Friday Sermon: Jesus — From the Bible and the Quran
by Yamin Alibaksh
25 December 2020 (Ahmadiyya Muslim Literary Trust, Trinidad & Tobago)
Opening Passages from the Holy Quran:
Yamin Alibaksh began by reciting two passages from the Holy Quran. The first compared Jesus with Adam, explaining that Adam had been created from dust by the divine command to be. The second placed Jesus within a long succession of prophets that included Noah, Abraham’s descendants, David, Solomon, Job, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Zacharias, John, Elias, Ishmael, Elisha, Jonah and Lot. He used these passages to establish the sermon’s central perspective: Jesus had been an honoured and righteous prophet of God, but he had remained within the same broad prophetic order as the other messengers.
The sermon had been delivered on Christmas Day, so he had chosen to examine beliefs about Jesus from both Christian and Islamic sources. His purpose had not been merely to retell the familiar Christmas story. He had wanted listeners to consider how historical assumptions, inherited doctrines and the language of scripture had shaped the very different conclusions that Christians and Muslims reached about Jesus.
Christmas Day and the Global Religious Setting:
He first placed the discussion in a global setting. Citing approximate demographic figures available at the time, he said that Christianity remained the world’s largest religious affiliation, while Islam represented a substantial and growing share of humanity. Hinduism and people without a formal religious affiliation also formed major parts of the world’s population. He observed that Islam’s numerical growth had largely reflected population growth in Muslim societies, whereas one of the most significant changes in belief had been the movement of many people from organised Christianity towards secularism.
He also mentioned changes within Christianity, including the movement of adherents from older denominations towards Pentecostal forms of worship. These trends had shown that religious identity was not static. Even where a tradition continued to have large numbers, people’s understanding of doctrine and their relationship with institutions could change substantially over time.
The Christian Calendar Was Not Proof of Christian Doctrine:
He recalled a Christian pastor asking why the whole world used a calendar centred on the era of Jesus if Christianity were not uniquely true. Yamin Alibaksh answered by tracing the calendar’s development. Ancient Egyptians had recognised a solar year of approximately 365 days, the Jewish calendar had a very old continuing history, the Julian calendar had preceded the modern Western system, and Pope Gregory XIII had introduced the Gregorian reform in 1582 to correct accumulated calendrical error.
He explained that the division of years into BC and AD had later been restated as BCE and CE, particularly in secular usage. More importantly, the chronology calculated by Dionysius Exiguus had depended upon historical assumptions about the year of Jesus’s birth. Later scholarship had concluded that the calculation was probably several years out. The widespread use of the Gregorian calendar therefore reflected history, administration and global convention; it did not, by itself, prove every Christian doctrine about Jesus.
He said that interfaith discussion should nevertheless remain pleasant and respectful. His answer to the pastor had not been intended as ridicule. It had illustrated a wider principle: the popularity or universality of a convention could not guarantee that all the beliefs associated with its origin were free from error.
Uncertainty Surrounding the Date of Jesus’s Birth:
He stated that historians could not identify with certainty the exact year, month or day of Jesus’s birth. The Gospel account of shepherds watching their flocks at night had suggested a season when outdoor conditions were suitable, rather than the coldest part of winter. He then referred to chapter 19 of the Holy Quran, which described Mary being comforted beside a palm tree and receiving fresh ripe dates after giving birth. Since ripe dates belonged to a warmer season, he treated this detail as further evidence against a late-December birth.
The point had not been that scripture supplied a precise alternative birthday. Rather, the clues in the Bible and the Holy Quran had made 25 December historically doubtful. Christmas could therefore have retained religious and cultural importance for Christians without the date necessarily being the literal anniversary of Jesus’s birth.
Why 25 December Became Established:
He connected 25 December with ancient midwinter observances. Around the December solstice, the sun appeared to reach its lowest annual position before the days began visibly to lengthen again. Pre-Christian religions had already attached symbolic importance to this renewal of light. He referred particularly to traditions associated with Mithra and to claims that features later connected with Jesus—including a miraculous birth, death and restoration to life—had parallels in earlier religious ideas.
He argued that Christianity’s expansion among non-Jewish peoples had encouraged the adaptation of existing customs. In his presentation, Paul had played an important role in opening the movement to Gentiles, whereas Jesus’s own ministry had been directed principally to the Children of Israel. Incorporating familiar festivals and symbols had made transition into the growing Christian religion easier. The date and some associated customs had therefore reflected historical accommodation as well as theological belief.
Sources for Studying Jesus:
Yamin Alibaksh next reviewed the sources through which people studied Jesus. Christian literature had included the Old Testament, the canonical Gospels, Acts, the epistles, Revelation and a variety of apocryphal writings that had not been included in the Bible. He explained that Matthew, Mark and Luke were called the Synoptic Gospels because they often viewed events from a broadly similar perspective and drew upon related traditions. John had differed markedly in structure, language and theology.
Islamic discussion had relied primarily upon the Holy Quran, together with hadith and later scholarship. Both Christian and Muslim traditions had therefore contained a large majority that accepted a virgin birth and a smaller current that interpreted Jesus’s birth as a normal human birth. He aligned his argument with the latter position and sought to show that it could be defended from the principles and wording of the Holy Quran.
The Central Debate over the Virgin Birth:
He explained that most Christians had connected the virgin birth with the doctrine of original sin. According to that theology, humanity had inherited the effects of Adam’s fall, and Jesus had needed a unique birth so that he could serve as a sinless redeemer. Most Muslims had rejected original sin but had nevertheless accepted a virgin birth as a special miracle and a sign of God’s power.
He listed several explanations Muslim writers had offered for this exceptional birth. Some had said that it elevated the status of women in a patriarchal society; others had said that it demonstrated Jesus’s purity; and still others had treated it as evidence of his uniquely close relationship with God. Yamin Alibaksh believed that these claims unintentionally strengthened Christian apologetic arguments by making Jesus exceptional in ways not granted even to other prophets.
The issue had therefore mattered beyond the mechanics of birth. If Muslims accepted a series of unique claims about Jesus—an unparalleled birth, a bodily ascent and an exceptional future role—Christian critics could ask why he should not also be assigned a higher nature. The speaker’s aim had been to restore consistency by interpreting Jesus as fully human and by applying to him the same divine principles that governed the lives of other prophets.
The Holy Quran Was Not a Conventional Biography:
One argument for the virgin birth had been that the Holy Quran never named Jesus’s father. Yamin Alibaksh replied that the Holy Quran had not been written as a complete historical biography of every prophet. It had selected details that served moral and spiritual transformation. The fathers of many other prophets had also gone unnamed, yet nobody inferred from that silence that those prophets had lacked fathers.
He therefore treated the absence of a name as an argument from silence. A missing biographical detail could not carry more weight than the Holy Quran’s general presentation of prophets as human beings governed by the ordinary laws of life, unless the text clearly declared an exception.
Jesus among Prophets Who Had Fathers:
He returned to the passage from chapter 6 that had named a group of prophets, including Jesus. After listing them, the Holy Quran had referred collectively to some of their fathers, descendants and brethren. He understood this as a statement covering the prophetic group and therefore including Jesus within a line of normal human ancestry.
He noted that some interpreters had taken the Arabic expression for fathers in a broader sense, such as forefathers or ancestors, to avoid applying it directly to Jesus. He considered this reply unconvincing because ancestry still depended upon parentage. For him, the passage’s natural meaning had been that Jesus belonged to the same human and familial order as the other prophets named beside him.
Why Jesus Was Called the Son of Mary:
Another argument had focused on the repeated designation ‘Jesus, son of Mary.’ If Jesus had a father, critics asked, why had he not been identified through him? Yamin Alibaksh answered by describing naming practices in first-century Palestine. Most people had not possessed modern hereditary surnames, so individuals with common names were distinguished by a parent, place, occupation or other familiar association.
He mentioned examples such as Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene and Paul of Tarsus. Jesus had also been a common name. In the speaker’s account, Joseph had died before Jesus’s public mission became prominent, while Mary remained the best-known living point of identification. Calling him the son of Mary had therefore functioned as an ordinary and intelligible designation; it had not necessarily been a doctrinal statement denying a father.
Other Arguments from the Holy Quran Requiring Explanation:
He briefly identified several further arguments but said that each required a separate discussion. One compared Jesus with Adam: since Adam had no human father, some interpreters concluded that Jesus likewise had no father. Yamin Alibaksh replied that Adam had also had no mother, so the analogy could not simply be a comparison of biological parentage. He understood it instead as a comparison in created human nature and in dependence upon God’s command.
Other arguments referred to the accusation made against Mary, Jesus’s titles as a word, spirit or sign from God, and the account of Mary bringing the infant to her people. He rejected any suggestion that the Holy Quran had endorsed an accusation against Mary’s chastity. He maintained that these passages had to be read within their wider language, purpose and historical context, rather than being isolated as automatic proof of a virgin birth.
The Delegation of Najran and the Status of Jesus:
In the final part of the sermon, he recounted the traditional discussion between the Holy Prophet Muhammad and a Christian delegation from Najran. The delegates had asked how Jesus could be regarded merely as a servant of God when he had no father and had performed extraordinary works, such as healing the sick, giving information about hidden matters and, by God’s permission, bringing the dead to life and forming birds from clay.
The verse comparing Jesus with Adam had then supplied the central response of the Holy Quran. A miraculous origin or extraordinary sign did not turn a created being into the Creator. Adam’s creation had been even more unusual, yet neither Muslims nor Christians worshipped Adam as God. Miracles had demonstrated the power of God working through His messenger; they had not established an independent divine nature in the messenger.
Jesus’s Human Qualities Distinguished Him from God:
The Holy Prophet Muhammad had then distinguished Jesus from God through simple questions. God was eternally living, independent, guardian of all and the giver of sustenance. Jesus had not possessed these attributes independently. His knowledge and power had been limited to what God granted him, and he had remained dependent upon divine care.
Jesus had been carried in a woman’s womb, born and raised like other children, and had needed food and drink. He had experienced the normal requirements of human life and had been subject to mortality. Yamin Alibaksh regarded these ordinary facts as decisive. They had honoured Jesus as a genuine human messenger while preventing the elevation of a servant of God into God Himself.
The argument had been intentionally accessible rather than abstract. It had invited the delegation to compare the necessary qualities of the eternal Creator with the observable dependence of Jesus. Once that distinction had been accepted, exceptional miracles could no longer override the basic separation between God and His prophet.
The Prayer Challenge and the Closing Lesson:
He said that the discussion had eventually led to the proposed prayer challenge known as mubahala, in which both sides would pray for God’s judgement upon deliberate falsehood. The Christian delegation had not accepted the challenge. Yamin Alibaksh presented this episode as an example of the Holy Prophet Muhammad progressing patiently from questions and shared premises towards the central theological conclusion.
He closed by urging listeners to reflect upon religious customs as well as the verses of the Holy Quran. Inherited celebrations, calendars and doctrines had needed thoughtful examination rather than automatic acceptance. The search for truth had required historical awareness, careful reading and a willingness to distinguish the honour due to Jesus from claims that compromised the absolute oneness of God.
Overall Message:
The sermon had presented Jesus as a revered prophet within the continuous family of divine messengers. It had challenged the idea that the calendar, the date of Christmas, a virgin birth or extraordinary miracles proved divinity. Yamin Alibaksh had argued that the Holy Quran’s broader principles placed Jesus among human prophets who were created, dependent upon God and entrusted with signs by Him.
At the same time, he had encouraged respectful interfaith engagement. He had not treated disagreement as a reason for hostility. His preferred method had been to examine evidence, expose assumptions, apply the same standard consistently to every prophet and use clear reasoning to defend the unity and transcendence of God. Reflection of this kind, he concluded, could lead believers closer to God and strengthen their search for truth.