The theory of the substitution of 'Isa with others (Simon of Cyrene, Judas Iscariot), does not satisfy some interpreters of Islam, because not in accordance with the principles of God's justice. In addition, if grammatically traced, it’s also not suitable.
The reason given is that if a person's place of Jesus, should use the third singular pronoun self. Lakin shubiha lahu (but disguised for him) not Lakin shubiha lahum (but disguised for them). Another reason is the verse does not explain who his successor. There is no evidence from the Qur'an and the Hadith which says that people named Yahudza (Judas Iscariot) as a person whose face has been altered so that later replaced Jesus Christ on the cross. Only a book called the Gospel of Barnabas, a fictional tale of Muslims, in medieval times, which clearly write the name Yahudza as a person who was likened to Jesus. This book by some Muslims who are not educated regarded as the only true gospel that still exist, although this book contains a lot of things that do not fit well with the verses of the Koran, such as taking the title Christ for Jesus and pinned on Mohammed . Whereas the Arab prophet was never claimed that title and is very respectful of that title for Jesus, because in Islam, al-Masih's degree does not mean the same as the Messiah in Jewish theology.
Ishaq ibn Bishr in Tafsir Ibn Kathir, express opinions that are very close to the Christian view: "God made him die for three days, then turned back and was appointed to his side."
When viewed Qs an-Nisa 157, "... but they killed him not, nor crucified him, ..." then what is said in the verse there is conformity with the Gospel facts, namely that the Jews did not kill Jesus or crucify him. This is because the data concerning the gospel of Jesus' crucifixion, with clearly stated even though the Jews who demanded the punishment of Jesus, but who carry out the execution of Jesus was still a Roman soldier.
No comments:
Post a Comment