Regarding The Second Treatise of the Great Seth, the text you quoted is correct, but it nevertheless states just a few sentences before your quote that Jesus DID die in appearance only – which follows the general pattern of docetic gnosticm found in the Nag Hammadi library. Nothing about Judas susbstiting for Jesus though.

Yes, the substitution of Judas is from elsewhere, but I don’t recall where right now — I’ll see if I can find it, but I no longer have my 25-year-old paper! Anyway, the idea that Jesus died in appearance only was precisely my point: Judas was made to look like Jesus. This is Islamic exegesis of Qur’an 4:157, as we shall see, and it fits in with the Gnostic idea that Jesus only appeared to die on the cross.

Regarding The Second Treatise of the Great Seth, the text you quoted is correct, but it nevertheless states just a few sentences before your quote that Jesus DID die in appearance only – which follows the general pattern of docetic gnosticm found in the Nag Hammadi library. Nothing about Judas susbstiting for Jesus though.

I did not succumb to them as they had planned. But I was not afflicted at all. Those who were there punished me. And I did not die in reality but in appearance, lest I be put to shame by them because these are my kinsfolk.

Sura 4:157 is very similar to this view of Jesus, and I have no doubt now where that influence may have come from. But again there is no mention of Judas as a substitution for Jesus. So, maybe I am just misunderstanding your earlier comment regarding Judas.

Well, Sura 4 will be in a few weeks – I guess we can revisit it then. Thanks again for your effort.

I am not aware of any Gnostic gospel that blatently says that Jesus was not crucified. Some Gospels say that it was a docetic (Jesus only seemed to suffer and die – pure gnosticism) version of Jesus (Gospel of Peter, Acts of John), but Jesus nonetheless.

See, for example, The Second Treatise of the Great Seth, a Gnostic text found at Nag Hammadi. In it, Jesus says, “For my death which they think happened, happened to them in their error and blindness, since they nailed their man unto their death….It was another…who drank the galla and the vinegar; it was not I…I was another upon whom they placed the crown of thorns….And I was laughing at their ignorance.”

The only Gospel, that I am aware of, that has Judas replacing Jesus on the Cross is the Gospel of Barnabas from the 6th-7th century, and which is not a gnostic text. Am I missing something, or could those portions of the Quran and Gospel of Barnabas have influenced each other?

The Gospel of Barnabas is not that early. It’s a Medieval Muslim forgery, reflecting Qur’anic teaching and Islamic belief about the crucifixion.

There is a great deal of fascinating material in this line. My first writing on Islam was back in college in 1981 or so — a term paper on how Islam’s denial of the crucifixion of Christ (Qur’an 4:157) is related to and may be derived from the denial of the crufixion contained in several Gnostic gospels, particularly since both affirm that Judas was made to resemble Jesus and put on the cross in his place.

I am not aware of any Gnostic gospel that blatently says that Jesus was not crucified. Some Gospels say that it was a docetic (Jesus only seemed to suffer and die – pure gnosticism) version of Jesus (Gospel of Peter, Acts of John), but Jesus nonetheless.

The only Gospel, that I am aware of, that has Judas replacing Jesus on the Cross is the Gospel of Barnabas from the 6th-7th century, and which is not a gnostic text. Am I missing something, or could those portions of the Quran and Gospel of Barnabas have influenced each other?

19Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It was written, “JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

20Therefore many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and in Greek.

21So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews’; but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews.’”

22Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”

It wasn’t until I started looking into the Hebrew behind the English that I understood more of what happened in that instant. The Pharisees were asking Pilate to re-write what he had written to change it to a sentence which would in Hebrew say in effect “I am King of the Jews” –and “I am” is Yahweh! (which is why they were SO upset when Jesus said “before Abraham was born, I am”.

I also forgot to mention Zech 6:11-13 which is SUPER COOL!

11″Take silver and gold, make an ornate crown and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest.

12″Then say to him, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD.

13″Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices.”‘

“A man who’s name is Branch”
.
.
.
Sure makes the early Christians who went around calling themselves “Nazarenes” seem a LOT more significant now doesn’t it??!!! :-) :-) :-)

AWESOME isn’t it!?!!! Yeshuah Ha Messiach!! our High Priest and King!

Any Bible that lists parallel passages in the OT makes it possible, though. For example, when Jesus is tempted by Satan, he quotes OT passages from the Exodus that God spoke to Israel to demonstrate that Jesus is the true Israel. Another example is, “Out of Egypt I called my son,” (Hosea 11:1, Matt 2:15) It does help to know that ‘Jesus’ is really ‘Yeshua’ or ‘Joshua’, the man that led God’s people into the promised land.

Thanks for the encouragment!! :-) lol–many years ago, when I first heard that the Koran mentioned “Miriam” as the mother of Jesus–I was so haughty: I actually thought that Mohammed was mixing up Moses’ sister with “Mary” –’Didn’t he know that Jesus’ mother’s name was Mary??? Didn’t EVERYONE know that??? LOL!!! Imagine my shock when I found out that Jesus’ mother’s name actually WAS Miriam! and His name was Yaheshua, or even Hoshea–that basically, “Joshua” “Yahushua” and “Hosea” are ALL the same name in Hebrew. It’s “Salvation” That’s when I got a Strong’s Concordance and discovered http://www.blueletterbible.org

I so LOVE the Scripture!!! It’s so forthright that it’s EASILY understood (lol–in general–not every prophecy–but I’m SURE you know what I mean)

…and yet so amazingly rich–the more you delve, the more there is!! It’s so fantastic how He meets us exactly as we are, exactly where we are…from the brand new baby Christian, to the theologian -there is ALLways more to learn of Him!

Don’t you just LOVE it when you run accross something in the Old Testament that you hadn’t read in a while, or the last time you had read it, you hadn’t necessarily applied it to the New?? One of my favorite moments like that was reading Zechariah 3 the first time after I’d found out that “netzer” was Hebrew for branch or twig, or shoot. (It was during a bible study in which the quote “can anything good come out of Nazareth?” was mentioned and so the Hebrew name for the town was taught to show how insignifigant that town was thought.

It was like a couple of years later that I read the Zech. passage and it hit me like silent thunder: When Pilate had ordered it written “Jesus the Nazarene King of the Jews” nailed on the cross–and the Pharisees had tried to get him to change it–WHY they were so against it…in Aramaic (or Hebrew) it would have said LITERALLY

SALVATION of BRANCH
KING of the JEWS

No wonder they were upset!

MATTHEW 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

These are the kind of texts quoted by skeptics that show total ignorance. So you have no trouble with Satan teleporting Jesus to a high mountain but showing him the kingdoms of the world? NO WAY!

C’mon, think! If Satan can do one he can do the other. Notice how Jesus always responds, by quoting the bible. The Word uses God’s word.

This is not the place for an unrelated biblical discussion.

YIKES…OoookeeDOke!

Nonetheless there are many biblical texts that require “interpretation.” Here are two examples.

Aaahhm Not to be “nitpicky” but the challenge is to quote a couple of PASSAGES that are (to quote you) “easily contested” not one verse. – - – Out of context. Or one verse that requires interpretation–one third of the Scriptures are prophecy, so of course interpretation is gonna have to take place! Where we’re in disagreement is that two honest believing Christians could not agree as to how to interpret a PASSAGE and there not be an answer easily attained by adding more context ( say, by comparing similar passages where the same subject is addressed).

Just to BE “nitpicky” the answer to your second example is to include context: Back up to verse 11:

11″Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.

12″If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

13″No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.

14″As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;

15so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

The CONTEXT is testimony of “what we have seen” –anyone seen Elijah lately and asked him about his experiences in the afterlife?

To get HYPER nitpicky Elijah didn’t ascend under his own steam so to speak….so it’s not like there was a contradiction.

Now to deal with the first:

MATTHEW 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

From no place in the universe can one see the whole earth or even all the kingdoms of the world in Biblical times.

When I read “From no place in the universe can one see the whole earth”….at first I was a little confused, but then I spent SEVERAL minutes laughing and I feel much better–Thank you! It’s been a loooong day and that really helped! I’m assuming you realized… like probably two seconds after posting that, that quite literally from ANYWHERE in orbit one can see all of the Earth.

It’s exactly moments like these that make me REALLY wish for some sort of editing function once these are posted!

Was there anything else that brought that verse to mind? I guess I’m basically asking, you’re not saying that just because the subject of a verse is miraculous that automatically calls it into question are you? Was there some specific reason you chose that particular verse as easily contestable OTHER than it was miraculous?

What specifically are you contesting?

Thanks for taking the time! I hope you’re enjoying this as I am…and I hope my sense of humor doesn’t strike you as abrasive. Thanks again!

JOHN 3:13: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Does this mean that Elijah came down from heaven?

It’s two different references. Here Jesus is referencing the fact that after his resurrection, he will ascend into heaven. Elijah didn’t ascend into heaven (as Jesus did of his own power), he was carried into heaven by a whirlwind.

Our “Christian” scriptures have been sanitized of their Jewish roots…and that makes it doubly difficult to attempt to point out that He actually DID come to fulfill the Scriptures and not change/abolish/abrogate them. We’re kinda in a similar position to the Samaritans of whom Jesus says: “You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.” in John 4. I’m finding it just that much more rich and awe inspiring to try and delve into that fulfillment a little more.

Any Bible that lists parallel passages in the OT makes it possible, though. For example, when Jesus is tempted by Satan, he quotes OT passages from the Exodus that God spoke to Israel to demonstrate that Jesus is the true Israel. Another example is, “Out of Egypt I called my son,” (Hosea 11:1, Matt 2:15) It does help to know that ‘Jesus’ is really ‘Yeshua’ or ‘Joshua’, the man that led God’s people into the promised land.

This is not the place for an unrelated biblical discussion. Nonetheless there are many biblical texts that require “interpretation.” Here are two examples.

MATTHEW 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

From no place in the universe can one see the whole earth or even all the kingdoms of the world in Biblical times.

——————-
2 Kings 2:11: And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

JOHN 3:13: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Does this mean that Elijah came down from heaven?

Many thanks for this erudite site.

And much fascinating reading to add to my lists.

Maybe I was not clear enough in my remark concerning the comparison of the Qur’anic and Biblical narratives. Allah is the only author of the Qur’an and every word is that of Allah (passed to Muhammad through the angel). Muhammad does not speak and when he is supposed to give a specific message to the believers it is prefixed by “Say,…) leaving Allah as the sole narrator.

Hmmm. I thought you were pretty clear. I would have thought no additional clarification was needed—but I’m grateful you have! I would like to remind you that all of the Hadith and Sunnah are purely what Mohammed said—and what he did….and that they are considered “scripture” as well…I think they’re at least as equivalent to ours when Paul says “…I say, not the Lord” or “by concession, not as a command” in 1 Corinthians chapter 7. I would also like to mention that he says, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” -1 Tim. 3:16 (Some translations say “God breathed” instead of inspired. See also John 10:34-36. (Jesus reminding the Pharisees that what’s written in Scripture-they can not contradict.) Heck, just check out a few of the results of a “Scriptures” query!

The Bible does not follow this format. Although God does speak directly to Moses and hands off the 10 commandments in His own words there are other contexts, such as the epistles, where God is not the author of the (inspired) text. It is easier to contest or interpret an epistle which was written by a human about 100 years after Christ’s death than to contest one of the commandments.

LOL Ah—most of the epistles were penned by Paul (a.k.a. Rabbi Sha’ul) or his scribe (if I were going to get HYPER technical) *giggle*…and since the Romans put him to death somewhere around about 62 AD (less than thirty years from Jesus’ Resurrection) you might want to reconsider that.

Also I’m simply reissuing my original challenge to you, which was to please quote (just cut and paste) an “example or two”…because I used to believe as you do….but through direct examination, I no longer do. PLEASE give me a couple of examples of some Scriptural passages that you feel are “easier to contest or interpret”! ;-)

I was raised in the Catholic flavor of Christianity which is at variance with most protestant denominations but we can at least agree that there is room for interpretation of biblical text. In Islam the main division (Shi’a, Sunni) had nothing to do with the interpretation of the Qur’an but had to do with the succession after Muhammad’s death. The hadith (traditions of the prophet) led later on to other divisions but these are not part of the Qur’an.
Annar on July 16, 2007 at 4:38 PM

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I know, you aren’t at all at variance with us with the sole exception that your version is supposed to be the most whole or complete. As far as the Pope says, our Protestant churches are useful, (for bringing people to the Salvation of God) but we don’t have the whole ‘kit and cabootle’ so to speak. We (OTOH) are “at variance” with the Catholic Church on several points. I’d LOVE to get into a discussion on them…since I miss that with my friend since he changed from Eastern Orthodox Catholic, to RCC, to Baptist :-( LOL

While I’ve read some pretty harsh things written by some Protestants about the RCC…I personally don’t like “hit pieces” and MUCH prefer civil discussion where NEITHER party feels touchy, or vulnerable whatsoever….and besides, I tend to rely on Matthew 5:19 “Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. “ I tend to put emphasis on “IN the kingdom of heaven” So, as a Protestant, I might strongly disagree with oooh, the Immaculate Conception (MARY’s) for instance…but in no manner shape or form would I ever imply that any believing Catholic isn’t a Christian (or as the Muslims might say, “apostate”)

(I also feel the same way about Mormanism…) but I’ll not vote for Romney because either he doesn’t care enough about his religion to look into the huge dirth of archeological evidence (actually not even one scrap of physical evidence) in support of Joseph Smith’s “historical” teachings OR the guts to admit that he DOES realize it’s false, but was born into it, loves the people, structure etc etc etc and puts personal emphasis upon Jesus Christ and the Bible rather than the book of Mormon (whatever!) So—I won’t vote for him because of his lack of discernment, or courage to either investigate into and/or stand up against falsehood.

Sorry for the LENGTH!!!!

Sincerely,

I recall from my days in parochial school when I first heard about Mohammed’s invasion of Europe, that the Muslim battle cry was, “Accept Allah, or die!” That does not sound like there was any option of accepting jizya by the victims. Can you elaborate, or was my old religion textbook incorrect?

Maybe I was not clear enough in my remark concerning the comparison of the Qur’anic and Biblical narratives. Allah is the only author of the Qur’an and every word is that of Allah (passed to Muhammad through the angel). Muhammad does not speak and when he is supposed to give a specific message to the believers it is prefixed by “Say,…) leaving Allah as the sole narrator. The Bible does not follow this format. Although God does speak directly to Moses and hands off the 10 commandments in His own words there are other contexts, such as the epistles, where God is not the author of the (inspired) text. It is easier to contest or interpret an epistle which was written by a human about 100 years after Christ’s death than to contest one of the commandments.

I was raised in the Catholic flavor of Christianity which is at variance with most protestant denominations but we can at least agree that there is room for interpretation of biblical text. In Islam the main division (Shi’a, Sunni) had nothing to do with the interpretation of the Qur’an but had to do with the succession after Muhammad’s death. The hadith (traditions of the prophet) led later on to other divisions but these are not part of the Qur’an.

If only Mohammed’s first listeners had read and believed Galatians 1:

3Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,

4who gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father,

5to whom be the glory forevermore. Amen.

6I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;
7which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

8But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

9As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

10For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ.

Like the woman said, Mohammed was a stranger, encouraging murder and looting (not to mention raping and pillaging) full of greed and totally lacking any semblance of honor.

If Allah had willed, the nations would have believed the prophets he sent to earth, but this was not his will, although his reasons are left unexplained

The deeper we get into this, the more confusing it (not you, Robert, your explinations are great!) gets. First of all, I really have a problem with the whole no-free-will thing. Not only due to the fact that human free will is what made us fall from grace in the first place, but what Allah wills doesn’t make any sense. “I’ll send prophets, but in my infinite wisdom, I’ll make sure that hardly anyone believes them, and those who do will take my divine message the wrong way.”

Plus it seems like it’s playing an obscessive game of “opposites” with the Bible. The people of Isreal didn’t rebel against Saul, Saul rebeled against God! That was the whole pont!!

Maybe I’m just wacky, but the whole religion seems more and more like something from Bizarro world.

Thanks again Robert. It’s a lot to digest, and I’m probably getting about half of it, but I’m that much closer to being able to speak authoritatively on Muslim beliefs and mindset.

csdeven on July 16, 2007 at 9:32 AM

First–Yep-THANK YOU ROBERT!!

Second-csdeven–isn’t it scary????????!!!! (The Muslim mindset–of the BELIEVING one anyway)

YHWH/IAUE/I AM says, “I am the Good Shepherd” and “I lay my life down for the sheep” for “we all like sheep have gone astray” and “there is no rightous no not one” and “For God so loved THE WORLD that He gave His one and only Son” and “I take to pleasure in the death of the wicked”

SO to God we are all like sheep, vulnerable and prone to wandering away and being set upon by wolves or falling in pits–and He is our protector and loves us despite our own foolishness at times.

Allah hates the unbelievers. Allah made them not believe–from the beginning whether or not they would believe was decided by him and how much suffering they would endure was decided while they were yet in the womb and he DELIGHTS in their killing (quite extensively)

YHWH commands His followers to treat the aliens within their gates exactly as themselves…to shelter runaway slaves, to “love your neighbor as yourself” so-murder is ALWAYS evil cruelty is ALWAYS evil.

According to Allah though, slaughtering the swine and the apes is good. Sneaking into a female poet’s bedroom, gently removing the suckling babe from her breast and plunging a sword into her because she had the audacity to claim

“You obey a stranger who encourages you to murder for booty. You are greedy men. Is there no honor among you?”

-When her murderer asked if he should feel guilt due to her now orphaned sons Muhammed’s response was that her death had no meaning beyond a couple of goats butting heads.

This religion is straight from Hell.

A “good” Jew and a “good” Christian will not cheat a stranger and will be protective of all.

A “good” Muslim, like a “good” Nazi can kill even the most innocent without suffering “weakness”.

One point that should be repeated over and over again is that every word in the Qur’an is supposed to be that of Allah himself so that changing it is impossible and interpreting can be problematic; sometimes even life threatening.

I entirely agree with you here. Muslims themselves are the first victims of Islam, as any believing Christian understands-Allah is nothing more nor less than Satan himself. Every single believing Muslim is under delusion…and even nominal ones are stuck in it’s corrupt system.

Contrast this with the Bible where most of the writings are those of “divinely inspired” men and the direct utterances of the divinity are few and far between which leaves plenty of wiggle room for interpretation.

Annar on July 15, 2007 at 10:09 AM

I challenge you to provide an example or two. I used to believe the same thing…but upon examination continually find this to be false.

I’m protestant, so am more familiar with Christian theologians who are concerned with Scripture (as opposed to tradition). Some use a phrase–”let scripture interpret scripture” and therefore affirm that no doctrine should rest upon a single verse, but rather upon a firm foundation of contextually intact passages from both Old and New Testaments. After all, Jesus Himself quoted extensively from “the law” AND “the Prophets”

24″Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just exactly as the women also had said; but Him they did not see.”

25And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!

26″Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?”

27Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. Luke 24:24-27

TexasDan,

I too find it…abrasive to refer to Isa as Jesus…but then I imagine many Jewish people feel similarly to our refering to several Old Testament prophets by somewhat different names than they do…and the fact that our New Testament names have been extensively “gentilized” doesn’t help matters. For instance–”Jesus’” mother actually WAS referred to as Miriam–in Hebrew, her name was exactly the same as Moses’ sister. There is no “J” in Hebrew either, and John was actually much closer to Yacob. John the Baptist was actually Yochannan (or something similar to that) and Jesus’ name is actually something much more similar to Yeshuwhah and actually had MEANING in the Hebrew language. (God’s Salvation–or Yah’s Salvation) the Yah, being exactly the same as in “Halleluia” which is Praise to God (Yah) as in Yahuyah–or Yahwey

Our “Christian” scriptures have been sanitized of their Jewish roots…and that makes it doubly difficult to attempt to point out that He actually DID come to fulfill the Scriptures and not change/abolish/abrogate them. We’re kinda in a similar position to the Samaritans of whom Jesus says: “You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.” in John 4. I’m finding it just that much more rich and awe inspiring to try and delve into that fulfillment a little more.

Which brings up another amazing difference between our Scriptures and the Koran. In spite of those name changes (and Lord and God being used intead of Yawhey, Elohim etc and Christ instead of “annointed One” or Messiah etc Hebrew Titles–God/Yahwey is PERFECTLY able to work through them–despite our handling of His Word. Through myriad of translations–He still speaks through His Word. In direct contrast, Allah is only able to speak through his word when it’s spoken in Arabic–any attempt at translation is a defacto interpretation and different from the original enough to make it useless–ask any debating Muslim and they’ll tell you. It’s enough to make one laugh at the “deity” of Allah…but on the other hand cry for the souls of his believers.