Discrepancies in the Bible and Refuting the Crucifixion Doctrine

[AL-ATHRAM]

'In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful,

“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 crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.(157). Surah Nisa

"But [another] was made to resemble him to them"

You said that no one denies Jesus's descendant except a disbeliever and these are delusions that you invented. As well as you allowed things that are not permissible to the non-Arabs (Ajami). I Swear by Allah, you are in doubt about him. You have no knowledge except to follow doubt.

What is the meaning of Judas Iscariot saying, one of the disciples of Jesus who turned away from you, when he went out with the Jews. He told them that he was ashamed of him and therefore he would make the commanding on him since you did not know him personally. So, what did you do?

This testifies that the Jews did not know him and this is stipulated in your Gospel, as well that when they surrounded Jesus and those with him, he went out to them and said:

“Who are you looking for?” They answered him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am he.” ( John 18: 4-5)

They looked at "Judas" and asked about the signal they agreed with him on, so they arrested him. In your opinion, how did you believe the situation, as you recounted, that it had been baptized to others - where he did not know him - and Allah raised him as Enoch raised the Prophet.

“Enoch walked with God, and he was not found, for God took him. (Genesis 5:24)

Perhaps you have believed Judas Iscariot in his saying to him and in the text of your Gospel that he is an apostate, a disbeliever, and a cursed. His testimony is therefore not permissible. Or perhaps when he saw him and remorse, he put the commanding over other students and the student rushed to protect him himself.

The proof of this possibility is that in the text of your Gospel, which is in your hands, " Judas Iscariot " was then repent and returned to them the thirty dirhams with which he had sold him. In addition, he informed them that he was not the one arrested.

The Jews said:
“What is that to us? “ (Matthew 27: 3-4)

So, the Jews killed a man _by the proof of your record _ and they only knew him with the testimony of Judas Iscariot.

Allah Almighty can create a similarity to everything in the world. All the attributes of Jesus have parables in the space of possibility in nothingness that can be created in a place other than the body of Jesus, so the likeness occurs.

Saying similarities is saying something possible, not what is not necessary. This is supported by the Torah states that Allah Almighty created the snake from Moses' staff and it's greater than the similarities. Making an animal looks like an animal closer than making a plant look like an animal. The transformation of Moses's staff to a snake is what the Jews and Christians agreed upon. They also agreed on the transformation of the fire for Ibrahim cold and peace and the transformation of the water to wine. So, if you possible this, you may also possible the similarity without impossibility.

Moreover, the Gospel speaks that Jesus arose between the Jews in their seasons and festivals. He was preaching, teaching, and debating them till they admired his innocence and knowledge. So, they were saying:

Is it not Joseph's son?

Is it not Mary's son?

Is not his brothers with us?

Where did he get this wisdom?


If he was well known, why did the Bible stipulate that when they wanted to arrest him, they did not question it. until they paid one of his disciples, Judas, thirty dirhams to guide them to it. He came on Friday night, April 13, with a group of Jews with swords and sticks. The aforementioned disciple said to them:

“Whoever I kiss, he is the one. Seize him.” Immediately he came to Jesus, and said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” and kissed him. Jesus said to him, “Friend, why are you here?” Then they came and laid hands on Jesus, and took him .. Then all the disciples left him and fled.

But Peter followed him from a distance to the court of the high priest, and entered in and sat with the officers, to see the end.
The high priest answered him, “I adjure you by the living God that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God.”
Jesus said to him, “You have said so. Nevertheless, I tell you, after this you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of the sky.” (Matthew 26: 48-66).

And Luke says:
“66 As soon as it was day, the assembly of the elders of the people were gathered together, both chief priests and scribes, and they led him away into their council, saying, 67 “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you won’t believe, 68 and if I ask, you will in no way answer me or let me go” (Luke 22)

They asked the arrested person if he was Jesus. Why the question, does not indicate their doubt about the identity of the arrested person?! This is an important point to pay attention to. What was the answer of the arrested person when they asked him, he said:

"You said"

This is similar to what we say when we do not agree with what we hear "This is what you say." That is, the arrested person did not admit that he was Jesus. Luke says that the arrester's answer was:
“ If I tell you, you won’t believe, and if I ask, you will in no way answer me or let me go “

What does this answer mean?
If the arrested is Jesus, what if he tells them and they do not believe him?! They are looking for Jesus and want to arrest him.
This answer must be someone other than Jesus. If the arrested told them that he was not Jesus, they would not have believed him because he looked like Jesus and they are ready to arrest Jesus. Moreover, if that person asked them to release him, they would not have agreed because they thought or wanted him to be Jesus and because his answer is implausible to them because of the similarity of his features with Jesus and the disappearance of Jesus.

There is no doubt this confusion with the well-known are for many years in dialogues and arguments. All indicate the occurrence of similarity, especially in the Bible. On a dark night in an orchard when his image is distorted and his beauty is changed by beating pulling and types of punishment. Such a situation must not be confused between the thing and the other, as well as between the thing and its likeness. Where do you or the Jews get the assurance that the crucified is Jesus, not his likeness? Rather, speculation took place, as Allah Almighty said.

“And they did not kill him, for certain. (157) Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.(158).” Surah Nisa

Jews are not sure because they relied on the saying of "Judas". So, what is the need for you to prove the types of insult and punishment against the Lord of lords on your claim? This is the wonder. Then, in the Bible as well: that Jesus was with his disciples in the orchard when the Jews came in to request.


“went out and said to them, “Who are you looking for?” They answered him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am he.” (John 18: 4*8).

He hid his person from them twice and they deny his image. This is nothing but evidence of resemblance, and raising Jesus. Some of you have said that Jesus gave the power of transformation from image to image.

Matthew said in his Gospel:
“31 Then Jesus said to them, “All of you will be made to stumble because of me tonight, for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’* 32 But after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.” 33 But Peter answered him, “Even if all will be made to stumble because of you, I will never be made to stumble.” 34 Jesus said to him, “Most certainly I tell you that tonight, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.” (Matthew 26)

He testified against them with suspicion. Rather, he testified against their choice, " Peter ". He is his successor over them. At that time, the trust in your words was sealed, and decided to cast the similarity on the other than Jesus, and the words of the truth, Glory be to Him, were correct:

“ And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.(157). Surah Nisa

Hence, we know that these Gospels are not conclusive, as I have presented to you, they contain many differences and doubts. Further clarify, remember what "Judas" did, and that he lied in his saying to the Jews. This is indicated by the appearance of remorse for him.

And the saying of Jesus: Friend, why are you here?
If he was insisting on corrupting, why he called a friend. Then, do not forget that the Bible testified that Jesus testified to the twelve disciples with happiness:

“ when the Son of Man will sit on the throne of his glory, you also will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Matthew 19: 28).

His testimony is right. There is no doubt that the happy person does not commit the large corruption, if he embarks on it. And "Judas" is one of the twelve happy people.

Accordingly:
Either that "Judas" did not indicate it, Jesus did not speak the truth, or that your record has been distorted and replaced. So, choose for you one of these.

to be continued...
By: Al-Athram

[AL-ATHRAM]

In the name of Allah, the most gracious and merciful

Allah Almighty says:

" وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا لَهُمْ بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا بَلْ رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا (157). "

“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 crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.(157). Surah Nisa


"But [another] was made to resemble him to them"

Are you Jesus?

According to what they said, When the soldiers took the Messiah to the synagogue, they asked him:

“67 “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you won’t believe, 68 and if I ask, you will in no way answer me or let me go.” (Luke 22.)

Note the following:

1- Why did they ask him if he was Jesus or not? Isn't their question strange?!

So, they doubted who he was and that's why they asked him. A famous person like Jesus was healing the sick, raising the dead, and preaching everywhere. Thousands of people followed him as the Gospels mention. Why do they ask him who he is?!!

The reason is apparent: they doubted the identity of the accused before them, and the issue is not difficult: the disciples and Jesus are thirteen. When the accused was arrested, the chief of soldiers found that the number was twelve, so someone disappeared!! Where is he? Who is he? Everyone doubted what happened and the identity of the arrested person. Indeed, as we know, Jesus was saved by Allah from the hands of his seekers, and the traitor "Judas" fell into the hands of the military instead of him after Allah threw on him the similarity of Jesus, and Allah is powerful over everything.

2- What was the accused's answer?

He told them that if I told you, you wouldn't believe it. that is, if I told you that I am not the Jesus, you would not believe me and if I ask you to let me go because I am not the Jesus, you would not agree to my request. He is right, who among them believed that the arrested is “Judas” the traitor, not Jesus?!

It is not reasonable that the accused's intention was that if he said that he was Jesus, they would not believe him because they want Jesus, so why do they not believe that he is Jesus? But the accused's intention is that they do not believe that he is not Jesus. They do not believe that he is “Judas” similar to Jesus. In this case, they cannot believe that he is not Jesus.


Then if the accused is Jesus, why does he think that they will release him as long as they want to arrest him? As for Judas, this is what tempts him to ask for release as a reward for his betrayal of Jesus. But of course, they will not release him because they are inclined, despite their suspicion, to believe that he is the Jesus, just as their acceptance that he is not the Jesus proves their weakness and the power of Jesus and this is what they do not want.

3- When they asked him:

“ They all said, “Are you then the Son of God?” He said to them, “You say it, because I am.” (Luke 22: 70)

Again, the accused did not give them an explicit answer. He said: you say it. This indicates the refutation of the saying "Son of God". Also, the man did not say yes, rather he said this is what you say, not what I say. The aforementioned answer is exactly issued by "Judas" as well.

4- During this trial of the accused, none of the disciples of Jesus was there. Even Peter, who followed Jesus from afar, was outside the courthouse at this trial. This makes it very difficult to know the truth of what happened, especially since the Gospels tell different questions and answers. The accused may have said: I am “Judas” and they did not believe him and led him to the cross, maybe who knows? Because the Gospels did not mention the fate of “Judas” except for “when” he strangled himself.

5- Asking the priests about the identity of the accused indicates their doubt in him and the accused's answer confirms that he is not Jesus.

6- The accused said:

“From now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” (Luke 22: 69.)

This is the statement of the accused to the priests after they asked him whether is he Jesus. He answers that the Son of Man (Jesus) is with Allah. If Jesus is standing before them, how can he tell them that Jesus is now with Allah?!

So how can Jesus be in the synagogue of the high priest and be seated at the right hand of the power of Allah at the same time? It is not possible. The explanation for the accused's answer is that “Judas” was hearing from Jesus that he would go to Allah when he was arrested. That is why the accused “Judas” told them that Jesus was sitting at the right hand of Allah.

If we take Luke's account as it is, we summarize it as follows:

a- Asked the accused: Are you the Jesus? He answered: If I tell you no, you won't believe it. If you ask for release, you do not agree. In addition, Jesus is seated at the right hand of Allah.

b- They asked him: "Are you the Son of God?" he answered: this is what you say.

c- Pilate asked, "Are you the King of the Jews?" he answered: this is what you say.

Let's say these questions are interrogations, so what was the accused 's answer?

a- He refused to admit that he was the Jesus, as there is nothing in his answers that indicates his agreement that he is the Jesus, but he told them that he is not the Jesus because Jesus is sitting at the right hand of Allah, as he replied.
b- He refused that he (The son of God), and said: this is what you say.

c- He refused that he was the King of the Jews.

The essential point is the accused's statement that Jesus is now sitting at the right hand of Allah. Therefore, the arrested accused is not Jesus. This is conclusive evidence in the Bible itself that refutes the crucifixion of Jesus.

Luke narrates that the accused was flogged, beaten, and insulted by the military.


“The men who held Jesus mocked him and beat him. 64 Having blindfolded him, they struck him on the face and asked him, “Prophesy! Who is the one who struck you?” 65 They spoke many other things against him, insulting him.” (Luke 22: 63-65)


Suppose, for example, that the whipped is Jesus, is there Allah who is beaten and flogged? Does this make sense?!

Can Allah Almighty not protect Himself? So how does it protect the oppressed? How can he be beaten, flogged, and insulted and be Allah at the same time?!!

The one who was beaten is "Judas". They caught him thinking he was the Jesus. Judas got what he deserved after he sold himself and Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.

Luke tells us that Pilate turned Jesus into Herod to judge him, and then Herod sent him back to Pilate.

“Herod with his soldiers humiliated him and mocked him. Dressing him in luxurious clothing, they sent him back to Pilate.” (Luke 23: 8-11)
Luke alone mentioned this incident and the other Gospels did not mention it. Whether it happened or not, if it happened, why did the other Gospels not mention it?! If not, why did Luke make it up?

The mockers of the crucified said:


“The people stood watching. The rulers with them also scoffed at him, saying, “He saved others. Let him save himself, if this is the Christ of God, his chosen one!” (Luke 23: 35)

The mockers were the people and the presidents. If the people mock, where is the believer? If they were in a state of ridicule, why did they not say (the Son of God)?! Why is " Luke " singled out as the " chosen of God"?!

Two disciples of Jesus narrate to Jesus after his appearance after his alleged crucifixion and they do not know him:

“They said to him, “The things concerning Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people” (Luke 24: 19).

This statement shows that Jesus was a prophet among his disciples and they did not say about him (God or the Son of God).

Then he vanished after the disciples knew him.

The phenomenon of the disappearance of Jesus is frequent, and this is one of the miracles granted to him by Allah. Whenever he needed to disappear, Allah made this disappearance easier for him. The most prominent disappearance was that which occurred on the night of the raid.



to be continued...
By: Al-Athram

[AL-ATHRAM]

In the name of Allah, the most gracious and merciful

If Jesus is as pure as you claim, he is born of a woman of Adam's bloodline, and he is in her womb and fed on her blood, otherwise, how did he live nine months in it? As well as when he was born, he fed her milk until his childhood as well. So, his pure blood drank that damn virus - Adam's sin - at least 50% of his mother.

If the Christian scholars said that Mary was not carrying that damned virus, we told them how?

Isn't she Ann and Joachim's daughter?!

Is not Ann and Joachim one of the children of Adam who carry this virus according to your claim? How did the virus stop in them and not infect Mary?

If they insist on their claim that Mary did not carry that virus, we say bring your proof. Rather bring your proof that the sin of Adam exists in humans.


That sin was an individual behavior that was confined to Adam and ended with him. And the behavior is not inherited. How many bad fathers have good children, and good fathers have bad children. So, that sin was limited to him and did not infect his children. Man at birth is free from sin, and then when he grows up, he makes a mistake or does not make it. As for being born with a record, this is what is not unbelievable by reason, logic, law, or religion.

Going to the trial of Jesus

“57
“57 Those who had taken Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were gathered together. 58 But Peter followed him from a distance to the court of the high priest, and entered in and sat with the officers, to see the end.
59 Now the chief priests, the elders, and the whole council sought false testimony against Jesus, that they might put him to death, 60 and they found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward 61 and said, “This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.’ ”
62 The high priest stood up and said to him, “Have you no answer? What is this that these testify against you?” 63 But Jesus stayed silent. The high priest answered him, “I adjure you by the living God that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God.”
64 Jesus said to him, “You have said so. Nevertheless, I tell you, after this you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of the sky.”
65 Then the high priest tore his clothing, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Behold, now you have heard his blasphemy. 66 What do you think?”
They answered, “He is worthy of death!” 67 Then they spat in his face and beat him with their fists, and some slapped him, 68 saying, “Prophesy to us, you Christ! Who hit you?” (Matthew 26).

This story is fabricated, and our evidence is the inconsistency of the words of " Mark" in his Gospel as we mentioned it, but let us analyze the course of events in what is stated in " Matthew ".

Jesus was taken to trial after all the disciples who were with him fled, but Peter stayed with him from afar, and when they entered the synagogue, he entered with them from afar as well, as he sat among the guards to see the end for fear of being dragged into the case while he was in need of trouble. Not forget that he was the one who said to Jesus:

“Peter said to him, “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you.” (Matthew 26:35)

Another question, which is not the betrayal of “Peter”: Who told the details of what happened in the synagogue from the trial of Jesus?

Is it Peter? the only one who stayed with Jesus even from afar.

Certainly, the students were not present in the synagogue. They all fled as stated in the narrate" Matthew ". Therefore, they did not see the trial to narrate it to us or write it down. If Peter is the narrator let me not accept him or believe his words after what he did and before. The students did not exist, so is it one of the false witnesses, the chief priest, or one of the elders who trialed Jesus, who also will not accept their testimony. False witnesses are enough for them their false. As for the high priest and the elders, it is enough that they were the murderers who sentenced Jesus and looked for a reason to execute him.

Only those from the public people who beat, slapped, and spat on him along with the guards remained.

Does it make sense to take their testimony and leave Peter's testimony?

Fulfillment of Jesus's Prophecy in Peter.


“69 Now Peter was sitting outside in the court, and a maid came to him, saying, “You were also with Jesus, the Galilean!” 70 But he denied it before them all, saying, “I don’t know what you are
talking about.” 71 When he had gone out onto the porch, someone else saw him and said to those who were there, “This man also was with Jesus of Nazareth.”
72 Again he denied it with an oath, “I don’t know the man.”
73 After a little while those who stood by came and said to Peter, “Surely you are also one of them, for your speech makes you known.”
74 Then he began to curse and to swear, “I don’t know the man!”
Immediately the rooster crowed. 75 Peter remembered the word which
Jesus had said to him, “Before the rooster crows, you will deny me three
times.” Then he went out and wept bitterly. “ (Matthew 26)



Peter cannot be the narrator of this story. Neither are the priests, the people, or the guards. Certainly, it was not a revelation from the Holy Spirit to the elect whom we do not know. For a simple reason, it is a big contradiction between the four narrates. As we saw on the topic of the contradiction of the Bible – Part II.

In Luke, the one who saw Jesus first was a maid and secondly, a man, and the third was also a man. Peter denied knowing Jesus three times. Also in Luke, after denying his knowledge of Jesus, Jesus looked at him:

“The Lord turned and looked at Peter. Then Peter remembered the Lord’s word, how he said to him, “Before the rooster crows you will deny me three times” (Luke 22:61)

Moreover, Peter in the third time began to curse (according to Matthew and Mark) So did he curse Jesus confirming that he did not know him? And that he hates him like them. Does this mean the utmost hypocrisy and disbelief?

“11
“11 Now Jesus stood before the governor; and the governor asked him, saying, “Are you the King of the Jews?”
Jesus said to him, “So you say.” When he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then Pilate said to him, “Don’t you hear how many things they testify against you?” He gave him no answer, not even one word, so that the governor marveled greatly ........... Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release to you? ………….. But the governor answered them, “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” They said, “Barabbas!”
Pilate said to them, “What then shall I do to Jesus ..... They all said to him, “Let him be crucified!” Then the governor’s soldiers took Jesus into the Praetorium, ..... They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him ....... and mocked him ..... They spat on him, and took the reed and struck him on the head ....... and led him away to crucify him.
When they came to a place called “Golgotha” ..... they gave him sour wine‡ to drink mixed with gall.§ When he had tasted it, he would not drink. When they had crucified him, they divided his clothing among them ...... They set up over his head the accusation against him written, “THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS.” Then there were two robbers crucified with him, one on his right hand and one on the left. Those who passed by blasphemed him, wagging their heads
40 and saying, “You who destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross!” Likewise the chief priests also mocking with the scribes, the Pharisees, and the elders, said, “He saved others, but he can’t save himself. If he is the King of Israel, let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God deliver him now, if he wants him; for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’ ” The robbers also who were crucified with him cast on him the same reproach.” (Matthew 27: 11-44).


A strong return in a dramatic way. It has gone beyond the painful description of Jesus who was suddenly subjected to all the contempt and mockery, in words and deeds, of his generous self. Even from two crucified thieves on his right and left who are supposed to have severed legs to die of bleeding, since crucifying alone does not kill. So, we say:

Jesus was not spared from their words either when they were in their state of crucifixion and torment from cutting off legs in anticipation of death, they participated in jokes and laughter in mockery and disgrace to Jesus. They just need to come down crawling from the crucifixion and participate in the actual harm inflicted by others, including the chief priests, the scribes, the elders, and the public people of Israel. Then they return to the crucifying waiting for death while laughing and shaking their heads.

They are supposed to be sympathetic to Jesus because they share pain and destiny (if he is Jesus, peace be upon him). As we mentioned before.

Jesus was followed only by a group of women who were braver and stronger in faith than his fleeing disciples. Mark says:


“ There were also women watching from afar, among whom were both Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome; who, when he was in Galilee, followed him and served him; and many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem.” (15: 40-41)

” Then all the disciples left him and fled.” (Matthew 26: 56)
“They all left him, and fled.” (Mark 14: 50)



to be continued...
By: Al-Athram