Does the Qur’an Deny the Crucifixion of Jesus?


This is my presentation and discussion with Paul Williams on his outstanding and unique channel Blogging Theology. I discuss in detail what the Qur’an truly says about the crucifixion of Jesus (PBUH).

The presentation should help as a detailed reference for anyone interested in this subject. This is an overview of the presentation:

  • It is not about the historicity of Jesus’ crucifixion
  • It focuses on history and language, touchly on theology only in passing
  • It discusses the consensus of scholars, both Muslims and non-Muslims, that the Qur’an denies the crucifixion
  • It explains the motives and methods of the attempts that considers the consensus to be wrong
  • It examines the Qur’an’s alleged engagement with the Talmud
  • It discusses many exegetical issues
  • It builds on works by others and adds new insights from my own research

14 thoughts on “Does the Qur’an Deny the Crucifixion of Jesus?

  1. I whole heartedly agree with your concept that Jesus (pbh) was not crucified. I have written extensively on this subject (about 30,000 total words or more) using the Old T., N.Testament Quran and hadith materials wherever applicable. According to the direct words of Jesus (pbh) and Paul, Jesus could not have been crucified on a wooden cross! The Quran which I show has more than 12 verses dealing with this issue (directly or indirectly) needs to be looked at in order to use true history and responsible logic to show a unified concept of the non-crucifixion issue!
    My 3 as yet unpublished books go way beyond the normal treatment of this issue as well as other surprising issues including the use of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Old T. the New T. Quran and hadith materials to finally unmask the identity of Zul-Qarnain. Some may classify these things as Sufistic but I truly resent that implication as I depend on the unity of scripture and hadith literature along with true history to coordinate a more understandable and truthful tale of certain events.
    So with that said, I will include a copy of my writing concerning the perfection of the Quran according to the Old Testament and a surprising New Testament source! I do this to show you that I am in earnest about the need for searching for the truth and the belief in the Al-Haqq!
    Formerly, I was a Roman Catholic but that ended many decades ago!
    Ahmed Daud Ismail/
    Zephaniah Chapter 3 verses 9-10
    The use of the symbols { } is for clarification purposes only.
    Without a doubt it {The Quran} is (announced) in the {previous} revealed Books of {the} former peoples. Q (26: 196)
    Zephaniah 3: 9-10 (New International Version)

    Then I will purify the lips of the peoples, that all of them may call on the name of the LORD and serve him shoulder to shoulder.

    From beyond the rivers of Cush my worshipers, my scattered people {Gentiles}, will bring ME offerings.

    Zephaniah 3: 9-10 (21st Century King James Version)

    For then will I return to the people a pure language that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve HIM with one accord.
    From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia MY suppliants–even the daughter of MY dispersed–shall bring MINE offering.

    The Book of Zephaniah, which is a prophetical book discussing somewhat the approach of the ‘Judgment’, was originally written sometime in the 6th century BC although some scholars prefer a second century BC offering possibly borrowing on the originality of a manuscript from the 6th century BC. Whatever the truth of this matter, practically that amounts to about the same thing if the texts were followed in earnest.

    It is clear and unambiguous that The GIVER of the ‘gift’ being spoken about comes directly from THE ONE LORD (GOD) and not something that drops into a man’s head by his own doing. In other words, the gift that will be given is from GOD and directly from HIM and no other. This GIFT is mentioned as purified lips or a pure language and for a very good reason.

    Verse number 9 talks of purified lips of the peoples or a pure language. When a person talks about using the lips of peoples, one is talking about a manner of speech and when one talks about a manner of speech; one is talking about a certain language that will be used.
    Among humanity there is NO KNOWN pure language that has ever been invented by the hands of man. There has NEVER been a common language that has ever remained pure because like man, language that is developed from a creature (man) is like that creature – changing.
    The Eskimo living in his environment has perhaps over a hundred words for snow but people living in the desert may only have one or two words for this phenomenon.
    So language reflects the utility of man’s ‘changing world’ and hence the language changes – meaning that it does not remain pure but becomes adulterated according to need. Hence, the expression ‘I am bad’ can actually mean that I am good in the same language.
    So at least we know that there will be a language involved instead of tap dancing. This language has to be a SPECIAL LANGUAGE and not anything that man could think of because it will have the property of being PURE and REMAINING PURE and that will be quite a feat due to man’s proclivity in messing things up!
    Moreover, we cannot forget that this language will be DIRECTLY from the ONE GOD and who would ever attribute to HIM imperfection but one who is deformed in the soul.
    Also, the language cannot be common everyday speech because that would also get messed up by being morphed into many dialects. Rather the language must be very special AND EVEN CEREMONIAL for it to be ‘locked up’ and kept pure and unsullied by the hands of men.
    The type of ceremonial expressions used must not be looked upon as a run of the mill experience like joining a club but rather put into an EXALTED POSITION to merit such a stance as being pure and kept pure.
    There is only one logical form of highest thought taken by most men from the past to the present and that is the form of RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS EXPRESION. Hence, this protected language which is PURE and going to remain PURE is a Religious Language.
    From so-called shamans to tribal chiefs or witch doctors, there is shown a way of ‘talking’ to the ‘higher powers’ in that particular culture. The highest known symbolic discourse between man and the POWER WHO created him comes from religion and not astronomy or a study in arts and crafts.
    Being a Religious Language that remains PURE cannot be for one person or for one country and as the verses claim, which is fairly easy to figure out, this language will be for various peoples WHO PRACTICE this form of worship or belief system.
    A pure language like rituals will change over a period of time UNLESS of course it is in a form that a person can say and remember that it becomes the proverbial ‘written in stone’ language or a language unaltered through time.
    Jesus (pbh), for example, spoke a form of Aramaic called Syriac but we do not connect with the knowledge of what he declared in that language. Basically, his language has gone through the ‘treadmill’ of Greek, Latin, English and whatever other language which would alter the meanings even very minutely but still they would be altered.
    In other words, this PURE LANGUAGE may be spoken but it has to be PRESERVED AND REVERED such that it is in a written form that can be used as a STANDARD for checking the veracity of the spoken form or written forms coming from it and so highly thought of that any attempt to fool around with it will bring ‘dire consequences’.
    Hence, this written form must be duplicated in great quantities for the peoples and thusly can be easily checked out as to its maintaining its ‘perfection’.
    So a RECORD of the formation, development, delivery of this language has to be kept as from the beginning of its origins so as to be able to show that it has a track record of purity and not just some kind of fairytale story as an invisible book kept by and controlled by high priests.
    Therefore, the best form of preservation is an actual book by which a standard can be formed to test any copies that would be made of this book or recitations given from this book.
    Because we are looking at a ‘Book’ or widespread record of some kind, the matter becomes simple. Thinking that only one book spread around many countries will fit the bill is ludicrous. Therefore, each territory or, in this case, each place of CEREMONIAL WORSHIP must have an exact duplicate of the original.
    And if that ‘record’ or book was to be used in individual houses, which the Quran is, it would have to remain pure and not have any alteration done on it and go undetected when challenged and still be classified as being pure.
    Of course any person can alter the Quran personally but it would NOT BE ACCEPTED across communities when ‘put under the microscope’ and tested.
    The conclusion is simple. A BOOK must exist that is GOD GIVEN and it is and fully REMAINS AVAILABLE in its ORIGINAL LANGUAGE (not just a translated form as the verses from the two of the above Old Testament translated sources are)!
    Well if it is a GOD GIVEN BOOK it will be about the guidance given to man rather than instructions on how to perform tap dancing and this makes it a religious book which in turn makes it a TESTAMENT and that, in turn, makes it A SEPERATE PHASE OR FORM OF RELIGION as shown in the following verse from the New Testament.
    Where there is a NEW TESTAMENT GIVEN there is a paradigm change. This means that in the common language of man there will come a NEW RELIGION. This does not mean that the religion is brand spanking new but it is NOT going to be just a carbon copy of the preceding religion even though it may harmonize with the older testament for truths shall be revealed and lies will be uncovered!
    {For where a testament is {paradigm change}, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator Heb. (9: 16).}
    Jesus (pbh) didn’t ‘die’ a physical, total journey ending in death and bodily decay as ‘THE DEATH’ or the completion of his sojourn but, according to Islam, he WILL RETURN to lead the Islamic kingdom on Earth and after marriage and several decades will die and be buried (with the rich – Isaiah Chapter 53) with Prophet Muhammad (pbh) – and they will raise up together.
    Prophet Muhammad (pbh) DID DIE, however, and according to the New Testament, the PHYSICAL, COMPLETE DEATH is part of the proof of formation of an actual Religious Testament. Hence, the REALITY OF ISLAM according to this verse in the New Testament!
    Worshiping with ‘one accord’ can have many different meanings.
    When one comes across a puzzler like this, one has to fit something in that will be in agreement with those two verses thus making the whole of the verses to harmonize without any contradiction. In other words, one takes that meaning that will not throw off the other meanings given in those two verses.
    One can worship with one accord even though we are different as a people if that religion has a basis for belief (a basic, UNIFYING DOCTRINE) that ALL MEMBERS harmoniously believe in.
    In other words, the basis of belief must be such that the upholders of that belief system understand that system no matter to what various cultures they are found in. That would be the FIVE PILLARS OF ISLAM forming the basis of that belief system or the bedrock as its foundation amongst those who believe.
    ‘By all of its worshipers’ would mean from pole to pole and ocean to ocean such that THIS RELIGION would be a ‘WORLDWIDE RELIGION’ and NOT just for one city or country and that the true followers of that ONE RELIGION would follow the SAME HOLY BOOK without additional words or chapters thrown in or taken out – unlike the Catholic Bible versus the Protestant Bible which has a different number of books in its canon – and practice the same FIVE PILLARS.
    The part about standing ‘shoulder to shoulder’ can mean many things but it is the practice of Muslims to stand harmoniously and willingly in one accord during one of the essential pillars of faith and that is prayer – for the prayer to be accepted – men with men and women with women standing in straight line necessitating that they line up ‘shoulder to shoulder’!
    Besides the above explanation, how can we know that Islam is being discussed in these two verses from Zephaniah? That is easy for we have the geographical location given. A religion starts descending from ‘above’ through inspiration to those below. In other words, it has to have a physical presence and start from some place upon someone.
    So, in this case we need to have a geographical area to deal with at the very start of this revelation. So it is easy to see that a prophet will be involved and he will be speaking to some people in the beginning and these people will have a home base or be domiciled in some geographical area.
    The geographical area will be defined according to these verses based on the nature of the rivers found in the country mentioned. The country mentioned is that area of Cush or what is now known as Ethiopia.
    The rivers in Ethiopia may run in a north-south or south-north direction. Therefore, one must go ACROSS from these rivers in an east-west direction to find the location of any religion that emerged from the time of the writing of this book called Zephaniah.
    If one was to use willy-nilly logic and jump up or down going in a north or south direction in a random way by leapfrogging so many countries, then one could look for a religious movement with a preserved HOLY LANGUAGE coming from the north or south poles. However, when one restricts the search for this religion by going directly east or west from ‘across the rivers of Ethiopia’ then one must look for that religion in those areas.
    By going west from the rivers of Ethiopia one can keep going through the continent of Africa until one hits the Atlantic Ocean and NOT find any world-wide religion that can lay a claim for the fulfillment of the prophecy found in Zephaniah.
    However, when one goes to the east from the rivers of Ethiopia, one does find an ESTABLISHED WORLD RELIGION WITH NEARLY A BILLION AND A HALF PEOPLE THAT FULLFILLS ALL OF THAT PROPHECY FOUND IN THE BOOK OF ZEPHANIAH and this country turns out to be Arabia specifically starting in the area called Makkah.
    What about the ‘dispersed or scattered people’?
    The original Children of Israel tended to be tribal and not such a propagating religious movement. Their original language varies with the times and their original records are somewhat suspect due to the various inabilities to keep alive their documents throughout history – varied translations, yes but originals, NO!
    The other branch of this ‘tribe,’ commonly called Christians today, do tend to be propagating as to their faith BUT DO NOT PRESENT EITHER A PURE LANGUAGE KEPT IN BOOK FORM OR A UNIFORM WAY OF WORSHIP!
    That is, SOME Testament is used in a foreign-based language (Greek) or many kinds of translations making it easier for people to read and some form of creed is generally believed in but variations as to prayer, times of prayer, rituals and doctrine are quite varied and that is extremely important.
    These thoughts may be taken as a form of nitpicking but what does the word ‘PURE’ mean? Does it mean almost pure or does it imply 100% retrievable and provable pure? The verses in Zephaniah refer to the 100% form of purity not in custom but in the Language Guaranteed and Protected by the CREATOR LORD HIMSELF!
    So the dispersed and scattered people would be people covering A WIDE AREA that would have been left out of the equation for salvation or those reduced to following some form of tribal paganism or even a strange philosophy (man as a GOD) as many of the Christians declare. There is another thought to this, however.
    Considering the New Testament and its warnings of the ‘deterioration of the truth’ brought by Jesus (pbh) {refer to the scriptural sayings concerning the Spirit of truth found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Gospel of John) and what also is found in the Quran (Q 5: 14)}, one can gather that the floundering ship of truth must be resurrected with a PURE form of truth.
    Otherwise, bringing one’s corrupted ‘offerings’ needs no PURE LANGUAGE or TRUTH to be sent down from the heavens when corruption will suffice or trump REALITY and that the ONE GOD will accept any old trash or falsehoods created by man to be thrown up to honor HIM!
    It must be admitted that even a slow minded worshiper of any religion would be completely foolish as to confront the ONE GOD by proclaiming that HIS GIFT of a PURE LANGUAGE is foolish, misplaced or erroneous IF THAT PERSON HAS ANY HOPE OF A SUCCESSFUL FUTURE AFTERLIFE.
    Without a doubt it {The Quran} is (announced) in the {previous} revealed Books of {the} former peoples {Jews/Christians}. Q (26: 196)
    Praise be to ALLAH, WHO has sent to HIS Servant The BOOK {The Quran} and has allowed THEREIN NO CROOKEDNESS. Q (18: 1)
    And remember ALLAH took a Covenant from the People of the Book {JEWS AND CHRISTIANS} to make it KNOWN and CLEAR to mankind and NOT to hide it {WHAT IT CONTAINED ABOUT THE COMING OF THE PROPHET OF TRUTH}; but they threw it away behind their backs and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made! Q (3: 187)
    For those, too, who call themselves Christians, WE did take a Covenant, but they forgot a good part of the Message that was sent to them: So WE stirred up enmity and hatred between one and the other {to fight and squabble amongst themselves}, to the Day of Judgment. And soon will ALLAH show them what it is they have done. Q (5: 14)
    Those who reject ALLAH {THE ONE AND ETERNAL GOD} and hinder (men) from the PATH of ALLAH, their deeds will ALLAH bring to naught {NOT ACCEPT THEIR DEEDS}. Q (47: 1)
    WHOEVER {amongst the various religious peoples} goes right, then he goes right only for the benefit of his OWN SELF. And whoever goes astray, then he goes astray to his OWN LOSS. No one laden with burdens can bear another’s burden. And WE never punish until WE have sent a Messenger (to give warning). Quran 17:15

  2. Dear Dr. Fatoohi, Asalamoalaikum!

    I watched your talk on Blogging Theology with great interest. The topic of the life and crucifixion of Hadhrat Isa (pbuh) has always intrigued me. This has lead me over the past few years to spend many hours reading and learning about this topic from both scholarly Islamic and Christian sources.

    I would like to get your thoughts regarding a variety of topics you touched upon in the video and your previous blog post (i.e. Hadith regarding the crucifixion/death of Jesus, early renowned scholar’s positions, and motivation of those that claim Jesus did die). I will however limit this post to explaining what my understanding of Chapter 4 Verse 157 is and to invite your comments on same. I apologize in advance for the length of this post, however I would not be able to rest satisfied without explaining my reasoning clearly and entirely.

    I believe the crux in interpreting the verse lies in first determining the correct meaning of the word: صلبوه

    From my research صَلَبَ or صلبوا means: to put someone to death by hanging on a cross. The key being the person actually dies, so that if a person is hanged on a cross and does not die, it cannot be said that person was “crucified”. The most that can be said in this case is that the person was “attempted to be crucified”. Two proofs in support of this meaning:

    1. Lanes Lexicon defines this terms as: he put him to death in a certain well-known manner, and,
    2. On the basis of the doctrine of “the Quran interprets itself”: In Surah 5 verse 33 Allah uses the word “crucified”. In this verse Allah mentions that the punishment for waging war/spreading corruption is for the transgressor to be: اَنۡ یُّقَتَّلُوۡۤا اَوۡ یُصَلَّبُوۡۤ – i.e. “killed or crucified”. Here crucified must mean ‘to put the person to death via hanging on a cross” – it cannot mean to simply put the person on a cross and take them off alive. Crucifixion here and in all other places in the Quran means a method of execution resulting in death. Quran Chapter 12 verse 41 also supports the meaning mentioned in Lanes lexicon.

    With the meaning of the word “crucified” correctly understood, understanding the rest of Chapter 4 verse 157 becomes much clearer with all pieces falling into place. My understanding of each part of the verse is explained below. For ease of explaining my position on this ayah, the specific parts of the verse’s translation are in quotations, and my understanding is detailed in brackets below each specific part of the ayah.

    ” And saying (the Jews), “We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah”.”
    {Meaning: The Jews boasted about killing Jesus because they thought they had succeeded in having Jesus killed and therefore thought they had proved that Jesus was a false prophet and accursed according to their own scripture. The Quran in affirming that the Jews made this claim confirms that the Jews did believe they had successfully killed/put Jesus to death. Therefore there must have been an event that some Jews were witness to which lead to this belief and this boast. The only two options here are they either saw Jesus hanging and apparently dying on the cross, or there were stories that Jesus was killed in some other way the Jews were referring to as a basis of their claim.

    “They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him”
    [Meaning: The Jews did not kill Jesus by any means nor did they put him to death via hanging on the cross. By denying the “crucifixion” here the Quran does not deny the mere hanging of Jesus on the cross; it only denies his death on it. This is a crucial distinction. As stated above the meaning of the Arabic word صَلَبُوۡہُ “crucify” is to succeed in putting someone to DEATH via hanging on a cross.

    “but it was made to appear so to them. ”
    [Meaning: The “it” here can only be be referring to the topic being talked about before the word “lakin”. Another way of saying the same thing is it was made to appear to the Jews that they had successfully put Jesus to death, but he in fact was not killed by them. Based on my research, the verb شبه (in the passive voice) can also mean “he was made to appear like”, or “was made to resemble”. Now the question arises, who is the person who was made to appear “like one killed or crucified.” Clearly, it was Jesus whom the Jews tried to crucify or slay. Nobody else can be meant here, for there is absolutely no reference to any other person in the context. To what then was Jesus made to appear like? The context provides a clear answer to that question: Jesus appeared like one who had been killed i.e. the Jews wrongly took Jesus for dead. I believe this interpretation is in perfect harmony with the context of this verse, reason, and what modern historical evidence suggests at minimum regarding the crucifixion event (i.e. that it did occur). This understanding also removes the anxiety Muslim exegetes feel who incorrectly feel that the Quran denies Jesus being put on the cross when they are confronted with historical evidence that he was. It also saves those who cannot deny based on historical evidence that Jesus was put on the cross, but also cannot bring their reason to accept the substitution theory – a theory that has absolute no basis in the Quran, reliable Hadith, or reason.

    “Those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of conjecture. ”
    [Meaning: The “it” being referred to here can only refer to the question of the death of Jesus. The Jews say they killed Jesus. Christians say he died and was resurrected. However, neither party has attained the stage of certainty regarding this question.

    “They did not kill him with certainty. ”
    [Meaning; This last declaration is the thesis of this verse. Allah emphatically declares that the Jews did not kill Jesus for certain. This sentence does not deny that Jesus was put on the cross – if Allah wanted to deny that He would have said “They did not hang him on the cross for certain”. What Allah is denying is that the Jews did not kill Jesus. This denial only makes sense if an actual attempt was made on Jesus’ life in the first place – it would make no sense in my opinion for Allah to emphatically deny the Jews having killed Jesus if an attempt was not made on his life by them.

    In conclusion, I believe the verse when understood as explained above makes it clear that:
    1) An actual attempt on Jesus’ life was made (i.e. he was put on the cross – which is consistent with the verse itself and all modern historical accounts),
    2) The Jews thought he died on the cross because Jesus looked like one who was dead (i.e. unconscious), however they were not certain,
    3) In reality, however, Jesus had not died and therefore the Jews failed in their plan to kill him

    Lastly, I believe I have come to a sound conclusion (and solution based on the Quran) regarding the causes of the belief of some recent scholars who conclude that Jesus did die on the cross despite this verse clearly confirming the Jews did not kill him. I’ll leave that topic for another post however.

    Looking forward to hearing from you.


    1. Dear Salman,

      Thank you for your comment.

      I cannot go over things I have already discussed in the interview. More specifically, I concluded that Jesus was not put on the cross. Following the denial of killing by a denial of crucifixion as well can only mean denying a non-fatal crucifixion. Within the scope of the interview, I do not have much more to add beyond what I have already covered in detail.

      With respect to the verb شبه, linguistally, it cannot refer to Jesus, if this is what you are saying. I think the Zamakhshari and Razi both explain this point well.


      1. Thank you for your response. Do you believe the Quran confirms that Jesus died a natural death sometime after the attempted crucifixion event?

        It seems to me that many of the scholars who claim Jesus died on the cross do so because they see other verses in the Quran that they believe confirm Jesus’ death. What they fail to consider in my opinion is that those verses could be referring to a time possibly many years after the crucifixion event.

        1. Yes, I do believe that he died a natural death later.

          Yes, it is the fact that the Qur’an confirms that Jesus was mortal and died that makes some think that this his death was on the cross.

    2. If what you say is true, what happened after the crucifixion? He was taken down alive (while everyone thought he died). Was he buried? Did he get up and run away and go past the guards? And what is the significance of the “i will raise you to myself” verse?

      1. I could not understand your point, but then I noticed that, in an earlier reply, instead of writing “I concluded that Jesus was not put on the cross”, I had unwittingly missed out the word “not”! This has now been corrected. The video presents known and new observations confirming the standard understanding of the Qur’an that Jesus (PBUH) was not crucified.

        If this is not what you asked about, please explain.

        1. Thank you so much for replying to me. I’m very honored.

          I was actually talking to Salman Sadiq (and yes, indirectly to you too) that said that Jesus WAS put on the cross, but he wasn’t crucified (the meaning of which is he didn’t DIE from being placed on the cross). So, what happened after he was put on the cross and taken down from the cross alive?

          By the way, Dr Fatoohi. I apologize for saying this, but I have not finished watching your video yet. I wanted to know what your position in this crucifixion event was first before finishing it. I promise you, I’ll finish it later today.

  3. Dear Dr Fatoohi,

    I just finished your interview with Paul Williams. If I’m not mistaken, your conclusion was that the Quran clearly denies the crucifixion of Jesus. However, you also said in one of the comments here that Jesus “died a natural death later.” Doesn’t that mean you’re saying that Jesus WAS put on the cross, but did NOT die. He was taken down from the cross ALIVE. Am I understanding this correctly?

  4. In my reconstruction of what happened to Jesus (PBUH), I try to tie together the various pieces of information available. It is my reading of the texts, that Jesus was not put on the cross, which I make abundantly clear in the presentation using several arguments, but was raised to heaven.

    Now to the difference I have with the majority view. I do not take the term “heaven” here to mean some “spiritual” place, like the place where martyrs are alive, because Jesus was not killed anyway. I do not consider it, either, as a place that has its own supernatural laws, so people do not age, fall ill, die…. In other words, it is not like the paradise of the hereafter. Rather, I treat it as just another place/planet where he continued to live, as he lived on earth, and later died.

    1. Dear Dr Fatoohi,

      I understand your position now. And it is a possibility that I cannot disagree (or agree ) with. If you don’t mind me asking more questions (if you do, just ignore me), how do you understand about Jesus’ return? WILL he return? If so, will he be RAISED from the dead and sent back to earth? If he WON’T be returning, what is your understanding of Jesus being the MESSIAH (meaning, what was his mission as the messiah of the world, as opposed to his mission as a messenger to the Jews)? Thank you.

      1. It is interesting that you should ask about my view on the return of Jesus (PBUH). In my second interview with Paul Williams,, my mention of Jesus’ death, which means that he won’t return, was met with dismay and anger by some viewers. You can read the comments and my replies to some of them on the YouTube page. I have now written the first of a two-part article that deals with this subject. You can read a draft of it here You can post any feedback you may have there as well.

        The question of messiahship is completely different and I cannot deal with it here. I have dealt with it in some detail in a book on this subject I wrote almost fifteen years ago.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *