Gospel

In the text of the Holy Quran and the Bible, it is emphasized that God is invisible and cannot be seen by the eyes. There is a distinction in that while the Old Testament does not regard God as merely a mental entity, it acknowledges a direct presence of God in speaking to humans through specific verses and signs. The vision represented in the Quran is used to explain the perception of events and the manifestation of human actions on the Day of Judgment, whereas the vision in bodily form regarding seeing God exists in the Two Testaments. The language of the Holy Quran cannot be influenced by the language of the Bible, although there are similarities in some instances. Ultimately, despite the claims of the Bible regarding the invisibility of God, their descriptions often suggest a corporeal image. However, the Quran explicitly denies the embodiment and vision of God Almighty, and instances discussing sight are often interpreted as a denial of sight.

Among the four Gospels, the Gospel of John has a unique theology that distinguishes it from the rest of the Gospels. In this Gospel, unlike the synoptic Gospels, the divinity of Christ as the divine Logos is emphasized. Various opinions have been expressed about the source and main origin of the theology of the Gospel of John. Some consider it to be influenced by extra-religious schools such as Greek philosophy, and some consider it to be derived from reliable Hebrew sources, especially the Old Testament. This article, by reviewing different opinions and using historical and theological evidence, has determined the source of this theology as much as possible. The results obtained show that the theology of the Fourth Gospel is influenced by the foundations of Middle Platonic philosophy and Gnostic teachings. Of course, the degree of this influence is not the same, and this Gospel is most influenced by the mystical and Gnostic schools.

In their book, "The Other Prophet: Jesus in the Qur’an," Mouhanad Khorchide and Klaus von Stosch examine Qur’an 4:157, offering a perspective that challenges conventional Islamic interpretations of the verse. The central argument of Khorchide and Von Stosch is that the Qur’an does not explicitly reject the crucifixion of Jesus. Instead, they propose an alternative interpretation that aligns the verse with Gospel narratives. They contend that traditional Muslim exegetes have historically misconstrued this verse, presenting it as contradictory to Gospel accounts rather than acknowledging its potential consonance with them. This article systematically categorizes and then critically examines Khorchide and Von Stosch’s interpretation of Qur’an 4:157. Employing the method of Tafsīr al-Qur'ān Bi'l Qur'ān (interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an) alongside a comparative analysis with the New Testament, the study demonstrates how Khorchide and Von Stosch's reading of Qur’an 4:157 diverges from the verse’s explicit textual and contextual meaning.