"Nasara" derived from Nazareth?

[Zack]

I ask myself if the table mockering over the cross of Jesus I.N.R.I is expressing the view of the Romans about Jesus to be an Nazara.
Isn't it translated as Jesus the Nazarene King of the Jews.

No, it is just "Jesus, King of the Jews" in Matthew, Mark and Luke...

[Joseph Islam]

I ask myself if the table mockering over the cross of Jesus I.N.R.I is expressing the view of the Romans about Jesus to be an Nazara.
Isn't it translated as Jesus the Nazarene King of the Jews.

No, it is just "Jesus, King of the Jews" in Matthew, Mark and Luke...

Dear Deliverance, Zack and all.

As-salam alaykum.

I would like to second brother Zack's input that the reference in the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke (23:38) do not contain the prefix 'Jesus of Nazareth', although I do understand that the statement is slightly different in all three Gospels underscoring a consistent theme.
 
Matthew (27:37) - This is Jesus the *King of the Jews
Mark (15:26) - The King of the Jews
Luke 23:38 - This is the King of the Jews

(* basileus - leader of the people, commander, prince, king, lord of the land)

However, it is John's Gospel which is where one finds the prefix. The acronym allegedly represents what was written by Pontius Pilate on the cross (John Chapter 19:19) - 'Jesus of Nazareth The King of the Jews' and even though this was verbally opposed by the chief priests, Pilate retained what he had written (John 19:21) although I recall it to be written in three different languages. (Greek reads: ΙΝΒΙ).

From what I understand from Latin is that the 'I' reads the English 'J' and similarly 'V' is used instead of the U.  Therefore INRI would read 'Iesvs Nazarenvs Rex Ivdaeorvm' which would translate as "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." as in John 19:19.

'Nazoraios’ was apparently a name given to the 'Christians' by the Jews.

Acts 24:5 KJV 
"For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes"

It is interesting to note however, that many Muslims often do not trust four similar separate testimonies (or 3 Synoptic Gospels which excludes John) of prophet Jesus's teachings and life accounts, written arguably within some decades of the end of prophet Jesus's ministry on the assertions that there are 'differences' (after all why wouldn't there be? they are different testimonies, not photocopies), that there are irreconcilable anomalies and the testimonies are corrupted.

However, in the same stroke, they show absolutely no scruples to accept a secondary Islamic corpus compiled on the basis of largely 'single testimonies' (ahad transmission) (not written by any companions of the prophet), canonised many centuries after the death of the prophet at the behest of fallible rulers and compilers. It implies to me that there is a subconscious assumption in the minds of many Muslims that the early 'followers' were more noble and committed to follow a messenger of God (Prophet Muhammad) than the early followers of Christ. That the early followers of Christ could make serious mistakes in transmission from which the early followers of prophet Muhammad would be exempt. I find this an unwarranted intimation.

If separate testimonies within decades of prophet Jesus's ministry are not to be trusted on the grounds that there are 'differences' (as many Muslims claim), then what should be said about single testimonies (at times arguably even more contradictory), canonised centuries after the death of prophet Muhammad, with no comparable testimonies as in the case of the Gospels?

It is sadly, often a case of double standards.

Regards,
Joseph

[Zack]

Hello all,

Oh yes... I left out John. Just adding to Br. Joseph which I agree with, from a post yesterday in the "Bible category" is relevant here...There is only one Injil. Injil (Gospel) means "Good News", and so "Jesus was given the INjil" is literally translated "Jesus was given the Good News." What you refer to as 4 Injil's, are actually 4 inspired writings / testimonies by those in the era of Nabi Isa of the one Injil. It is generally understood there were 4 different audiences. For example, the record of Matthew is more written for the audience following the Torah, Hebrews...and in fact deals with issues relating to living under the Torah / Sharia.

Adding further, a scholar by the name of James Dunn, who is recognized as one of the premier theologians for Christians, however is controversial because he actually reads the Bible with an interpretation that is somewhat more in sync with the Quran / Hebrew mindset. Anyway one of his key points is not to have an understanding of  the written Injil (N.T.) as having an original book revealed shortly (ie. 3 years) after Isa, and everyone is looking for the original. That never happened!

He explains that our mistake is thinking in a "printing press / book" mindset for the Holy Books. On the contrary, it was an amazing oral society (as was Arabia with the Prophet Muhammad). Stories and recitations were memorised and compared. The Jews trusted this system for a 1000 years! Later, these memorised stories were transcribed and cross-checked with witnesses etc. and God enabled these witnesses to write the gospels that there is today. 

This mindset will help Muslims to move away from the idea of looking for "The Lost Injil". That is a 20th century mindset, as if I misplaced a book somewhere and can't locate it. (-:   I hope this helps....

[QM Moderators Team]

Dear Deliverance,

Your following post has been moved to a separate thread as a new topic.

http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1263

Online Deliverance
Full Member
***
Posts: 152
View Profile  Email  Personal Message (Online)

Discussions about the term 'Yahoud'
« on: Today at 09:22:31 AM »
 
Thanks for making my Picture about Nasara clearer.

Now i am about to know about the term"Yahoud" sometimes it is written without "YA " and is been shown as "HAdou" in sura 2:62 for example "إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ وَٱلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ "

Does "Hadu" come from the Prophet HUd or is it derived from Thunder (sons of Thunder?)