> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.valuemysoul.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # The Jesus Islam Cannot Accept - URL: https://www.valuemysoul.com/the-jesus-islam-cannot-accept/ - Published: 2026-08-02T04:49:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-08-29T18:26:19.000Z - Description: Islam honors Jesus highly — virgin-born, Messiah, worker of miracles — while denying that he was divine or crucified. These are not two emphases within a shared portrait: on the crucifixion, the two texts make flatly incompatible historical claims about the same afternoon. - Author: Dedrick Wright - Tags: Islam, Christ, Apologetics, Other Religions Of all the points where Christianity and Islam diverge, none is sharper than the identity of Jesus of Nazareth. Islam honors him highly — virgin-born, called the Messiah, a worker of miracles by Allah's permission — while insisting he is a created human prophet who was neither divine nor crucified. The New Testament presents him as the [eternal God incarnate](../jesus-is-god-a-series-on-the-deity-of-christ), crucified under Pontius Pilate and bodily raised on the third day. These are not two emphases within a shared portrait. On the crucifixion in particular, the two texts make flatly incompatible **historical** claims about the same afternoon in first-century Jerusalem, and both cannot be true. ## What Islam Teaches: Isa, a Great and Honored Prophet — But Not Divine Islam holds Jesus (*ʿIsa ibn Maryam*, "Jesus son of Mary") in unusually high regard among non-Muslim religious figures: he is born of a virgin ([Qur'an 19:20–21](https://quran.com/19/20?ref=valuemysoul.com)), called the Messiah (*al-Masih*), strengthened by the Holy Spirit, and given miracles including healing the blind and raising the dead by Allah's permission ([Qur'an 3:49](https://quran.com/3/49?ref=valuemysoul.com); [5:110](https://quran.com/5/110?ref=valuemysoul.com)): > "'I have come to you with a sign from your Lord: I will make for you a bird from clay, breathe into it, and it will become a ˹real˺ bird—by Allah's Will. I will heal the blind and the leper and raise the dead to life—by Allah's Will.'" — [Qur'an 3:49](https://quran.com/3/49?ref=valuemysoul.com) The Qur'an even calls him "a word from \[Allah\]" and "a spirit from Him" ([Qur'an 4:171](https://quran.com/4/171?ref=valuemysoul.com)) — language Christian apologists such as Sam Shamoun have long argued sits uneasily with the rest of Qur'anic Christology, since "word" and "spirit of God" are unusual descriptors to apply to a mere creature. Despite this elevated language, the Qur'an is emphatic that Jesus is not divine and must not be worshiped: > "O People of the Book! Do not go to extremes regarding your faith; say nothing about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger of Allah and the fulfilment of His Word through Mary and a spirit ˹created by a command˺ from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers and do not say, 'Trinity.' Stop!—for your own good. Allah is only One God. Glory be to Him! He is far above having a son!" — [Qur'an 4:171](https://quran.com/4/171?ref=valuemysoul.com) > "Those who say, 'Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary,' have certainly fallen into disbelief. The Messiah ˹himself˺ said, 'O Children of Israel! Worship Allah—my Lord and your Lord.' Whoever associates others with Allah ˹in worship˺ will surely be forbidden Paradise by Allah. Their home will be the Fire. And the wrongdoers will have no helpers." — [Qur'an 5:72](https://quran.com/5/72?ref=valuemysoul.com) > "And ˹on Judgment Day˺ Allah will say, 'O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you ever ask the people to worship you and your mother as gods besides Allah?' He will answer, 'Glory be to You! How could I ever say what I had no right to say?'" — [Qur'an 5:116](https://quran.com/5/116?ref=valuemysoul.com) Crucially, the Qur'an also denies the historical event at the center of Christian faith — the crucifixion: > "And for boasting, 'We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.' But they neither killed nor crucified him—it was only made to appear so. Even those who argue for this ˹crucifixion˺ are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoever—only making assumptions. They certainly did not kill him. Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise." — [Qur'an 4:157–158](https://quran.com/4/157-158?ref=valuemysoul.com) The dominant, though not universal, interpretation among classical and modern [Sunni](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni%5FIslam?ref=valuemysoul.com) commentators (Ibn Kathir, al-Tabari) is that someone else — a substitute made to resemble Jesus — was crucified in his place. At the same time, Jesus himself was taken up to heaven alive, to return bodily before the Day of Judgment as a sign of its nearness — a belief with substantial support in the [Hadith](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith?ref=valuemysoul.com) literature: > "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (Jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler); he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya." — *Sahih al-Bukhari* [3448](https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3448?ref=valuemysoul.com) The detail that the returning Jesus will "break the Cross" is worth pausing on, since it concedes the symbol's centrality to Christianity while casting its destruction as the act by which Jesus corrects the error — an odd assignment for a figure the same tradition says was never crucified. Whatever the precise mechanism, the Qur'an is unambiguous on the two points that matter most for this comparison: Jesus did not die by crucifixion, and Jesus is not God incarnate. ## What Christianity Teaches: Jesus Christ Is God Incarnate The New Testament's claim about Jesus is not merely that he was a great prophet empowered by God, but that he is himself the eternal, pre-existent God who took on human nature without ceasing to be God. John opens his Gospel with the plainest possible statement of this: > "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." — [John 1:1](https://ref.ly/Jn1.1;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com), [14](https://ref.ly/Jn1.14;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com) John 1:1 makes three distinct claims in the Greek. **"The Word *was*"** — ἦν ὁ Λόγος (*ēn ho Logos*) — is in the imperfect tense, denoting continuous prior existence: the Word did not come into being; He simply *was*, without beginning. **"The Word was *with* God"** — ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν (*ho Logos ēn pros ton theon*) — turns on the preposition πρός (*pros*; [BDAG](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BDAG?ref=valuemysoul.com) 874), which indicates face-to-face, personal relationship, establishing that the Word is personally distinct from the Father. And **"the Word *was* God"** — θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος (*theos ēn ho Logos*) — asserts full participation in the divine nature, not "a god" in some lesser sense. Together, these three clauses affirm eternal pre-existence, personal distinction, and full deity — the very Trinitarian structure the Qur'an rejects as *shirk*, examined in detail in [*Is Allah the God of the Bible*](../is-allah-the-god-of-the-bible). The phrase **"became flesh"** — Greek σὰρξ ἐγένετο (*sarx egeneto*, [John 1:14](https://ref.ly/Jn1.14;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)) — records the moment of incarnation: the eternal Word entered fully into human existence, taking on genuine humanity — hunger, fatigue, grief, death — without any diminishment of His divine nature. This is the doctrinal center that the Qur'an's insistence that Allah "has never had offspring, nor was He born" ([Qur'an 112:3](https://quran.com/112/3?ref=valuemysoul.com)) is specifically written to rule out. Still, the New Testament never presents the Sonship of Christ as a matter of physical begetting in the way the Qur'an polemicizes against ([Qur'an 19:35](https://quran.com/19/35?ref=valuemysoul.com)): > "It is not for Allah to take a son! Glory be to Him. When He decrees a matter, He simply tells it, 'Be!' And it is!" — [Qur'an 19:35](https://quran.com/19/35?ref=valuemysoul.com) Christian theology has never taught that God the Father procreated a son in any physical or sexual sense; "Son of God" in Scripture is a title of eternal relationship and shared essence, not biological descent — a distinction Muslim polemic against [the Trinity](../three-at-once-the-scenes-where-the-whole-trinity-appears) frequently does not engage on its own terms. Paul makes the same claim even more directly: "For in Christ all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form" ([Colossians 2:9](https://ref.ly/Col2.9;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)). The author of Hebrews applies Psalm 45:6 — "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever" — directly to the Son, recording the Father Himself addressing the Son as God ([Hebrews 1:8–9](https://ref.ly/Heb1.8-9;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)). F.F. Bruce, writing in the NICNT series, comments: "The fact that the Son is addressed as 'God' by One who is Himself God shows that the term is used of the Son in the fullest sense" [\[1\]](#fn1). When the resurrected Christ appears to the disciple Thomas, Thomas responds not with a rebuke for excessive devotion but with worship: "My Lord and my God!" — and Jesus commends rather than corrects him ([John 20:28–29](https://ref.ly/Jn20.28-29;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)). Jesus also claims for himself the divine name revealed to Moses at the burning bush. When the Jewish leadership challenged him, Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am" ([John 8:58](https://ref.ly/Jn8.58;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)) — **"I am"** in Greek is ἐγὼ εἰμί (*egō eimi*), the rendering of **"I AM"** — Hebrew אֶהְיֶה (*ʾehyeh*) — the divine name given at [Exodus 3:14](https://ref.ly/Ex3.14;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com). [Craig Keener](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig%5FKeener?ref=valuemysoul.com) notes that "the immediate attempt to stone Him... confirm\[s\] that His hearers understood Him to be claiming the divine name of Exodus 3:14" [\[2\]](#fn2) — the prescribed penalty for blasphemy under [Leviticus 24:16](https://ref.ly/Lev24.16;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com). ## The Crucifixion and Resurrection Here the two faiths make flatly incompatible historical claims, not merely differing theological interpretations of a shared event. The New Testament presents the death of Jesus by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, and his bodily resurrection three days later, as the historical bedrock of the entire Christian message: > "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." — [1 Corinthians 15:3–4](https://ref.ly/1Cor15.3-4;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com) Paul explicitly stakes the entire truth-claim of Christianity on the historicity of this event: "if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless" ([1 Corinthians 15:17](https://ref.ly/1Cor15.17;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)). All four Gospels narrate the crucifixion in detailed, geographically and historically anchored terms, naming the Roman prefect (Pilate), the method of execution, witnesses at the site, and the burial in a known tomb (Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23; John 19). Non-Christian first-century and early second-century sources independently corroborate the fact of Jesus' crucifixion under Pilate, including the Jewish historian [Josephus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus?ref=valuemysoul.com) (*Antiquities* 18.3.3) and the Roman historian [Tacitus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus?ref=valuemysoul.com) (*Annals* 15.44), who reports that "Christus... suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus." The near-universal consensus among historians of antiquity, across the theological spectrum, is that Jesus of Nazareth was in fact crucified; the substantive scholarly debate concerns the resurrection, not the crucifixion itself. The Qur'an's denial of the crucifixion ([Surah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surah?ref=valuemysoul.com) 4:157–158, quoted above) was written roughly six centuries after the event, in a different language and location, and it stands in opposition to this body of near-contemporary testimony. Whatever theological motivation lay behind the Qur'anic text — a concern to vindicate Jesus, a reflection of docetic-influenced Christian traditions circulating in pre-Islamic Arabia (some scholars point to affinities with the second-century [Gnostic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism?ref=valuemysoul.com) *Basilidian* teaching that a substitute was crucified in Jesus' place, and with certain strands of Gospel of Barnabas–type material, though the dating and origins of these connections remain debated among historians of religion) — it places the Qur'an's testimony on this point in direct conflict with both the New Testament documents and the wider historical record. For Christianity, this is not a peripheral disagreement. The crucifixion is the mechanism by which atonement for sin is accomplished — the subject of [*Can Good Deeds Outweigh Your Sin?*](../can-good-deeds-outweigh-your-sin) — and the resurrection is the vindication of Christ's identity and the guarantee of the believer's own future resurrection ([1 Corinthians 15:20–23](https://ref.ly/1Cor15.20-23;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com); [Romans 1:4](https://ref.ly/Rom1.4;nasb95?t=biblia&ref=valuemysoul.com)). A Jesus who did not die and rise is not, in New Testament terms, capable of saving anyone. --- 1. *The Epistle to the Hebrews*, rev. ed., Eerdmans, 1990, p. 58 [↩︎](#fnref1) 2. *The Gospel of John: A Commentary*, Baker Academic, 2003, vol. 1, p. 775 [↩︎](#fnref2)