The fourth objection is that some of the relevant parts of the event of Jesus’s Second Coming, as mentioned in the narratives, have apparently already taken place in the past. The question arises: if his descent has not occurred despite the occurrence of these events, then how can we maintain certainty about the authenticity of the incident? Before explaining this matter, it is essential to understand two things about the nature of the foretold incident.
Firstly, the narratives of Jesus’s Second Coming are accounts of a future event. As for their acceptance or rejection, there is a difference of opinion among Muslim scholars. The majority view is that their attribution to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is reliable, therefore the Second Coming of Jesus is certain. In contrast, some scholars believe that the attribution of these narratives to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is not reliable, hence it is incorrect to form the concept of Jesus’s Second Coming based on them.
This disagreement may persist until one of the following two scenarios occurs:
This means that if the matter of dispute relates to an observable event, the occurrence or non-occurrence of it serves as a decisive argument to resolve the dispute. If the event occurs, the argument of its proponents is substantiated; if the time passes and it does not occur, the argument of those disagreeing is substantiated. It means that no possibility of doubt or dispute remains thereafter.
Secondly, the event of Jesus’s Second Coming, as mentioned in the narratives, comprises of several partial incidents. When an event is described as such, it is essential for it to occur in its entirety. The parts that make it up should also occur, and in the same order, without distortion or omission, with regard to the time and sequence of occurrences, and also considering secondary details. It is not justifiable to connect multiple parts of an event from different eras to indicate that it has already occurred. Nor it is appropriate to overlook parts that are different from the description of the event or to derive some ambiguous or illogical interpretation for the missing links of the description. In other words, an event attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) must meet every standard of reason and tradition. This is because his word is the word of Allah, where there is no possibility of error or forgetfulness.
After this introduction, let us now examine the hadith that clearly determines the time of Jesus’s Second Coming. In Sahih Muslim, it is narrated:
عن أبي هريرة أن رسول اللّٰه صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم، قال: لا تقوم الساعة حتى ينزل الروم بالأعماق أو بدابق، فيخرج إليهم جيش من المدينة، من خيار أهل الأرض يومئذ.
فإذا تصافوا، قالت الروم: خلوا بيننا وبين الذين سبوا منا نقاتلهم، فيقول المسلمون: لا، واللّٰه لا نخلي بينكم وبين إخواننا.
فيقاتلونهم، فينهزم ثلث لا يتوب اللّٰه عليهم أبدًا، ويقتل ثلثهم، أفضل الشهداء عند اللّٰه ويفتتح الثلث، لا يفتنون أبدًا .
فيفتتحون قسطنطينية، فبينما هم يقتسمون الغنائم، قد علقوا سيوفهم بالزيتون، إذ صاح فيهم الشيطان: إن المسيح قد خلفكم في أهليكم، فيخرجون، وذلك باطل.
فإذا جاءوا الشأم خرج، فبينما هم يعدون للقتال، يسوون الصفوف، إذ أقيمت الصلاة، فينزل عيسى ابن مريم صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم، فأمهم فإذا رآه عدو اللّٰه، ذاب كما يذوب الملح في الماء، فلو تركه لانذاب حتى يهلك، ولكن يقتله اللّٰه بيده، فيريهم دمه في حربته.
It is narrated from Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: ‘The Hour (Day of Judgement) will not occur until the Romans descend in al-A‘maq or in Dabiq. An army from Madinah made up of the best people on earth at that time will face them.
When both armies arrange themselves in ranks, the Romans would say: Do not stand between us and those (Muslims) who took prisoners from amongst us. Let us fight with them; and the Muslims would say: No, by Allah, we would never get aside from you and from our brethren that you may fight them.
They will then fight, and a third (part) of the army will flee from the battlefield, whom Allah will never forgive, a third (part of the army) which would be constituted of the best martyrs in the sight of Allah will be killed, and the remaining one-third of the army who would never be put to trail would win and conquer Constantinople. While they would be busy distributing the spoils of war after hanging their swords by the olive trees, the Satan would cry: the Dajjal has taken your place among your families. Upon hearing this news, Muslims will immediately return. However, this news will be false.
Then when they arrive in Syria, the Dajjal will come out. At that time, after preparing for the battle, when Muslims are lining up in rows for the Fajr prayer, Jesus, son of Mary (PBUH), will suddenly descend and lead them in prayer. When the enemy of Allah would see him, he would dissolve just as salt dissolves in water. If he had been left alone, he would still have dissolved and died eventually, but Allah would kill him through Jesus’s hand, and He would show his blood on Jesus’s spear. (Sahih Muslim, No. 7460)
From this hadith, the following points are understood:
The details of this hadith clarify that Prophet Jesus (PBUH) will descend when the Muslim army, having conquered Constantinople, will be returning. Please note that this narrative from Imam Muslim explicitly states that Prophet Jesus (PBUH) will descend at the precise moment when the Muslim army, after conquering Constantinople, hears of the Dajjal’s emergence and turns back towards Madinah.
The reality is that Constantinople was conquered on May 29, 1453, corresponding to the 20th of Jumada al-Awwal 857 AH. Since then, it has remained in the control of Muslims, even becoming the capital of the Islamic State of Turkey under the name Istanbul. Meaning, the time determined for the descent of Jesus, (PBUH) by the hadith in Imam Muslim has passed, immediately after the conquest of Constantinople in June/July 1453. Constantinople has been conquered, but the Dajjal has not appeared, nor has Prophet Jesus, (PBUH) descended.
If this is the reality, then we must either accept one of the two aspects of the narrative as correct and attribute the other to an error or addition by the narrator.
Either we must accept that the mention of the descent of Prophet Jesus (PBUH) is correct but the descriptions of the conquest of Constantinople and its victorious army are additional, having no connection to the descent of Prophet Jesus (PBUH). Or believe that the description of the conquest of Constantinople and its victorious army is correct, but the mention of the descent of Prophet Jesus (PBUH) is an addition.
The occurrence of both events simultaneously is unacceptable because one of these closely linked events has already taken place 570 years ago. However, the problem is that if we accept one event and deny the other, the entire narrative becomes questionable. This is because if the prophecy of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), has been correctly transmitted, it cannot undergo even the slightest alteration. It is a decree of the Almighty that unfolds exactly as uttered by the Prophet’s blessed tongue.
While trying to solve this issue, our scholars have not preferred one of the mentioned possibilities or abstained from the narrative; instead, they have presented another interpretation. They believe that the conquest of Constantinople that occurred in 1453 is not the one mentioned in the narration. They believe the conquest of Constantinople will occur again. At that time, Jesus (PBUH) will descend, and the events mentioned in the said hadith will transpire.
This interpretation, however, raises several rational objections.
The first objection is that given the extraordinary historical significance of Constantinople and the centuries-long persistent efforts of the Muslims to conquer it, and considering the prophecy and the glad tidings of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), a second conquest of Constantinople, if it does occur, cannot be as exceptional and monumental as the first.
To understand this objection, it is imperative to know basic information about the background of Constantinople and the efforts of the Muslims to conquer it.
Constantinople, the ancient name for Istanbul, was named after the Roman Emperor Constantine who adopted Christianity in the 3rd century CE and made this city his imperial capital. This city remained the capital of the Christian Byzantine Empire for 1100 years. In the 5th century CE, the Christian world was divided into two major empires: the western empire had Rome as its capital, and the eastern empire had its capital in Constantinople. The eastern empire included the Balkans, Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, and Ethiopia among others. The head of the church in this empire was called the Patriarch, while the head of the western church was known as the Pope. Constantinople also had an extraordinary religious significance in the history of Christianity because one of the two central churches of Christianity was established there. Its name was Hagia Sophia. This church was one of the oldest and most sacred places of worship for Christians, who believed that it would never fall into the hands of non-Christians.
Constantinople’s extraordinary status was such that the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) had promised paradise to the Muslims who would fight to conquer it. It is reported in Sahih of Bukhari:
فحدثتنا أم حرام : أنها سمعت النبي صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم، يقول : أول جيش من أمتي يغزون البحر قد أوجبوا، قالت: ام حرام، قلت: يا رسول اللّٰه انا فيهم، قال: انت فيهم ثم قال النبي صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم: اول جيش من امتي يغزون مدينة قيصر مغفور لهم، فقلت: انا فيهم يا رسول اللّٰه، قال: لا.
Umm Haram narrated that she heard the Prophet (PBUH), say: ‘The first of my Ummah to undertake a naval expedition in Allah’s cause have made Allah’s mercy and forgiveness obligatory for themselves.’ Umm Haram added: ‘I said, O Messenger of Allah, will I be among them?’ He replied, ‘Yes, you are among them.’ Then the Prophet (PBUH) said, ‘The first of my Ummah to attack the city of Caesar (Constantinople) will be forgiven.’ I asked, ‘Will I be one of them, O Messenger of Allah?’ He said, ‘No.’ (Bukhari No. 2924)
It is reported in the Sahih of Muslim:
عن نافع بن عتبة، قال: كنا مع رسول اللّٰه صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم في غزوة، قال: فاتى النبي صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم قوم من قبل المغرب عليهم ثياب الصوف، فوافقوه عند اكمة، فإنهم لقيام ورسول اللّٰه صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم قاعد.
قال: فقالت لي نفسي: ائتهم فقم بينهم وبينه لا يغتالونه، قال: ثم قلت: لعله نجي معهم.
فاتيتهم، فقمت بينهم وبينه، قال: فحفظت منه اربع كلمات اعدهن في يدي.
قال: تغزون جزيرة العرب، فيفتحها اللّٰه ثم فارس، فيفتحها اللّٰه ثم تغزون الروم فيفتحها اللّٰه، ثم تغزون الدجال فيفتحه اللّٰه.
قال: فقال نافع: يا جابر لا نرى الدجال يخرج حتى تفتح الروم.
Nafi‘ ibn Utba said, We were with the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) on an expedition when some people came from the direction of the west wearing woolen clothes. they met him by a hillock while they stood and the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was seated.
Nafi says that a thought came to him that he should go to them and stand between them and him lest they try to assassinate him. Then he said to himself: Perhaps he is having a private conversation with them (and going there would be unsuitable). Anyway (giving preference to the first thought) I approached them and stood between them and the Prophet On this occasion, I remembered four things that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) conveyed to me, counting them on my hand.
He said: You will wage war in the Arabian Peninsula, and Allah will grant you victory, then you will attack Persia and Allah will grant you victory, then you will fight the Romans[60] and Allah will grant you victory, then you will fight the Dajjal and Allah will grant you victory. Nafi' said: O Jabir bin ‘Amr, I think the Dajjal will not emerge until the Romans are conquered.[61] (Muslim No. 7466)
The first Muslim expedition set out to conquer Constantinople during the caliphate of Uthman (RA) and was led by Muawiyah (RA). This army attacked Cyprus. Although Muslims did not gain control over Cyprus, they managed to sign a treaty with its people.
Later, during his reign, Muawiyah (RA) dispatched an army under the command of Yazid ibn Muawiyah. This army laid siege to Constantinople. After a prolonged siege, when victory was not achieved, the army returned.
Subsequently, various rulers launched multiple attacks on Constantinople, but victory could not be secured. These rulers include Umar ibn Abdul Aziz, Hisham bin Abdul Malik, Mahdi Abbasi, Harun Al-Rashid, Bayezid Yildirim, and his son Murad II.
The glory of the conquest of Constantinople is attributed to the grandson of Bayezid Yildirim, Mehmed II. He began the siege of Constantinople on the 26th of Rabi‘ al-Awwal 857 AH, corresponding to April 6, 1453. After an extraordinary and historic struggle, he successfully conquered Constantinople on the 20th of Jumada al-awwal 857 AH, corresponding to May 29, 1453, and hence he became famous in history as Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror.
This is the historical background of the conquest of Constantinople. If this is presented purely without any reference, everyone would believe that this extraordinary event could indeed be the fulfillment of the prophecy of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
Now, consider this from another angle. So, for example, hypothetically, if Prophet Jesus descends, but neither is Constantinople conquered nor does the emergence of the Dajjal occur, would it be said that Prophet Jesus will descend again at a later occasion and other events will happen then, or would it be said that the descent negates the other events?
Similarly, if the emergence of the Dajjal happens, but neither does Jesus descend nor is Constantinople conquered, would it be said that the Dajjal would emerge again and the remaining two events would occur at that time, or would it be said that this event negates the other two events?
So, the question is, if from the aforementioned three events, the conquest of Constantinople has occurred, but the other two connected events have not happened, what is the basis to avoid negating the other events?
It should be noted that the description of any past, present, or future event always includes certain relevant secondary events. To believe in the account of the event, one must believe in all its component events, their sequence, and their interconnection. It is not possible to exclude some components, change their sequence, or interpret them in such a way that the continuity is broken, or to imagine such a temporal distance between them that the narration of the event becomes doubtful.
It should also be clear that according to a hadith, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) has stated that the signs of the nearness of the Day of Judgment will be sequential events. That is, they would not face irrational or unusual delays or postponement. The words of the hadith are:
عن عبد اللّٰه بن عمرو، قال: قال رسول اللّٰه صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم: الآيات خرزات منظومات في سلك، فإن يقطع السلك يتبع بعضها بعضا.
Abdullah bin Amr reported: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: ‘The signs (of the Day of Judgment) are like beads strung on a string; if the string breaks, they will come after one another.’ (Musnad Ahmed No. 7040)
عن أبي هريرة، عن النبي صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم قال: خروج الآيات بعضها على إثر بعض، يتتابعن كما تتتابع الخرز في النظام .
Abu Huraira reported from the Prophet (PBUH) who said: ‘The appearance of the signs (of the Day of Judgment) will follow one after the other like pearls falling in succession when the string is cut.’ (Al-Mu‘jam Al-Awsat by Al-Tabarani No. 4271)
The second issue is that in order to accept this interpretation by scholars, we would need to turn back the wheel of civilization and culture. That is to say, it must be assumed that an era will return when wars will be fought with spears and swords instead of gunpowder, atomic, and chemical weapons. The system of maintaining a regular modern army, where soldiers are employees receiving salaries from the state, would come to an end, and the old method would resume, where soldiers would be allocated spoils of war after the victory.
The third issue is to assume that Turkey's capital of Istanbul (formerly Constantinople) will return to the control of the Romans, and it will regain its extraordinary religious and political significance in the world that it held in the fifteenth century or earlier.
The fourth issue is that embracing this interpretation negates the status of the related narrative or other similar narratives as prophecies. This is because a prophecy is only considered as such when it informs us with a definite and time-bound event in the future. Therefore, if the occurrence represented by the conquest of Constantinople is not determined – meaning it is not decided how many times the Muslims will conquer Constantinople and which conquest will be followed by the descent of Prophet Jesus – then how can this narrative be considered a prophecy? Furthermore, if the meaning and occurrence of one event in the narrative, namely the conquest of Constantinople, is ambiguous, then how can the meanings and occurrences of the other events, namely the descent of Prophet Jesus and the emergence of the Dajjal, be considered unambiguous?