Editing Jesus in Islam (section)

=== Substitution ===
It is unclear exactly where the substitution interpretation originated, but some scholars consider the theory originating among certain Gnostic groups of the second century.{{sfn|Leirvik|2010|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=IEUdCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA34 34]}}

Some disagreement and discord can be seen beginning with Ibn Ishaq's ({{abbr|d.|died}} 761) report of a brief accounting of events leading up to the crucifixion, firstly stating that Jesus was replaced by someone named Sergius, while secondly reporting an account of Jesus' tomb being located at Medina, and thirdly citing the places in the Quran ({{qref|3|55|pl=y}}, {{qref|4|158|pl=y}}) that God took Jesus up to himself.{{sfn|Watt|2013|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=_qxlAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA39 39–40]}}

[[Michael Cook (historian)|Michael Cook]] notes that denial that Jesus died follows the Christian heresy of [[docetism]], who were "disturbed by that God should have died", but that this concern conflicts with another Islamic doctrine, that Jesus was a man, not God.{{sfn|Cook|1983|p=79}} According to [[Todd Lawson]], Quranic commentators seem to have concluded the denial of the crucifixion of Jesus by following material interpreted in Tafsir that relied upon [[Apocrypha|extra-biblical Judeo-Christian sources]],{{sfn|Lawson|2009|p=12}} with the earliest textual evidence having originated from a non-Muslim source – a misreading of the Christian writings of [[John of Damascus]] regarding the literal understandings of docetism (exegetical doctrine describing spiritual and physical realities of Jesus as understood by men in logical terms) as opposed to their figurative explanations.{{sfn|Lawson|2009|p=7}} John of Damascus highlighted the Quran's assertion that the Jews did not crucify Jesus being very different from saying that Jesus was not crucified, explaining that it is the varied Quranic exegetes in Tafsir, and not the Quran itself, that denies the crucifixion, further stating that the message in the {{qref|4|157|pl=y}} verse simply affirms the historicity of the event.{{sfn|Lawson|2009|p=12}}