RESURRECTION - WHEN LOVE REPLACES LOGIC

Happy Easter to my readers. So glad I get to publish on this joyful day.

Easter always reminds me of the simple joys of my childhood days in Alexandra village, Singapore. There were times I spent roaming the hill at the back of our wooden hut, searching for chicken eggs in the underbrushes and climbing trees to reach into the cusps of those huge Platycerium bifurcatum staghorn ferns where mother hens used to nest. It was not about picking for the kitchen table but to get a couple of warm eggs under the mother hen. I needle pricked the eggs and sucked it down while they were still warm. It was tasty and supposedly thought to be nourishing.

Eggs represent the idea of birth. The shells crack and the chicks emerge. Easter eggs were originally painted red to remind us of the blood of Christ. We celebrate Easter Sunday to rejoice in the resurrection of Christ, three days after Good Friday, the anniversary of our Lord's crucifixion.

Christianity is currently the largest religious group in the world. A 2020 estimate put total number of adherents at 2.6 billions (all denominations). In a nutshell, the Christian faith believes Jesus is one of the divine personality of God. He is God who took on human form to come to Earth, who took on the sins of mankind by his sacrifice on the crucifix. He died on the cross and arose three days later.

Today is Easter, one of the most important days of the faith. The tenets of Christianity rest on one single pillar - resurrection. Thus, if resurrection never took place, Christianity collapses. Can it be proven that the resurrection of Christ really took place almost two thousand years ago. If not, can it be proven the event never took place. Majority of Christians simply took it in good faith and never questioned.  

Liberals and atheists do not belief there is such a thing as God, thus resurrection is a non-issue with them. In any case, these science junkies can never prove that resurrection never took place. Judaism wants nothing to do with Jesus. Buddhism and Hinduism make no reference to Jesus. 

Of all other religions, Islam alone has a strong stand on this issue. As Islam is the second greatest religion in the world having 1.9 billion adherents, and their holy book the Quran, specifically make mention on this topic, we should make an attempt to analyse what's been said.

The Quran makes a strong stand against the divinity of Christ and the Holy Trinity. In fact this stand is so strong by the early Muslims that in the inscriptions on the walls of the perambulatory in the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, the attack on Christ divinity and Holy Trinity was cast in stone repeatedly in many places. One wonders why a holy place built to celebrate the Miraj (the Prophet's night ascendance up to heaven where he met Allah) has no inscription to celebrate the event, but a focus against Christ divinity and the Holy Trinity.

Whilst the Quran rejects Christ divinity and the Holy Trinity, the holy book revers Jesus and Mother Mary. The Quran teaches Muslims to hold Jesus in high regards, as a prophet of God, not the Son of God. The name Muhammad appeared only 5 times (including once as Ahmad) in the Quran whilst Isa (Arabic for Jesus) is mentioned 97 times in 93 surahs. Christians of various denominations who wonder why Roman Catholics hold such reverence to Mother Mary, may well be surprised that she is the only woman mentioned by name in the Quran which also called her the greatest woman who ever lived. That Mary appears 70 times in the Quran speaks volumes.

Since the Quran rejects Christ divinity, there can be no resurrection. Let's first look at the question of divinity.

Surah (19:19): He (Angel Gabriel) said: "I am just a message-bearer of your Lord, I have come to grant you a most pure boy."

​قَالَ اِنَّمَاۤ اَنَا رَسُوۡلُ رَبِّكِ ​ ۖ  لِاَهَبَ لَـكِ غُلٰمًا زَكِيًّا

Surah (19:20): Mary said: "How can a boy be born to me when no man has even touched me, nor have I ever been unchaste?"

قَالَتۡ اَنّٰى يَكُوۡنُ لِىۡ غُلٰمٌ وَّلَمۡ يَمۡسَسۡنِىۡ بَشَرٌ وَّلَمۡ اَكُ بَغِيًّا

Surah (19:21) : The angel said: "Thus shall it be. Your Lord says: 'It is easy for Me; and We shall do so in order to make him a Sign for mankind and a mercy from Us. This has been decreed.' "

قَالَ كَذٰلِكِ​ ۚ قَالَ رَبُّكِ هُوَ عَلَىَّ هَيِّنٌ​ ۚ وَلِنَجۡعَلَهٗۤ اٰيَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَرَحۡمَةً مِّنَّا​ ۚ وَكَانَ اَمۡرًا مَّقۡضِيًّا

There are several surahs relating to the Annunciation of the Lord. The Quran says the virgin conception is by a decree by Allah. There are other surahs that mention Jesus is blessed with the Holy Spirit and he has ability to speak from childhood. Muslim scholars interpret no divinity, just a miraculous virgin birth, decreed by God. Quran denies the divinity of Christ, but definitely conveys the description of Christ as a supernatural entity, far from the natural prophet it teaches Muslims..    

According to the Quran, there can be no resurrection because Jesus didn't even die on the cross. 

Surah 4:157  ".. they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them .."

وَّقَوۡلِهِمۡ اِنَّا قَتَلۡنَا الۡمَسِيۡحَ عِيۡسَى ابۡنَ مَرۡيَمَ رَسُوۡلَ اللّٰهِ​ ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوۡهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوۡهُ وَلٰـكِنۡ شُبِّهَ لَهُمۡ​ ؕ وَاِنَّ الَّذِيۡنَ

اخۡتَلَـفُوۡا فِيۡهِ لَفِىۡ شَكٍّ مِّنۡهُ​ ؕ مَا لَهُمۡ بِهٖ مِنۡ عِلۡمٍ اِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ​ ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوۡهُ يَقِيۡنًا ۢ ۙ

Majority of Muslims can quote this surah. Allah arranged for a Jesus doppelganger to take his place. Since Jesus didn't die on the cross, there was no resurrection. The implication is Allah arranged for someone to be killed in place of Jesus. The divine morality here is open to debate.

Outside of the Quran, and Bible, did anyone else speak of the death of Jesus? 
- Publius Cornelius Tacitus (AD 56-120) Roman historian and senator, wrote about the execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate.
- The Greek historian Thallus. It is not clear when he lived and died, but most date his writings to about 50 AD. Thallus wrote about the great darkness at the time of the crucifixion which he explained as eclipse of the sun.
- Roman-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37 - 85) wrote about a Jew called Jesus who had many disciples from various countries, how Pilate condemned him to death by crucifixion, and how his disciples narrated he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive.
- Phlegon, a historian born about AD 80. His actual works cannot be found. We know him  through famous Christian scholar Origen Adamantius and Greek historian Sextus Julius Africanus who quoted him about 100 years later. Phlegon wrote about the crucifixion of Christ in the time of Tiberius Ceasar. He wrote about the darkness and earthquake on the day of crucifixion. Note - the Crucifixion was one day after Passover, that was the time the moon is on the opposite side of the Earth to the sun. So an eclipse of the sun was impossible. What caused the darkness?

- The Talmud (ancient Jewish rabbinical record) also mentions the crucifixion on the eve of the Feast of Passover, as well as the earthquake.

Isn't it amazing how external records confirm so many little details found in the Bible. Many of these sources are not sympathetic to Christians thus elevating the authenticity. Could all these ancient historians be wrong? Could they have been fooled by Allah's clever trick of letting someone else die in place of Jesus as surah 4:157 suggests? Including Mother Mary, Mary Magdalene and John who were at the foot of the cross, and spoke to him at Calgary, could they have mistaken the Man in the Middle for Christ? Could Joseph of Arimathea,  Nicodemus, and the rest of the party that took the body of Jesus down, prepared him in spices, wrapped him in clean linen cloth, and took him to the cave. Could this entire party of people so up close and intimate with Jesus, not know it was not Jesus? Could historians and people during the times of Jesus, or just a few years after his death, be so wrong, and the Quran, written 600 years after the crucifixion (by a man who could not read nor write) be spot on? Where would you bet - historical criticism or hocus pocus?

The other problem is, Quran has several surahs that contradict 4:157 that the average Muslims might not even be aware. 


Surah (53:38): “That no bearer of a burden shall bear the burden of another"

اَلَّا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِّزۡرَ اُخۡرٰىۙ‏

The Quran here talks about personal accountability. Thus the guilt, sin, transgression cannot be transferred to someone else. This is the foundational theological framework why the Quran denies the idea of Jesus dying on the cross to absolve us from sin. There can be no representative repentance. This is apparently important to Allah because it is repeated again in surah 6:164. Unfortunately this opens up the criticism of no coherent theological base because it runs counter to 4:157. How can Allah pull a trick and make someone else to die on the cross and take on the transgression of Jesus?


Surah (19:29) :Thereupon Mary pointed to the child. They exclaimed: "How can we speak to one who is in the cradle, a mere child?"

فَاَشَارَتۡ اِلَيۡهِ​ ؕ قَالُوۡا كَيۡفَ نُـكَلِّمُ مَنۡ كَانَ فِى الۡمَهۡدِ صَبِيًّا‏

Surah (19:33) "Peace be upon me the day I was born and the day I will die, and the day I will be raised up alive."

وَالسَّلٰمُ عَلَىَّ يَوۡمَ وُلِدْتُّ وَيَوۡمَ اَمُوۡتُ وَيَوۡمَ اُبۡعَثُ حَيًّا

In the surah on Maryam the Quran talks about how Allah blessed Christ the child with the ability to speak at the time when he was in the cradle. 19:33 is Baby Jesus speaking in the first person. Clearly, he was talking about his death and resurrection. The Quran actually confirmed the resurrection. Muslim scholars' defence of this is the reference is to a future Jesus death after the second coming. But this argument is defeated in surah 19:15)

Surah (19:15) : Peace be upon him the day he was born, and the day he will die, and the day he will be raised up alive.

وَسَلٰمٌ عَلَيۡهِ يَوۡمَ وُلِدَ وَيَوۡمَ يَمُوۡتُ وَيَوۡمَ يُبۡعَثُ حَيًّا

19:15 is about John the Baptist. The phrase is almost exactly similar to 19:33. Thus if the argument by Muslim scholars that 19:33 Jesus was talking about his future death in the second coming, then 19:15 is making the ridiculous claim that there will be a second coming of John the Baptist. Clearly both 19:33 and 19:15 refer to their deaths in that lifetime, not a future life. Thus Jesus died and was raised. Resurrection confirmed.

Surah (3:55) : (And it was part of His scheme) when Allah said: 'O Jesus! I will recall you and raise you up to Me and will purify you (of the company) of those who disbelieve, and will set your followers above the unbelievers till the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me you shall return, and I will judge between you regarding what you differed.

اِذۡ قَالَ اللّٰهُ يٰعِيۡسٰۤى اِنِّىۡ مُتَوَفِّيۡكَ وَرَافِعُكَ اِلَىَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِيۡنَ كَفَرُوۡا وَجَاعِلُ الَّذِيۡنَ اتَّبَعُوۡكَ فَوۡقَ

الَّذِيۡنَ كَفَرُوۡۤا اِلٰى يَوۡمِ الۡقِيٰمَةِ ​​ۚ ثُمَّ اِلَىَّ مَرۡجِعُكُمۡ فَاَحۡكُمُ بَيۡنَكُمۡ فِيۡمَا كُنۡتُمۡ فِيۡهِ تَخۡتَلِفُوۡنَ

The contention in interpretation here is the word 'mutawaffika' مُتَوَفِّيۡكَ. It means 'to cause to die'. Some Muslim choose to use the term 'to put to sleep' -- thus can be awakened. This particular interpretation from islamicstudies.info prefers to interpret the word 'recall'. Thus Muslim scholar say Jesus did not die. Allah recalled him, just as one recalls an official back to headquarters. 'Mutawaffika' means 'cause to die'  and that would mean Allah's plan was for Jesus to die, and then raise him up. A clear case of Christ resurrection.


Having made the assertion the denial of crucifixion and resurrection is incorrect, is it possible to show proof the events actually occurred? This is an interesting challenge, but it requires another blog.


ps - the title is a paraphrase of Fyodor Dostoyevsky's quote "Life (had) relaced logic.

This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs there. Thanks.