Proof #14: The fallacy

And there is none among the People of the Book but will believe in it before his death; and on the Day of Ressurection, he (Jesus) shall be a witness against them (4:160)

This verse has three indirect references, two of which are ambiguous (underlined above), making it uncertain what they're referring to. The interpretation of these references can alter the verse's meaning. The following discussion explores the implications of interpreting these references in different ways.

Understanding #1

And there is none among the People of the Book but will believe in him (Jesus) before his (Jesus) death; …

Many scholars who believe Jesus is still alive base their claim on this understanding. They argue that both references, 'bihi' and 'mauti-him', point to Jesus, suggesting that every one of the People of the Book will believe in Jesus at an unspecified future time, before Jesus' own death. The logic is that since not all Jews have yet believed in Jesus, this verse implies Jesus is still alive. They propose that this event — all Jews believing in Jesus — will occur after his descent from the heavens.

How is this to come about? It is said that upon his return Jesus will wage a war of extermination against the Jews. But before going on this all-out offensive, he will issue an ultimatum: they can accept him and live or they can reject him and die. And forthwith he will begin the killing process that will spare not a single rejecting Jew. This is a key point. This understanding does not allow even a single rejecting Jew to survive. The usage of the all-inclusive in-min-ahlil-kitabi at the beginning of the verse requires that 100% of the Jews must participate in of what follows — here, ‘belief in Jesus’. What better way to ensure 100% participation than to kill 100% of those who do not! When Jesus is done with the holy massacre the only type of Jew left alive will be one who believes in him. And having accomplished this, Jesus will have successfully removed the primary obstacle to his own death and in due course will also die. But until then, he remains very much alive, they say.

Of course, the first (and glaring) problem here is the genocide of the Jews, but that apparently is a non-issue with the proponents of this translation. They are resigned, if not quite comfortable, to the complete extermination of the Jews as a race. Attempting to shame them into changing their minds probably won't work, so let's focus on dialectical analysis to see if it leads us anywhere. The expression 'in-min', when applied to a group of people or things, means each and every one of them, with no exclusions permitted. In this verse it is applied to the People of the Book, i.e. the Jews. While it simply means all Jews, past and present, the proponents of #1, have placed a number of exclusions on it. All Jews who have existed and died before Jesus’ reappearance are excluded. All those who reject him after his reappearance are also excluded (they will be killed by him, of course). It is also said that after the extermination of the world Jewry and subsequent death of Jesus, qiyamah, the calamity that will bring the world to an end would soon follow; yet at other places it is also said that the world will be choke-full of disbelievers when it happens. The question then arises: if everyone ends up believing in Jesus, and by extension, in God and Muhammad, who on Earth would these non-believers be? It turns out these wretched people will be those Jews and others who will go “astray” after Jesus’ death. One might imagine that the Jews, converted under duress, would be particularly eager to revert as soon as Jesus dies and the threat to their lives is lifted.  Who could blame them? Anyway, that's the third exclusion. Thus, a term implying universal inclusion is progressively narrowed until a thin sliver of its intended targets remains within its scope. This, in my opinion, mutilates a uniquely all-inclusive clause. Let the reader be the judge.

Understanding #2

And there is none among the People of the Book but will believe in him (Jesus) before his (person of the Book) death; …

Proponents of this translation say that in their death-throes Jews are forced by angles to believe in Jesus. This, obviously, is impossible to verify. However, it does not help the argument of Jesus' life or death either way.

What it “really” means:

Clearly, the first translation is logically absurd and violates Arabic usage, notwithstanding unleashing of extreme cruelty towards the Jews; a cruelty that would make Nazi-era atrocities seem tame by comparison. The second translation is acceptable only because it is neither provable nor disprovable.

Here is an alternate reading of the verse which clarifies its meaning.

And there is none among the People of the Book but will believe in it (conjecture expressed in 4:158) before his (own) death; …

The previous verses (4:158-159) state that although they claim to have killed Jesus, it is merely a conjecture about which they lack certainty and are in doubt. They neither managed to kill him nor successfully crucify him; they attempted to humiliate him, but Allah exalted him. The implied reference 'bihi' in 4:160 refers to this conjecture. It means the state of doubt among Jews/Christians about this matter will persist during their lifetime, and only in the afterlife will this issue be resolved for them, and not as they expect.

Next Proof>