返回总目录
Jesus The Light And The Fragrance Of God
Copyright © 1996 by M. Anderson.
All rights reserved.
Jesus The Light And The Fragrance Of God
by M. Anderson
Part 4: Strike The Truth In The Cross
Chapter 1: The Theory of Substitution
In this fourth part of our book we investigate the controversial subject of
Jesus' exit from this earth to be with God. It is a subject which has
generated much heat and discussion, not only between Muslims and
Christians, but also amongst Muslims themselves across the centuries.
The question is: 'Was Jesus lifted up, body and spirit to be with God,
without experiencing death on the over or was he crucified, dead, then
raised from the dead and lifted up?'
Here we deal with that old question, firstly by looking at the material
presented by commentators of the Qur'an, tracing the thoughts of those of
early times through to the present day; and secondly, by examining the
contribution some modern thinkers have made on the subject.
Before we begin, however, we must remember that it is the Truth we seek to
know, and not merely the traditions handed down by our forefathers. The
truth is never afraid of testing, nor does it shy away from scrutiny. The
Qur'an states:
God strikes both the true and the false. As for the scum, it vanishes as
jetsam, and what profits men abides in the earth. [1]
Dr. Qaradawi, commenting on this verse said,
The Qur'an likens the Truth with running water and a useful metal, and
likens what is false with the scum or the foam of water which goes
downstream ... and what remains is the Truth. [2]
The truth, any truth, can stand the strikes of the hammers of investigation
and criticism, but error and falsehood will burst and vanish at the
slightest touch, as does foam. The Truth is not afraid of being handled,
touched, examined from a closer vantage point, but error shrinks from any
of these things. Error can only stand behind the label "Do Not Touch".
Truth is so solid that it can bear to be struck by men, by demons, even by
God Himself, as the above Qur'anic verse states.
THE QUR'ANIC PASSAGES
The following are the passages in the Qur'an which deal with our subject.
Two translations will be cited, N.J. Dawood of the Penguin Classics, and
A.J. Arburry of the World's Classics.
1. 'Peace be upon me, the day I was born, and the day I die, the day I am
raised up alive' [3] (A.J. Arburry). Dawood's translation is substantially the
same.
2. 'He said: "Isa (Jesus), I am about to cause you to die and lift you up
to me. I shall take you away from the unbelievers and exalt your followers
above them till the Day of the Resurrection."' [4] (N.J. Dawood)
'When God said, "Isa, I will take thee to me, and will raise thee to me,
and I will purify thee of those who believe not. I will set thy followers
above the unbelievers till the resurrection day.'" [5] (A.J. Arburry)
3. 'They declared: "We have put to death the Messiah Isa son of Mary, the
apostle of Allah." They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but
they thought they did. Those that disagreed about him were in doubt
concerning his death, for what they knew about it was sheer conjecture,
they were not sure that they had slain him. Allah lifted him up to His
presence; He is mighty and wise.' [6] (N.J. Dawood)
'And for their saying, "We slew the Messiah, Isa son of Mary, the
messenger of God"- yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him; only a
likeness of that was shown to them. And those who are at variance
concerning him are in doubt regarding him; they have no knowledge of him,
except the following of surmise; and they slew him not of a certainty - no
indeed; God raised him up to Him; God is All-mighty and Wise.' [7] (A.J.
Arburry)
4. 'And when God said, 'O Isa son of Mary, didst thou say unto men "take me
and my mother as gods, apart from God?". He said "To Thee be Glory! It is
not mine to say what I have no right to ...I was a witness over them, while
I remained among them, but when thou didst take me to Thyself, Thou wast
Thyself the watcher over them, Thou Thyself art witness of everything."' [8]
(A.J. Arburry). Dawood's translation is substantially the same.
A SURVEY OF THE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE QUR'ANIC PASSAGES
Following the development of the interpretation of the above passages,
beginning with the earliest reports (as far as possible) to the latest
theories, we will rely on Tabari's commentary, as it is the earliest
commentary available dealing with the subject at some length, and it is
also the one which influenced subsequent commentators, right up to the
present day. [9]
Tabari records two kinds of reports about what is believed to have happened
to Jesus. We will cite the samples that typify each kind, then survey
Tabari's analysis of them. Later on we will survey the subsequent
interpretations of the Qur'anic passages by other commentators.
TABARI'S REPORTS
THE FIRST KIND OF REPORT
Tabari gives the following report which seems to be the earliest report on
the belief that someone else was substituted for Jesus and so was killed
instead of Jesus.
According to one group of traditions, as a result of Jesus' request for a
substitute to be killed in his place, only one person had the likeness of
Jesus cast upon him. Tabari records six traditions with this particular
feature, of which this is a representative example :
The Jews surrounded Jesus, and nineteen of his disciples in a house. Jesus
then said to his disciples, 'Who will take my likeness and get killed, and
Paradise will be his?' One of the disciples accepted, and Jesus was lifted
up. When the disciples came out the Jews saw that they were nineteen in
number. The disciples told the Jews that Jesus was lifted up to heaven. The
Jews counted them and found that one of their number was missing, yet they
saw that one who accepted the likeness of Jesus amongst them, so they were
in doubt concerning him. They then killed that man, thinking him to be
Jesus, and crucified him. [10]
In another tradition all the disciples were turned to the likeness of
Jesus. There is only one report with this particular feature.
Tabari relates; on the authority of a Jewish convert called Wahb, the
following story:
Jesus and seventeen of his disciples went into a house. There, they were
surrounded [by the Jews who were seeking Jesus]. So when they entered, God
cast the likeness of Jesus on the whole group. The Jews exclaimed, 'You
have cast a spell on us! Either bring forth Jesus or we shall kill you
all' Jesus then said to the disciples: 'Who amongst you will buy today
Paradise in exchange of his life?'. One of the disciples said: 'I will' So
he went out saying: I am Jesus. Being changed into the likeness of Jesus,
they then took him and killed him, believing him to be Jesus. Hence, 'It
was made only to appear so to them'. And the Christians also believed the
same. And God lifted Jesus up that day. [11]
THE SECOND KIND OF REPORT
Here is the only sample of the second kind of Tabari's reports. This
version differs in many ways from the others, the essential difference
being that in this one, Jesus does not ask for a volunteer to take his
place and so die instead of him, but God cast the likeness of Jesus on some
unspecified person. This report is also related on the authority of the
same man called Wahb.
When God informed Jesus that he would soon leave this world, He was
troubled by death, and grieved. He therefore called the disciples together
for a meal saying, 'Come all of you tonight for I have a favour to ask of
you.' When they all had come, He served them Himself, and when they had
finished eating, He washed their hands and helped them to perform their
ablutions with His own hands, and wiped their hands on His garments.
The disciples considered this as an act below the master's dignity and
expressed their disapproval. But Jesus said, 'Anyone who disagrees with Me
in what I do tonight is not of me, nor I of him.' Thus they accepted. When
He had finished, he said, 'As for what I have done for you tonight, serving
you at table and washing your hands with My own hands, let that be an
example for you. You consider Me the best of you, so let no one among you
consider himself better than the others, and let each one of you offer his
life for the others as I have laid down (or sacrificed) my life for you. As
for the favour I ask of you, it is that you pray to God fervently that He
may prolong My life.'
But when the disciples stood up to pray, they were overcome by sleep, so
they were unable to pray. He began to rouse them, but they were too sleepy
... Then Jesus said, 'The shepherd will be taken away and the sheep will be
scattered'. He continued, 'In truth, I say to you, one of you will deny Me
three times before the cock crows. And another will sell Me for a few
pieces of silver and consume My price'.
After this they left Him and went out, each going his own way. The Jews
then came seeking Him, and they seized Sham'un , saying, 'He is one of his
companions', but he denied, saying, 'I am not his companion'. Others also
seized him and he likewise denied. Then he heard the crowing of a cock, and
he wept bitterly.
The next morning, one of His disciples went to the Jews and said, 'What
will you give me if I lead you to the Christ?' They gave him thirty pieces
of silver, which he took and led them to Him. Before that, however, they
became under an illusion [or an apparition appeared to them or they
imagined it]. Thus they took Him after ascertaining that it was He, and
tied Him with a rope. They dragged Him, saying, 'You raised the dead and
cast out Satan, and healed those who were demon possessed, can you not save
yourself from this rope?' They also spat on Him and placed thorns upon His
head. Then they brought Him to the wood on which they wanted to crucify
Him. God, however, took Him up to Himself and they crucified the man who
seemed to them to be Jesus.
Then Jesus remained seven days. Then His mother and the woman whom Jesus
cured from madness came to weep in the place where the crucified one was.
Jesus came to them and said, 'For whom do you weep?' They answered, 'For
you' He said, 'God had taken Me up to Himself and no harm befell Me. For
this is a thing which only appeared to them. Go now and tell the disciples
to meet Me at such and such a place' So eleven disciples went and met Him,
but the one who sold Him and led the Jews to Him was missing. Jesus asked
His companions about Him and they said, 'He regretted what he did, so he
hanged and killed himself.' Jesus said, 'Had he repented, God surely would
have pardoned him.' [12]
TABARI'S ANALYSIS OF THE FIRST KIND OF REPORT
Let us consider Tabari's analysis of the first kind of report, that is,
where Jesus asked for someone to have his likeness cast upon him.
Tabari found a problem with all versions of these reports because they
included this request, since it would have made the disciples fully aware
of what actually happened. [13] And that, according to Tabari's understanding
of the Qur'anic verse (Q. 4:157,158), would make the followers of Jesus
certain of what actually happened, not uncertain and confused, following
conjecture, as the Qur'anic verse states. The request of Jesus for a
volunteer (according to Tabari's understanding of that verse) contradicts
the Qur'an.
Tabari believed that neither the disciples nor the Jews knew what actually
happened. The disciples of Jesus sincerely believed that Jesus was
crucified, and so were not lying. They simply reported what they saw with
their eyes, but their eyes deceived them. What they saw was not in reality
Jesus dying on the cross. From that time on all the followers of Jesus did
not know what actually happened to him, until the time of the Qur'an, when
the true story was revealed.
Here, the problem is stated in Tabari's words:
The disciples would have been eye witnesses of the lifting up of Jesus, and
eye witnesses of the transforming of the disciple who consented to have the
likeness of Jesus cast upon him. So the disciples would not be confused or
in doubt as to what actually happened. Though their enemies the Jews would
have been confused as they thought that the one they killed was Jesus....
For how can the disciples be confused when they heard the words of Jesus:
'Who among you would consent to have my likeness (shabahi) cast upon him,
be killed, and be my companion in Paradise?'... and also heard the answer
of his disciple: 'I would', and witnessed the transforming of that disciple
into the likeness of Jesus? [14]
In the second version, where all the disciples had the likeness of Jesus
cast upon them, there is an atmosphere of confusion. In this case,
everywhere the disciples looked they saw the likeness of Jesus. But the
problem of Jesus' request for a volunteer to take his place still remains.
Although all had the likeness of Jesus, yet they knew the one who
volunteered was the one then killed. This version also would leave only the
Jews confused about the true identity of the crucified one, and not the
disciples of Jesus. Again, that is contrary to the belief that both the
Jews and the disciples did not know what actually happened. For both the
Jews and the followers of Jesus say that Jesus was crucified.
It is not only that the above versions pose this problem but it could be
argued they also make one of the disciples to be a liar, with the consent
of Jesus, for he claimed to be Jesus when he was not.
These stories then have problems. Tabari, however, prefers the two reports
given on the authority of Wahb. He prefers the report in which all the
disciples were changed to look like Jesus, but with the provision that
Jesus' request for a substitute be omitted altogether from the report. [15]
The alternative acceptable report also given on the authority of Wahb, has
Jesus betrayed by one of his disciples. In this report, Jesus does not ask
for a substitute to take his place:
The disciples of Jesus deserted him before the Jews came to arrest him.
Jesus then remained alone, but his likeness was cast on one of his
disciples who had been with him in the house and subsequently left him. In
this way he was changed. This man was killed and the disciples and the Jews
thought that the one who was killed was Jesus, since they saw his likeness
on him. The truth was hidden from them ... the disciples then cannot be
considered as liars because they simply told what they saw as it appeared
to them. [16]
Tabari's finding then is this: Jesus did not ask for a volunteer, but
somehow the likeness of Jesus was cast on someone who then died on the
cross instead of Jesus.
TABARI'S THEORY CHALLENGED
Tabari's theory has been challenged, for without Jesus' request for a
volunteer to die on the cross instead of him, God is presented as an unjust
God who made an innocent man to suffer for another against his will.
Here is what Dr. Mahmoud Ayoub had to say concerning this problem:
Important to most of the substitutionist interpretations is the idea that
whoever bore the likeness of Jesus, and consequently his suffering and
death, did so voluntarily. It must have been felt by Hadith transmitters
and commentators that for God to cause an innocent man to die unjustly to
save another would be divine wrongdoing (zulm), which cannot be predicated
of God. Thus the theory which eventually gained most popularity was that
one of the disciples voluntarily accepted death as a ransom for his
master. [17]
So we are back to square one, with a theory retaining the inherent problem
of Jesus' request for a volunteer, that was rejected by Tabari. If that
substitute voluntarily accepted death in place of Jesus, then we have the
inescapable objection which was rightfully and logically raised by Tabari.
How can the disciples be confused, having heard the request of Jesus and
the answer of his disciple, and having witnessed the transforming of that
disciple into the likeness of Jesus? [18] This being contrary to the Qur'an
4:158.
If, however, we accept Tabari's theory, that would make God to be unjust;
for He cast the likeness of Jesus on someone against his will, causing one
that was innocent to be killed.
This substitution theory, contradicts the Qur'an as well as the character
of God!
THE PUNISHMENT SUBSTITUTION
After Tabari the substitution theory was not totally rejected, but took a
new form. In this new form, God is completely clear of the charge of
injustice.
Some versions of this theory go like this:
When God changed those who insulted Jesus and his mother into animals, [as
a result of Jesus' request to God], Judas the leader of the Jews heard
about it, and was afraid that he might be transformed to an animal too. So
he gathered the Jews together and agreed to kill Jesus. Gabriel made Jesus
enter the top part of a house with a sky light in the ceiling. Then Gabriel
lifted him up. Judas the leader of the Jews sent one of his friends, whose
name was Titanus, into the house to kill him, but he could not see him, so
he delayed. The people outside thought he was fighting with him in the
upper part of the house. There God cast the likeness of Jesus on that man,
and when he came out to his friends, they killed him and crucified him.
Some say that God cast the likeness of Jesus only on the man's face and not
on his body. The people said, 'The face is Jesus' face but the body is
Titanus' body'' Others said, 'If this is Titanus, then where is Jesus, and
if this is Jesus, where is Titanus?' [19]
In this version Jesus did not ask for a volunteer, and the one who was
killed and crucified was not an innocent man, so he deserved to be killed.
In this report neither the Jews nor the disciples knew what actually
happened. Indeed they were confused, for the face was that of Jesus but the
body was that of Titanus. Here Tabari's lost link is found, and his
objection is answered. Also, God is not portrayed as unjust.
This report was related on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas, who was one of the
very early companions of the Prophet (he was four years old when the
Prophet died). So that tradition must have been known to Tabari. One
wonders why, then, Tabari did not use this report. It would have been a
perfect one for his understanding of Q. 4:157,158. Indeed this report does
not appear at all in Tabari's collection of the reports he mentions in his
commentary!
THE PROBLEM OF THE SUBSTITUTION THEORY
The theory of substitution in whatever form it took was not safe from the
scrutiny of those who wrestled with this issue.
A commentator who carefully analysed and discussed the substitution theory
and its implications at great length was Fakhr ad-Din al-Razi (d.
606/1209).
Razi, after surveying all the forms of the substitution theory, said,
'These forms (of the substitution theory) are contradictory and conflicting
and God knows the truth of the matter.' [20] But this contradictory nature did
not cause Razi to reject the substitution theory totally, for he understood
the Qur'anic verse, 'They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but
they thought they did' [21] to mean that God did cast the likeness of Jesus
upon someone, who was killed instead of Jesus. [22]
Razi, however, admits there are six problems with the theory of substitution.
1. Razi asked the question, 'If it can be claimed that the likeness of one
man could be cast on another, this would open the gate of sophistry. For
if we see Zayd, maybe he is not Zayd, but it is the likeness of Zayd that
was cast on another. Then no marriage or ownership rights could be
ascertained. Further, this would lead to doubt concerning historically
transmitted reports. This historical transmission provides a sure source of
knowledge... If, however, we allow the possibility of the occurrence of
such confusion of identity, this would lead to doubt concerning the
historically transmitted reports and in turn this would finally lead people
to doubt all sacred laws...
'In sum, the opening of such a gate of sophistry necessitates doubting the
truthfulness of historical reports, and this in turn leads to doubt in
fundamentals, and that leads to doubting the prophethood of all prophets.
This is a path leading to doubt in fundamentals, and must therefore be
rejected.' [23]
2. Since 'the Most High God commanded Gabriel to accompany Jesus in most
circumstances (for that is what the commentators said of His words 'I
confirmed you with the Holy Spirit'), and since the tip of one of the wings
of Gabriel is sufficient to destroy the whole world, how then is it that
Gabriel was unable to protect him from the Jews? Besides he [Jesus] himself
was able to raise the dead and heal the blind and the leper. How is it that
he could not destroy those Jews who intended to harm him...?' [24]
3. If 'God, the Most High, was able to save him from his enemies by lifting
him up to Himself, what was the advantage of casting the likeness of Jesus
on another, except the charge that the innocent substitute died to no real
gain for himself?'
4. 'If the likeness of Jesus was cast on some one else and Jesus was lifted
up to heaven, leaving people to believe that the crucified was Jesus when
he was not; that amounts to forcing ignorance and deception on people. And
that is not worthy of God's wisdom.'
5. 'The Christians in masses, east and west, in spite of their strong love
for Jesus, and their exaggeration concerning him, reported that they saw
him dying on the cross. If we deny their report, that would be doubting the
historically transmitted reports, and such doubt necessitates doubt in the
prophethood of Mohammad, and the prophethood of Jesus, even their
existence, and the existence of all the prophets.'
6. 'It is historically transmitted that the crucified remained alive for
quite a while on the cross, if he was not Jesus he must have expressed his
own agony, and said 'I am not Jesus but I am someone else'. He also must
have tried very hard to convince people of his case. But since nothing like
that was reported, it follows then that the claim of a substitute is not
true.' [25]
The important point drawn from Razi's writings is this: Once we doubt that
Zayd is Zayd, but suspect that Zayd might be someone else, what guarantee
is there that Jesus was Jesus or Mohammad was Mohammad? And what guarantee
is there now that what they said is truly what they said? If divine
knowledge or anything is to be reliable, such confusion cannot be admitted,
for then how can we be certain of anything at all?
RAZI'S POSSIBLE SCENARIO
Razi offers the opinion of some who said:
When Christ was taken up, the Jews took a man whom they killed, claiming
that he was Jesus, for Jesus was a man little given to social intercourse,
and thus known only to a few chosen companions. The Christian agreement in
the transmission of the crucifixion goes back to a few people whose
agreement on a false report is not improbable." [26]
Dr. Ayoub gives a more detailed account of the above story: 'The Jews
sought to kill Jesus, but God took him up to Himself. They therefore took
another whom they crucified on a high and isolated hill, allowing no one to
come near him until his features had changed beyond recognition. They were
thus able to conceal the fact of Jesus' Ascension, which they witnessed,
and to spread false reports of his death and crucifixion.' [27] (Emphasis
added)
The main idea behind the above story is to remove the problem that God is
the author of this deception and the cause of this confusion of identity,
because 'for God to allow such confusion of identity for whatever reason
would be too irrational and therefore inadmissible.' [28]
In this solution, it is not God who is the author of this confusion of
identity, but the Jews. God is not portrayed here as a deceiver but as
helpless against the scheming of the Jews. For the Jews win and God loses
control. His purpose has been defeated. For the Jews have managed to
conceal the fact of Jesus' Ascension, which is a mighty work of God. The
Jews managed to make it void as if God did not do it. In the above solution
while God's justice and rationality are met, as far as those who hold this
view are concerned, God's purpose in the Ascension of Jesus, is thwarted
and the Jews are seen as outsmarting God. This theory makes a mockery of
God's sovereignty and greatness. The earliest form of substitution was
based on divine deception, but this one is based on human deception which
turns the power of God to naught.
Furthermore, according to the above story, if the Jews were eye witnesses
of the Ascension, were the disciples also eye witnesses? Would God reveal
the Ascension to the unbelieving Jews and hide it from the faithful band of
the followers of Jesus, and leave them in darkness, ignorance and grief?
And if they were eye witnesses, then the disciples could have told everyone
that the crucified one was not Jesus but that it was a lie, and that Jesus
was lifted up to be with God.
If this theory were true then the Jews have also succeeded in misleading
the followers of Jesus, and thus thwarted God's purpose. These disciples
believed in him and the Qur'an called them 'Shuhoud', that is 'eye
witnesses' when it said of them: 'Count us amongst the witnesses' [29]
Razi himself, commenting on the description of the disciples as witnesses
said, 'The request of the disciples to be counted amongst the witnesses was
answered, and God made them prophets and apostles.' [30]
Could those disciples whom God made prophets and apostles be so cut off
from God that they knew neither what actually happened to Jesus, nor that
the Jews were only lying concerning the crucified one?
Razi also said that 'since the disciples were described as witnesses, their
testimony was associated with God's mention, and this is a high degree and
a great rank.' [31] If those whose mention is placed along side God's witness
were deceived by the Jews, that would make a mockery of the testimony of
God to the disciples of Jesus. Besides God could have easily revealed to
those disciples of Jesus that he was not crucified, and that the Jews were
only telling a lie. Such a theory would run contrary to the purpose of God
in establishing His truth, and contrary to the nature of God, who
miraculously lifted Jesus up but could do nothing for his followers. If the
substitution theory makes a mockery of divine justice this theory would
make mockery of God's covenant with the faithful band that followed Jesus.
THE INFLUENCE OF THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS
The 'Gospel of Barnabas' did not appear until the sixteenth century. With
the appearing of this 'gospel' we see the return of one of the old forms of
the substitution theory. This gospel tells us:
Judas Iscariot led the Jews and Roman soldiers to arrest Jesus at night in
a house. When God saw the danger approaching his servant He ordered Gabriel
and Mikhaiel and Rafaiel and Oryiel, His ambassadors, to take Jesus from
the world. So they took Him out of the southern window of the house and
carried Him up to heaven. All the disciples were asleep, and the wonderful
God acted wonderfully, insomuch that Judas was so changed in speech and in
face that the disciples believed him to be Jesus. And Judas, having
awakened the disciples, was seeking where the master was. The disciples
marvelled, and answered: 'Thou, Lord, art our master'. He smiling said:
'Now are ye foolish, that know not me to be Judas Iscariot.' ... The
soldiers came and arrested Judas, then he was taken and crucified. He lost
his mind so that his incoherent protests were considered as those of a
madman. Jesus, on the other hand, appeared after three days to his mother
and the rest of the disciples to comfort and reassure them that he did not
die, he even requested from the four angels to testify that he did not die.
Then before their eyes the four angels carried him up into heaven. [32]
After so many modifications to the substitution theory, Dr. Ayoub had this
to say about the Gospel of Barnabas:
This is most probably a late work, written under Islamic influence and
agreeing with Islam on many crucial points. [33]
In other words it is most probably a forged work, written under Islamic
influence. Because of that influence the author took an obvious Islamic
position on many crucial points in the debate between Christians and
Muslims. This gospel also contradicts the Qur'an in that it calls Mohammad
the 'Christ'. Nowhere in the Qur'an do we find that Mohammad is called the
Christ, rather it is Jesus Son of Mary who is called the Christ.
The Gospel of Barnabas, then, teaches a version of the old substitution
theory, with Judas as the one who was crucified. But the earliest reports
tell us that Judas committed suicide, so the Gospel of Barnabas contradicts
the earliest reports collected by Tabari.
Thus we have come back full circle back to the earliest interpretation of
the words 'shubbiha lahum' as meaning 'another took his likeness and was
substituted for him'. Once more we are back to square one!
THE REJECTION OF THE SUBSTITUTION THEORY
Traditional commentators like Sayed Qutb clung to the Gospel of Barnabas as
their evidence for the substitution theory, while modern thinkers shy away
from it.
So the latest interpretations of the Qur'anic verses on the subject fall
into two groups. One group insists on the substitution theory, like that of
Sayed Qotb [34], while others, mainly modern thinkers, refuse the substitution
theory totally.
Modern thinkers are aware of the embarrassment caused by this confusion.
Here is what Dr. Kamel Hussein had to say:
The idea of a substitute for Christ is a very crude way of explaining the
Qur'anic text. They had to explain a lot to the masses. No cultured Muslim
believes in this nowadays. The text is taken to mean that the Jews thought
they killed Christ but God raised Him in a way we can leave unexplained
among the several mysteries which we have taken for granted on faith
alone. [35] [emphasis added]
Dr. Hussein rejects the substitution theory. It so lacked simplicity and the
ring of truth that it had to be modified repeatedly to cover all the holes.
It is a crude way of explaining the Qur'anic text; the idea of a substitute
is not well thought out. Even after almost one thousand years of
modifications, thinkers still discard it as a backward thing that belongs
to the uncultured, and hopefully to the past. It is an insult to the
intelligence of the thinking man.
Dr. Mahmoud Ayoub also said:
The substitution theory will not do, regardless of its form or purpose...
it makes a mockery of divine justice and the primordial covenant of God
with humanity. [36]
The theory of substitution in any form is rooted in and based on divine
deception, whether the deception of Jesus' disciples or the deception of
the Jews. If it involves the deception of the disciples, then it turns the
Merciful God into a monster (God forbid), for how can God deceive the
disciples of Jesus, the faithful band that believed His messenger, and
after them the followers of Jesus generation after generation? And if it
involves the deception of the Jews, that also does not fit the character of
God; nor does it confound the arrogance of the Jews, for they still believe
that they killed Jesus, and boast about it. What the Jews needed, was to be
shown without a shadow of a doubt that they had no power over Jesus.
And if some say that the Jews did see Jesus ascending to heaven, but the
disciples did not (hence the report of the Christians that Jesus was
crucified) then this amounts to saying that God allowed the infidel Jews to
see the Ascension, but the faithful followers were denied this sight and
were left in darkness and despair. If this was so, what sort of message
would those Hawariyun (the disciples of Jesus) have had for the world, if
all they had to say was that Jesus was only crucified and did not ascend?
If they claimed he ascended, yet did not see him ascending they would have
been the greatest liars in the history of mankind.
How could the prophet to whom God gave the clearest evidence, confuse his
disciples and his followers?
The Gospel of Barnabas tells us that although Jesus appeared to the
disciples after his Ascension, they all dispersed into the different parts
of the world, and kept silent about the true story, which they knew very
well. Only the supposed Barnabas had the courage to write the true story
and the world had to wait for sixteen centuries after the event to know
what actually happened. Is this the way God reveals His truth?
The historically transmitted reports by the followers of Jesus are well
known all over the world, as Razi observed: 'The Christians in their
masses, east and west, in spite of their strong love for Jesus, and their
exaggeration concerning him, reported that they saw him dying on the
cross.'
This must have been what the disciples of Jesus taught as they spread east
and west.
The substitution theory insults and mocks both man and God, and therefore
must be rejected.
1. The Qur'an, 13:17.
2. Dr. Qaradawi, al-Iyman wal-Hayat, seventh ed., Cairo, Maktabat
Wahbah, 1980 , P. 5.
3. The Qur'an, 19: 33.
4. The Qur'an, 3: 55.
5. The Qur'an, 3: 55.
6. The Qur'an, 4:157,158.
7. The Qur'an, 4:157,158.
8. The Qur'an, 5:116-120.
9. Ayoub, Mahmoud M., "Towards an Islamic Christology II", The Muslim
World, Vol. LXX, April 1980, No. 2, p. 92.
10. Tabari, commenting on Q. 4:157, ref. No. 10783.
11. Ibid., ref. No. 10779.
12. Ibid., ref. No. 10780.
13. Ibid., 4:157.
14. Tabari, comments after ref. No. 10789.
15. Tabari, commenting on the Qur'an, 4:157.
16. Ibid.
17. Ayoub, Mahmoud M., "Towards an Islamic Christology II", The Muslim
World, Vol. LXX, April 1980, No. 2, P 97.
18. Tabari, comments after ref. No. 10789.
19. Magma'u al-Bayan, Abu 'Ali al-Fadl Ibn al-Hasan al-Tubrusi, commenting
on Q. 4:157.
20. Razi, at-Tafsir al-Kabir, Commenting on Q. 4:157.
21. The Qur'an, 4:157,158.
22. Razi, at-Tafsir al-Kabir, Commenting on Q. 3: 55.
23. Ibid., Commenting on Q. 4:157.
24. Ibid., Commenting on Q. 3:55.
25. Ibid., Commenting on Q. 3:55.
26. Ibid., Commenting on Q. 4:157.
27. Ayoub, Mahmoud M., "Towards an Islamic Christology II", The Muslim
World, Vol. LXX, April 1980, No. 2, P. 102.
28. Ibid., P. 102.
29. The Qur'an 3:53.
30. Razi, at-Tafsir al-Kabir, Commenting on Q. 3: 53.
31. Ibid.
32. The Gospel of Barnabas, translated from Italian MS by Lonsdale and
Laura Ragg, sections 214-221.
33. Ayoub, Mahmoud M., "Towards an Islamic Christology II", The Muslim
World, Vol. LXX, April 1980, No. 2, P. 113.
34. Sayed Qutb, Fi Zelal al- Qur'an, commenting on Q. 4:157.
35. City of Wrong, Kenneth Cragg, London, 1960, P. 222.
36. Ayoub, Mahmoud M., "Towards an Islamic Christology II", The Muslim
World, Vol. LXX, April 1980, No. 2, P. 104.
Click here to continue with the next chapter.
If you would like to ask further questions, obtain a hard copy of this
series of booklets or for any other reason you are welcome to contact
M. Anderson via email to fragrance@integrity.org.