Is the Quran historically inaccurate?

[Goose]

1. The Quran says…

"That they rejected Faith; That they uttered against Mary A grave false charge; That they said (in boast): 'We killed Christ Jesus The son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah.' But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. Nay, Allah raised him up Unto Himself; and Allah Is Exalted in Power, Wise. And there is none of the people of the book (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (Jesus) Before his death; And on the Day of Judgment He (Jesus) will be a witness Against them." 4:156-159

2. Scholars say…

Atheist New Testament scholar Gerd Ludemann acknowledged, "Jesus' death as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable." Gerd Ludemann, The Resurrection of Christ, pg 50.

The critical New Testament scholar and Jesus Seminar co-founder John Dominic Crossan wrote, "Jesus’ death by execution under Pontius Pilate is as sure as anything historical can ever be. For, if no follower of Jesus had written anything for one hundred years after his crucifixion, we would still know about him from two authors not among his supporters. Their names are Flavius Josephus and Cornelius Tacitus...We have, in other words, not just Christian witnesses but one major Jewish and one major pagan historian who both agree on three points concerning Jesus: there was a movement, there was an execution because of that movement, but, despite that execution, there was a continuation of the movement." John Dominic Crossan, Who Killed Jesus?, pg. 5

John P. Meier wrote, "For two obvious reasons practically no one would deny the fact that Jesus was executed by crucifixion: (1) This central event is reported or alluded to not only by the vast majority of NT authors, but also by Josephus and Tacitus...(2) Such an embarrassing event created a major obstacle to converting Jews and Gentiles alike...that the Church struggled to overcome..." (John P. Meier, "The Circle of the Twelve: Did It Exist during Jesus' Public Ministry?", Journal of Biblical Literature 116 [1997] p. 664-665).


Is the Quran historically inaccurate regarding Jesus’ death?

If the Quran is historically inaccurate can it be considered the word of God?

[Murad]

Yes most muslims acknowledge a crucifiction took place; but it was not the Messiah himself.

I dont think you can prove the following verse of the Quran wrong:

it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow

On the contrary; let me quote one of my post regarding the historical accuracy of the bible:

Jeremiah 29:10 Informs us that the Babylonian Exile will last 70 years. And the 2nd Chronicles 36:21 tells us that this came about.
But, the duration of time from the destruction of the temple (which was the beginning of the exile) in precisely 586 B.C., to the return of the Israelites to their promised land after Cyrus overthrew the Babylonian Empire in 538 B.C. was 48 years, and not 70.
A very; very clear historical error.

Also i remember while reading Daniel(5:30-31); it said said that Darius the Median took over the Babylon empire, but it was Cyrus of Persia who overthrew the Babylonian Empire in war. Yes; we know there is a 'Darius the first' in history, there is no mention of a Darius of Median anywhere.

[Goose]

Yes most muslims acknowledge a crucifiction took place; but it was not the Messiah himself.

I dont think you can prove the following verse of the Quran wrong:

it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow

No, the burden of proof falls on you to prove the Quran correct. The Quran makes a statement of fact. It claims “But they killed [Jesus] not, Nor crucified [Jesus]� All the early Biblical and non-Biblical evidence supports Jesus’ death by crucifixion. It is one of the best attested events of the ancient world. It is so well attested to that even the critics of Christianity, as I’ve noted in the OP, acknowledge the historicity of the crucifixion of Jesus. The Quran is clearly historically inaccurate on Jesus’ death by crucifixion. If the Quran is historically inaccurate, it is unlikely to be a revelation from God.

[Murad]

Such strong words from you goose, i've always wanted to see verifable|unbiased evidence..... maybe you can provide it?

The burden of proof does not fall on me, as i do not need to justify it in order to justify my religion.
It is you that needs to provide authentic evidence(not texts that were written decades later) to show Jesus Christ died. And in doing that you must also somehow prove this verse of the Quran wrong:

it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow

Can you prove what a magician does is not an illusion?

So i'll be waiting.

[Goose]

It is you that needs to provide authentic evidence(not texts that were written decades later) to show Jesus Christ died.

Even atheists and critics of Christianity accept the historicity of Jesus' death by crucifixion. It's been called "indisputable." I suspect your reluctance to accept it as historical is dictated by your commitment to the Quran, not rational historical enquiry.

Think about it rationally. Who do you think probably had a better access to information about what happened? People writing about the event that received their information from witnesses of the event or someone writing 600+ after.

So i'll be waiting.

I’ll be waiting for you to prove the Quran is historically accurate in this regard. You’ll have to overturn the weight of early Biblical and non-Biblical evidence and the consensus of scholarship on the matter. Good luck with that.

[Board]

It is you that needs to provide authentic evidence(not texts that were written decades later) to show Jesus Christ died.

Even atheists and critics of Christianity accept the historicity of Jesus' death by crucifixion. It's been called "indisputable."

Not everyone accepts the claims of the NT and there have been strong arguments against even the existence of Jesus as having been a real, living person.

I site the following:

The Jesus Puzzle

Richard Carrier's review of The Jesus Puzzle

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... uzzle.html

The crucification is definitely disputable since the person claimed to be crucified's existence can be disputed.

The probability of the events may be > 50% so it could be called likely that the events took place but it is certainly not "indisputable".

[Goose]

Even atheists and critics of Christianity accept the historicity of Jesus' death by crucifixion. It's been called "indisputable."

Not everyone accepts the claims of the NT and there have been strong arguments against even the existence of Jesus as having been a real, living person.

The Jesus myth theory is not taken seriously amongst the academic community. If it was, there would be far more scholars arguing for it. Even Wells, Doherty’s mentor, no longer argues for a mythical Jesus. Wells wrote, "Today, most secular scholars accept Jesus as a historical, although unimpressive figure.� (Wells, G. A. "Jesus, Historicity of." in The New Encyclopedia of Disbelief, ed. Tom Flynn. Prometheus, 2007, p. 446.). It’s just not an historically tenable position.

I site the following:

The Jesus Puzzle

If I’m not mistaken, Doherty, is the only person who seriously argues for a mythical Jesus. He has a BA in history and hardly an authority. He’s by far in the minority. No, he’s not even in the minority, that’s being too generous. He’s virtually alone.

Richard Carrier's review of The Jesus Puzzle [/

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... uzzle.html

Richard Carrier isn’t a Jesus-myther. At least I’ve never seen him seriously argue for the position that Jesus was mythical.

The crucification is definitely disputable since the person claimed to be crucified's existence can be disputed.

The probability of the events may be > 50% so it could be called likely that the events took place but it is certainly not "indisputable".

Take it up with Gerd Ludemann, an atheist New Testament scholar. He called it “indisputable,� not me (see the OP).

[Murad]

Even atheists

Generalising?

and critics of Christianity accept the historicity of Jesus' death by crucifixion. It's been called "indisputable." I suspect your reluctance to accept it as historical is dictated by your commitment to the Quran, not rational historical enquiry.

I've asked for archaeological proof; verifable....; you seem to have such a strong position; yet you have failed to provide me any evidence.

Think about it rationally. Who do you think probably had a better access to information about what happened? People writing about the event that received their information from witnesses of the event or someone writing 600+ after.

Obviously the first option; but you still havn't proved the Quran wrong:

it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow

So i'll be waiting.

I’ll be waiting for you to prove the Quran is historically accurate in this regard.

Again, that is a fail attempt to justify your unauthenticated Bible.
I dont need to prove the Quran right or wrong when it comes to the crucifiction; it is you that needs to persuade me that the crucifiction did happen to a man named Jesus Christ.
And by proving that; you will also have to prove the following verse of the Quran wrong.

it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow

If you cannot do this; there is no point of going back and forth in your arguement.