Did Jesus raise the dead?

Raising the dead in literature generally symbolizes a rejection of fate or God's power, yet ironically, this feat is commonly attributed to Jesus as one of his many miracles. Christian attribution of such power to Jesus is understandable, after all they consider him wholly Divine and bringing a few corpses back to life would be relatively simple. However Muslims believe Jesus to be just a man, yet, perplexingly, many among them attribute super-human powers to him including the ability to raise the dead. Whether the dead can come back to life (now or ever) is not a difficult question to answer, it is a matter of shared human experience. The finality that is Death is not lost on anyone except perhaps the insane or deeply bereaved. Yet when it comes to religion, sane people have no problem adopting resurrection myths as part of their belief system despite the fact that there is no single verifiable instance in all of recorded history of a dead coming back to life. That, in itself, should be sufficient to show such things just do not happen. There should really be no need to quote holy scriptures to establish an elementary reality as this. However, Muslims who believe in the resurrection phenomenon mistakenly attribute it to the Quran, therefore it is best rebutted with the aid of Quran itself.

On the finality of death the Holy Quran is quite clear :

Allah takes charge of souls at the time of death, and of those not yet dead during their sleep. Then he retains those in respect of which He has decreed death, and sends back the others for an appointed term. In that are surely Signs for a people who reflect. (39:43)

While the soul of one who is merely sleeping is returned for an appointed term, the soul of one who dies is retained with God. In clear and unequivocal terms the Quran describes death as an irreversible phenomenon. Any verse of the Holy Quran that purports to say otherwise would need to be understood in metaphorical terms, otherwise Quran would be contradicting itself. As it happens, "revival" or some variant thereof is one of the most heavily used metaphors in any language, Arabic being no exception. It is never understood literally. In English we have a dying man being brought back to life, a sinful soul is saved when it is born again, or someone imminently threatened is a dead man walking, who, if he survives, gets a second lease on life.   Quran which is widely considered to be the pinnacle of Arabic erudition uses various rhetorical devices, including metaphorical expressions in abundance. So when it says that Jesus revived the dead, it can only mean that he revived the spiritually dead, which, after all, was why he came.  There is no room for literal reading of that verse in the presence of 39:43 above.  

About Jesus the Quran says:

and you (Jesus) did raise the dead by my command (5:111)

Interestingly, we find similar terminology used for Muhammad. Here people are called to respond to Allah and His Messenger when they are called to life.  

O ye who believe, respond to Allah and His Messenger when he calls you that he may bring you to life ... (8:25)

Clearly the ones being raised to life are the spiritually dead. Possibly the most spectacular example of raising of the dead is the transformation of the Arabs from a violent, barbaric people into a learned and spiritual empire.

Applying the phrase literally to Jesus while not applying it in the same way to Muhammad is  problematic as it elevates Jesus to a station above that of Muhammad. That should be of concern to Muslims as they claim superiority of Muhammad over all other prophets. Furthermore as the Seal of the Prophets (Khatam-an-Nabiyeen), which is his most important title, Muhammad should be able to demonstrate all feats attributed with the position of prophethood, yet he never resurrected the physically dead. That would be akin to a seal which only carries a partial impression, hence defective.  However both Jesus and Muhammad did create a spiritual revival in their respective times, the latter arguably did so with far greater success.

There is another grave problem that the literal interpretation of resurrection stumbles right into.  Neither the Quran nor the Bible, let alone laws made by man, mention what is to be done with the resurrected people. Anyone familiar with lawmaking knows that obscure possibilities also need to be accounted for if a law is to claim completeness. When laws made by man have holes it is usually because the lawmakers did not account for something, we cannot accuse God of the same fault. Omission of how to handle such situation by any religious scripture is noteworthy.

Playing out a hypothetical scenario of resurrection can quickly turn complicated. When people die certain things begin to happen pretty much automatically. The body is disposed off, buried or cremated, financial affairs of the deceased are settled, and inheritance is distributed.  The spouse goes through a period of bereavement and once over the initial shock eventually moves on with life. At some point they start courting new prospects and in many cases get remarried. Basically life goes on. Before too long, the hole that was created by the departed gets filled so completely that even if the dead were to return there would be no space left for them to be accommodated in the society. If, however, that were to happen, without doubt it would be a catastrophe. Its unlikely that many would be pleased (except maybe the mother!) to see the deceased rise from the grave, dust off the dirt and amble back home looking for a smooth return to status quo ante. The prophet may have shown a spectacular miracle but it would be one with the potential to ruin the peace of an entire town. With the dead man's property sold off, his wife with a new husband, his livelihood taken, he is unlikely to return to a situation very welcoming. Chances are that he does not even know he was dead, all he knows is that suddenly the world has gone topsy turvy. It would be a frightful mess to resolve. One would expect that with every resurrection there would be a flurry of litigation sufficient to keep an army of lawyers busy for a long time. On what basis would any court settle such disputes? Not finding any help in their law books, perhaps, the court will turn to the holy scriptures. The whole mess, after all, was created by a holy man out to impress his deniers. May be his revealed book would come to aid with some guidance. So they would turn to the book and start perusing it diligently page by page hoping to find a way out. And exactly what guidance would they find there? Nothing! Not even a hint of a solution. Then they would wonder if what they saw was miracle or a very cruel joke.

Its not without good reason that the phenomenon of death is final and definitive. It is fundamental in the grand order of things and one of the inviolable decrees of God. Verse 39:43 (above) after describing the finality of death fittingly concludes: in that are surely signs for people who reflect.

Proof #16: Inescapable death

Then We fashioned the sperm into a clot; then We fashioned the clot into a shapeless lump; then We fashioned bones out of this shapeless lump; then We clothed the bones with flesh; then We developed it into another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators. (23:15)

Then after that you must surely die. (23:16)

Here, the process of creation is described as it goes through its various stages in the womb. Once a complete human specimen is delivered, it begins its inevitable journey to its death. Jesus would have gone through the very same process and would have met his eventual and timely death in due course.

While Quran presents an overwhelming evidence of Jesus' natural death, yet there are many Muslims who remain insistent on his continued life. It is a difficult position to defend, which goes against nature as well as the Word of God. But the defenders of the indefensible are usually of the unyielding kind. When beaten on all fronts, at some point they take refuge in the last of all fall-back shelters—their very last line of defense: Fine, he is dead! but is it not in the power of God to bring him back to life? They just have to have him back! That question, mercifully, is also answered right here in the next verse:

Then on the Day of Resurrection will you be raised up. (23:17)

Yes he will be raised, but not here. It will be in the Hereafter, along with everyone else. There he will not be asked to save the politics of the Muslim ummah, fight wars for them or grant them global domination, while they idle about and watch the wholesale slaughter of the infidels. Such macabre and cruel expectations are products of sick minds and will never be fulfilled.  When Jesus is raised, like everyone else, he will only be asked to give an account of himself, a glimpse of which is given in the Holy Quran and is discussed here.

Proof #15: Aging—a fact of life

It is Allah Who created you in a state of weakness, and after weakness gave strength; then after strength, caused weakness and old age. He creates what He pleases. He is the All-knowing, the All-Powerful. (30:55)

It's hard to believe anyone would wish for Jesus to be alive and cursed with aging for millennia. A typical lifespan becomes painful once old age approaches; 2000 years would be an unbearable existence. The Holy Quran defines aging as an undeniable principle applicable to all life forms, including Jesus. Aging inevitably leads to a loss of physical and mental abilities. It's relentless and irreversible. If something is alive, it ages. Born weak, humans gain strength until they reach a peak, then decline sets in, progressively diminishing faculties. In extreme old age, existence can become a sort of living death, with dignity entirely compromised. Thankfully, most people pass away before reaching this terminal stage.

Jesus is a man, and being a prophet doesn't exempt him from life's realities. The Quran supports the idea that if he were still alive, his existence would be reduced to a state of mental death. Aging for 2000 years is the worst fate imaginable, and it's unlikely a revered prophet of God would be made to suffer this. There's no precedent for what existence at such an age would be like, but we can speculate that such a person would be incapable of rational, coherent thought. His brain would be physically damaged, and muscles atrophied to complete uselessness. Instead of pinning the entire Ummah's rescue hopes on such a person, wouldn't it be better to let him rest in peace?

Also see:
Proof #6: Indignities of old age
Proof #11: Unstoppable Ageing

Next Proof>

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>

Do Mortals travel to the Heavens?

Or thou have a house of gold or thou ascend into heaven; and we will not believe in thy ascension until thou send down to us a book that we can read. Say, Holy is my Lord! I am not but a man sent as a messenger. (17:94)

This verse dismisses the possibility of humans ascending to the heavens to bring guidance. When disbelievers made various demands of the Holy Prophet, one being that he should ascend to the heavens and bring a book from there, he was advised to respond that his claim is merely that of a mortal prophet, making the demand nonsensical. 'Holy is my Lord,' signifies that Allah is far above such absurdities.

Muslims who believe that Jesus physically ascended to the heavens are, in fact, supporting the Christian viewpoint. If Jesus truly ascended to the heavens and will return one day, this verse alone is enough to affirm his status beyond mortality, which aligns precisely with the Christian belief.

Would Jesus descend on the shoulders of angels?

Those who anticipate a physical descent of Jesus from the heavens, carried by angels, should reflect on this verse. Such whimsical expectations are typical of those who oppose prophets, often demanding visible signs like angels descending—in this case, as in Noah's time:

And the chiefs of his people, who disbelieved, said, 'He (Noah) is only a man like yourselves; he seeks to make himself superior to you. And if Allah so willed, He could have surely sent down angels. We have never heard of such a thing among our forefathers. (23:25)

Proof #13: The conjecture

And their saying, 'We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah;' whereas they slew him not, nor crucified him, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified; and those who differ therein are certainly in a state of doubt about it; they have no definite knowledge thereof, but only follow a conjecture; and they did not convert this conjecture into a certainty; On the contrary, Allah exalted him to Himself. And Allah is Mighty, Wise. (4:158-159)

This passage emphasizes their failure to murder Jesus by any means. The verse begins with the Jewish boast of having succeeded in murdering Jesus.

The Holy Quran firmly rejects this claim. By the verse's end, a conclusive declaration is made: they certainly failed to kill him. This implies that it's not the act of crucifixion that is denied, but death by crucifixion.

Read rest here:  see note 158

Next Proof>

Proof #12: The inevitable decline

The example of life on earth is like that of water that We cause to descend from heaven. Then with it mingles the vegetation of the earth of which both the people and the cattle partake. It continues to be so until the earth blossoms forth in full bloom and ripens into loveliness—then while those who possess it deem themselves supreme over it, there suddenly descends Our decree at night or during the day. Then We render it a field that is mown down as if it had not existed the day before. Thus do we expound our Signs for a people who reflect. (10:25)

This is another expression of the same universal law that governs all life. Like vegetation, life blossoms to a full bloom, then withers away and dies. Is Jesus exempt from this universal law's certainty?

Next Proof>

Proof #11: Unstoppable Ageing

And him whom We grant long life—We revert him to a weak state in creation. Will they not then understand? (36:69) more translations

This verse portrays aging as an inevitable natural process, exempting no one. Like everyone else, Jesus would be subject to it. After reaching physical maturity, he would have aged and weakened over time, eventually becoming an old man and meeting his death. This is unremarkable; his fate could be no different from any other human's. Yet, if we believe he's still alive, stepping into his third millennium, this verse implies his physical and mental faculties would be so deteriorated that his existence would be meaningless. The only life this verse allows him is one indistinguishable from death itself.

Next Proof>

Proof #10: Life limited to the terrestrial

But Satan caused them both to slip by means of it and drove them out of the state in which they were. And We said: ‘Go forth; some of you are enemies of others, and for you there is an abode in the earth and a provision for a time.’ (2:37) more translations

This verse clearly establishes Earth as the lifelong abode for humans. As long as a person lives, their physical existence remains confined to the terrestrial world. Upon death, the astral body, or soul, departs and joins the deceased in the celestial world, leaving the physical body to decay and return to dust. Humans are born, live, and die in the mundane world. It's like a prison, with death being the only possible escape. This verse rejects the idea of Jesus, or anyone else, ascending to the heavens alive. The Holy Prophet saw, in his special vision known as the Mairaj, Jesus in the Second Heavens accompanied by Prophet Yahya. This reference is from Sahih Bukhari.:

Malik bin Sasaa narrated that the Holy Prophet said, "While I was lying in the Kaaba... Gabriel accompanied me until we reached the nearest heaven... I saw Adam there. Gabriel told me, 'This is your father, Adam. Greet him.' So, I greeted him, and he returned the greeting, saying, 'Welcome, O' pious son and pious Prophet.' Then Gabriel ascended with me to the second heaven. There, I saw John and Jesus, who were cousins. Gabriel told me, 'These are John and Jesus. Greet them.' So, I greeted them, and they both returned my greeting, saying, 'Welcome, O' pious brother and pious Prophet...' 

This evidence also poses a problem for the concept of a living Jesus. What would he be doing among the dead? Such an illogical blend of the living and the dead is intellectually indefensible and makes religion a subject of ridicule. It would be wise for Muslims to reject the notion of a living Jesus, a concept that grants him a superhuman status, elevating him above creation and infringing on divinity. This belief is profoundly harmful, contradicting Tauheed, and aids Christians in their claims of Jesus's divinity and sonship.

Next Proof>

Proof #9: Synopsis of Jesus' life

‘And peace was on me the day I was born, and peace there will be on me the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised up to life again.’’ (19:34) more translations

Here Jesus refers to three principal events of his existence: the day of his birth, the day of his death and his resurrection on the Day of Judgement. One might expect that, in addition to these three events, his purported ascent and the subsequent descent in the Latter days would be significant enough to warrant a mention. Yet, we find them conspicuously absent. If real, these momentous and unprecedented events, with enormous consequences for him and the rest of humanity, would be on par with his birth, death and resurrection.  Yet, Allah makes no mention of them here or anywhere else in the Holy Quran. On the contrary, numerous verses assert his death as having already occurred, some directly and others indirectly, while not a single verse speaks of his corporeal ascent to the heavens, his future descent or his continued survival. One can only conclude that it is a figment of some people's imagination, that is unequivocally rejected by the Holy Quran.

Next Proof>

Proof #8: It's curtains for the earlier prophets

Those are a people that have passed away; for them is what they earned, and for you shall be what you earn; and you shall not be questioned as to what they did. (2:135) more translations

The preceding verses mention a number of prophets. This verse declares the prophets of the bygone days as all dead. 'For them is what they earned' means their accounts are closed, and their actions have ended. There is finality and closure regarding their actions, and a separation between us and them. This verse is, in fact, a corollary of Holy Prophet Muhammad^saw being the Khataman Nabiyeen, the Seal of the Prophets. Earlier prophets have no unfinished business left, and hence there is no need to keep any of them unnaturally alive in the heaven's recesses. In other words, it is not their problem anymore. The task of spreading God's message is in the safe and capable hands of the Holy Prophet of Islam, may peace and blessing of Allah be upon him. All spiritual blessings and ranks now flow through him. The Holy Prophet is in no need of help from a prophet sent to another people. Through his power of spiritual purification, he is capable of raising such souls from among his own people who would help him in his mission, some of whom may even reach the status of a prophet while staying subservient to him. That is entirely consistent with his status of Khataman Nabiyeen, whereas the return of an earlier prophet to rescue his mission, a prophet who received nothing by way of spiritual food from him, is a rank insult and is tantamount to breaking that seal.

Next Proof>

Proof #7: On unnatural lifespans

We granted not everlasting life to any human being before thee. If then thou shouldst die, shall they live here forever? Every soul shall taste of death; (21:35-36) more translations

This verse asserts that individuals who existed before Muhammad, peace be upon him, were not granted an extended lifespan beyond natural limits, indicating that those from earlier times have indeed departed.  The question then arises whether Jesus, who came 600 years before Muhammad, could be an exception to this verse's implication. The claim is that Jesus, who was reportedly alive in the heavens when this verse was revealed, doesn't violate its principles as the verse only refutes the concept of eternal life, and 600 years is well short of eternity! Upon his return and the resumption of his natural aging process, he would eventually pass away. Although he might live for a few thousand years, it's far from being eternal, hence there's no contradiction.  This argument has issues: the term 'everlasting' should be interpreted as 'unnaturally prolonged', not 'eternal'. Eternity makes little sense because eternity cannot exist before a specific point in time. When a limit is set on the timeline, such as the birth of the Holy Prophet in this context, the concept of eternity becomes invalid as it cannot exist within defined boundaries. No one could have existed in eternity, before Muhammad. The subsequent part of the verse builds on this, asking “If then you should die” implying that the Prophet will also pass away in the normal course, just like everyone before him. 

The claim that 'everlasting' here means 'eternal' creates a conundrum for the Prophet. It poses a question to him which he cannot answer. From his perspective, eternity hasn't arrived, nor can it ever arrive for him or anyone else.  Thus, it's impossible for him to judge if someone 'before him' is still alive when eternity 'happens'. Projecting this scenario into the future is also unhelpful for two reasons: firstly, eternity is unreachable, and secondly, he is mortal, which this verse also concludes. The Holy Prophet can only bear witness to and corroborate the absence of abnormal life spans before him, including that of Jesus.

Next Proof>

Proof #6: Indignities of old age

And there are some of you who are caused to die prematurely, and there are others who are driven to the worst part of life with the result that they knew nothing after having had knowledge (22:6) more translations

In this verse, Allah categorizes people into two groups based on their lifespan:

• The first group, which comprises the majority of mankind, includes those who die prematurely. They could have lived longer if not for illnesses, accidents, or harm.
• The second group includes those who reach the natural limits of their life, progressively losing control over their faculties as they transition from life towards death. Allah refers to this as the “worst” part of life, a state of existence that is loathsome and wretched. Mentally, they devolve, becoming child-like. Further decline wipes out their life memories. Advanced cerebral activities slow down, and brain functions are limited to controlling respiration and heart rhythm. For those who continue to live, their minds transform into empty canvases, stripped of lingering memories, emotions, or sensations. Ultimately, death compassionately takes those who, in essence, had departed much earlier.

Given this, it's clear that Allah, the Creator who understands the design of man, divides mankind into these two groups. Jesus, being human, must fall into one of these groups. Either he met his death at its appointed and appropriate time two thousand years ago, or he is still alive, subject to the inevitable ravages of time. If still living, his physical and mental state would have declined so significantly that his existence would be inconsequential. In such a condition, his ongoing survival could not be of any advantage to him or humanity.

Next Proof>

Proof #5: Prophets need to eat to live

And We did not give them bodies that ate no food, nor were they to live for ever. (21:9) more translations

This verse makes the following statements about prophets:

• They cannot survive without food.
• They do not live forever.

In 5:76, it is mentioned that Jesus "used to" eat food. If he no longer eats, according to this verse, his physical existence must have ended, implying he has died.

The verse also asserts that prophets don't have eternal life. The phrase "live forever" shouldn't be taken too literally, as the idea of eternity is abstract and hard to grasp. An argument solely denying eternity lacks depth.  Do we wait for an eternity to see if this verse bears true? This can be understood by questioning if a lifespan of a million or a thousand years would conflict with this verse. Evidently, both would. This verse disallows any lifespan that could be seen as unnaturally long or deviating from the norm. If Jesus were still alive, his age would be approximately 2000 years, a lifespan that is extraordinary for both a common person and a prophet.

Next Proof>

Did Jesus create birds?

Not according to this verse:

Surely those on whom you call upon instead of Allah cannot create even a fly, though they should all combine together for the purpose. And if the fly should snatch away anything from them, they cannot recover it therefrom. Weak, indeed, are both the seeker and the sought. (22:74)

This verse asserts that false deities don't possess the capability to create even a creature as simple as a fly.  If the ability to create a fly implies godhood, then creating a bird, a higher order creature, would undoubtedly imply the same. However, some Muslims, misinterpreting the metaphorical expression used in 3:50, believe that Jesus created birds. This verse challenges that belief and entirely dismisses the possibility. Among all those "called upon instead of Allah," Jesus holds a distinctive position, having the most followers. If it's accepted that he could create living birds of flesh and blood, with or without God's permission, then the argument of 22:74 fails in its first and most crucial test case.

In defense of the literal interpretation of 3:50, it's argued that Jesus could create birds and resurrect the dead only with Allah's permission. Since granting permission remains Allah's prerogative, the Unity of Godhead remains intact. However, this reasoning weakens the argument in the previous verse. We're informed that life creation is a unique ability of Allah, setting Him apart from His creation, and it's a power He's loathe to delegate. However, stories circulate of specific individuals, notably virtuous ones, who received this power. Their moral standing, prophethood, or lack thereof is irrelevant. If accurate, this delegation of the power to create life could undermine the concept of a singular God. An impartial observer might infer that several beings possess life-creating abilities. By sharing His unique power, God could be seen as complicating matters, making the quest for the One True God exceedingly challenging. How can one discern which ancients were granted Allah's permission to create life and which were not? In this context, there would be no basis to criticize those who attribute partners to Allah.

Then again, what became of the birds Jesus created? These birds must have reproduced and multiplied, leading us to the assumption that there are two kinds of birds in the world: those created by Allah and those created by Jesus. It's more probable that these two types have intermingled, making it impossible to definitively state whether a specific bird was entirely created by Allah, by Jesus, or a combination of both.  If this doesn't constitute shirk, then what does?

Meaning of Birds in the Quran

There is no contradiction in the Holy Quran. The reference to 'birds' can be metaphorically interpreted as individuals who achieve significant spiritual elevation:

Seest thou not that it is Allah Whose praises, all who are in the heavens and the earth celebrate, and so do the birds with their wings outspread? (24:42)

Indeed, regular birds, along with all of God's creations, both living and non-living, are included in "all who are in the heavens and the earth." The reference to birds with outspread wings could symbolize the most noble of all creations that praise Allah. This could only be spiritually soaring humans, deserving of special and honored recognition.

Jesus' Destination of Refuge

And We made the son of Mary and his mother a Sign, and gave them shelter on an elevated land of green valleys and springs of running water. (23:51)

After surviving crucifixion, Jesus left his persecutors' land and journeyed East to find the lost tribes of Israel. He eventually reached Kashmir, where he lived a long, fruitful life preaching to the dispersed Jewish tribes that had previously settled there. He is buried in Srinagar's Khanyar quarter. His tomb, known as the resting place of Prophet Yuz Asaf (Jesus the Gatherer), can still be visited today. This Quranic verse describes Kashmir as an "elevated land of valleys and springs of running water."

His mother, Mary, is believed to be buried in the Pakistani town of Murree, at a site known as Pindi Point. Locals refer to the tomb as Mai Mari da Asthan, or the Resting Place of Mother Mary. This region of Pakistan is located at the foothills of the Himalayas, at the entrance to the Kashmir Valley.

Regarding further information on this topic, I recommend the book "Jesus in India" by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian (1835-1908). It's a foundational work on this subject, tracing Jesus' journey through Nasibus, Persia, Afghanistan, and finally Kashmir, where he preached among the Jews who had settled there after their deliverance from Nebuchadnezzar's bondage.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's book: Jesus in India (complete text)
BBC Documentary: Did Jesus Die on the Cross?
Tomb of Jesus Website
Mary's Tomb

Proof #4: Prophets before Muhammad have all died

And Muhammad is but a messenger. Indeed, all Messengers have passed away before him. If then he dies or is slain, will you turn back on your heels? (3:145) more translations

Two points are being made here with reference to the Holy Prophet^saw:

• Since prophets before him have all died, this prophet will also die, and his death would not indicate a defect in his prophethood.
• If it were necessary for prophets to live forever, then show us a single instance from among earlier prophets who is still alive.
  

If Jesus, who came approximately six hundred years before the Holy Prophet, was still alive, then neither of these arguments would hold.

The construct used here is similar to that used in 5:76 (discussed earlier). It begins with the statement that prophets before Muhammad have all died. The Arabic term 'khalat' is used for 'death', which means to pass away. Some argue that khalat could also mean any form of departing, including bodily ascending to the heaven while still alive. Arabic usage of khalat would resist this interpretation but presently let's not get into lexical discussion. This verse spares us that trouble as it internally provides a complete interpretation: If then he dies or is slain, will you turn back on your heels? Thus, a prophet can pass away either by natural death or by being slain. No third possibility is mentioned, implying it doesn't exist.  If there were other ways prophets passed away, they should be listed here, otherwise, the verse would be incomplete and factually incorrect, which is not expected of God's word. To illustrate, consider a cricket analogy:

If Javed is neither bold nor caught, is he still batting?

For completeness, this statement should enumerate all possible ways an innings can end, without omission. Otherwise, it's defective and uninformative about Javed's innings. Anyone with basic cricket knowledge knows Javed's innings could end in various ways. For example, he could be out hit-wicket, run out, out for handling the ball, or simply exceeding the match's allotted time. However, the statement fails to mention these, limiting itself to only two possibilities. This leaves us with two options: we could insist there are only two ways of ending an innings—ignoring cricket laws and countless match accounts. Alternatively, we could deem this statement incomplete and defective. Anyone with basic cricket knowledge would choose the latter. This statement doesn't clarify if Javed is out, still playing, or if he will ever complete his innings. It essentially tells us nothing. Attributing such a defective statement to the Holy Quran is, to say the least, problematic.

Omission indeed implies impossibility. If any prophet had ascended to heaven, it couldn't have been omitted here. Jesus is particularly relevant when considering this verse, as he was the prophet closest in time to Muhammad, hence his fate should be addressed first. In 4:158, it's stated he wasn't slain. Therefore, he must have died a natural death.

The inclusion of "all" before "Messengers" in the translation, while not present in the original Arabic, is implied due to the conclusion drawn: the prediction and certainty of Muhammad's death. This conclusion is only logical if the premise applies to all prophets. If "all" is replaced with "some", the verse would imply that Muhammad is certain to die because some previous prophets died, which doesn't logically follow. If only some died, why should Muhammad necessarily die? Replacing "all" with "some" would only make sense if the argument was that Muhammad may or may not die, which isn't the case.

Consensus of the Companions
Is there any hadith in which the companions discuss and assert Jesus' death one way or another? The difficulty in finding such a hadith is that sane people hardly engage in arguments over the death of individuals long gone. The absence of any hadith to this effect, in fact, points to Jesus's death, not his life. For example, no one today holds discussion forums on whether George Washington, the first president of the United States, is alive or dead, which tells us that his status is not a subject of controversy, and all agree that he has died. It would reflect poorly on someone's intelligence to needlessly belabor the point that George Washington has died. Similarly, the companions of the Holy Prophet did not hold discussions on the deaths of Moses, Isaac, Abraham, Noah, Adam, nor did they discuss the status of Jesus simply because they believed him to have died and there was no reason to question it such that it became a topic of interest. However, there is one remarkable incident which leaves little doubt as to where they stood on the matter of the death of all prophets, including Jesus. That incident took place following the Holy Prophet's passing. His body was still unburied, and his companions, overwhelmed with emotion, struggled to accept his death despite his lifeless form being visible before them. The following narrative is taken from Sahih Bukhari:

Abdullah bin Abbas narrates that when Abu Bakr arrived Umar was addressing the people. He said, “O‘ Umar sit down.” Umar did not sit but people left him and turned thier attention towards Abu Bakr, who then said, “Those amongst you who worshipped Muhammad should know that Muhammad has died. Those who worshipped Allah should be satisfied that Allah is alive and is impervious to suffering death. Allah has said that Muhammad^saw is but a messenger. Verily all Messengers have passed away before him. If then he dies or is slain, will you turn back on your heels? Those among you who turn back on their heels will not harm Allah a whit and Allah will reward those who are thankful.”

In another account, it's reported that Umar was so distressed that he unsheathed his sword, threatening to strike anyone who claimed Muhammad had passed away. Upon hearing this unsettling news, Abu Bakr unveiled Muhammad's face, kissed his forehead, and acknowledged that Allah wouldn't cause him to die twice. He understood Muhammad wasn't coming back. He then assembled everyone in the Masjid-al-Nabwi and recited this exact verse (3:145). Those in doubt then realized the reality. Umar reportedly felt weak and collapsed. The attendees felt as though this verse was being revealed anew. With great wisdom, Abu Bakr managed to stabilize the sensitive situation. This verse was enough to convince everyone present that Muhammad had departed like the prophets before him. If there was a common belief that any of the previous prophets were still alive, Abu Bakr's logic would have been flawed. If 'khalat' didn't mean death, Umar wouldn't have been convinced and would have argued about Jesus's case. Instead, no one protested, and everyone concluded, based on this verse, that Muhammad had died like the prophets before him.

Next Proof>

Proof #3: Jesus fate no different to earlier prophets

The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a Messenger; surely, Messengers like unto him had indeed passed away before him. And his mother was a truthful woman. They both used to eat food. (5:76) more translations

This verse makes the following claims:

• Jesus was a messenger, and previous messengers have passed away.
• Jesus and his mother ate food.

In this verse from the chapter Al-Maidah, both statements independently assert Jesus’ death.

Argument 1

The first part of this verse uses a classic syllogistic construct, a form of reasoning where a conclusion is drawn from two given or assumed propositions, with a common term providing the bridge. For example: propositions "All humans are mortal," and "All Greeks are humans" together imply All Greeks are mortal. 

Here, the common term is messenger, linking the two propositions Messiah, son of Mary, was only a messenger and messengers before him have passed away. The implied conclusion is that Jesus, like all messengers before him, has passed away. 

Indeed, while syllogism can lead to invalid conclusions if misused, it's unlikely that such a strong reasoning device would be used in a misleading way in this context. The logical conclusion drawn from the verse is that Jesus, like all prophets before him, has passed away.

Argument 2

The same verse asserts that Jesus and his mother used to eat food. If both Jesus and his mother, mentioned together, stopped eating, and we know his mother's cessation was due to death, it's reasonable to infer Jesus also stopped eating for the same reason: his own death.

There is not much wiggle room interpreting this verse differently, yet it could be argued that it's possible for Jesus to have stopped eating but still be alive by some special decree of God. However, this escape route is also blocked by the Quran. The following puts to rest the notion that Jesus, despite being hungry, is somehow surviving in the fourth heaven:

And we did not give them (Messengers) bodies that ate no food, nor were they to live for ever. (21:9)

Let's assume Jesus is still alive and will one day descend from the heavens. Imagine his return day. Having not eaten for over two thousand years, he'd naturally look forward to food and might ask his hosts, the Ulema, for something to break his extraordinarily long fast. He'd be surprised when, instead of a feast in his honor, the Ulema present him with verse 76 from Al-Maidah. They'd tell Jesus that according to the Holy Quran, he used to eat food, and since there's no mention of his future eating, they feel obliged to deny him much-deserved hospitality. Al-Maidah:76 prevents Jesus from eating anything. The moment Jesus consumes even a morsel, Al-Maidah:76 would be factually incorrect. No amount of Jesus' protestations would prevail. On one hand, the Ummah would risk losing the Quran's integrity, and on the other, a starving man in need of food! Of course, the Ummah can't lose the Quran, so Jesus would have to save the world on an empty stomach!

With a bit of reflection, it becomes abundantly clear that belief in a living Jesus is, in fact, a grave insult to our Holy Master, Muhammad^saw. If there was someone who deserved to live and return, it would have to be the Master Prophet himself. It is troubling for one who truly loves Muhammad to accept that someone who received no spiritual training from him could bring about the spiritual revival of his people in the latter days. Remember, Jesus, having preceded Muhammad in time, is not his spiritual pupil. As far as Jesus is concerned, he owes nothing to Muhammad. Yet, the same cannot be said of Muhammad if the scenario of Jesus's return is true. He would find himself monumentally obliged to the returning Israeli prophet as the Ummah is rescued at the time of its greatest need. Does this mean Muhammad was simply not up to the task of producing a savior from among his own people and was left with no choice but to requisition one from the distant past? If so, it's a stunning admission of Islam's inability to produce quality followers. When Jews needed a messiah, they were not told to get one from the cold storage of earlier peoples; their savior was from among their own, showing there was still life in Moses's spiritual lineage. However, in the time of their greatest peril, Muslims are supposed to go begging to the Jews and borrow their messiah—a cringe-inducing scenario for any self-respecting Muslim with troubling implications on the honor of the Holy Prophet. Where does that leave the Quranic claim of Muslims being the best of all peoples and their prophet the highest in rank? Instead, the Christian claim that Jesus is the "Alpha and the Omega—the first and the last" would be proven. It would be Jesus alone who would save the world, and the fact that there was Muhammad somewhere between Jesus' first and second appearance would only be a footnote in religious history. Jesus would indisputably emerge as the Savior and the Christian boast would stand vindicated. There is no escaping this conclusion for those Muslims who await the literal return of Jesus as part of their belief system. But thankfully and mercifully, this notion is nipped in the bud by the Holy Quran with its straightforward declaration that Jesus has died. May his soul rest in peace!

“Your Imam from amongst you”

The Holy Prophet^saw stated that the forthcoming Issa (Jesus) would originate from within the Ummah. He used the phrase imamokum minkum, meaning "your imam from among you." This Hadith, sourced from Bukhari and Muslim, is highly reliable.

Abu Huraira narrates that the Holy Prophet^saw said that (O Muslims!) how would you feel when son of Mary will descend amongst you and he will be your imam from amongst you.

This narration negates the possibility that the 'son of Mary' to return is the original Jesus. The one to lead Muslims will be from among them, the followers of Muhammad, whereas Jesus was a Bani-Israeli from Moses' people. The Quran limits his charter to a specific group, the Children of Israel (see 3:50, 61:7). A prophet sent to the Children of Israel would be foreign to Muslims. Muslims, as followers of the Universal Prophet Muhammad, come from all global races, not just the Children of Israel. Jesus simply lacks the qualifications to address Muslims or a worldwide audience. If he were to return in person, Muslims, based on the Quran's authority, would be justified in declining to follow him.

Also, the term "nazala," which means 'to descend,' needs clarification. It is a principal stumbling block for those who approach this issue with preconceived notions, expecting Jesus to float down from the skies—like a skydiver with his parachute deployed, perhaps—but without a parachute. In Arabic, the term "nazala" is also used to signify high importance, usefulness, or glory. The Quran uses this term in relation to clothing, iron, and cattle (see 7:27, 57:26, and 39:7), each described as having descended and each having undoubtedly played a critical role in the progress of human civilization. The same word is used in relation to Muhammad himself (see 65:11-12)! Of course, no one understands it to mean that Muhammad descended from the heavens. Therefore, the descending of the messiah signifies his high status and the critical role he would play in the revival of Islam. His coming would be a source of great blessing for Muslims; he would be born within the Ummah and metaphorically given the name Jesus, son of Mary, to indicate his remarkable similarity with that prophet, even though he would be an entirely different person.

The question arises: why has he been called Jesus and not by some other name? To understand this, one needs to be attuned to the language of scriptures and prophets, which is always rich in metaphors and analogies, especially when it comes to prophecies. Given that Holy Muhammad was a prophet mirroring Moses in many ways, the anticipated messiah among Muhammad's followers is named after the messiah who appeared to Moses' people, further underscoring this parallel. This elegantly completes the analogy between Muhammad and Moses. Moreover, the name 'Jesus' carries a wealth of clues aiding in his identification upon arrival. The timing, circumstances, the condition of Muslims at that time, and numerous other indicators are all subtly encapsulated within this name.

To conclude, the Messiah, the savior of Muhammad's followers, would emerge from their midst. His spiritual prowess would be a direct result of the Holy Prophet's influence, and all his triumphs would essentially be victories of Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

Next Proof>

Proof #2: God's promise to Jesus

O Jesus Indeed I will cause thee to die and exalt thee to Myself, and will clear thee of the charges of those who disbelieve, and will place those who follow thee above those who deny thee, until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me shall be your return, and I will judge between you concerning that wherein you differ (3:56) more translations

This verse is pivotal in the debate, cited by both sides. The term Tawaffi was previously discussed in Proof 1, where it was argued to mean death.  Another significant term here is rafa, which translates to 'to raise'.  Rafioka illayya literally translates to 'raise thee to Myself'. The verse's beginning references two divine acts: causing Jesus to die (mutawaffika) and raising Jesus to Himself (rafioka illayya). Regardless of interpretation of rafioka illayya, it's clear that it happens after mutawaffika. Therefore, Jesus will die before being raised.

Could this imply that Jesus was physically ascended to heaven? It's important to note that the verse only mentions Jesus being raised towards God, not to the heavens. Let's delve into what 'raising towards God' could mean. First, it cannot imply a physical ascension, where Jesus' body physically moves in a particular direction. For Jesus to physically move towards God, from point A to point B, it implies a physical existence of God. Moreover, for point B to be different from point A, God must not be present at point A, as only then would moving towards point B make sense. If God is omnipresent, then it's impossible for Jesus to physically move towards Him. At most, Jesus could remain physically stationary.

Indeed, an alternative and more profound interpretation could be that rafioka signifies an elevation in spiritual rank. Furthermore, since Jesus is claimed to have died on the cross, which is considered an accursed death according to the Old Testament (Deut 18:20; 21:22-23), God absolves him of that disgrace and determines his fate to be the exact opposite - a noble death and a rise in spiritual status.

Next Proof>

Proof #1: Jesus' own testimony on the Judgement Day

This short dialogue takes place between God and Jesus on the Judgment Day when he is asked if he gave his followers the belief of his own and his mother's divinity. He responds in the negative and begs complete ignorance on what happened after his death.

“And I said nothing to them except that which Thou didst command me ‘Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’ And I was a witness over them as long as I remained among them, but since Thou didst cause me to die, Thou hast been the Watcher over them; and Thou art Witness over all things. (5:118) more translations

Argument 1:
This verse discusses two distinct phases of Jesus’ existence in relation to his people: one when he was among them and the other when he was no longer present. The boundary between these two phases is defined by the Arabic word "tawaffi". His absence from among his people is preceded by the state of tawaffi.   The question is whether Jesus is currently present among his people or absent from them. If he is not among his people, then the state of tawaffi has undoubtedly preceded this absence.

Argument 2:
According to this verse, Jesus emphasizes that the Christian belief in his divinity did not exist while he was among his people; it only took root after Allah had caused tawaffi to him. The doctrine of Jesus' “Sonship” as a part of the Holy Trinity is a well-established fact among Christians, so in light of the above verse it must be concluded that Jesus has already experienced his tawaffi.

The logical inference from this verse is that Jesus has indeed undergone the state of tawaffi, and if tawaffi is interpreted as death, then the verse directly asserts that he has already experienced death.

Meaning of Tawaffi
The term "tawaffi" appears twenty-four times in the Holy Quran, consistently carrying one of two meanings: death or sleep. When the action is performed by God or the angels upon a human, tawaffi specifically denotes death, except when used alongside the qualifier 'night,' where it signifies sleep. Importantly, in all instances, it refers to the soul and not the body. This distinction remains consistent across Arabic literature, both past and present.

Here is a complete list of verses using this word: 2:235, 2:241; 3:194; 4:16, 4:98; 6:61, 6:62; 7:38, 7:127; 13:41; 10:47, 10:105; 12:102; 16:33, 16:71; 22:6; 32:12; 39:43; 40:68, 40:78; 47:28; (this reference scheme counts Bismillah as the first verse of every chapter)

Usage of Tawaffi in Hadith
Holy Prophet^saw has used Tawaffi in exactly same context in relation to himself. This Hadith is taken from Buhkari Kitab-ul-Anbiya and Commentary on chapter Al-Maida:

Ibne-Abbas narrates that the Holy Prophet said: “On the Day of Judgement I will see some people from among my companions being taken to the Left. Upon seeing them I will say, ‘my companions! my companions!’. I will be told that when I parted from them they turned back on their heels. At that point I will say the same thing what (Jesus son of Mary) the righteous had said: that while I was among them I watched over them but once You caused me to die (Tawaffi) it was You alone who watched over them.”

This hadith indicates that the nature of the tawaffi of Jesus is similar to the tawaffi of the Holy Prophet. The fact that the Holy Prophet states, "I will say what Jesus had said," suggests a shared nature of the experience. The use of the same word in the same context by the Holy Prophet is noteworthy and implies a similarity in the manner of their respective tawaffi.

Furthermore, Imam Bukhari quotes Ibn-e-Abbas stating that tawaffi means deaths specifically in the context of the Maidah verse 118 (Bukhari Kitab-ut-Tafseer). This statement from Ibn-e-Abbas, coming from one of the most trusted sources in Islam, provides significant weight to the interpretation of tawaffi as death in relation to this particular verse.

The commonly accepted meaning of the word "tawaffi" is death. This interpretation is reinforced by its use in funeral prayers (namaaz-e-janaza), where the supplication includes the phrase "Cause us to die (tawaffi) in the state of submission." In this context, the word clearly signifies the end of life or death.

Lexical Meaning of Tawaffi
Assas-ul-Balagha, Qamoos, Taj-ul-Uroos, Lisaan-ul-Arab, Sihah-e-Johri, Farhang-e-Asaphia all agree that tawaffi means death.

Corollary: He is never going to return

When God questions Jesus about certain Christian beliefs on the Day of Judgment, Jesus pleads ignorance, claiming he has no idea about what occurred after his death. One might question the truthfulness of this testimony, considering that, as alleged by many Muslims, he made a second in-person appearance on Earth just a few years ago (40 years, it is claimed), where he had observed the extent of Christian misguidance and set matters straight about his divinity. In such a scenario, his testimony would be vastly different.  Instead, he merely says he doesn't know.

Furthermore, he could have defended himself by acknowledging that the supernatural events of his ascension and his prolonged existence without food or drink led his followers, understandably, to believe he was divine. Upon landing back on Earth, however, he had made sincere efforts to refute this misconception, emphasizing that, though a human like none other, he was still not a god.  Any Christian that didn't come around to this explanation faced unpleasant consequences—to put it mildly.  Surprisingly, we see not a word of all that. This leads to the conclusion that he never returns, and the cruel drama associated with his in-person second coming where he kills all the Christians in violation of Quranic injunction of la ikraha fid-din (there is no compulsion in religion), is a fiction that will never come to pass.

Next Proof>