Interestingly, the earliest textual evidence stating that Muslims deny the historical event of the crucifixion is not actually Muslim at all – it comes from the writings of the Christian Church Father, John of Damascus.
Qur’anic commentators came to deny the crucifixion of Jesus, this view is not actually rooted in the Qur’anic verses but comes from tafsir which rely on other material from extra-biblical Judeo-Christian sources (Lawson, The Crucifixion, 12). But the denial of the historical crucifixion was only one view among others on the subject to emerge from the Islamic world. There have been alternate interpretations of the same Qur’anic verses which collectively offer a range of perspectives on the crucifixion – from total denial to actually asserting that the crucifixion did take place historically.
The Isma‘ili Muslim philosophers of the tenth and eleventh century were able to achieve a remarkable reconciliation and rapprochement between the Qur’anic and Christian views of the Crucifixion. While affirming the historicity of the event (in common with Christians), the Isma‘ili philosophers were still able to deny Christ’s death from a more spiritual perspective which they saw reflected in the Qur’anic verses. In fact, some of the Isma‘ili philosophers actually emphasized the importance of Christ’s death on the Cross from an esoteric perspective and saw in it an immense eschatological meaning. Finally, the Isma‘ili thinkers, relying on the method of ta’wil (esoteric exegesis), perceived great spiritual truths hidden in the symbolism of the Cross – the same truths which they saw symbolized in the words of the Islamic testimony of faith known as the Shahada.
The Isma‘ili View of the Crucifixion
Several Isma‘ili philosophers of the tenth and eleventh centuries commented on the Crucifixion including the Ikhwan al-Safa, Ja’far ibn Mansur al-Yaman, Abu Hatim alRazi, Abu Yaqub al-Sijistani and al-Mu’ayyad fi’l-Din al-Shirazi. All of them are in agreement in affirming the historicity of the Crucifixion, confirming that it was indeed Jesus himself who was crucified and not a substitute as maintained by many other Qur’anic commentators. For al-Mu’ayyad fi’l-Din al-Shirazi denying the historicity of the Crucifixion is to contradict a historical fact established by the testimony of two major religious communities, the Jews and the Christians. Even the prominent Sunni Muslim theologian al-Ghazali eventually came to affirm the Crucifixion, most likely learning this from the Isma‘ili sources ( Lawson, The Crucifixion, 78). The Ikhwan al-Safa go as far as to narrate the entire story of Jesus’ Crucifixion in their Epistles as follows.
the contemporary Islamic philosopher Seyyed Hossein Nasr writes:
Summary
Ismaili Shiites believe in the crucifixion of Jesus, very interesting.