The Challenge of Islam and Discussing the Death of Jesus

Over the last several years, I have had many opportunities to engage in spiritual discussions with Muslims in our campus ministry in Columbus, Ohio. On several occasions, I have told Muslims that I will never become a Muslim because of their position on the death of Jesus. For Christians, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central to the Gospel message. After all, the kerygma in the Book of Acts is that the Messiah was crucified according to the plan of God (Acts 2:23), that He was raised from the dead, and that He appeared to His disciples (Acts 2:24, 31–32; 3:15–26; 10:40–41; 17:31; 26:23).

Muslims, however, believe that Jesus did not die. Instead, they believe the early disciples were deceived and that Allah delivered Jesus. The Qur’an says in Sura 4:157:

“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.”

From this passage, most Muslim scholars conclude the following:

• Jesus was not actually killed on the cross.

• Someone else may have been made to look like Him, or the event was made to appear that way.

• God rescued Jesus and raised Him to heaven.

Across both Sunni and Shia traditions, it is commonly believed that:

• Jesus was taken alive into heaven.

• He will return before the Day of Judgment.

• He will defeat Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (the false messiah).

• He will eventually die a normal human death.

As historians evaluate the sources available concerning the resurrection of Jesus, a critical issue is the dating of those sources. Regarding early testimony, historian David Hackett Fischer writes:

“An historian must not merely provide good relevant evidence but the best relevant evidence. And the best relevant evidence, all things being equal, is evidence which is most nearly immediate to the event itself.” (1)

As noted above, Islam claims that Jesus was never crucified and therefore never rose from the dead. However, the Qur’an was written roughly six hundred years after the life of Jesus, making it a much later source of information than the New Testament. The evidence suggests that the core historical content of the Gospel—the death and resurrection of Jesus—was circulating very early within the Christian community. As mentioned earlier, historians look for records that are closest in time to the events they describe. Given the early date of 1 Corinthians 15:3–8, along with other sources, it is evident that this material is historically earlier than the Qur’an.

In Bart Ehrman’s book Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth, he addresses the Christ-myth theory. Unsurprisingly, the book was criticized by many atheists. Although I find Ehrman inconsistent on a number of issues, I still respect his work in several areas. One section of the book that I found particularly interesting is where Ehrman discusses the types of sources historians look for when determining whether a person existed in the past.

Ehrman says:

“Historians prefer to have lots of written sources, not just one or two. The more, obviously, the better. If there were only one or two sources you might suspect that the stories were made up. But if there are lots of sources—just as when there are lots of eyewitnesses to a car accident—then it is hard to claim that any of them just happened to make it up.” (pp. 40–41)

Now consider some of the sources that mention the death of Jesus:

First Century

• Matthew

• Mark

• Luke

• John

• Paul

• Peter

• Josephus

• Clement of Rome

Early Second Century

• Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110)

Mid–Second Century

• Justin Martyr (c. 150–165)

• Melito of Sardis (c. 160–180)

Late Second Century

• Irenaeus (c. 180)

Third Century

• Tertullian (c. 200)

• Origen (c. 220–250)

• Hippolytus of Rome

Fourth Century

• Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 310–325)

• Athanasius of Alexandria

• Cyril of Jerusalem

Late Fourth–Fifth Century

• John Chrysostom

• Augustine of Hippo

Fifth–Sixth Century

• Leo the Great (5th century)

• Gregory the Great (late 6th century)

Consider the implication of the Islamic claim. According to Islam, Allah allowed the first-century disciples to be deceived into believing that Jesus literally died on a cross. Not only that, but this supposed deception continued for roughly six centuries until Muhammad received a revelation through the angel Gabriel.

When I discuss this issue with Muslims, they often listen carefully, but in many cases it falls on deaf ears. Muslims believe that Muhammad received direct revelation from the angel Gabriel and that these revelations were the very words of Allah, which became the Qur’an. For them, this settles the matter. If a perfect divine dictation is assumed, it does not matter that Muhammad lived six centuries after Jesus or that he had no contact with the apostles or earliest witnesses.

From this perspective, historical investigation—such as the need for early sources and eyewitness testimony—is overridden by the claim of divine revelation. Thus, the Qur’an is viewed as perfect, even though it appears on the scene some six hundred years after the events it describes.

Reference

1. David Hackett Fischer, Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1970), 62.