The Mystery of the Messiah: The Messiahship of Jesus in the Qur’an, New Testament, Old Testament, and Other Sources (by Louay Fatoohi)

messiah_500x760LF

To my knowledge there is no academic studies of what the messiahship of Jesus means in the Qur’an in comparison with the messiahship in Judaism and Christianity. This book: The Mystery of the Messiah: The Messiahship of Jesus in the Qur’an, New Testament, Old Testament, and Other Sources, by Louay Fatoohi (Luna Plena Publishing, 2009 ), is the only one of its kind.

I consider Dr. Louay Fatoohi a unique muslim scholar of comparative religion. He came from Arab Christian background and has been passionate in studying the Qur’an, Islam and comparative religion since his youth . He is one of a few muslim author I know who is equally conversant with scholarly works on religion on both Christian and Islamic tradition, modern and classical as well as other historical sources, or on combinations of these writings.

This book, I must say,  is concise yet dense with information with meticulous crafted analysis on  why and how the Messiah was developed in Judaism and Christianity. Fatoohi seeks to show that the Qur’anic Messiah is actually the historical one. Fatoohi drew upon his extensive study on the historical Jesus as he went through the concept of the “Messiah” in the Qur’an, the Bible (canonical and non canonical sources) and Dead Sea Scrolls and scholars from this field.

In one chapter Fatoohi examines the concept of “Messiah” in the Hebrew Bible and other Jewish sources, including the Dead Sea Scrolls,. He make a very important observation that this title “Messiah” in the Hebrew Bible is applied only to historical never prophetic / future saviour figures, only later Jewish theology and literature started to invent this title as prophetic King, the salvational eschatological Messiah serving to free an oppressed jews abandoned by God.  Fatoohi also explains different messiahs in other Jewish writings, the most prominent is the one described as the “son of David” the Royal military saviour and other is the priestly Messiah of Aaronic decendant, albeit the jews were not unanimous in their depiction of the awaited Messiah.

In another chapter Fatoohi go through the concept of the term Messiah in the greek New Testament, Christos (Χριστός) from which “Christ” is derived. All New testament writers recognise Jesus as the Christ but in the New Testament the concept of “the Messiah”reflect the substantially bigger role as opposed to the Hebrew Bible. However Fatoohi explains Jesus of the Gospels was not properly anointed according to jewish tradition so that Jewish authorities and most jews did not recognise his messiahship. The same chapter Fatoohi highlight that the term “Christ”makes most of its appearance in Paul’s letters. Paul incorrectly use the term “Christ” as a proper name not title. This show his flawed understanding of what the term mean. Paul’s Christ is a spiritual figure who came to redeem people, by being crucified and raised from the dead. This version of Christ, Fatoohi argues, blur the historical Jesus because it is lack of Jesus historical details. Over centuries, most christians took Paul version of historical Jesus and focus only on the alleged crucifixion and the resurrection of him.

Fatoohi dedicated a chapter discussing Al-Masih in the Qur’an.  Essentially Fatoohi shows that the title is never presented as the reason for a special prophethood that make Jesus one of the most favoured prophets (yes , Jesus is one of those prophets) however Qur’an 3:45  give indication that the Messiah was a concept that God had previously revealed: a prophecy, although this prophecy is not specifically cited anywhere in the Qur’an as mentioning it centuries after it was fulfilled would not serve any purpose. Also Fatoohi explains that the use of definite article Al Masih does not necessarily mean that the Qur’an implies that there was only one Messiah although Jesus was the one special Messiah.

The rest of the chapters Fatoohi discuss the different identities and attribute that the Gospel writers presented the Christ and examine each one of them from the Qur’an perspective, here are some salient points from this book, which I find it interesting:

  • King of the Jews — in addition to anointed priests and prophets , the awaited Messiah is seen by the Jews as King, however the general context in NT, Fatoohi argues that Jesus never sought nor was he ever given the Kingship title. Jesus confirmed that he was the Christ in a way that a prophet and rabbi who remind people to go back to the religion of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Aaron and all Hebrew prophets. The Christian image of the Messiah as a Spiritual King is the result of blending the Jewish concept of the messiah as an earthly King with the fact that Jesus historical role who was a spiritual leader to the Jews. The Qur’an corrected this distortion and put Jesus as a prophet who teach his people to go back to the teaching of what earlier prophets had brought. Jesus of the Qur’an is not a political leader who was expected to re-establish an earthly kingdom i.e. Israel nor a quasi God who posses the throne of Heaven.
  • Second Coming — Fatoohi persuasively argues that the concept of Jesus second coming was developed by Jesus early followers to explain his failure to deliver what they thought the Christ was going to do. The Qur’an does not support this concept of returning Messiah. The Qur’an messiah fulfilled his mission on earth. Although there are a number of hadiths attributed to Prophet Muhammad that seems to confirm Jesus second coming, it must have been influenced by Christian understanding. I am surprised that Fatoohi arrive at this conclusion  there is Qur’anic verses which indirectly seems to suggest Jesus return e.g.[Sûrah al-Nisâ’: 159, Sûrah al-Zukhruf: 61] as well as those hadiths predicting the returning of Jesus which are considered authentic, nevertheless I still find Fatoohi position plausible albeit minority position among Islamic scholars. I will look into this matter.
  • Son of David — Many christians are eager to link Jesus as being descendant to David, the second King of Israel (later just Judah) who had descendants also upon the throne. Here Fatoohi shows how contradictory position in the four gospels in relation to Jesus as being the son of David, and how those position were not reconcilable. On the other hand the Qur’anic position is consistent in maintaining that Jesus is “the son of Mary”, this mean the Qur’an reject any idea that Jesus is a warrior Messiah like David who was going to restore Israel thus the fulfilment of the prophecy to David in 2 Samuel 7:16. In my opinion Fatoohi also spot on when bringing the point that Jesus link to Aaron because the fact that the Qur’an call Jesus’ Mother as “sister of Aaron. While as Fatoohi pointed out it is common mistakes among Biblical scholar to understand the expression “sister of Aaron” as meaning that Mary had brother called “Aaron” not as title of tribal connection , I have personally fascinated by this Qur’an term. To me  there is a good reason why the Quran refer Mary to Aaron kinship. It emphatically gives a particular significance that Mary’s son ie. Jesus has the birth right as “the Messiah” or anointed one as we can read in Exodus 30:30-31 when  God ordered prophet Moses to anoint his brother Aaron with a special type of anointment with a particular oil for kings …..from this anointing it give him and his heirs the right to the priesthood title down to prophet Jesus, hence the title Jesus “the Messiah”.
  • Saviour — Fatoohi explains that the Qur’anic Messiah of Jesus is neither a saviour to bring the jews to restore its own kingdom nor the one who save people from sin by playing role as atoning agent, he is no unique saviour,  a messenger and prophet albeit one of special messenger who was conceived miraculously and performed impressive miracles.
  • Suffering Messiah — Fatoohi rightly mention that Judaism actually never knew of a suffering or resurrected messiah and the Qur’an reject the idea that the Messiah ever suffered the Passion. The concept of suffering messiah was a novelty that Christian writers introduced.

 

As a final point, Fatoohi concluded from his study  that the messiahship of Jesus in the Qur’an represent the original concept of the messiah or one messiah which was revealed by God which predate any shift in the meaning by Jews and Christian. At first the Jews did not expect a redeemer Messiah as this title is just for any past figures who were anointed as a gesture to sanctify themselves. Later the Jews started to invent a eschatological warrior messiah and associate him with King David to restore the Kingdom of Israel. Christians inherited this type of Messiah and projected it even more on their Christ: a King from throne of Heaven who already came to atone people sin. Jesus saw his messiahship as a mandate to conform divine messages that had been revealed to previous prophets that is calling people back to the way of God of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Aaron and all Hebrew prophets.  That is the historical Messiah the Qur’an is telling us about.

I can say Fatoohi’s study  is helpful in considering critically how the significance  of Messiahship evolved from just anointed  past figures  to eschatological warrior King of Judaism to Pauline god-men Jesus and later how the Qur’an corrected Jesus messiahship back into rightful role : to led jewish people to salvation by showing them the right way to God.

As no other Muslim writer/scholar I know have ever attempted to author a book focusing on the concept of “Messiah” like this book, I praise the author for his initiative.

Also Dr. Fatoohi has also authored books on similar genre in my collection which I also recommend

 



Categories: Recommended Reading

Tags: , , , , , , ,

53 replies

  1. I never heard about this scholar before, Thanks for introducing him to me.

    Like

  2. One Question:We have to buy the books, there are no free copies?

    Like

  3. I like Fatoohi’s books but he is absolutely wrong about the second coming. The ahadith mentioning it are mutawatir and there is no doubt as to their authenticity. There is no evidence that they were influenced by Christian sources. That is an assumption that he makes. If they were, then surely there would be much more similarities between the second coming in Christian sources (such as the Book of Revelation) and the authentic ahadith.

    Like

  4. This scholar doesnt believe in Eesa (pbuh) second coming? wow, that’s a bombshell for me.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I don’t have a view about the second coming….years ago I used to think it is silly to doubt the second coming…but now I don’t know.

    I don’t know the historical research on the second coming but I think the issue is not that the book of REvelations influenced the hadith but that there were a lot of Christians who converted to Islam and then brought their baggage with them…

    and that baggage is not necessarily something exactly like book of revelations…also remember that the Christians of the middle east were not influenced by same books in todays New TEstament Cannon…there were other oral sayings and many other books that did not make it to the cannon and it took sometime to the cannon of the Eastern Roman Empire to eventually influence all Christian areas.

    Also, I am not so sure of the mutawattir status of those hadith.

    Are they mutawattir at every stage down to the referenced sahabi and the referenced narrator after the sahabi?

    Just email Louay Fatoohi if he thinks it is mutawattir, etc…he emails me eventually when I emailed him.

    Like

  6. The ahadith are related by close companions of the Prophet (pbuh), and not just random Christian converts to Islam. And as brother Eric said, it was accepted by the vast majority of scholars, including hadith specialists. There is no reason, therefore, to doubt the authenticity of those ahadith. Furthermore, the Quran refers to Jesus (pbuh) as a “sign of the hour”. The vast majority of scholars have interpreted that as a reference to the second coming.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. He make a very important observation that this title “Messiah” in the Hebrew Bible is applied only to historical never prophetic / future saviour figures, . . .

    No; Daniel 9:24-27 is all about prophesy and future. Uses the word Messiah twice, the one who will come and do those six things in verse 24 – make atonement for sin, etc.

    עַד־מָשִׁיחַ

    Daniel 9:25
    until Messiah the prince . . .

    Daniel 9:26
    יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ

    the Messiah will be cut off

    see Isaiah 53:8
    He will be cut off from the land of the living

    Daniel 9:24-27

    24 “Seventy weeks [seventy periods of seven years = 490 years] have been decreed for your people and your holy city,

    to finish the transgression,
    to make an end of sin,
    to make atonement for iniquity,
    to bring in everlasting righteousness,
    to seal up vision and prophecy and
    to anoint the most holy place.

    25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.

    26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

    27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

    verse 26 shows Messiah will be killed
    and the temple will be destroyed after Messiah is killed
    ( 70 AD)

    Jesus predicted that in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 (prophetic, future to Jesus)

    Boom; Fatoohi is refuted.

    Like

    •  

      With the name of Allah the Gracious the Merciful

       

      KT wrote:

      *****************

      עַד־מָשִׁיחַ

      Daniel 9:25

      until Messiah the prince . . .

      **************************

      Flawed translation. How did you get the definite article “the” in Daniel 9:25?

      The word  עַד־מָשִׁ֣יחַ  Ad-mashiakh is simply  “until anointed (one)”  The context of this verse we know the this refer to a (anointed) Ruler (Heb: Nagid נָגִ֔יד  ) and this could well be any ruler.

      It is wrong to try to translate this word as if “the Messiah”, like a proper name. it is not!

      It is not a reference to particular  Messiah but a reference to one who is anointed because clearly here is no definite article (Hey ~ ה) before the word (משיח ~ Mashiakh)

      In Daniel 9 there are two event and two anointed subjects, one after 7 weeks and another after an additional 62 weeks. (by week, Heb: Shavuim שבעים), here it means a period of 7 years “week” according the Hebrew Bible usage)

      The first “anointed” individual identified as a ruler in Daniel 9:25 is King Cyrus, who came 7 weeks of years after the destruction of Jerusalem. Then from Cyrus’ Decree to rebuild Jerusalem, “it will be built again” for an additional 62 weeks (434 years). But “in troubled times,” Daniel 9:25, meaning under the foreign domination of the subsequent Persian, Greek and Roman rule. The Greek is mentioned in Daniel 11:2 and Roman alluded to in Daniel 1:30 where the word (כתים ~ Kittim) refers to the Roman capital of Constantinople). Then in the 69th week (483 years) after the destruction of the first Temple and 1 week (7 years) before the destruction of the second Temple, an anointed one is cut off. The fact that there is no definite article indicates that this can refer to several different anointed subjects. King Agrippa the last King of Israel (Kings are considered anointed as it says in 1 Chronicles 11:3) who was killed during this time. It also refers to the last High priest (priests are anointed as seen in Leviticus 4) and the sacrifices (indicated in Leviticus 8:10-11). All three subjects were considered anointed and were cut off during the final week before the destruction of the second Temple.

      Like

  8. Daniel 9:24-27 – all prophetic and future about Messiah

    verse 25 – decree to rebuild Jerusalem – Cyrus, king of Persia (decrees the Jews can go back to Jerusalem and rebuilt the temple – Ezra 1:1-4, Isaiah 44-45) and Artaxerxes (Ezra 6-7 (457 BC); decrees to rebuild Jerusalem, after the first temple of Solomon was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. Artaxexes decree in 457 BC, counting down – 483 years later (490 – 7), brings us to around 26 AD (anointing of the Holy One – Jesus’ baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit); then in middle of next 7 years, He is cut off and killed. (one week = seven years, last verse, 27)

    Like

    • Your appeal to the book of Daniel strengthen Louay Fatoohi thesis that only later Jewish theology and literature started to invent “Messiah” title as prophetic King, the salvational eschatological Messiah serving to free an oppressed jews. Scholars consider the Book of Daniel as late addition in the Hebrew Bible, some scholars even attribute the authorship to the Maccabeans in 166 B.C., give the book a late date.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Personally speaking, after every Prophet, another Prophet came and testifies preceding Prophet were actually a Prophet of the God. Since Mualim (saw) is a final prophet, someone has to come and do the same for him, I feel. And by someone I mean a Prophet.

    Eesa’ Second coming make sense to me. He wasn’t departed from this world in a same way like the other Prophets did.

    Like

  10. Ken Temple “to make an end of sin… to bring in everlasting righteousness,…”

    Nope, didn’t happen. Same as it ever was. Boom Megafail

    Liked by 2 people

  11. The overwhelming position of the Ulamas of the Ahlus Sunnah w’al-Jama’ah believe in the return of Prophet Jesus (p) , that’s why I really want to look into this matter more

    I say:
    It is well-known that scholarly consensus is protected from error, because the ummah cannot agree on misguidance. At-Tirmidhi (2167) narrated from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Allaah will not cause my ummah to agree on misguidance.” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami‘ (1848)

    Like

  12. there doesn’t seem to be a belief of a bloody human sacrificial ritual for the atonement of sins in the jewish torah. neither does there seem to be an idea of man god which gets slain for atonement of sins

    the christian always wants his man god myth to be free of sin, but we see something interesting in the book of job

    david j. a clines remarks concerning job 2.3 ‘… now for the first time it is with a single word explicitly granted that job has been “SMITTEN FOR NOTHING” ‘

    God admits that he is allowing job to be TORTURED ‘for no reason’

    and the hebrew 3 letter word means ‘smitten FOR NOTHING’

    isaiah 53 :

    10And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God’s purpose shall prosper in his hand.

    and

    5But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed.

    i have read that the jews say that the ss was smitten for something (not sinless ss), but the smiting the nations gave him went over board. we note that in the torah suffering can be put on someone, even if that some one didn’t do anything . we also note that NO WHERE is the slaying of human said to mimic sacrifice of an animal for the atonement of sins. one of the baffling questions is how did animal sacrificial ritual become human sacrificial ritual in pagan religion like christianity? the jewish text was going north and christianity went south. very strange.

    Like

  13. Scholars consider the Book of Daniel as late addition in the Hebrew Bible, some scholars even attribute the authorship to the Maccabeans in 166 B.C., give the book a late date.

    Liberal scholars, not conservative scholars who believe God can predict the future and send prophets with a message to the people. You are using liberal scholars who in their worldview and presuppositions would apply the same thinking to Muhammad of Islam and dismiss him and everything claiming to the miraculous in the Qur’an also.

    Tobi Singer and other believing Jews believe Daniel was written by the prophet Daniel around 530 BC. ( a few years after Cyrus the Persian conquered Babylon (539-536 BC) and let the Jews go back to the land of Israel.

    Jesus Himself pointed back to Daniel 9:26-27 as the prophesy of the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Jesus predicted it in 30 AD, a week before He was crucified. (Matthew 24:15)

    The Messiah appears in Daniel 9:26 after 483 years, and then is cut off in the middle of the week. (cut a covenant – points to the cutting of the new covenant on the cross, the sacrificial atonement for sin).

    It is true that the definite article is not there in Hebrew for “Messiah”; and Mashiakh מָשִׁיחַ means “anointed one”; but sometimes the context allows for understanding of an anarthrous noun to have the concept of one that includes a definite article.

    The Hebrews did have the concept of the Messiah who would die for sins, which Daniel 9:24-27 shows; along with Isaiah 53.

    The passage (Daniel 9) is prophetic because it is predicting the future ( 70 periods of seven years = 490 years)

    Temple is rebuilt after the first 49 years ( seven sevens = 7 periods of seven years) – temple rebuilt. (v. 25) and then after 62 more sevens (62 x 7 = 483) – brings us to around 26 AD, when the holy one was anointed – Jesus’ baptism. (to anoint the holy one – v. 24) This also includes Herod’s expansion of the temple to be as glorious and big as the temple described in Ezekiel chapters 40-48.

    Then Messiah is cut off (v. 26), killed.
    The parallel with Isaiah 53:8 is obvious. “He was cut off from the land of the living”

    the temple was destroyed again after Messiah will be cut off. (v. 26 – “the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary”

    The remaining “week” (seven years) is 26-33 AD – in the middle of the week He makes a firm covenant (30 AD) – the crucifixion of Christ and fulfills the New Covenant. (This is the New covenant in My blood – Matthew 26; Mark 14; Luke 22, etc.)

    About 3 and 1/2 years later Saul is converted to Christ, becoming the apostle Paul. (gospel message going out to the Gentile nations and the 490 years is finished for Jerusalem and temple being significant, as Christ fulfills final sacrifice as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. (John 1:29)

    Like

    •  

      With the name of Allah the Gracious the Merciful

      KT //It is true that the definite article is not there in Hebrew for “Messiah”; and Mashiakh מָשִׁיחַ means “anointed one”; but sometimes the context allows for understanding of an anarthrous noun to have the concept of one that includes a definite article.

      The Hebrews did have the concept of the Messiah who would die for sins, which Daniel 9:24-27 shows; along with Isaiah 53.//

       

      That’s a bit of a stretch. Sorry!

      Obviously not only that there is no definite article (Hey ~ ה) before the word (משיח ~ Mashiakh),  Christians, employ a blatant and intentional mistranslation of the Hebrew word (משיח ~ Mashiakh”) since their translations has the word “Messiah” mentioned twice in Daniel 9; while  word literally simply means “anointed” and is an adjective as in the 1 Samuel 10:1-2 where the word clearly mean an act of consecration. It is not a personal pronoun that refers to a particular individual called “The Messiah.” The word (משיח ~ Mashiakh”) is used throughout the Hebrew Bible no less than 100 times and refers to a variety of individuals and objects.

      Priests: Leviticus 4:3
      Kings: 1 Kings 1:39
      Prophets: Isaiah 61:1
      Temple Alter: Exodus 40:9-11
      Matzot ~ Unleavened Bread: Numbers 6:15
      Cyrus ~ a non-Jewish Persian King: Isaiah 45:1

      Even in Christian translations almost all the word Mashiakh is translated as “anointed.” The only exception is twice in Daniel 9 verses 25 and 26. This inconsistency is even more blatant since Christian translators translate the word (מָשִׁ֫יחַ ~ Mashiakh) as “anoint” one verse earlier when it is used in Daniel 9:24.

      Just as Fatoohi has pointed out, all this term “Messiah” in the Hebrew Bible is applied only to historical objects/figures, only later Jewish theology and literature started to invent this title as prophetic King redeemer,  Christians inherited this type of Messiah and projected it even more on their version of Messiah: the Pauline Christ: a King from throne of Heaven who already came to atone people sin.

      Jewish understanding of Daniel 9:24-26 as follows:

      24) Seventy weeks (490 years) to finish the transgression, to anoint the Holy of Holies (i.e. place)
      25) Know therefore and discern that from the issuing of a word (Heb: דבר ~ Devar) to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (starting from its destruction) until an anointed ruler/leader (Heb: נגיד ~ naged ie. Cyrus) will be seven weeks (49 years) and then for sixty-two weeks (434 years) it will be built again with plaza and moat but in troubled times. (Persian, Greek and Roman domination)
      26) Then after the sixty-two weeks (483 years from the destruction of the first Temple) an anointed one (sacrifices, last Jewish priest and king) will be cut off (meaning it will be no more), and the people of the prince (Romans) who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. (in the 70th week 490 years from the destruction of the first Temple)

      Nothing to suggest a prophecy of “the Messiah” Jesus who will die for other people sin like in christian understanding

       

      Liked by 1 person

    • It is not a “liberal” scholarship, arguments for a late (2nd century BC) dating for the book of Daniel are based on the linguistic analysis and the Manuscript Evidences.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Ken Temple “to make an end of sin… to bring in everlasting righteousness,…”

    Nope, didn’t happen. Same as it ever was. Boom Megafail

    How do you know it did not happen?

    It is a reality for those who have faith in Jesus Christ and His atonement. (Romans 3:24-26; Romans 5:1-11)

    It does not mean to bring an end to the existence of sin and evil in the world; rather it means to provide the atonement for the guilt of sin (forgiveness) and the power to overcome sin by living holy lives.

    If you have faith in Jesus the Messiah as your Savior from sin and Lord of your life; the reality of forgiveness for the guilt of sin is applied to your heart and conscience and soul; and the power/ability to overcome sin by living a holy life is also given to us believers. See 2 Peter 1:3-4 – “seeing that His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness” and Titus 2:11-14 – the grace of God has appeared . . . instructing and discipling us to say no to sin . . .

    Like

  15. “How do you know it did not happen?”

    Because you are still sinning, committing idolatry

    Like

  16. there doesn’t seem to be a belief of a bloody human sacrificial ritual for the atonement of sins in the jewish torah. neither does there seem to be an idea of man god which gets slain for atonement of sins

    the christian always wants his man god myth to be free of sin, but we see something interesting in the book of job

    david j. a clines remarks concerning job 2.3 ‘… now for the first time it is with a single word explicitly granted that job has been “SMITTEN FOR NOTHING” ‘

    God admits that he is allowing job to be TORTURED ‘for no reason’

    and the hebrew 3 letter word means ‘smitten FOR NOTHING’

    isaiah 53 :

    10And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God’s purpose shall prosper in his hand.

    and

    5But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed.

    i have read that the jews say that the ss was smitten for something (not sinless ss), but the smiting the nations gave him went over board. we note that in the torah suffering can be put on someone, even if that some one didn’t do anything . we also note that NO WHERE is the slaying of human said to mimic sacrifice of an animal for the atonement of sins. one of the baffling questions is how did animal sacrificial ritual become human sacrificial ritual in pagan religion like christianity? the jewish text was going north and christianity went south. very strange.

    Like

  17. It does not mean to bring an end to the existence of sin and evil in the world;

    rather it means to provide the atonement for the guilt of sin (forgiveness) and the power to overcome sin by living holy lives.

    Like

  18. “How do you know it did not happen?”

    Because you are still sinning, committing idolatry”

    that’s because all apocalyptic literature thought end to sin would come pretty soon with some signs like:

    There were certainly prophets before Jesus who preached doom on Jerusalem and/or the Temple, so Jesus could have picked up the idea from them. The first century was a time of apocalyptic ideas such as those found in the Dead Sea Scrolls whose sectarian writings are filled with expectation of a soon coming final judgment, and who even predicted a final battle b/w sons of light and darkness that centered on Jerusalem. The fear that Romans would destroy Jerusalem and/or desecrate or destroy the Temple seems to have been on a lot of people’s minds. Josephus mentions some other fellow prophesying the doom of Jerusalem soon before it occurred, but it wasn’t Jesus.

    all we need to do is do more research on the apocalyptic ideas and see that they all seemed to have dreamed of sin free world which did not come.

    Like

  19. Mrsonic:

    It is not “Christian” interpretation that went south and Jewish interpretation went north”, etc.

    Rather all the first believers in Jesus and interpreters of the OT text were JEWS !! (Luke is the only Gentile (Greek, Roman) of the NT writers.)

    All of the interpretation of Isaiah 53 in the New Testament was by JEWS. Acts 8 (Luke quoting Philip explaining Isaiah 53 to the Ethiopian Eunuch) , John, Peter, Paul, Matthew, Mark – these are all Jews who interpreted Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and Daniel 9:24-27 as the Messiah who come and be the atonement for sin.

    Genesis 3:14 – God said to the serpent (the devil):
    . . .

    Genesis 3:15 started it with

    And I will put enmity
    Between you and the woman,
    And between your seed and her seed

    [ “her seed” only time ever in Hebrew literature where feminine form is used with “seed” = points to the virgin birth of Messiah] ;

    He [ Messiah] shall bruise you on the head,
    And you shall bruise him on the heel.”

    The Jews have always seen this as the first word of good news about the Messiah to come who would defeat Satan.

    They knew that Messiah would come from Abraham’s seed and be a blessing to all the nations. (Genesis 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14, and be from seed of Judah (Genesis 49:10).

    Like

  20. Acts 8:25-40 – notice the Jew Philip teaches and interprets Isaiah 53 as Jesus the Messiah to the Ethiopian Eunuch:

    25 So, when they had solemnly testified and spoken the word of the Lord, they started back to Jerusalem, and were preaching the gospel to many villages of the Samaritans.

    26 But an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip saying, “Get up and go south to the road that descends from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a desert road.)
    27 So he got up and went; and there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure; and he had come to Jerusalem to worship,
    28 and he was returning and sitting in his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah.

    29 Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go up and join this chariot.”

    30 Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”

    31 And he said, “Well, how could I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

    32 Now the passage of Scripture which he was reading was this: [ Isaiah 53:7-8 ]

    “He was led as a sheep to slaughter;
    And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
    So He does not open His mouth.

    33 “In humiliation His judgment was taken away;
    Who will relate His generation?
    For His life is removed from the earth.”

    34 The eunuch answered Philip and said, “Please tell me, of whom does the prophet say this? Of himself or of someone else?”

    35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.

    36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?”

    37 [And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”]

    38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him.

    39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch no longer saw him, but went on his way rejoicing.

    40 But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he passed through he kept preaching the gospel to all the cities until he came to Caesarea.

    Like

  21. Ken Temple “rather it means to provide the atonement for the guilt of sin (forgiveness) and the power to overcome sin by living holy lives.”

    Humankind has the ability to gain forgiveness and live holy lives universally. Always had and will have, insha Allah. This is NO exclusive limitation only given to people who believe what you believe. Whatever that is, listening to your doublespeak

    Like

  22. Genesis 3:15 started it with

    And I will put enmity
    Between you and the woman,
    And between your seed and her seed

    [ “her seed” only time ever in Hebrew literature where feminine form is used with “seed” = points to the virgin birth of Messiah] ;

    here is a response by your jewish brethren

    THE “SEED OF A WOMAN”: A KERNEL OF DECEPTION1

    Click to access Gen315.pdf

    http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/3313/Numbers-and-tribal-transmission#.VrtMH1WLTnA

    Like

  23. ken temple is still unable to find his human sacrificial ritual in isaiah 53

    i quote again

    there doesn’t seem to be a belief of a bloody human sacrificial ritual for the atonement of sins in the jewish torah. neither does there seem to be an idea of man god which gets slain for atonement of sins

    the christian always wants his man god myth to be free of sin, but we see something interesting in the book of job

    david j. a clines remarks concerning job 2.3 ‘… now for the first time it is with a single word explicitly granted that job has been “SMITTEN FOR NOTHING” ‘

    God admits that he is allowing job to be TORTURED ‘for no reason’

    and the hebrew 3 letter word means ‘smitten FOR NOTHING’

    isaiah 53 :

    10And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God’s purpose shall prosper in his hand.

    and

    5But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed.

    i have read that the jews say that the ss was smitten for something (not sinless ss), but the smiting the nations gave him went over board. we note that in the torah suffering can be put on someone, even if that some one didn’t do anything . we also note that NO WHERE is the slaying of human said to mimic sacrifice of an animal for the atonement of sins. one of the baffling questions is how did animal sacrificial ritual become human sacrificial ritual in pagan religion like christianity? the jewish text was going north and christianity went south. very strange.

    Like

  24. 7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he would not open his mouth; like a lamb to the slaughter he would be brought, and like a ewe that is mute before her shearers, and he would not open his mouth.

    8From imprisonment and from judgment he is taken, and his generation who shall tell? For he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them.

    9And he gave his grave to the wicked, and to the wealthy with his kinds of death, because he committed no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.

    10And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God’s purpose shall prosper in his hand.

    1. unable to see human sacrificial ritual of man god myth. unable to see that death /slaying brings atonement for sins.

    Like

  25. yhwh like bruising and punishing people who according to job

    “SMITTEN FOR NOTHING” ‘

    but the suffering is not the SAME as slaying/death
    completely different.

    “10And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution,”

    my soul is deeply troubled even unto death , says your man god.
    but it didn’t DIE. neither did the ss in isaiah 53.

    yhwh likes to punish brutally, but no atonement from human sacrificial ritual

    Like

  26. the later Jews who rejected the Messiah and rejected the believing Jews interpretation of the OT are the ones you are using. (After being scattered after 70 AD and 135 AD (Bar Kochba rebellion), the Rabbinic Judaism had to go back and Re-interpret the TaNaKh to fit their rejection of the Messiah and His disciples and the Jewish interpretation of the first believers. (Jesus’ take on OT and the apostles/disciples interpretation of the OT – all Jewish.) They had to re-interpret everything, since the temple was destroyed. But the first Jewish believers recognized that Jesus the Messiah fullfilled those prophesies of Daniel 9:24-27; Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and Gen. 3:15; 12:3; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14; 49:10 and more –

    You are using later Jewish interpretation –

    go back to the original Jewish interpretation of the OT, which is the NT –

    which the Qur’an honors by:

    1. Calling Jesus the Messiah المسیح , which the Jews do not.
    2. Believing in the Virgin Birth of Messiah, which Jews do not. (Qur’an Surah 3 and 19)

    Like

  27. EVEN IF it died, there is no atonement from slaying of a god who gets slayed as a human.

    Like

  28. okay i will tell you again. it doesn’t seem like there is any atonement from the slaying of your “al maseeh”
    ?


    You are using later Jewish interpretation –

    go back to the original Jewish interpretation of the OT, which is the NT –

    which the Qur’an honors by:

    1. Calling Jesus the Messiah المسیح , which the Jews do not.
    2. Believing in the Virgin Birth of Messiah, which Jews do not. (Qur’an Surah 3 and 19)”

    Like

  29. Where do you get the idea of relating the Hebrew word חִנָּם (Khinnam = without cause, without purpose) to Isaiah 53:10-12 ?? It is not there.

    “to destroy without a purpose” or “to smite without a cause” are actually 3 words ל = to, towards
    בַלְּעֹו – to destroy him
    חִנָּֽם = without cause or without purpose

    לְבַלְּעֹו חִנָּֽם׃

    there is absolutely no relationship of this to Isaiah 53 at all.

    Like

  30. i know there isn’t . i was trying to make another point.

    Like

  31. Yes there is atonement, and the first Jewish believers in Jesus as Messiah all believed that and wrote it in the 27 books of the NT. (Luke is not Jewish, but is quoting Jews, like Mary, Peter, John, Philip, Saul of Tarsus, etc. )

    Isaiah 53 calls him a lamb led to the slaughter and John the Baptist ( a Jew ) said of Him, “behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” John 1:29

    and

    John the apostle, a Jew, also shows Messiah to be the lamb who was sacrificed – Revelation chapter 5.

    Even the Qur’an sees the concept of the substitution of the innocent ram in place of Abraham’s son that would cause a substitutionary ransom. Qur’an Surah 37:107 – “we have ransomed him with a mighty sacrifice”

    Like

  32. Ken Temple “Yes there is atonement, and the first Jewish believers in Jesus as Messiah all believed that..”

    No they did NOT. They continued to bring sin offerings in the temple in Jerusalem. Biblically proven, signed sealed and delivered.

    Like

  33. this is what ed babinski says

    “Have you counted jesus predictions of his death in each gospel starting with mark, then Matthew, luke and John? I think you will find that the number of predictions increased and also start to begin sooner in his ministry, very soon indeed in the fourth gospel john, with the baptist in the first chapter declaring jesus to be the lamb of god, a sacrificial lamb. Mark has no such early prediction. Let me know what you find when you study the gospels in the chronological order I suggested. The tell me how you see the story growing over time.”

    interesting

    3Despised and rejected by men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness, and as one who hides his face from us, despised and we held him of no account.

    4Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains-he carried them, yet we accounted him as plagued, smitten by God and oppressed.

    5But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed.

    so verse 5 seems to tell us what it is “bearing”

    the transgressions AGAINST it. so it is carrying sins in a figuratively way and not literal. so even though it may be sinful servant it isn’t responsible for the sins committed against it

    “wounds we are healed”

    this must be figurative as well because christians are still polluted in sin. they are not healed .
    so it doesn’t seem that is 53 thought that ripping of flesh = atonement

    or death of human = atonement

    Like

  34. maybe the reason why is 53 did not use the below language because is 53 did not see the ss as blameless who was smitten for NO reason.

    quote:

    “Where do you get the idea of relating the Hebrew word חִנָּם (Khinnam = without cause, without purpose) to Isaiah 53:10-12 ?? It is not there.

    “to destroy without a purpose” or “to smite without a cause” are actually 3 words ל = to, towards
    בַלְּעֹו – to destroy him
    חִנָּֽם = without cause or without purpose

    לְבַלְּעֹו חִנָּֽם׃

    there is absolutely no relationship of this to Isaiah 53 at all.”

    Like

  35. “A human sacrifice for sin occurs nowhere else in the Old Testament, and [Lutheran scholar Gerhard von Rad writes]: “’the suggestion that the servant’s sacrifice surpassed the sacrificial system would certainly be unparalleled in the Old Testament, and it perhaps
    also contradicts Deutero-Isaiah himself.’” Old Testament theology By Paul
    R. House.

    this is what i am trying to figure out. where do christians get human sacrificial ritual from this passage?
    it is very mind baffling.

    Like

  36. Gerhad Von Rad – a very famous liberal scholar, who stayed in Germany during Hitler’s time and seems to have not objected to the evil Nazis. Shameful.

    the quote above is still avoiding the Jewish understanding of the OT in the New Testament.

    For example,
    the Jew Philip in Acts 8 (I gave that above)
    The Jew Peter in 1 Peter 2:18-25 – interprets Isaiah 53 as about Jesus’ atonement for sin; the lamb led to the slaughter.

    The Jew John the Baptist – John 1:29
    The Jew apostle John – Revelation chapter 5

    The Jew Saul of Tarsus, Paul the apostle – all 13 of his letters.

    The Jewish Christian writer of the book of Hebrews proves this – the whole thing, 13 chapters is about Jesus the Messiah, the one who brought a better covenant and fulfilled the OT by the sacrifice of the new covenant.

    Like

  37. Ed Babinsky – an atheist.
    We can dismiss him; all he does is attack Christianity and the idea of a Creator God – so he is against Islam and Allah also; so you cannot use him in that argumentation.

    Like

  38. He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution

    i quote :
    If you look up the word Asham in your Strongs (Christian) concordance) you will find that it is always I say always the individuals sin. Never for others as Ezekiel 18 and 33 shows us.

    end quote

    did jesus die for his own sins?

    Like

  39. Rabbi Tovia Singer, who is quoted and used a lot here by Muslims, at least agrees that Daniel was written by Daniel around 530 BC.

    Most of the reasons for rejecting the early date are anti-supernatural bias and presuppositions.

    Like

  40. Rabbi Tovia Singer exposes atheists and their presuppositions against prophesy in Daniel. Rabbi Singer affirms the book of Daniel was written by the prophet Daniel around 530 – 500 BC. and affirms Daniel served under Nebuchadnezzar and then later under Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian.

    http://www.toviasinger.tv/small-bites/why-do-atheists-claim-that-daniel-is-a-forgery-rabbi-tovia-singer-exposes-their-motive-and-error/

    Like

  41. no. maybe after a careful look at the language used, words used etc one comes to the conclusion that text belongs to a different date? this has nothing to do with “anti supernatural”

    Like

  42. Rabbi Singer even affirms that Daniel 9:26 is about the destruction of the 2nd temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD, by the Romans.

    Like

  43. I’ve read some of Dr Fatoohi’s work and I’ve noticed heis weird belief on Hadith. Adnan Rashid was confronted with the theory the Hadith of the second coming are fabricated through Christian influence, he said the second coming of Jesus is mentioned in the Quran.

    For me, the second coming makes sense. There’s so much debate (sadly some insults too) around who Jesus really was and we know he did not die so his return serves many purposes…one of which uniting people who differ over him.

    Thanks for the review. Overall, Fatoohi is a very useful resource and he has a really good way of explaining away the borrowing polemic as well as breaking down Christian arguments etc..

    Liked by 1 person

  44. If anyone wants to email Dr. Fatoohi, below is his email address on his blog…

    louay.fatoohi@gmail.com

    Regarding whether the Qur’an indicates Prophet Jesus’s second coming, Joseph Islam who describes himself as Qur’an centric to say that it doesn’t.

    I read it before a while ago and forgot what he says but here it is…

    Click to access Second%20Coming.pdf

    Regarding the hadith about the Ummah cannot agree on an error…first of all, the notion that we can know what every Muslim thinks or what they thought in the past is too far fetched…

    Secondly I might be recalling this incorrectly so please but I distinctly recall that Professor Jonathan Brown saying that that hadith is weak.

    Please check out his chapter on how hadith influenced theological views in his Intro to Hadith book.

    Like

    • Just to give an update,

      I have been in contact with Mr/ Fatoohi, regarding the second coming of Nabi Isa Al Masih, he acknowledges that there is no disagreement, or at least nothing of significance, among Muslim scholars on the return of Nabi Isa, however he allow himself the freedom of ijtihaad because he do not see it as an element of the core of Islam. (…and I agree with him).

      Mr. Fatoohi also wrote to me that he had analysed Qur’anic verses and he believe the popular interpretations are influenced by prior acceptance of the concept of return not derived from it. However he admit that he is open to possibility that he could be wrong in his interpretation, His intention is to one day publish a small book on this particular concept which will be addressing all his analysis.

      I respect his position and feel grateful for Mr. Fatoohi willingness to discuss his alternative view to me.

      Like

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: