“Along with many in the 2nd century, the Basilidians held that matter was inherently evil. They could not accept that the resurrection of physical human bodies would serve any possible good, so they denied it. Denying a general physical resurrection, they had to deny the physical resurrection of Christ. Furthermore, this obliged them to deny Christ’s crucifixion, instead saying that Simon of Cyrene was crucified in his place.
…
We must not deny the importance of this brief historical survey. To begin with, not all of these groups actually denied that Jesus was crucified. Some thought he was, yet downplayed the importance of the physical man, elevating the divine Christ who was supposedly separate. Others claimed that someone else was cunningly switched for Jesus before the crucifixion. What is clear is that they were basing their beliefs on flawed philosophy, not historical knowledge. They rejected the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ simply because it was distasteful to them”
Fra: http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/crucifix.htm

Men hov!

Hvad praler jøderne med her:

Sura 4:157:
‘…de sagde: “Vi har dræbt Messias, Jesus, Marias søn, Guds udsending” – men de dræbte ham ikke, og de korsfæstede ham ikke. Det forekom dem blot således. De, der er uenige om ham, er i tvivl om den sag. De har ingen viden derom, men kun løse formodninger. De har med sikkerhed ikke dræbt ham.

Hvordan kan det være at jøderne

1) venter på messias? og
2) ikke mener at Jesus er messias? og
3) at jøderne praler med
a) at de har dræbt ham de venter på? og
b) at Messias er Jesus, Marias søn?

Jeg mener at det mest oplagte svar er en misforståelse i forfatterens (givetvis Muhammeds) forståelse af Jødernes Messiasforståelse og indholdet i evangelierne.
Hans kone, Khadija var kristen, men har ikke nødvendigvis kendt til hele NT og givetvis blandet en masse sammen med oprindelig pre-islamisk tankegods og jødisk og kristent ditto.