What do you think?
Rate this book
The Crucifixion and the Qur'an: A Study in the History of Muslim Thought
The first book to examine the controversial Qur'anic phrase which divides Christianity and Islam.
According to the majority of modern Muslims and Christians, the Qur'an denies the crucifixion of Jesus, and with it, one of the most sacred beliefs of Christianity. However, it is only mentioned in one verse - 'They did not kill him and they did not crucify him, rather, it only appeared so to them' - and contrary to popular belief, its translation has been the subject of fierce debate among Muslims for centuries. This innovative work is the first book devoted to the issue, delving deeply into largely ignored Arabic sources, which suggest that the origins of the conventional translation may lie within the Christian Church. Arranged along historical lines, and covering various Muslim schools of thought, from Sunni to Sufi, "The Crucifixion and the Qur'an" unravels the crucial dispute that separates the World's two principal faiths.
According to the majority of modern Muslims and Christians, the Qur'an denies the crucifixion of Jesus, and with it, one of the most sacred beliefs of Christianity. However, it is only mentioned in one verse - 'They did not kill him and they did not crucify him, rather, it only appeared so to them' - and contrary to popular belief, its translation has been the subject of fierce debate among Muslims for centuries. This innovative work is the first book devoted to the issue, delving deeply into largely ignored Arabic sources, which suggest that the origins of the conventional translation may lie within the Christian Church. Arranged along historical lines, and covering various Muslim schools of thought, from Sunni to Sufi, "The Crucifixion and the Qur'an" unravels the crucial dispute that separates the World's two principal faiths.
256 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 2009
5 people are currently reading
116 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
March 20, 2017
THEY [JEWS] DID NOT KILL HIM [JESUS] AND THEY DID NOT CRUCIFY HIM, RATHER, IT ONLY APPEARED SO TO THEM. - Quran 4:157.
This book is about this verse and the Muslim exegetical history associated with it from the ancient times to the modern period.
Is Quran denying the historicity of Jesus' crucifixion?
The answer is ought through the exegetical works. Some of them offer the opinion that Jesus was not crucified and killed by Jews. Because, a prophet cannot be killed and that too by people bent on eliminating him with jealousy. And according to Quran, Jesus is a great prophet. If so, how to explain the claim of others (Jews and Christians) that Jesus was crucified.
The explanation offered is that the Jews and Christians are in error. God raised Jesus to Himself even before his arrest and Jesus' likeness was cast upon someone else and that person was crucified. But because the disciples had scattered during the time of Jesus' arrest, no one was sure of the identity of the person crucified. There was also an attempt to identify the substitute - Judas Iscariot, one of the disciples, one of the Jews, etc.
There is another school of exegesis that stated that only the body of Jesus was crucified while his spirit was taken away to God. It was the shell that suffered. Here, they affirm the crucifixion of Jesus. But even here some of the exegetes claimed that the sufferings was transferred to a demon or a condemned person. And so Jesus escaped suffering.
These exegetical studies are analysed from ancient times to the present times. and the author categorically states that Quran as such does not say anything explicitly. The Quranic verse can very well be read in either way (affirming historicity and denying historicity). It was in fact a Christian (John of Damascus) who claimed for the first time that Quran denied historicity of crucifixion. His intention was to show the difference between Islam and Christianity of his times. The Muslim exegetes had both opinions in the beginning. But later as the difference between the religions became sharp, they could not associate redemption with the sufferings of Jesus as Christians had done. So they opted for denial of historicity of crucifixion. Also it supported their claim that a prophet cannot suffer and die.
Also it is important to note that it is not an important part of Quran. This indication about crucifixion appears only once in Quran and that too as an example for faithlessness (Jews were faithless in handing over Jesus, the prophet to death). So it is not the important teaching. It is clubbed with many examples for people's faithlessness.
The findings were fascinating for me, a Christian. The only problem I had with the book is the various Arabic/Persian terms used. The explanations are not given at times and there is no glossary. Also you might feel lot of repetitions.
Not sure whether I gave a good review. But one thing is fact for sure: It is an interesting book.
This book is about this verse and the Muslim exegetical history associated with it from the ancient times to the modern period.
Is Quran denying the historicity of Jesus' crucifixion?
The answer is ought through the exegetical works. Some of them offer the opinion that Jesus was not crucified and killed by Jews. Because, a prophet cannot be killed and that too by people bent on eliminating him with jealousy. And according to Quran, Jesus is a great prophet. If so, how to explain the claim of others (Jews and Christians) that Jesus was crucified.
The explanation offered is that the Jews and Christians are in error. God raised Jesus to Himself even before his arrest and Jesus' likeness was cast upon someone else and that person was crucified. But because the disciples had scattered during the time of Jesus' arrest, no one was sure of the identity of the person crucified. There was also an attempt to identify the substitute - Judas Iscariot, one of the disciples, one of the Jews, etc.
There is another school of exegesis that stated that only the body of Jesus was crucified while his spirit was taken away to God. It was the shell that suffered. Here, they affirm the crucifixion of Jesus. But even here some of the exegetes claimed that the sufferings was transferred to a demon or a condemned person. And so Jesus escaped suffering.
These exegetical studies are analysed from ancient times to the present times. and the author categorically states that Quran as such does not say anything explicitly. The Quranic verse can very well be read in either way (affirming historicity and denying historicity). It was in fact a Christian (John of Damascus) who claimed for the first time that Quran denied historicity of crucifixion. His intention was to show the difference between Islam and Christianity of his times. The Muslim exegetes had both opinions in the beginning. But later as the difference between the religions became sharp, they could not associate redemption with the sufferings of Jesus as Christians had done. So they opted for denial of historicity of crucifixion. Also it supported their claim that a prophet cannot suffer and die.
Also it is important to note that it is not an important part of Quran. This indication about crucifixion appears only once in Quran and that too as an example for faithlessness (Jews were faithless in handing over Jesus, the prophet to death). So it is not the important teaching. It is clubbed with many examples for people's faithlessness.
The findings were fascinating for me, a Christian. The only problem I had with the book is the various Arabic/Persian terms used. The explanations are not given at times and there is no glossary. Also you might feel lot of repetitions.
Not sure whether I gave a good review. But one thing is fact for sure: It is an interesting book.
June 12, 2023
Whilst not bringing anything new to the table content wise, this turns out to be a good referencing work for looking at the timeline of varying interpretations of 4:157-158 throughout the past 1400 years.
NB - Author isn’t writing from Sunni perspective & Shia thought is prevalent in places.
NB - Author isn’t writing from Sunni perspective & Shia thought is prevalent in places.
May 6, 2023
This book is exceptional. It covers the history of Islamic interpretation pertaining to Jesus’ crucifixion as mentioned in Sura 4; it is also not a polemical project; it is neutral and irenic, which is refreshing because it’s not trying to convince the reader of anything except a diverse range of interpretations across Islamic thought by showing the actual historical records. Instead of trying to convince the reader of Islamic tradition being wrong or misguided, it simply and clearly presents evidence of an idea as it developed into Islamic dogma. The reader can extrapolate and draw conclusions on his or her own.
This study is also not dry or boring; It’s concise and well-organized.
This study is also not dry or boring; It’s concise and well-organized.
July 3, 2022
In this book Professor Lawson has given us a fascinating review of the variety of interpretations of Q4:157-58 expressed in the Islamic intellectual traditions over the centuries. The roots of the classic "substitution theory" are examined, but I was particularly interested in the Isma'ili interpretations, affirming that the real physical body of Jesus, not that of a substitute, suffered death and crucifixion, while his soul was taken to God. Also interested in the rationalist interpretations of al-Zamakhshari and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.
March 10, 2016
This is an extremely readable and engaging account of the various ways in which Muslims have understood the Qur'an's treatment of the historical event of the crucifixion (be it of Jesus or someone else.) he makes a very convincing case that the idea that someone was substituted for Jesus on the cross need not have any basis in the text, but I feel he could go much further in exploring the "why's" because a physical crucifixion of Jesus need not lead to atonement theology. As a Muslim I found the various perspectives presented throughout history (especially before the 14th) absolutely fascinating.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews