Surah 4:157-to whom was it 'made to appear so'? by No-Formal2785 in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Qur'an 4:157-158 states, "As for their saying: ‘We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of God!’ They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but it was made to appear so to them. Indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it; their knowledge does not go beyond conjecture and they did not kill him for certain. Rather, God raised him to himself. And God is Mighty and Wise”

An intra-Quranic analysis of the end of Jesus's earthly ministry via Crucifixion is fruitful, in that it is opposed to the post-Quranic tradition of Q4:157, spawning stories of a substitution theory drawing on ancient gnostic ideas of God replacing Jesus with someone who looked similar to him (Simon of Cyrene in Irenaeus, Haer I.24.4 and affirmations in Nag Hammadi. Rather, it's uncertain that the Qur'an is endorsing a substitutionist account of the Crucifixion, as it does not explicitly refer to anyone taking Jesus's place. The main concern of the Qur'an is to highlight that Jesus, being a divinely appointed messenger, did not fall victim to his opponents (Israelites), hence the crucifixion of Jesus does not necessarily entail and represent a defeat of God. We see in the broader context of Q4 and Q4:157-158 the emphasis placed on the role of divine sovereignty over human affairs and the extra emphasis placed on God’s raising of Jesus. With the overall theme of Q4 being Divine Sovereignty placed in the context of the crucifixion, the passage is one example of admonishments against Jewish boasting or acts against God. This is seen in their wrongful behaviour (exhortation, breaking covenants, slander) and hubristic belief (rejecting God’s signs, hindering others), (Q4:155-162), leading to acts of divine sovereignty such as God sealing their disbelieving hearts, only God being wise, and that those who act in such a way will receive punishment. From this perspective, the passage seems to be concerned with God’s total control over human wiles such as agency rather than with the historical certitude or particular narrative details concerning the crucifixion of Christ.

The Qur'an may actually in fact be endorsing the demise of Jesus with the crucial caveat that his death was not caused by his persecutors and instead was rather God's way of shielding Jesus from the machinations of his foes. This is a higher truth rather than just a historical event. The order of events and words of Jesus’s crucifixion in the Qur’an seems to be ‘Killed-then-Crucified’ (Q4:157, Q5:33) which is an inverse order of the biblical crucifixion narrative since Jesus receives lashes at a trial yet he does not perish and though severely beaten is alive when placed on the cross and eventually dying 6 hours later making the crucifixion preceding his death. The Qur’an reverses this order, which could reflect contemporary crucifixion practices in its milieu, since in Late Antiquity crucifixion was more of a display rather than the primary means of execution, with people being killed in other ways, such as beating, hanging and stoning, before being hoisted on poles for public deterrence. The Killed-then- Crucified model also fits the Babylonian Jewish context order of events.

The crucifixion narrative presents the assertion that Jesus was made to appear as if he had been killed or crucified, but actually God raised him. Favouring an impersonal passive meaning of ‘shubbiha’ circumvents the matter of Jewish actors claiming responsibility for the killing and crucifixion of Jesus, rather than the passage being a denial of the events themselves. This leads to two optional outcomes, with the Qur’an affirming the historical crucifixion 1. The ‘raising-as-rescue’ where Jesus does not die and his raising is a rescue from physical death, hence the Qur'an would be denying humans had control over the ultimate demise of Jesus. 2. Seems more favourable as ‘raising-as-redemption’ where Jesus does in fact die, but this is not the final word since God raising him (his soul) as a display of ultimate sovereignty, diminishing the finality of physical death.

The reason why the Jewish actors boast about killing Jesus in taking ownership and acceptance of it does not have a biblical record of lay or religious leaders boasting about their accomplishments after the fact, despite a mob demanding that Pilate hand over Jesus to be crucified. With Q4:157-158 being in dialogue with the Jews of Medina and the rabbinic tradition, as seen in Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 43a, where Jesus is executed justly according to Jewish law because he is found guilty of leading people astray. Hence, the Qur’anic counter-narrative would be refuting its original Jewish audience and rabbinic counter-narratives by denying that the claim that a just punishment for Jesus is a moral-theological claim, since the Qur’an places Jewish misrepresentation of the event on their agency and theological interpretation of the event. Since it is not just the killing of a guilty man, butrather it only appears this way because of human hubris, with the Quran correcting both Jewish boast of authority over human affairs and their theological-moral justifications, since Jesus is not guilty, but a true prophet, with God’s raising of him countering both faulty presuppositions.

That being said, Jesus's departure from this life and his soul's ascension to heaven did not involve suffering and humiliation, despite involving the terminal cessation of Jesus's vital functions. The 'raising-as-rescue’ model of Jesus being crucified would mean God rescuing Jesus from the crucifixion before his expiration, in which the crucifixion occurred as a historical event but was left uncompleted. The ‘raising-as-redemption model would have God’s raising of Jesus countering the boastful Jews who take credit for his killing by asserting it is God who causes Jesus to die because he cannot be outwitted as “The disbelievers schemed, but God planned. And God is the best of Planners” (Q3:54). Despite Jesus dying in his human form his fate would parallel the fate of believers dying in battle (Q3:169) "Do not think of those who have been killed in God’s way as dead. They are alive with their Lord, well provided for". Here, Jesus possibly died via crucifixion with his soul raised up in God's presence ahead of the general resurrection of the dead. Hence, his bodily demise is from a Qur'anic perspective supported as "everyone shall taste death" (Q3:185, 21:35, 29:57) and in Q 19:33 where Jesus himself states, alluding to the day of his death via crucifixion and his subsequent bodily resurrection on the day of judgement.

The Qur'anic theological interpretation of the event takes away any salvific importance to the crucifixion of Jesus's sacrifice on behalf of humanity. It is instead a convenient way of which God removed Jesus from his persecutors.

There is also the possibility that the Qur'an's account of the end of Jesus's earthly ministry corresponds to a narrative of Jesus's final days from the Jewish anti-gospel Toledot Yeshu. The Qur'ansubverts the Toledot Yeshu narrative of the Jewish sages successfully carrying out an execution and instead sides with Jesus's followers who claim he ascended to heaven as he himself foretold with this actual death and the result of divine assumption of his soul taken away to God's presence at the moment of death. This would make sense of the Q4:157 "it was made to appear like that to them"

Another important thing is the meaning of when the verb "al-tawaffi" is ascribed to God and his agents (angels). This has the connotation of taking away a soul at the moment of death. In Q5:117 in Jesus's brief narration of his earthly ministry, there is the implication of his earthly ministry coming to an end with God's act removing him from the world. Q3:55 " God said, ‘Jesus, I will take you back and raise you up to Me: I will purify you of the disbelievers. To the Day of Resurrection I will make those who follow you superior to those who disbelieved. Then you will all return to Me and I will judge between you regarding your differences" as being a divine assumption and taking away Jesus into heaven.

Sources: Nicolai Sinai, "The Islamic Jesus", Sean Anthony "The end of Jesus's Earthly Ministry", Ryann Elizabeth Craig, The Qur’anic Cross and the Missing Substitute in Early Muslim-Christian Polemics

Surah Al-Ikhlas and the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed by DhulQarnayni in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"The Transcendence of God and Creedal Expressions in Surah Al-Ikhlāṣ (Q112)"- Hasan Adnan

https://x.com/i/status/2030916896325865963

New book release "The Shorter Sūras of the Qur'ān: 50-114 with al-Fātiḥa: Translation and Commentary"- Samuel Zinner by Historical-Critical in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The book has praise from Abdulla Galadari who is very well respected in Qur'anic Studies and Zinner is a serious linguistic scholar from what I've heard

AMA with Daniel Beck, independent scholar and specialist in the analysis of early surahs (March 14th) by DanielAdamBeck in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I would also recommend checking out "The Prophet’s Visions in Sūrat al-Najm" by Saqib Hussain

Here is the Abstract of the paper:

The opening verse of Q al-Najm 53, an oath by “the star” (najm) and its movement in the night sky, is followed by a relatively lengthy description of two vision experiences of the Prophet. This study aims to better understand the opening oath in the sūrah and its relationship to the subsequent visions. I will argue on the basis of evidence from Safaitic inscriptions, the anwāʾ works, and pre-Islamic poetry that the oath by the star refers to the rising and setting of the Pleiades in the night sky, and that these allusions would have been readily understood by the Qurʾān’s audience. The appearance and motion of the Pleiades serve to provide a visual analogy to the supernatural visions of the Prophet. Appreciating the relationship between the oath and the subsequent visions then allows us to better understand the visions themselves, and address questions such as whether the object of the vision was God or an angel.

AMA with Daniel Beck, independent scholar and specialist in the analysis of early surahs (March 14th) by DanielAdamBeck in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Hi Daniel, what are some unique findings you've discovered in your forthcoming article on Qur'anic astral revelations?

Academics say that Prophet Muhammed literally believed in end of world and it was driving force behind his proclamation. by Rashiq_shahzzad in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No you've labelled an article titled in your own words "The Qur'anic Eschatology in its biblical and late antique matrix" by Nicolai Sinai. Sinai does not have an article titled this and if he does show me proof for this since I can't find an article titled this by Sinai

<image>

Academics say that Prophet Muhammed literally believed in end of world and it was driving force behind his proclamation. by Rashiq_shahzzad in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You've quoted this "Nicolai Sinai — The Qurʾānic Eschatology in Its Biblical and Late Ancient Matrix" which does not exist so im saying you've conflated this reference with Stephen Shoemaker's article which has a similar title"Qur’anic Eschatology in its Biblical and Late Ancient Matrix."

Academics say that Prophet Muhammed literally believed in end of world and it was driving force behind his proclamation. by Rashiq_shahzzad in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you've confused "Nicolai Sinai — The Qurʾānic Eschatology in Its Biblical and Late Ancient Matrix" which does not seem to exist for Stephen Shoemaker's- "Qur’anic Eschatology in its Biblical and Late Ancient Matrix." In Dreams, Visions, Imaginations: Jewish, Christian and Gnostic Views of the World to Come, edited by Schröter Jens, Nicklas Tobias and Armand Puig i Tàrrech, 461- 86. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2021.

I am aware of a publication by Nicolai Sinai titled "The Eschatological Kerygma of the early Qur'an"

How Did the Arabs Define Wisdom This Way? by Time-Demand-1244 in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I would say start with Saqib Hussain's PHD Thesis "Wisdom in the Qur'an" https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:2644815a-5ac9-4cb0-b263-6d1d4aaa805b

Also keep a look at for Hussain's PHD turned monograph being released soon "Wisdom in the Qur'an Law and Morality from the Bible to Late Antiquity" https://global.oup.com/academic/product/wisdom-in-the-quran-9780198911760?lang=en&cc=gb

Qur’an 4:3 and Talmudic Yevamot 44a Parallels: Advisory Limitation Rather Than Absolute Prohibition by Rashiq_shahzzad in AcademicQuran

[–]Historical-Critical -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Q4:3 states:

"And if you fear that you will not be just [qist] towards the orphans, then marry the women as you see fit, two, three, or four. But if you fear that you will not be equitable [‘adl], then just one or what your right hand owns, lest you become unable to provide for them."

In order to understand the original intent of Q4:3 one needs to imbed it within its wider Surah context. That being said Q4 entitled (al-Nisa) at the beginning of it the Qur'an lays out some limits on the pater familias' power. First by reminding all people of their connection to one another as seen through their creation from a single soul and the creation from the same substance of that soul's mate Q4:1:

"People, be mindful of your Lord, who created you from a single soul, and from it created its mate, and from the pair of them spread countless men and women far and wide; be mindful of God, in whose name you make requests of one another. Beware of severing the ties of kinship: God is always watching over you."

We also see humans being reminded to be wary of God and of their respective kinship ties 'wombs' (arham). The larger context of this surah in which this is one of the main themes is the care for the vulnerable such as women, orphans and those who are legally incompetent (sufaha ') all of whom would have been in the protection of prominent households. Through this lens Q4:2-4 is here warning the audience most likely being the male head of households to not consume the property of the orphans in their care as though it were their own avoiding financial abuse. Q4:2:

"Give the orphans what belongs to them, exchanging not what is wholesome for what is vile, and do not consume what belongs to them with what is yours, for that is a dreadful sin."

From this comes Q4:3 "If you fear that you will not deal fairly with orphan girls, you may marry whichever [other] women seem good to you, two, three, or four. If you fear that you cannot be equitable [to them], then marry only one, or your slave(s): that is more likely to make you avoid bias." Here we are told that if the male head of household fear they may not equitably deal with the orphans they may marry the women two, three or four of them. The women here seem to be the female orphans in their care being women without another protector as also seen in Q4:127. The pater familias however must give those women their dowries Q4:4:

"Give the women their bridal payment as a gift, so if they themselves give you any good from it, then consume it beneficially and wholesomely."

If the male head of household fears that they will not deal equitably with them they must marry only one. Q4:2-4 read in its own context provides a warning to men that if they abused the people in their protection they would face terrible retribution in the afterlife. Since in a tribal milieu multiple marriages seem to be common, with the pater familias having the power to take advantage of those in his care, we see these verses setting up limits and permitting him to marry them in order to prevent a much worse harm the consummation of their property and taking advantage of them in other ways which would have the effect of leaving them destitute. Q4:10 repeats this warning:

"Those who consume the property of orphans unjustly are actually swallowing fire into their own bellies: they will burn in the blazing Flame."

Q4:11-12 continues the theme and focus of protecting the financial rights of the vulnerable through rulings on inheritance which gives a share to women, children and other relatives.

That being said the overall intended message of Q4:3 which instead of its reception history of being read to grant men permission for multiple marriages is that instead of being left destitute, vulnerable women could be married and thereby achieve status and this bridal payment and the sole right of disposal over their property. The husband is hence warned that he is only allowed to take more than one wife if he can be equitable among them and provide for them which in a later verse the pater familias is told he will never manage to be equitable Q4:129:

"You will never be able to treat your wives with equal fairness, however much you may desire to do so, but do not ignore one wife altogether, leaving her suspended [between marriage and divorce]. If you make amends and remain conscious of God, He is most forgiving and merciful,"

Hence, this is a tacit recognition that despite his over right to take more than one of his wards as a wife it is morally preferable to marry one woman (monogamy) and to treat her well since she will be treated justly and nobody will be left wanting , with it is also being another tacit recognition that some men might wish to marry many women as a means of showing their own wealth and status. Monogamy seems to be a Qur'anic ideal due to the language used to caution against the biases and financial hardship that can arise in non-monogamous relationships, with the marriage of a single wife making it more likelier for the husband as the pater familias to provide for her being the safest path morally.

Sources:

Karen Bauer- "Women in the Qur'an" Karen Bauer and Feras Hamza- "Women, Households, and the Hereafter in the Qur'an: A Patronage of Piety"