The event of the cross is not of man's invention. Otherwise Christians would not have been content to attribute to their leader, prophet and Saviour, yea their Lord this great ignominy. The Law of Moses says, ...because anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse (Deuteronomy 21:23). The Gospel says, Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us, (for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree'  (Galatians 3:13). Not only have Christians confessed the fact of the Crucifixion but they have proudly regarded it the source of their bounties and heavenly blessings and the fountain of all Salvation; for themselves as well as for all who believe in the Crucified Christ and the redemption he accomplished by his memorable death. It seems to me, in discussions with my Muslim brothers, that the subject of Christ's crucifixion is an historical event in some respects. Therefore I have chosen now to discuss it historically.

The prophets of old, David, Isaiah, Daniel and others prophesied on every aspect of the life of Christ, especially his death and resurrection, starting more than 1,050 years before it happened. In fact some had fixed the place of the crucifixion and the time, citing signs, some of which were natural such as the eclipse of the sun and earthquake. Others were historical such as the final cessation of the sacrifice, because it had pointed to Christ's great sacrifice; also of the end of the monarchy among the Jews.

When Jesus came, he announced to the Jews plainly that what was written in their Law concerning his death had to come to pass and that he had to be crucified to atone for the sins of mankind. The apostles after him gloried in this Crucifixion, leading one of them to say, For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2). A few days after the crucifixion one of them stood up before a great crowd of Jews and declared, You, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross (Acts 2:23). The result of his speech was that 3000 of those present believed in the Crucified One.

The crucifixion became the theme of the disciples and of apostolic preaching, the pivot of all their sermons, and the only way to obtain forgiveness of sins. They used to say, God forbid that I should boast, except in the cross of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in spite of being followers of the Crucified. The Christian Church, in every century since has regarded the crucifixion of Christ as the original disciples did. The reason is that nothing in the Torah and Gospel is clearer than this fact.

The famous Jewish historian Josephus mentioned the crucifixion of Christ, saying, Pilate sentenced Christ to be crucified to satisfy the clamour of the chief priests among us, and those who loved Christ at first did not leave him but continue with us to this day. They are called Christians after him. Even Jews today admit that Christ was crucified and the Qur'an itself witnesses that the Jews admit that they killed Christ, as you can see in Sura al-Nisa' 4:156, ...and for their saying, We slew the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of God. The Rabbi Yohanan Bin Zakka, disciple of the famous Hillel wrote a book in Hebrew a long time ago, mentioning the Jews sentencing Christ to be crucified because he claimed to be God's Son and that they hanged him on a tree outside Jerusalem, in accordance with the order of the king and the Jewish rulers.

The Talmud incidentally mentions the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and the pagan historian Tacitus mentioned in chapter 15 of his work, written nearly 40 years after Christ, that he was killed by order of Pontius Pilate, the local governor during the reign of Tiberius.

This historian wrote to people who lived at the time of Christ and in all likelihood some had been eye witnesses at his death. He had access to Roman records, where the official chronicles of the various governors were kept. Among them were the chronicles of the governors of Palestine, where Christ was crucified. Consequently this author's writings were held in high esteem since they related to official events and public information.

The important fact is that Pilate sent a report to Rome about the crucifixion and death of Christ which has been preserved among the records of Rome as was customary with civilised empires of the day. From this legal inscription Tacitus was able to obtain his information in addition to other public sources. Reference to this inscription was made by the philosopher Flavius Justinus in writing to the Emperor Antonius Pius in the year 139 AD; also by the scholar Tertullian, writing from Carthage in the year 199 AD.

Thus you see that the incident of the crucifixion of Christ was a thing predetermined and a notable event known among pagans, Jews and Christians; not only among the common people but also among the elite for 600 years. Until the Qur'an came and denied it, not openly, but by means of ambiguous statements and various texts which have caused much uncertainty for Muslims, causing some to deny it emphatically and others to believe it, as you noted from the previous section.

Now thoughtful reader, assume that 50 honest men witnessed clearly that Zaid killed Amr, and that the eyewitnesses knew perfectly both the killer and victim. Then assume that the killer confessed publicly to his ugly deed. For about 600 years it is the general belief and an undisputed fact that Zaid killed Amr. But then, after this long period a contradictory witness presented himself before the judge, obviously not an eye witness. Let us assume that he was an impartial witness and said, I testify that the killing did occur but that the one killed was not Amr but Bakr. How do you think the judge would decide the case? Would he confirm that Amr had been killed or would he judge that the one killed was Bakr, basing his decision on this latest isolated testimony? There is no doubt that a fair-minded judge would confirm the decision that it was Amr who was killed on the basis of numerous witnesses and the confession of the killer. Anyone who judges otherwise would demonstrate his ignorance of civil and canonical laws and only confirms to others that he is totally devoid of justice!

I do not have to warn you that this example concerns the case of Christ's crucifixion and applies to it in every way.

What will you say after this, oh Muslim brother, you who are looking for the truth? I counsel you to leave your credal bias and judge in this matter as a free man, according to justice and your intellectual honesty. You will find that the case is simple, and does not require all this troublesome pursuit. You will then know that Christ (Isa) was killed and crucified to redeem the world. But he arose from the grave and ascended up to heaven victorious. Henceforth, death will not have dominion over him.

External Link: www.the-good-way.com