Tag Archives: christianity

April 3, 2026 · 2:11 am

Does the Christian Heaven have a place for women?

“Women shall derive benefit from what they acquired. Ask, therefore, Allah out of His bounty: behold, Allah has indeed full knowledge of everything.”(Qur’an 4:32)

﷽ 

Does The Christian Heaven Have a Place For Women?

We were recently thinking sincerely about this very issue. It seems that Christianity is a bit ambiguous over whom ‘the elect are‘. Many people will say that Jesus died for ‘all‘. However, Calvinists are usually quick to point out that this is not the case. Jesus only died for a few ‘elect‘ whom they believe God has chosen before the foundation of the world.

With that said, texts in the New Testament that tend to generalize salvation, or promises of heaven to all can no longer be taken at face value or for granted.

The very sad thing one quickly realizes about Christian concepts of God, as well as Christian concepts of salvation, is that they are all very male-oriented and male-dominated.

Now it is possible that one might say well what about the women in John’s vision found in the book of Revelation?

We have two “women” in John’s Vision. Neither of these can be taken to be real, actual women. One of them is a whore (false church) and the other is a whore (Israel) that found redemption.

“A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.” (Revelation 12:1)

What can be immediately seen from this text is that it is symbolism and nothing literal about it.

In fact, the word for ‘heaven‘ is ‘ouranoj‘.

The word can mean the sky, the air, the vaulted expanse of the sky. You will note that this woman is wearing various heavenly bodies like the sun, the moon under her feet, and she is wearing a crown of 12 stars.

You will also note the symbolism in the following passage:

“The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.”(Revelation 12:6)

You have to wonder why this “woman” would need to flee into the wilderness to be taken care of if “she” was already in heaven.

Many commentators say that this symbolic “woman” is actually Israel herself. The same Israel that God likened to an adulterous prostitute spoke of in the Bible when God said the following about her:

If this symbolic woman is Israel, Israel too has been likened to a whore:

“But you trusted in your beauty and used your fame to become a prostitute.”(Ezekiel 16:15)

“You adulterous wife! You prefer strangers to your own husband!”(Ezekiel 16:32)

However, this prostitute and adulterous wife, Israel, finally gets to wear a crown of glory in the following passage:

“Then, when I make atonement for you for all you have done, you will remember and be ashamed and never again open your mouth because of your humiliation, declares the Sovereign Lord.” (Ezekiel 16:63)

So there is no woman in heaven at all. What is relayed is a vision of glorified Israel that God has forgiven for its past adultery and prostitution.

The other “woman” mentioned is a whore who has not found redemption.

“One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits by many waters. With her, the kings of the earth committed adultery, and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”

Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet and was glittering with gold, precious stones, and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. The name written on her forehead was a mystery: Babylon the great the mother of prostitutes and of the abominations of the earth. I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus.” (Revelation 17:1-6)

So neither of these provide us with examples of actual women. It is symbolism.

For example, within the Trinity itself, God’s self-love is only expressed in an eternal relationship of Masculine self-love. God — The Father, who loves God The Son. God — The Holy Spirit is a conduit of this love.

It is an eternal bond of masculine self-love.

Now it is interesting that within the Trinity there is no concept of feminine self-love expressed anywhere. There is no Mother and no Daughter in the Trinity. Not even a relationship between a father and a daughter. Nor a relationship between a mother and a son.

How unfortunate that the concept of God dwelling in a community of eternal self-love includes only manifestations of the masculine.

In Islamic theology, the very word that is used to describe the essence of Allah (swt) is the Arabic word ‘dhat‘ and surprise, it is a feminine word.

“But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come”.(John 16:13)

The Holy Spirit is expressed here in terms of the masculine.

What about heaven? Is there a place for Christian women?

Do keep in mind that there are some very negative sentiments towards women in general in the Bible.

“I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare….while I was still searching but not finding, I found one upright man among a thousand but not one upright woman among them all” (Ecclesiastes 7:26-28).

“No wickedness comes anywhere near the wickedness of a woman…..Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die” (Ecclesiastes 25:19,24).

St. Tertullian rips into women when he says:

“Do you not know that you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the Devil’s gateway: You are the unsealer of the forbidden tree: You are the first deserter of the divine law: You are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image, man. On account of your desert, even the Son of God had to die.”

Source: (https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/tertullian27.html)

Source: (The Gospel According to Woman, London: Elm Tree Books, 1986, pp. 52-62. See also Nancy van Vuuren, The Subversion of Women as Practiced by Churches, Witch-Hunters, and Other Sexists Philadelphia: Westminster Press pp.28-30)

“As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home, for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” (I Corinthians 14:34-35)

Unfortunately, we have no record of Jesus ever once calling Mary, Mother.

“And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? My hour is not yet come. His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.” (John 2:1-5)

How beautiful, loving, and intimate it would be to have said to Mary, “mother” instead of just the very disconnected “woman”.

“And your Lord has decreed that you not worship except Him, and to parents, good treatment. Whether one or both of them reach old age while with you, say not to them so much as, “uff,” and do not repel them but speak to them a noble word.” (Qur’an 17:23)

“For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as having been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you be Christ’s, then are you Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:26-29)

(Now the above passage is simply talking about status in the mystical union Christians have in Christ).

Citing Galatians 3:28 as “proof that women are included as women in heaven” is theologically weak. Paul’s point is about soteriological access (all can be saved regardless of social category), not about resurrection embodiment. Christian eschatology does not promise you will be a woman in the new creation in the same sense you are now. This point will rapidly unfold in what follows.

There is still rank on the Earth. Notice the Holy Spirit informs us that women rank below men.

“But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of a woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3)

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5)

We (believers) shall be like Him (Jesus): All Christians are transformed into Sons of God.

“Beloved, now we are now the sons of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.” (1 John 3:2)

Prima Qur’an Comments: One thing you will learn very quickly is that this ‘we‘ quickly becomes a reference to men only. Notice it says that ‘we‘ shall be like him.

What is the proof that the children of God are not daughters but sons? The New Testament is replete with evidence that we will be sons of God.

”Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.” (Ephesians 1:4-5)

He (God) chose ‘us‘ for adoption as sons not daughters!

“But as many, as received Him, to them He gave the right to become the sons of God, even to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:12-13)

“Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called the sons of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him.” (1 John 3:1)

“For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba”, Father.” (Romans 8:15)

“For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.” (Romans 8:14)

“Yet the Israelites will be like the sand on the seashore, which cannot be measured or counted. In the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’” (Hosea 1:10)

Prima Qur’an: Now some may muse that ‘Israelites’ here would be a reference to both men and women. However, it is not women who were created to become the sons of God. Women were simply created for the good pleasure of men.

The New Testament affirms this when it says,
“Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” (1 Corinthians 11:9)

“A man is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.” (1 Corinthians 11:7)

These texts do not really need any comment.

No women or feminity in heaven, so God’s horny sons had to sleep with earth women.

“And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” (Genesis 6:1-2)

If there were ‘daughters of God‘, the lusty sons wouldn’t have made a play for Earth women.

In fact, Jesus reinforces this point.

“ For in the resurrection, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” (Matthew 22:30)

Some people may see a contraction between Matthew and Genesis, but there isn’t any.

A. There are no females in heaven and that is why the Sons of God went after the daughters of men. They had the courtesy to marry them.

B. As humanity as we know it comes to an end, the institution of marriage will no longer be around. You will be like the angels, aka SONS OF GOD.

How St. Augustine of Hippo plays the role of a concern troll on this very issue!

In The City of God (Book XXII) he states the following:

Chapter 17.— Whether the Bodies of Women Shall Retain Their Own Sex in the Resurrection.

“From the words, Till we all come to a perfect man, to the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, Ephesians 4:13, and from the words, Conformed to the image of the Son of God, Romans 8:29, some conclude that women shall not rise women, but that all shall be men, because God made man only of earth, and woman of the man. For my part, they seem to be wiser who make no doubt that both sexes shall rise. For there shall be no lust, which is now the cause of confusion. For before they sinned, the man and the woman were naked, and were not ashamed.”- St Augustine of Hippo.

“From those bodies, then, vice shall be withdrawn, while nature shall be preserved. And the sex of woman is not a vice, but nature. It shall then indeed be superior to carnal intercourse and child-bearing; nevertheless the female members shall remain adapted not to the old uses, but to a new beauty, which, so far from provoking lust, now extinct, shall excite praise to the wisdom and clemency of God, who both made what was not and delivered from corruption what He made.” – St Augustine of Hippo.

“For at the beginning of the human race the woman was made of a rib taken from the side of the man while he slept; for it seemed fit that even then Christ and His Church should be foreshadowed in this event. For that sleep of the man was the death of Christ, whose side, as He hung lifeless upon the cross, was pierced with a spear, and there flowed from it blood and water, and these we know to be the sacraments by which the Church is built up. For Scripture used this very word, not saying He formed or framed, but built her up into a woman; Genesis 2:22, whence also the apostle speaks of the edification of the body of Christ, Ephesians 4:12, which is the Church.” – St Augustine of Hippo.

“The woman, therefore, is a creature of God even as the man; but by her creation from man unity is commended; and the manner of her creation prefigured, as has been said, Christ and the Church. He, then, who created both sexes will restore both. Jesus Himself also, when asked by the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection, which of the seven brothers should have to marry the woman whom all in succession had taken to raise up seed to their brother, as the law enjoined, says, You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. Matthew 22:29. And though it was a fit opportunity for His saying, She about whom you make inquiries shall herself be a man, and not a woman, He said nothing of the kind; but In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Matthew 22:30. They shall be equal to the angels in immortality and happiness, not in flesh, nor in resurrection, which the angels did not need, because they could not die.” – St Augustine of Hippo.

“The Lord then denied that there would be in the resurrection, not women, but marriages; and He uttered this denial in circumstances in which the question mooted would have been more easily and speedily solved by denying that the female sex would exist, if this had in truth been foreknown by Him. But, indeed, He even affirmed that the sex should exist by saying, They shall not be given in marriage, which can only apply to females; Neither shall they marry, which applies to males. There shall therefore be those who are in this world accustomed to marry and be given in marriage, only they shall there make no such marriages.” – St Augustine of Hippo.

Source: (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120122.htm)

First, this text is a clear admission that such a view that women shall not be raised as women, but all shall be men was a known position. This is enough to show anyone that the text is certainly not clear on the matter. In fact, this is the reason why, in the case of Catholics, Orthodox and others, they need such people to begin with.

Second, St. Augustine, in his genius, feigns to address. He pretends to address it. Why do we say this? Of all the text that St. Augustine could have used, he uses the text that says: “but are as the angels of God in heaven.”

ὡς hos in Greek translates as: even as.

St. Augustine plays the role of a concern troll. He feigns opposition but brings a text that actually proves his opponent’s position.

Angels in heaven are all masculine and have masculine names. They always appear as men. They certainly do have lust as well.

“And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” (Genesis 6:1-2)

The angels visiting Abraham are called anashim (men).

“The Lord appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he hurried from the entrance of his tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground.” (Genesis 18:1-2)

The angel who appears to Joshua is described as a “man” (ish).

“Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” (Joshua 5:13)

Angels at the tomb of Jesus (Matt 28, Mark 16, Luke 24) – described as neaniskos (young man) or andres (men).

“There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.” (Matthew 28:2-4)

“But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.” (Mark 16:4-5)

“While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead?” (Luke 24:4-5)

The two angels with Lot (Gen 19) – called anashim.

“The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground.  “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.” (Genesis 19:1-2)

“The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here,  because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.” (Genesis 19:12-13)

“And I heard a man’s voice from the Ulai calling, “Gabriel, tell this man the meaning of the vision.” (Daniel 8:16)

“While I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening sacrifice.” (Daniel 9:21)

“The angel said to him, “I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to tell you this good news.” (Luke 1:19)

“In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee.” (Luke 1:26)

“But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not himself dare to condemn him for slander but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” (Jude 9:9)

“ And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.” (Revelation 12:7)

All this is very clear. The angels always appear as men. The voice from heaven sounds masculine. The angels all have masculine names.

Everyone in Christ gets transformed into a son of God. Rather you are male or female.

This is very important when you read the following passages. At first blush, it looks like it includes all mankind or humanity. However, as we have seen previously, there will not be any women in paradise.

The Bible makes it very clear that all men and women can be saved under the title of ‘men’ but they, the women, will be transformed into the sons of God.

“For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.” (Romans 8:29)

The greek word for conformed is σύμμορφος (summorphos)

Morphe (μορφή) is an ancient Greek word meaning the form, shape, outward appearance, or nature of a person or object.

“He came as a witness to testify concerning that light so that through him all men might believe.” (John 1:7)

Paul says quite clearly about who God wants to be saved, and who he sent his Son for, in 1 Tim. 2:4-6:

“Who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time.” (1 Timothy 2:4-6)

“For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.” (1 Timothy 4:10)

While it is true that the word ‘men’ is a euphemism for mankind; the other texts that have been quoted show clearly that the feminine presence has no place in the kingdom of heaven. Any woman that is to be saved becomes a ‘son of God’. She does not retain her feminine identity.


The children of God are never ‘daughters of God‘ they are always ‘sons of God‘.

At the very least, in the Qur’an, Allah (swt) has acknowledged that people attribute daughters to the divine. In the Bible, not even the faintest whisper of that being a possibility.

“And they attribute to Allah daughters– exalted is He – and for them is what they desire.” (Qur’an 16:57)

“For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God. The Spirit you received does not make you slaves so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him, we cry, “Abba, Father.” The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory. I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. For the creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed.” (Romans 8:14-19)

Prima Qur’an: All men will be able to share in the glory of God and Christ. The glory of God and Christ, both of whom are masculine persons. In the passage above, ‘God’s children‘ and ‘sons of God‘ are used interchangeably. God’s children are his sons. They were never his daughters! They never become his daughters.

“You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:26)

“This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother.” (1 John 3:10)

“Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.” (Revelation 14:1)

“No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins(parthenos). They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb. (Revelation 14:3-5)

Not one of the 144,000 is a woman! No women are ever mentioned to be in the kingdom of heaven! No women are mentioned among those who could learn the song. Not even one honourable mention among them.

In Christianity, as explained above, women are created for men, not for the glory of God.

Remember it says “who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins” -This also means sex in marriage. Men are created for heaven as they ultimately reflect the glory of God. Women, however, only reflect the glory of men as the Bible tells us.

“A man is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.” (1 Corinthians 11:7)

Let us make man in our image“ (Genesis 1:26)

Jesus was sent to save men. Those men who accept Jesus will be accepted as God’s sons. They will become the sons of God.

Some modern translations of the Bible have tried to say ‘children of God’ or they even have gender-sensitive Bibles now! They do this to cover up the facts and the truth.

Christianity does not have heaven for women! In Christianity, the ideal scenario is virgin men in mystical union with (The Son (masculine), The Father (masculine), and the Holy Spirit (masculine).

This is unlike heaven as Allah mentioned in the Qur’an. It is for everyone. Men and Women!

Notice in the New Testament as to the salvation and status of women in the hereafter and contrast that with the very crystal clear teachings of the Qur’an!

“Women shall derive benefit from what they acquired. Ask, therefore, God out of His bounty: behold, God has indeed full knowledge of everything.” (Qur’an 4:32)

“And whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while being a believer – those will enter Paradise and will not be wronged, even as much as the speck on a date seed.” (Qur’an 4:124)

The Christians’ only wish is that they had a verse like this.

Prima Qur’an Conclusion:

The Christian heaven is not a place for women. There is no expression of eternal feminine love within the ‘godhead’. If anything ,a woman (who sheds the flesh) is changed into a ‘son of God‘ so that “she” now ‘he‘ as a ‘son of God‘ can enjoy fellowship as the bridegroom of Christ.

Whereas in Islam, the text is very clear that women will be among those who partake in heaven.

If one had to ask which text (The New Testament) or the (Qur’an) is unambiguous and very clear about women being in paradise the Qur’an wins this hands down.

“Whoever does righteousness, whether male or female, while he is a believer, We will surely cause him to live a good life, and We will surely give them their reward in the Hereafter according to the best of what they used to do.”(Qur’an 16:97)

“And their Lord responded to them,“Never will I allow to be lost the work of [any] worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another. So those who emigrated or were evicted from their homes or were harmed in My cause or fought or were killed – I will surely remove from them their misdeeds,and I will surely admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow as reward from Allah, and Allah has with Him the best reward.” (Qur’an 3:195)


Allahu Akbar! Allah is the greatest!

To the women reading this. We invite you to Islam!

You are all most welcome!

May Allah Guide the Christians so they do not burn in hellfire!

May Allah Guide the Ummah!

May Allah Forgive the Ummah!

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 2, 2026 · 2:09 am

Christian Heaven and Islamic Heaven: Virgins, Violence and Coup D’état!

“They shall have whatever they wish with their Lord.” (Qur’an 39:34)

﷽ 

The Christian Heaven: Virgins, Violence, and Coup D’état!

Much seems to be made of the idea that the Qur’an mentions carnal pleasure in heaven, drinking of heavenly wine, and/or the eating of foods. Thus, the Qur’an is made out to be a depraved book that focuses on the lust and passions of men in particular.

This is unlike Christianity, where when we reach heaven we have an ‘eternal walk’ with the Lord. As Shabir Ally said in a debate with Jay Smith, “That’s going to be a long walk, Jay.”

First and foremost, it is absolutely imperative that anyone reading this should know that the Qur’an nowhere promises anyone 72 virgins in paradise! Nowhere!

This statement is in Hadith literature.

“It was mentioned by Daraj Ibn Abi Hatim, that Abu al-Haytham ‘Adullah Ibn Wahb narrated from Abu Sa’id al-Khudhri, who heard the Prophet (saw) saying, ‘The smallest reward for the people of Heaven is an abode where there are eighty thousand servants and seventy-two houri, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from al-Jabiyyah to San’a.”

Even then it should be noted that the above hadith is considered to have weak chain.

It is attributed to the Messenger of Allah (saw) that he said:

“In Paradise, there is a pavilion made of a single hollow pearl sixty miles wide, in each corner of which there are wives who will not see those in the other corners; and the believers will visit and enjoy their wives.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4879)

So one hadith above mentions servants and houri (beings created for pleasure) and it is not mentioned if they are for those without spouses, those with spouses or not. The second hadith is addressing people who have wives. Now, if there was no decency involved, one would wonder the need to have distance? Again, the idea is that this is a reference to a man who has more than one wife and just as you would not make love to one wife in front of the other in this life (this is just etiquette and respect), you would not do as such in the next life.

“He it is Who has sent down the Book upon thee; therein are signs determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save God and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7) 

“No soul knows what comfort is kept hidden for it as a recompense for that which they used to do.” (Qur’an 32:17)

Abu Hurairah reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said that Allah said:
“I have prepared for My righteous servants what no eye has seen and no ear has heard, nor has it occurred to the human heart. Thus, recite if you wish, ‘And no soul knows what joy has been kept hidden for them.”’

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7498)

The above verse of the Qur’an coupled with the below hadith is often argued to say that the afterlife is allegorical. This is not true. The verse of the Qur’an coupled with the hadith says exactly what it says. That is that no soul knows what comfort is kept hidden from it. It does not mean we will not have that which we are familiar with or that we do not have a frame of reference for.

So now let’s get to two places in the Qur’an that the missionaries seem to be having a field day with.
Here is comparing three different translations of the Qur’an chapter 56, verses 35–37.

Now some Christian apologists, being embarrassed about details and language that the Holy Spirit supposedly inspired people to write in the Bible, are pulling out all the stops to make the verses above say ‘swelling breast’.

We think Christians like them are embarrassed that the Holy Spirit inspired someone to write the following in the Bible (according to their theology)…

“Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.” (New International Version Ezekiel chapter 23 verse 20)

Ain’t nobody trying to hear that! We already got the picture that this woman was carried away.

The sad thing is that in the Bible you will never see a man match a woman in terms of lewdness or promiscuity.

Women are always used as symbols for evil, and that which is vile and filthy.

“The Whore of Babylon” …for example…

“All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;….” (Isaiah 64:6)

Giving charity to the people of Haiti, or giving your organ to a dying child or spouse so that they may live, is simply described as a woman’s ‘filthy rag’ in Christianity. All good deeds on this Earth are compared to a woman’s menstrual cloth.

Every noble act ever committed by any human being anywhere is simply a ‘filthy rag’

Feeding a starting child. Giving comfort to an orphan. Providing a blanket for the homeless cold and feeble old man. All of it is likened to a woman’s menstrual cloth!

So no better image could be conjured up in the mind of the Holy Spirit than a woman having her monthly bleeding – bleeding we might add that was given to her as a punishment by God according to Christianity.

However, later we find out that God gets cheated on. That the ‘wife’ of God became like a prostitute.

“‘But you trusted in your beauty and capitalized on your fame by becoming a prostitute. You offered your sexual favors to every man who passed by so that your beauty became his. You took some of your clothing and made for yourself decorated high places; you engaged in prostitution on them.” (Ezekiel 16:15-16)

Prima Qur’an: We have always wondered why many Christian and Jewish men had a very unhealthy relationship and attitude towards women. When the Creator of Heaven and Earth gets cheated on, then who is the average man compared to God?

Even some Christian polemist who got cheated on may feel a kindred spirit with God.

So here are the verses that Christians think are embarassing for Muslims.

(Qur’an 56:35)

YUSUFALI: We have created of special creation.
PICKTHAL: Lo! We have created them a creation
SHAKIR: Surely We have made them to grow into a growth,

(Qur’an 56:36)

YUSUFALI: And made them virgin – pure, –
PICKTHAL: And made them virgins,
SHAKIR: Then We have made them virgins,

(Qur’an 56:37)


YUSUFALI: Beloved, equal in age,-
PICKTHAL: Lovers, friends,
SHAKIR: Loving, equals in age,

And let us look at the next set of verses in the Qur’an comparing three different translations. (Qur’an chapter 78 verses 31-33)

(Qur’an 78:31)

YUSUFALI: Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of desires;
PICKTHAL: Lo! for the duteous is an achievement –
SHAKIR: Surely for those who guard is an achievement,

(Qur’an 78:32)

YUSUFALI: Gardens enclosed, and grapevines;
PICKTHAL: Gardens enclosed and vineyards,
SHAKIR: Gardens and vineyards,

(Qur’an 78:33)

YUSUFALI: And voluptuous women of equal age;
PICKTHAL: And voluptuous women of equal age;
SHAKIR: And voluptuous women of equal age;

You can see for yourself how various translators have rendered the text: https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/78/33/

In talking about the Qur’an mentioning of physical pleasure in heaven, a Lebanese Christian convert to Islam, Hajji Gibril Houdad, says the following,

“The perfection of Islam dictates that it have a motivation for every type of person including those that are not motivated except through sensory reward, which is the common lot whether Christians deny it or not and that the principle of Paradise as a reward for martyrs is also very much present in their doctrine. However, Paradise in Islam also describes a higher level called Ridwan i.e. the lavishing of Divine good pleasure, to which we pray that Allah guides us.”

What about Muslim women? What will they get in paradise?

“And whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while being a believer – those will enter Paradise and will not be wronged, even as much as the speck on a date seed.”(Qur’an 4:124)

“Women shall derive benefit from what they acquired. Ask, therefore, Allah out of His bounty: behold, Allah has indeed full knowledge of everything.” (Qur’an 4:32)

One of the scholars said that the rewards of women in the Quran are implied (rather than specifically stated)because they are more bashful than a man. A man needs it to be spelled out to him and a woman can read between the lines.

Allah mentions some of the pleasures of Paradise. The translation of the verse is: “And round about them will (serve) boys of everlasting youth. If you see them, you would think of them as scattered pearls.” (Qur’an 76:19)

“These are creatures that are created for service. This is what they love to do. There is no exploitation or anything like that in the modern politically-correct world we live in. These people are created for this. This is their Ibadah (worship) to Allah. If you –the prophet SAAWS- saw them you would consider them scattered pearls and this is just indicating how beautiful they are” -Shaykh Hamza Yusuf.

“They shall have whatever they wish with their Lord.” (Qur’an 39:34)


So in Islam, we are not crude people. We are taught to be refined and to be cultured. Allah says that women will have what they wish from Allah. If a person wants to ask for details, this just shows the level of their own civility. We don’t speak about our mothers, sisters, and daughters in such an open way as many people do today. May Allah give them more shyness, modesty, and refinement! Amin!

You can read more about that here:

https://sheikhynotes.blogspot.com/2010/01/womens-reward-in-paradise-in-islam.html

So now we come to it… The Christian paradise…

In this article, we ask: Does the Christian Heaven have a place for women? We were hard-pressed to find any verse in the Bible that unequivocally stated this as such:

Does the Christian Heaven have a place for women?

Women are little more than an afterthought in the Christian salvific scheme.

It also seems to me that the Christian paradise is not really something to look forward to but simply a refuge away from something.

Unlike the Qur’an, where Allah is inviting people to paradise, Christians never use descriptions of paradise or ‘long walks with God for all eternity’ as a means of bringing people close to God.

Christianity is more or less about being ‘saved’. Saved from what? Saved from eternal everlasting hellfire.

In Christianity, heaven is not something to be invited to, rather it is an escape from.

It’s as if someone is telling you that you have the choice between:

A) Go into a room and be burned alive forever and ever for all eternity.

Or

B) You can go into a room and eat potato soup for all eternity.

Only a glutton for punishment would choose option A.

Now the analogy of spending time with God to potato soup is most definitely lacking. Yet this is what Christianity does. For all its doctrine and evangelical teaching, none of it is about calling people to God. It’s all about fleeing from wrath!

Now, obviously the Qur’an teaches that hellfire is eternal. Those who dwell therein will dwell forever. Yet as Shaykh Gibril mentioned above, some people are motivated by reward/punishment and others may not be so.


Early Christianity and, indeed, western civilization seem to have some rather unhealthy feelings towards sex and sexuality in general.

So there you are, long walks with the heavenly father, the lion lays down with the sheep (how nice for the sheep) and so forth…

So there you have it….paradise ….heaven, a place of eternal peace, with everyone singing kumbaya……OR IS IT?

War and Coup D’état in heaven!


“And there was WAR IN HEAVEN. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back.” (Revelation 12:7)

 Good grief!

Is heaven a place of war and violence? Let’s keep reading…

So much for Jesus’ argument that he wasn’t casting out devils by the power of Satan!

“So Jesus called them together and began to speak to them in parables: “How can Satan drive out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, it cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, it cannot stand.” (Mark 3;23-25)

“And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force.” (Matthew 11:12)


Well, apparently you don’t have to be saved after all! If you’re violent enough, you can simply take the kingdom of heaven by force!

What on Earth is going on?

“He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.” (Luke 10:18)

“The great dragon was hurled down–that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.” (Revelation 12:9)

Ahh yes, Sunday school days. As one of our colleagues recalls the story. There was an angel named Lucifer who apparently got jealous of God. Lucifer wanted to run things, and so he had a secret meeting with some angels, and together they tried to sack the boss!

Now the story itself is nowhere in the Bible. It’s not Biblical! We have no idea who cooked this up. Allah knows best. There are a lot of problems with this story. It makes you wonder where the idea to rebel against God came from? If everything was as pure as the driven snow.

It also makes a mockery of God, as if Allah wouldn’t know that the angels were plotting against him. Not only this, but this is NOT Islamic theology. We have NO concept of fallen angels.

“O believers! Protect yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is people and stones, overseen by formidable and severe angels, who never disobey whatever Allah orders—always doing as commanded.” (Qur’an 66:6)

“who do not speak until He has spoken, acting at His command.” (Qur’an 21:27)

As we asked before what is to stop the next disgruntled angel from wanting to sack the boss!

So we don’t know about you but as a believing man or woman, we would much prefer the heaven in which we are relaxing on a couch, with handsome servant boys (if we are a women) and beautiful young maidens (if we are men) than to be witness to the next Coup D’état!

Jesus, heaven, and virgins…

Let’s open our Bibles to Matthew chapter 25 verses 1-13


Matthew 25

“The Parable of the Ten Virgins”

1 “At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3 The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4 The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5 The bridegroom was a long time coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
6 “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’

7 “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8 The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’

9 “‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’

10 “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. ???

11 “Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’

12 “But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’

13 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

Now did you notice that it says, “The Parable”? It does not say that in the Greek Text. This is a heading that someone has put into the story. Anyhow, there are a number of things about this story that are odd. If Jesus is the bridegroom, then are these the brides,plural—polygamy?

“In the parable of the ten virgins (Matt 25:1-13), there is no mention of the bride simply because the virgins are the brides. In fact, copyists of New Testament manuscripts recognized the straightforward meaning and added “and bride” to a number of manuscripts at the end of Matthew 25:1. As mentioned above in the quote from Maimonides, Jewish law permitted marrying multiple wives at the same time and no doubt some Israelite kings built their polygamous households in this manner.” -Blaine Robinson

Source: (http://www.blainerobison.com/concerns/polygamy.htm)

Now it gets strange because, apparently, these virgins go with Jesus, “The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.”


Now, of course, there is no mention of sex, but there is a picture of virgins being married to Jesus. If people say that the brides refer to both men and women, you’re not helping your case. You are actually painting a picture which, indeed, would be even more bizarre.

So who are these virgins that go with Jesus?

144,000 Virgin Men Offered To Jesus In Heaven!!!!

Move over Islam and your paltry sum of “72 virgin women” you ain’t seen anything yet! Here comes’ Jesus with 144,000 virgin men!

“Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.” (Revelation 14:1)

*note* Jesus and the Father do not share the same name!

“No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins(parthenos). They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as first fruits to God and the Lamb.” (Revelation 14:3-5)

Now, if we allowed ourselves to enter into the minds of perverted polemicists like many of the Christians who assail Islam, we could allow our imaginations to just run wild with passages like the ones above. Like why are 144,000 virgin men likened to fruit?

Why is sex (as we mentioned above) seen as something dirty in Christian theology? Remember it says “who did not defile themselves with women” –This also means sex in marriage.

Why the emphasis upon virgin men?

Does the Bible ever give us a clue anywhere else as to the use of virgins?

“Now, therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.” (Numbers 31.17-18)


According to the Christians, “Jesus” orders the Israelites to keep alive the young virgin girls for themselves because they have special purposes (shrugs shoulders).

Take a look at the the weak hadith that mentions the 72 houri again.

“It was mentioned by Daraj Ibn Abi Hatim, that Abu al-Haytham ‘Adullah Ibn Wahb narrated from Abu Sa’id al-Khudhri, who heard the Prophet (saw) saying, ‘The smallest reward for the people of Heaven is an abode where there are eighty thousand servants and seventy-two houri, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from al-Jabiyyah to San’a.”

The text does not say the houri are for pleasure. But if it is assumed to be the case, then…

“But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. ???

Thus, it is hoped that Christians will take our understanding of the Qur’an based upon its chief principle of interpretation of chapter 3 verse 7 a little more seriously.

The Christian heaven: Wars, Sedition, Violence, and filled with 144,000 lucky virgin men!

The Islamic heaven: Eternal peace. The sovereignty of Allah reigns supreme, mind-blowing cosmic orgasmic sex with earthly beings and celestial beings on a level you could never have imagined! A place where delights await both men and women.

Choose wisely!

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

March 31, 2026 · 2:12 am

A Christian Dilemma & How might Jesus have died?


“And so, for the breaking of their pledge, and their refusal to acknowledge Allah’s signs, and their slaying of prophets against all right, and their boast, “Our hearts are already full of knowledge”- not so, but Allah has sealed their hearts as a result of their denial of the truth, and now they believe in but few things.” (Qur’an 4:155)

﷽ 

“And because of their disbelief and of their speaking against Mary a terrible slander.”

“And for their saying: “We have killed the Messiah Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah!” They did not kill him, nor did they impale him, but it appeared to them so. Those who dispute are in doubt of him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture; they certainly did not kill him.”

“Rather, Allah exalted him in his presence. Allah is Almighty, the Wise.” (Qur’an 4:155-158)

It is important to understand that the whole context of these verses is in reference to Jews. The Qur’an asserts they, their and them all in reference to Jews. There is absolutely no reference to Romans.

The Qur’an asserts that the Jews mocked Jesus, ‘We have killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary the messenger of Allah!’

This is similar to the mocking recorded here:


“And they said, Prophecy to us, Messiah. Who hit you?” (Matthew 26:68)

As well as:

“In the same way the chief kohen and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. “He saved others,” they said, “But he can’t save himself. Let this Messiah, this King of Israel, come down from the cross, that we may see and believe.” (Mark 15:31-32)

It is important to note that the Qur’an in the above passages does not categorically deny the death of Christ Jesus. The Qur’an refutes that Jews were responsible for it.

“They did not kill him” (It means in any way conceivable)

This statement is also asserted here:

“And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) you when you did show them the clear Signs, and the unbelievers among them said: ‘This is nothing but evident magic.'” (Qur’an 5:110)

Qur’an 4:157 is not a reference to the supposed “Crucifixion” either in support or denial. The Qur’an simply does not mention the event known as the ‘Crucifixion’. The Qur’an is simply ambivalent about it.

Also of importance to note is that the Qur’an 4:157 does not interact with the supposed historical event called the “Crucifixion”. There is no mention of the Romans anywhere in the Qur’an 4:157. It does not even interact with Christian historical beliefs at all!

The only place that Allah (swt) mentions Romans is the following text:

“The Romans have been defeated.” (Qur’an 30:2)

Some people just see Romans where there are no Romans!

Is Qur’an 4:157 an Anti-Semitic Anti-Jewish Text of the Qur’an?

First, the Qur’an cannot be anti-Semitic, because the Arabs themselves are a Semitic people.

Allah informs us in regard to the children of Israel:

“Yet they are not all alike: there are some among the People of the Book who are upright, who recite Allah’s revelations throughout the night, prostrating.” (Qur’an 3:113)

As regards to the clam of Qur’an 4:157 let’s examine the text closely

This is important because most Muslims see Qur’an 4:157 as relating to the so-called “Crucifixion”. They also somehow see Romans in the text! Those Muslims make Jews culpable in the death of Jesus.

Because they somehow, for some ungodly reason, think that the text has to do with Romans crucifying Jesus, they have to make sense of the following:

“BUT IT APPEARED TO THEM SO.“

It is important that the following views all posit cross, crucifixion and Roman involvement in Qur’an 4:157.

View one: Mistaken identity. Allah made someone look like Jesus, and presumably he was killed. Jews are still culpable. They just got the wrong guy. Jews kill “stealth” Jesus.

Second view: Swoon theory. Jews attempted murder via Roman proxy. Jesus was crucified but, he was not crucified to death.

Third view: The Jews didn’t kill Jesus the Romans did! Jews are culpable though, as they hand Jesus over to Roman authorities. The Jews, via Roman proxy, did indeed kill Jesus’ body but not his soul. People like Todd Lawson hold this view.

Prima-Qur’an comments:


Notice that “but it appeared to them so” is in reference to the double denial. Whereas the three views above connect it only to “they did not (ṣalabūhu) him”.

However, the “but it appeared to them so” is in reference to any and all accusations. It is obvious that all the accusations cannot be synchronous, unless it is to be interpreted as a denial of a death (like stoning) and a post-mortem event (like impaling). Which means that(salabuhu) is not a death act.

Please see our article under the discussion of Qur’an 5:33

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

The three above views believe somehow there was only one particular event and the people were contemporaneous to said event.

Jews did not kill Jesus at all. They are not culpable, they did not kill the body and they did not use the Romans as proxies. The Qur’an does not affirm any of this.

Anti-Semitic. Anti-Jewish Text of the New Testament?

Note this statement by Paul:

“For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone.” Source: (1 Thessalonians 2:14-15)  

This one statement, ‘The Jews who killed the Lord Jesus’, has been the bedrock of Christian hatred of Jews for centuries. They were called ‘Christ Killers’ and guilty of committing deicide. Upon this statement, Jews were put in ghettos.

The Protestant Reformer Martin Luther wrote a book: “The Jews and their Lies.”

Some of Martin Luther’s comments were:

That the Jews were: “venomous beasts, vipers, disgusting scum, canders, devils incarnate.”

He also stated: “Their private houses must be destroyed and devastated, they could be lodged in stables. Let the magistrates burn their synagogues and let whatever escapes be covered with sand and mud. Let them be forced to work, and if this avails nothing, we will be compelled to expel them like dogs in order not to expose ourselves to incurring divine wrath and eternal damnation from the Jews and their lies.”

At one point he wrote: “...we are at fault in not slaying them...”

There can be no doubt that such sentiment was influential among Christians who did what they did to Jews during World War 2.

Prior to that, history tells us that:

“On 31 March 1492,Ferdinand 2 of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, the rulers of Spain in 1492, declared that all Jews in their territories should either convert to Christianity or leave the country.”

It is very important that we give you just an overview of why the Qur’an clears Jews of this false charge; as well as the theological, social and political impact that such a belief had among Christians towards Jews.

The Qur’an refutes the idea that Jews did either of two things:

“They did not kill him, nor did they impale him.”

They did not kill him: (Which is a very general meaning. They did not kill him at all)

Nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him.

The Qur’an is interacting with information in circulation among Jews concerning any notion they had about him killing him or playing a part in him being impaled in reference to the idea circulating from oral traditions that Jesus was stoned to death and his body was impaled.

One such report in circulation could be:

Other writings assert that Jesus was killed AND THAN displayed in a tree.

“The mishna teaches that a crier goes out before the condemned man. This indicates that it is only before him, i.e., while he is being led to his execution, that yes, the crier goes out, but from the outset, before the accused is convicted, he does not go out. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: On Passover Eve they hung the corpse of Jesus the Nazarene after they killed him by way of stoning. And a crier went out before him for forty days, publicly proclaiming: Jesus the Nazarene is going out to be stoned because he practiced sorcery, incited people to idol worship, and led the Jewish people astray. Anyone who knows of a reason to acquit him should come forward and teach it on his behalf. And the court did not find a reason to acquit him, and so they stoned him and hung his corpse on Passover eve.”

Source: [ https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.43a ]


This is, of course, from the Jewish rabbinical literature. It asserts that Jesus was stoned to death for sorcery, idol worship and leading the Jewish people astray — all charges of which Allah clears Christ Jesus from.

By the way, the above text is taken from the Jewish Sanhedrin. Many times we have noted that Christian apologists will cut the passage up and not mention anything about stoning. Some people can be very slippery.

Remember that according to the Gospel of John, Jews say to Pilate:

“Pilate said, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.” “But we have no right to execute anyone,” they objected.” (John 18:31)

However, this itself is flatly contradicted by the following:

“Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council.” (Acts 6:11-12)

” The Jews and religious leaders listened to Stephen. Then they became angry and began to grind their teeth at him. He was filled with the Holy Spirit. As he looked up to heaven, he saw the shining-greatness of God and Jesus standing at the right side of God. He said, “See! I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right side of God!” They cried out with loud voices. They put their hands over their ears and they all pushed on him. Then they took him out of the city and threw stones at him. The men who were throwing the stones laid their coats down in front of a young man named Saul. While they threw stones at Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” After that he fell on his knees and cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died.” (Acts 7:54-60)

In fact, several times the Gospel accounts tell us that Jews tried to stone Jesus.

“At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.” (John 8:59)

“Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him..” (John 10:31)

Those Jews certainly don’t sound like people who would say, ” But we have no right to execute anyone, “


“And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree.” (Acts 10:39)

Jesus was put to death first and than hanged on a tree.

“The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew and hanged on a tree.” (Acts 5:30)

Jesus was put to death first and then hanged on a tree.

By the way, some translations see the problem with the above text, and they cover this up by saying: “Hung him on the tree and killed him.” or ‘Killed him by hanging him on the tree.”

Again very slippery.

“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, cursed is everyone that hangs on a TREE.” (Galatians 3:13)

(This is the text that will eventually come back to haunt the Christians.)

Note: The above-mentioned verse is found here:

“If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not listen to them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out to the elders of his city, and to the gate of his place; And they will say to the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city should stone him with stones, that he will die: so that you put evil away from among you; and all Israel will hear, and fear.”


“If a man guilty of a sin worthy of death, and is put to death AND his corpse hung on a tree, it shall not remain on the tree overnight. You shall bury it the same day, otherwise, since God’s curse rest on him who hangs on a tree, you will defile the land which the Lord, your God is giving you as an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 21:18-23)

The Hebrew root ת.ל.ה/י can mean hang. But in the context of corpses, it means “impale,” and thus עץ here means not “tree” or “gallows” but “stake.”

You will notice this as well when you look at disparate translations of the text.

‘Hung on a tree‘ or ‘impaled on a tree.’

In any case, the hanging or impaling was not the means used to execute the criminal; he was first put to death by the ordinary means, stoning, and his corpse was then exposed on high as a salutary warning for others.” Source: (New American Bible pg. 180 commentary on Deuteronomy 21)

So what is the objective of Qur’an 4:157-158 ?

a) It repudiates the claims of those Jews who claimed that they killed him in any way shape or form. In this case, the ‘they didn’t kill him’ would be a reference to stoning.

b) It repudiates the claims of those Jews who claimed the impailed Jesus. The text clearly mentions salabu-impailed. Jesus died by being impailed. The text of Qur’an 4:157 is a reference to what Jews claimed about Jesus.

c) In connection to this, it repudiates the claim that Jesus became a curse or accursed. (Deuteronomy 21:18-23)

All of this can be seen by the following:

“Rather, Allah exalted him in his presence. Allah is Almighty, the Wise.” Source: (Qur’an 4:158)

Whereas the New Testament claims:

“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, cursed is everyone that hangs on a TREE.” (Galatians 3:13)

Question? Did Jesus commit a sin worthy of death?

“And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be put to death, and you hang him on a TREE: his body shall not remain all night upon the TREE, but you shall in any wise bury him that day; that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God gives thee for an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 21:22-23)

If the answer is yes, then Jesus is not an unblemished sacrifice!
If the answer is no, then Jesus is obviously not accursed as he is not guilty of sin and thus never lifted anyone from any law! Allah obviously knows who is guilty and who is not.

Merely being displayed in the tree does not mean one is accursed. You have to have committed a sin worthy of death.

Paul said above in Galatians 3:13 that Jesus became a curse for us.

“Therefore, I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 12:3)

If no one speaking ‘by the Spirit of God’ calls Jesus accursed, we wonder what spirit motivated Paul to make such a statement?

Accursed has reference to the state of one’s heart. This is not something to attribute to a messenger of Allah.

“When you do read the Qur’an, seek Allah’s protection from Satan the l-rajimi.” (Qur’an 16:98)

l-rajimi means the rejected, accursed or stoned. This verse is also a rejection of the claims of Christians that Jesus became a curse, or those Jews who claim that Jesus was stoned, or the overall claim by those who never accepted him as being rejected.

Satan is the raijim not Jesus!

All three claims in one are refuted.

This is why Christians believe that Jesus said:

“And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27:46)

The Qur’an also repudiates the claim that Jesus was ever forsaken by Allah. Both before, during, and after the death of Jesus.

BEFORE HIS DEATH

“Behold,” the angels told Mary, “Allah has given you the glad news of the coming birth of a son whom He calls His Word, whose name will be Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, who will be a man of honor in this life and the life to come, and who will be one of the ones nearest to Allah.” (Qur’an 3:45)

Can it be argued that there ever was a time in which Jesus was not ‘near to Allah‘?

During his death. If we assume the Roman imperium impaled Jesus, the following could have been revealed to him as reassurance and solace:

“Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will exalt you in my presence and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)

This is also what is meant by:

“The Day when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Holy Spirit.” (Qur’an 5:110)


This is why we know that if Jesus actually cried out while being impaled, it is an acknowledgment of him willing to die in holy armed struggle against the Roman imperium.

“And at the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Ali, lemana, shabakthani! Which means, My God, my God, for this is my purpose! “

Source: (Mark 15: 34 George M Lamsa translation)

AFTER HIS DEATH

“Rather, Allah exalted him in his presence. Allah is Almighty, the Wise.” (Qur’an 4:158)

” And how I prevented the children of Israel from harming you when you came to them with all evidence of the truth.” (Qur’an 5:116)

“I did not say anything to them except what you commanded me with: That worship Allah, my Lord, and your Lord.” (Qur’an 5:116)

THE CHRISTIAN DILEMA. REVISITING GALATIANS 3:13

Temporal Mismatch (Ante-mortem vs. Post-mortem)

Deuteronomy 21:22-23 explicitly describes a two-step process:

  1. The man is put to death (executed by legal means, typically stoning).
  2. Then his corpse is hung on a tree.

The hanging is not the means of execution. It is an additional act of post-mortem shaming.

In Roman crucifixion (or impalement), the person dies on the tree. The tree/cross is the instrument of death, not a display after death. Paul applies “cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree” to a living person dying on the tree. That is a category error according to the original legal context.

The Curse Attaches to a Convicted Criminal, Not the Method Alone

Deuteronomy 21:22 says the man was put to death for a capital offense — a sin worthy of death. The curse is not magical or mechanical. It is juridical: God’s law says a executed criminal’s displayed corpse brings a defilement if left overnight.

Paul, however, treats the phrase “cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree” as if hanging itself imparts a curse, regardless of the person’s innocence or guilt. He then claims Jesus became that curse for us, even though Jesus was (in Christian belief) innocent.

But the Torah text assumes guilt. An innocent person would never be executed, let alone hung. So Paul inverts the logic: an innocent person takes on a curse meant for the guilty by undergoing a death resembling the post-mortem display.

This is massively devastating to Christianity.

The Qur’anic Critique.

The Qur’an implicitly rejects this entire move in *Q 4:157-158* by:

  • Denying Jewish claims to have killed or impaled Jesus.
  • Affirming God exalted Jesus to Himself — no curse, no humiliation.
  • Rejecting the idea that any prophet of God could be in a state of divine curse or abandonment.

From a Qur’anic perspective, Paul’s error is not exegetical sloppiness but theological overreach — applying a law about executed criminals to an innocent messenger of Allah, and then turning that into a doctrine of vicarious atonement.

The writer of Galatians misapplies Deuteronomy 21:22-23 by:

  1. Ignoring the post-mortem context and treating it as ante-mortem.
  2. Ignoring the requirement of a prior capital crime.
  3. Using the verse to claim Jesus became a “curse” — something the Qur’an explicitly denies.

The Dilemma Restated

Premise 1 (from Torah, Deuteronomy 21:22-23):
The “curse of God” applies only to a person who has committed a sin worthy of death, who is executed, and whose corpse is then displayed on a tree.

Premise 2 (from Christian theology):
Jesus died by hanging on a tree (cross), and Galatians 3:13 says he became a curse for us.

Question: Did Jesus commit a sin worthy of death?

A: Yes, Jesus committed a sin worthy of death.

  • If yes, then:
    • Jesus was a legitimate criminal under Torah law.
    • He was not innocent.
    • He cannot be an “unblemished” or sinless sacrifice (contradicting 1 Peter 1:19, Hebrews 9:14).
    • His death was his own just punishment, not a vicarious atonement for others.
    • Christianity collapses because the entire sacrificial logic requires a sinless victim.

Conclusion: Christianity is false.

B: No, Jesus did not commit any sin worthy of death.

  • If no, then:
    • Deuteronomy 21:22-23 does not apply to him.
    • The “curse” in that verse has no legal or theological standing over an innocent person.
    • Paul’s application of the curse to Jesus in Galatians 3:13 is invalid — he is quoting a verse that has nothing to do with an innocent man.
    • Jesus did not “become a curse” for anyone.
    • He therefore did not redeem anyone from the curse of the law, because there is no mechanism by which an innocent person’s undeserved death transfers to the guilty under Torah.

Conclusion: Paul made an exegetical and theological error. Jesus remains innocent, but Pauline atonement theology is unfounded.

Why This Dilemma Is Fatal to Pauline Christianity?

Christian theology wants both:

  1. Jesus is absolutely sinless (no sin worthy of death).
  2. Jesus became a curse for us (Galatians 3:13 quoting Deuteronomy 21).

But the Torah text does not allow an innocent person to be “cursed” in that juridical sense. The curse is not magical or transferable — it is a legal declaration attached to a guilty, executed criminal’s corpse.

Paul’s move is to sever the curse from guilt and reattach it to the method of death alone. That is not exegesis; it is creative theology. But it violates the plain meaning of the Hebrew text.

The Qur’anic Resolution

The Qur’an simply rejects the premise that Jesus was ever in a state of curse or humiliation before God:

“Rather, Allah exalted him in His presence. Allah is Almighty, the Wise.” (Qur’an 4:158)

And:

“They did not kill him, nor did they impale him, but it appeared to them so.” (Qur’an 4:157)

From the Qur’anic perspective:

  • Jesus committed no sin.
  • He was not accursed.
  • He was not abandoned by God (contra Matthew 27:46).
  • Therefore, Galatians 3:13 is a false attribution to God’s law.
  • Allah knows who is guilty and who is innocent. An innocent man does not become cursed, and no prophet is made a curse for others.

Possible Christian Responses (And Why They Fail)

Christian ResponseWhy It Fails
“Jesus became a curse representatively, not because he was guilty.”Deuteronomy 21 does not recognize representative curse. The curse is on the actual criminal.
“The curse is on the manner of death, not the person’s sin.”The text says “cursed by God is everyone who hangs” — but that “everyone” is already defined as an executed criminal. You cannot separate the curse from guilt.
“Paul is doing midrash, not literal exegesis.”Then it is not a proof text. If you abandon literal meaning, you abandon legal force.
“Jesus bore the curse for us as a substitution.”Substitution requires the substitute to be legally eligible to bear the curse. Torah never allows an innocent substitute to be cursed in place of the guilty.

None of these responses resolve the core logical contradiction we have identified.

THE LESSON FOR MUSLIMS IN THE DEATH OF JESUS AS A MARTYR.

This is based on speculation.

It is likely that Jesus died as a martyr in an armed struggle against the authority of the Roman imperium.

“And never think of those who have been killed in the cause of Allah as dead. Rather, they are alive with their Lord, receiving provision, Rejoicing in what Allah has bestowed upon them of His bounty, and they receive good tidings about those after them who have not yet joined them – that there will be no fear concerning them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 3:169-170)

Allow me to share with you a very interesting text from the Qur’an.

The Injil or Gospel is mentioned 12 times in 12 verses of the Qur’an. In one of those verses we have the following:

“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 9:111)

Prima Qur’an Comment: Out of all the teachings that Allah could inform us about concerning what Jesus taught in the Injil, why did Allah mention the teaching concerning martyrdom? Why would Jesus teach about ‘killing and being killed’ if he was simply a pacifist?

“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28)

“I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more.” (Luke 12:4)

This is exactly what Allah [swt] would have revealed to Jesus if indeed the Romans impaled Christ Jesus.

“Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will exalt you in my presence and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)

Jesus received good tidings about those that would come after him and have not joined him yet. While the people were perceiving that Jesus had a horrible ending, the death of Jesus was a tranquil experience, and Jesus was told that he would be cleared of the falsehoods said concerning him.

“It is Allah Who takes away the souls at the time of their death, and those that die not during their sleep. He keeps those for which He has ordained death and sends the rest for a term appointed. Verily, in this are signs for a people who think deeply” (Qur’an 39:42)

“And do not say about those who are killed in the way of Allah, “They are dead.” Rather, they are alive, but you perceive [it] not.(Qur’an 2:154)

“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties in exchange for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. It is a true promise binding upon Him in the Torah and the GOSPEL and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 9:111)

Look at this astonishing verse above. That the idea of fighting in the cause of Allah [swt] killing and being killed is established in the Qur’an, the Torah and the GOSPEL.

Rather than Christ Jesus being seen as some theological projection onto Judaism, a very different picture emerges. We have a Christ Jesus who was a Jewish prophet, a Muslim, a Messenger of Allah [swt], and a figure ultimately wanted dead by the Roman authorities.

Instead, what emerges is a picture of a Messenger of Allah [swt] who was defiant to the very end. He challenged the religious authorities of his time and challenged the government of his time, ultimately leading to his trial and his death. In the face of this death, Jesus became triumphant and became a symbol of martyrdom.


Jesus had spent most of his life calling the children of Israel to Allah and correcting the learned on points where they were in error. Jesus’ teachings on martyrdom were a threat to the Roman government. Jesus and a group of pious Jews who were sick and tired of the Roman Imperium most likely led a violent revolt against the Romans. Jesus and some of his people were charged with sedition and impailed.

Jesus didn’t die with relative dignity hanging from the cross. He died, suspended on one single stake penetrating his body: he was impaled. There were no nails in his hands or feet. He did not die on a cross-shaped execution tool († or T). Just a sharp stake shoved right into his body upon which he was suspended – that is the most logical and plausible form of execution of Jesus by far…

Furthermore, one of the alleged witnesses, St. Mark, tells us that at the most critical juncture in the life of Jesus — “All his disciples forsook him and fled“- (Mark 14:50).

The Roman spectacle of impalement was meant to be as savage and tortuously cruel as possible because it had to accomplish two things.

  1. To act as a visual deterrent to crime and, in the case of Jesus — uprising against an oppressive regime.
  2. To provide a theater of gore to satisfy the bloodlust of those who came to watch. The spike was the centerpiece of this typically gruesome Roman conception. That is why they didn’t just kill Jesus with a sword and be done with it.


Most likely the Romans introduced the tip of the spike into the victim’s back side and continued hammering it, pushing it far enough to where it passed under the pelvic bone so it would support the body on the impale.

The two thieves, if they were real, (most likely really guilty of sedition), get the same treatment. When the impale device was upright, it kept the victim’s body from being torn loose by his own weight and sliding off. That was its practical use.


But there was also a kind of diabolical sideshow, something to further attract the viewer interest in the impalement process. With the spike thrust under the pelvic bone, but not yet coming out of the body, a man could use the leverage of his arms and his legs to project his body outward, curving it away from the impale and thus preventing the spike from penetrating any further up into the bowels. But as one’s arms gave out, one’s body would slowly sink down on the spike, causing the spike to penetrate further along through one’s maze of intestines.

Eventually, after the leg strength also gave out, all leverage was lost and the body, of its own weight, would slump/slide back against the vertical beam, driving the spike slightly upwards through the body’s maze of vital organs until it pierced the stomach lining from the inside out, spewing blood and guts all over the ground.

Mercifully, death usually followed in a short time thereafter. When it came to devising fiendish methods of torture and death, the Romans were absolutely without equal. They left no sadistic, bloodthirsty detail behind.

It is also reasonable that Jesus hastened his own death by forcing his body down on the spike, an extremely awesome and heroic achievement! It indicates that Jesus had no fear of death. We imagine Jesus looking on at the Romans, with a certain look in his eye as if to say, “Go ahead, make my day!” Whereas the two thieves, if they were real, (most likely rebels) used all their strength to cling to life as long as possible. Hence, the breaking of the legs!

During his death: When the Romans impaled Jesus, it is possible the following was revealed to him as reassurance:

“Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will exalt you in my presence and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)

This is also what is meant by:

“The Day when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Holy Spirit.” (Qur’an 5:110)

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE BODY OF JESUS?

This would be an obvious question from Christian. One that they may find suspect.

The Christian version:

“Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli.” (Luke 3:23)

We are told that God incarnate was on the earth for 30-something years, not really doing much of anything. Only 3 years of his life were truly important. He died on the double cross, rose from the dead and ascended bodily up into heaven.

A possible Muslim version

During the impalement, Allah (swt)took the soul of Jesus, leaving behind his body, as he does with everyone else. His body was either given over to his followers or they stole it at night for a more proper burial.

“While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.” (Matthew 28:11-15)

Even though we have not even a shred of evidence outside the New Testament accounts that this was a Jewish polemic directed towards Christianity, we believe it to be plausible. Namely, the disciples took the corpse of Jesus and buried it in a place they found suitable.

The life of Jesus can be likened to a 3-hour Blu-ray in which, in the Christian version, the first 2 hours and 30 minutes are missing (30 years) and in the Islamic version [that we find plausible] the last 15 minutes are missing (last few days).

Whatwe mean by this is that the last 15 minutes are so important to Christian theology that they are obviously not going to be agreeable to what we believe.

Muslims don’t have to lose any sleep over where the bodies of prophets are buried. In the end Allah (swt) knows best.

For reasons why we do not find the supposed crucifixion historical kindly see our article here:

The Question of the Historical Crucifixion and the Martyrdom of Jesus.

“The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had already passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!” (Qur’an 5:75)

“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

11 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 28, 2026 · 3:02 pm

Dr. Shabir Ally: The Text of the Qur’an cannot be used to substantiate the return of Jesus.

 “Do they then only wait for the hour that it should come on them all of a sudden? But already come some tokens thereof, and when it comes to them, how shall they have their reminder?” (Qur’an 47:18).

﷽ 

Dr. Shabir Ally has a channel called: “Let the Qur’an Speak.” In one particular episode he went over the verses that are often used to justify the return of Jesus -alayi salam. Dr. Shabir Ally has concluded that these verses cannot be used to justify the return of Christ Jesus.

The episode is titled: The Coming Messiah | The Quran in Dialogue with Other Faiths, ep. 29 | Dr. Shabir Ally

Below is the transcript:

“Peace be with you. Thanks for joining me for this continuing chat in which we talk about the Quran in conversation with other scriptures and religions. Today I want to look at the widespread belief that there is going to be a future savior or messiah or some personality who is going to bring about all that we expect to be right with the world and do away with injustice and so on. So why do we have such a pervasive feeling among the world’s religions? Let’s look at them one at a time and see what exactly is expected, and then we will analyze why.” -Dr. Shabir Ally.

“First of all, the Quran. In the Quran, we have some mention of apparently something that is going to happen in the future, and then people have taken this to mean that Jesus, on whom be peace, is coming back. Take Surah 4, verse 159, for example, speaking about Jesus having been raised into heaven. Now it says in verse number 159 (Shabir speaks Arabic). In the English translation: “Every one of the people of the book will definitely believe in him before his death. And on the day of judgment, Jesus will be a witness against them.” Now it is interesting that this verse is being used to justify the belief that Jesus, on whom be peace, will come again. But at the same time, there are very ancient commentators on the Quran who said that this does not mean that at all. You see, there is a question: when it says that there is none of the people of the book except that will believe in him before his death, what does the word “his” refer to? Does it refer to “his” meaning Jesus’ death, or does it refer to “his” meaning the person of the book? So if it refers to the person of the book, it means that before the person of the book dies, all of reality will be open to him or her as it is open to every one of us when we reach that moment of death. That is when the person of the book will understand correctly and believe correctly about Jesus. So those who previously rejected him, such as his Jewish opponents, will come to understand him and believe in him correctly. And the Christians, on the other hand, who had so over-glorified him will come to recognize him truly as he is, as a prophet and as a messenger of God. So on that view, it is not really talking about Jesus coming back. But if it is taken to mean that “his” is a reference to Jesus, before his death, that would mean that Jesus has not died yet, and when he comes back, before he dies, at that time every one of the persons of the book will believe in him. So you cannot take an ambiguous verse like this and make it mean something of such major import as a major figure coming back into the future and doing all of these great things. Of course, that belief is in Hadith, and one who takes the Hadith as very authentic will naturally be constrained to that belief. But we should not read that belief back into the Quranic verses without proper warrant.” -Dr. Shabir Ally.

“Another verse that is cited to refer to the second coming of Jesus is Surah 43, verse number 61. So what does it say in the Arabic? (Shabir speaks Arabic). And the English translation – here, I will read first, then we will try to analyze it: “And his second coming is truly a sign for the hour. So have no doubt about it, and follow me. This is the straight path.” Now when it says “second coming” here in the English translation, the translator has used a half square bracket to insert the word “second” and mark it off as an insertion. But even without marking that word as an insertion, even the word “coming” is not there in the Arabic. There is nothing like (Shabir speaks Arabic) in the Arabic – “his coming” – it just says (Shabir speaks Arabic), which literally means “and he is” or “it is.” Now if it is understood to mean “it is,” then that is a reference to the Quran, which has been mentioned previously within the same context. So it (the Quran) will be a sign of the hour, or as it is also read alternatively, it will contain knowledge of the hour – that the Quran itself is knowledge of the hour, or knowledge personified, something like this. Only if it refers to “he” as a human person can it possibly refer to Jesus. But does it refer to his second coming? It may be just that it is referring to him as a fact because of some miracles pertaining to him or associated with him that he will become a sign, or he is a sign of the hour. By his performing these miracles, people can take heed from that and realize that God, who made it possible for Jesus to do all of these things, is able to bring about what is called the hour. So in short, we can say that there is no verse of the Quran that clearly indicates that Jesus, on whom be peace, is coming again. And apart from that, there is no future messianic figure that is mentioned in the Quran. The closest you have to a figure is Dabbat al Ard (a creature from the earth who will speak to people) or Ya’juj and Ma’juj. They are mentioned in the 18th chapter of the Quran and also in the 21st chapter of the Quran. But there is no future messianic figure in the Quran. Why? We will try to come back and analyze that. But I want to go forward to look at scriptures of the other Abrahamic faiths.” Dr. Shabir Ally.

Prima Qur’an: Dr. Shabir Ally is someone who has been involved in interfaith dialogues, discussions and debates for 35 years. If he felt there was some solid proof for the second coming of Christ Jesus in the Qur’an he would have advanced it.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

March 26, 2026 · 8:35 pm

Jesus was not crucified: the evidence with Dr. Ali Ataie

“And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him; (وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)but it was made to appear to them so. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.”  (Qur’an 4:157)

﷽ 

These are some of our thoughts after an attentive listen of all 3 hours 36 minutes and 33 seconds on the Blogging Theology video entitled: ‘Jesus was not crucified: the evidence with Dr. Ali Ataie.’

You may see this here:

Paul Williams and Blogging Theology are still our number one favourite youtube channel.W

e also feel (for our interest) the most relevant in the English language.

Our thoughts are that Dr. Ali Ataie is almost there. The stand out from this, the absolutely commendable point is that Dr. Ataie is challenging what is considered to be a historical ‘fact,’ namely that Jesus of Nazareth was Crucified to death by the Roman Imperium.

That in and of itself is refreshing. We have been saying this for years. After looking at the so called “evidence” both biblical and extra biblical we haven’t found it convincing at all.

As we have pointed out in a previous article here: how does anyone read Qur’an 4:157 and walk away with the understanding that it is talking about Romans, Crucifixion or Cross at all?

It is simply bizarre to us.

The Non-Crucifixion Verse by Dr. Louay Fatoohi: A response

Dr. Ataie has a good opening preface that when it comes to issues like resurrection, and other miracles those are simply things that history cannot attest to. There could be a natural and supra natural explanation. Miracles are not considered by modern historians when looking at the past. That being said miracles are not unhistorical it’s just that being in the realm of the supranatural historians do not consider it.

This is a very fair and reasonable point raised by Dr. Ataie.

Again another reason why Muslims should not be too excitable over claims by historians and /or orientalist. At the heart of research are simply different epistemology.


Paul Of Tarsus conversion story for example, is non historical.

“I trust Allah and his Messenger.”-Dr. Ataie

We can only say that: “Ditto.”


@17:55 “If that man said that Jesus wasn’t crucified then I believe him. And I don’t care what Bart Ehrman…..”-Dr. Ataie

Prima Qur’an comments: You see dear reader for some reason Dr.Ataie, Dr. Shabir Ally, Dr. Fatoohi, all think the Qur’an is engaging with something called “crucifixion”

The Qur’an is neither affirming nor denying any crucifixion. The Qur’an is interacting with claims made by Jews about Jesus (as).

As regard to an event that is commonly called ‘The Crucifixion’ the Qur’an is simply indifferent. It simpy neither denies nor affirms it.

Please see:

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

@19:34 Why in the world did he (Muhammed) deny the crucifixion of Jesus? -Dr. Ataie

Prima Qur’an comments: Again we have read the same Qur’an Dr. Ataie is reading and we simply do not see crucifixion any where in the Qur’an at all.

“The historical case for the crucifixion is not nearly as strong as what we have been lead to believe.” -Dr. Ataie.


@22:36 “It is axiomatic for Westerns that it has happened.”

@24:09 Dr. Ataie goes into the various theories Muslims have in regards to the “crucifixion” of Jesus.

Dr. Ataie is closet to the truth out of them all (Has he been reading Prima-Qur’an?).

@30:17 Dr. Ali Ataie comments that “Crucified victims were left on their crosses long after they expired.”

Dr. Ali Ataie still struggles with Divine Rapture Theory. As he does not find it to be in agreement with the Qur’an and/or historically plausible.


@32:26 Dr. Ali Ataie addresses the issue of Supranatural identity transference.
@32:50 Dr. Ali says that most Muslim exegetes go with this idea that “Jesus was no where near a cross.”

A common trope that we hear from some atheist is that secular historians are objective, unbiased and inductive.

@34:12 objective, unbiased, inductive. -Historians?

Dr. Ataie does an excellent job of going into an analysis of this. How historians have come up with different perspectives and have contradicted each other and how they may not be as objective or unbiased or even as inductive as they may lead themselves to believe.

Dr. Ataie, We owe you lunch! Well said. May Allah (swt) elevate him.

@40:28 Dr. Ataie states: “But I do believe that myth and legend has probably soo permeated the gospel accounts of Jesus passion narratives that it is not at all beyond reason to dismiss them completely as historical fiction!”

Prima-Qur’an comments: Allahu Akbar! There you go Dr. Ataie now that is the ticket!
Than the idea that someone was “crucified” is likely based upon what? Myth and legend.

Dr. Ataie gets into his understanding of: Qur’an 4:157 “It was made to appear to them so.“

@53:38 “They did not have information. It did not come from a reliable source.”
@54:11 “Jews and Christians ended up following hearsay reports about some crucifixion event from non eye-witnesses….”

Prima-Qur’an comments: This is exactly what shubbiha lahum means. It is not shubi ha alayhim!

In fact because we love you the readers insh’Allah we will give you a sneak peak at one of the slides that Shaykh Hilal and those of us at Prima Qur’an have been working on.

  1. Disagreements.
  2. They are in doubt.
  3. They have no knowledge about it.
  4. They are following dhan (assumption or conjecture).

These are not things that we would describe eye witnesses to an event with.


@54:25 “When you say it was made to appear to them that it was so who is the implied actor there? Who made it appear to them it was so. Is this referencing God or some other-who is applied in that if you see what I mean?” -Paul Williams.

Prima Qur’an comments: Brother Paul asked a very great question. Very insightful. This is what was answered above. The whole event in which by the way is Allah (swt) addressing Jews and claims made by Jews is that they killed Jesus and impailed him.

This is based upon Jewish claims that were in orally in circulation in the time of the Prophet (saw).

There is absolutely nothing in Qur’an 4:157 about Romans, or about a cross or about a crucifixion which we will come to Insh’Allah

@1:00:53 “Is there any material evidence of any Jew who was ever crucified by the Romans in ancient Palestine? Apparently tens of thousands of Jews were crucified and all archeologist have ever found was a single heel bone of a man with a nail driven through it, they call him Yohanan. I don’t know how they know his name but that’s what they call him.” -Dr. Ataie.

@1:12:24 “Paul was the first one in recorded history to claim that Jesus was crucified.”- Dr. Ataie.

Prima-Qur’an comments: This is a genius point not because its clever but because it’s true and it is overlooked by way too many.

Paul lays down his theology in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8.

In fact, Allah-willing we will go ahead and lay out the systematic destruction of this group of text

“If the foundation is destroyed what shall the righteous do?” (Psalms 11:3)

Question: Just how important is the theology in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8?

Answer:

“Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins.” (1st Corinthians 15: 12-14, and 17)

Prima Qur’an Comment: Two major points need to be deduced from the above proof text.

1) If Christ Jesus did not raise from the dead, Christianity is a fruitless endeavor in every respect. Muslims do not say that, the Bible says it.

2) If Christ Jesus is not raised from the dead, Christians are still in their sins; and the whole of Christian theology is fruitless. Muslims do not say that, the Bible does.

Note: (Paul does not try and prove his case on an emptied tomb.)

“For I determine not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” (1st Corinthians 2:2)

Note: Paul is not interested in the historical Christ.

In fact Paul never met the historical Jesus in his lifetime! He only claims to have met Jesus in a vision in Acts 9 , 22 and 26 and each and everyone of those text if juxtaposed contradict and conflict with one another.

“If the foundation is destroyed what shall the righteous do?” (Psalms 11:3)

How sound is that first account of the crucifixion that Paul is relating to us and the whole of Christian theology is hinging on?

How sound is it? Is the foundation solid?

Analyzing the foundation of Christian theology.

(1 Corinthians 15:3-8) <<< The Foundation of Christianity is built upon this text.

“For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures.” (1st Corinthians 15:3)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

Paul is referring to the Hebrew Scriptures because there were no New Testament writings at that time. However the fault in this text is that there is no place in the Hebrew scriptures that says a Messiah will die for our sins! Nowhere from Genesis to Malachi! There are allegories about other things.

“And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.” (1st Corinthians 15:4)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

Again, nowhere in the Hebrew scriptures from Genesis to Malachi does it say that a Messiah will rise from the dead on the third day!

“For as yet they knew not the scripture that he must rise again from the dead.” (John 20:9)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

Even Jesus disciples did not know any scriptures about a Messiah rising from the dead.

There is a major contradiction in this narrative as well.

A Contradiction

“And although THEY found no cause of death in him, yet desired THEY Pilate that he should be slain. And when THEY had fulfilled all that was written of him THEY took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulcher.” (Acts 13:28-29)

Note: (They the Jews who desired his death put him in the tomb, which is contradicted point blank by the Gospel of Mark.)

“And HE brought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulcher which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulcher.” (Mark 15:46)

Note: (Joseph himself put Jesus in the tomb not the Jews who desired his death as in Acts.)

Also, if they fulfilled all that was written of him there would be no “rose again the third day according to the scriptures.”

“And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the Twelve.” (Ist Corinthians 15:5)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

There the Greek word for seen is Opthe, and is used for spiritual seeing as in a vision. No where in the Bible does it say Peter had an independent sighting of Jesus n this order that Paul is giving?

Question: What does ‘opthe’ mean?

Answer: spiritual seeing a vision

Also “ appearing to the twelve” is wrong because Judas committed suicide. To say that twelve is just a terminology is not true! Jesus called them the 12 apostles and when Judas died the terminology changes to 11 until the election of Mathias in Acts 6:2!

Catholics, however, got it right. The Douay-Rheims which was diligently compared with the original Greek’ text they say 11! So Somebody’s Greek text is wrong!

Source: (The Douay-Rheims New Testament (published by Tan Books and Publishers, INC. P.O. box424 Rockford, Illinois 61105)

“After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto the present, but some are fallen asleep.” (1st Corinthians 15:6)

This is contradicted by the following text.

“This man God raised on the third day and granted that he be visible, not to all the people, but to us, the witnesses chosen by God in advance, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.” (Acts 10:40-41)

From Emmaus to Jerusalem Paul wedges in 500 people who he says saw Jesus, and then Jesus ascends up into heaven that day.

“And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.” (Luke 24:51)

This is in contrast to the following

“Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: To whom also he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:2-3)

The “Third Coming of Jesus”?

So if Jesus really did go up into heaven after he was raised again and then ‘beamed’ back down to hang around for 40 more days only to ‘beam’ back up this would mean that Christians are awaiting the 3rd coming of Jesus, and that just doesn’t sound too illustrious.

“After that he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.” (1st Corinthians 15:7)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

No where in the Bible does it say James had an independent sighting of Jesus in this order Paul is projecting. The Epistle of James has no account of a risen lord. What an encounter to leave out!

Again when all the apostles are mentioned are there 11 or 12? Which Greek text?

“And, last of all, he was seen of me also, as one born out of due time.” (1st Corinthians 15:8)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

Finally, Paul insert himself in the picture!

Note: Paul has been using that same word seen in Greek (OPTHE) all the way through to apply to all the apostles. Paul did not have a physical encounter with Jesus.

Paul also believes that the disciples did not have a physical encounter with Jesus as he uses the Greek word Opthe-seen all the way through 1 Corinthians 15:3-8.

Paul’s First account is thus discredited and the ‘foundation has been destroyed’.

We can stop right here and disregard everything else since the source of this crucifixion business is found to be incredible. However, we will pursue this in hopes that some people who did not grasp the argumentation above will find other evidence, Insha’Allah, conclusive.

Our apologies dear reader for the detour; we will continue with Dr. Ataie’s presentation.

Dr. Ataie continues also building his case upon what Paul has presented.

Namely that Paul says:

“ I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin.  I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.” (Galatians 1:11)

The isnaad-the chain of transmission of the Christian account of the crucifixion it begins with Paul.

@1:30:34 Dr. Ataie is quoting a statement of Bart Ehrman which is “Who would make up a crucified Messiah?”

Dr. Ali Ataie makes some good points butwe are not sold on the idea of the Jews expecting a Crucified Messiah. We do believe that the gospels are literary fiction to create a counter-Jesus narrative.

Also, important to note that the Qur’an no where states that no one killed Jesus. There is however, a specific text addressed to a group of Jews who claimed to have either killed or impailed Jesus.

Allow us to share with you a very interesting text from the Qur’an.

The Injil or Gospel is mentioned 12 times in 12 verses of the Qur’an. In one of those verses we have the following:

“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have  Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.” [Qur’an 9:111]

Qur’an Comment: Out of all the teachings that Allah could inform us about concerning what Jesus taught in the Injil, why did Allah mention the teaching concerning martyrdom? Why would Jesus teach about ‘killing and being killed’ if he was simply a pacifist?

To read more the Ibadi view please read:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/what-happened-to-jesus-and-how-did-he-die/

@1:34:38 “The Qur’an says there was ikhtilaaf among the Christians?” -Dr. Ataie

Prima-Qur’an comment: Wait what??!

Can Dr. Ataie show us in the Qur’an 4:157 where there is mention of Christians? There is no mention of Christians. Allah (swt) is clearly addressing claims made by some Jews.

Dr. Ataie please be more careful in your handling of the text!

Dr. Ataie makes an interesting point that Q: The Sayings Gospel has no passion narrative or resurrection narratives.

Dr. Ataie twice during the presentation used language of obfuscation.

@2:04:09 “impailed on the cross” -Dr. Ataie

Prima-Qur’an comment: crucifixion and Impailment are suspension punishments but they are not the same thing. It is possible that Prima Qur’an is gaininig traction and that some people want to use language that obfuscates the issue.

A) Impailment is a punishment where a pike/spike or other sharpened object is shoved through the loins/lubmus region of the body. The spine is used to hoist the individual. Depending upon the technique used it is designed to be a quick death struggle after. After the hapless victim cannot use their feet or hands to keep the impale device from reaching vital organs due to exhaustion. The impale device pierces vital organs and the victim dies an excruciating death.

B) Crucifixion is a punishment where an individual is put on a patibulum which is than affixed to a crux (a pole or beam). There is no nothing driven through the spine and the spinal column is relatively left intact. This suspension punishment focuses on putting nails through the hands and feet and meant to be a prolonged death struggle. Death is usually from asphyxiations. No vital organs are pierced. In fact people could survive being crucified for days. Hence, Christians make a huge ordeal about Jesus being scourged before Crucifixion.

@2:39:11 Dr. Ataie is quoting the Sefer Toledoth Yeshu, the Aramaic version and yet quotes the following to us in English:

“The Rabbi says Jesus was executed for sorcery by stoning and then crucified his body was than removed from the cross and dragged through the streets.” -Dr. Ataie

Prima-Qur’an comment: We are very curious to know the source that Dr. Ataie is quoting from.We are very doubtful that the Aramaic words are cross and crucify just as we know that the Qur’an 4:157 does not say crucify or cross.

In fact, Jews do not crucify anyone either. But they do impail!

The Jews Don’t Crucify People. Great exchange with Rabbi Dov Stein.
Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

The Sefer Toledoth Yeshu (The Book of the History of Jesus)

You could read other versions that would describe how the Romans convicted him; how he died a charlatan’s death (hanging not even on a tree, but on a cabbage stalk); and suffered a criminal’s burial.

@2:49:21 Dr. Ali Ataie gives his version of events that he thinks happens.

Prima-Qur’an comments: Dr. Alie believes that Jesus Barabbas is crucified instead of Jesus by the Romans. A different take to the substitution theory with the key differences being that no miracles happened and no one was made to look like Jesus. Jesus miraculously ascended into heaven where it is presumed here is there even until this day.

@2:58:44 “wa lakun shuba lahum” Was made to appear to them so by the evangelist it was precisely their passion narratives that made people to think that Jesus was crucified.

“For we did not follow cleverly contrived myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.” (2 Peter 1:16)

@3:23:50 “Perhaps what Paul meant is that the Jews killed him by Crucifixion but historically and legally how would the Jews have executed Jesus? If he was found guilty of blasphemy or sorcery which is actually what the Toledoth Yeshu and Qur’an suggest the charges were. “This is evidence sorcery.” If that’s the case they would have stoned him and than crucified his body post mortem.” and thus the Qur’an says wama qataluhu wama salabuhu nor crucify him post mortem.”

Prima-Qur’an comments: Oh Dr. Ataie so close so close. If Dr. Ataie would have simply consulted Jewish legal works he would have found the answer to his question. A very good question btw.

“but historically and legally how would the Jews have executed Jesus?”

Once you figure that out Dr. Ataie welcome to the Ibadi position on Qur’an 4:157. Welcome home!

It is not crucifixion it is impalement.

And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him; (وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)but it was made to appear to them so. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.”  (Qur’an 4:157)

  1. Notice that the context Qur’an 4:157 is speaking about Jews. There is no mention of Romans in the text. You may start at Qur’an 4:154 for context.
  2. There is a double denial. They did not kill him nor did they (ṣalabūhu) him.
  3. Why the seemingly redundant text? Is it not sufficient to say “And they did not kill him?” Surely that covers everything?
  4. Why would Allah (swt) deny that Jews “Crucified” Jesus? Especially if Allah (swt) is aware of Jewish laws?
  5. Jews do not crucify anyone nor do they put people on crosses.
  6. Jews do however impale people. So translating (ṣalabūhu) as impale makes complete sense.
  7. The phrase “but it was made to appear to them” does not indicate that this was something Allah (swt) did.

Now what happens is for some reason Muslims look at Qur’an 4:157 and they see Romans! The whole context of the text is that Allah (swt) is talking about Jews.

If Allah (swt) wanted to say Romans he certainly he could have. Yet, Qur’an 4:157 mentions nothing about the Romans.

“The Romans have been defeated.” (Qur’an 30:20)

So where than do Muslims gets Romans or Crucifixion or Cross in Qur’an 4:157 ?? 🤷

Other articles about Dr. Ataie.

Dr. Ali Ataie and his understanding of شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ (shubbiha lahum) Qur’an 4:157
Is Dr. Ali Ataie of Zaytuna a Flat-Earther?

May Allah Guide the Christians so that they do not burn in the hellfire.

May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 25, 2026 · 1:09 am

The Non-Crucifixion Verse by Dr. Louay Fatoohi: A response

“And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him; (وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)but it was made to appear to them so. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.”  (Qur’an 4:157)

﷽ 

In today’s entry on Prima-Qur’an we will be going through this paper by Dr. Louay Fatoohi and sharing some thoughts on what he has written.

thenon-crucifixionverse-louayfatoohiDownload

Those who are not aware the following is a biography of Dr. Louay Fatoohi.

Biography
The above is also his website. If you have not read the following book, we would highly recommend it.

We gave our review of the book here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1FCI7QXBCG2SJ/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=9670526027

So now to the topic at hand: The Non-Crucifixion Verse: A Historical, Contextual, and Linguistic Analysis by Louay Fatoohi.

We read from his article:

“In the Qur’an, though, there is little interest in how and when false beliefs appeared, what their historical development was, or whether they were traceable to oral or written tradition. When certain beliefs are rejected in the Qur’an, this comes in the form of asserting that these were not communicated by God through prophets but distortions of the revelations and/or total fabrications by people.” -Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: We would agree that the Qur’an is not “speaking to the wall.” It is certainly addressing claims. In this case, we would both agree with claims made by Jews.

“It sounds unrealistic and farfetched to think that if an average Jew at the time was asked why they thought that the Christian Messiah was false, they would have pointed to one of those few passages in a polemical book that they probably had never read any part of!” -Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: Again we agree. Though it seems rather obvious that the Qur’an 4:157 at least addresses some claims made by some Jews as to a possibility of why they would reject Jesus as the Messiah.

“Also, if 4:157 is to be linked to the known claim that the Jews killed Jesus, then the logical source of choice should be the Gospel narratives, not a passing and vague reference in the Talmud.”-Dr. Louay Fatoohi.

Prima Qur’an: Yeah, so at this point we are glad that Dr. Fatoohi has made his statement conditional. “If 4:157 is to be linked.” Because it begs the question: Why would the Gospel be a logical source of evidence for Jews? Dr. Fatoohi doesn’t quite flesh that out for us.

“Had the Qur’an engaged with the Talmud, it would have probably attacked it and accused the Jews of creating a book that was not revealed by God.” -Louay Fatoohi


Prima Qur’an: Much like the hadith, it is considered a second source of revelation for Muslims. Perhaps Dr. Fatoohi had not considered that the Talmud acts in much the same way. The Rabbis believe their teachings go back in direct transmission to an oral Torah received by Moses (as).

There is also this verse where Allah (swt) could have plainly stated the word Torah. The Torah is never used in a disparaging way in the Qur’an.

“How terrible it is to those who write the Book with their hands and then say, “This is from Allah,” to sell it for a little money. How terrible it is for them for what their hands have written, and how terrible for them what they have earned.” And they say, “The fire will most certainly not touch us for more than a limited number of days.” Say [unto them]: “Have you received a promise from Allah- for Allah never breaks His promise – or do you attribute to Allah something which you cannot know?” (Qur’an 2:79-80)

The mishna states:

Source: (https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Eduyot.2.10?lang=bi)

Prima Qur’an:We want to re-emphasize that we are in complete agreement with Dr. Fatoohi’s statement here:

“In the Qur’an, though, there is little interest in how and when false beliefs appeared, what their historical development was, or whether they were traceable to oral or written tradition. When certain beliefs are rejected in the Qur’an, this comes in the form of asserting that these were not communicated by God through prophets but distortions of the revelations and/or total fabrications by people.” -Louay Fatoohi.

Prima Qur’an: So coming to the verse in question under the section titled: The Non-Crucifixion Verse in Focus, Dr. Louay Fatoohi states:

“In this section, I aim to show that both the language and context of 4:157 repeatedly and unambiguously indicate that this verse can only be a denial of both the killing and the crucifixion of Jesus. This is what underpins the consensus of Muslim exegetes in their understanding of this verse. Conversely, rejecting this ubiquitous interpretation is driven by a priori views and convictions, which I have already quickly reviewed, that are extraneous to the Qur’anic text.” – Louay Fatoohi

Prima-Qur’an:We are going to strongly suggest that this is what Dr. Louay Fatoohi and early Muslim exegetes did. In fact, quoting Dr. Louay Fatoohi:

“In his historical tome Tārīkh al-umam wal-mulūk, al-Ṭabarī quotes Wahb Ibn Munabbih (d. 114/732) on the crucifixion. The latter is known for introducing Jewish and Christian narratives into Islamic tradition.” – Louay Fatoohi

Prima-Qur’an: Dr. Louay Fatoohi then beautifully demonstrates that the Qur’an 4:157 when taken into context is addressed to Jews.

“More specifically, we will focus on the four verses leading to 4:157 and the verse that follows it, as they provide immediate contextual information that is useful for avoiding any misunderstanding of 4:157. We will start with verse 4:153 as it commences a new context in which the Jews, and later Jesus, are the main subject.”-Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: So this is where our frustration with Dr. Fatoohi and the popular view on these verses comes in. Again, no blame on Dr Fatoohi because he seems to be following those early Muslim commentators who tried to fill in the void by relying upon extraneous material.

Point 1. When reading the verses in context. Where is there any mention of Romans?

Allah (swt) is not unfamiliar with the Romans.

“The Romans (l-rūmu) have been defeated.” (Qur’an 30:2)

There is no text in the Qur’an that connects Romans (l-rumu) with an act known as salabu.

Point 2. There is no text in the Qur’an that connects Christians (nasara) with an act known as (ṣalabū)

Point 3. Because Allah (swt) is addressing Jews, salabu cannot be a reference to a cross or a crucifixion! Why? Because Jews simply do not crucify people. Dr. Louay Fatoohi, or anyone under the sun, has given us a shred of evidence that they do!

How could we explain this away if we were a Muslim apologist? Aha! This particular group of Jews were already rebellious, so they crucified him in violation of their laws! Then we thought about it some more and said that doesn’t make any sense.

Think about it. Allah (swt) is addressing claims made by Jews against Jesus (as). Among their boast is a claim tantamount to saying: “We did something to Jesus that is not prescribed by Jewish law!”

It is among the most bizarre claims we have ever come across.

In fact, as Dr. Fatoohi quoted John of Damascus, who rightly critiques this view.

“A much more detailed early Christian account of the Muslim belief about the crucifixion comes from the monk John of Damascus, around a century after Muḥammed’s time. Having accused the Prophet of authoring the Qur’an by plagiarizing the Old and New Testaments with help from an unnamed Arian monk, he goes on to say the following: And he says that the Jews wanted to crucify Him in violation of the Law, and that they seized His shadow and crucified this. But the Christ Himself was not crucified, he says, nor did He die, for God out of His love for Him took Him to Himself into heaven.” -Louay Fatoohi

Dear readers, this error is so serious that this one issue would be enough to make anyone reconsider their Islam! How could Allah (swt) not be aware of Jewish methods of execution?! 

We have two options.

1. Imputing ignorance to Allah (swt) concerning Jewish methods of execution. 

2. Muslim exegets being mistaken by relying upon extraneous material and imposing meaning upon the plain text of the Qur’an.

It is clear that the first option is not an option for the believing Muslim.   Besides, is there any proof that these early Muslim exegetes were well versed in the laws of the Jews?

Ironically, the verse that Dr. Fatoohi calls ‘The Non-Crucifixion Verse’ actually is a crucifixion verse, not just the crucifixion of Jesus.

Point 4. Dr. Fatoohi seems comfortable to translate (ṣalabū) as crucifixion!

Though Dr. Fatoohi has stated:

“Finally, I should add a note about the Arabic word root ṣ-l-b, which is ubiquitously translated as “crucify.” This word appears in the Qur’an in a verbal form six times (al-Nisāʾ 4:157; al-Maʾida 5:33; al-Aʿrāf 7:124; Yūsuf 12:41; Ṭāhā 20:71; al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:49). In one instance, Pharaoh makes this threat to the magicians who accepted Moses’ claim to being God’s messenger.” -Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: This is frustrating because usually wefind Dr. Fatoohi to be circumspect but he did the exact same thing that Todd Lawson did. Which is to ignore an analysis of the use of the word with the text of the Qur’an. Dr. Fatoohi also left out that this root word s-l-b is used twice as a noun form. Something Lawson at least did not leave out. Such a crucial word is treated by Professor Todd Lawson and Dr. Fatoohi as nothing more than an afterthought.

““It occurs in the Qur’an eight times (4:157; 12:41; 7:124; 20:71; 26:49; 5:33; 86:7;4:23). Six of these are as a verb with the accepted meaning of ‘to crucify’. The others are as a noun meaning ‘back’ or ‘loins’ (86:7; 4:23). ”

Source: (pg 31 The Crucifixion and the Qur’an: A Study in the History of Muslim Thought)

“This use may indicate that ṣ-l-b means some kind of execution by suspension.“-Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: Dr. Fatoohi goes into a discussion about some debate over the form of Jesus’ crucifixion.

“There is some debate about how Jesus was crucified, whether he was nailed to a cross, and what shape it had, or was suspended until he died.”-Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: Actually, this need not be a mystery for us at all. As Dr. Fatoohi has pointed out in the text of Qur’an 4:153-157 the whole focus is on the Jews. So why the curious fixation with the Romans?

Let us see what Jewish sources of punishment there are:

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/capital-punishment (no mention of crucifixion at all)

Source: https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9985

Source: https://www.sefaria.org/Deuteronomy.21.22?lang=bi&aliyot=0

Notice that in the above text the culprit is killed first, and then they are impaled on a stake.

Notice that when Dr. Fatoohi dismisses the swoon theory, he states:

“Any claim that Jesus suffered a non-fatal crucifixion is also dismissed. The verse unambiguously states that Jesus was not killed or even non-fatally crucified.” -Louay Fatoohi

Prima-Qur’an: There is a double denial. They did not kill him nor did they (ṣalabūhu) him. Which means he was not even impaled. (If we are being consistent). They didn’t kill him (which covers every type of death under the sun) nor did they impale him—which would be a post-mortem suspension. Seems quite consistent with what we are seeing from Jewish law.

Or as Dr. Fatoohi states: “not crucified” if we have some strange fixation on the Romans.

So, since Dr. Fatoohi believes the Qur’an is denying that Jesus was even on the cross, then it would be worth asking Dr. Fatoohi. The following: “Do you believe whoever was “crucified” was this crucifixion post-mortem (occurring after death) or an ante mortem (occurring before death)?

After all, Dr. Fatoohi does not seem certain when he says:

“This use may indicate that ṣ-l-b means some kind of execution by suspension.”-Louay Fatoohi.

Prima-Qur’an: This would seem to argue that he is on board with the idea of ante mortem crucifixion. However, I am in agreement with Dr. Fatoohi when he states:

“I would argue that such disregard for the basics of Arabic would make the Qur’an unintelligible.” -Louay Fatoohi.

Prima Qur’an: However, such obfuscation is wholly unnecessary, if we allow the context of the Qur’an to speak, and it is clear that Jews practice post-mortem suspension.

“By the time of the Qur’an, the classical interpretation of the crucifixion of Jesus using a T-shaped cross or a variation of it was already long-established. So, the crucifixion that is rejected in 4:157 seems to be the commonly accepted image of the execution of Jesus.”-Louay Fatoohi


Prima-Qur’an: commonly accepted image according to whom? Since Jews are being addressed, why not reference what (salabu) would look like to them? Again, why the fixation with the Romans and the Christians when there has already been an admission that the immediate text and the context is a response to Jews?

Remember the fixation with Christian beliefs in the Qur’an, according to Dr. Fatoohi, is:

“The human nature of Jesus is repeatedly stressed in the Qur’an and his divinity is rejected in unambiguous terms.”-Louay Fatoohi

Prima-Qur’an: Agreed! Obviously, there is a different agenda when dealing with Christian objections to Islam. If becoming a Muslim meant that a Jew had to accept Jesus as Messiah, then Allah (swt) would have a different agenda when dealing with their objections.

“But we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles.” (1 Corinthians 1:23)

“These scholars suggest that the majority consensus is based on a misunderstanding of the Qur’an, which Muslims have failed to correct for fourteen centuries.” -Louay Fatoohi


Prima-Qur’an: Well, actually, these 1400 years of scholarship is really based upon copy and paste now, isn’t it? To pretend that every Muslim exegete independently researched every single verse of the Qur’an is just simply presumptuous. What we have is a majoritarian belief based upon individuals incorporating extraneous material from oral traditions without connected chains of narrations going back to the source that contain conflicting accounts.

We are also surprised by Dr. Louay’s appeal to the consensus of scholars when he himself does not believe in the return of Christ Jesus. This is certainly the position of the consensus of scholars. So we can take Dr. Louay’s appeal to consensus as not being serious.

We mean on what consistent basis does Dr. Louay Fatoohi dismiss the second coming of Jesus (as) which is mentioned in quite a number of hadith that do have connected chains and yet expect that we should not dismiss outright beliefs based upon individuals incorporating extraneous material from oral traditions without connected chains of narrations going back to the source that contain conflicting accounts?


None of what has been shared is from the canonical gospels. Would have been great if Dr. Fatoohi would have shared with us an exact quote from the tafsir literature of the tale of substitution. Because it sure the heck would have been very interesting reading a word-for-word detailed account of how the Jews (not the Romans) crucified stealth Jesus. Or about how the Jews killed and then crucified stealth Jesus.

Perhaps in a future article Dr. Fatoohi may give us a detailed quote of these narratives.

However, one central theme stands out. Someone was made to appear to look like Jesus.

This seems to be the understanding of: was made to appear to them so/walākin shubbiha lahum 

Note the following:

“Third, the denial of the crucifixion in 4:157 is followed in 4:158 by a second action that is explicitly attributed to God, which is raising Jesus.”-Louay Fatoohi

Prima-Qur’an: Yet, this was made to appear to them so/walākin shubbiha lahum  is not an action attributed to Allah.

Another example is the following:

“And the answer of Ibrahim’s people was not but that they said, “Kill him or burn him,” but Allah saved him (fa-anjaynāhu) from the fire. Indeed in that are signs for a people who believe.” (Qur’an 29: 24)


Why don’t we see that language, ‘Allah saved him (fa-anjaynāhu) from ‘salabu’ ?

This much is clear when The Ashari in aqidah and Shafi’i in Fiqh, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, who was not satisfied with the substitution theory, was absolutely merciless in his take-down of this concept when he pins:

“This opens the door of sophistry, So that if we saw Zayd it would be possible that it was not really Zayd but that the likeness of Zayd had been cast upon another. This would imply the nullification of social contracts such as marriage and ownership. Also it would lead to the impugning of the principle of tawatur, bringing into serious doubt all transmitted historical knowledge. This principle should be upheld as long as it is based on perceived phenomena (al-mahsusat). Such confusion about perceived phenomena would threaten the foundations of all religious laws (shar-iya). Neither is it permissible to argue for such transference of identity by appealing to the tradition that allows for miracles during the time of prophecy. Such a provision would bring into question the identity of the prophets themselves, which in turn would call into question the probity of the sources of religious knowledge.”

Source: Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (Mafatih, al-ghayb al-mushtahar bi-al-tafsir al-kabir.)

So it is obvious that ‘made to appear to them’ is not something one can attribute to Allah.

Allah (swt) tells us about his sublime revelation:

“It is a blessed Book which We have revealed for you so that you will reflect upon its verses and so the people of understanding will take heed.” (Qur’an 38:29)

“Surely We know well that they say about you: “It is only a human being who teaches him,” (notwithstanding) that he whom they maliciously hint at is of foreign tongue, while this (Qur’an) is plain Arabic clear.” (Qur’an 16:103)

There really is no need for so much confusion and obfuscation over this verse. We do not need to appeal to extraneous material that is not divine in authority, has no connected chain back to the original sources, is confused in its reports and proclaims some supra natural event that Allah (swt) himself did not claim.

وَإِنَّ ٱلَّذِینَ ٱخۡتَلَفُوا۟ فِیهِ لَفِی شَكࣲّ مِّنۡهُۚ مَا لَهُم بِهِۦ مِنۡ عِلۡمٍ إِلَّا ٱتِّبَاعَ ٱلظَّنِّۚ

“It was made to appear to them so” is not a text addressed to anyone who witnessed anything at all!

 ٱخْتَلَفُوا۟ Tells us that there are disagreements

شَكّ Tells us that they are in doubt

مَا لَهُم بِهِۦ مِنۡ عِلۡمٍ Tells us they are not basing this upon knowledge

ٱتِّبَاعَ ٱلظَّنِّۚ Tell us they are following dhan (assumption or conjecture)

“And indeed, those who differ in it surely are in doubt about it. Their knowledge is based upon the following of dhan assumption or conjecture.”

In other words, those who are saying: “We killed Christ Jesus the Son of Mary the Messenger of Allah.”  Are not eyewitnesses to anything. They are only following the traditions of those who make claims based upon conjecture and no knowledge.

ٱتِّبَاعَ ٱلظَّنِّۚ it is this same following of dhan (assumption and conjecture) taken from the very same people whom Allah (swt) tells us are in disagreements, are in doubt, not based upon knowledge that we get ultra bizarre translations of the Qur’an an like the following:

And because of their saying (in boast), “We killed Messiah Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah,” – but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not (i.e. Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) )  (Qur’an 4:157) –Muhsin Khan & Muhammed al-Hilali

Does that make a lick of sense to anyone?

So let’s get this right. Wahb Ibn Munabbih takes his knowledge from people whom Allah (swt) tells us are in disagreements, are in doubt, not basing information upon knowledge, only following conjecture, and they get to inform us about what Allah’s revelation says?

“So if you are in doubt, [O Muhammed], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those (ahla l-dhik’ri) who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.” (Qur’an 10:94)

Notice the phrase: ahla l-dhik’ri and not ahla l-kitābi

The above verse is only applicable in those matters where they themselves do not have doubts about the matter and has to be taken into context with what Allah (swt) has description of those in (Qur’an 4:157)

May Allah (swt) bless Dr. Louay Fatoohi for his sincere and noble efforts. For the most part, he is only defending the indefensible. 1200 plus years of fuzzy logic and copy-and-paste scholarship. Statements by converts to Islam which are based upon conjecture and have no connected chain of transmission going back to the companions of Jesus.

Please do see our article:

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157
The Jews Don’t Crucify People. Great exchange with Rabbi Dov Stein.

May Allah Guide the Christians so that they do not burn in the hellfire.

May Allah (swt)bless the ummah.

May Allah (swt) forgive the ummah.

May Allah (swt) guide the ummah.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

March 24, 2026 · 10:04 am

The Question of the Historical Crucifixion and the Martyrdom of Jesus.

“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 9:111)

﷽

Today we examine the evidence for the alleged Crucifixion from the prima facie evidence itself, namely the New Testament. There are many texts in the New Testament that state after the fact, that Jesus died. What we want to do is look at the event itself, the language used as well as the words that are attributed to Jesus in regard to the alleged event.

Every once in awhile a Christian gets the idea that he wants to experience the suffering that Jesus endured on the so called double-cross. So this person will lay down half naked on a beam of wood and gets someone to nail the palms of his hands (or the wrist) and his feet to the beam. When the beam of wood is stood up on its end, the persons’ body weight immediately tears his hands and the feet loose and they slide off the beam in degradation and humiliation.

This happened all to often, and people began to really wonder if the ecclesiastical images of Jesus inspired by painters, having him on the double cross were really true.

Thus, in all effort to make sense of the ecclesiastical images, made popular by paintings, the all too familiar “nailed to the double cross” method, along came the idea that the hands were not only nailed to the cross, but ropes were used to bind the forearms to the horizontal beam. This satisfied the world that such a method would prevent a body from falling off the cross and everyone breathed a sigh of relief.

LOOK AT ALL THE ROPES AND BONDS !!

The below video is a ‘Crucifixion’ that happened on Friday April 29th 2025 in Indonesia, the country with the world’s largest Muslim population.

We are simply fascinated by all the ropes and bonds used to hold the body in place.

WHAT ABOUT THOSE NAILS???

Matthew, Mark, Luke mention nothing at all about nails in the hands and/or feet.

Remember none of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) mention anything at all about nails.

“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit des not flesh and bones, as you see me have.” (Luke 24:39)

Only in John’s Gospel do we get:

 “Now Thomas (also known as Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” (John 20:25)

Nothing about nails in the feet!

We also get this vague passage in Colossians:

“Having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the σταυρῷ (staurō) . (Colossians 2:14)

If the etymology of the verse is stressed, this verse is the only direct indication of any nails used to attach Jesus to the stauros.

“They pierce my hands and feet.” (Psalm 21:16)

Nothing about nails in the feet!

WHAT DOES JESUS SAY ABOUT THE FORM OF HIS EXECUTION?

Quite curious when Jesus begins to speak of the passion (according to the evangelist) he does not say much regarding the execution form. He is surprisingly vague.

IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK JESUS DOESN’T MENTION (σταυρόω) stauroó IN CONNECTION TO HIS DEATH AT ALL!

“And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.” (Mark 8:31)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day”. (Mark 9:31)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? And he answered and told them, Elias verily come first, and restore all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be held in contempt.” (Mark 9:11-12)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:  And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.” (Mark 10:33-34)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

IN THE GOSPEL OF LUKE JESUS DOESN’T MENTION (σταυρόω) stauroó IN CONNECTION TO HIS DEATH AT ALL!

“Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.” (Luke 9:22)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

” Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men. But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him of that saying.” (Luke 9:43-44)

This is certainly the writing of a redactor. It is third person. Here the writer is emphatic that they did not understand this statement. It was hid from them and that they did not perceive the meaning of it. Why not just ask him to explain it? Well apparently, “they feared to ask him about“. It is not explained.

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

We get much the same in the following passage:

“Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again. The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about. (Luke 18:31-34)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN JESUS DOESN’T MENTION (σταυρόω) stauroó IN CONNECTION TO HIS DEATH AT ALL!

JESUS COMPARES HIMSELF TO THE SNAKE BEING LIFTED UP (EXALTED)

“And as Moses lifted up (exalted) the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up (exalted).”(John 3:14) This saying may imply some kind of suspension, but nothing more.

The the right is the god Asclepius. The god of medicine, healing, and rejuvenation. Here he is pictured with is serpent entwined staff. On the left is a depiction of the Prophet Moses exalting the snake on a staff. You will find this incident in Numbers 29:6-9

Christians seem to be embarrassed by the idea of Jesus comparing himself to being exalted like the healing snake that Moses put on the pole. However, that healing snake obviously is not the Satan snake of Genesis, as that Satan snake was cursed by God, and the healing snake on Moses pole was directed by God.

Just like Jesus was taken to be worshipped as a false god, so too the snake on the pole was taken to be worshipped. So King Hezekiah did the following:  

“Over time that He removed the high places, smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles. He broke into pieces the bronze snake Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense to it. (It was called Nehushtan.)” (2 Kings 18:4)

THE ONLY GOSPEL WHERE JESUS MENTIONS (σταυρόω) stauroó TWICE IN CONNECTION TO HIS DEATH IS THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW!

“From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.” (Matthew 16:21)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.” (Matthew 17:22-23)

No mention of the ecclesiastical double-cross!

“Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill AND ; σταυρώσετε stauosete others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.” (Matthew 23:34)

Notice that it says here: “Some of them you will kill AND stauosete.”

ἀποκτενεῖτε (you will kill) καὶ (and) σταυρώσετε (?)

The prophets, sages, and teachers will be killed and some type of suspension/impaling will follow this killing.

Also note that this is an act that the religious Jews carry out. Jesus does not connect σταυρώσετε stauosete to himself here.

What ever σταυρώσετε stauosete means it has to be a punishment that religious Jews would carry out. Otherwise Jesus, would be ignorant of Jewish law!

Jew’s don’t crucify people! They do not suspend people on a double cross! It is not in the TNCH and it is not in the Talmud.

“Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,  And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him staurosai σταυρῶσαι : and the third day he shall rise again.” (Matthew 20:18-19)

Matthew adds here for the first time that the end of Jesus life will be connected with an act referred to with suspension/impaling.

“And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said to his disciples, You know that after two days is the feast of the Passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be staurothenai σταυρωθῆναι .  Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, at the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas.  And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.” (Matthew 26:1-4)

The second time that the end of Jesus life will be connected with an act referred to with suspension/impaling

THE CONCLUSION:

In the Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John Jesus does not connect his death with (σταυρόω) stauroó at all!

Only in Matthew do we see two passages where Jesus connects his death with (σταυρόω) stauroó.

We also know that what ever (staurothenai σταυρωθῆναι) means in Matthew 26, and (staurosai σταυρῶσαι) in Matthew 20, Jesus connects (stauosete σταυρώσετε) in Matthew 23 with an act that the Jews do!

Juxtapose the text and do the math!

HOW THE WORD (σταυρόω) stauroó IS USED IN CONNECTION WITH JESUS TRIAL

 As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “CrΣταύρωσον! CrΣταύρωσον !” (Stauroson) But Pilate answered, “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.” (John 19:6)

Why would Pilate tell the chief priest and their officials to “crucify” or σταυρώσατε (staurosate) Jesus if:

  1. They had no power to do so.
  2. Pilate was aware of their laws?

Meaning: Jews don’t crucify people! They do not suspend people on a double cross!

Had the Jewish authorities been directly involved, Jesus would have been stoned, or he would have been killed and then impaled.

“Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him.” (Acts 7:52)

“While they threw stones at Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”  After that he fell on his knees and cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died.” (Acts 7:59-60)

“However, biblical law prescribes hanging after execution: every person found guilty of a capital offense and put to death had to be impaled on a stake (Deut. 21:22); but the body had to be taken down the same day and buried before nightfall, “for an impaled body is an affront to God” (ibid., 23).”

Source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/capital-punishment

“Then said Pilate unto him, Why do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to (σταυρῶσαί) staurōsai you, and have power to release you?” (John 19:10)

“But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, (σταύρωσον) staurōson him. Pilate said to them, Shall I (σταυρώσω) staurōsō your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he over to them to be (σταυρωθῇ) staurōthē. And they took Jesus, and led him away.” (John 19:15-16)

 “Pilate said unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all said to him, Let him be (Σταυρωθήτω) Staurōthētō. And the governor said, Why, what evil has he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be (Σταυρωθήτω) Staurōthētō.” (Matthew 27:22-23)

“Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be (σταυρωθῇ) staurōthē.” (Matthew 27:26)

“And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to (σταυρῶσαι) staurōsai him.” (Matthew 27:31)

“And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas: (Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison.) Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spoke to them again. But they cried, saying, (Σταύρου) Staurou (σταύρου staurou).  And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil has he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.  And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be (σταυρωθῆναι) staurōthēnai. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.” (Luke 23:18-23)

And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

“And he released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.” (Luke 23:24-25)

 “And they cried out again, (Σταύρωσον) Staurōson him. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil has he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, (σταυρωθῇ) staurōthē him.” (Mark 15:13-14)

“And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to σταυρώσωσιν staurōsōsin him.” (Mark 15:20)

THE CONCLUSION: It is clear from this narrative that the Roman authorities are looked upon as reluctant and even sympathetic to Jesus. Where as the Jews are being looked at as antagonist. If the above accounts are to be harmonized than what ever one understands the terminology for (σταυρόω) stauroó to mean it must be understood in light of Pilate’s statement. “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. (John 19:6)

WHO CARRIED THE (σταυρὸν) stauron AND WHY?

The general public thinks that Jesus carried the cross-shaped execution tool († or T), influenced by ecclesiastical paintings and art-history. The common interpretation that Jesus was carrying the crossbeam (patibulum) is not supported by the Biblical text. The theory may be based on the centuries of ecclesiastical paintings, and/or other art work that would lead to the seemingly logical conclusion that a solid pole together with a solid crossbeam out would be too heavy to be carried. Thus, according to this view Jesus must have been carrying only a part (assumed to the crossbeam) of the execution tool (the assumed cross).

“And they compelled one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his (σταυρὸν) stauron.” (Mark 15:20-21)

“As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the (σταυρὸν) stauron.” (Matthew 27:32)

“As the soldiers led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the (σταυρὸν) stauron on him and made him carry it behind Jesus.” (Luke 23:26)

When it comes to the walk towards Calvary, the gospels do not say that Jesus fell or struggled under the weight of the stauros, contrary to the common assumption. The synoptic gospels say that Simon was forced to carry the staturos, without saying why. The synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke have Simon carrying the stauros. Where as the Gospel of John has Jesus carrying his staturos:

 “And he bearing his (σταυρὸν) stauron went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha.” (John 19:17)

Now notice the synoptic Gospel of Matthew, Mark and Luke do not have Jesus bearing his (σταυρὸν) stauron to being with. Where as John says that Jesus bares it himself. Christians imagine scenarios where Jesus carries the (σταυρὸν) stauron and suddenly he cannot.

HOW DID CHRISTIANS TRY TO DEAL WITH THIS DILEMA?

This is an example of how Christian evangelist try and make sense of this:

“Well, John 19:17 does say Jesus bore his own cross to Golgotha. And the synoptics say Simon of Cyrene helped part of the way (Mark 15:21; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26).

This is because of Jesus’ weakened state from being flogged. However, John does not say only Jesus carried the cross the whole way, or that Simon of Cyrene did not help him. That is read into the text. John just chose to omit this part of the journey to Golgotha because it was distracting from the themes of his gospel, such as God’s sovereign plan.”

My Response:

Where does (Mark 15:21; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26) mention: “helped part of the way“?? That is correct that John does not say that “only Jesus carried the (σταυρὸν) stauron the whole way or that Simon of Cyrene did not help him.” However, the text also does not say that Simon did help him, or that he carried it part way! That is actually ‘reading into the text‘. You have to wonder what prevented Simon from carrying the (σταυρὸν) stauron all the way?

THE CONCLUSION:

The whole account of the gospels so far rest solely on the meaning of the diversely used verb stauros. So far nothing has been said about the notorious crossbeam-neither on Jesus (and/or Simon’s) shoulders nor attached to the pole. In fact, nothing is said about the shape or the nature of the execution tool, other than that it was a staturos. As has been seen, the texts describing Simon of Cyrene carrying Jesus stauros do not even indicate that the carried device was a patibulum and are thus futile to use as evidence that the stauros of Jesus resembles the assumed shape of a cross.

THE ACTUAL EVENT CALLED (σταυρωθῆναι) staurothenai POPULARLY KNOWN AS “CRUCIFIXION”

“And they (Σταυρώσαντες) Staurōsantes him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.” (Matthew 27:35)

It is perhaps surprising that the act called “crucifixion” by the masses itself is mentioned only in passing.

On the matters of what sort of “cross” was used to “crucify” Jesus and how he was supposedly fastened, suspended, impaled, hung upon it Matthew is absolutely silent. This becomes all the more interesting when you consider that Matthew is the only book in the entire New Testament where Jesus is actively participating in an act called (staurothenai) σταυρωθῆναι

“Where they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the middle.  And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the (σταυροῦ) staurou. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was (ἐσταυρώθη) estaurōthē was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.” (John 19:18-20)

“Then the soldiers, when they had (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.” (John 19:23)

“Now in the place where he was (ἐσταυρώθη) estaurōthē there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.” (John 19:41)

“And when they had (σταυροῦσιν) staurousin him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take. And it was the third hour, and they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him.” (Mark 15:24-25)

THE CONCLUSION: There is no mention of nails. There is no mention of ropes. There is not much of a description to label what took place as a “historical account.”

The ecclesiastical tradition that many have taken to be accurate and true cannot be substantiated from the aforementioned text!

DEATH BY ROMAN SPEAR OR (σταυρωθῆναι) staurothenai POPULARLY KNOWN AS “CRUCIFIXION”

“But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.  Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.” (John 19:33-34)

Comments: Now if they saw that Jesus was already dead, they didn’t have any reason to pierce his side! He was dead already! If they were not sure, what would they have done? They would have broken His legs!

This is the version of Matthew most of you read in your bibles

“The rest said, “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to save him.” (Matthew 27:49)

There is surprising silence about the fact that two of the best manuscripts of the New Testament, the Codices Sinaitcus and Vaticanus, describe Jesus as being killed by a soldier’s spear instead of the suspension per se. Matthew 27:49 according to condex Sinaticus: “The other said, Let [him] be, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him. Another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and blood.”

In fact so troubling is this text that Dr. Daniel B Wallace (a prominent defender of the idea that the Bible is inerrant) landed himself in some hot soup!

“Dr. Wallace wrote, “In fact, it has been repeatedly affirmed that no doctrine of Scripture has been affected by these textual differences.” Elsewhere he has adjusted this claim by referring to “cardinal” doctrine and “plausible” variants. I wonder if Dr. Wallace included the doctrine of inerrancy among the doctrines to which he refers. In the same manuscripts that he considers the most reliable (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus), the text of Matthew 27:49 says that Jesus was speared before He died. This textual variant introduces a contradiction with the timing presented in John 19:33-34, where Jesus is speared after His death. I welcome Dr. Wallace to explain how this variant in the “best” manuscripts – a variant which Hort (the most influential compiler of the Revised Text in the 1800’s) regarded as plausibly original – can be embraced without abandoning the doctrine of inerrancy.”

Source: https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/matthew-27-49-doctrinal-question-of-the-blood-of-jesus.946/

You may also see:

http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2018/02/matthew-2749-was-jesus-pierced-before.html

THE CONCLUSION:

In the synoptic accounts of the gospels, the spear thrust occurs after Jesus has expired on the supposed “cross”, therefore the Jews who came to see Pilate about the bodies evidently assumed that Jesus and the two thieves would still be alive at that time.

THE WORD (σταυρόω) stauroó IN CONNECTION WITH THE TWO THIEVES.

THIS WORK OF ART AND WORK OF FICTION IS WHAT MOST CHRISTIANS IMAGINE WHEN THEY THINK ABOUT JESUS AND THE THIEVES

Most Christians envision in their minds that there were three “crosses” at Calvary. There is nothing in the Gospels that would suggest that the thieves (or revolutionaries) were dealt with in a manner different from Jesus. That is to say there is nothing to suggest three separate “crosses”.

“And with him they (σταυροῦσιν) staurousin two thieves; the one out of his right hand, and the other out of his left. (Mark 15:27)

 “Then were there two thieves (σταυροῦνται) staurountai with him, one out of the right hand, and another out of the left.” (Matthew 27:28)

“And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him, and the malefactors, one out of the right hand, and the other out of the left.” (Luke 23:33)

“Where they (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the middle.” (John 19:18)

Now before you dear reader I would suggest you to look at these disparate Christian translations and watch as some of them try to deceitfully pull the wool over your eyes.

Behold! https://biblehub.com/john/19-31.htm

“Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the BODIES [PLURAL] would not remain on THE (σταυροῦ) STAUROU [SINGULAR] on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that THEY [PLURAL] might be taken away. So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the FIRST MAN, and then the legs of the OTHER ONE who had been (συσταυρωθέντος systaurōthentos) together with him. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.” (John 19: 31-33)

You see the Christian translations attempts to cover up the obvious? Doesn’t John say that there were BODIES (PLURAL) on a [SINGULAR]  STAUROU? 

What these verses tell us is that three men were attached/suspended to ONE staurou! 

John 19:32 further substantiates this fact: The Greek word systaurōthentos not only means that the two criminals were simply “with him,” but that both of them were also suspended/impaled “together with him” -“together with him” on the SAME STAUROU!

One more final point as the icing on the cake. Now imagine the popular ecclesiastical images of Jesus with the two thieves, one to his right and one to his left. For example the image posted above. If one robber was crucified on a separate cross on Jesus LEFT side and the other robber was on his RIGHT (THREE crosses, placed side by side by side) with Jesus in the MIDDLE, then this becomes a huge problem with the deaths of the two robbers. This is because the soldiers who killed FIRST the two robbers and LAST they came to Jesus in the MIDDLE to kill him. Jesus being in the MIDDLE would have made him the SECOND to be killed!

HOW DID CHRISTIANS TRY TO DEAL WITH THIS DILEMA?

  1. First was deception through translations which we saw on display above.
  2. Realizing that not everyone has the I.Q of a Turnip they had to come up with some strategies.

Since the New Testament called those “crucified” with the Messiah both robbers (Matthew 27:38) and also malefactors (criminals) (Luke 23:32), One Christian scholar, proposed that there were two malefactors and also two robbers! So we now have a row of five crosses!

The Roman soldiers came to the first one broke his legs, then the second broke his legs and than to Jesus, didn’t break his legs and proceeded on down the row. Even though this interpretation is a valiant effort it still goes against the fact that the two malefactors were two robbers. Also, when we go back and look at the four text in the first section, it is obvious there is only two mentioned; one on each side.

To this Christian scholar’s credit he realized the problem. How could the soldiers first break the legs of the two robbers and then come to Jesus who was in the middle of them?

Actually, the answer is quite simple! They walked AROUND the (σταυροῦ) staurou breaking legs as necessary to hasten death!

THE CONCLUSION:

It is clear from reading these text we do not get the ecclesiastical images of Jesus inspired by painters, having him and two thieves beside him on the double crosses.

HOW THE WORD (σταυρωθῆναι) staurothenai IS USED IN CONNECTION WITH JESUS POST DEATH

He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be (σταυρωθῆναι) staurōthēnai, and the third day rise again. (Luke 24:6-7)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken by two super natural beings (angels) about Jesus.

“And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have (ἐσταύρωσαν) estaurōsan him.” (Luke 24:20)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken about Jesus.

“And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not: for I know that you seek Jesus, which was (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon.” (Matthew 28:5)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken by a super natural being (an angel) about Jesus.

“And he said unto them, Be not affrighted: You seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.” (Mark 16:6)

Not spoken by Jesus. Spoken by a super natural being (an angel) about Jesus.

THE CONCLUSION: In his post death appearances. Jesus does not use the word(σταυρωθῆναι) staurothenai in connection to his death at all!

THE USE OF (σταυρόω) stauroó IN OTHER NEW TESTATMENT WRITINGS

Well, we don’t even get passed the first book of Acts without the crafty Christians up to their old tricks.

“He was delivered up by God’s set plan and foreknowledge, and you, by the hands of the lawless, put Him to death by nailing Him to the cross.” (Acts 2:23)

However, is that what it really says?

 “This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by προσπήξαντες (prospēxantes) “ (Acts 2:23)

Look at the various translations here:

https://biblehub.com/acts/2-23.htm

“So they cast off the anchors and left them in the sea. At the same time they loosened the ropes that tied the steering-oars; then hoisting (ἐπάραντες) eparantes the foresail to the wind, they made for the beach.” (Acts 27:40)

Actually all the term means is to fasten to, to impale. There is no mention of (σταυρόω) stauroó in Acts 2:23. There is no mention of nails at all!

Hence the added bracketed words (on a cross) in the picture above.

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made the same Jesus, whom you have (ἐσταυρώσατε) estaurōsate, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36)

“Knowing this, that our old man is (συνεσταυρώθη) synestaurōthē with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” (Romans 6:6)

From sun and stauroo to impale in company with (literally or figuratively) — crucify with.

Source: https://biblehub.com/greek/4957.htm

“(συσταυρωθέντος systaurōthentos) together with him”- (John 19:32)

THE USE OF (κρεμάσαντες) kremasantes ON A (ξύλου) xylou IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

“The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew (κρεμάσαντες) kremasantes on a (ξύλου) xylou tree.” (Acts 5:30)

“And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom (κρεμάσαντες) kremasantes on a (ξύλου) xylou tree.” (Acts 10:39)

“And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the (ξύλου) xylou tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.” (Acts 13:29)

“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the (ξύλου xylon) tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes you were healed.” (1 Peter 2:24)

“But we preach Christ (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness.” (1 Corinthians 1:23)

Question: Why would a Messiah who was (ἐσταυρωμένον) estaurōmenon be a stumbling block to the Jews?

“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, “Cursed is every one that (κρεμάμενος) kremamenos on a (xylou) ξύλου tree.” (Galatians 3:13)

“And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be put to death, and you hang him on a (עֵֽץ) es tree; his body shall not remain all night upon the (הָעֵ֗ץ) ha es tree, but you should surely bury him the same day; for he that is (תָּל֑וּי) ta-lui hanged is accursed by God; that you defile not the land which God gave you gives you for an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 21:22-23)

Paul’s usage of the text puts the definitive question in focus. The implied definition of the present investigation. Deuteronomy 21:22-23 is OUTSIDE the boundaries of the ecclesiastical “crucifixion.”

To put it in other words, Jesus, was executed by some type suspension or impalement. That is not what Deuteronomy 21:22-23 describes. Paul nevertheless connects the text of Deuteronomy with the death of Jesus.

Thus, Paul connects the death of Jesus, as an ante-mortem suspension, with the text of Deuteronomy 21:22-23, which describes a post-mortem suspension. He connects an event with the boundaries of the definition of the ecclesiastical label “crucifixion” with a text that describes an event that fall out side those boundaries!

Is it then possible to uphold a definition that contradicts the view of Paul?

The present day reader sees a distinct punishment form called the ecclesiastical “crucifixion” which is not compatible with Deuteronomy 21:22-23.

For Paul refers to a diverse suspension punishment in which a person is suspended/impaled as a corpse after an execution (as in Deut 21:22-23).

Paul’s point of view in Galatians 3:13 is that Jesus could have been stoned before being suspended/impaled -post mortem. He would be a curse anyhow.

Remember a few previous points!

“Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and ; σταυρώσετε stauosete others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.” (Matthew 23:34)

As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “CrΣταύρωσον! CrΣταύρωσον !” (Stauroson) But Pilate answered, “You take him and σταυρώσατε (staurosate) him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.” (John 19:6)

“However, biblical law prescribes hanging after execution: every person found guilty of a capital offense and put to death had to be impaled on a stake (Deut. 21:22); but the body had to be taken down the same day and buried before nightfall, “for an impaled body is an affront to God” (ibid., 23).”

Source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/capital-punishment

Do you understand what the Jews (who know their text better than any Christian or Muslim) are saying?

SO HOW MIGHT HAVE JESUS ACTUALLY DIED?

Keep in mind this speculation from us based upon reflecting on a plausible scenario.

We drew the conclusion that the Jews did not kill Jesus, the Romans did. The text are written to make the Romans look reluctant to kill Jesus. We believe the Romans wanted Jesus dead. The Jews are portrayed as the ones who killed Jesus. I do not believe that Jesus was some type of pacifists teacher either. Out of all the references to the Injeel in the Qur’an, Allah (swt) informed us that Jesus preached martyrdom!

“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 9:111)

So, allow us to clarify, the concept that Jesus died on, The “cross” or the “double cross” rather, as a cross would actually be one beam and a double cross would be two beams; this it did not happen. The most revered ecclesiastical icon of all of Christianity is a historical fraud.

Jesus didn’t die with relative dignity hanging from the cross. He died, suspended on one single pike penetrating his body: he was impaled. There were no nails in his hands or feet. He did not die on a cross-shaped execution tool († or T). Just a sharp stake shoved right into his body upon which he was suspended – that is the most logical and plausible form of execution of Jesus by far…

Furthermore, one of the alleged witnesses, St. Mark, tells us that at the most critical juncture in the life of Jesus — “All his disciples forsook him and fled“- (Mark 14:50).

The Roman spectacle of impalement was meant to be as savage and tortuously cruel as possible because it had to accomplish two things.

  1. To act as a visual deterrent to crime and in the case of Jesus -uprising against an oppressive regime.
  2. To provide a theatre of gore to satisfy the blood lust of those who came to watch. The spike was the centerpiece of this typically gruesome Roman conception. That is why they didn’t just kill Jesus with a sword and be done with it.

Most likely the Romans introduced the tip of the spike into the victims back side and continued hammering it, pushing it in far enough to where it passed under the pelvic bone so it would support the body on the impale.

Do see our article:

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

The two thieves if they were real, (most likely really guilty of sedition) get the same treatment. When the impale device was upright it kept the victims body from being torn loose by his own weight and sliding off. That was its practical use.

But there was also a kind of diabolical sideshow, something to further attract the viewer interest in the impalement process. With the spike thrust under the pelvic bone, but not yet coming out of the body a man could use the leverage of his arms and his legs to project his body outward, curving it away from the impale and thus preventing the spike from penetrating any further up into the bowels. But as one’s arms gave out, one’s body would slowly sink down on the spike, causing the spike to penetrate further along through one’s maze of intestines.

Eventually, after the leg strength also gave out, all leverage was lost and the body, of its own weight, would slump/slide back against the vertical beam, driving the spike slightly upwards through the body’s maze of vital organs until it pierced the stomach lining from the inside out, spewing blood and guts all over the ground.

Mercifully, death usually followed in a short time thereafter. When it came to devising fiendish methods of torture and death, the Romans were absolutely without equal. They left no sadistic, bloodthirsty detail behind. The Romans were filthy beast!

It is also reasonable that Jesus hastened his own death by forcing his body down on the spike an extremely awesome and heroic achievement! It indicates that Jesus had no fear of death. We imagine Jesus looking on at the Romans, with a certain look in his eye as if to say, “Go ahead make my day!“

Where as the two thieves, if they were real, (most likely rebels) used all their strength to cling to life as long as possible. Hence, the breaking of the legs!

During his death: When the Romans impaled Jesus the following was revealed to him as reassurance:

“Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will exalt you in my presence and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)

This is also what is meant by:

“The Day when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Holy Spirit.” (Qur’an 5:110)

Thus, to the onlookers what looked like a gruesome death display was for Jesus (as) a rather tranquil experience.

“Allah said, “O fire, be coolness and safety upon Ibrahim.” (Qur’an 21:69)

AND ALLAH (SWT) KNOWS BEST!

“Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to eat from the (ξύλου) xylou tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.” (Revelation 2:7)


 “And do not say of those who are killed in the way of Allah that they are dead; they are alive even though you do not perceive it.” (Qur’an 2:154)

In the end all this is speculation. The Qur’an does not address the event known as the Crucifixion. It neither denies it nor affirms it. The Qur’an addresses Jewish claims and Jewish methods of execution.

Indeed if the Qur’an did try to connect the Jews to any attempt to Crucify Jesus then the Qur’an itself would be a patently false revelation. This would make Allah (swt) unaware of Jewish methods of execution and this is totally unacceptable.

Do see the following articles:

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157
The Jews Don’t Crucify People. Great exchange with Rabbi Dov Stein.

To read more…

All articles on the alleged return of Christ Jesus.

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

8 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 23, 2026 · 2:06 am

Is Christ Jesus God?

﷽ 

“O Jesus, the son of Mary! Recount my favour to you and to your mother. Behold! I strengthened you with the Holy Spirit so that you would speak to people in childhood and in maturity.” (Qur’an 110)

“To Jesus the son of Mary, We gave clear signs, and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit .” (Quran 2:253)

“We gave Jesus the son of Mary clear signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit .” (Qur’an 2:87)

“And say, “Praise to Allah, who has not taken a son and has had no partner in His dominion and has no need of a protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with great glorification.” (Qur’an 17:111)

Here Jesus (as) is contrasted with Allah (swt).

Jesus needs to be strengthened with the Holy Spirit. Whereas Allah (swt) has no need of any protector. In fact, Allah (swt) emphasizes that the one who needs a protector is due to some inherent need.

“An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him.” (Luke 22:43)

Three points:

A) If the angel was there to strengthen Jesus’ human nature, what was deficient about the presence of Almighty God himself in Jesus that couldn’t give Jesus that strength? An angel is redundant.

B) If the angel was there to strengthen Jesus’ divine nature, that too does not make any sense. How does an angel strengthen God?

C) If the angel was there to strengthen the God-Man -then this leads us back to point A.

This is a dangerous concept because if Jesus could not turn to the Divine within himself which we are told the ‘whole fullness of godhead‘ dwells, then what precedent does this set for the rest of humanity?

Some people will start to call upon angels rather than God. This is not acceptable. What also makes the above text doubly redundant is that Jesus is already filled with the Holy Spirit.

“And the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him.” (Luke 3:23)

Imagine if you will if it said that the ‘Father descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him’. Why would the Holy Spirit whom we presume to be the divine, in essence, need to descend upon the son whom we presume to be divine in nature? If Jesus has the ‘fullness of the godhead’ which means the complete presence of the hypostatic union why the need for the Holy Spirit?

“And Jesus being full of the Holy Spirit returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness.” (Luke 4:1)

Imagine if you would if the text said, ‘being full of the Father returned from the Jordan’. What kind of understanding is this? Is God filled with God?

It looks as if Jesus is being assisted by an agent known as the Holy Spirit.

“How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil because God was with him.” (Acts 10:38)

“You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know.” (Acts 2:22)

Is there power in the name of Jesus?
Many Christians believe that there is power in the name of Jesus. They also falsely assume that the name of God is Jesus.

We have answered that in our article here:

Why Jesus Is Not The Name of God.

God has attributes that are possessed at all times. God is not God without his attributes. Did Jesus have these attributes at all times?

Christians often tell us that their concept is that Jesus is the ‘Godman’. The problem with this is not that Jesus ‘deity‘ empowers his humanity to do amazing feats like walking on water and so forth. The problem is that Jesus’ humanity overcomes his ‘deity‘ time and time again. The flesh can never overpower the divine might of God.

Example #1. Infinitude. God is self-existent. Is Jesus?

Allah in the Qur’an is self-existent and ever-living.


“Allah is that upon which all things are dependent, while Allah is dependent upon nothing.” (Qur’an 112:2)

“And rely upon the Ever-Living who does not die, and exalt His praise. And sufficient is He to be, with the sins of His servants, Acquainted -” (Quran 25:580)

However, Jesus is not self-sufficient.

“I live by the father.” (John 6:57)

Example #2. Unlimited Power. Allah is All-power in the Qur’an.

“Blessed be He in Whose hands is Dominion, and He over all things has power.” (Qur’an 67:1)

However, Jesus is not all-powerful.

“The Son can do nothing of himself…” (John 5:19)

Now Christians will obviously try and explain this away by saying that Jesus voluntarily lays aside some of these prerogatives of divinity. In accordance with their understanding of (Philippians 2:6-7).

Now there are huge theological problems with this which we will come back to insh’Allah. However, Christian theology opens itself up to enormous theological conundrums.

If God, in any manifestation of the third of the three, can, “lay aside divine prerogatives”, this means that God theoretically could “lay aside” divine prerogatives of being truthful, or of being just. This can mean that it could be deceitful or unjust — authubillah min dhalik (We seek protection in Allah from these thoughts).

Now there is clear subordination in John 5:19 as well.

“Ontological equality, but economic subordination,” in other words, “equal in being, but subordinate in role.”

Source: (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994), Chapter 14 The Trinity, pp. 251-252.)

Interestingly, he even quotes from A.H Strong who says:

“We frankly recognize an eternal subordination of Christ to the Father, but we maintain at the same time that this subordination is a subordination of order, office, and operation, not a subordination of essence.”

Whatever helps our Christian friends sleep well at night.

Example #3. Omniscient, Infinite Knowledge.

Allah is All-knowing in the Qur’an.

“It is He Who created for you all things that are on earth; moreover, His design comprehended the heavens, for HE gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; and of all things, He has perfect knowledge.” (Qur’an 2:29)

However, Jesus is not all-knowing.

“But of that hour no man knows, no not the angels which are in heaven, neither the son, But the Father.” (Mark 13:32)

Note: Jesus gives priority to the angels because they are in heaven, and he is on earth.

Is Jesus still God’s son after the resurrection? Christians will say yes. So this verse still applies to him.


Not only that, but if Jesus’ prayer was answered in John 17:5 “Give me the glory that I had with you before,” This would mean he would fully be in that essence; however, his knowledge is obviously not the same in essence as the Father. The Father is keeping secrets from the person of the Son. Their knowledge is not the same in essence.

Is God a man or the son of man? Can we apply these terms to God?

“God is not a man, that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent.” (Numbers 23:19)

“Whom do men say that I, the son of man, am?” (Matthew 16:13)

Note: Jesus used the term ‘son of man’ for himself. Also, Jesus was a man appointed by God. Since God is not a man or the son of man, then Jesus is not God.

God does not have the ability to lie or to repent. So this also raises the questions: Did Jesus have the capacity to lie or to repent? If he didn’t, was he ever really truly fully man?

Further irrefutable proof Jesus was only a mortal human being.

“And as Peter was coming in ,Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet and worshiped him, but Peter took him up saying, stand up, “I myself also am a man (anthropos).” (Acts 10:25-26)

There above the Greek word for man is Anthropos.

Question: What does the word Anthropos mean?

Answer: It means a mortal human being, full man. It distinguishes man from the animal kingdom on one hand and distinguishes man from a deity and divine essence on the other.

Source: (https://biblehub.com/greek/444.htm)

Anthropos is where we get the word anthropology, which means the study of man.

Whereas Theos is where we get the word Theology, which means the study of God.

“You who are Israelites, hear these words, Jesus the Nazorean was a man(anthropos) commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him in your midst, as you yourselves know.” (Acts 2:22)

“I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst” (Hosea 11:9)

“But now you seek to kill me, a man (anthropos) who has told you the truth which I heard from.” (John 8:40)

Here Jesus applied a term to himself that allows therein no allowance for deity or terminology, such as the ‘God-Man.’ Jesus stresses here that he is a mortal human being without a dual nature. Never in Greek literature has the term anthropos come to mean God, or ‘God-Man’. Anthropos—by its definition, is to be without a dual nature.

The Tri-theist will tell you that Jesus is fully God and full man. Now God, being fully deity for the sake of argument, could come in the guise of a man. Example history is replete with Hercules, Zeus, Aphrodite, Amen-Ra, and the plethora of other gods and goddesses that legend say came in the form of human beings. However, a person can not be fully man and also be fully deity, because to be fully man (anthropos) is not to be divine.

Now we could stop our discussion here in light of what Jesus said about being anthropos. There is no one in Christianity that can stand up to that argument. Sure a person can bring a slew of proof texts (John 1:1, John 10:30, John 8:58, John 20:28, Colossians 2:9, Titus 2:13) but each one of those texts will fundamentally contradict John 8:40.

We could take another approach with Christians and ask:

Do Christians really believe that Jesus was ever truly a human being?


The Position of the Qur’an.

“The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a messenger; messengers before him had indeed passed away. And his mother was a truthful woman. They both used to eat food. See how We make the message clear to them! Then behold, how they are turned away!” (Qur’an chapter 5:75)

“I say this because many deceivers have gone out into the world. They deny that Jesus Christ came in a real body. Such a person is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7 New Living Translation)

The above argument from the Qur’an is not an argument against the deity of Christ per se. Rather, it can be argued that this text of the Qur’an is directed towards those who took the first steps in making Jesus a deity: namely the docetists or a group of Christians that held the belief in docetism.

Question: What is docetism?
Answer: The idea that Jesus did not come in the flesh or that Jesus the son of Mary was simply a spirit or apparition.

Docetism etymologically from the Greek verb dokeo, which means: “to seem, to appear, to be.”

Source: (https://biblehub.com/greek/1380.htm)

In fact, when we Muslims engage Christians in debates, we point to the fact that he was simply anthropos (a mortal human being).

Jesus is reported to have said, “In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. ” (Mark 7:7)

“I do not accept human praise. Moreover, I know that you do not have the love of God in you.” (John 5:41)

There is an ample amount of text in the New Testament that shows that Jesus was not really human but simply appeared human, took on human form, or was a glorified apparition. If a person doesn’t see the theological wrangling going on in the following text, then something is wrong.

Take, for example, 1 Timothy 3:16

“Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He [a]APPEARED in a body [b] was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.”

Footnotes:

  1. Some manuscripts God
  2. Or in the flesh

“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14)

Jesus ‘beams down’ like in Star Trek! “The Word became Flesh“

In the Gospel of John, there is no virgin birth narrative.

John 3:16 which used to be translated as ‘Gave his only-begotten son’, has now been cast aside for the more famous ‘only unique’, ‘only son’, ‘only of his kind” etc. Begotten would imply that Jesus came into existence and for this writer that is simply not a given.

Also, note that there is no mention of Mary in the Gospel, according to John. It is simply some woman who is identified as Jesus’ mother. As if Jesus could have been adopted. Please see John 2:4 and John 19:25

So this writer has Jesus simply beam down or ‘materialize‘ like Captain Kirk on Star Trek.

What this text is saying is that Jesus took on the form of a human being. Just like the Holy Spirit took on the form of a dove. It doesn’t literally mean that the Holy Spirit incarnated as a dove or otherwise, the Christians would believe in two incarnations.

It simply means that the Holy Spirit was “dokeo” meaning it seemed to be, supposed to be, or appeared to be.

For example, one can look at Philippians 2:6 for further collaboration. Philippians 2:6-7 is a passage that many Christian scholars believe is likely a fragment of an early Christian hymn. These early Christians had docetic tendencies and views. They held that Jesus was not really in the flesh like other human beings, but only seemed, or appeared to have a body or a form. The form he had was purely spiritual.

“Instead, he emptied himself by taking on the form(morphe) of a servant, by becoming like other humans, by having a human appearance.” (Philippians 2:7)

Other Christians have quite a different interpretation of Philippians 2:7. They imagine the Son playing the role of Clarke Kent from Superman 2 where he powers down in the crystal chamber.

“Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage. Instead, he emptied himself (kenosis) by taking on the form(morphe) of a servant, by becoming like other humans, by having a human appearance.” (Philippians 2:7)

So what is this Kenosis? What did he empty himself of? If they say he emptied himself of divine attributes, then he is no longer God. God is not God without his attributes.

Kenosis means: (to empty, render void, perceived as valueless, deprived of content)

Source: (https://biblehub.com/greek/2758.htm)

The other issue this brings up is the subordination doctrine. As mentioned earlier, Christians like to coin theological terminology that they feel helps them escape from difficult issues. Like the idea of their being subordination in the economy of the Trinity.

The text in Philippians 2:7 is also in direct contradiction to the text of Colossians 2:9 which states:

“For in Christ, all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form.”

You can see my other entry where I talk about if Christians believe in two incarnations: Did God become a dove?

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/does-the-biblical-text-assert-two-incarnations/

“For in Christ, all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9)

Yet, we are told in Luke 3:22

“And the Holy Ghost descended in bodily form like a dove upon him and a voice came from heaven which said,” You are my beloved Son in you, I am well pleased.”

Docetic Christians would have told us that they do not believe in two incarnations. That the Holy Spirit did not really become a bird/dove. Simply that it took on a bodily form. In the exact same way as Colossians 2:9 mentions a bodily form.

Original Word: εἶδος
Transliteration: eidos

Which means: appearance, fashion, shape, sight. From eido a view, i.e. Form (literally or figuratively) — appearance, fashion, shape, sight.

Source: (https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/eidos.html)

It’s amazing that the early Tri-theist Christians burned the writings of Marcion’s Christian faction. He is such an interesting person. Marcion, according to many, was an advocate of Paul, and he rejected the Old Testament, only accepting certain books that now comprise the 22/27 books of the New Testament depending upon the faction of Christianity you belong to.

Marcion formed the first Christian canon of the New Testament. Interestingly, we do not have the writings of Marcion. We only know about Marcion through his opponents. Guess we all know how well our opponents can represent our views (something us Ibadis know too well).

Now what most Christian scholars hide from the masses is the fact that the early Christians BURNED Marcion’s writings. You will also hear an interesting tale that he did a cut-and-paste job with the Gospel of Luke.

Especially interesting to us Muslims is the controversy regarding Marcion and the ‘Gospel according to Luke‘.

Take for example the controversy around the following text in the Gospel of Luke. This brings us back full circle to the beginning of this article.

“43An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him.44 And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.[a]

a]

Footnotes:

Luke 22:44 Some early manuscripts do not have verses 43 and 44.

Now put your detective hat on for a moment. If I held the position that Jesus was God but only appeared to be a human being ,why would the text above be problematic? Does the text above support that Jesus was also fully human or that he was simply God alone?

Once you ponder over this you will be able to see why “some early manuscripts do not have verses 43 and 44.”

“While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” (Luke 24:36)

“37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. 38 He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your minds? 39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.” (Luke 24:37-39)

“40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43, and he took it and ate it in their presence. (Luke 24:40-43)

“44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.” (Luke 24:44)

Here is a link to an interesting discussion on Hort’s theory of Non-Interpolation, and it’s influence on the English version of the New Testament text here: http://www.bible-researcher.com/noninterp.html

Here is some of the discussion on verse 40 above.

“Luke 24:40. Was ver. 40 omitted by certain Western witnesses (D ita,b,d,e,ff2,l,r1 syrc,s) because it seemed superfluous after ver. 39? Or is it a gloss introduced by copyists in all other witnesses from Jn 20.20, with a necessary adaptation (the passage in John refers to Jesus’ hands and side; this passage refers to his hands and feet)? A minority of the Committee preferred to omit the verse as an interpolation (see the Note following 24.53); the majority, however, was of the opinion that, had the passage been interpolated from the Johannine account, copyists would probably have left some trace of its origin by retaining τὴν πλευράν in place of τοὺς πόδας (either here only, or in ver. 39 also). [p. 187]”

Now someone would probably counter that Luke 24 does a great job of countering the Christian docetic position based upon two points.

1) People cannot touch a glorified body, apparition, form, etc.
2) People cannot hold onto a glorified body, apparition, form, etc.

Now, this text is very tricky because one cannot have their cake and eat it too. Obviously, according to Christians today, they do believe that Jesus was a glorified body (a body that had nail prints in it). Not only this but what was the point of eating broiled fish and honeycomb?

Now as for the objections above. We find it strange that people would say you cannot touch a glorified body, or hold onto a being that is merely taking on the form or shape of a body.

Christians also believe that God eats yogurt, drinks milk, and eats roasted meat as well!

“When the food was ready, Abraham took some yogurt and milk and the roasted meat, and he served it to the men. As they ate, Abraham waited on them in the shade of the trees.” (Genesis 18:18)

So Christians do not believe that Jesus is really a human being.

Because to be really a human being is NOT to be God. They do not believe that he was human but simply that God came down and tabernacled among humanity. There has never been a human being in the existence of humankind that was God. If you want to argue that God comes and takes on a form or a shape, drinks milk, and eats fish, honeycombs, yogurt, and roasted meat, fine! However, no one can say that any of those entities or beings were truly human.

“I say this because many deceivers have gone out into the world. They deny that Jesus Christ came in a real body. Such a person is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7 New Living Translation)

This is why iour contention that the vast majority of Christianity today is Anti-Christ!

Anti is the Greek word which means in place of.

The Christians will claim that they believe that Jesus was fully God and fully man. However, to be fully man is not to be fully God. You can say that a circle can have three sides all you want it does not make it true.

Islam has the truth. We believe that Jesus is the Messiah. He was born of the Virgin Mary (May Allah cover her in mercy) and he is a mortal human being. It is Christian theology that has betrayed the real son of Mary.

This is a reason why the Qur’an above says Mary and Jesus BOTH ate food. The emphasis is that Jesus eats food in the same way that Mary does. He does it for the same reason and purpose. He is really a mortal human being. It is not the way the Christians (who are docetist in disguise) that Jesus eats broiled fish and honeycomb because he is a glorified apparition!

The problem that Islam has with Christians is not only that they claim that Jesus is God. The real problem is that Christians do not believe that Jesus was really a human being; they believe he took on the form of a servant or appeared in the likeness of men.

“I say this because many deceivers have gone out into the world. They deny that Jesus Christ came in a real body. Such a person is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7 New Living Translation)

It is our hope that the sincere Christian is able to see these theological constructs for what they truly are.

Philosophical objection to the Trinity

The argument from René Descartes

Cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am)

The Christian concept of the Trinity does not stand up to the philosophy of René Descartes.

René Descartes speaks of a person as the subject of self-awareness and freedom—in brief, a person as a conscious and autonomous self.

Is God aware of his own existence?
Does ‘God the Father’ think?
Does ‘God the Son’ think?
Does ‘God the Holy Spirit’ think?


If there is only one mind and one self-existence, then God is absolutely one and not tri-unity. If there are three minds and three self-existences, then without doubt trinitarian Christians have slipped into Tri-theism and worship three gods.

Are the Trinitarian Gods one in mind, will, and action? If so, how can this be so? If the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one in mind, will, and action, in what sense can they be three persons? If the three act as one and so are one in nature, what room is left to distinguish three persons?

One can slip into talk of three distinct centers of consciousness and decision-making, and an interpretation of the divine persona that abandons monotheism and ends up with three gods in perfect dialogue among themselves.

Such a conception can hardly ward off tri-theism or the idea of three self-sufficient subjects who enjoy a separate existence, always act together as a closely meshed community of divine individuals, but do not constitute one God.

None of the members of the trinity alone are fully God. If the Trinity is to be understood, we have a situation where Jesus is God, the Father is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but none of them on their own are fully God.



Examples of Jesus’ humanity overpowering his ‘deity’.


Does God increase in wisdom?

“For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.” (1 John 3:20)

“And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and man.” (Luke 2:52)

We know that God does not increase in wisdom. God is All-Wise.

Does God Sleep?

“Behold, he that keeps Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.” (Psalm 121:4)

“But he (Jesus) was asleep.” (Matthew 8:24)

Can Satan himself tempt God?

“God cannot be tempted with evil.” (James 1:13)

“And when the devil ended all the temptation (of Jesus), he departed from him for a season.” (Luke 4:13)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

Now each of those points brought up above is about Jesus sleeping, increasing in wisdom, and being tempted with evil, we know what our Christian friends will say. That all of this is in regard to the humanity of Jesus. For example, do we sleep, do we have a soul, does our soul sleep?

The Big Theological and Philosophical challenge to Christianity.

Can God Die?

“God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in an unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.”(1 Timothy 6:15-16)

So now who or what died on the double-cross?

Just as God is not tempted, doesn’t increase in knowledge, doesn’t require sleep, God does not die.

God didn’t die. God’s essence did not die. God the Father did not die. God, the Holy Spirit, did not die. God the Son did not die.

That is the end of Christianity. It so frustrates Christians in debates with Muslims that the Christian immediately pushes a panic button and will either introduce a non sequitur, or statements that are not analogous at all.

“Even my Muslim friends don’t believe that death is the cessation of life!”

So the Christian tries a diversion tactic. Say something truthful about your opponent that they are forced to agree with in order to take the tension out of the room.

To our dismay, time and time again, Muslim debaters let Christians off the hook on this.

True, Muslims believe that there is life after death, but the Christian is trying to avoid the subject of death altogether. Muslims also believe that our souls are created; they are not eternal. Muslims believe that we do indeed die.

So that which Christians claim died on the double-cross, was it created or eternal? And notwithstanding the fact that there is life after death, back to the pointed question:

Who or what died on the double-cross?

“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28)

Which also begs the question: what did God really sacrifice?

We can’t say God sacrificed his life because God couldn’t die.

We can’t really say that God sacrificed his son because he got his son back.

We can’t even really say that God sacrificed time, as God exists outside space/time.

Which also still leaves our Christian friends in their sin. All that happened, in reality, was a cosmic charade. In the end, a man was left to suffer. God didn’t partake in any suffering. It was simply flesh that was abandoned on the double-cross.

It says, “About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice,” ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’” (Matthew 27:46)

Jesus is speaking as flesh here. The Father can never abandon the Son because they are co-eternally joined in one essence.

All that was left was flesh, the same flesh that we are told can’t please God.

“Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:8)

For more on the above see our article:

The Death Knell of Christianity

Who is God?

We will look at the New Testament evidence that overwhelmingly shows that only the Father is God.

Answer: 1 Corinthians 8:6
“But to us, there is one God, the Father.” (Not Trinity, not the son, -The Father.)

“Let us read from Young’s Literal Translation: “For even if there are those called gods, whether in heaven, whether upon earth — as there are gods many and lords many — yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] all things, and we through Him.” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)

This is very important because of all those Elohim(gods/ which one is truly God? Paul says the FATHER. This verse clearly refutes Christian Tri-theism.

“That the God of our ‘Lord Jesus Christ’, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation.” (Ephesians 1:17)

Who is the God of ‘Lord Jesus Christ’?

“Blessed be the ‘God and Father’ of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Peter 1:3)

Who is the God and Father of ‘Lord Jesus Christ’?

“We always give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you.” (1 Colossians 1:3)

“One God and Father of all.” (Ephesians 4:6)

“My Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)

“My Father is greater than all.” (John 10:29)

“Jesus said, touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: But go to my brothers and say unto them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God, and your God.” (John 20:17)

“And surely Allah is My Lord, and your Lord, so worship Him. This is a Straight Path.” (Qur’an 19:36)

Note: Jesus should be ‘fully glorified’ God here, as he is saying these words in his post-resurrected body.

“Have we all not one Father? Has not One God created us?” (Malachi 2:10)

This text is sufficient to put at rest the tired arguments that, because Jesus called God his father, he was making himself equal with God. This is not what Jesus said. This is what some Jews said about Jesus. However, Jesus never makes any claims that the Father belongs exclusively to him. John 20:17 made that abundantly clear to all those who can see.

Jesus also is reported to have told people to pray, “Our Father who is in heaven.”

Now Christians (depending upon if they are Tri-theist as are the ‘Trinitarians’ or if they are Modalists as are the ‘Oneness Pentecostals’) will try and bring a proof text to support their respective positions to identify Jesus as the Father.

Proof text used by Christians to try and identify Jesus as the Father

#1) The first proof text they try and use is Isaiah 9:6

“For to us, a child is born, to us, a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

Now, more often than not, the only thing that the Tri-theist wants from this passage is that Jesus is called ‘Mighty God’. They do not really want to deal with the fact that it also says this person will be called “Everlasting Father,” because it deals some damage to their doctrine, and gives credence to the Modalism that the ‘Oneness Pentecostals’ believe in. So what they normally do is say these are simply titles but not names of Jesus. Or they represent the realities of Jesus (that the Father is expressed in him) etc.

Because the Trinity doctrine is very explicit that Jesus is not the Father. We are always dismayed by their use of this passage.

Isaiah 7:14 comes to mind where it says,

“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)

Who ever really called him Immanuel? In his lifetime? So we wanted to bring the Isaiah 9:6 passage up because it’s the only passage beside John 10:30 (that we will soon be dealt with) that Christians would try and use to show that Jesus is the Father.

The popular Christian version of Isaiah 9:6 is not even in Septuagint 2.0!

“For a child is born to us, a son is given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. And he will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6)

Source: (https://biblehub.com/isaiah/9-6.htm)

This is what you are used to seeing, correct? Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

https://biblehub.com/sep/isaiah/9.htm

“For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.”(Isaiah 9:6 -The Septuagint 2.0 The Holy Spirit’s Fav Version)

Where are all these other names?

So who is upon the truth? Are Latin Roman Catholics, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox upon guidance for trusting a text that does not make Christological claims about Jesus, such as calling him (Jesus) ‘The Everlasting Father’? Claims that contradict the idea that Jesus is not the Father?

Or are those Protestants who trust in the Masoretic text (although they still give it a Christological bent). Are they upon the truth? 

Only one person in the Jewish scriptures is referred to as “mighty god” and his name is Hizkiyyahu or, Hezekiah (mighty god). Jewish names, like many Muslims’ names, are what one may call a theophoric name.   The 1st century Christians did not use Isaiah 9:6 for Christological purposes. Latter ones did though. Changing the Hebrew perfect tense to future tense. 

#2) The second proof text they try and use is John 10:30

Was Jesus one with the creator in essence or one in submission to the overall divine plan?

“If you be the Christ (Messiah) tell us plainly?” (John 10:24)

” I and my Father are one.” (John 10:30)

Now the Christian tri-theist will tell you this text proves that Jesus is God. However, are they consistent when we point out the following text to them?

“Neither I pray for those alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be ONE; Like you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be ONE in us: that the world may believe that you have sent me. And the glory which you gave me I have given them; that they may be ONE, even as we are ONE.” (John 17:20-22)

You see the Greek word Hen means one in purpose. It does not mean one in essence. Jesus said that the disciples would be one “Even as we are one”.

Think about that. If Jesus meant by saying ‘The Father and I are one‘ that he is in essence God; then this also means the 12 disciples are also in essence, God! So now the tri-theist who believe in three gods dwelling in community together would now have a godhead unity of 15 (inclusive of the 12 disciples). One would hope that common sense coupled with modesty would have kept Christians from going overboard with such conclusions but all we have to do is point out Benny Hinn.

Discussion on Benny Hinn’s theology of John 17:20-22

Little wonder we have world-famous televangelist Benny Hinn running around with his ‘little god‘ theology.

Benny Hinn is getting bolder and bolder these days, telling his followers they are gods and even Christ Jesus. There is no end to Christian blasphemy of Allah (swt).

“When you say I am saved, what are you saying? You are saying, I am a Christian. What does that word mean? It means I’m anointed. You know what the word anointed means? It means Christ. When you say I’m a Christian, you are saying I am Mashiyach in Hebrew. I am a little messiah walking on earth, in other words. That’s a shocking revelation! We are not, we are not, having, we don’t have a part of Him running around in our stomach feeling goosebumps. His spirit and our spirit-man are one, united. There is no separation, it’s impossible. The new creation is created after God in righteousness and true holiness. The new man is after God, like God, Godlike, complete in Christ Jesus, the new creation is just like God. May I say it like this, you are a little god on earth running around.” http://www.cephasministry.com/benny_hinn.html

So, if these Christians are little gods walking around on the Earth, we have the right to ask them if they are false gods or true gods? We will come back to this question.

Say what you want about Benny Hinn, but at least he is interpreting the passage on a more consistent basis than most tri-theist. After all, if the Christian is filled with the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit =God, then the Christian is experiencing their own incarnation of the divine as well!

“Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwell sin you?” (1 Corinthians 3:16)

Conclusion: Only the Father is God. Jesus is not the Father.

We feel the evidence above is abundantly clear that Jesus is not the Father, and that Christ Jesus has a God.

Who is the only true God according to Jesus?

“This is life eternal that they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You, the only true God, has sent.” (John 17:3)

So, according to Jesus, the only True God is the one who sent him (Jesus). We also now have our answer to the question: are the Benny Hinn Christians false gods or true gods? According to Jesus, they would be false gods.

Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” (John 20:17)

Jesus has a god. As such Jesus can’t be God.

“Good master, what must I do to have eternal life? Why call me good when none is good but God!” (Mark 10:17-18)

Christians will say that Jesus is asking a rhetorical question. However, the point we cannot agree with them on is that Jesus is indirectly asserting divinity for himself. This text of Mark 10:18 is arguably used more strongly as an anti-divinity statement than some esoteric knowledge the man who came to Jesus was receiving. Again, we see the Christian argument and recognize it. However, as it is a rhetorical question, it can also be argued as a strong statement of denying deity as well.

“He that is sent is not greater than he that sent him.” (John 13:16)

Here Jesus says that there is only one true God. If there is truly a distinction in the economy of the ‘godhead’, as the Tri-theist say, then it means that ‘God the Father’ sent ‘God the Son’.

Jesus said, “He that is sent (himself) is not greater than he (God) that sent him.”

So this very distinction in the community of gods known as the “economic Trinity” is self-undoing. This is also why these two verses[John 17:3 & John 13:16], coupled together, have been so damaging to their doctrine over the years.

“For there is one God, and one Mediator between God, and man, the man (anthropos) Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5)

Prima-Qur’an Comment: If Jesus were God we wouldn’t have need of a mediator because people could go to God directly. Think about it!

“Now there is no mediator when only one party is involved, and God is one.”(Galatians 3:20)

The Qur’an itself states that righteous people can make intercession on our behalf.

“Who can intercede (mediate) except by his permission.” (Qur’an 2:255)

Note: Allah does not say Holy Prophets and righteous people cannot intercede for us. Allah simply says that no one can except by Allah’s permission’; thereby focusing the prayer and request of the individual ultimately to Allah as the source of all power.

In Islam, the Prophet Muhammed (saw) will make intercession for the righteous Muslims on the day of judgment. Whereas those Muslims who do not repent from major sins and reform their ways will be in hellfire with no redemption.



Allah is the owner of the throne, not Jesus!

“But if they turn away, say: “Allah suffices me: there is no god but He; On Him is my trust, ‘He is the Lord of the Throne Supreme!” (Qur’an 9:129)

“If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! But glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: above what they attribute to Him!” (Qur’an 21:22)

“Say: “To who belong the earth and all beings therein? If you know!:” They will say, “To Allah!” Say: “Yet will you not receive admonition? ” Say” “Who is the Lord of the seven heavens and the Lord of the Throne Supreme?” “They will say,” to Allah. “Say: “Will you then not be filled with awe?” Say”: “Who is it in whose hands is the governance of all things,-who protects all, but is not protected by any? Say if you know:. They will say, “It belongs to Allah.” Say” “Then how are you deluded?” (Qur’an 23:84-89)



“Therefore exalted be Allah, the King, the Reality: there is no god but He, the Lord of the Throne of Honor!” (Qur’an 23:116)

“Glory to the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of the Throne He is Free from the things they attribute to Him! So leave them to babble and play until they meet that Day of theirs, which they have been promised.” (Qur’an 43:82-83)

“I am the Lord and there is no other. There is no God besides me. It is I who arm you, though you know me not.” (Isaiah 45:5)

“But he, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked up intently to heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55)

“And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man, standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:56)


Note: The Holy Spirit is strangely absent from the picture. Why is that?

“If then you were raised with Christ, seek what is above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God.” (Colossians 3:1)

“Bathsheba, therefore, went unto king Solomon, to speak unto him for Adonijah. And the king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself to her, and sat down on his throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right hand.” (1 Kings 2:19)

“Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.” (Matthew 20:23)

Prima-Qur’an Comment: T

he above verses show that Jesus is clearly not God. Not only that, but if Jesus was God, and he was standing/sitting next to God, that would show obviously to those whose hearts are not blind that there were two gods! Reflect on what is stated in Isaiah above ‘there is no God beside me.“

So the text says Jesus was standing at the right hand of God. Then the text says Jesus was sitting at the right hand of God. Maybe after thousands of years of standing, one wants to sit down and take a break. The point is that Jesus is in proximity to the divine but clearly is not the one sitting on the main throne in the same way the mother of Solomon is not sitting on the main throne.

Christians should focus their prayer on the owner of the throne and not the one hanging out beside the throne!

Subordination of Jesus and the Holy Spirit to God: Are they truly equal?

“They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah gives power and direction to all things.” (Qur’an 5:17)

Anyone who studies early Christian theological debates and history will know that many early Christian theologians held the concept that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were both subordinate to God in some way or another.

The proponents of Tri-theism were against this as it would render their concept of three co-eternal, co-equal persons (deities) null and void.

One such powerful argument is as follows. If Jesus is the son of God, he is not co-eternal as the Father beget him. Thus, being time-barred, he could not be co-eternal. (This was an argument from Bishop Arius)

If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this, it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he [the Son] had his substance from nothing.

Bishop Arius could quote from proof text such as:

“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” (Colossians 1:15)

All human beings are the ‘image of God‘.

“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God, he created them; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:27)

Moreover, in response to this, the Tri-theist would argue that Jesus is eternally begotten (an oxymoron that has no real meaning).

Even though, when asked to explain this concept of an ‘eternally begotten’ son, they fall flat. They will argue that if God is eternal Father, then it logically follows that he should have an eternal son. The only way you can be a father is if you have offspring, in this case, a son.

The Tri-theist started to back away from scripture and use philosophical and theological arguments. An example is the sun and sunlight. No sunlight equals no sun; and no sun equals no sunlight. However, even this example falls flat under scrutiny.

Where the so-called logic fails in this argument is due to the fact that nowhere does the Bible say that the Son begets the Father. Nowhere does scripture say that the Father is generated by the Son. It is the Son that flows from the Father!

The argument is that the one who is called Father is a prior to all. The Father is un-begotten or un-originated.

Subordination of the Holy Spirit to the Father.

When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, he will testify on my behalf.” (John 15:26)

This perspective insists that only the Father is the ultimate source and fountainhead of divinity, from whom the Son and the Spirit derive-the former by generation and the latter by a procession.

Subordination of the Son to the Father.

“And you belong to Christ and Christ belongs to God.” (1 Corinthians 2:23)

“But, I would have you to know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3)

“And when all things shall be subdued unto him (GOD), then shall the Son (Jesus) also himself be subject unto him (GOD) that put all things under him (Jesus), that God may be all in all!” (1 Corinthians 15:28)

  1. All things are subdued unto God. The ‘all‘ here is total control.
  2. The Son himself is subdued unto God.
  3. The Son who reigns over all creation was granted by the one who put creation under his authority.


“And Jesus came and spoke unto them, saying, “All power is given unto Me in Heaven and on earth.” (Matthew 28:18)

  1. The ‘all‘ Jesus speaks of is not total control. Because it is obviously not control over the one who has given him control.

God alone reigns supreme in the end!

Subhan”Allah! (Glory be to Allah) does it get any more clear than this?

Note: You might have this concept of the son at the‘right hand‘ of God, but in the end, God will subdue him!

The only viable option is a form of Unitarian Christianity. Trinitarian Christianity is patently false.


Text that clearly refutes Tri-theism!

The voice of Jesus is not the voice of God in essence.

“And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard. His form you have never seen.” (John 5:37)

“No man has seen God at any time.” (1 John 4:12)


Note: Remember that if Jesus was the “God-Man” and his ‘deity’ is the same essence as the Father, then in essence his voice would be the voice of God in essence. However, Jesus clearly states that those present were not listening to the voice of God!

The people who were addressed by Jesus above (John 5:37) heard his voice. This shows the voice of Jesus in essence is not the same as God’s in essence. Thus, Jesus is not God according to the above proof text.

God is not a spirit (one of many) = Compound Unity = Trinity.

John 4:24 “God is a spirit.” (King James Version)

The text above has been corrected to the following text.

John 4:24 “God is Spirit.” (Revised Standard Version).

Spirit in Greek is Pneuma -an intangible being.

Prima Qur’an Comment: The text of John 4:24 has been corrected to show that God is spirit (singular) and not ‘a’ spirit (compound unity). If God and the Holy Spirit were of the same essence, then God would be ‘a spirit’. This text clearly refutes Tri-theism.

The Holy Spirit and God are not the same in essence.

“For He shall not speak of Himself; But whatsoever he shall hear (from God) that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come.” (John 16:13)

Prima-Qur’an Comment: Holy Spirit—Whatever he shall hear, he shall speak. If the Holy Spirit were truly the same in essence as the Father in essence, then what he speaks, in essence, would be his own in essence and not what he has heard in essence.

Jesus does not have the glory in essence that God has.

“Now glorify me, Father, with the glory that I had with you before the world began.” (John 17:5)

Is “I am the Lord this is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to idols.” (Isaiah 42:8)

Prima-Qur’an Comment: Jesus the ‘God-Man’ is asking to have the same glory that he had with the Father before the world began. If that is the case, then Jesus’ glory, in essence, is of a different glory, in essence, that of God. In essence, Jesus’ glory is not of the same essence as God.

Jesus has his own spirit.

“Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46)

Actually, if the trinity were true, the statement above should be, “Into your hands I commit our spirit.” Or, “into your hands, I commit this spirit” as a reference to the human spirit.

If Jesus and God had the same spirit in essence, then the above text should read ‘into your hands I commit our spirit; because, in essence, they would have the same spirit.

Jesus does not have the same will as God in essence.

“Not as I will, but as you will.” (Matthew 26:39)

Prima-Qur’an Comment: If Jesus the “God-Man’ had, in essence, the same will as God has in essence, then he would be God in essence. However, the will of Jesus, in essence, is different than the will of God in essence; and thus they are not the same in essence.”

Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not the same in essence.

“And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan.” (Luke 4:1)

Prima-Qur’an Comment: If Jesus was already God in essence at his incarnation, then there would be no need to make this distinction as Luke does here. Was he not full of the Holy Ghost before? Remember, according to Tri-theist, Jesus is the ‘fullness’ of the godhead’ bodily. Not only this, but it would mean that God is full of God!

Conclusion:

“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man (Anthropos) approved of God among you, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by him, in the midst of you, as you also know. (Acts 2:22)

  1. Jesus was Anthropos.
  2. He was approved by God. God does not need anyone’s approval.
  3. Those miracles, and wonders and signs. God did that via Jesus. Jesus did not do that of himself.

“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)

May Allah (swt) save the Christians from the hellfire.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 31, 2026 · 5:26 am

A critique of Apophatic theology, also known as negative theology

Say, “My Lord has only forbidden immoralities – what is apparent of them and what is concealed – and sin, and oppression without right, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down authority, and that you say about Allah that which you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)

“Say (O Muhammed): What thing is of most weight in testimony? Say: Allah is Witness between me and you.” (Qur’an 6:19)

Ibn Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “Reflect deeply upon the creation, but do not reflect upon the essence of the Creator. Verily, His essence cannot be known other than to believe in it.”

Source: (Musnad al-Rabī’ 742 عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ تَفَكَّرُوا فِي الْخَلْقِ وَلا تَتَفَكَّرُوا فِي الْخَالِقِ فَإِنَّهُ لا يُدْرَكُ إِلا بِتَصْدِيقِهِ 742 مسند الربيع بن حبيب 2976 المحدث الألباني خلاصة حكم المحدث حسن في صحيح الجامع)

﷽ 

This is a (PrimaQur’an) critique of it. So, rather than this being any robust response or engagement from our school, this is an endeavor from a team of non-specialists in philosophy.

The arguments contained here are by no means original from us either. However, this article is sprinkled with our thoughts and conclusions when looking at this particular approach to theology.

For those not formally trained traditionally or academically in theology or philosophy, it is also by no means a deep dive. These are very elementary critiques that we think would appear before any seasoned mind.

Apophatic theology is another name for theology by way of negation. From the Greek ἀπόφημι (apóphemi) ‘to say no’. This is to say that God is known by negating concepts that might apply to him using the insufficiency of human language and rational concepts to describe God.

Ultimately, it is the theology of making no affirmative or positive attributes or assertions of any kind about God. That God is so completely unknowable that we can only engage in conversation about the divine by means of negation. What God is not.

Hopefully, one might appreciate the irony in such an approach, in that both negative and positive statements about God are both equal propositions about divine nature. One is put forward in the positive and the other in the negative. For apophatic theologians, ultimately they must take on the mantle of mysterions and appreciate the complete mystery, otherness and unknowability of God rather than say what could lead to misleading theological concepts about God.

One of our colleagues has said before in this article about an encounter they had while giving a guided tour of a Masjid where a man from California just out of nowhere blurted out the statement: “There is no truth, nothing is true!”

So they turned to the man and said: “Is that true?”

It entails a logical contradiction. It is a logical contradiction because we can be certain that we do not know anything for certain. Which in turn renders our uncertainty very uncertain itself!

Rather, one states that a triangle has three sides or one states that it does not have three sides. Both statements, rather positive or negative, are still both propositions.

” That you say about Allah that which you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)

So you could approach this statement: “and that you say about Allah that which you do not know,” from two angles.

Both angles do not support apophatic theology at all.

The first approach may seem clever. That would be to question: “What is it that we actually know about Allah?” They would affirm: “We do not know anything about Allah.” The proponents of apophatic theology would begin with negations.

What is it that we actually know about Allah? Which entails the opposite of an Apophatic theological approach.

What we say about Allah that which we do not know itself entails there are things that we do know about Allah.

You would have to know what something is in order to negate what it is not.

How can we say in any consistent and meaningful way what God is not like unless we have a model or conception of what God is like?

What is a hamburger not like?

How could one provide an answer to this question unless he/she has some idea of what a hamburger is like?

“Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing” (Qur’an 42:11)

This verse poses a number of problems for proponents of apophatic theology.

The verse does not negate Allah (swt) being a ‘shay’. It simply states that there is no shay like unto him.

The verse in context then affirms that Allah (swt) is the Hearing the Seeing. Thus, it immediately supplies us with two affirmations about Him.

So even if we give ta’wil interpretations to Hearing, Seeing and Him, they would be interpretations that would tell us something about Allah (swt).

This immediately shows that apophatic theology is inherently contradictory. In saying that God is unknowable or inexpressible, we have already described God’s nature that it is unknowable and inexpressible, thus asserting propositions about God.

Just as they would when trying to exegete the above text of the Qur’an.

In fact, apophatic theology is not something that can be derived from revelation as one of the purposes of revelation is to tell us the will of God.

Apophatic theology cannot affirm a will for God. Therefore, apophatic theology is an exercise in philosophy(not a belief in revealed revelation).

It relies upon using the very limitations of 3D carbon-based lifeforms, existing in the space/time continuum equipped only with their very limited abilities of perception and reason — via a 3D carbon-based lifeform -via from the vantage point of existing in the space/time continuum.

In apophatic or negative theology, we cannot know or affirm that Allah is Love. We do not know or cannot affirm that Allah is Loving.

We cannot know or affirm that Allah loves Muhammed (saw).

We cannot know or affirm that Allah loves Ali ibn Abu Talib.

We cannot know or affirm that Allah loves the Ahl Bayt.

At best, we could still advance propositions: Allah is not hateful. Allah does not hate.

Allah does not hate Muhammed (saw).

Allah does not hate Ali.

Allah does not hate the Ahl Bayt.

Because just as Allah (swt) does not love Muhammed (saw) or love Ali or love the Ahl Bayt, he does not hate any of them either.

The greatest mysterions are those who can give no definite propositional answers about God at all!

In fact, in negative theology, God may not be simple at all. Because to state that God is simple is a positive statement.

God is possibly more complex and more complicated than anything we could imagine. Hence, the very premise of apophatic theology could, in a very real sense, be self-defeating.

Ultimately, it is a belief in an unknown ‘other’ that one cannot explicate. Rendering itself more complicated than the Trinitarian Athanasian creed by far!

Because this concept (which is what it is at this point) is completely unknowable, it gets to the point of asking rather or not if it is even God we are talking about.

We could, for all intents and purposes, talk about God-1.

In other words, the philosophers could have beguiled themselves into believing in an entity that is God in every aspect except the most important, ‘the unknowability’. Surely this itself presents a conundrum.

We simply would not have a basis for knowing at all.

We could simply be talking about a being or entity that is beyond our capacity to fathom but would still not necessitate that entity being God/Allah.

That is because, ultimately, in negative theology, God cannot be perceived and is not perceivable.

We cannot say anything in relation to God and space/time. We cannot really say anything in relation to God and God’s relation to any creation. Because we would not have the slightest clue what a relationship would be like.

Allah is nothing? Allah is something? Allah is everything? Which is correct?

Which of the statements has textual support from the Qur’an?

“Say (O Muhammed): What thing is of most weight in testimony? Say: Allah is Witness between me and you.” (Qur’an 6:19)

The above text clearly states in response to the question of what thing has most weight in testimony that Allah (swt) is that thing which has most weight in testimony.

There is no text in the Qur’an that states that Allah is no-thing.

There is no text in the Qur’an that states that Allah is everything. This too would be defeated by logic as there would not be a creator-created distinction.

Apophatic theology leads to bizarre, contradictory conclusions about the attributes of God.

We cannot say that God Creates Perfection.

We cannot say that God Creates Perfection because we cannot say that God Creates at all.

There are also problems with affirmation of negatives to Allah/God.

So when we don’t say that Allah is Hate or Allah is Love. We can only say that Allah does not Hate and Allah does not Love.

But can we affirm the negatives for the following?

Does God have power and control over himself? Is this something to affirm or negate?

Does God have autonomy?

Does God have sovereignty?

Because the moment we assert negative prepositions for these questions, we are now introducing another force besides God.

If you say that the Divine Essence is not autonomous or not sovereign, then this necessitates another actor.

So, logic dictates that we must assert that the Divine Essence has the positive attributes of Autonomy and Sovereignty at the very least; or we are now redirecting our conversation and our interest away from this supposed ‘God’ to that force that God submits to.

Another conundrum of this philosophical discourse is that if this God has the qualities of essence, the very fact there is conversation concerning it makes it among the categories of things that conversation is being held concerning. Even if the conversation is philosophical or speculative in nature.

In other words, another defeat for apophatic theology is that God is being discussed, even if it is only in the sense of negation. Thus, we are affirming a positive about God. That positive being that God’s very nature can be discussed and mused over like any other subject known or unknown.

We can only discuss subjects that have come to our consciousness. Even if those subjects are abstract concepts like time, infinity and nothingness.

We are using language to describe, negate or affirm the concept just as we would use language to negative or affirm any other thing.

So apophatic theology is helpless to deny that God is beyond the realm of pontification, reflection or discussion, or it would render its own position vain. This is because apophatic theologians themselves discuss, pontificate and muse over what is not God.

Apophatic Theology and Proving Negatives.

Apophatic theologians think they can make negative assertions about God without having to prove those negative assertions.

This gets into the debate we have with atheists, where (the uneducated among them) state one cannot prove a negative.

For one thing, a real actual law of logic is a negative, namely the law of non-contradiction.
This law states that a proposition cannot be both true and not true. Nothing is both true and false. Furthermore, you can prove this law.

For example: the very statement: “you cannot prove a negative” is itself a negative claim that would not be true if it could be proven true!

Here is another negative we can prove via mathematics.

There is no rational number whose square is 2. 

https://www.mytutor.co.uk/answers/1092/University/Maths/Is-there-any-rational-number-whose-square-is-2/

Thank you, Andrei S!

So, when making negative statements about God. God is not like this and God is not like that. What is the contrast?

Remember the earlier question:

What is a hamburger not like?

You would have to know what something is in order to negate what it is not.

This would lead us to some intrusive and counter-intuitive conclusions. Such as the bizarre perspective that perhaps the one who has never ever thought about God is the closest to the truth concerning God.

Here we are not talking about the Atheist who has made a propositional stance against God. Here we are talking about such a hypothetical person that has never considered God at all.

Recall that even apophatic theologians are among those who believe that God’s very nature can be discussed and mused over like any other subject known or unknown.

Apophatic Theology Is Hostile Towards Certain aspects of Mysticism and Sufism in particular.

Those aspects of mysticism and Sufism that Apophatic Theology is a virulent enemy of the idea of Fan’a (annihilation of the self in the divine) or having a direct experience with the Divine. This is not possible and the aspirant, according to apophatic theology, is in a state of grand disillusionment. How would they objectively know that they have arrived? That arrival could be a veil itself and, in the face of apophatic theology, it most certainly is.

The argument from the Qur’an is that God must be something.

“Or were they created by no-thing (ghayri shayin), or are they ˹their own˺ creators?” (Qur’an 52:35)

A no-thing would be a non-shay. Non-existence. Unless one wants to argue that the Qur’an is utilizing a spacious argument. May Allah protect us from the Shaitan!

Why would the argument be used that they were created from nothing if the first creation was created from nothing?

Thus, logically, a true negative theology would entail that we cannot say anything about God, which ultimately you will see is the conclusion that many of them end up reaching, by stating that God does not exist (has existence).

Maybe their perspective is similar to the Ein-Sof of Kabbalist philosophy. Maybe they reduce the perceivably complex to the least complex. A name which is still a composite consisting of letters; such that to escape even that multiplicity in the naming of the nothing they chose ע

Even then, that is problematic.

The Christian tradition has the following:

“See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.” (Colossians 2:8)

“For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.” (Acts 17:23)

If God is unlike anything that we can understand or relate to at all, then how could one justify any response to God? Prayer, worship, obeying his commands and shunning that which is prohibited?

“Thus We have appointed you a middle nation, that you may be witnesses against mankind, and that the messenger may be a witness against you.” (Qur’an 2:143)

Again, these are some of our initial thoughts on the subject.

The Claim: Apophaticism states that no positive predicate can be applied to God. God is beyond all human categories and language.

The Contradiction: To claim that “God is beyond all predicates” is itself a predicate. To say “God is unknowable” is to claim a piece of knowledge about God (namely, that He possesses the property of being unknowable). The statement “No statement about God is true” must, if true, apply to itself, rendering it false.

In essence, the apophatic approach attempts to use language to assert the failure of all language, which is a logical paradox. It tries to climb a ladder of negation and then kick it away, but the act of kicking it away is still a use of the ladder.

God, beyond being, must have the quality of being able to give or ground being.

As the philosopher Anthony Kenny quipped, “The God of the apophatic theologian and the God of the atheist seem to share a remarkable similarity.”

Meaningful negation logically depends on some prior understanding of what is being negated.

This leads to an infinite regress of negation: to negate a concept, you must use another concept, which you must then also negate, ad infinitum. This process can never logically conclude, as every step requires a conceptual framework that the theory itself claims is invalid.

The Unjustified Starting Assumption
The entire apophatic edifice is built on one key premise: that the human mind is utterly incapable of forming any true concepts about a transcendent God.

This is an epistemological claim presented as an absolute truth. However, it is not logically proven within the system; it is merely asserted.

A critic can ask: How do you know that human concepts are entirely inadequate? To know this would require having access to God’s nature to compare it to our concepts, which is precisely what the apophatic theologian claims is impossible.

Therefore, the foundational premise of apophaticism is both unproven and, by its own standards, unknowable.

Self-Referential Problem

If we say “God is ineffable” or “God cannot be described,” we are still making a positive assertion about God.

This seems self-contradictory: the claim “God cannot be spoken of” is itself a way of speaking about God.

Epistemic Vacuity

If all positive descriptions are denied, what content remains to distinguish God from nothingness?

A purely negative theology risks collapsing into nihilism: saying “God is not this, not that” could equally describe a void or absence.

This makes it hard to explain how believers know they are actually speaking of God rather than simply of “not-X”.

Dependence on Positive Knowledge

Negation requires a prior positive reference. To say “God is not finite,” one must know what “finite” means and apply it meaningfully.

Thus, negation parasitically depends on the very affirmations it claims to reject.

Pure apophaticism may be logically impossible without at least some cataphatic (positive) foundation.

Oh Allah, if anything that was penned by us was in error, we turn ourselves over to your Mercy. You, the knower of intentions.

With Allah (swt) is success.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 15, 2026 · 12:27 pm

The more one learns Salafi aqidah the more Christianity makes sense.

“O humanity! Eat from what is lawful and good on the earth and do not follow Satan’s footsteps. He is truly your sworn enemy. He only incites you to commit evil and indecency, and to claim against Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 2:168-169)

﷽ 

The more one learns about Salafi aqidah the more Christianity makes allot of sense.

Proposed debate scenario:

Opening presentation. Thank you all for joining me for tonights debate Trinity vs Tawhid.

I want to address the audience tonight and suggest the real question:  “How many is God?” Or “How complex is God?”

You see both the Christian and the Muslim, we both agree God is one but we also both agree that God is a unity. Trinity means three in one. Tawhid means: unity or coming together.

Yes in the NT we cannot find Jesus using the exact phrase I am God. However we do find him saying I am.

We don’t find the word tawheed in the Qur’an. Yet Muslims believe it is threaded throughout the Qur’an.

I’d like to challenge my Muslim opponent tonight to find me one verse any verse where Allah says: “My nature is simple”.

We have the mystery of the union of god and flesh. The Muslim, the mystery of how an attribute can be eternal and represented in temporal form.

We have the mystery of the trinity. The Muslim, the mystery of Allah’s unity where attributes are not identical to the essence nor other than it.

For my Muslim opponent indeed the Muslims treat sin as something trivial even hell is a brief sojourn. For us sin is darkness, seperation from God and yearns for redemption.

On and on it goes….

Rather than saying Allah is alien the clever Christian quotes the anthropomorphic similarities….bridging that chasm.

christ ate, slept, and wept.

Allah walks, chuckles and appears before men. 

“I tell you if God can cast his voice in the burning bush he can certainly join with flesh!! Hallelujah!”

and on and on it goes…

Theology matters.

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,