User:CPO675/Sandbox 1: Difference between revisions

A barrier between two seas and the cosmic oceans

Main page image to upload (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tSZVB0TTdpOtG0Y5sUbrCrsBiiHFZ-Io/view?usp=sharing). Rights brought from iStock to use on website.https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/estuary-difference-between-fresh-water-and-sea-water-from-above-gm1462114312-495765419?phrase=estuary+freshwater+saltwater&searchscope=image%2Cfilm

Introduction

The Quran refers to two different bodies of water, emphasising there is one sweet and one fresh, and that they meet but there is a barrier between them. Both early and medieval Muslims, and modern Academic scholarship, have identified this with an ancient belief of there being a cosmic ocean of water surrounding the world.^[1] Other classical scholars have attributed it to the way fresh water bodies of water are separate to the salty seas and oceans in general, rather than two specific bodies of water, not taking the verse literally.^[2][3]

Some modern Muslims have tried to reconcile the relevant verses with natural phenomena, including estuaries meeting the sea, and different seas having different salt levels. However critics do not believe the verses accurately describe this, and actually conflicts with the description as will be stated in the article. When a fresh water river flows into the sea or ocean, there is a transition region in between. This transition region is called an estuary where the fresh water remains temporarily separated from the salt water. However, this separation is not absolute, is not permanent, and the different salinity levels between the two bodies of water eventually homogenize. The Qur'an, by contrast, suggests that there is a separation between two seas, one salty and one fresh water, maintained by some sort of divine barrier placed between them.

The Qur'an

There is a consistent theme of 'the two seas' ("al-baḥrayni, ٱلْبَحْرَيْنِ"), with the exact term being used 5 times in the Quran.

We are told that there are two seas ("al-baḥrayni, ٱلْبَحْرَيْنِ"), one freshwater (palatable and sweet), and one seawater (salt and bitter), and that there is a barrier that it is forbidden to be pass, implying that they will never be passed.

Q55:22 quoted below states that coral emerge from both seas. However, coral are found only in salt water oceans, and exposure to freshwater leads to coral bleaching.^[4]

And again in Q35:12 we are told the two seas with one being freshwater (palatable and sweet), and one seawater (salt and bitter). But from both come fresh meat (presumably fish) and ornaments to wear come from both (presumably coral and pearl as mentioned above in verse Q 55:22).

Again, there is a barrier between the two seas.

Another reference to "the two seas" is found in the story of Moses and his servant, where he meets a man (Al-Khidr) who has special knowledge of events that have not yet happened from god, and tests Moses to carry out seemingly immoral tasks without asking him why:

The full story of Moses ad Al-Khidr can be found lower in the page for context.

Apologists claims

Estuaries and salt water

Apologists claim that the Quran is referring to different bodies of water have different densities which causes them not to mix, creating a barrier between them, and even that the descriptions show advanced knowledge of science that could not have been known to a person from the 7th century. You can see the images referenced in this link which are repeated on many Islamic websites.

The first claim is around fresh water from rivers meeting seas/oceans of salt water, with the transition stage known as estuaries:

Note that in the above referenced claim in the book (Introductory Oceanography, Thurman), they have added the words “Zone of Separation” and “The partition" onto Figure 4 (saying “with slight enhancement”), which the book itself does not have - clearly to link the word 'partition' (as translated into English by several official translators of the Quran) with the scientific book.

Issues with this interpretation

Problems with miracle claim

Critics point to issue's with inserting this is a scientific miracle (and even scientifically accurate):

1. Firstly as with all claims of scientific miracles in ancient scripture, nothing scientifically new was known/discovered from this verse as one would expect if it clearly described a new scientific fact - the method of 'discovering' falls into several typical categories used for these claims such as selective literalism, de-historicization and pseudo-corelation (see Scientific Miracles in the Quran), taking advantage of ambiguity in language to fit a modern reading..
2. The idea of the density of salt water being more than freshwater, separating the two was already known at least by the time of Aristotle (382 BC to 322 BC); “The drinkable, sweet water, l of it drawn up: the salt water is heavy and remains behind.”^[5]
3. This description is so basic and lacking any actual science (i.e. God creates a barrier between two seas which stops them merging), it could easily apply to someone sailing nearby or over one of these and passing on the descriptions as humans have sailed since ancient times,^[6] and the colours are often different (as seen in the image on this page), leading people to assume there was an actual barrier placed by God between the two waters.
4. This description also seems to imply there is no mixing between them at all, and could just as easily be written by someone believing that someone incorrectly believing this.

A deeper analysis can be found on the now defunct and archived former (more polemical) Wikiislam website' page on scientific miracles Meeting of Fresh and Salt Water in the Quran.

Problems with general accuracy

We are told that there are specifically the two seas (al-baḥrayni).

• This uses the definite particle 'al' for 'the' for a specific two seas, not general.
• 'baḥr' بحر for large body of water/sea.
• the dual suffix/ending in 'ayni' -ين means there are two of them, as apposed to singular or plural (3 or more in Arabic).

1. Yet this happens in many places (there are over 1,200 documented estuaries,^[7] i.e. more than two) across the world - nowhere does the language suggest this is the case, as to match this Qur'an verse it must be referring to a single specific but unnamed estuary. There are many far better ways to phrase this if it meant this natural and general phenomena.
2. There are many different types of estuaries (e.g. Salt wedge, Fjord-type, Slightly Stratified - you can read about them here and on CostalWiki for accessible science for the general reader), however despite what it may look like on the surface they all mix to varying degrees - which is not a logic inference of having a barrier between them that they are forbidden to pass.
3. It does not use the word specifically for river (نھر "Nahar" - a word also used elsewhere in the Qur'an to describe a river) and sea, which would have been an accurate way to describe it.
4. If the mixing zones isn't part of either 'sea' being mentioned but a 'barrier', then there are arguably 3 bodies of water in this, and the language could reflect the mixing zone by stating that one of them is made of both sweet and salty water (brackish water^[8]). This also would separate it from the other specific seas being referred to as we will discuss in the next section.

Two actual seas

Secondly, it states the verses not specifically mentioning sweet and salty waters are referring to different seas with different kinds of waters (again click the link to see the images):

Problems with miracle claim and general science

• Firstly, it is a leap of faith to separate the sweet and salty seas from the other two 'seas' mentioned in Quran 55:19-20 from the others, as they all use the same phrase to refer to a specific two seas it is implied the audience is already familiar with.
• Quran 35:12 states ornaments for us to wear are from both seas, salty and sweet linking the coral and pearl this to the sweet and salty seas as repeated in verse 55:22.
• Again, using the definite particle 'al' and barrier between them implies this is for two specific seas, while this phenomena occurs in many places, even the North Atlantic, South Atlantic the Pacific Oceans have different salt levels.^[9] And there are more examples of aquatic sills^[10], with some notable examples given here - which does not match a single specific case as the definite article used in the Quran suggests. For vertically mixed zones where salinity changes rapidly, a pycnocline zone, and more specifically, a halocline zone^[11], is always a mixture of fresh water and salt water - in fact it is a product of their mixing.
• For the second point about the difference between the Atlantic and Mediterranean oceans not mixing, this is not true, as Piers Chapman of Texas A&M University writes on Waterencyclopedia^[12]: 'Mixing in the ocean occurs on several scales.. The best-known example of this process, known as salt fingering, occurs where very salty water from the Mediterranean outflow mixes into the North Atlantic... Most mixing, however, takes place on larger scales in response to forcing by the wind'.

Historical context

Antiquity interpretation

There is another interpretation for this verse which critics argue is the only one to accurately fit this verse on a literal reading, which is discussed below. This fits a prevalent antiquity (and pre-antiquity) view that was present across the region, and also held in biblical cosmology and later Christian/Jewish exegesis at the time of Mohammad, that this refers to a somewhat magical cosmic ocean surrounding the Earth.

This likely originates from ancient Mesopotamian myths, such as the ancient Akkadian myth of the Abzu, the name for a fresh water underground sea that was given a religious quality in Sumerian and Akkadian mythology. Lakes, springs, rivers, wells, and other sources of fresh water were thought to draw their water from the Abzu underground sea, while the Ocean that surrounded the world was a saltwater sea. This underground sea is called Tehom in the Hebrew Bible. For example, Genesis 49:25 says, "blessings of the heavens above, and Tehom lying beneath".^[13] Wensinck explains,^[14] "Thus it appears that the idea of there being a sea of sweet water under our earth, the ancient Tehom, which is the source of springs and rivers, is common to the Western Semites".

Similarly in Greek mythology, the world was surrounded by Oceanus, the world-ocean of classical antiquity. Oceanus was personified as the god Titan, whose consort was the aquatic sea goddess Tethys. It was also thought that rainfall was due a third ocean above the "Firmament of the Sky" (a vast reservoir above the firmament of the sky is also described in the Genesis creation narrative). Whether the two seas mentioned in the Qur'an referred to these mythological seas or a more general inviolable barrier between bodies of salt and fresh water, critics argue that the verse in question is scientifically wrong.

The antiquity view is well summarised in Tommaso Tesei's 2015 article 'Some Cosmological Notions from Late Antiquity in Q 18:60–65: The Quran in Light of Its Cultural Context', examining the Qur'ans verse on Moses meeting a servant at the meeting of the two seas, which he claims is influenced by a story of Alexander the Great (see Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance), which also features in this Surah. The main discussion is on verses:

The full article from Tommaso, which is recommended to read to understand the context, can be read in the link on JSTOR for free by making an account, which provides a full overview.

The Quran states that Moses is able to reach “the junction of the two seas” (majmaʿ al-baḥrayni), where he meets a Servant of God. It states that he is able to reach it after hearing from his young attendant about the fish that they were carrying with them (for food) escaping. This is twice referred to, in Q18:61 and v63. In both cases the dynamic is described by exactly the same phrase, with v63 ending in ʿajaban, which is commonly translated as “wondrously” or “in a marvellous way,” and 'saraban', which has caused problems and disagreements among Muslim commentators:

The puzzled commentators have given rise to a number of conflicting interpretations by later Muslims^[15] starting from the mid-8th century exegesis, who often came up with miraculous/magical stories to link the dead fish escaping with a tunnel (a summary is provided in the article). Tommaso states that such attempts to relate the path the fish takes in the sea to passage on land are direct consequences of the apparent discordance between the meaning of the word sarab, “subterranean passage,” and the place where it is said to be found: the sea. It seems the later commentators did not have the full story it arose from. With the story matching a common motif of the water of life surrounding the Earth that could give life to the dead:

Islamic scholar Gabriel Said Reynolds also notes this 'junction between two seas' (and other verses mentioning the two seas) as likely meaning the waters of the heaven. He also provides a translation of the relevant sections from the Alexander Song in his 2018 book "The Quran and Bible: Text and Commentary",^[16] which seems to have influenced the story (again see Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance):

This also explains why the fish (which was their food, i.e. dead) then comes back to life and takes to the sea in a 'marvellous' way (it is worth pointing out the obvious that there is no sea on Earth that can revive dead animals):

Similar to other religious near-East sources:

The Biblical and Judeo-Christian background literature

The story of Moses and his servant is one of four stories in Surah al-Kahf. Modern academic scholarship has identified antecedents of each story in the lore of late antiquity. This particular story is almost unanimously considered to derive from a legend about Alexander the Great and his search for the water of life. For details see the section on the four stories in Surah al-Kahf in the article Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature. The bible itself also contains a sea above the Earth:

Islamic Scholar Angelika Neuwirth notes in her commentary on verses 55:19-22, that the text, along with many other verses, contains calls to the Palms:

Pre-Islamic poetry

The fact that the Qur'an addresses it's audience with the claim of the two (specific not general) seas, without giving more explanation or context about what they are or where, also suggests the initial audience were acquainted with it's meaning. We can see these views were also prevalent in Arabia at the time of Mohammad's preaching as this poem from a contemporary of Muhammad mentions the Earth being settled on the waters:

Post-Islamic Poetry

We further see the cosmic ocean continue to appear in poetry from respected Muslim poets, such as by Dhu'l-Nun Al-Misri (d. 859), who was born in Akhmim, upper Egypt and was an Egyptian Sufi Master. He was considered the Patron Saint of the Physicians in the early Islamic era of Egypt and is credited with having introduced the concept of Gnosis into Islam.^[20] In his Qasida 'Hymn of Creation', we find:

This view has more evidence from Islamic sources.

Islamic Literature - The two seas in the story Moses and Al-Khidr

In Quran 18:60 Moses states that he won't give up until he reaches the two seas, or has progressed for many 'ages' (in Arabic huquban حُقُبًا) , with the word implying this junction is extremely far from land (many translators such as Yusuf Khan, Shakir and Muhsin Khan translate it as 'years'), taking longer than any journey on our actual oceans would take. For example Christopher Columbus's journeys to America in the 1,400's took around 4 weeks to 6 months depending on the wind and weather.^[21] This suggests the author thought it was very far away from the Middle East where Moses is said to have preached.

This story continues where Moses goes with a 'servant of God' at the junction of the two seas, who is unnamed in the Qur'an but called 'Al-Khidr' in the Hadith. This man has extremely accurate foreknowledge of both future events and human nature (predestination), so he carries out seemingly strange immoral tasks and tells Moses to be patient and not ask him about them; these are making a hole in a boat to sink it, killing a young child, and fixing a wall for free for a town that refused them hospitality.

However Moses cannot help but ask why they are doing them, so after three events Al-Khidr parts ways with him and tells him why he committed the acts; he made a hole in the boat as it was about to be stolen by a king if they departed at that moment, the child was killed as he would become a disbeliever, hurting his devout parents - so God will replace him with a 'purer' one, and the as for fixing the wall, he built it because it is covering a hidden treasure and two orphan boys will find this later.

This verse is expanded upon in a sahih/authentic hadith: Sahih Bukhari 4:55:613

We can see that the servants knowledge of events to come is so great he is able to teach a prophet as important as Moses, and even become annoyed with him and leave him for questioning him. This kind of knowledge is usually only reserved for God, which although not a direct piece of evidence, fits someone coming from a special sea in the sense they are so supernatural and unlike any other character in the Quran. The verses talking about the two seas also usually appear after important creation events: Quran 55:22 is mentioned just after creating humans and jinn, Quran 35:12 following creation of humans from clay, and Quran 27:61 - a verse before mentions creating the heavens and the Earth; suggesting this is an important part of creation, which two specific but essentially random (as are never identified) seas are not as fitting.

Islamic Views - Hadith and Qur'an

In the two most authoritative hadith collections, we see in Sahih Bukhari that Muhammad is recorded as saying that when going into the seven heavens on a night journey (see Buraq), the rivers in paradise came to Earth via the Nile and Euphrates. This clearly backs up the idea identified by Tommaso that fresh water comes into Earth via a freshwater cosmic ocean:

And this idea is backed up in Sahih Muslim:

From this Quran verse we see the God's throne was on 'the waters' during creation:

Which were there before the universe was created (this hadith is rated Hasan/Good by Darussalam):

As well as a hadith in Sunan Ibn Majah's collection, which although is rated 'Da'if/weak' (so unlikely to have come directly from Muhammad), show's early Muslim understanding of the verses as a cosmic sea in the sky, above the seventh heaven:

Islamic Commentaries

Al-Tabari also provided an interpretation on this meaning of this verse to mean a 'sea in the sky and earth that meet every year' (with other views in his tafsir on verse:)

And speaks of a cosmic waters that surround the Earth and heavens elsewhere.

Angelika Neuwirth notes that's Tabari's is the interpretation in accordance with the Qur'anic evidence, while other later interpretations (e.g. of different actual seas and metaphorical seas of fresh and salty water discussed below) were created to fit new Greek science.^[22]

Al-Qurtubi, another prominent Sunni Scholar also provides this 'sky and Earth sea meeting' view:

Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs and Tafsir Ibn Al Kathir commentary on verse 18:60, while not stating this comes from a cosmic ocean (but rather a nearby spring), also relate this story to a rock which contains the fountain of life reviving a dead fish, which pulls motifs from the near-East view of a magical cosmic waters with life giving qualities. (Once again it is worth pointing out the obvious that there is no magic fountain or rock on Earth that can revive dead animals).

It is also very difficult to imagine how one would know they had reached a junction of two seas, if this was referring to man-made sea boundaries as (such as the Persian and Roman seas) which many later commentaries guess at. However they would be more likely to know by reaching a magical barrier between the Earthly sea and cosmic ocean.

This idea of a cosmic ocean also has strong connections to the myth of the Islamic whale (see The Islamic Whale) swimming in the ocean with Earth on it's back, a view held by most major traditional Islamic scholars on their Qur'an commentaries such as Al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, Al-Razi, Al Qurtubi etc.

Separately, in the story of Gog and Magog, also linked to Dhul-Qarnayn/Alexander the Great and this tale, some Shi'i traditions locate the barrier (of Gog and Magog) either behind the Mediterranean, between the two mountains found there, whose rear part is the encircling sea/ocean of the world (Bahr al-muhit).^[23]

As mentioned in the introductory paragraph, there are many classical scholars who have attributed the 'two seas' verses other than Moses reaching them (in Q18:60-65) as non-literal, in the sense that it is referring to the way that fresh water bodies of water are separate to the salty seas and oceans in general,^[24]usually by land.^[25] However once again it should be noted that it is not supported by the actual language of the Quran which designates the verse to be talking about two specific large bodies of water, rather than the many, many separate but unconnected bodies of fresh water across Earth. This view for example by Ibn Kathir seems supported by the fact that no-where on Earth has a sea with fresh water rather than a linguistic analysis (let alone there is no-where on Earth a freshwater sea touches a saltwater sea without merging).

Folklore and maps

Karen C. Pinto, a scholar who wrote a book on medieval Islamic maps, focusing on a distinct tradition of maps known collectively as the Book of Roads and Kingdoms (Kitab al-Masalik wa al-Mamalik, or KMMS)^[26], shows this view, known as the encircling ocean (al-Baḥr al-Muḥīṭ), was also part of Islamic folklore and art:

Images of this can be seen for free in her 2017 article In God's Eyes: The Sacrality of the Seas in the Islamic Cartographic Vision on P56 and P57.

External links

• https://archive.wikiislam.net/wiki/Meeting_of_Fresh_and_Salt_Water_in_the_Quran - Previous archived Wikiislam page on the former site covering this 'miracle'
• Answering Islam - Facts About the Seas and Oceans
• The Rain Model in Muhammad's Mind - an article on Islam Vs Atheism.com covering this topic and other water cycle related verses in the Quran and hadith
• Waters that Never mix - YouTube video

References

Historical Jesus Practice

Like many biblical characters, the Qur'an contains verses relating to the Christian Jesus (named Isa), whom it affirms was really a prophet of Allah and 'the messiah'; though it is unclear what this means exactly, with many different Islam interpretations. [1] (see Isa page for a theological discussion). Unlike in the bible, the Qur'an states he is just a human and not the son of God {{Quran|4|171}} (e.g. {{Quran|17|111}} {{Quran|2|116}}),

He is said to have preached 'the gospel/Injeel', similarly to how Moses was given the Torah ({{Quran|5|46}} and Muhammad the Qur'an. This has lead to the dominant Islamic position is that the New Testament we have (which contains 4 'gospels') is a corrupted/changed document that does not match his original teachings.[2] Therefore Muslims disregard the Christian Jesus as essentially an altered version of the real one, who allegedly was not actually crucified {{Quran|4|157}}[14] nor ever claimed to be the son of God (e.g. {{Quran|17|111}} {{Quran|2|116}}), which ~600 years later was clarified

However while Muslims may reject the biblical Jesus on theological/faith-based grounds alone, there has been much secular scholarship for more than 200 years seeking to reconstruct the real historical Jesus (independently from Islamic studies) from historical-critical methods rather than Christian theological/faith-based one's, whose results conflict with the Qur'anic one in key ways.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Qur'an includes references to Jesus (referred to as Isa in Islam), acknowledging him as a prophet of Allah and the Messiah, but with unclear implications that have led to various interpretations in Islam. Unlike the Christian Bible, the Qur'an portrays Jesus as a human being, not the son of God.

It states that Jesus preached the gospel (Injeel) but suggests that the New Testament has been altered and does not reflect Jesus's original teachings.

According to the Qur'an, Jesus was not crucified, nor did he ever claim to be the son of God. While Muslims reject the Christian view of Jesus based on theological grounds, secular scholarship has also sought to reconstruct the historical Jesus through critical methods, which differ from the Qur'anic portrayal.

Imminent Apocalyptic Preacher

Mention arguments are too long to fit on here, recommend reading X,Y,Z for for all points.

Analysis of the sources had made it a consensus view that Jesus believed the 'apocalypse',  i.e. judgment day in Islam; the end of history where the forces of evil would be destroyed and the righteous would enter the kingdom of heaven would happen within his lifetime ?or at least very soon after?.

As biblical scholar Albert Schweitzer famously pointed out in his seminal 1906 work 'The Quest of the Historical Jesus', Jesus’s failed prophecy was not an aberrant remark but at the core of his message.[3] Only in later writings did this message begin to be subverted for a metaphorical kingdom of Earth of those who join Jesus's followers believing in salvation and the resurrection [4]

I.e. only later Gospel writers, beginning with Luke (or John), began to reinterpret these apocalyptic messages as the expected return of Jesus didn’t materialize, suggesting a more spiritual interpretation of the "Kingdom of God." This reinterpretation is seen as an attempt to reconcile early Christian beliefs with the reality that the world didn't end as expected. []

Jesus was estimated have lived between (source) The books that make up the New Testament, documenting Jesus's life and teachings, (and believed by Christians to be divinely inspired writings to cover his teachings, death and salvation) are again consensus to be written in order of seven authentic letters of Paul followed the first Gospel, Mark (~C. 70 C.E), two more inauthentic (source) letters from Paul, followed by The Gospel of Matthew and then The Gospel of Luke, (both~ 80-90 C.E.), five more inauthentic letters attributed to Paul (ibid), followed by The Gospel of John (~90-100 C.E.), with the Book of Revelations and several more inauthentic letters attributed to Paul after that.[5] The books/letters and their dates are as follows:[5]

Date Approximated Dating 1 Thessalonians (Pauls letter) C. 49 C.E. Galatians C. 49-51 C.E. 1 Corinthians C. 54-55 C.E. 2 Corinthians C. 55-56 C.E. Romans C. 56-57 C.E. Philemon 55 C.E. or 61-63 C.E. Philippians C. 59-62 C.E. The Gospel of Mark C. 70 C.E. 2 Thessalonians 70-90 C.E. 1 Peter 70-110 C.E. The Gospel of Matthew 80-90 C.E. The Gospel of Luke 80-90 C.E. The Acts of the Apostles 80-90 C.E. Colossians 80-100 C.E. Ephesians 80-100 C.E. The Epistle to the Hebrews 80-100 C.E. The Epistle to James 80-100 C.E. The Gospel of John 90-100 C.E. The Epistle of Jude 90-100 C.E. The Book of Revelation C. 96 C.E. 1, 2, and 3 John C. 100 C.E. 1 and 2 Timothy 90-120 C.E. Titus 90-120 C.E. 2 Peter 110-140 C.E.

New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman notes that the majority of scholars hypothesis there was also an earlier but lost Gospel known in scholarship 'Q' to have existed, based off shared stories between the gospels of Luke and Matthew which do not come from the earliest Gospel of Mark, which may shared sayings appear to come from. It is believed they used Mark as a key source too.[6]

As Bart Ehrman (year) notes, through careful examination of the earliest and most likely authentic material (e.g. multiply and independently attested, dissimilar[15] and matching the context), we can see early Christians believed and saved the beliefs and saying of Jesus's imminent apocalyptic sayings [9]

Beginning with the earliest writings on Jesus, the authentic letters of Paul, (explain what Paul's letters are) we see some explicit references

• 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 (~C. 49 C.E.): Paul writes, "According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven... And the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air." Paul includes himself and his contemporaries in the group who will be alive at Christ's return.

• 1 Corinthians 7:29-31  (~C. 54-55 C.E.): Paul advises, "What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not... For this world in its present form is passing away." This sense of urgency indicates Paul believed the end was near.

This is continued in the Gospels, in fact, the very first words Jesus utters in the first gospel to be written are,

“The time has come. The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news” (Mark 1:15).

(Mark 13:3-31) …after describing what will happen in the apocalypse… 29 Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it[d] is near, right at the door. 30 Truly I tell you

And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”

(Mark 9:1)

“Whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of that one will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.… Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the Kingdom of God has come in power” (Mark 8:38–9:1).

The in the next Gospel Matthew

(Matthew 10:23) When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

(the Son of man was a cosmic judge for the hour[8])

(Matthew 16:28) “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

(Matthew 24:3-34)  31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it[e] is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

(Matthew 3:2-10) 2 “Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.. ..10 Even now the axe of God’s judgment is poised, ready to sever the roots of the trees. Yes, every tree that does not produce good fruit will be chopped down and thrown into the fire.

In Luke we continue to see early apocalyptic traditions, however as Bart Ehrman notes, we begin to see a 'de-apocolyting' of the message in Luke, [10] who edits earlier traditions from Mark and Q so that it is the next generation that it will arrive.[11]

(Luke 21:7-33)

…29 He told them this parable: “Look at the fig tree and all the trees. 30 When they sprout leaves, you can see for yourselves and know that summer is near. 31 Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

(Luke 9:27) 27 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.”

(Luke 12:40) 40 You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.”

(you must be ready - even though it's an unexpected hour?)

Very unlikely to be added by Christians after the fact, as it didn't happen.

John the Baptist whom Jesus closely preached with and is mentioned many times in the NT, and is incidentally is mentioned in the Quran,  was also an apocolyptic pracher  (Matthew 3:2-10)

The Q source gives further information, for here John preaches a clear message of apocalyptic judgment to the crowds that have come out to see him: “Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruits worthy of repentance.… Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Luke 3:7–9). Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 138). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

The Gospel of John writing X years later after the first and second generations passing away,  de-apocalypses much further [12]

Later apocraphyla written after John denies it further, and explicitly condemn the view [13]

Interestingly, the imminent apocalyptic message is completely absent in John, written 10-20 years later as it beocme more apparent it isn't happening, and so 'kingdom of heaven only now becomes a metaphor.

Ethical teachings and their apocalyptic context

(not to save money)

Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (Matthew 6:19-21, NRSV)

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 19). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

(Don’t worry about basic human needs)

...do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. (Matthew 6:25-26, NRSV) Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 20). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

(don't worry about clothing)

Jesus taught his followers to be encouraged by how God “clothes” the lilies of the field. And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? (Matthew 6:28-30, NRSV)

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 23). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

(never say no to a borrower)

Just in case you still don’t think Jesus taught his followers to be financially irresponsible, here’s another thing Christians certainly wish he hadn’t said. ...do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you. (Matthew 5:42, NRSV)

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 25). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

(complete pacifism - believes god will destroy all follower sin their lifetime - and very different to Islamic jihad quote self-defence and offensive warfare verses)

You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, ‘Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you. (Matthew 5:38-42, NRSV)

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 26). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

(give away all your possession - very impractical unless worl ending and soon will have no need for them

So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions. (Luke 14:33 NRSV)

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (pp. 34-35). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

(will receive 100 fold in 'this' life)

Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age—houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields, with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life. (Mark 10:29-30, NRSV) We can’t test the promise of eternal life since none of us reading this book have died, but we know that the hundredfold reimbursement in this life makes no sense whatever. I guess televangelists with private jets can make a case that the hundredfold reward Jesus promised in this life works for them,

Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (p. 36). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition.

Further than direct references, Jesus's prediction of an imminent apocalypse underpins many of his teachings, such as advising not to worry about the future  “Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself” (Matthew 6:34), which make little sense outside of this apocalyptic context.

See: Madison, David. Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn't Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (pp. 78-79). Insighting Growth Publications. Kindle Edition. For additions to Luke on apocalypticism.

References

[1] Durie, Mark. The Qur’an and Its Biblical Reflexes: Investigations into the Genesis of a Religion (pp. 321-322). Lexington Books.

The difficulty of analyzing Arabic masīḥ opened the door to much speculation by Muslim exegetes about its interpretation. Lane’s entry for masīḥ states that the major lexicographer al-Fīrūzabādī reported that 50 different meanings had been proposed.

[2] What Do Muslims Think about the Gospels? IslamQA. 2023. https://islamqa.info/en/answers/47516/what-do-muslims-think-about-the-gospels

[3]  Schweitzer, Albert. The Quest of the Historical Jesus (E.g. see pp. 358-368). Jovian Press.

[4]

[5] Bible in Chronological Order (Every Book Ordered by Date Written). Marko Marina, Ph.D. 2024. Bart Ehram.com.  https://www.bartehrman.com/bible-in-chronological-order/

[6] And then there was Q. Bart Ehmran blog. 2017. https://ehrmanblog.org/and-then-there-was-q/

Matthew and Luke obviously share a number of stories with Mark, but they also share with each other a number of passages not found in Mark.  Most of these passages (all but two of them) involve sayings of Jesus — for example, the Beatitudes and the Lord’s Prayer.  Since they didn’t get these passages from Mark, where did they get them?  Since the 19th century scholars have argued that Matthew did not get them from Luke or Luke from Matthew (for reasons I’ll suggest below); that probably means they got them from some other source, a document that no longer survives.

[7]

[8] At Last. Jesus and the Son of Man. Bart Ehrman Blog. 2020. https://ehrmanblog.org/at-last-jesus-and-the-son-of-man/

[9] Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 128). Oxford University Press.

Throughout the earliest accounts of Jesus’ words are found predictions of a Kingdom of God that is soon to appear, in which God will rule. This will be an actual kingdom here on earth. When it comes, the forces of evil will be overthrown, along with everyone who has sided with them, and only those who repent and follow Jesus’ teachings will be allowed to enter. Judgment on all others will be brought by the Son of Man, a cosmic figure who may arrive from heaven at any time.

[10] Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 130). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

The earliest sources record Jesus as propounding an apocalyptic message. But, interestingly enough, some of the most clearly apocalyptic traditions come to be “toned down” as we move further away from Jesus’ life in the 20s to Gospel materials produced near the end of the first century. Let me give one example. I’ve already pointed out that Mark was our earliest Gospel and was used as a source for the Gospel of Luke (along with Q and L). It’s a relatively simple business, then, to see how the earlier traditions of Mark fared later in the hands of Luke. Interestingly, some of the earlier apocalyptic emphases begin to be muted. In Mark 9:1, for example, Jesus says, “Truly I tell you, there are some who are standing here who will not taste death until they see that the Kingdom of God has come in power.” Luke takes over this verse—but it is worth noting what he does with it. He leaves out the last few words, so that now Jesus simply says: “Truly I tell you, there are some who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Kingdom of God” (Luke 9:27). The difference might seem slight, but in fact it’s huge: for now Jesus does not predict the imminent arrival of the Kingdom in power, but simply says that the disciples (in some sense) will see the Kingdom. And strikingly, in Luke (but not in our earlier source, Mark), the disciples do see the Kingdom—but not its coming in power. For according to Luke, the Kingdom has already “come to you” in Jesus own ministry (Luke 11:20, not in Mark), and it is said to “be among you” in the person of Jesus himself (Luke 17:21, also not in Mark).

[11]

Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 130-131). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

Let me stress that Luke continues to think that the end of the age is going to come in his own lifetime. But he does not seem to think that it was supposed to come in the lifetime of Jesus’ companions. Why not? Evidently because he was writing after they had died, and he knew that in fact the end had not come. To deal with the “delay of the end,” he made the appropriate changes in Jesus’ predictions. This is evident as well near the end of the Gospel. At Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin in Mark’s Gospel, Jesus boldly states to the high priest, “You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62). That is, the end would come and the high priest would see it. Luke, writing many years later, after the high priest was long dead and buried, changes the saying: “from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God” (Luke 22:69). No longer does Jesus predict that the high priest himself will be alive when the end comes.

[12] Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 131). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

Here, then, is a later source that appears to have modified the earlier apocalyptic sayings of Jesus. You can see the same tendency in the Gospel of John, the last of our canonical accounts to be written. In this account, rather than speaking about

[13]

Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 131). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

This “de-apocalypticizing” of Jesus’ message continues into the second century. In the Gospel of Thomas, for example, written somewhat later than John, there is a clear attack on anyone who believes in a future Kingdom here on earth. In some sayings, for example, Jesus denies that the Kingdom involves an actual place but “is within

&

Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 134). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

Before moving on to a consideration of the specific criteria that historians use with the Gospel traditions, let me stress again here, in conclusion, my simple point about our rules of thumb. The earliest sources that we have consistently ascribe an apocalyptic message to Jesus. This message begins to be

muted by the end of the first century (e.g., in Luke), until it virtually disappears (e.g., in John), and begins, then, to be explicitly rejected and spurned (e.g., in Thomas). It appears that when the end never did arrive, Christians had to take stock of the fact that Jesus said it would and changed his message accordingly. You can hardly blame them.

[14] See commentaries on this verse 4|157 for an explanation https://quranx.com/tafsirs/4.157 of mainstream view. https://journal.rts.edu/article/it-was-made-to-appear-like-that-to-them-islams-denial-of-jesus-crucifixion-in-the-quran-and-dogmatic-tradition/ for problems with it and alt explanations

[15] Ehrman, Bart D.. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (p. 92). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

“Dissimilar” traditions, that is, those that do not support a clear Christian agenda, or that appear to work against it, are difficult to explain unless they are authentic. They are therefore more likely to be historical.