesus had died. Meanwhile, the majority of subsequent Hadith and Tafsir argue in favor of the opposite.
-- from wiki --

This is a false statement Thomas. There is no disagreement and confusion in the Islamic canon. The Islamic canon is the Qur'an. That is all. There are so-called canonical books of hadith too, but they are not actually the canon, the canon is the Book we believe we received from Allah.
The hadith compilations are a treasure store of wisdom, so long as they conform to the Qur'an, and secondarily it helps that they have a strong corroborated chain of narration ("isnaad") but personally l don't care much about that, so long as it tessalates with the Qur'an's deep thinking.

As for your view that the hadith first said that Jesus died but then later said the opposite: I'd love to see this. It's in contradiction to the Qur'an, so this will be most interesting to see.
If you have a contention about our religion, base it on truth. Please.

(Modern Moslem scholarship makes more sense to me....

Cherry Picking / False Authority logical fallacy. You are just picking out what suits your narrative, no matter how obscure and whack-a-doodle-doo baseless it is to us.

It seems the substitutionist theory originated with 2nd century Gnostics, and the Quran and Hadith have been clearly influenced by (heretical) Christian sources that prevailed in the Arab peninsula.

I'm not even sure what to call this logical fallacy.
Basically, you are joining two very distant dots and making a false pattern.
Your original premise: Islam is false.
Therefore your conclusions will support that Islam is false.
Circular logic perhaps? NO, there's more to it but l don't know the exact call for it.
So anyway, you are not approaching this with an open mind. You are approaching it with the bias that Islam is false and CHRIST HAS RISEN!
So therefore Islam must have copied this doctrine from that prior group which also had the doctrine. Islam even copied windows from the Manichaeans who, did you know, also had windows? And Mark the gnostic with his bowlhead haircut sitting there with high cheekbones yes maybe he was Persian but a very good Aryan and kind of Roman so it's all good and very wise he was and he wrote really nicely illustrated books with a candle burning next to him and the stars shining and then a bearded pre-islamic Arab, oh he was so scary he snatched the books of Mark the Gnostic and he was so swarthy at that, so he ran wit the books to his tent and now Muslims have the books and they copied from it DANG!!!! Wow you must be having fun in these orientalist wiki sleuthings Thomas !
Christian sources that prevailed in the Arab peninsula? There was no Christian Bible in Arabic until long after Islam came about, as far as l'm aware and Christianity certainly wasn't common in the area.

Please disabuse yourself of these remote possibilities and conquer the mainstream first.

Muslim commentators have been unable to convincingly disprove the crucifixion, the problem compounded by their substitutionist theories.

What is there to disprove? Our holy book says it didn't happen. Yours says it did. That's the crux of it.
However, our narrative is coherent in itself as l've shown in my previous long post to you on this thread. It has a flow to it.
I could go further and state flatly that your crucifixion narrative is logically absurd (= impossible). I'll save that for another time. But l can 100% prove it. I will not hand wave. I mean this: l will state my case in the minutest detail, and stand my ground whilst integrating your replies so long as they are intellectually honest. I will then overcome all of your objections and reaffirm my case, that your narrative is illogical, i.e. mathematically impossible i.e. a contradiction in terms. Feel free to challenge me to show this, l will absolutely show it. No anger, no hate from me. I'll be a gentleman.

Most Western scholars, Jews and Christians believe Jesus died, while orthodox Muslim theology teaches He ascended to Heaven without being put on the cross and God transformed another person, Simon of Cyrene, to appear exactly like Jesus who was crucified instead of Jesus.

Simon of Cyrene isn't mentioned in our scripture so please why bring him into it? Maybe some have conjectured about this or that person. But you haven't even gotten to grips without scripture nor our mainstream, and now you're pulling Simon of Cyrene out of some place?

Disagreement and discord can be traced to Ibn Ishaq (d. 761), reporting that Jesus was replaced by someone named Sergius, that His tomb is in Medina.

Let me be candid here. 80% of all Wiki controversies on early Islamic theology trace back to Ibn Ishaq. I've no idea why but l always turn off when he is namedropped.
I am telling you flatly: the mainstream view is in line with ... shock .... the Qur'an, our only scripture.
The Qur'an doesn't contradict itself on this matter.
So, there is no contradiction and discord.
Unless you firmly put yourself in the market for it, in which case sooner or later you'll find a discord provider and buy into it. But it's pointless because this is not a mainstream view. The mainstream view Thomas, remember to get through that first!!!

John of Damascus highlighted the Quran's assertion that the Jews did not crucify Jesus being very different from saying that Jesus was not crucified, explaining that it is the varied Quranic exegetes in Tafsir, and not the Quran itself, that denies the crucifixion, further stating that the message in the 4:157 verse simply affirms the historicity of the event.

What? The Qur'an states that Jesus wasn't crucified. Believe it or reject it but that is what we believe.
What on earth are you rabeting on about, seriously????
When l look at all the confusion on this page it's just you hoodwinking yourself, from obscure references or even spurious references, l don't know, all l know is this isn't what we, the main body, believe. We are not a barely-there majority either, we are by far the main body.

Subsequent scholars of the 10th century on affirm the historicity of the Crucifixion, reporting Jesus was crucified and not substituted.

Christian scholars?
Muslim scholars? Why would Muslim scholars say that? Who said that? Actual quotes? Why would they say that? Were they just quoting what others said in error? The Qur'an makes the view clear. He was not crucified according to our beliefs. If you believe he was, l won't contest that. It's your right. I'm just contending with you here because you're making false assertions about my beliefs.

More recently, Mahmoud M. Ayoub, a professor and scholar, provided a more symbolic interpretation for Surah 4 Verse 157:
The Quran, as we have already argued, does not deny the death of Christ. Rather, it challenges human beings who in their folly have deluded themselves into believing that they would vanquish the divine Word, Jesus Christ the Messenger of God. The death of Jesus is asserted several times and in various contexts. (3:55; 5:117; 19:33.)

What? The Qur'an denies the death of Christ.
Please don't lie about what is in the Qur'an.
Reject our beliefs if you want, l don't care. But please don't misrepresent us.

Here are the verses you cited, as you can see, they DO NOT ASSERT the death of Christ, at least not on the cross:

Sorry Thomas, but you lied by citing Qur'an 3:55 as referring to the death of Christ as if on the cross, when in fact it mentions his ascent alive to God / heaven:
003.055 (And remember) when Allah said: O Jesus! Lo! I am gathering thee and causing thee to ascend unto Me, and am cleansing thee of those who disbelieve and am setting those who follow thee above those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then unto Me ye will (all) return, and I shall judge between you as to that wherein ye used to differ.

Sorry Thomas, but you lied by citing Qur'an 5:117 as referring to the death of Christ as if on the cross, when in fact it doesn't even mention death of anybody:
005.116 And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah ? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden ?
005.117 I spake unto them only that which Thou commandedst me, (saying): Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. I was a witness of them while I dwelt among them, and when Thou tookest me Thou wast the Watcher over them. Thou art Witness over all things.

Sorry Thomas, but you lied by citing Qur'an 19:33 as referring to the death of Christ as if on the cross, when in fact we just believe that Christ will return to earth to fulfil his role as Messiah, and then marry and die a natural death:
019.029 Then she pointed to him. They said: How can we talk to one who is in the cradle, a young boy ?
019.030 He spake: Lo! I am the slave of Allah. He hath given me the Scripture and hath appointed me a Prophet,
019.031 And hath made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and hath enjoined upon me prayer and almsgiving so long as I remain alive,
019.032 And (hath made me) dutiful toward her who bore me, and hath not made me arrogant, unblest.
019.033 Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!


Sorry Thomas but ... are you on some kind of marathon?
OK l'll try to get through the rest of your post:

Early interpretations of verse 3:55 ("I will cause you to die and raise you to myself"), attributed to Ibn 'Abbas, used the literal "I will cause you to die" (mumayyitu-ka) rather than the metaphorical mutawaffi-ka "Jesus died". Wahb ibn Munabbih, an early Jewish convert, reportedly said "God caused Jesus, son of Mary, to die for three hours during the day, then took him up to himself." From Ibn Ishaq: "God caused Jesus to die for seven hours", while at another place reported that a person called Sergius was crucified in place of Jesus. Ibn-al-Athir forwarded the report that it was Judas, while also mentioning the possibility it was a man named Natlianus.

What? Seriously what on earth are you on about?

Here are some more translations of Qur'an 3:55 in case you didn't bother checking yourself and in case you're going to dismiss the translation l've just given above:

When Allah said: “O ‘Īsā , I am to take you in full and to raise you towards Myself, and to cleanse you of those who disbelieve, and to place those who follow you above those who disbelieve up to the Day of Doom. Then to Me is your return, whereupon I shall judge between you in that over which you have differed.
— Mufti Taqi Usmani

As Allah said, "O Isa, (Jesus) surely I am taking you up to Me, and I am raising you up to Me, and I am purifying you of the ones who have disbelieved. And I am making the ones who have closely followed you above the ones who have disbelieved until the Day of the Resurrection. Thereafter to Me will be your return; so I will judge between you as to whatever you used to differ in.
— Dr. Ghali

God said, ‘Jesus, I will take you back and raise you up to Me: I will purify you of the disbelievers. To the Day of Resurrection I will make those who follow you superior to those who disbelieved. Then you will all return to Me and I will judge between you regarding your differences.
— Abdul Haleem

(And remember) when Allah said: O Jesus! Lo! I am gathering thee and causing thee to ascend unto Me, and am cleansing thee of those who disbelieve and am setting those who follow thee above those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then unto Me ye will (all) return, and I shall judge between you as to that wherein ye used to differ.
— Pickthall

(Эй Муҳаммад алайҳис-салоту вас-салом), Аллоҳ айтган бу сўзларни эсланг: «Ё Ийсо, албатта Мен сени Ердан бус-бутун (яъни, ҳеч қандай зарар етказмасдан) олувчи ва Ўз ҳузуримга кўтаргувчиман. Ва кофирлар ёмонлигидан халос қилгувчиман ҳамда то Қиёмат Кунигача сенга эргашган зотларни кофирлардан юқори қўйгувчиман. Сўнгра Менга қайтажаксиз. Бас, ўзим сизлар талашиб-тортишган нарсалар ҳақида ораларингизда ҳакамлик қилурман.
— Alauddin Mansour

[Mention] when Allah said, "O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify [i.e., free] you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you [in submission to Allah alone] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ.
— Saheeh International

(And it was part of His scheme) when Allah said: 'O Jesus! I will recall you1 and raise you up to Me and will purify you (of the company) of those who disbelieve,2 and will set your followers above the unbelievers till the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me you shall return, and I will judge between you regarding what you differed.
— Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi

Sahih International: [Mention] when Allah said, "O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you [in submission to Allah alone] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ.

Yusuf Ali: Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.

Shakir: And when Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed.

Muhammad Sarwar: He told Jesus, "I will save you from your enemies, raise you to Myself, keep you clean from the association with the disbelievers, and give superiority to your followers over the unbelievers until the Day of Judgment. On that day you will all return to Me and I shall resolve your dispute.

Mohsin Khan: And (remember) when Allah said: "O 'Iesa (Jesus)! I will take you and raise you to Myself and clear you [of the forged statement that 'Iesa (Jesus) is Allah's son] of those who disbelieve, and I will make those who follow you (Monotheists, who worship none but Allah) superior to those who disbelieve [in the Oneness of Allah, or disbelieve in some of His Messengers, e.g. Muhammad SAW, 'Iesa (Jesus), Musa (Moses), etc., or in His Holy Books, e.g. the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), the Quran] till the Day of Resurrection. Then you will return to Me and I will judge between you in the matters in which you used to dispute."

Arberry: When God said, 'Jesus, I will take thee to Me and will raise thee to Me and I will purify thee of those who believe not. I will set thy followers above the unbelievers till the Resurrection Day. Then unto Me shall you return, and I will decide between you, as to what you were at variance on.



Are those enough translations of Qur'an 3:55 Thomas? Are you sure it says "I will cause you to die and raise you to myself"? Nor is there any variant reading of any verse in the Qur'an to the extent that you mention here. The variant readings just amount to vowel markings and nothing more. They are not a matter of controversy to us at all. I really don't know where you get the idea there are variant readings you've mentioned. I really think your sources have lied to you.

Don't attack a straw man. I really want you to critique our religion, our scripture, our beliefs. I love that type of productive debate. But l can't entertain you if it's just one guy sat in his cubicle spinning off fibs, his own or regurgitated from Wiki, as if that is my faith he's taking on oh-so valiantly! Please be more professional about this.

Al-Masudi (d. 956) reported the death of Christ under Tiberius.

LOL. Mas'udi collected legends and so on (l like his works from what little l've read). I'd be very surprised if he actually reported that as his own view. It was probably one of the historiographical curiosities he reported on. Also, it doesn't matter, we already know what the Qur'an states. That is our scripture. Look this verse up for example: Qur'an 4:157: "And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain."

Mahmoud Ayoub furthers modern Islamic scholars' interpreting the historical death of Jesus, the man, as man's inability to kill off God's Word and the Spirit of God, which the Quran testifies were embodied in Jesus Christ. Ayoub continues highlighting the denial of the killing of Jesus as God (my emphasis) denying men such power to vanquish and destroy the divine Word. The words, "they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him" speaks to the profound events of ephemeral human history, exposing mankind's heart and conscience towards God's will. The claim of humanity to have this power against God is illusory. "They did not slay him ...but it seemed so to them" speaks to the imaginations of mankind, not the denial of the actual event of Jesus dying physically on the cross. Islamic reformer Muhammad Rashid Rida agrees.
-- from wiki --

Cherries! Come get your cherries! Cheeerries for sale. Come get your cherries! Freshly picked, nice!

So it seems that:
The narratives of Jesus are derived from various Christian sources, orthodox, heterodox and heresiarch. The nativity (primarily Luke) with additional speculation about Mary and Joseph's 'backstory'. The infancy narratives are apocryphal and were regarded by the Fathers as post-era fictions.

The crucifixion – clouded by conflicting commentaries – can be seen as utilising Gnostic speculation to interpret a metaphorical reading of the Qur'an as literal. Read metaphorically, it does not contradict that orthodox Christian understanding – that Christ was crucified, died, rose again and ascended into heaven.

Modern Islamic scholarship makes the most sense to me.

There's no mention of some a 'Pilate conspiracy', which frankly sounds a bit like some 'Dan Brown' nonsense.

Want me to be frank, Thomas? Frankly, you're wasting your time making a straw man of our beliefs and knocking that straw man down. Please, stop cherry picking and outright fibbing.

Sure you just copy-pasted but the onus was on you to check before pasting.

Dude, l've tried to tell you what we believe and l hope you will integrate my feedback but somehow l doubt it will make any difference, l have a feeling you will still continue your negative assertions about my religion's tenets and the consensus views of its adherents. Please surprise me, write about us from our own sources!!!

 

[RJM]

Ok see you later, i may need another self imposed exile soon. I don't want to develop deity complex - which happens when talking about religion too long.

In the meanwhile if you want to follow my pointer and look into our eschatology you'll see what l mean about the person foretold to come, who actually will claim all these things, in sequence. So, nothing was arbitrary in our narrative. But i'm not asking you to believe it. I'm just explaining it that's all. Peace!

Thank you for explaining the Islamic view of Jesus. Christians respect the right of Muslims to believe what they do. They do not insult Islam or mock the Quran. They merely ask the same on these forums in return.

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

Thank you for explaining the Islamic view of Jesus. Christians respect the right of Muslims to believe what they do. They do not insult Islam or mock the Quran. They merely ask the same on these forums in return.

Right. Let me know if you feel l have done so. It is against my religion to mock other religions. Debate them sure, but not mock. So l will genuniely take a look at what l've written if you request it.

 

[RJM]

Right. Let me know if you feel l have done so. It is against my religion to mock other religions. Debate them sure, but not mock. So l will genuniely take a look at what l've written if you request it.

In fact it doesn't apply to you. It is good to discuss our beliefs.

Our scriptures differ on the subject of the crucifixion. In the end we both base our belief on the veracity of those books. We can agree to disagree. The problem would be continuously correcting someone from another faith about their beliefs, from the standpoint of my own.

It will be interesting to see how @Thomas reacts to your thorough response to him. It could be the beginning of an interesting debate, imo

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

By the way, l'll admit, 19:33 is about as close as you'll get to the Christian narrative of death on cross, then ascension. But it doesn't actually explicitly say that, and the rest of the Qur'an's statements on the matter don't say that so l'm happy just to say it means: born, die (as returned Messiah, after vanquishing the antichrist, and marrying), then resurrected for the ultimate time.

Qur'an
019.033 Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!

 

[Ahanu]

@Thomas
Muslim scholars? Why would Muslim scholars say that? Who said that? Actual quotes?

Enjoy . . .

 

[RJM]

Enjoy . . .

Thank you. Saved to watch later

 

[RJM]

@Ahanu
Thank you for sharing that video. The speaker intimately understands both Christianity and Islam. I thought it was 50 minutes well spent. The thoughts will stay with me permanently.

Would the Sunni 'majority' accept the views expressed?

 

[Thomas]

1. The "Moslem" variant is on the face of it no issue but as you know, it is often used by white supremacists, neo-nazis and K.T. romanticisers to signal that one isn't well disposed to Muslims.

I was unaware of this until @muhammad_isa intimated as such. Again, apologies for any offence, it was not intended.

2. I find Muhammad_Isa to be an extremely affable and tolerant individual. It is a loss to the forum if you estrange this one.

At times, yes, at times, no.

Be assured, he is missed by those, including myself, who have had dealings with him over a long period, nevertheless, on occasion he was unnecessarily rude and offensive.

3. Please can you put into a few lines what your contention with Muslims is about the crucifixion?

In short my belief coincides with the Biblical account. Initially this came up because @muhammad_isa suggested the crucifixion was something of a cover-up conspiracy organised by Pilate.

we as Sunni (traditional, i.e. orthodox) Muslims do not believe Jesus was crucified.

OK.

By the way: Get it out of your head that Muslims hate Christians...

Was never there.

 

[Thomas]

So after all is said and done l would say it's unfair for Thomas to expect the other Muslim poster to accept the dogma of the Crucifixion, especially considering its supernatural nature

Actually, I don't expect anyone to accept the dogma, but I would defend it when it's refuted, as @muhammed_isa was doing.

 

[Thomas]

From the Christian side, to corroborate:
1. Jesus's face had been transfigured before

But there is no suggestion that He was not recognisably Jesus – He did not appear as someone else.
There are post-resurrection appearances where Jesus is not recognised, and then is, but these too are not put down to Him having the appearance of someone other, rather it was the mind of the witness was veiled.

So, my synthesis showing mostly the points where Christianity and Islam concur:

Actually, on point one there is concurrence with orthodoxy, but not on any other. What version of Christianity are you referring to as concurring?

Now, @Thomas, you say this is a mega swindle, a mega deception. I really dont' see how.

As far as the Jewish people and the Roman audience was concerned, Jesus was crucified.

Our Prophet had to hide in a cave (in a story similar to that of Robert the Bruce), with spiders weaving webs at the mouth of the cave and so putting off pursuers. Our Prophet kept very quiet when they were searching that cave.

Yes, we have the same story in the Flight to Egypt.

No, the two are not the same at all, one of your logical fallacies, I'm afraid.

Nor does it address the central issue, which is if the substitution theory is true, then a Prophet of God ended his ministry with a deception and left the people believing in a) something not true and b) led them into error.

 

[Thomas]

The point being: you can accept that a face can be transfigured. Thomas can also appreciate a Tulpa. So why not baddie gets transfigured?

The assumption here is transfiguration can mean someone appearing as someone else.

In the event on the mountain, Jesus was recognisably Himself throughout, just lit with radiant light, so the argument doesn't follow.

 

[Thomas]

But still, it's a bit cruel to let Christianity as we know it today become the dominant faith of the world, surely that means God made a big mistake in the process of hoodwinking the baddies, he hoodwinked the world!

My point.

 

[Thomas]

Enjoy . . .

I did ... very much so!

A reminder to me that I was introduced to Isma'ili theology by Reza Shah-Kazemi when I was into the Traditionalists. I preferred him to the somewhat suprematist view of Seyyed Hossein Nasr, who became something of the spokesperson for the Traditionalists. Having just written this, it might be that I'm condemning Dr Nasr on the basis of his followers, and perhaps he is more nuanced than I supposed (A bit like Origen and the later 'Origenists') ...

... suffice to say I'be bookmarked Dr Andani's other youtube presentations.

And ... Yay! Just visited his website and downloaded "The Metaphysics of the Common Word: A Dialogue of Eckhartian and Isma‘ili Gnosis"

Thanks for the link!

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

1. What modern scholars say Jesus died?
2. Why do they say he died?
3. What does it matter what they say?
4. What is the point in being a scholar of Islam if one contradicts what the Qur'an actually said?

Enjoy . . .

Hello can l ask why you would think l would enjoy that nearly 50-minute video?
Here are reasons l would not enjoy it:
1. It is link hurling, something l am averse to, it downgrades the quality of a debate if it is made the core of a point being made, rather than a take-or-leave curio.
2. That long? Aint nobody got time for that.
3. Did you understand it? If so, put it in your own words.
4. When l asked "What modern scholars say Jesus died" what l meant was: I would like the entire sequence of questions to be run, as a test of worthiness of a statement, the entire sequence being:
What modern scholars say Jesus died?
Why do they say he died?
What does it matter what they say?
What is the point in being a scholar of Islam if one contradicts what the Qur'an actually said?

^^^^ All of those questions ^^^
Please, you're assuming l'm unaware of Shi'i and ghulat (extreme shi'i) sect Christology. I'm well aware of it.
These groups are extreme groups. The Assassins that supposedly murdered Christian pilgrims and so provoked the Crusades were Nizari Isma'ilis, a branch of the same group you are glibly presenting to me in , it seems , support of your own cause? Please note the irony in citing the Isma'ilis.
And anyway, l'm saying over and again: please conquer the mainstream Islamic viewpoints first

But there is no suggestion that He was not recognisably Jesus – He did not appear as someone else.

I thought l made it clear but l'll explain: The concept is there. That a face can look different. Be transformed. Trans vs. trans.
As l like to say: please try to envisage how your opponent might be right, that will keep a discussion on point, relevant, without meandering unnecessarily.

Actually, on point one there is concurrence with orthodoxy, but not on any other. What version of Christianity are you referring to as concurring?

I am talking about the text not the beliefs of this or that group.
I am saying: we have these broad concepts conserved, and therefore the Muslim narrative uses no special mechanisms unheard of before.

As far as the Jewish people and the Roman audience was concerned, Jesus was crucified.

You know already that we have an explanation for this

No, the two are not the same at all, one of your logical fallacies, I'm afraid.

I take logical fallacies very seriously. Which fallacy did l invoke?

Nor does it address the central issue, which is if the substitution theory is true, then a Prophet of God ended his ministry with a deception and left the people believing in a) something not true and b) led them into error.

SufiPhilosophy said: ↑
But still, it's a bit cruel to let Christianity as we know it today become the dominant faith of the world, surely that means God made a big mistake in the process of hoodwinking the baddies, he hoodwinked the world!

My point.

OK so l have a good concept of your take on this then l think. And l answered that. I showed how:
1. The teaching of Christ was not arbitrarily lost. It maybe survived with the People of the Cave and the Inscription in the Qur'an, said to be the Seven Sleepers, whom according to Wiki, disappeared circa 250 CE under persection, and according to the Qur'an, slept in a cave for [EDIT: UNKNOWN, l foolishly quoted Wikipedia as saying 309, but that is not definite] years, and so they would reappear circa 559 CE, and they then went to the nearest town and presumably revived Nazarene Christianity, and maybe got assassinated with some followers perhaps outliving them a few years, to the extent that they died out when or lived only a while after the birth of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). It is also said that a Christian Monk recognised the Prophet Muhammad as somebody special when he was on a merchant voyage through Syria, and the Monk blessed him. It is also said, albeit from an Islamic source, that the Christians of the Levant were awaiting the other person foretold by Jesus, as another prophet, at the time of Muhammad.
2. A lie is an active thing. There was no active lie. It was evading the baddies. Personally l would be satisfied if Jesus said "look behind you" and the baddies looked and saw nothing and then Jesus punched them in the nuts. I really don't care I think you're making this a sticking point because, shrugs.
3. I also mentioned how there was still relevance in the concept of a man that becomes a prophet then the messiah then a god. It is in our prophecies. I strongly suggest you Bing "Ibn Kathir Signs before the Day of Judgement" you'll read some very interesting things and you'll see the great emphasis on this person who is foretold to come just before Jesus returns, a very bad person who l don't even like to mention the name of , l consider it that bad (cough ... antichrist). He will claim to be a new prophet, then messiah, then god. Moreover, he will have immense powers. Every prophet that ever lived warned about him, including the >100,000 other prophets sent to all mankind.

My point is, the Christian passion play isn't arbitrarily sent to the cutting bin by the Islamic version. It continues in our prophecies and eventually rears its head in the greatest catastrophe ever. And moreoever, the true Christianity isn't arbitrarily truncated, it continues with the 7 Sleepers and blossoms into something universal, with the final Prophet Muhammad. Sorry to state my dogmas on this thread but l'm just explaining how nothing is arbitrary in our version of events.

And yep, as l said: a lie is something actively told. Nobody lied in our version but as l also said, l wish Jesus did lie and punch the baddies in the nuts as a result, l really don't care, l think you're making too big a deal of this, in order to delineate yourselves from us. Feels like reaching, bro. No offence.


By the way, here's what the Qur'an says about the People of the Cave and the Inscription, thought to be the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus:

018.007 Lo! We have placed all that is on the earth as an ornament thereof that We may try them: which of them is best in conduct.
018.008 And lo! We shall make all that is thereon a barren mound.
018.009 Or deemest thou that the People of the Cave and the Inscription are a wonder among Our portents ?
018.010 When the young men fled for refuge to the Cave and said: Our Lord! Give us mercy from Thy presence, and shape for us right conduct in our plight.
018.011 Then We sealed up their hearing in the Cave for a number of years.
018.012 And afterward We raised them up that We might know which of the two parties would best calculate the time that they had tarried.
018.013 We narrate unto thee their story with truth. Lo! they were young men who believed in their Lord, and We increased them in guidance.
018.014 And We made firm their hearts when they stood forth and said: Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth. We cry unto no God beside Him, for then should we utter an enormity.
018.015 These, our people, have chosen (other) gods beside Him though they bring no clear warrant (vouchsafed) to them. And who doth greater wrong than he who inventeth a lie concerning Allah ?
018.016 And when ye withdraw from them and that which they worship except Allah, then seek refuge in the Cave; your Lord will spread for you of His mercy and will prepare for you a pillow in your plight.
018.017 And thou mightest have seen the sun when it rose move away from their cave to the right, and when it set go past them on the left, and they were in the cleft thereof. That was (one) of the portents of Allah. He whom Allah guideth, he indeed is led aright, and he whom He sendeth astray, for him thou wilt not find a guiding friend.
018.018 And thou wouldst have deemed them waking though they were asleep, and We caused them to turn over to the right and the left, and their dog stretching out his paws on the threshold. If thou hadst observed them closely thou hadst assuredly turned away from them in flight, and hadst been filled with awe of them.
018.019 And in like manner We awakened them that they might question one another. A speaker from among them said: How long have ye tarried ? They said: We have tarried a day or some part of a day, (Others) said: Your Lord best knoweth what ye have tarried. Now send one of you with this your silver coin unto the city, and let him see what food is purest there and bring you a supply thereof. Let him be courteous and let no man know of you.
018.020 For they, if they should come to know of you, will stone you or turn you back to their religion; then ye will never prosper.
018.021 And in like manner We disclosed them (to the people of the city) that they might know that the promise of Allah is true, and that, as for the Hour, there is no doubt concerning it. When (the people of the city) disputed of their case among themselves, they said: Build over them a building; their Lord knoweth best concerning them. Those who won their point said: We verily shall build a place of worship over them.
018.022 (Some) will say: They were three, their dog the fourth, and (some) say: Five, their dog the sixth, guessing at random; and (some) say: Seven, and their dog the eighth. Say (O Muhammad): My Lord is Best Aware of their number. None knoweth them save a few. So contend not concerning them except with an outward contending, and ask not any of them to pronounce concerning them.
018.023 And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow,
018.024 Except if Allah will. And remember thy Lord when thou forgettest, and say: It may be that my Lord guideth me unto a nearer way of truth than this.
018.025 And (it is said) they tarried in their Cave three hundred years and add nine.
018.026 Say: Allah is Best Aware how long they tarried. His is the Invisible of the heavens and the earth. How clear of sight is He and keen of hearing! They have no protecting friend beside Him, and He maketh none to share in His government.[/QUOTE]

 

[Thomas]

@Thomas, please understand that the main division of Muslims - the Orthodox - do not have any doubts about Jesus.

Never thought they did. Difference in belief is something else.

Please disabuse yourself that we are in disarray over this!!!

Again, I don't think Islam is in disarray – just that there is a diversity of opinion.

Please understand that I hold Islam in high regard, but that does not necessarily extend to fundamentalists, who I have little time for, be they Muslim, Christian, or otherwise.

It would be remiss to avoid Muslim sources and instead to rely on Wikipedia on this subject.

I am actually in agreement with you on that, however, I was discussing issues with @muhammed_isa, who regards all orthodox Christian sources as partisan and therefore 'unreliable', whereas he has no problem with Wikipedia, which he assumes as authoritative.

I can say from hard experience that time and again, it distorts and sends everything to hell. Go to a mainstream Islamic source first and foremost.

I quite agree. When I was doing my degree, wikipedia sources were not acceptable references.

This is a false statement Thomas. There is no disagreement and confusion in the Islamic canon.

I accept that criticism. I worded it too polemically. There was evidently contradictory opinions.

... no matter how obscure and whack-a-doodle-doo baseless it is to us.

In your opinion. Not mine. Professor Mahmoud has received a Kent Doctoral Fellowship, a Fulbright scholarship and a Canada Council Fellowship. Their work is peer-reviewed, and their reputation founded on their scholarship, so you will understand that I regard their view as far more credible than your offhand dismissals?

Your original premise: Islam is false.

Nope.

So therefore Islam must have copied this doctrine from that prior group which also had the doctrine.

I am not saying must have. Rather, it's suggestive, to say the least.
The restof your comment is a mix of ad hominem and straw man.

Christian sources that prevailed in the Arab peninsula? There was no Christian Bible in Arabic until long after Islam came about, as far as l'm aware and Christianity certainly wasn't common in the area.

I think you're mistaken. I never said 'Bible', I said 'sources'.

Take a breathe, please, and calm down.

 

[SufiPhilosophy]

In your opinion. Not mine. Professor Mahmoud has received a Kent Doctoral Fellowship, a Fulbright scholarship and a Canada Council Fellowship. Their work is peer-reviewed, and their reputation founded on their scholarship, so you will understand that I regard their view as far more credible than your offhand dismissals?

]

I am saying: he goes against the Qur'an, and thus against those with-the-document, i.e. the Orthodox, which is "us" and so these alt views are baseless to "us".
EDIT: i was responding to your generalisation about "modern muslim scholarship" being your preferred source, with a counter to that generalisation. Moreover l trenchantly argued that beyond the dox (our scripture, Qir'an) there is nothing new so far as our mainstream goes - no modernity. And as reason dictates.

By the way, as an asides, what was your degree in / thesis in? Not trying to gain ammo, just wondering.


Just that and then l will quit this debate as i am a bit worn out now as u noted.

 

[Thomas]

My degree was in Roman Catholic theology, a BA(Div).

My thesis was on Mystagogia ('to lead through the mysteries') and the need for it in the modern world.