Re: Return of Hazrat Isa A.S.
The context is obtained from the whole section if you read a few ayahs back then you will see that it is far more important to believe he was a prophet, not God and not a falsifier … which is the more crucial point than whether he died or not.
If the tense is future then he (AS) was not killed and has not died that is simple logic …
your reasons for contradictions are not based on soundness either:
3:55 - those who reject faith will be anyone who disbelieves … also even if it was for Jews - what is wrong for Jews to be around until the Day of Judgement? Is there a reason that you have to infer Jews will not be around on the Day of Judgement?
For the other point I have already answered that … Verse 4:159 when it states " illalayu/minanna bihi qabla mawtihi" - the term illala means “but must” - it does not mean “but will” …
“Must” means that they should be doing so, but “will” means that it will be happening … besides why should Jesus (AS) be a witness AGAINST those who believe in him/it ? No rather he will be a witness against those who knew they had to believe in him, but failed to do so - hence the meaning of “must” is applicable not “will” …
Also in this verse in the Arabic it speaks of the people in the collective … why do you assume that there is a switch of tenses from collective to singular and then back to collective again? Especially when another individual is being spoken about? It is not the case … the singulars in this verse refer to Jesus (AS) …
Ahl-ul-Kitab is in jarr due to the min harf … making it ahl-il-kitab … This is jamma therefore the term is mo’annis (feminine) and the muzare is flanked with a laam … denoting future definite.
Illa can also mean “except” so another translation which agrees with the original is …
And none from the people of the Book will (get by) on Judgement Day without being testified against by him … except those who will and have believed in him (as a true prophet)
- because it would be meaningless to testify against a people who already have a firm belief about who he was yet were still confused about his disappearance. It would only be those who think he was dead for the wrong reasons who he will testify against. Those who knew him to be alive or those who thought him to have been killed yet have coherent beliefs about him will not be among those who he testifies against.