๐๐จ๐ง๐ญ๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ฉ๐ซ๐จ๐๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐ข๐๐ฌ ๐๐ง ๐๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐๐ซ๐ข๐ฉ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ? ๐๐ฌ๐๐๐ง๐ฌ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฌ
Mohamad Mostafa Nassar
Twitter:@NassarMohamadMR
Contradictions are present until the very end of the descriptions because neither John nor Matthew refer to Jesusโs Ascension. Mark and Luke are the only one to speak of it.
For Mark (16, 19), Jesus was โtaken up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of Godโ without any precise date being given in relation to His Resurrection. It must however be noted that the final passage of Mark containing this sentence is, for Father Roguet, an โinventedโ text, although for the Church it is canonic!
There remains Luke, the only evangelist to provide an undisputed text of the Ascension episode (24, 51): โhe parted from them and was carried up into heavenโ. The evangelist places the event at the end of the description of the Resurrection and appearance to the eleven Apostles: the details of the Gospel description imply that the Ascension took place on the day of the Resurrection.
In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke (whom everybody believes to be their author) describes in chapter 1, 3 Jesusโs appearance to the Apostles, between the Passion and the Ascension, in the following terms:
โTo them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God.โ
The placing of the Christian festival of the Ascension at forty days after Easter, the Festival of the Resurrection, originates from this passage in the Acts of the Apostles. The date is therefore set in contradiction to Lukeโs Gospel: none of the other Gospel texts say anything to justify this in a different way.
The Christian who is aware of this situation is highly disconcerted by the obviousness of the contradiction. The Ecumenical Translation of the Bible, New Testament, acknowledges the facts but does not expand on the contradiction. It limits itself to noting the relevance the forty days may have had to Jesusโs mission.
Commentators wishing to explain everything and reconcile the irreconciliable provide some strange interpretations on this subject.
The Synopsis of the Four Gospels edited in 1972 by the Bibli cal School of Jerusalem (vol. 2, page 451) contains, for example, some very strange commentaries.
The very word , Ascensionโ is criticized as follows: โIn fact there was no ascension in the actual physical sense because God is no more โon highโ than he is โbelowโ โ (sic). It is difficult to grasp the sense of this comment because one wonders how Luke could otherwise have expressed himself.
Elsewhere, the author of this commentary sees a โliterary artificeโ in the fact that โin the Acts, the Ascension is said to have taken place forty days after the resurrectionโ. this โartificeโ is โintended to stress the notion that the period of Jesusโs appearances on earth is at an endโ. He adds however, in relation to the fact that in Lukeโs Gospel, โthe event is situated during the evening of Easter Sunday, because the evangelist does not put any breaks between the various episodes recorded following the discovery of the empty tomb on the morning of the resurrectionโฆโ-โ. . . surely this is also a literary artifice, intended to allow a certain lapse of time before the appearance of Jesus raised from the dead.โ (sic)
The feeling of embarrassment that surrounds these interpretations is even more obvious in Father Roguetโs book. He discerns not one, but two Ascensions!
โWhereas from Jesusโs point of view the Ascension coincides with the Resurrection, from the disciplesโ point of view it does not take place until Jesus ceases definitely to present Himself to them, so that the Spirit may be given to them and the period of the Church may begin.โ
To those readers who are not quite able to grasp the theological subtlety of his argument (which has absolutely no Scriptural basis whatsoever), the author issues the following general warning, which is a model of apologetical verbiage:
โHere, as in many similar cases, the problem only appears insuperable if one takes Biblical statements literally, and forgets their religious significance. It is not a matter of breaking down the factual reality into a symbolism which is inconsistent, but rather of looking for the theological intentions of those revealing these mysteries to us by providing us with facts we can apprehend with our senses and signs appropriate to our incarnate spirit.โ
๐๐จ๐ฐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ญ ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฌ๐๐๐ง๐ฌ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐จ๐ ๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฉ๐ก๐๐ญ ๐๐๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐จ๐ง ๐จ๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐ฒ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ฏ๐ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐๐๐ฏ๐๐ง๐ฌ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐ฌ๐ญ๐๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ๐ก ๐๐ฎ๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐ข๐จ๐ซ๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ ๐จ๐ฏ๐๐ซ ๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฉ๐ก๐๐ญ ๐๐ฎ๐ก๐๐ฆ๐ฆ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ฉ๐จ๐ง ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ ๐จ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ฆ?
If we use the Christian logic that the ascension of Prophet Jesus son of Mary would make him God or son of God, then the others who ascended to heavens would they become Gods or son of God as well?
As above-mentioned the bible itself claims that many ascended to heavens alive as well.
Such a faulty way of thinking is what has led Christians to such false belief that Jesus is God/son of God because he ascended to heavens alive.
Building up on the above, using death, life or ascension does not mean that Prophet Jesus son of Mary is God or son of God or superior to Prophet Muhammed peace be upon him.
In fact, the Bible itself in John 3:13 confirms that ascension or descension does not mean the any human who ascended, descended, or will ascend or descend is God or son of God or better than any future Prophet:
โNo one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heavenโthe Son of Manโ
In Fact, Islamically speaking Prophet Muhammed peace be upon him is better not only than Prophet Jesus son of Mary but also better than all the Prophets and messengers of Allah Exalted he and contradictions in the ascension account of the Bible. (See links at the end of this article addressing that topic).
However, Islamically speaking, the Glorious Quran confirms that Prophet Jesus son of Mary was not killed or crucified but Allah exalted He saved he by lifting him up and raising Prophet Jesus son of Mary to heavens, where he is awaiting the second return. So, the ascension of Prophet Jesus son of Mary to heavens is an Islamic fundamental creed, as demonstrated in Quran (4:157-158) as demonstrated below.
Allah Exalted He sayys in The Glorious Quran:
“and for boasting, โWe killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.โ But they neither killed nor crucified himโit was only made to appear so.1 Even those who argue for this หนcrucifixionหบ are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoeverโonly making assumptions. They certainly did not kill him.
Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.” Quran (4:157-158)
๐๐ฌ ๐๐จ๐ซ (โ๐ข๐ ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ ๐ก๐๐ฏ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ง ๐ฆ๐, ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ ๐ก๐๐ฏ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ง ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ก๐๐ซโ)
๐๐จ๐๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ญ ๐ฆ๐๐๐ง ๐ฐ๐ก๐จ ๐ก๐๐ฌ ๐ค๐ข๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐ ๐ฆ๐ ๐ก๐๐ฌ ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ก๐๐ซ ๐ฌ๐ข๐ง๐๐ ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ฌ๐ข๐๐๐ซ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ฆ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐ ๐ข๐ง๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐๐๐ฅ๐ ๐จ๐ง๐?
๐๐๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐จ-๐๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐ ๐ข๐ง๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐๐๐ฅ๐ ๐ญ๐ฐ๐จ ๐ง๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐๐ฌ ๐๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐ฅ ๐๐ ๐๐ญ๐, ๐ฐ๐๐ง๐ญ ๐ญ๐จ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ญ๐จ๐ข๐ฅ๐๐ญ, ๐๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐จ-๐๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐ ๐ญ๐ฐ๐จ ๐ง๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐ญ๐จ๐ฉ๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ซ๐- ๐๐ก๐๐ญ ๐ข๐ฌ ๐๐ฅ๐๐ฌ๐ฉ๐ก๐๐ฆ๐จ๐ฎ๐ฌ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ข๐ฉ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ซ๐ข๐ฌ๐ฆ ๐ญ๐จ๐ฐ๐๐ซ๐๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ซ๐ฎ๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ = ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐๐ก
When Christians are questioned about whether there are differences between the father, son, and the holy spirit they rush to say that all of them share the same divine nature and they are inseparable as they are One God, and that Jesus has the two divine and human inseparable natures
However, when we Muslims point to them that fact, that Prophet Jesus on of Mary was created, ate food, went to the toilet, the very same Christians, again rush to try to make endless justifications that Jesus son of May human nature is what make him do that and he is not divine at those situations.
Which one is it, does Jesus Christ purported two natures are inseparable or are they separable based on Christianโs mode and best interest?
Christians repeatedly indicate that Prophet Jesusโ son of Mary is sinless and alive in heavens, therefore he must be God and son of God and Both are the same right?
If being sinless and alive in heavens are the determining factors in being God. Then according to such faulty Christin logic, many other sinless Prophets e.g., Enoch and Elijah who were ascended to heavens and alive up there see Genesis 5:24 NASB, Hebrews 11:5, 2 Kings 2:11-12, NKJV, they must be Gods as well as angels who are sinless and alive in heavens.
Obviously, such ideas are ridiculous, and it does not mean that when God elevates sinless Prophets alive to heavens that those Prophets are Gods or son of Gods. Only Allah is only true deity worthy of worship.
It is worth mentioning in the same breath that the same Bible has contradictory statement in John 3:13 says no one has ascended to heaven. Which one is correct?
As for Jesusโs being taken up, He was raised to heavens alive safe and sound with his body and soul, and any Muslim who deny that Islamic fact, is not a Muslim as he/she would be denying some parts of the Glorious Holy Quran.
And as for the nature of the life he is now leading, scholars hold different views in this regard, as this is not decisively established in the Quran.
It is very difficult to discuss a question when the one asking it has already assumed certain things to be the case. Also, talk of one prophet being superior to another is not helpful for a real interfaith dialogue to take place.
However, we will try to answer as best we can, we have repeated time and time again that Muslims respect all former prophets and messengers of Allah Exalted He.
Former prophets, like Jesus, Moses, and Abraham (peace be upon them all), were given a message by Almighty Allah, but His final message, according to Islam, was given to Muhammed (peace be upon him) who was the Seal of the Prophets.
Similarly, all previous messages were an important revelation by Allah at their time in history, but the Noble Quran is Allahโs final revelation to humankind
Source: The Science Faith