I think Ghamdi sb follows first assol of hadith science. That says if there is any hadith conflicting to quran than that hadith will be rejected. According to Ghamdi Sb, in quran its clearly mention that Hazrat Isa was given natural death and there is dialogue between Hazrat Isa and Allah which shows that there is no return of Isa.
This question has been asked many times so I am pasting links to those topics. You can read. If u have still question mods will reply u.

1) Discussion 1486

2) Discussion 36021

3) Discussion 36400

4) Discussion 35124

5) Discussion 31734

6) Discussion 36823

7) Discussion 38216

Well Moderators can give better response.
I think its because, majority of scholars didnt understood the verse same way as Ghamdi sb. Why it happened, may be because of influence of bible

This issue relates to more of an epistemological domain than being a discussion on sources of religion. Ahad (Hadith corpus) despite being a ‘zanni ilm’ is a source of knowledge nevertheless. Therefore, attitude of outright rejecting Ahadith just because they appear to be in contradiction of Quran sounds a very plausible option but at the same time not very epistemological, especially when due thought is not given to the reasons which led to creation of such Ahadith. Epistemological justice demands that after considering all the relevant questions, one should reach to any such conclusion, especially when there are so many narrations on one subject (like in this case).

Ghamidi Sahab after giving due consideration to all these factors, thinks that these descriptions align more logically with experiences that usually are shown to prophets in Roiya (dreams) just like with Musa (sws) and Khuzar (sws) and with dream shown to Jesus (sws) (‘Yohanna Arif ka Mukashfa’). Ghamidi Sahab do think of a proper interpretation (‘tabeer’) for this dream. But at this point of time, he is not willing to share his interpretation of this dream because he thinks this may distract us from academically thinking about the main points surrounding this matter and may result in undue debate over the interpretation of dreams.

He answered this in the following video.

Please refer to the video below from 13:46 to 17:20 and from 20:47 to 25:19