The Crucifixion Debate: Opening Part II

The Quranic Text, Uthmanic Revision, and the Claim of Clarity

I am asserting that the reason Shabir Ali sits here this evening and denial the thesis is due to these 40 Arabic words traceable at their earliest to the revision done by the Quranic text or by Uthman and Undertaken by a committee chosen by him sometime after the middle of the 7th century according to the tradition recorded in Al-Bukhari.

There truly is no other reason. And what is more though the Quran claims to be a clear book written in the perspicuous Arabic tongue the fact is this text is nowhere near clear let alone perspicuous. Many have pointed out that if it were not for surah 4157 the Quran's teachings and such texts as surah 355 in 1933 where the death of Jesus is mentioned would be easily understood without prompting.

Very obtuse Explanations require us to believe the text is referring to a future death of Jesus that has not even taken place as yet. What is more the text as it is written is very unclear prompting as Shabir himself has noted any number of contradictory Interpretations by Islamic scholars over the centuries.

And what is truly amazing to me is this when the Quran contradicts the Christian teaching of the deity of Christ it does so repeatedly and Forcefully. We likewise find references to this in the Hadith.

But when it comes to this one single ayah these 40 lonely Arabic words that pop into the Quran out of nowhere We likewise cannot find any meaningful commentary on these words in the Hadith literature.

Think of it. Muslims for 200 years could not think of any commentary by Muhammad on this ayah. And yet I As a Christian and to believe these 40 Arabic words written over half a millennium after the Christ event in a different language from far Away or to be taken to be sufficient to overthrow the entirety of the New Testament and the testimony of eyewitnesses and martyrs.

The New Testament Witness to Jesus’ Death and Resurrection

But as it is my job to defend the thesis this evening Allow me to read into the record the ancient testimony of the Gospels regarding Jesus's own words about his death. If these words are to be contradicted I assert the one doing so needs to do more than point out that liberal secular scholars tend to disagree with words that claim to Be inspired that is a given if we are to believe these words are falsely attributed to Jesus.

And I suggest that proof of the dishonesty of the writer writers needs to be provided. Documentary evidence of later tampering with the text must be submitted. Without such evidence the words of Jesus must stand.

And so we start with these words recorded by Mark. During the time when the eyewitnesses to these events were alive and well and very active in preaching Jesus's message in Mark 8 We read. And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed and after three days rise again.

And he was stating the matter plainly and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. But turning around and seeing his disciples He rebuked Peter and said get behind me Satan for you are not setting your mind on God's interests.

But man's. And he summoned the crowd with his disciples and said to them if anyone wishes to come after me He must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. Likewise in Mark 10 45 we read. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served.

But to serve and to give his life a ransom for many. This New Testament witness to the centrality of the purpose of Christ and the cross is given prophetic authority in the words of the angel. Recorded in Matthew 121.

She will bear a son and you shall call his name Jesus for he will save his people from their sins. The Apostle John often refers the self-giving of Christ as a means of salvation. But one summary statement that is particularly striking is found in Revelation 5 9 through 10.

And they sang a new song saying worthy are you to take the book and to break its seals. For you were slain and Purchased for God with your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God and they will reign upon the earth.

Paul's testimony is ubiquitous on this subject, of course. So I simply read into the testimony these words from Titus chapter 2. Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ Who gave himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed and to purify for himself of people for his own possessions.

Zealous for? Good deeds. Many other texts from Peter and the writer to the Hebrews could be included. But we do not need to belabor the point the evidence of the New Testament on the issue is overwhelming consistent and clear.

Early Christian Witness from Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp

I'd like to remind our Muslim friends this evening of just how strong the evidence is that this was the faith of his thought Messiah and his disciples keeping in mind that the first 100 years of history after the death of Muhammad Yields almost nothing that bears witness to his life work or teachings and that to quote Humphreys quote our evidence for documentation Prior to 750 AD consists almost entirely of rather dubious citations and later compilations.

And quote the Christian evidence the central teaching of the cross is much more primitive much closer to the original sources than almost anything that can be cited for the life and teachings of Muhammad.

For example a scant 65 years after the crucifixion the elders of the church at Rome wrote to the church at Corinth. This letter is traditionally called first Clement dating around AD 96 here. Because the love he had for us Jesus Christ our Lord in accordance with God's will gave his blood for us and his flesh for our flesh and his life for our Lives.

And quote. And in section 7 the same letter. Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ understand how precious it is to his father. Please note that the earliest Christian writings outside of the New Testament take the message of the crucified Messiah and salvation through his blood as a given.

There simply is no evidence that it was a point of contention between the allegedly true followers of Jesus and some Pauline group that has taken over the faith. The only people who were attacking the concept of the crucifixion were doing so because of their connection to Gnosticism a religion that denied that Jesus had truly been a man and that he had a physical body.

Now it is pretty obvious why people who did not believe Jesus was truly a man. But merely a phantom would deny the crucifixion as it is very difficult to crucify spirits. But is likewise painfully obvious that Jesus was not a Gnostic sage wandering the streets of Jerusalem.

And surely the fantasies that developed into the writings of the Gnostics over a century after Christ have nothing to do with historical reality of the preaching of the cross being at the heart of the Christian faith from long before.

The first Gnostic tried to make room for Jesus and his pantheon of emanations from his God. About 77 years after the crucifixion Ignatius bishop of Antioch was traveling to Rome to die as a martyr. In the letters He wrote as he traveled are repetitive references to the cross and the death of Christ.

Remember this documentation is still about 70 years closer to the events of Jesus's life than the best Documentation that exists for any of the events in Muhammad's life. Remember hadith collections like al-bukhari date from over two centuries after the death of Muhammad.

So Ignatius was three times closer to the sources than al-bukhari was in his epistle to the Smyrnians. He wrote. Quote. I glorified Jesus Christ the God who made you so wise for I observed that you are established in an unshakable faith.

Having been nailed as it were to the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ in both body and spirit and firmly established in love by the blood of Christ totally convinced with regard to our Lord that he is truly of the family of David with respect to human descent son of God with Respect to the divine will and power truly born of a virgin baptized by John and or that all righteousness might be fulfilled by him.

Truly nailed in the flesh for us under Pontius Pilate and Herod the Tetrarch from its fruit. We derive our existence that is from his divinely blessed suffering in order that he might raise a banner for the ages through his resurrection.

For his saints and faithful people whether among Jews or among Gentiles in the one body of his church end. Quote. Around the same time Polycarp wrote of the testimony of the cross and said we must pray for the enemies of the cross when he wrote Of the Philippians interestingly these enemies were not denying that Jesus died on a cross.

No, indeed. They were arguing that Jesus was a false Messiah Christianity a hoax. But they were not in any way denying the historical reality of the crucifixion. And so we see that in the first hundred years after the death of Christ in the Christian scriptures Christian writings even in secular writings.

The cross is always connected with Jesus. The next element of our thesis that Jesus the Messiah gave himself willingly as the sacrifice for God's people is Again, the plain and consistent teaching of the entirety of the New Testament as well as all those followers of Jesus in those early years.

Jesus’ Willing Sacrifice and the Meaning of Gethsemane

Though some misread the inspired text isolating particular verses from the rest of Scripture in an attempt to make it sound. Otherwise there can be no question that all the New Testament including the synoptic Gospels make it plain that Jesus Willingly gave himself upon the cross of Calvary.

We have already heard Jesus words from Mark and Matthew that it was necessary the Son of Man Suffer and die and rise again the third day. Luke likewise records these truths. It is not an argument to isolate Jesus's prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane.

From the rest of the testimony of the synoptic Gospels and claim that Jesus was an unwilling participant in the scheme of the cross. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Indeed such a theory makes Jesus downright cowardly for in the Muslim view Jesus is merely facing his own death and many have been the men who have faced death with bravery and courage.

The reason Jesus praised the father in the garden has nothing to do with the fear of death. It has everything to do with the sinless Son of God becoming sin for us. So we might become the righteousness of God in him.

It has everything to do with the wrath of God falling in its full fury upon the willing substitute. This is the only way to understand the prayer of Jesus without accusing him of cowardice. It also happens to be the only way to read the Gospels in a fair and even-handed manner by allowing them to speak for themselves.

It is a horrible misreading of his words to miss the real reason for the prayer. But the Muslim is forced to misread the text since the real reason for the prayer has everything to do with Jesus becoming the substitute for God's people and taking their sins upon himself.

And this Islam coming six centuries later denies. If Islamic readers the Gospels would apply the same rule of interpretation of the New Testament that they do to the Quran. They would not mistakenly accuse the writers of errors and come to false conclusions about the intentions of Jesus.

But many following after those who do not believe God can speak or reveal his truth. Hit one part of the New Testament against another and the synoptics are said to present one view while John presents a contradictory one.

But it is far more consistent to allow for harmonization of an ancient text than to assume contradiction. This is true in reading the Quran and it is true in reading the Bible. So we read Jesus saying in John 10 18.

No one has taken it away from me. That is his life, but I lay it down on my own initiative. I have authority to lay it down. I have authority to take it up again this commandment. I received from my father.