sign in sign up
<<
Home , Judas Iscariot, The Shadow of Nazareth



 

 

 The Trial of   The Crucified Traitor 

As narrated by The Old, and The New  Testaments and History 

   

 

Abu Hamed   

1

Preface The Holy - according to the Christians is composed of: 1- The Old Testament which includes all the books revealed to Moses( peace be upon him) and all the prophets that came before ( peace be upon him). There are some differnces between Christians sects when it comes to admitting some of these books.

2- The includes the four admitted by their Clerical synod: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and June ( they did not admit the rest of the gospels) in addition to Acts that cites the actions of Paul who was a Jew who claimed to have heared Jesus in his was to Damascus after the elevation of the latter. Paul then started to preach for Jesus the Son of God. This paul is the one who distorted the Christian belief which was based on the oneness of Allah. After Acts are some messages sent to some towns, most of which were written by Paul. Christians believe that all what is mentioned in the New Testament is revealed via the Holy Spirit. They also beilive that the Old Testament is filled with about Jesus and his deeds. In this book, we have discussed them according to their beliefs especially what Peter mentions about Juda the traitor:" and his bishopric let another take" so that the number of disciples reaches twelve and this mentioning was considered a of what is cited in Psalms which state that the one crucified is Judas, n ot Jesus. Also we have proved the credibility of according to Galatians that refers to it, which proves its existence. We have depended on what they mention in their Holy Book and their beliefs.

2 Introduction The Truth Cited by the Qur'an about Jesus( Peace be upon him) 1- Jesus is not the Son of God :"Such is 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). (It is) a statement of truth, about which they doubt (or dispute). It befits not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son [this refers to the slander of Christians against Allah, by saying that 'Iesa (Jesus) is the son of Allah]. Glorified (and Exalted be He above all that they associate with Him). When He decrees a thing, He only says to it, "Be!" and it is." (Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 19:34-35). 2- Neither is Jesus God: "Surely, they have disbelieved who say: "Allah is the Messiah ['Iesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary)." But the Messiah ['Iesa (Jesus)] said: "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Verily, whosoever sets up partners in worship with Allah, then Allah has forbidden Paradise for him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong•doers) there are no helpers."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 5:72) 3- He is not One of Three either:" Surely, disbelievers are those who said: "Allah is the third of the three (in a )." But there is no ilah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall the disbelievers among them."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an: 5:73). 4- Jesus was not crucified because Allah has answered back the Jews who claimed to have crucified him:" and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) "(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 4: 157-158). All these facts were crystal clear to the followers of Jesus who kept after him. Today's Christians',however, do not believe in this in spite of the clear proofs stating this from the Holy Book and from reason. They act as:" And when it is said to them (the Jews), "Believe in what Allah has sent down," they say, "We believe in what was sent down to us." And they disbelieve in that which came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2:91) They made the issue of the axis upon which all their creed rotates since it was carried out to wipe away the sins of man. Other dogmas were built on this basis like the dogma of Trinity and that proved fallacious in The Innocence Of and His Virgin Honest Mother. Behind all this distortion and misguidance was a person called Paul.

3 If Jesus was killed, the Qur'an would have clearly mentioned this since the Qur'an mentions the absolute truth with the extreme impartiality to any sect or religion:"Nay, you are but human beings, of those He has created, He forgives whom He wills and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and to Him is the return (of all). "(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 5:18). It would be nothing weired if Jesus was killed because so many prophets were killed, which is stated in the Qur'an:" Say: "Verily, there came to you Messengers before me, with clear signs and even with what you speak of; why then did you kill them, if you are truthful?"(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 3:183), " ane every disbelieving nation plotted against their messenger to seize him"(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 40:5)," Is it that whenever there came to you a Messenger with what you yourselves desired not, you grew arrogant? Some, you disbelieved and some, you killed."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 87), and " Say (O Muhammad Peace be upon him to them): "Why then have you killed the Prophets of Allah aforetime, if you indeed have been believers?"" ( Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2: 91) in addition to what is mentioned in the Old Testament describing as the murderer of prophets.

4

The First Chapter

- The issue of Crucifixion: Who is the Crucified one? - The one Crucified is Judas Ischariot according to the Old and New Testaments. - Barnabas Bible: Qur'anic Proofs of its Credibility. - Barnabas Bible: Proofs of its credibility from Glatians( the New Testament). - Judas the Crucufied: Historical Statement.

5

The first Chapter The issue of Crucifixion: Who is the Crucified one? There are but two hypotheses: 1- Either the crucified one was Jesus- as the Christians cliam. In such case, Judas had a free life enjoying the reward of . 2- Or the one crucified was Judas Ischariot- as the Qur'an states- which is the whole truth after Allah had put Jesus' resemblance upon Judas and the Jews tried and crucified him. In such case Allah had saved him from treason and this Judas has no existence on the face of the earth.

What do the Old and New Testaments Mention about the one crucified? 1- it is stated in the New Testament that Peter says about Judah: “Men and brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take.” (Acts: 16-20) . 2- As for the Old Testament: The Psalm referred to is :“To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. Hold not your peace, O God of my praise, For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with words of hatred, and fought against me without a cause. For my love they are my adversaries: but I give myself unto prayer. And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love. Set you a wicked man over him: and let stand at his right hand. When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor. Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be

6 blotted out. Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the LORD; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out. Let them be before the LORD continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth. Because that he remembered not to show mercy, but persecuted the poor and needy man, that he might even slay the broken in heart. As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. As he clothed himself with cursing like as with his garment, so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones. Let it be unto him as the garment which covereth him, and for a girdle wherewith he is girded continually. Let this be the reward of mine adversaries from the LORD, and of them that speak evil against my soul. But do thou for me, O GOD the Lord, for thy name's sake: because thy mercy is good, deliver thou me. For poor and needy, and my heart is wounded within me. I am gone like the shadow when it declineth: I am tossed up and down as the locust. My knees are weak through fasting; and my flesh faileth of fatness. I became also a reproach unto them: when they looked upon me they shaked their heads. Help me, O LORD my God: O' save me according to thy mercy: That they may know that this is thy hand; that thou, LORD, hast done it. Let them curse, but bless thou when they arise, let them be ashamed; but let thy servant rejoice. Let mine adversaries be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion, as with a mantle. I will greatly praise the LORD with my mouth; yea, I will praise him among the multitude. For he shall stand at the right hand of the poor, to save him from those that condemn his soul. “ (Psalms: 109). These are the texts mentionend about Judas Ischariot in both the Old and New Testaments. It can be seen that the one sentenced was Judas. Also Pslam 109: "As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. As he clothed himself with cursing like as with his garment, so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones." confirms that the one crucufued is Judas in addition to Galatians 3:13" "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." ". This contradicts what Paul mentions that Christ has become a curse for our sake. The psalm matches what Peter said about Judah. It confirms that the one tried was Juda since it says: “When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. … Let his days be few; and let another take his office …Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow” (Psalms: 109:7- 9). The Psalm then concludes with a prophecy about Christ and an account for his state when they wanted to seize him and God saved him by elevating him.

7 Who is Paul? 1- Lots of lying prophets( frauds) appeared just after the elevation of Christ- as the messages of the New Testament shows. 2- Paul was one of the disbelievers of Jesus who declared his persecution to the first generation of Christians. When it had become clear to him that this clear persecution is of no good, he decided to wear the mask of faith in order to destroy Christianity from within. He claimed that he saw a light on his way to Damascus and that Christ asked him: “Shaul, why do you persecute me?”. . He was then taken by Barnabas and got introduced to the rest of the followers. 3- Paul then stripped Christianity of its content except for four issues. He considered crucifixion the basis of all what he called for. If this creed falls, all that he calls for is refuted. 4- Modern and olfd Muslim scholars who studied this topic condemned this Paul completely like: - Imam El-Qurtoby who said to the Christians:" He distorted your religion for you and changed the true religion of Christ by allowing what Jesus had banned. That is why his jurisdictions found a fertile land among you." - Sheikh Abu El-Baka' Saleh Ibn El-Hosain El-Gaafary stated in embarrassing those who distorted the Bible:" This Paul stripped them of their religion through artful tricks when he saw their minds ready to grow all he had planted. In addition, this mean person distorted the Torah." - in Fetouh El-Sham for Abu Abd-Ellah El-Wakedy, Mokawkes the ruler of states in his speech:" Paul has misguided you and changed your beliefs and allowed you to commit was had been prohibited before. He told you to drink spirits, eat pork, and commit sins; Jesus could have never called for this." - Yokana- the son of the ruler of Aleppo wrote to his daughter:" A man called Paul misguided the Christians and made them deviate far away from truth. He was from amongst the Jews and allowed them the old disbelief."

8

Barnabas Gospel 1- Barnabas-according to his gospel- is an apostle of the twelve chosen by Jesus, or at least he was one of the preached second class messengers after in the life of Jesus. Acts (11:22) describes him as:" . He was then taken by Barnabas and got introduced to the rest of the followers." 2- This gospel first appeared after it had been discovered in 1709 (i.e. in the beginning of the Eighteenth Century). It was discovered by Craimer, one of the consultants of the Russian King when he was staying in Amesterdam . however, some scholars refer to the mid of the Fifteenth Centurey and the Sixteenth Century after the paper had been analyzed. 3- Dr. Khalil Sa'ada- who translated Barnabas Gospel into Arabic- refers to the fact there is another gospel that confirms Juda's crucifixion and condemns Paul:"Apparently there was a Bible called The Ignatius Bible, the drawings of which were effaced and traces lost. It starts and ends with a denunciation of Paul, and possibly that Bible is the origin of Barnabas'.) Dr. Sa'ada, who is Christian, is knowledgeable about some that were not accredited by the clerical synods and his words–mentioned earlier- prove the validity of Barnabas' Bible and the facts cited within. 4- Dr. Khalil Sa'ada stated in his introduction for the translation of Barnabas Bible how this gospel differs from the four approved gospels- as he argues- in four points: a- Jesus denied his divinity and his being Son of God. b- Ishmail was the one intended to be offered as a sacrifice by his father in the command of God, not Isac. c- The Awaited Messiah is not Jesus; it is Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). d- Jesus was lifted to heavens while the one crucified was Judas Ischariot. 5- This Bible is one of the old ones. It was mentioned in the books of the Second and Third Centuries. In other words, it was recorded 200 years before Messenger Muhammad(Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). It is mentioned in Tayseer Idhar El- Hak (p.517) " if it is claimed that Muslims got rid of this gospel after the appearance of the Prophet(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), it would be nonsense because Muslims did not care about the four gospels. Therefore, it would not be logical to turn to Barnabas Gospel. Also, it is really hard to believe that Msulims changed the versions of Barnabas Gospels that existed in Christian countires, churches, and libraries back then. The changes related to the prophecies of Messenger Muhammad ( peace and blessings of Allah be u[pon him) did not affect the scriptures existing there."

9

Qur'anic Proofs of Barnabas Bible Credibility 1- We have mentioned the fact that the truth about the crucufuxion of Judas Ischariot was known six centuries at least before the discovery of Barnabas Gospel. Also, Dr. Khalil Sa'ada refers to the fact there are other gospels that confirm this fact about his crucifixion which arfe in agreement with the Noble Qur'an and Baranabas Gospel. 2- The prophecy about the coming of Prophet Muhammad( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and that he is the Awaited Messiah. The Qur'an states: "Those to whom We gave the Scripture (Jews and Christians) recognise him (Muhammad SAW or the Ka'bah at Makkah) as they recongise their sons. But verily, a party of them conceal the truth while they know it - [i.e. the qualities of Muhammad SAW which are written in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)].” (Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2:146). It is also narrated that Omar Ibn El Khattab once asked Abduallah Ibn Salam, a Jewish : “Do you know Muhammad as much as you know your own son?”. The latter replied: “I know him even better. The Honest (trustworthy) descended from Heaven to the Honest (trustworthy) on earth by his quality, so I recognized him. I do not doubt his being a prophet. As for my son, I can not tell what his mother might have done”. (Ibn Katheer: part I). Moreover, Jesus’ prophecy about Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and his name “Ahmad” as revealed in the holy verse “… and giving glad tidings of a messenger to come after me whose name shall be Ahmad” ( Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 61:6) was known to some Christians who lived during the time of prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Otherwise, they would have defied it then. Furthermore, the word “periclotus”, given by Christ as glad tidings to his followers, proved later to mean the praised one (Muhammad or Ahmad) 3- Ceil mentions in his introduction to the translation of the meaning of the Qur'an a prophecy about the coming of Prophet Muhammad(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in the Bible of Barnabas about the saying of Jesus:" Get acquainted -Barnabas- that God punishes for the sin even if it is a small one because God does not like sins. When my mother and disciples had loved me for the sake of the worldly life, Allah became angry and willed- through his justice- to punish them in this life for this offensive creed so that they are saved from -fire. Eventhough I am innocent, when some people had called me God or Son of God, God hated this saying of them and his will ruled that do not laugh at me or mock me on the Day of Judgement, so He decided that mocking takes place in this worldly

10 life When Judas is crucified and everyone thinks I am on the cross. Nevertheless, this mockery shall remain until Muhammad, the Messenger of God, comes. When he comes to life, this doubt shall vanish and the mistake will be cleared." (This text is mentioned in Dr. Khalil Sa'da's translation p. 1206).

11 Barnabas Bible and the Galatians The New Testament includes the four Gospels authenticated by the clerical synods: the , the , the , and the . Next to these comes Acts, which is supposed to narrate what the apostles did after the resurrection of Christ. However, most of this book is dedicated to the works of Paul and Barnabas only. Then comes the Messages sent by Paul or others to some countries. Among these messages is the one sent by Paul to Galatia. This message includes a response to what is mentioned in the ; which in turn, confirms the existence of this Gospel back then. In the beginning, Jerusalem Church sent Barnabas to Antioch to preach. Then, he brought Paul to Antioch to help him with preaching. They also shared preaching in other cities. According to Acts 15, Paul and Barnabas quarreled about who would accompany them on their journey. Barnabas wanted John, who is known as Mark, to accompany them, while Paul did not want him to do so. So, they disputed and each went on his own way. Barnabas took Mark and headed for Cyprus. Paul, on the other hand, chose and went to Syria. Paul and Barnabas never met after the quarrel. After passing Galatia, Paul and his companion were prevented by the Holy Ghost from preaching in Asia. (It should be noted here that Galatia is in Asia). One may wonder here how would both preachers have such a dispute over a companion after all the co-operation between them, especially when they were on their way to continue their missionary?! Or was there another reason each of whom mentioned individually: Barnabas in his gospel and Paul in his Message to the Galatians?! . How come then there is a message to the people of Galatia while he was prevented from preaching there?! Considering things the way they are in Acts would mean that: First: There is a certain fact that the writer of Acts wanted to hide that the dispute between Paul and Barnabas took place in Galatia, or why then would Paul criticize Barnabas in Galatia when they actually had left each other long before that. Second: The dispute between Barnabas and Paul was because each of whom wanted a different companion and that does not mean attacking each other or ending up with a quarrel. Third: It is mentioned in Acts that the Holy Ghost prevented the revelation in Asia, including Galatia, then how come Paul addressed his message to the people of this city?! Actually, all the previously mentioned shows that there was a dispute

12 between Paul and Barnabas concerning the four issues mentioned in the Gospel of Barnabas to which Paul had responded in his message to the Galatians. Meanwhile, the author of Acts wanted to hide this fact by saying that the Holy Ghost prevented the revelation in Asia, including Galatia. In order to completely hide this fact, those who determine Paul’s route during his journeys did not include Galatia in it. Here is a map for the first and second journeys showing that Paul’s route did not include Galatia.

13

These charts are taken from the Holy Bible printed in Egypt Press under the number 977- 230-270-5, second version, first edition. The issues mentioned in the Gospel of Barnabas to which Paul had responded: Galatia starts by Paul's saying: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ” (Galatians:1:6-10). He then said, “that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that we should remember the

14 poor; the same which I also was forward to do. But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation”. (Galatians: 2:9-13). In chapter 3 he said: “ O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? “(Galatians: 3:1). Then, in the fourth chapter, he says: Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham11 had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the ) other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which engendereth to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as5 then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. “(Galatians: 4:21-31). As for the fifth chapter, it says: “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” (Galatians: 5:2) Obviously, the previous texts tackled the following issues: 1- Reproaching the Galatians because they converted from the Gospel of Christ, the one preached by Paul, to another Gospel… which proves that there was another gospel to which Paul was responding. Then comes his attacking Peter and Barnabas and his saying that the latter followed their hypocrisy, as a proof that the other gospel is the Gospel of Barnabas. Moreover, according to the route mentioned in Acts, Barnabas was not in Galatia which confirms the fallacy of the points mentioned in Acts. 2- The second dispute was over the fact that Paul made Jesus a god and makes himself a slave to Jesus while people refuse this. Who are these people? Are not they the disciples of Jesus? 3- Barnabas said in the beginning of his gospel:" Barnabas, Jesus Nazarene's apostle, wishes you all, people on Earth, peace and console. Dear people, God The Great has sent His prophet Jesus as a mercy with guidance and

15 signs to correct Satan's misguidance in the name of piety: spreading highly atheist teachings, dubbing Jesus the son of God, refraining from circumcision which God has always called for and legalizing defile meat. Those are Satan's followers among whom is as Paul about whom I talk with the utmost sorrow and who is the reason why I am writing the truth I have seen and heard while being with Jesus to be guided and escape Satan's deception and God's hell. So, beware those who spread any teachings incompatible with what I told you so that you would survive. May God be with you and protect you from Satan and all his evils, Amen" 4- If we add up to Paul's alleged vision hiss saying: "….I did not consult any man. Nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately to Arabia and later returned to Damascus. Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter." (Galatians 1:16-18), and also his say: "Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas.." (Galatians 2:1), we would know that Paul's teachings are but his own words and taken neither from Jesus nor from his apostles. 5- The third point of dispute is that the son whom Abraham was willing to sacrifice was actually Ishmael not Isaac and that the foretold Messiah is not Jesus but Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Paul had tackled this issue in (Galatians 4/ 21:31) as mentioned before. The question now is: What's the reason of including this story with such magnitude and exaggeration? The most prominent part of this story is his attack on those who wanted to follow the revelation (which came down upon them and him) and the Jews twisted the facts so that the one meant becomes Isaac not Ishmael. Here, Paul's attack on those people shows that they were telling the truth about the person sacrificed, being Ishmael not Isaac, and about the awaited Messiah being Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), or else, what would be the reason behind reporting the story of Hagar and Sarah in his message to the Galatians and attacking Hagar and her offspring? Paul –in his preaching- or rather, his misguidance- claims equality between the Israelites and the other nations in accepting the "grace" of Christ's crucifixion. Then, why would he attack Hagar and her offspring saying that "this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia." Whereas " But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. "? Then he digresses: (But what the book says is: Send away the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman is not to inherit as the son of the freewoman. Then brothers, we are the sons of the freewoman, not the bondwoman.) First, had they been the words of Sarah as the book says, that wouldn't have been considered revelation anyway. Nevertheless, doesn't the offspring of the bondwoman

16 belong also that of Abraham? So it should be better than other nations at least in that respect. Accordingly, if he was the one carrying glad tidings to nations, why didn't he include Hagar and her offspring among them? In fact, that matter, for both Paul and the Jews –to whom he belongs- is too dangerous to neglect especially because of his malice and the Jews' knowing that the awaited Messiah is the offspring of Hagar. The Jewish conspiracy this time against Christianity was embodied in Paul's attempts to distort Christianity by getting rid of the truth about Ishmael and that the Messiah is his offspring. Maybe that's the reason why the Jews asked for crucifying Christ when he told them that the awaited Messiah is Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). (See the chapter: The awaited Messiah is Muhammad). 6- The fourth point of dispute is about circumcision which the latter claimed unnecessary or rather refused. 7- The fifth point of dispute between Barnabas and Paul is the issue of crucifixion. Barnabas believes that Jesus was not crucified, but Judas was; he was made to appear like Jesus, captured, humiliated, tried and crucified. Jesus was not crucified, but was raised up to God. Paul's response to this dispute was very clear in his message to the Galatians and was violent, exaggerated and fanatic as well; he believed that the issue of crucifixion is the core of the faith he preaches and once it collapses, the whole Christian creed collapses as well. The nullity of the doctrine of crucifixion has already been clarified (there is a chapter compiled under that thesis), but what is more important now is how Paul responded to Barnabas regarding that issue in (Galatians 3:1). He says: "You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." Isn't it clear now after his violent description of the Galatians as foolish and bewitched that the Bible he attacked earlier revealed to the Galatians that Jesus was not crucified and they believed in that?! Surprisingly, moreover, Paul went too far telling them that Jesus' crucifixion occurred in front of their eyes. So now where is that place –Galatia- in Turkey recently? How far it is from Jerusalem where the crucifixion of Christ actually took place! All the above mentioned confirms that Jesus was not crucified and shows the validity of Barnabas' Bible with all the facts that came in it, those which made Paul reply. And the act of replying proves the existence of Barnabas' Bible from the early days of Christianity.

17

Judas the Crucified: Historical Statement A lot of explanatory books interpret the Qur'anic verse: "but a resemblance of him was presented to them..", using a lot of explanations which never came in neither the Qur'an nor the prophet's Sunna; that's why these are considered attempts from the compilers to clarify how this resemblance was presented. Also, some of these attempts were made by some Christians who either embraced Islam afterwards or not. 1- Among the attempts made to explain this resemblance is that of Imam Al- Tabari, died in the 9th century, "Some Christians claim that Youdes Zachariah Yota is the one who was likened for them thus was crucified. So he said: 'I am not him; I am the one who helped you seize him.'". 2- Al-Zamakhshari, died in the 11th century, however, explained it saying: (It was said that a man was hypocrite to Jesus, and when the latter was to be killed, that hypocrite offered to show them the way to capture Jesus. So he went to Jesus' house but was likened to Jesus and captured instead. People then had a dispute and asked: "if that's Jesus, then where is our companion. And if that's our companion, then where is Jesus?" 3- Then Ibn Katheer,died in the 13th century, explained the same verse saying: "Some Christians believe that Youdes Zachariah Youhana, Judas, was the one made to appear like Jesus, so they crucified him while he was screaming: "I am not him; I am the one who lead you to him." All these explanations were mentioned by Christians starting from the 9th until the 13th century and all of them prove that the one crucified was Judas the traitor. In addition, all these explanations had appeared before Barnabas' gospel, the one stating that Judah was the one crucified, came out to light in 1709 – at the beginning of the 18th century. However, some scientists believe that the first version of Barnabas' Bible dates back to the middle of the 15th century or the 16th century. Hence, comparing the previous dates will make it clear that some Christians since the 9th century did believe that the one crucified was Judas the traitor and that happened at least 6 centuries before the appearance of Barnabas' Bible. That means that crucifying Judas was already known along with those facts about Judah's resemblance to Jesus, and again that confirms the existence of Barnabas' Bible and other Bibles as well stating Judah's crucifixion.

18

The Second chapter How and Why He was Tried and Crucified

- The Trial of Judas The Traitor. - The Incidents of the Arrest. - The Incidents of the Trial. - The Reasons.

19

The Second chapter How and Why He was Tried and Crucified The Trial of Judas Ischariot The Trial of Judas First of all, it is worthy mentioning that Judas, since the arrest of the one to be crucified, trial and crucifixion, disappeared totally from the city. That incident was justified as: he regretted what he did, so he went to the temple, gave the bribe (thirty pieces of ) and then hung himself. Another story says that he fell and "all his intestines spilled out." From the texts that narrate, one that says: "Early in the morning, all the chief and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death. They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor. When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. "I have sinned", he said, "For I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. That' is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Then what was spoken by the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel, and they used them to buy the potter's field, as the Lord commanded me." Matthew (27/1-10) Another text in (Acts) says: "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judah, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus- he was one of our number and shared in this ministry." "With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language , that is Field of Blood." "For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms, 'May his place be destroyed; let there be no one to dwell in it,' and, 'May another take his place of leadership'(1/16-20) In both texts, there is a feigned excuse for the disappearance of Judas; that's why the two prove to be inconsistent. By means of comparison between the two texts, it would be clear that in Matthew, Judas regretted and returned the thirty

20 silver coins to the chief priests and the elders, the incident which was not mentioned at all in Acts, also in Matthew Judas was said to have thrown the silver in the temple and left. Though in Acts, Judas brought a field as a reward for his wickedness, in Matthew it was mentioned that the chief priests were the ones who bought the potter's field. Even in the way he died, still the difference goes on between the two texts: in Matthew he hanged himself, whereas in Acts he fell and "his intestines spilled out." Judas the traitor disappeared and contradictory stories were made up to justify his disappearance while at that time he was the one sued in front of the chief priests; the situation which ended with his crucifixion.

The incidents of arresting the one to be crucified "Then he returned to his disciples and said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting? Look, the hour is near, and the is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us go! Here comes my betrayer!" While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people. Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I is the man; arrest him." Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Greetings, Rabbi!" and kissed him. Jesus replied, "Friends, do what you came for." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him." (:45-50) However, Luke (21:37-38) narrates: "Each day Jesus was teaching at the temple, and each evening he went out to spend the night on the hill called the Mount of Olives, and all the people came early in the morning to hear him at the temple." begins with: "Now the Feast of unleavened bread, called the , was approaching, and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some way to get rid of Jesus, for they were afraid of the people. Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus. They were delighted and agreed to give him money. He consented, and watched for an opportunity to hand Jesus over to them when no crowd was present." (22:1-6).Later in the same chapter: "While he (Jesus) was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, but Jesus asked him, "Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?" When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should

21 we strike with our swords?" And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him. Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour-when darkness reigns." (Luke:22:47-53) Now in (John): (When he had finished praying, Jesus left with his disciples and crossed the Kidron Valley. On the other side there was an olive grove, and he and his disciples went into it. Now, Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. So Judas came to the grove, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and . They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons. Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, "Who is it you want?" "Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "I am he," Jesus said. "And Judas the traitor was standing there with them. When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, "Who is it you want?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." "I told you that I am he," Jesus answered. "If you are looking for me, then let these men go." (John: 18:1-8) And in the same chapter: "Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him and brought him first to " Viewing these stories of arresting Jesus (as Bibles claim) one can find it impossible to put these facts together or see any resemblance. It's worth saying here that the aim now is not to highlight differences and distortion in the Old and New Testaments, as it is a matter of fact by now, but the aim is to show that one story was deliberately distorted to indicate that Jesus was the one sued and crucified not Judas. And that is all consistent as Luke then Matthew and Mark compiled their Bibles with the help of Paul's followers not the help of Jesus' apostles.

Here is the analysis of the previous stories: First: It is impossible for the chief priests and the Pharisees not to recognize Jesus after all his deeds: as bringing the dead to life, healing the ill, feeding five thousand with some bread and fish in addition to his constant teaching in the temple in front of the Jews, priests, Pharisees and others. And according to Luke's Bible (22:53), Jesus said to them: "Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me." Also, as mentioned in (Luke 37) "Each day Jesus was teaching at the temple, and each evening he went out to

22 spend the night on the hill called the Mount of Olives, and all the people came early in the morning to hear him at the temple." So, after all this, do the chief priests still need to be guided to Jesus by Judas' kiss to him? Then by taking a look at verse 19 in Luke (20) which says that the chief priests wanted to arrest him so they watched him and sent spies seemingly pious. From all the previously mentioned facts, it can be concluded that Jesus did not use to sleep in the town but in the Mount of Olives; away from people, in a place not known for the priests or for the Pharisees. Thus, Judas' betrayal was not by making them recognize Jesus with the kiss but was to show them his place (Luke 22/1:6). That's because they didn't know the place while he did since it was the place where Jesus met his disciples (:2). And it seems that the place was dark and that's why they took torches and lanterns with them (John 18:3). Judah's treachery lies in getting them to know the place where Jesus resides; there was no kiss whatsoever. When they entered, Judah was made to appear like Jesus, consequently, he was arrested, tried and crucified. The issue of the kiss was mentioned to allegedly prove that Jesus was the one crucified; Judah remained and Jesus was arrested. And in order to fake this incident, a story of Judah's death is made up. He died and only Jesus remained to meet his doom embodied in ten horrendous crimes each of which is worse than the other. There is no problem whatsoever to have had the son of God crucified and insulted in a way that doesn't suit his ; all is for the sake of the doctrines of Crucifixion and Redemption. According to the incidents mentioned in the four gospels, Christ was stripped of his clothes, of which every soldier took his share, (:24). This means that Christ was naked when crucified. Was that meant to be a public scandal??!! May be the act of stripping in itself is enough to prove that the one crucified is Judah, the one who is worthy of such a flagrant insult. Such a fact can not be accepted by Paul and his disciples. There was only one person crucified and Judah disappeared completely, so a story is contrived, the way previously shown, to justify his disappearance.

The Trial "Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, and said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? But Jesus held his peace.

23 And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death." (Matthew 26: 59-66) In , "they led the Christ away, and delivered him to the governor. And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest. And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly." Mark's narration almost reconciles with that of Matthew until the part in which the chief priest asked". According to Luke (22:66), the story goes like, "And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. And they said, what need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth." And the whole multitude of them arose, and led him unto Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King. And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it. Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man. And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place. When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilaean. And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time. And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him. Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him. And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate. And the

24 same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves. And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him: No, nor yet Herod: for I sent you to him; and, lo, nothing worthy of death is done unto him. I will therefore chastise him, and release him." (:1-6) As for the story cited in John, it is completely different from the stories narrated in Matthew's, Mark's, and Luke's. According to John (18:1:9), "When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples. And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples. Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. " In the same chapter(John 18:12-14), "Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him, And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to , which was the high priest that same year. Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people." "The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me? Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest." John(18:19-24) In the same chapter, "Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas. Pilate then went out unto them, and said, what accusation bring ye against this man? They answered and said unto him, if he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee (Notice

25 that they did not charge him with or accuse him of any crimes). Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?" "Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe, And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands. Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, ! When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid; And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer. Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I

26 crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away." John (19:1-16) After presenting the story of Jesus' trial the way it is mentioned in the four gospels, and after showing the obvious discrepancy between what is mentioned in the gospels of Luke, Matthew and Mark on the one hand and that of John on the other, one can be sure of the fact that these gospels are indeed fabrications contrived according to the viewpoints of those who wrote them. Only God knows what was written in those gospels denounced by the clerical synod including that of Barnabas, which was proven to be authentic according to what was mentioned in Paul's message to the Galatians. The following is an examination of what was mentioned in the four gospels in order to show that the one crucified is Judah, not Jesus. According to the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, the first thing to be noticed when it comes to the answers of the crucified is that he was saying "Ye say", for, when he was tried, the archbishops asked "Art thou the Christ? Tell us. And he said unto them, if I tell you, ye will not believe: and if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go." "Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am." Luke's version along with the aforementioned answers complement what was mentioned in Barnabas's gospel- denounced by the majority of Christians, stating that the one crucified before the archbishops was Judah the traitor. According to Luke, he says, in response to their question "Ye say that I am." Thus, it's understandable that the archbishops insisted that he, Judah, was Jesus, despite the former's insistence that he is not. Such an answer is actually a denial of what is implied in the question "And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it." It's also obvious that Jesus did not claim to be the king of the Jews, so "Ye say" is also a denial of that. The same goes for each time the crucified says" Ye say". It's also worth mentioning that Jesus always "showed himself" without being asked to, as stated in John that he was once talking to " a woman of Samaria"; "The woman saith unto him, I know that Messiah cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.";"Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he." So, if Jesus did that before, why would not he in a situation regarded as a core belief for those who uphold the doctrines of crucifixion and redemption?!! (NB. We are only analyzing what is narrated in the four gospels to refute the allegations of their writers, as we surely believe that the coming Messiah is Muhammad- peace and blessings be upon him.) As for the Gospel of John, there is no doubt that it was written after the

27 clerical synod had settled on the desired creeds. It was the only gospel to start with "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." to include the sentence " God So Loved the World" and to mention resurrecting Lazarus. Moreover, it was the gospel that leveled Cai'aphas, the high priest who tried the one crucified, to the status of a prophet. " And one of them, named Cai'aphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, (i.e the Pharisees) Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that he should also gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad." (:49-52) Therefore, if Cai'aphas did believe in such issues of crucifixion and redemption, why did he try the crucified and allow his insult?? Obviously, the doctrines of crucifixion and redemption appeared after Jesus was raised to heaven, for his disciples didn’t know anything about such doctrines before. And one may wonder, provided that such creeds were core Christian beliefs, why did not Jesus expound on them given they are the most fundamental parts of his message to this universe? How is this possible when his disciples, those who are supposed to spread his message after him, did not know anything about them?! According to the gospels, after the burial, some women went to the grave with some sweet spices on Sunday. This is the first evidence they knew nothing about resurrection. In fact, when they told the apostles about the Christ's resurrection, their "words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass." Luke [24:11-12] "And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.", Luke [24:37] "For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead," John [20:9] All these aforementioned texts are satisfactory evidence that the disciples did not know anything about resurrection. Is it possible that the crucified, alleged to be Jesus Christ, let his disciples run into confusion knowing nothing neither about their main belief nor the most important events for which he was mainly sent while high priest Caiaphas knew all that?! All what is mentioned in the gospels about the Christ's crucifixion and resurrection which his disciples knew nothing about, not to mention that it is said that after his resurrection, the Christ taught his disciples about his core belief, is fabricated and contrived in order to validate and corroborate the

28 doctrines of crucifixion and redemption. According to Mark [9/30] and [10/32], he told them about his death and resurrection. However, they knew nothing about that according to Luke and John. Each one wrote what occurred to him leading to such contradictions and discrepancies. Allah says in His Noble Quran, "Do they not consider the Quran? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy." (Meaning of the Noble Quran 4:82) As for the alleged prophecies about crucifixion and the trial, the one crucified and tried was Judas Iscariot while Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him) was rescued by Allah according to Psalm 109. Did these prophecies include how the crucified had been insulted before crucifixion?! Was it mentioned that the Son of God who, according to the Christian beliefs, is the Word of God from Whom he cannot split was to be insulted?!(Exalted be He)

When we move away from Jesus Christ's disciples who were ignorant of crucifixion and resurrection to his immediate family, we find out that: First: His Mother: An angel said to his Virgin Mother Mary, bringing the glad tidings of his birth, "And, beholds, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever" Luke [1/32]. Did Mary discern after receiving this piece of glad tidings that her son was to be arrested, insulted, and crucified?! Second: Zachariah (Peace be upon him): In Luke's gospel, it is related that Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost after his son had been delivered, and he prophesied saying," Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us" Luke [1/67]. According to Zacharias' words, it is crystal clear that redemption means being saved from enemies and those who hold hatred in their hearts. They do not have any reference to the alleged crucifixion and redemption doctrines. This is a further emphasis that the word redemption refers to redeeming the people of Israel from their enemies, not redeeming mankind from their sins. This is what two apostles who were heading to a village called Emmaus said three days after crucifixion. They told him, though they did not know him, that he was to redeem Israel, L:uke [24/21]. Third: His brethren: In John(7: 3-5), it is related that " His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see

29 the works that thou doest…for neither did his brethren believe in him." Given the fact that the aforementioned are Jesus' relatives, how is it possible then that none of them knew of the alleged crucifixion or resurrection? Reaching this point, two issues should be borne in mind. First, both prophecies, whether the one mentioned by to Virgin Mary that "the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David", or the other by Zechari'ah that " Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; as he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: that we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us" were not made manifest neither in John the Baptist, who was killed and his head was brought "in a charger" for Hero'di-as' daughter (:10), nor in Jesus, who was allegedly crucified. If these prophecies were not realized, how could a man believe that the Old Testament is full of prophecies about what would happen to Christ?! Or is it true that Christians distorted the Old Testament to secure their false allegations concerning Christ? Second, concerning Jesus' "brethren", one may ask: did Jesus have siblings? Some Christian authors point out that Jesus had no "brethren" whatsoever and that the word resembles -in meaning, what was mentioned in (Genesis 13:7) " and there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram's cattle and the herdmen of Lot's cattle: and the Canaanite and the Per'izzite dwelt then in the land. And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren." It's worth mentioning here that despite the fact that they are relatives, Abram and Lot are not actual "brethren". Therefore, according to those authors, the word "brethren" mentioned in the four gospels, the way previously shown, doesn't entail actual brotherhood. Here are some texts from the gospels left for the reader to ponder and analyze: 1- The previously highlighted text showing how his "brethren" didn't believe in him. 2- "While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." (/46:50) This text, along with others in (/19:20) and (:33), also implies that his "brethren" didn't believe in him

30 3- It was also mentioned in Matthew (13:54) that " And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? And his brethren, James, and , and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?" Is it logical then to interpret the word "brethren" the way Abram used to address Lot? "When as his mother Mary was espoused to , before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." So, he "knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."(/20:25) Some texts in the New Testament assert that Jesus had actual brothers. If this turned out to be true, a multitude of Christian doctrines would need to be revised such as those concerned with Virgin Mary, whether those alleged "brethren" are gods or half gods, the influence of something as such on the concept of Trinity and the doctrines of crucifixion and redemption………..etc.

The Causes of Crucifixion Provided that Jesus was crucified, what was the reason behind his crucifixion? One of the main reasons why Jesus was crucified was that he allegedly claimed to be the son of God. "The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken." (/30:35) Paradoxically, Jesus always referred to himself as the son of man. It was also claimed that he wanted to be a king. However, there is no ground for such a claim in all the gospels, for when Pilate asked him" Art thou the King of the Jews?", he answered, "My kingdom is not of this world." Moreover, when the Pharisees "took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk", "they sent out unto him their disciples with the Hero'di-ans, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. Tell us therefore, What thinkest

31 thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." (/17:21) This situation indicates how cautious Jesus was not to claim kingship. What can be assured is that the reason why the Jews wanted to get rid of Jesus and have him crucified is the conversation he had with the Pharisees in which Jesus denied being the foretold Messiah as well as the fact that the coming Messiah is neither the son of David nor one of his descendants. This was also the reason impelling Paul to fabricate the story of seeing Jesus on his way to Damascus and, consequently, call for the creeds of crucifixion and redemption in his gospel. He claims that it was only revealed to him, and that's why Jesus' disciples knew of it three years later. The aforementioned conversation also explains why the priests and the Jews cried out before Pilate "crucify him". Had those who followed and believed in Jesus attended-such as the five thousand he fed (Matthew 14:21), those who listened to his preaching in the synagogue, or those who witnessed his entry to Jerusalem (:13), they would have definitely outnumbered those who demanded his crucifixion, for they weren't preoccupied with the idea of the coming Messiah and whether he is the son of David or not. It was actually a main concern to the fanatic priests, Pharisees and Jews, who couldn't bear the thought that the coming Messiah is a descendant of Ishmael. That's what made Paul fabricate the story of seeing Jesus to prevent the fact that the Messiah isn't a descendant of David from spreading around. He was the right man for the job; a man who follows the motto 'the end justifies the means', no matter how or what this method is. For once he went to a city called Phil'ippi, along with Silas, but the people of the city "caught Paul and Silas, and drew them into the market place unto the rulers, and brought them to the magistrates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city, and teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans. And the multitude rose up together against them; and the magistrates rent off their clothes, and commanded to beat them. And when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, charging the jailer to keep them safely." Then, "The magistrates have sent to let" them "go", But Paul said unto them, They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; and now do they thrust us out privily? nay verily; but let them come themselves and fetch us out. And the sergeants told these words unto the magistrates: and they feared, when they heard that they were Romans." (Acts 16) It was also mentioned in (Acts 21:22) that after he was arrested by the Jews for some reasons " he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying, I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cili'cia." Then, the chief captain

32 commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him. And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?" In (Acts 23) he insulted "the chief priest" as "the high priest Anani'as commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth. Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?" "Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people. But when Paul perceived that the one part were , and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both. And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle." He lies for the sake of his interest; he is once Roman, then Jewish and again Roman then a Pharisee!! These situations are indicative of the nature of the character who established Christianity among pagan circles and helped promote their idolatry in the name of Christianity. It might be argued here that there is no difference between being one of the Jews or the Pharisees, for the latter are regarded as Jews. However, what is stressed here is the course of action he used to safeguard his interest. A further example supporting the abovementioned is his reaction to the Jews' complaint saying that he never insulted the Jews, the synagogue nor Caesar though he once declared in his message to the Galatians (3:10) " For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." Another when he said in his message to the Corinthians (9: 20) "And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some."

That is Paul, a chameleon that is capable of faking different identities to stabilize pagan doctrines and creeds that eventually predominated and

33 prevailed over Christianity; all for the sake of keeping the fact that the coming Messiah is a descendant of Ishmael, not of David, from spreading around. Allah decribes them as:" How bad is that for which they have sold their ownselves, that they should disbelieve in that which Allah has revealed (the Quran), grudging that Allah should reveal of His Grace unto whom He will of His slaves. So they have drawn on themselves wrath upon wrath. And for the disbelievers, there is disgracing torment."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2:90). They have disbelieved in Muhammad(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) beforer his coming and conspired against him to prevent the prophecy from being delivered to the people in order to stop against the people's faith in this message. However, Allah will not allow except that His Light should be perfected even though the Kafirun (disbelievers) hate.

34

The Third Chapter

- The Awaited Messiah is Muhammad(Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). - The Nullity of the Creed of Crucifixion and Redemption. - The Descendance of Jesus (Peace be upon him).

35

Explaining That the Messiah or the Awaited Maseeh is Muhammad  Among the prophesies mentioned in the Old testament more than once, and which is considered by both the Jews and the Christians the focus of all Old Testament prophesies, is that foretelling the upcoming of the awaited Messiah (Maseeh). The Messiah here is not a name for a specific person such as (Jesus son of Mary, for instance), but a reference to the one God rubbed with oil. All prophets foretold about his coming. Christians, however, claim the he is Jesus Christ . It is mentioned that this prophet will sit on the right hand of the Lord. The Jews believed that he would be of the descendants of David . Nevertheless, some texts were mentioned in the Christian gospels in Luke(20:41), Mark(12:35), and Matthew(22:41-46): "Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, “What do you think of the Christ ( The Messiah)? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “Of David." He said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet?’ “If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?" No one was able to answer him a word, neither dared any man from that day forth ask him any more questions." This conversation is of extreme importance, as it proves that all the Jews' claims are wrong (about the awaited Messiah); they thought he was of the offspring of David , but Jesus told them that David called him Lord or "my Lord" , as the quotation states, so how can he be his son while David called him 'my Lord' ?! This text, on the other hand, proves that the Christians' claims were also wrong, because the Christians believe that the one meant in the text is Jesus because he is of the offspring of David. But David can not call Jesus "Lord" or "my Lord" simply because Jesus is of his offspring. That is why Barnabas (one of Jesus' disciples, and who has a gospel carrying his name, and whom the Christians never admit because it proves that Jesus is only a messenger of Allah) stressed that the Awaited Messiah is of the offspring of Ishmael, and that is prophet Muhammad (Ahmad) . Christians can not have the right to claim that Jesus, son of Mary, is the one meant by the prophesy of the Old Testament, for he is, as mentioned before, the offspring of David. Moreover, no one can argue that what is meant is the Divine part of Jesus that is not the offspring of humans, and therefore David called it

36 "Lord". It is unlikely to claim that, for the Christian scholars themselves, explaining the first word "Lord" in "Lord said to my Lord", said it meant God ; the second "Lord" , however, is believed to be the human part of Jesus, which is the offspring of David, and therefore he (Jesus son of Mary) cannot be the Messiah. No one could longer claim that the one sitting on the right hand of God is Jesus son of Mary, neither by his human nature (for it is the offspring of David and Jesus denied the Messiah to be so), nor his divine nature (for that backs up polytheism). Moreover, we would rather believe, like Barnabas, that the Awaited Messaih is the offspring of Ishmael , and that he is Muhammad  ; this supports what is recorded in Genesis in the Old testament that the Awaited Messiah is not the offspring of Judah son of Israel. It is recorded in Genesis: (49/10),: (The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come, and the gathering of the people). Thus, we can conclude that after the last prophet of Judah's offspring, then Shiloh will come ( Shiloh is the awaited Messiah) , as the text says, and Shiloh is not the offspring of Judah. All prophets, from Moses to Jesus the son of Mary are the offspring of Judah, also the prophets who did not come from the offspring of Judah had never claimed to be the Awaited Messiah including Jesus the son of Mary according to the above text, also Jesus the son of Mary was the last prophet from the offspring of Judah. That is why Barnabas assured that the awaited Messiah is from Ishmael's offspring and that is Muhammad  . Paul, the Jew and the great enemy of Christianity who only converted to Christianity to destroy the from inside, came with a hollow message to the Christians –the one to the Galatians. In his message, Paul violently attacked Barnabas and his Gospel. That sufficiently proves the existence of Barnabas' Gospel, yet today's Christians deny such a fact (please go through what has been mentioned above about the validity of Barnabas Gospel). It is worth mentioning here that the people of the Book (the Jews and the Christians) talk about the Awaited Messiah, they believe that someone will precede the Messiah and will bring the glad tidings of his coming, as the Old Testament stated that Elijah (Elias)  will come before the Messiah in Malachi (4:5) " See, I will send you the prophet Elijah " So Elijah will be that person. Jews claim that God elevated Elijah to Heaven alive when the latter's enemies tried to kill him. Then, in what sense would Elijah come before the

37 Awaited Messiah? We say that this person who will come before the Messiah will be a prophet having the spirit and the strength of Elijah or will be like him. Christians believe that Elijah is John the Baptist i.e. prophet Yahia  in order to justify their claim that the Awaited Messiah is Jesus Christ himself. So The Christians claimed that Elijah who will come before Awaited Messiah is John the Baptist and the awaited Messiah is Jesus Christ. We believe that this is a complete fabrication and a vain attempt to prove this claim. It is alleged in some texts of the gospel that Elijah is John the Baptist as in Mathew (17:10-11): "And his disciples asked him, saying, why then say the scribes that Elijah must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elijah truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elijah has come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spoke unto them of John the Baptist." According to this text, the Disciples spontaneously understood that Christ was talking about John the Baptist without mentioning his name. There is another text preceding this one which casts doubts on the whole text. In verse 11 in the same book there is a text in which Christ says that John the Baptist is Elijah whose coming is foretold before the coming of the Awaited Messiah. The fabrication here is very clear because if Christ had already told the Disciples that John is Elijah in verse 11, why would they ask him about Elijah again in verse 17?!! This raises doubts about the truthfulness of one or both of these stories. The story of Christ saying that John is Elijah is more doubtful because according to the stories of some gospels, John himself denied being Elijah:" And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, who are you? And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, what then? Are you Elijah? And he said, I am not. Are you that Prophet? And he answered, no. Then said they unto him, who are you? That we may give an answer to them that sent us. What say you of yourself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Isaiah. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, why do you baptize then, if you are not that Christ, nor Elijah, neither that Prophet?" John (1:19-25). Thus John the Baptist denied this claim that he is Elijah, and John the Baptist was the greatest prophet sent to the Israelis. How come then his words contradict with what Jesus said that John the Baptist is Elijah who will come before the Awaited Messiah.?! We see that the stories that announced that John the Baptist is Elijah were fabricated and that the gospel's writers: Mathew, Luke and Mark knew that

38 Elijah must precede the Messiah. As for John who recorded the fourth gospel, presumably he knew nothing about this and accordingly he mentioned John's denial of being Elijah who will come before the awaited Messiah. We believe that John the Baptist is not Elijah for several reasons: 1-If John the Baptist was the greatest prophet sent to the Jews, he would certainly know if he was Elijah or not. The prophecy stated that Zechariah  would have a son named John the Baptist:" For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." Luke (1:15-17). According to this text, it is clear that John the Baptist was a great prophet before the Lord. Moreover, he was filled through his mother's womb from the Holy Spirit. Doesn't he know if he was Elijah or not ?! Does not this mean that he was a God because he was filled with the Holy Ghost, the third divine figure for Christians?!!! What matters here is that the text signifies that John the Baptist is represented before the people with Elijah's spirit and strength and this contradicts with John the Baptist's own confession. 2- Elijah's descriptions and miracles were mentioned in the Old Testament, and they do not apply to John the Baptist (Yahia)  . Some of these descriptions were mentioned in I Kings: a- It is he who ordered rain to fall. 17/1 b- Crows served him food. 17/6 c- Food and oil were blessed for a long time. 17:8-16 d- He resurrected the dead. 17/22 e- He ate a meal that would make him strong enough to walk for forty days and forty nights. 19/8 Some of his miracles were also mentioned in II Kings book: a- Fifty soldiers arrested him, so he prayed to God causing a fire to breakout and kill them and another fifty people (1:12) b- While he was walking in Jordan's river after splitting it with a hit, there came a fire craft pulled by fire horses which elevated Elijah to Heavens during the storm. (2:11) We wonder if John the Baptist possessed any of these miracles? The answer is absolutely in the negative. It has never been narrated that John the Baptist had such miracles and this is agreed upon by Jews, Christians and Muslims. Jews

39 and Christians admit that John the Baptist had no miracles. In addition, Elijah was not arrested or killed. In fact, he killed the soldiers and was elevated to Heavens during the storm. On the other hand, John the Baptist was arrested, murdered and his head was cut off and presented on a plate to "Herod" the dancer as stated in Mathew (14:11). If these descriptions and miracles did not apply to John the Baptist, who would they apply to? Who is Elijah who brings the glad tidings of the coming of the Awaited Messiah? It is believed that all or most of the descriptions said to be of Elijah apply to Jesus Christ the son of Mary. Jesus Christ was the one who had miracles like resurrecting the dead and blessing the food which were attributed to Elijah. He was the one who fasted for forty days and then became hungry (as stated in the Bible) and he was to be arrested and crucified according to the stories of the gospels. The Qura'nic truth states that Allah saved Jesus by elevating him to Heavens and making one of his enemies look exactly like him to be crucified instead of him. This Qura'nic description is harmonious with the description Elijah mentioned in the Old Testament: that Elijah was not arrested but a storm came to burn the soldiers and saved him by being elevated to Heavens. Consequently, a logical conclusion to this is that Jesus Christ, son of Mary, was the one who came with the spirit of Elijah to bring the glad tidings of the coming of the Awaited Messiah or the final prophet. This confirms with what is mentioned in the Noble Qur'an "And (remember) when 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), said: "O Children of Israel! I am the Messenger of Allah unto you confirming the Taurat [(Torah) which came] before me, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmed. But when he (Ahmed i.e. Muhammad SAW) came to them with clear proofs, they said: "This is plain magic.""(Interpretation of the Noble Qur'an 61:6). This in turn would prove that there is no doubt that Prophet Muhammad  is the Awaited Messiah whose coming was foretold by the sacred books of Christians and Jews. The following is a chart comparing between Elias, John the Baptist and Jesus Christ providing evidence from Christian references:

40

From Elijah John The Baptist Jesus I Kings:17 1 Rain fell upon his Never came with a Of such he has words miracle nothing (Numbers 1) 2 He went to a figs tree Crows getting him Never came with a to eat but he found no food miracle fruit, and so he (Number 6) prayed for its death 3 The blessing of food Never came with a The blessing of food and oil for a long time miracle sometimes. (8:16) 4 Resurrecting the dead Never came with a Resurrecting the dead (Number 22) miracle 5 The angel of God touches him and so he eats a meal that gave He fasted for forty Never accredited any him strength to walk days and then he was miracle for forty days and hungry forty nights (I Kings, Page 19, Number 8) II Kings 1 Fifty soldiers were According to the sent after him so he bibles in hand he was prayed and a fire came captured, been He was captured and and burnt the fifty through a trial and beheaded soldiers and another crucified. According fifty (1:12) to the Noble Qura'n, Allah saved him. 2 While walking in After he talked to his Jordan river after he captured him, and he disciples, he was split it into two, a was killed. His head elevated while they chariot pulled by fire was presented to gazed and a cloud horses came and took on a plate. took him away.

41 Elijah to heavens. Mathew (11/14) Acts (1:9) (2:11)

After this analogy is drawn, is it possible to say that John the Baptist was the one who came before the Awaited Messiah in the spirit and power of Elijah? John the Baptist (Yehia ) was never accredited any miracle, and his life was completely different from Elijah's, especially on the occasion of killing him, and presenting his head to Herod the dancer. I do not think that someone would say that John the Baptist came with the spirit and power of Elijah unless that person is a denier or an unreasonable contender. The one who came with the spirit and power of Elijah (on applying the texts of the Old and New Testaments) is Jesus Christ  who was sent to foretell the coming of the Awaited Messiah: Muhammad  .



42

Defying the Dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption Christian theology is mainly based upon the dogma of Christ's  crucifixion as a means of redemption for mankind. The second pillar of Christianity, however, is that of Trinity. That is why all Christian missionaries emit from these two spots.

The dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption for the Christians It states that when Adam  disobeyed God and ate from the forbidden tree, he and his descendants became sinners who should be punished in eternal Hell. They should be punished for the sin of their father. However, since God is the Just and Merciful, He faced a problem: for if He punished Adam and his descendants, this contradicts His being Merciful, and if He does not punish Adam, this contradicts His being Just. So God kept thinking for thousands of years till He found the following solution: To make His son, who is a God as well, be born by a woman from the descendants of Adam. Thus he became a complete human being, because she gave birth to him!! And he is a complete God, because he is the son of God!! He will be infallible, and will live for a long time with people , will be eating and drinking from what they eat and drink, and will be enjoying and suffering what they enjoy or suffer. Then his enemies will kill him very violently by crucifixion. People who are crucified are damned in the Holy Book. Thus Jesus Christ bears damn and crucifixion in order to save people. He gets humiliated, slapped, and spitted on as it is mentioned in the Holy Book!!! Anyone who does not believe in this belief is a loser, who believes in it is a winner and will enjoy being with Christ , Messengers and Saints in Heaven. That is why Christians cannot believe that Christ  was not crucified as it is mentioned in the Noble Qur’an. Instead, they started creating doubts and suspicions about the Noble Qur’an and Islam. Accordingly, it was a must to show the Christians the insincerity of their dogma of crucifixion answering the knotty questions and demolishing as well any other false issue claimed without true evidence. The Dogma of the Crucifixion and Redemption of the Indians The dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption is not a Christian invention as it is

43 an ancient belief with which pagan nations were familiar. The scholar Dwan states in his book "The Myths of Torah, and What is Equivalent for them in other Religions", pages: (181 -182) that the concept of redemption through sacrificing one of the gods is an ancient one known to the pagan Indians, and others. He then provides evidence such as that of "Krishna"; Krishna is the first son, who is the same god Vishnu who has neither a beginning nor an end. As they further claim, he pitied the earth for its heavy burden. So, he redeemed mankind sacrificing himself. Dwan mentions that Mr. Moor has portrayed "Krishna" crucified like he is portrayed in the books of the Indians: pierced- footed, pierced- handed, and with a human heart hanging over his garment (p 184). Hook states in his journey (1/326) that the pagan Indians believe in the idea the embodiment of one of the gods making a sacrifice out of himself to redeem mankind. M. William states in his book Hinduism that the pagan Indians believes in the Original Sin; it is clear in the prayers they recite which are "I am guilty, and I commit sins. I am instinctively evil since I was in the womb of my mother. So, redeem me, Oh, Savior of the sinful." (P. 36) Higin mentions that Andrade Elicrozius- who was the first European who managed to enter Tibet and Nepal - told him that the god worshipped by the people of these countries - god Andrawo- was killed by crucifixion and piercing his nails in order to save mankind from their sins, and that the picture of such crucifixion exists in their holy books. The Mexicans worshipped a crucified god whom they call the savior and the redeemer. Moreover, the inhabitants of the Yucatan worshipped a god crucified to save them from the punishment of their guilt, and they called him the son of god. A number of crosses were found with the picture of this crucified son. Indeed, there are many other shapes for that dogma that can be found in Muhammad Tahir El Taneer's The Pagan Dogmas in Christianity. In this book, the reader would find out that the mentioned dogma has its root in previous theologies such as that of the Roman, and the Indians, and that such a belief has nothing to do with Jesus Christ- peace be upon him. If you would like to approach the truth, you have only to read the Qur'an.

Criticizing the Dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption Those who believe in crucifixion and redemption think that it is based on justice and mercy. But if you think about it very carefully, you will find that it has nothing to do with just or mercy. It is rather very cruel and unjust. Here is the proof: 1- God permits Adam everything in heaven and says “‘You are free to eat

44 from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.’” (Genesis 2:15-17). This means that Adam did not know what is good and what is evil before eating from the forbidden tree. Is not it a must that commissioning should be to a wise man who knows the good and evil? How is he punished without being ready for commission? How was he commissioned before knowing the good and the evil? Does not this contradict justice and mercy on which the belief of crucifixion and redemption is based? Adam did not know whether it is good or bad to eat from the tree “‘You will not surely die,’ the serpent said to the woman.” (Genesis 3:4), “And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” (Genesis 3:22). Thus the first basis of this belief is not true. Because commissioning someone who does not know the good and the evil is unjust and cruel. Another example is from “The Christian Philosophy of Forgiveness” by the Christian author Awad Sam’an p. 247. He defends the belief of crucifixion and redemption and he has an objection about the responsibility of children who do not know this belief saying: “As we know that those who do not know the difference between the good and evil are not responsible people. And since children do not know the difference between the good and evil, thus they are not responsible in front of God. Consequently, they are not guilty even if they commit any sins.” So the person who cannot distinguish between the good and evil is not responsible for his sins. Thus this Christian writer affirmed unintentionally that Adam  was not responsible for his deeds when he was commissioned. Therefore, the basis of the belief of crucifixion and redemption is nullified.

2- If we suppose that Adam  was responsible for his deeds when he ate from that tree and that he was acquainted with the difference between good and evil. In spite of that he disobeyed God and ate from the tree. Was not it better to forgive Adam and not to get him out from Paradise since he is the only son of God -as the belief of redemption states? However, Adam  and his wife Eve were thrown out from Paradise “To Adam he said, ‘Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it’, ‘Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the

45 field.’” (Genesis 3: 17-18). What guilt did ground commit to be cursed? Can’t you see that when Adam and Eve were thrown out from Paradise they were punished and that there is no need for redemption any more? Is not this a double jeopardy? First, Adam was punished and descended to earth. Second, the redemption, disobedience and punishment -according to this belief- continued to be carried by Adam and his descendants including all mankind before crucifixion, during it, after and till Day of Judgment. This contradicts justice and mercy, for punishment is executed twice.

3- If redemption is for all mankind, this will require that all people, alive or dead, return to Paradise, because redemption saves them from punishment. But this did not happen, for the dead are still dead and life continued on earth with all its hardships and commissions. It is so cruel that punishment was executed twice and people did not return to Paradise. Were they not forgiven by this redemption? Instead, disobedience and punishment continued, and crucifixion did not change anything.

4- If the sin of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil requires that God sacrifices His only son to be crucified in order to redeem this sin, is not crucifixion itself a series of crimes? The son of God was crucified after an unfair trial by perjury. He was whipped, spitted on, stripped, slapped and punched. They put a crown of thorns on his head, then he was crucified and insulted by all those who passed him by “Then the governor's soldiers took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole company of soldiers around him. They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, and then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on his head. They put a staff in his right hand and knelt in front of him and mocked him. "Hail, king of the Jews!" they said. They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him.” (Matthew 27:27-31). Do not these crimes and sins need a group of Gods and sons of Gods to be sacrificed? Because according to the belief of crucifixion and redemption Gods are crucified as a sacrifice. It is really very strange that Adam’s sin is redeemed by a series of sins. What is stranger is what is mentioned in “The LORD said, ‘What have you done? Listen! Your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground. Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive

46 your brother's blood from your hand. When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.’ said to the LORD, ‘My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.’ But the LORD said to him, ‘Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over.’ Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. So Cain went out from the LORD's presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.” (Genesis 4: 10-15). If the one who killed his brother is punished like this, how come –for God’s sake- those who killed the innocent son of God be forgiven?!!

5- Assume that a man commits a crime and he should be punished, and another man was permitted to be punished instead of him. Does not the redeemer have the right to choose and accept to be punished? This is the least that can be done to achieve justice. But Jesus Christ  did not choose or accept to be punished instead of Adam and his descendants “He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled. ‘My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death,’ he said to them. ‘Stay here and keep watch.’ Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. ‘Abba, Father,’ he said, ‘everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me.’” (:33-36), “About the ninth hour Jesus  cried out in a loud voice, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?’—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46) It is quite clear from these texts that Jesus Christ  did not like to drink from this cup. This contradicts justice and mercy, because the crucified is an innocent man who does not deserve being punished and he does not accept redemption.

6- This is the belief of crucifixion, and redemption which is argued, by its makers, to be based upon mercy, and justice. They not only humiliated Jesus Christ  , but also cursed him throwing his noble soul into Hell-fire as Paul states:" Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse himself, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." " (Galatians 3:13) Added that it is recorded in Acts (2:31) what its author claims to be an oracle for the  after crucifixion:" he was not abandoned to Hell, nor did his body see decay."

47 What sort of defamation is that against Jesus Christ, ? He is regarded by us- the Muslims- as one of the five "Messengers of strong will", while those who falsely claim to be his disciples- such as Paul- accursed him making him in the . It is so puzzling that the descending of Christ in Hell turned to a firm belief; it is recorded in the book " The Pagan beliefs in Christianity" under the title of the descending of Jesus Christ into Hell so as to redeem the tortured that, just as the pagans claim about the descending of their god's children into Hell so a to redeem the tortured, the Christians do about the descending of Christ to redeem the tortured as well. It is mentioned in the Christian doctrines that Jesus became among the dead, and that on the second day, he rose up from amongst them. Saint Chrisestom in 347 Ad demonstrates:" No one denies the descending of Christ into Hell, save the disbeliever." Also, Saint Chlamydeous the Alexandrian said in the beginning of the third generation after Christ: "Christ preached the people of Hell as he did to the people of the earth so as to believe in him, and be redeemed wherever they are. If the God descended to Hell- as the Bible mentions- is that for the Jews only, or for all people? If that was for all people, all of those who believed in him are redeemed, and if it was for the nations who admitted him, it is a calamity for the other nations." Also, Saint Oregon believed in that. Moreover, Saint Nichodimus mention in his bible the issue of descending, and the conversation emerged between him, and the chief of the daemons in chapter fifteen, and seventeen to redeem the people of Hell including women, men, and children. The question is, where did the crucified person go after crucifixion? The Bible says that he was buried among the dead in his grave. However, Matthew (26:64), before the trial, mentions "From now you will see the son of man sitting on the right hand of the Lord's will." Also, Matthew (27:38-44) records that two thieves were crucified beside him, on his right and left, and that they were mocking him. The same incident is mentioned in another manner in Luke (23:43); it mentions that one of them was mocking, while the other defending him, so he said to him: "The truth I tell you, you shall be with me in the Paradise." So, where did he go after crucifixion? To Paradise? To the grave? On the right hand of the Lord? Or to Hell? Can it be deduced that the right hand of the Lord's will is the grave? We seek refuge from Allah of such a claim, or can it be that Paradise is Hell?!!

7- There was an objection by a European scientist that the crucified did not die on the cross, but rather he lost consciousness. Because he was injured in his hands and feet only and this does not kill, besides he stayed on the cross for

48 three hours only according to the Bible and he can stay alive more than this on the cross. In addition, when he was injured by the spear he bled which indicates that he was still alive. But it was not Jesus Christ  who was crucified, it was rather Judas Iscariot the traitor and according to the previous objection Judas the traitor did not die on the cross. All these contradictions and problems concerning crucifixion show that this belief is falsified.

8- We are still speaking about the incidents of crucifixion: It is stated in Matthew “He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matthew 12:39-40), “It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening approached, , a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. When he learned from the centurion that it was so, he gave the body to Joseph. So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.” (Mark 15:42-46). Thus the time of burial was on Friday after sunset. “After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.’” (: 1-6). In (:11-18) Mary Magdalene went to Jesus’ grave at dawn before sunrise and found that its cover was moved. It is clear from the previous texts that the crucified stayed in grave on Saturday only, because the two women went to grave on Sunday at dawn and they did not found him. So it is probable that he got out from grave before their coming according to their testimony. This means that the crucified stayed in grave two nights and one day not three days and three nights. Consequently, either the prophecy or the incidents are not true. The incidents mentioned about the resurrection of Christ  among the dead

49 indicate that he was not crucified and that he appeared after crucifixion hiding from Jews and it is Judas who was crucified. This explains the disappearance of Judas Iscariot during the crucifixion because he was on the cross.

9- Assuming that the belief of crucifixion and redemption is true, how long does the punishment for disobedience of Adam take? God says to Adam “when you eat of it [the tree of the knowledge of good and evil] you will surely die.” Is this death everlasting? Or will it last till Day of Judgment? Or is it for just two nights and a day? If this death is never-ending, this achieves justice and mercy, but it contradicts all Christian beliefs such as Trinity, crucifixion and redemption, etc. because the crucified would be dead forever. If this death is till Day of Judgment, this means that the crucified would be dead till Day of Judgment. If this death is for two nights and a day, is it logical that a punishment of two nights and a day needs a divine sacrifice?! If anyone were asked to be buried after death for one day and two nights in order to be forgiven for all his sins, he would definitely agree, especially if we put aside Paul curses for the crucified and being in Hell and adopt instead what comes in “For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit.” (1 Peter 3:18). Are not all these contradictions about the resurrection of Christ , crucifixion and staying in grave for a very short time, etc. not logical? 10- The Old Testament witnesses so many contradictions between this dogma, and the texts! Deuteronomy is considered a base for the Jewish and Christian theologies. Jesus , in the gospel of Matthew (5:17), announces that he never came to abolish the Law of the prophets, but to fulfill them. It is stated in Deuteronomy (24:16): "Fathers should not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin." Also, it is recorded in Proverbs (21:18) "the wicked become a ransom for the righteous, and the unfaithful to the upright.", and in Ezekiel (18:1-9) " the word of the Lord came to me: " what do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel? ' the fathers eat our grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'? As surely as I live, declares the sovereign Lord, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. For every living soul belongs to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die. Suppose there is a righteous man who does what is just, and right. He does not eat at the mountains shrines.....Yet you ask why does not the son share the guilt of his father?' Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep my decrees, he will surely live." This is also revealed in the Holy Qur'an: " Except those who repent and

50 believe (in Islamic Monotheism), and do righteous deeds, for those, Allah will change their sins into good deeds, and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an (25:70) This is what Ezekiel, Deuteronomy, and the Noble Qur'an agree upon. However, the dogma of crucifixion necessitates that God is unjust and unmerciful because he tortured Jesus  for a sin not of his made. So, his torture can not be destined by a God who is the most Just and the most Merciful. We seek refuge with Allah from such belief.

11- The belief of crucifixion, and Redemption does not only contradict with the texts of the Bible, but it also abolishes all the divine messages as they all aim to urge the people to do the good deeds, and avoid sins on the base of the fair reward. Nevertheless, the belief of salvation claims that Jesus'  crucifixion washed away man's sins. Accordingly, all those who believe in it shall gain salvation regardless of what they did even if they were mischievous. This, no doubt, encourages corruption, and spreads mischief. But if one believes that s\he will certainly be reckoned for all his deeds, he would be careful to do the good deeds, and avoid sins. No one dares to say that the master's forgiving for his disobedient slave contradicts with justice or perfection. Toleration is considered by all to be a virtue. So, the Christian claim that toleration goes against perfection is rejected. It is most dazzling that Christians pray for forgiveness as mentioned in Matthew (6:12) "and forgive us as we forgive those who wrong us." Two elements are strange and confusing in this verse: The first is that they compare God's forgiveness to theirs i.e. they assimilate God’s forgiveness to their forgiveness. The second one is that tone of pride which is irrelevant for repentance. This is also mentioned in Luke (11:4) "And forgives our sins, for we forgive all who wrong us". Using this form, they justify the reason of asking God's forgiveness saying that they forgive all those who wrong them. Do not they deserve forgiveness if they do not forgive?! Yet, who can forgive all those who wrong him/her?! However they, in accordance with their belief, do not need to ask for forgiveness because Christ  washed away their sins by his crucifixion. Thus, they can do whatever they wish with no fear of punishment. In fact, those who embrace such beliefs do not realize how merciful God is. Allah mentions in the Noble Qur'an: " Say: "O My slaves who have transgressed against themselves (by committing evil deeds and sins)! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah, verily Allah forgives

51 all sins. Truly, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an (39:53), and " Those () who bear the Throne (of Allah) and those around it glorify the praises of their Lord, and believe in Him, and ask forgiveness for those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah) (saying): "Our Lord! You comprehend all things in mercy and knowledge, so forgive those who repent and follow Your Way, and save them from the torment of the blazing Fire! "Our Lord! And make them enter the 'Adn (Eden) Paradise (everlasting Gardens) which you have promised them, and to the righteous among their fathers, their wives, and their offspring! Verily, You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise. "And save them from (the punishment, because of what they did of) the sins, and whomsoever You save from (the punishment, because of what they did of) the sins (i.e. excuse them) that Day, him verily, You have taken into mercy." And that is the supreme success."Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an (40:7-9)

12- What invalidates the dogma of crucifixion and redemption is to believe in the Day of Resurrection. The Day of Resurrection was not mentioned in the first five books of the Old Testament which were revealed to Moses  .The first mentioning comes in Isaiah: 24 around the third century B.C. It is also scarcely mentioned in the four gospels, but it is mentioned in some messages such as Romans (2:3):" And reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practice such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?"," But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life" (2:5-7), and" For there is no respect of persons with God." (2:11) These texts imply that people will be justly judged on Doomsday. Those who keep on performing good deeds are honored and immortalized in the Hereafter, while the evil doers are discontented and exasperated having the wrath of God upon them as mentioned before. In response to such texts we have to consider that Adam only died after he had repented, and God had forgiven him to give mankind the chance to perform good deeds and to be rewarded in the Afterlife. Moreover, it shall be considered that God's law of reward and retribution is and has always been one and the same for all people including the Israelites. This is crystal clear to anyone who reads the Old Testament books narrating the history of the Israelites. This is crystal clear to anyone who reads the Old Testament that depicts God's severe retribution for committing sins and not worshipping Him, as well as His

52 forgiveness when they repented. Moreover, when it is taken into consideration that all people will be judged on The Last Day:" For those who have done good is the best (reward, i.e. Paradise) and even more (i.e. having the honour of glancing at the Countenance of Allah swt) Neither darkness nor dust nor any humiliating disgrace shall cover their faces. They are the dwellers of Paradise, they will abide therein forever." Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an 10:26) i.e. Allah's way of dealing is the same without changing because he the is Most Just and most Merciful in this world, in Doomsday and in the Afterlife: it is mentioned in the Noble Qur’an ( …. So no change will you find in Allah's way of dealing, and no turning off will you find in Allah's way of dealing). Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an (35:43) We have to wonder what changes the dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption brought about?! The answer is an absolute nothing. Accordingly, what Christians assume about incarnation of the word, Trinity, Crucifixion and Redemption has no religious or logical basis.

13- Christians who embrace the dogma of crucifixion and redemption claim that Jesus Christ was sacrificed for the sake of humanity in order for their sins to be forgiven; the first of which is their father Adam's  and which was inherited by his descendants. They further claim that all this happened because of God's love for mankind, and that is why he sacrificed his only child. There are two narrations dealing with this respect: First story: it is a dialogue in the New Testament between Christ  and a Canaanite woman “Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, ‘Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.’ Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, ‘Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.’ He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.’ The woman came and knelt before him. ‘Lord, help me!’ she said. He replied, ‘It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs.’ ‘Yes, Lord,’ she said, ‘but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table.’ Then Jesus answered, ‘Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.’ And her daughter was healed from that very hour.” (:21-28). It becomes clear from this dialogue that: a- The message of Christ  was limited and directed to Israelis only. What confirms this is what Christ said to his disciples when he sent them to Gospel “These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: ‘Do

53 not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the . Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.’” (:5-6). b- All mankind except Israelis, according to Christ (oft he Holy Book) in this dialogue , are dogs. He also calls this Canaanite woman a dog, because she does not belong to the Israelis whom he calls the children. c- At the very beginning Christ was unwilling to help that Canaanite woman and heal her daughter. This leaves us wondering how the believers of the dogma of crucifixion and redemption could imagine that such person, who had a limited message confined only to the Israelites, who admitted that he was sent for them only, who despised and depicted the other people as dogs, and who refused to give little help to a woman, can simply accept to be sacrificed for the sake of humanity?! How would a prophet whom they claim to be God's Son commit such deeds?! We, Muslims, reject the Bible's bad picture of Jesus Christ  who, on the other hand, Jesus Christ  was depicted and praised through Allah's words in the Noble Qur'an as "And He has made me blessed wheresoever I be, and has enjoined on me Salat (prayer), and Zakat (obligatory ), as long as I live." Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an 19:31 Second story: It is from the Old Testament. It is about “But he said to me, ‘You will conceive and give birth to a son. Now then, drink no wine or other fermented drink and do not eat anything unclean, because the boy will be a Nazirite of God from birth until the day of his death.’” (Judges 16:7), “So he told her everything. ‘No razor has ever been used on my head,’ he said, ‘because I have been a Nazirite set apart to God since birth. If my head were shaved, my strength would leave me, and I would become as weak as any other man.’” (Judges 16:17), “The woman gave birth to a boy and named him Samson. He grew and the LORD blessed him, and the Spirit of the LORD began to stir him” (Judges 13:24-25). It is obvious from the previous texts that Samson was blessed by God, and God’s spirit stirs him. Here is another story of Samson. The story in brief is that a lion cub came roaring towards him. The spirit of the Lord came upon him in power and so he tore the lion cub apart with his bare hands like a goat. Some time later, he returned to the same place and saw the lion's carcass with a swarm of bees and some honey inside it. He scooped out some honey and ate it. Then, he told the thirty Palestinians this story as a riddle. He promised to give them thirty changes of garment in case they answered, and in case they did not, they should be the ones to give him another thirty. The riddle was: out of the eater, something to

54 eat; out of the strong, something sweet. When they could not solve it, they made Samson's wife coax him to tell her the answer and so they gave him the answer. Their answer was: what is sweeter than honey? What is stronger than a lion? The end of the story was that the spirit of God came upon him in power. He went down to Ashkelon, slew thirty of their men, took their spoil and gave their clothes to those who had explained the riddle (Judges 14:19). This very story is recorded here because the main character, Samson, is said in their Holy Book to be blessed by God and that God's spirit came upon him in power. The question, then, that comes to light to those who believe in Crucifixion and Redemption: if God and His spirit caused the death of some people as a result of others' explanation of a riddle, would He sacrifice His Son for the sake of these people who, as they claim, inherited Adam's sin?! Did God's spirit which made Samson kill and burn and which is cruel and unfair suddenly find out that the Son had to be sacrificed for the humanity out of justice and mercy?!

14- We return to Crucifixion and Redemption: In John (17:3-4) some of Christ's words to his disciples- before the crucifixion and before Judah Iscariot had come- were "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do." Jesus Christ's last words to his disciples demonstrate that he believes in the oneness of God and that he is but His messenger. Muslims also believe is the messenger of Allah and bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and that Muhammad is His messenger. These words from John: 17 are mentioned here to show that Christ's  last words were that he delivered the message and completed the mission to which he was assigned by God. This mission was completed before the incident of crucifixion which happened to Judah Iscariot. Christ (peace be upon him) had not come to the world to be crucified but to accomplish a divine mission, and he did. The phrase " I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do" demolishes the whole dogma of crucifixion and redemption.

15- The most surprising and peculiar fact about this creed of crucifixion and redemption is that Allah is the one who created Adam and commanded him not to eat from the tree. He is also the One who decided on the penalty. It is He who passed His divine laws to His messengers in order to reward people for their deeds. Yet, according to the dogma of crucifixion and redemption, He deserved

55 retribution (Exalted be He). So it is He who suffered from the penalty as if He penalized Himself. Those who believe in this dogma surprisingly had confidence in the misleading sentence, "For God so loved the world He gave His only begotten son so that everyone who believes in that begotten child may not perish, but have eternal life." It is obvious that they do not realize how forgiving and just God is. They even did not respect God's Exaltedness. Therefore, they considered it natural to be made fun of, spit on, and even cursed (Exalted be He). They also took this sentence as an excuse to perform whatsoever deed they wish believing that Christ  washed away their sins.

16- As for their claim about this dogma having special prophecies we say that it is based on mere falsifications. Besides, if some of the texts they mentioned were applied, it would be found out that they were against their beliefs, as mentioned before in the sixth text concerning the disappearance and death of Judas Iscariot. Some books of the Bible became farcical in order to match some prophecies with their stories. One of these is the prophecy of Christ  entering Jerusalem on a donkey or a colt. What is even more surprising is that a special text was made up about bringing the donkey so that the prophecy is fulfilled. Christ sent his disciples to a certain place to untie the donkey and bring it to him to ride. Thus, the prophecy proves to be true. This story is mentioned in Mathew (21:2):" then sent Jesus two disciples saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me." This took place to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet who said" Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey ". In Mark (11:2, 4) it is mentioned as a colt only. These texts refer to what is in Zachariah (9:9) about the King of Zion. The whole book mentions stories about the wars between the Israelites and other nations. If the dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption is that contradictory, unreasonable, against Islamic law, and full of flaws, how did it prevail and predominate the true monotheistic religion Christ  was sent with?! The answer is that it is a pagan belief. Some scholars from the west whose minds reject such beliefs proved this fact true. Mohamed Taher El- Taneer's book "Pagan Beliefs in Christianity" summed all this up. A further proof is the picture of the crucified Krishna, the Indians' savior, and next to it is

56 that of the crucified person in Christianity. It is clearly shown how identical they both are.

17- In conclusion, when it is taken into consideration how the dogma of Crucifixion and Redemption is misleading and contradicts the main duty of messengers and the texts in which those who embrace it believe, and how false the pillars it is based on are, it is shown that it defies Man's existence and his succession on earth, which are based on carrying out God's demands in order for good and happiness to prevail in this world as well as in the Afterlife. As a commentary on this dogma, Mr. Mohamed Rasheed Reda, the author of "El-Manar Interpretation of the Noble Qur'an" writes: Man's salvation in the

57 Afterlife and his attaining eternal happiness and comfort depend on purifying himself by abandoning false pagan beliefs and immortal deeds so that he would get rid of evil from his soul and would be able to do righteous deeds. Doing the opposite of all that means Man's damnation as Allah states in the Noble Qur'an 91:7-10:" And by Nafs (Adam or a person or a soul, etc.), and Him Who perfected him in proportion; Then He showed him what is wrong for him and what is right for him; Indeed he succeeds who purifies his ownself (i.e. obeys and performs all that Allah ordered, by following the true Faith of Islamic Monotheism and by doing righteous good deeds). And indeed he fails who corrupts his ownself (i.e. disobeys what Allah has ordered by rejecting the true Faith of Islamic Monotheism or by following polytheism, etc. or by doing every kind of evil wicked deeds)." Allah created Man innately capable of performing evil as well as good deeds. It is he who can either purify or corrupt himself. The one who has faith in Islamic monotheism and follows Allah's orders can be purified, and his place in the Garden of the Afterlife will be maintained. The one who does not do so and has false superstitious beliefs and performs evil deeds, corrupts his own self and is destined to go to hell. To purify oneself does not mean not to commit any sins or misdeeds but to get rid of evil from soul and heart. Thus, if they did, they would instantly repent, ask for God's pardon and make up for their sin by performing a righteous good deed. It is like a housewife who is responsible for cleaning, sweeping and all the household chores. Whenever there is a little speck of dust or dirt she is the one to clean it. Thus, the house is clean most of the time. Even the cleanest house must sometimes have some dust that is frequently removed. Reward or retribution depends on the action itself; God burdens not a person beyond his scope. The one who truly purifies himself, has faith and performs good deeds is blessed by God, while the one who does not, ends up with the wrath of God, is never blessed, can never intercede with Him in the Afterlife and cannot be redeemed. Allah states this in the Qur'an in 2:255:"Who is he that can intercede with him without his permission?" It is mentioned also: "He knows what is before them, and what is behind them, and they cannot intercede except for him with whom He is pleased. And they stand in awe for fear of Him." Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an (21: 28), " And fear the Day (of Judgement) when no person shall avail another, nor shall compensation be accepted from him, nor shall intercession be of use to him, nor shall they be helped." Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an (2: 123), and " O you who believe! Spend of that with which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession. And it is the disbelievers who are the Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc.) " Interpretation of the Noble Qur’an

58 (2:254). This concludes that it all depends upon man's own choice; Allah states in the Noble Qur'an 2:261 that" Allah gives manifold increase to whom he pleases." Are not these Islamic teachings which honor man, and motivate him to ask for perfection through his faith, devotion and righteous deeds? Are they not better and more constructive than believing in such a cruciferous story which is taken from pagan superstitions that neither a rational man can believe nor a sound heart can trust?

The Descending of Jesus Son of Mary (Peace be upon him) Abu Hurayra narrates that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:" By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, Son of Mary (Jesus) will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims) as a just ruler and will break the Cross and kill the pig and abolish the Jizyah (a tax taken from the non-Muslims, who are in the protection, of the Muslim government). Then there will be abundance of money and no one will accept charitable gifts. Abu Hurayra then reinforces Jesus' descending by the end of times saying:" And recite of you wish' And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death). And on the Day of Resurrection, he ['Iesa (Jesus)] will be a witness against them."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 4:159) (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3, Book 34, No. 425). "Breaking the cross" refers to the demolishing Christianity and the Christian glorification of the cross. As for killing the pig, it refers to disestablishing the false creeds. Establishing the jizyah is due to the fact the he will not accept any other creed but that of Islam. Allah states: " And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death)" it clearly states that all Christians and Jews are to believe in Jesus in the proper faith before death. That is, he is the Messenger of Allah and His bondsman; he is neither God nor Son of God. The realization of the Jew or the Christian that Jesus is the Messenger of Allah and His bondman is useless since it is too late on the deathbed at the very last moments when no repentance is accepted. We ask Allah to shelter us from this.

59 Moreover, Allah's allegation in the case of Jesus is made clear since he was commanded to speak in the cradle as a proof on his virgin mother's innocence. It is bizarre that Jesus' speaking in the cradle is not mentioned in any of the Christian authorized gospels; however, if any woman anywhere and anytime claims that she got pregnant despite having no sexual contact with a man in the permission of God, would anyone believe her? The Qur'anic narration is the sole testification that tells of the non-physical contact with any human in the case of Mary's pregnancy. In other words, the coming of Jesus at the end of times is to demolish the creed of Crucifixion and Redemption as well as Trinitarianism that made Allah composed of three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The last stage is Jesus' presence before Allah on the Day of Judgment: " And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?' " He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner•self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All•Knower of all that is hidden and unseen. "Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.' And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things. (This is a great admonition and warning to the Christians of the whole world). "If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if You forgive them, verily You, only You are the All•Mighty, the All•Wise." Allah will say: "This is a Day on which the truthful will profit from their truth: theirs are Gardens under which rivers flow (in Paradise) - they shall abide therein forever. Allah is pleased with them and they with Him. That is the great success (Paradise). To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is therein, and He is Able to do all things."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an: 5:116-119) Allah The Greatest is Most Truthful. All the praises and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).

60

Appendix for the Sketches Showing the Humililations Directed to Judas

61 Addendum showing the humiliation Judas went through Among the humiliations mentioned in the Bible are: 1- They striped him and dressed him in crimson garment ( Matthew 27/28). 2- They platted a crown of thorns, put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand mocking him saying "hail king of Jews"( Matthew 27/29). 3- They spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. (Matthew 27/30) and (Mark 15/19). 4- They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots after crucifixion (Matthew 27/35). 5- They scourged him (Matthew 27/26). 6- They smote him on the face (Matthew 26:67). 7- They buffeted him (Matthew 26:67). 8- They had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote you? (Luke 22:64) 9- And said many other things against him (Luke:22:65). 10- They crucified him (Matthew 27).

62

63

64

65

These humiliations Judas went through, which was fair for his treason that ended up with his crucifixion. It is wired that those who believe in Crucifixion and Redemption claim- in accordance with the present gospels- that such humiliation was presented for Jesus Christ whom they always attribute to b glorified!! What glory is that? Was the divine nature back then within the human nature receiving this very same humiliation? Or did the divine nature give up the human nature as happened when crucifixion? Glorified be Allah of what they claim!! Were these humiliating crimes included as prerequisites for God's mercy to wash away the people's sins? Did the Son of God have to bear them all? Certainly mean is their creed Allah almighty is The One, The Besought of All, The Eternal Alive, The Self-Subsistent, The Most High, The Most Great, The Glorious, The Lord of Majesty and Honor, The Most-Eminent, The Sovereign, The All-Holy…..to the end of His Most Beautiful Names and Supreme Traits.