Jesus (Isa) A.S. in Islam, and His Second Coming

[Chrystalwuzhere]

In the past, we have discussed Islam in reference to our own Endtimes, and what the Muslim view of Jesus is in reference to these end days. Core posted a thread in the Non Christian Religions (http://www.christiantalkzone.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=129) > Islam (http://www.christiantalkzone.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=130) forum showing the Muslim beliefs regarding Jesus and His second coming.

We thought it would be good to add it to this forum as well since it has been a point of discussion in the past.



Muslims do believe that Isa (A.S.) was sent down as a Prophet of Allah (God), but he (Jesus) is not God or Lord, nor the son of God. Muslims do not believe that Isa (A.S.), also known as Jesus by Christians and others, is dead or was ever crucified. We believe that he was raised to heaven and is there, and will descend at the appointed time, end all wars, and bring peace to the world.

Jesus (Isa) A.S. in Islam, and his Second Coming (http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/jesus.html)

[eahaddix]

There is many things wrong with Islam. For starters, there is no evidence that Muhammad was speaking to the archangel Gabriel, or Jibril, as opposed to a demonic spirit. Muhammad, personally, never tested this spirit, which left Muhammad speculating about the true identity of "Gabriel," until he simply accepted the spirit's claims.

Volume 4, Book 55, Number 546:

Narrated Anas:

When 'Abdullah bin Salam heard the arrival of the Prophet at Medina, he came to him and said, "I am going to ask you about three things which nobody knows except a prophet: What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle" Allah's Apostle said, "Gabriel has just now told me of their answers." 'Abdullah said, "He (i.e. Gabriel), from amongst all the angels, is the enemy of the Jews." Allah's Apostle said, "The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her." On that 'Abdullah bin Salam said, "I testify that you are the Apostle of Allah." 'Abdullah bin Salam further said, "O Allah's Apostle! The Jews are liars, and if they should come to know about my conversion to Islam before you ask them (about me), they would tell a lie about me." The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and 'Abdullah went inside the house. Allah's Apostle asked (the Jews), "What kind of man is 'Abdullah bin Salam amongst you?" They replied, "He is the most learned person amongst us, and the best amongst us, and the son of the best amongst us." Allah's Apostle said, "What do you think if he embraces Islam (will you do as he does)?" The Jews said, "May Allah save him from it." Then 'Abdullah bin Salam came out in front of them saying, "I testify that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah." Thereupon they said, "He is the evilest among us, and the son of the evilest amongst us," and continued talking badly of him.
Source: ""Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 55: Propets," by the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/055.sbt.html)

When Muhammad arrived in Medina, 'Abdullah bin Salam tested Muhammad with three questions. In one of these questions, 'Abdullah asked Muhammad why children resemble certain family members. "Gabriel" provided Muhammad the answer, which was the assertion that a child will resemble whichever biological parent "discharges," or organisms, first, before conception. Clearly this is scientifically inaccurate, thereby undermining the reliability of "Gabriel."

Now, what about the compilation of the Qur'an?

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509:

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:

Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:

'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty..(till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.
Source: "Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 61: Virtues of the Qur'an," by the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/061.sbt.html)

After the battle of al-Yamamah in 633 CE, Abu Bakr, the first caliph, noticed that there were significant casualties among those who had memorized the Qur'an. This caused him to speculate that portions of the Qur'an had been lost. In response, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, Bakr's future successor, suggested to Abu Bakr that the written fragments of the Qur'an be collected. However, in reading this, the question arises: How could portions of the Qur'an be lost due to casualites among the Qurra' of the Qur'an, if a complete copy of the Qur'an had been written down by scribes, as Muslims claim?

There is no evidence to support the idea that a complete written copy of the Qur'an was created in Muhammad's presence. However, there is evidence that different Muslims memorized different portions and/or versions of the Qur'anic text spoken by Muhammad, thereby creating confusion.

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 521:

Narrated Masriq:

'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take (learn) the Qur'an from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b.' "
Source: "Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 60: Prophetic Commentary on the Qur'an (Tafseer of the Prophet (pbuh))," by the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/060.sbt.html)

Here one observes that Muslims learned different portions of the Qur'an from different Muslims.

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 682:

Narrated Ibn Mas'ud:

I heard a person reciting a (Quranic) Verse in a certain way, and I had heard the Prophet reciting the same Verse in a different way. So I took him to the Prophet and informed him of that but I noticed the sign of disapproval on his face, and then he said, "Both of you are correct, so don't differ, for the nations before you differed, so they were destroyed."
Source: "Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 56: Virtues and Merits of the Prophet (pbuh) and his Companions," by the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/056.sbt.html)

Here one observes that the Qur'an was recited by different people in different ways.

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

'Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'PI have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever." But Allah said [ref. Qur'an 2:106]
Source: "Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 61: Virtues of the Qur'an," by the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/061.sbt.html)

Here one observes that certain people who memorized the Qur'an left out some of what Muhammad said.

Volume 6, Book 60, Number 468:

Narrated Ibrahim:

The companions of 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda', (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them,: 'Who among you can recite (Qur'an) as 'Abdullah recites it?" They replied, "All of us." He asked, "Who among you knows it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?" Alqama recited:

'By the male and the female.' Abu Ad-Darda said, "I testify that I heard me Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:--

'And by Him Who created male and female.' but by Allah, I will not follow them."
Source: "Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 60: Prophetic Commentary on the Qur'an (Tafseer of the Prophet (pbuh))," by the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/060.sbt.html)

Here one observes disagreement between those who memorized the Qur'an over how to recite the Qur'an.

In response to all this, Muslims point out that Muhammad said the Qur'an would be revealed in "seven ahruf," which should account for these variations, thereby negating any such disagreements as being irrelevant. However, if the said Muslims within the above ahadith were aware of the seven ahruf, then why did they disagree with each other? Moreover, why is there no ahadith that define what these "seven ahruf" are? Even modern Muslim scholars disagree over how to define what the "seven ahruf" are (further reading (http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/Denffer_uaq/Ch5S4.htm)). Yet, this does not stop Muslim apologists from using the "seven ahruf" as a "blank check argument" to explain away the historical problems associated with the Qur'an.

[eahaddix]

Among the disagreements between Muslims and Christians, the most critical disagreement is about the identity of Christ Jesus.

The Bible states that Christ Jesus is God incarnate . . .

John 5:18 [NIV]
For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

*See also: John 8:56-58 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:56-58;&version=31;), John 1:1-2, 14 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:1-2,%2014;&version=31;), Revelation 22:12-13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2022:12-13;&version=31;) [plus Revelation 1:8 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%201:8;&version=31;)], Titus 2:13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus%202:13;&version=31;), Isaiah 9:6 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%209:6;&version=31;), etc.

. . . while the Qur'an denies that 'Isa, or Jesus, is Allah incarnate.

Surah 5, "The Dinner Table"
[5.72] Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Marium; and the Messiah said: O Children of Israel! serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust.
[5.73] Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.
[5.74] Will they not then turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
[5.75] The Messiah, son of Marium is but an apostle; apostles before him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman; they both used to eat food. See how We make the communications clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away.

*See also: Sura 4:171-172 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html), Sura 5:17-18 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/005.qmt.html), Sura 6:100 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/006.qmt.html), Sura 9:30 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html), Sura 10:68 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/010.qmt.html), Sura 23:91 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/023.qmt.html), Sura 112:1-4 (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/112.qmt.html), etc.

[cbressler1976]

I always feel like I am cheating on God when I read about Islam....many people tell me to read the Quran, so that I can better understand the Revelations...but I can't do it....I feel like a cheater.....

[CoreIssue]

I always feel like I am cheating on God when I read about Islam....many people tell me to read the Quran, so that I can better understand the Revelations...but I can't do it....I feel like a cheater.....
Reading the Qur'an won't help you understand Revelation. Not at all.

This is part of the idea that Islam is the AC religion. Or that physical Babylon will be restored..

The AC religion is restored Roman Paganism, with the AC as the godking. The EU is his empire.

[DaimyoMateo]

I think it should be called the Third Coming actually

[CoreIssue]

I think it should be called the Third Coming actually
Third Coming for Islam? Please define One and Two.

Just curious.

[DaimyoMateo]

It is just minor really but I suppose that if one is
adamant about Jesus coming back to life in the
resurrection and having communication with certain followers is an important pillar of the Christian faith (at least for most Christians) than
acknowledgement of the event would make his return later the 3rd coming. I believe muslims would believe in the second coming and not the third.

[CoreIssue]

It is just minor really but I suppose that if one is
adamant about Jesus coming back to life in the
resurrection and having communication with certain followers is an important pillar of the Christian faith (at least for most Christians) than
acknowledgement of the event would make his return later the 3rd coming. I believe muslims would believe in the second coming and not the third.

Ah! The problem is Coming is not described as a single event but a set of events within a unique situation. The Bible does not say first and second. It said he would come, had come and will come again. So it is a theological shorthand.

Birth to final ascent is one who event, thus the First Coming. After Armageddon when he physically returns is the Second Coming.

So I agree he came at the incarnation, died on the cross and entered Hell, rose from Hell, went to Heaven and came back after and finally ascended not to return until the Second Coming.

The Rapture isn't a Coming because he only enters the clouds, does not return to the earth itself.

Can be confusing for some until they get comfortable with the references.

[DaimyoMateo]

When a bird takes flight we can say it is out of this world. Even being suspened in the air I consider it within this world. So if Jesus is in the clouds along side 100s of other people flying around in aircraft then I believe he is here with us. He came from Mary (1st time). Died and went to Hell and came back inorder to rise in full body to heaven (2nd time). Someday he may return in the clouds maybe higher or lower than other people traveling in airplanes (3rd time).

[CoreIssue]

When a bird takes flight we can say it is out of this world. Even being suspened in the air I consider it within this world. So if Jesus is in the clouds along side 100s of other people flying around in aircraft then I believe he is here with us. He came from Mary (1st time). Died and went to Hell and came back inorder to rise in full body to heaven (2nd time). Someday he may return in the clouds maybe higher or lower than other people traveling in airplanes (3rd time).
I cannot stop you from using your own definition. But it isn't in the Biblically given context, which makes it flawed.

Remember the Greek and Hebrew for earth do not include the air. Those are included as one meaning of heaven. Like wrist is included with the hand in the Greek but not in the English.

You have to remember the source language usage.

[DaimyoMateo]

The source is from God and not the pen of an ancient Roman or Hebrew. The vehicle is of course Greek and Hebrew but not the source. The human languages may in fact be imperfect to represent the full divine understanding but the context of whether a Roman meant the world with the air is their problem not ours. The full divine message still speaks and therefore today is the context for the meaning of world, Earth, Planet, air etc.

[CoreIssue]

The source is from God and not the pen of an ancient Roman or Hebrew. The vehicle is of course Greek and Hebrew but not the source. The human languages may in fact be imperfect to represent the full divine understanding but the context of whether a Roman meant the world with the air is their problem not ours. The full divine message still speaks and therefore today is the context for the meaning of world, Earth, Planet, air etc.
That is an illogical answer.

God used the language of the day in which he delivered per grammatical rules, definitions, etc. He wrote using the hand of men as a tool. Not a divine dictionary. So we read accordingly. The meaning didn't change when translated to English, Chinese, French and so on. Therefore it is your problem.

Your argument mystifies and opens the door for anyone to believe what they want to believe. But the Bibles says his word is not of private interpretation so that cannot be true it is mystical meaning.

Meanings can change with different languages. And they do change over time. In example, what gay meant and how it was used a mere 100 years ago is not when it means in usage today. There is no resemblance at all.

[DaimyoMateo]

His word is a living word and not a dead ancient language. Because ancient people thought one way it made since to them that way. We are now more sophisticated that God's word is for us now not then. When God inspired the words he knew that man's understanding of his world was not as high as it is today. He gave his word with all people in mind and those of the past were concerned with events of their time. Well here we are and we usually consider the atmosphere part of the Earth. God knew we would come to this point. How is God's word suppose to inspire the truth if people are expected to try to figure out how ancients viewed the world? If the bible is perfect then it needs to be a living bible with a living langauge that sparks enlightenment with people of any time and place.

[CoreIssue]

His word is a living word and not a dead ancient language. Because ancient people thought one way it made since to them that way. We are now more sophisticated that God's word is for us now not then. When God inspired the words he knew that man's understanding of his world was not as high as it is today. He gave his word with all people in mind and those of the past were concerned with events of their time. Well here we are and we usually consider the atmosphere part of the Earth. God knew we would come to this point. How is God's word suppose to inspire the truth if people are expected to try to figure out how ancients viewed the world? If the bible is perfect then it needs to be a living bible with a living langauge that sparks enlightenment with people of any time and place.
You are making occult/mysticism arguments here. Setting your rules instead of looking for God's rules.

What does hand mean? In the English it excludes the wrist. In the Greek it includes the wrist. Crucifixions were through the wrist, not the hand. How do you deal with that reality in your thinking?

There was a time where some had no written revelation, some had only Mosiac Law and some had the Gospel, all at the same time. The Bible tells you how God deals with each.

Throughout history there has always been early historical and other sources of information to aid in understanding the Bible. God provides, just not in the way you are demanding.

God sets the rules, not you or me. You have nothing but your personal opinion to back your position. Something to think about.

[DaimyoMateo]

Right, it is my personal opinion and there it is. You have yours.

[DaimyoMateo]

"Throughout history there has always been early historical and other sources of information to aid in understanding the Bible. God provides, just not in the way you are demanding."

Can't be serious? awww it really is pointless.

[CoreIssue]

"Throughout history there has always been early historical and other sources of information to aid in understanding the Bible. God provides, just not in the way you are demanding."

Can't be serious? awww it really is pointless.
I am serious but I agree this is pointless. It really is appearing you are looking for reasons and justifications not to believe.

You want to set the rules and that will remain the big problem.

[DaimyoMateo]

"Throughout history there has always been early historical and other sources of information to aid in understanding the Bible. God provides, just not in the way you are demanding."

God has been providing for one small region on this Earth historically. I get the feeling that when you think history you simply refer to the bible. The bible lists one small event compared with what is happening in general with the rest of the world. Just seems very narrow sighted to me. Your statement borders on a sort of historical selfishism. I just made that word up but it may work. Like when people talk about the Dark Ages, this only applies to western Europe. Everywhere else in the world was for the most part better off here and there. I mean Japan was experimenting with imperial goverments modeled on China and I am sure it was high times for some tribes in the Americas. you get my point?

Like when history books say "in 1492 Columbus discovered America" they could just as well say in 1492 American natives discovered Columbus lost at sea. Which is more the truth.

[CoreIssue]

I have been studying history for decades. My son has a degree in history with honors. And I have studied hundreds of religions, historically and otherwise.

So, I see how Man's relationship with God has flowed through the ages. It began with one God and Man corrupted it over time into many gods.

Your secularist model on religions does not fit the facts.

But, as said before, you are hunting for negatives, so I will bow out :tiphat:

[DaimyoMateo]

Well I would think you would of learned something.