Tag Archives: prophecy

Are Prophets Jesus & Muhammed foretold in the Old Testament?

“Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet, the unlettered, whom they find mentioned in the Law and the Gospel.” (Qur’an 7:157)

﷽ 

Introduction: Methodology and Metonymy

Note that the above text does not indicate that a name would be found in the Law or the Gospel. It is simply descriptions of this Prophet.

However if we were to entertain the possibility of the name of the Blessed Prophet (saw) being mentioned anywhere what would the methodology look like?

What is the methodology used to show that the Blessed Prophets Jesus & Muhammed is mentioned in the Old Testament?

For our Christian brothers and sisters to be consistent, we would like to bring their attention to the following text:

He said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and in the psalms must be fulfilled.”(Luke 24:44)

Note: Jesus talks about events written about him in the law of Moses; however, when we look at the Torah, we do not find the name of Jesus anywhere.

There can only be one of two conclusions from this.

  1. Jesus was not telling the truth.
  2. When Jesus says, ‘written about him ‘. He is speaking about metonymy.

The Christians conclude that point 2 is the correct understanding. Though Jesus is not mentioned by name at all in the Law of Moses; Christians would point out that the scriptures speak of him, nonetheless. This is a matter of interpretation, not a matter of explicit textual evidence.

In both the Qur’an and the ‘Gospel according to Luke’ a literary device known as metonymy is used.

What is metonymy?

“Metonymy has traditionally been defined as merely a figure of speech where the name of one entity is substituted for that of another entity that is contiguous to it (Peters, 2003; Wendland, 2003). Thus, according to the traditional rhetorical view, metonymy is only referential, and it involves substitution provided that the substituted entities are contiguous. Thus, according to cognitive linguists, metonymy is not merely a figure of speech; it is also a way of thinking and conceptualizing. Therefore, any definition of metonymy should not talk about words or names of things; rather, it should be about concepts or entities.”

Source: (Translation of Metonymy in the Holy Qur’an: A Comparative, Analytical Study) -Reem Salem Al-Salem

This methodology used by the Christians should be kept in mind as we continue our discussion on “Muhammed and Jesus mentioned in the Old Testament.

We simply ask that consistent methodologies be used.

The New Testament makes the following claim about the Tanach/Old Testament concerning Jesus.

“That he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.” (1 Corinthians 15:4) Jews have always been puzzled by this Christian claim as there simply are no Scriptures (here meaning the Tanach) about a Messiah who will rise from the dead.

We have seen well meaning Christians offer the following:

Psalms 16:8-11
Isaiah 53:10-11
Hosea 6:1-2
Jonah 1:17-2:2, 6-7, 10. 

Yet when brought under close examination by both Muslims and Jews none of those text say anything at all that the author of Corinthians 15:4 is claiming.

Third the New Testament back projects supposed prophecies about Jesus that are nothing more than quote mining text. There is nothing amazing in the text to warrant awe to begin with. Worst still the text has to be taken out of context to even remotely, possibly, apply it to Jesus!

Case in point.

“And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.” (Matthew 2:15)

First off what is even remarkable about this? Really? However, what is truly embarrassing is the source this is ripped out of context from.

“When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. But the more they were called, the more they went away from me. They sacrificed to the Baals and they burned incense to images.” (Hosea 11:1-2)

This text in no way shape or form is a reference to Jesus. Who ever thought it was a good idea to rip the text of Hosea 11:1 and ignore the context and some how make this some amazing prophecy should fear Allah! If we were take this into context we would have to believe that the more Allah (swt) called to to his son (Jesus) -instead of (Israel) the more they(Jesus) went away from him (Allah). They (Jesus) sacrificed to Baals and they (Jesus) burned incense to images. This demonstrates a complete disregard for the context of the verse, which is a serious interpretive error.

So the fact that Christians can do this and be amazed about these prophecies in the Tanach when there are more tenable and reasonable prophecies about Muhammed (saw)then it really shows you the depths of some people’s spiritual blindness.

“Indeed, it is not the eyes that are blind, but it is the hearts in the chests that grow blind.” (Qur’an 22:46)

The Metonymy has to make sense. In the case of Matthew 2:15 and the citation of Hosea 11:1-2 it does not work.

To show the reader that it is not very difficult to take passages out of context in the “Old Testament” and make them apply to Jesus, we decided to see if we were any good at it. None of these are prophecies that Christians currently accept. However, we quote mined the Tanach and found things that could be applicable to Jesus. This is known as contextomy. You the reader be the judge.

“And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man, thus fulfilling what was WRITTEN of him.” (Luke 2:52)

Well, we would then have a {footnote} that would say (Proverbs 3:4). You, the Christian wanting to see the amazing ‘prophecy’ fulfillment’ would turn to find.

“And you will find favor and understanding in the sight of God and man.” (Proverbs 3:4)

So that is fulfilled in Jesus. If not, why not?

“And they all forsook him and fled, thus fulfilling what was WRITTEN of him.” (Mark 14:50)

We would then have a {footnote} that would say (Isaiah 53:3). You, the Christian wanting to see the amazing ‘prophecy’ fulfilled, would turn to find:

“He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.” (Isaiah 53:3)

So that was fulfilled when the disciples all left Jesus. If not, why not?

“Jesus wept, thus fulfilling what the scripture said concerning him.” (John 11:35)

We would then have a {footnote} giving (Psalms 69:3). You, the Christian wanting to see this amazing ‘prophecy’ fulfilled, would then find:

” I am weary with my crying; my throat is parched. My eyes grow dim with waiting for my God.” (Psalms 69:3)

So this was fulfilled when Jesus wept. If not. why not?

If Christians object that these examples are ‘taken out of context,’ then they must apply the same standard to their own proof-texts. Context matters, unless it is being used to support a theological agenda.

Christians see Jesus in Psalm 22 but not Psalm 51.

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from my cries of anguish? My God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, but I find no rest.” (Psalm 22:1-2)

So the Christians will argue with the Jews that Psalm 22 is about Jesus.

However, Christians will not say the same about Psalm 51.

 Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love; according to your great compassion
    blot out my transgressions. Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.” (Psalm 51:1-2)

The name of Jesus is neither text. The presupposition of the one doing the interpretation.

For example the Jews do not accept the Christian interpretation of (Psalm 22) as a reference to Jesus.

Source: (https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/the-truth-about-psalms-22-17)

Jews are often exhausted by Christian attempts to find references or prophecies concerning Jesus in the Tanach. Likewise, this frustration is given to Muslims by Christians who feel that there are no references to Muhammed (saw) in the Tanach.

Are prophets Jesus (as) or Muhammed (saw) mentioned by name in the Tnch?

Jesus name in the Tnch would be Yeshua יֵשׁוּעַ

Yeshua” is the Aramaic form of “Joshua” (Yehoshua).

The name “Yeshua” appears approximately 30 times in the Tanakh, referring to various individuals.

The name means that ‘God is salvation’. Which should be a huge eye opener for any Christian. There would be no Hebrew name that would be equivalent of saying: ‘I am salvation’ for that would be blasphemous.

Second, it is proof beyond doubt for those who have hearts to see and minds to reflect that the name Jesus cannot be the name of God. It was a run of the mill name.

There was a magician named Bar Jesus.

“When they had travelled through the whole island as far as Paphos, they met a magician named Bar-Jesus who was a Jewish false prophet.” (Acts 13:6)

Jesus the son of the father or Jesus called Messiah.

So when the crowd had gathered,Pilate asked them,‘Which one do you want me to release to you:
Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?’” (Matthew 27:17)

There was a contemporary of Paul called Jesus-Justus

“And Jesus, who is called Justus, who are of the circumcision; these alone are my co-workers for the kingdom of God, and they have been a comfort to me.” (Colossians 4:11)

Another proof that Jesus cannot be the name of God is the following text:

“Then the Levites, Jeshua, Kadmiel, Bani, Hashabneiah, Sherebiah, Hodiah, Shebaniah, and Pethahiah, said, “Stand up and bless the Lord your God from everlasting to everlasting. Blessed be your glorious name, which is exalted above all blessing and praise. (Nehemiah 9:5)

It is clear that someone with the name Jesus is askingfor blessing in the name of God. -Which is not his name. This Jesus in the Tanach is directing praise away from himself.

Is this name Yeshua יֵשׁוּעַ connected to any prophecies about a future prophet in the Tanach? 

The answer is no it is not.

There is however another so called claimed name to be of Jesus (as)

We read: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us“. (Matthew 1:23)

This is used to make a connection to some supposed prophecy of a virgin birth:

“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son,and will call him Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)

Immanuel is also a common Jewish name which means ‘God is with us‘.

Maher-shalal-hash-baz was called Immanuel in the following text:

“It shall pass into Judah and flood it all throughout up to the neck it shall reach; It shall spread its wings the full width of your land, Immanuel!” (Isaiah 8:8)

That this is an example of a failed prophecy plain pure and simple. It’s amazing the lengths that Christian apologists will go through to make this all add up. It is used as a plot device to move the story of Jesus along. No one called him Immanuel at all. Not his own mother, not his disciples. The Christians do not baptize in this name or pray to this name at all.

Now imagine if the text in Isaiah 7:14 said: “The virgin will conceive and give birth a son, and will call him Yeshua .” Now that would be truly something wonderous.

Is the name of Muhammed (saw) in the Bible?

Now obviously, for a Chrisitian or a Jew this debate has huge implications for them.

First and foremost this may come as a shock to many in the Jewish and Christian communities but what you call the “Hebrew alphabet” today is actually the Assyrian (square) script (Ktav Ashuri, כתב אשורי), borrowed from Aramaic, while the Samaritan script, which is largely forgotten outside of Samaritan communities, is actually a direct descendant of the ancient Paleo-Hebrew script used by the Israelites before the Babylonian Exile.

In other words, the Samaritans, who were historically marginalized by mainstream Judaism, preserved the original Hebrew script, while the Jewish community, which considers itself the true heir of Israelite tradition, abandoned it in favor of a foreign-derived script.

Source: (https://samaritantorah.com/samaritan-alphabet)

The debate around Mahamaddim.

The Hebrew Bible does not have a rigid, mathematically perfect rule for the intensive (“majestic”) plural. It is a feature of the language, not a strict law.

The claim that mahamaddim is an adjective is precisely what is being debated. If a Muslim argues it is a proper noun (a name) disguised in a plural form, then the “adjective” rule does not apply.

So let us take a look

Muhammed‘s name in the Tanach would be: Mahamaddim מַחֲּמַדִּ֑ים -someone greatly desired, someone greatly sought and longed for.

Mahamadd-im the im is a plurality of respect for someone of high position and/or status.

Source: (Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English lexicon https://hebrewcollege.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/BDB.pdf)

So their claim is that this word is a noun. A noun is a reference to a person, a place or a thing.

Source: (Koehler-Baumgartner (HALOT): The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament https://yausha.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/The-Hebrew-and-Aramaic-lexicon-of-the-Old-Testament-study-edition-volume-1.pdf)

Their claim is also that this word is a noun. A noun is a reference to a person, a place or a thing.

“His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.” (Song of Solomon 5:16)

This name is a foreign name in Hebrew. Hebrew (with the exception of liturgy) was a dead language for quite some time until Eliezer Ben-Yehuda with the aid of the Arabic language revitalize it.

Arabic preserved the ancient Semitic root system more faithfully than Hebrew, which was dormant for centuries.

Is this name Mahamaddim מַחֲּמַדִּ֑ים connected to any prophecies about a future prophet in the Tanach? 

The answer is yes: 

“My beloved is white and ruddy, the chief among (מֵרְבָבָֽה)–merebabah- ten thousand.” (Song of Solomon 5:10)

This individual is connected with the coming of 10,000. He is a conqueror. He has a fiery law (The Qur’an) in his right hand.

Notice that the Orthodox Jewish Bible says: 

His mouth is most sweet; yeah he is machamaddim (altogether desirable [see Shir Hashirim 2:3; Chaggai 2:7 says Moshaich is the Desired of All Nations]). This is dodi (my beloved), and this is my friend ,O banot Yerusahylayim. [T.N. The next chapter is commented on extensively beginning at page vii. This section is one of the most important Scriptures in the Bible because it buttresses Isa 7:14 and its foundational meaning.]”

It connects the Song of Solomon passage with Haggai 2:7

“And I will shake all the nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: And I will fill this house with glory, says the Lord of hosts.”

Now they (Orthodox Jewish Bible) believes that the Desired of all nations is the Moshaich. We have established that it is Muhamaddim.

Conclusion.

  • The plural form *-im* can function as an intensive plural (majestic plural) to indicate greatness or high status.
  • This is precisely how the Orthodox Jewish Bible interprets it: “machamaddim (altogether desirable)” but then connects it to the Messiah.
  • Therefore, even if it is not a proper name in the grammatical sense, it functions as if it were a title for a specific individual—the “Desired One.”

God’s unconditional promise to Abraham. And the conditional covenant with Isaac

“And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: behold I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him A GREAT NATION.” (Genesis 17:20)

How did God keep his promise as stated in Genesis 17:20?

Although some people say that God did indeed bless Ishmael by blessing the Arabs with oil or giving Ishmael’s descendants this or that material good, we must reflect on what it means when God says he will make someone A GREAT NATION.

The Prophet Job comes to mind when we think of this because what was the greatest gift God gave to Job was unwavering faith in him. It was not the double portion of things lost but the confidence of knowing that one can serve God even in the face of great adversity.

A GREAT NATION by God’s definition does not necessitate material wealth and benefit.

“And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?” (Mark 8:36)

Is Ishmael an Illegitimate son?

Sometimes our Jewish and Christian brethren will try and object by claiming Ishmael was illegitimate, although this is not the case.

“And Sarah, Abram’s wife took Hagar, her maid, the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan and gave her to her husband to be his WIFE, (not concubine or mistress!) and he went unto Hagar, and she conceived; And she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes.” (Genesis 16:3-4)

“I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:3)

We as Muslims in our five daily prayers during the sitting (julus) position on the 2nd rakat or the 4th rakat recite the following:

“Say: ‘O Allah, exalt the mention of Muhammed and the people of Muhammed as you exalted the mention of Ibrahim. And bless Muhammed and the people of Muhammed as You blessed Ibrahim and the people of Ibrahim in all the Worlds.”

Source: (The Reliable Jurisprudence of Prayer (Al -Mu’tamad fi’ Fiqh as-Salah -written by al-Mu’tasim b. Sa’id al-Ma’wali. page 271)

This is very different where the author of the Torah is calling Abraham cursed.

The father of the promise (Abraham) is called cursed for sleeping with his father’s daughter.

For example:

“Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father, though not of my mother, and she became my wife.” (Genesis 20:12)

“Cursed is anyone who sleeps with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother. Then all the people shall say, “Amen!” (Deuteronomy 27:22)

THE CONDITIONAL COVENANT WITH ISAAC

Sometimes our Christian & Jewish friends may even tell us that God established his covenant with Isaac.

It is important to keep in mind two things regarding this. One is that Isaac was never the only son, and the second is that the contract or covenant had stipulations attached to it.

“If these ordinances depart from before me, says the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me forever. Thus, says the Lord; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundation of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all they have done, says the Lord(Jeremiah 31:36-37)

Now the counter to this is that it means that Israel will never cease to be under a covenant with God. This is not true. The text above is hyperbole. This is proven by the following explicit text. If that covenant was unconditional God would not allow or say the following:

“And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it.” (Exodus 32:19-20)

“That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, you have been rebellious against the Lord and how much more after my death? Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears and call heaven and earth to record against them. For I know that after my death you will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because you will do evil in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.”(Deuteronomy 31:25-29)


“The Lord said to Moses, Tell the Israelites: You are a stiff-necked people. Where I go up in your company even for a moment, I would exterminate you, Take off your ornaments, therefore; I will then see what I am to do with you. So, from Mount Horeb onward the Israelites laid aside their ornaments.” (Exodus 33:5-6)

But if you do not obey Me and do not carry out all these commandments, if, instead, you reject My statues, and if your soul abhors My ordinances as to not carry out all My commandments, and so break My covenant, I, in turn, will do this to you: I will appoint over you a sudden terror, consumption and fever that will waste away the eyes and cause the soul to pine away; also you will sow your seed uselessly, for your enemies will eat it up.” (Leviticus 26:14-16)

“For the Lord your God in the midst of you is a jealous God; otherwise the anger of the Lord your God will be kindled against you, and He will wipe you off the face of the earth.” (Amos 9:8)

“A remnant (very few) of Israel will return, a remnant (very few) of Jacob will return to the Mighty God.” (Isaiah 10:21)

In fact in the New Testament the following is attributed to Jesus:

“Jesus said unto them, did you never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? Therefore, I say, The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to A NATION bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: But on whomsoever, it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. And when the chief priest and Pharisees had heard this parable, The perceived that he spoke of them.” (Matthew 21:42-45)

The stone in Mecca is called: Hajar Al Aswad-The Black Stone.

Hajar-Is the name of the Mother of Ishmael-Father of the Arabs.

“And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: behold I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him A GREAT NATION.” (Genesis 17:20)

How was the above promise kept in (Genesis 17:20)

Answer:

“Certainly, we have revealed to you a Book which will give you greatness. Do you not then understand?” (Qur’an 21:10)

Alhamdulillah (All praise be to God), the people of the Arabian Peninsula the descendants of Ishmael have received a holy revelation (The Qur’an) commanding them to believe in the one God of Abraham; and has instructed them to live in a righteous and peaceful manner!

So, Muslims believe that God did establish a covenant with Isaac; however, as we can see the children of Israel (all but the remnant) went astray. Now We want to know about the messenger that received this revelation, and is it possible that there is text in the Bible itself that could relate to the advent of such a messenger or be interpreted itself as such?

Tampering of the text of the book of Genesis by idle and jealous hands.

First thing to understand is that that the Jews do not have a monopoly on understanding and interpreting the Tanach. There is another group known as the Samaritans and they have strong charges against the Hebrew Masoretic text. They, the Samaritans also keep the Torah and they have given strong evidence of editorial changes.

Before we proceed further, we need to understand that there are parts of the narrative of the events between Hagar, Sarah, Ishmael, Isaac and Abraham that simply do not add up. In fact if as recommended you saw the article on Genesis chapter 3 that will become abundantly clear.

Isaac was never Abraham’s only son. In fact Ishmael was born before him.

Then He said, “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” (Genesis 22:2)

Christians and Jews have tried to rescue the text by focusing on: “whom you love” by trying to argue that Isaac was the only son whom Abraham loved. There is nothing from the text to substantiate this. In fact quite the opposite.

And Abraham said to God, “Oh that Ishmael might live before you!” (Genesis 17:18)

This is a clear attempt to write Ishmael out of the picture and the promise that God had given unto him.

Some odd and conflicting text in the book of Genesis:

“Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore him Ishmael.” (Genesis 16:16)
“Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.” (Genesis 21:5)

“Early the next morning Abraham got some bread and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. Then, placing the child on her back, he sent her away…” (Genesis 21:14)

The NAB footnote reads:

“Placing the child on her back: a reading based on an emendation of the traditional Hebrew text. In the traditional Hebrew text, Abraham put the bread and waterski on Hagar’s back, while her son apparently walked beside her. In this way the traditional Hebrew text harmonies the data of the Priestly source, in which Ishmael would have been at least fourteen years old when Isaac was born; compare 16:16 with 21:5, cf. 17:25. But in the present Eulogist (?) story, Ishmael is obviously a little boy, not much older than Isaac; cf. vv. 15, 18.”

Contradictions in the narrative: What is the reason that Sarah mistreats Hagar and asked her to be sent into the wilderness?

Now this is all told according to the vantage point of Sarai or so we are told to believe. At one point Sarah says that once Hagar realizes her station and standing has changed that perhaps she becomes haughty. Again, nothing from Hagar shows this, it is the perception of Sarai. Yet we are giving a very different story in another chapter. Rather than a pregnant Hagar showing scorn towards Sarai and that being the reason that Hagar is sent away we have a different narrative. In this narrative the reason for Hajar being sent away is that we now have s much older Ishmael

“When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress. Then Sarai said to Abram, “You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my slave in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the Lord judge between you and me.” (Genesis 16:4-5)

“Then Sarai mistreated Hagar; so she fled from her.” (Genesis 16:6)

“The child grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a great feast But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.(Genesis 21:9-10)

One other point to add concerning this early narrative is the following text:

“And Abraham said, “My son, God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering.” So they went both of them together.” (Genesis 22:8)

Christians will see an allusion to Jesus in the statement: “God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering.” There are a number of problems with this. The whole purpose of Abraham to offer up his son was to show his submission to God, and not as a sin offering. Secondly Jesus was never a holocaust offering. The Christians do not believe that Jesus was given as burnt offering. Finally, as you will hear ussay over and over we can get all this sorted out once we sort out Genesis chapter 3 and the very incorrect and incoherent theology that Christians have in regard to it.

The greatest prophecy in the Torah. Deuteronomy 18:18

“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” (Deuteronomy 18:18)

Note: The above-mentioned prophet is not mentioned by name.

“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” (Deuteronomy 18:18)

Now it is very clear that neither the name Yeshua (יֵשׁוּעַ) or Mahamad(מַחֲּמַדִּ֑ים) are in the above text.

Christians will give justifications for why this text is a reference to Yehsua (Jesus). We will give justifications for why this text is a reference to Mahamad (Muhammed).

You, the reader, be the judge.

Reasons Why Deuteronomy 18:18 does not refer to Jesus.

#1. If Jesus is God, his words would be his own not put in his mouth.

#2. Moses got married and Jesus did not get married.

#3. Moses had a law -the Torah. Jesus gives no law. Christians teach the law is a curse.

#4. Moses was conceived naturally and Jesus had a miraculous birth.

#5. Moses overcame his enemies and Jesus was handed over to his enemies.

#6. Jesus would not be the literal son of God if he was a prophet like Moses.

#7. Jesus never claimed to be the prophet like unto Moses.

Paul claims that Jesus was not like Moses.

Paul undermines Deuteronomy 18:18 by telling us how Jesus is not like Moses.

“Therefore, holy brothers and sisters, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession; He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all His house.For He has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house.For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later;but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house—whose house we are, if we hold firmly to our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.” (Hebrews 3:1-6)

This passage is a carefully constructed argument that establishes Jesus’s superiority over Moses, not his similarity. The structure is deliberate and devastating for the claim that Jesus is “like Moses” in the sense required by Deuteronomy 18:18.

  • Moses was a servant in the house.
  • Jesus is a Son over the house.
  • The builder of the house has more honor than the house itself.

The prophecy does not promise someone “greater than Moses”; it promises someone “like Moses.”

The Gospel of John informs us how Jesus is not like Moses.

“Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘HE GAVE THEM BREAD OUT OF HEAVEN TO EAT.’” Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven and gives life to the world.” Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.”  Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; the one who comes to Me will not be hungry, and the one who believes in Me will never be thirsty.(John 6:31-35)

  1. John has Jesus explicitly demote Moses: “It was not Moses who gave you the bread.”
  2. John has Jesus elevate himself: “I am the bread of life.”
  3. The contrast is not “similarity” but “replacement”: Moses provided physical manna; Jesus is the true bread. That is not a “like” relationship; it is a “replacement” relationship.
  4. John has Jesus claim a role Moses never claimed: Moses never called himself the bread of life. That claim is categorically different from being a prophet like Moses.

ACCORDING TO PETER IN ACTS 3:19 DEUTERONOMY 18:18 WAS NOT FULFILLED IN JESUS

Christians say that Jesus fulfilled all these prophecies in the ‘Old Testament‘ yet many of them understand that Jesus did not fulfil what was expected of him. Some say that half of the prophecies still await fulfilment. In fact the great prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:18 has YET TO BE FULFILLED according to the book of Acts.

The Acts 3 Argument: Why Deut. 18:18 Cannot Be “Fully” Fulfilled in Jesus

In Acts 3:19 we read:

Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out. When the time of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began (he must stay until this prophecy is fulfilled) for Moses truly said unto the fathers, a prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me; Him shall you hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. (That prophet like unto Moses, Deuteronomy 18:18), And all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. You are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, and IN THY SEED SHALL ALL THE KINDRED OF THE EARTH BE BLESSED.”- in reference to (Genesis 21:13)

The ‘time of refreshing’ according to Christians who follow the view of the idea of a Millennial kingdom is that Israel is in a way holding up the train. No repentance =no refreshing…=no 2nd coming of Jesus. In other words Jesus will not return until after repentant Israel acknowledges Him as their Messiah.

This is all ironic considering that many of these Zionist Christians are supportive of Israel and it’s oppression of the Palestinians (both Christian-Muslim). By continuing to support Israel with their hard earned money and putting their allegiance to Israel over their allegiance to their country they ironically continue to bolster Israel and make it haughty and proud. Did the thought ever occur to them that if they abandoned Israel (with money and support) that Israel may find itself broken and therefore have no choice but to to Jesus and repent and accept him as Messiah, which in turn ushers in his reign?

In fact, The New American Bible says the following in its footnote of Acts 3:22:

“A loose citation of DT 18:15 which teaches that the Israelites are to learn the will of Yahweh from only their prophets. At the time of Jesus, some Jews expected a unique prophet to come in fulfilment of this text. Early Christianity applied this tradition and text to Jesus and used them especially in defense of the divergence of Christian teaching from traditional Judaism.”

As we can see according to Deuteronomy 18:18 still awaits fulfilment!

  1. Christians claim Deut. 18:18 (“a prophet like Moses”) is about Jesus.
  2. Peter, in Acts 3:19-24, explicitly quotes Deut. 18:18 and ties it to the “times of refreshing” and the “restitution of all things”  events that Peter says are future and will only happen when Jesus returns from heaven.
  3. Therefore, even by Christian admission, the full scope of Deut. 18:18 has not yet been accomplished in Jesus’ first coming.
  4. If the prophecy remains partially unfulfilled, then logically, one of two things must be true:
    • Option A: Jesus is the prophet, but he failed to complete the mission in his first coming, so he must come back to finish it (the Christian “two-staged” defense).
    • Option B: Jesus is not the prophet described in Deut. 18:18, because the prophecy describes a single figure who completes the entire mission (law-giving, leadership, conquest) in one lifetime—just like Moses did.

If the prophecy required a “second coming” to be completed, then the prophecy was not fulfilled in Jesus’ lifetime. And if it was not fulfilled in his lifetime, why should we believe he is the final Prophet like Moses, rather than a forerunner to someone else who did complete it?

Why the Christian “Two-Staged” Defense Fails The Logical Test

  • Moses did not need a “second coming” to complete his mission. Moses completed his prophetic role fully. He delivered the law, led the people, and died.
  • If Jesus is the “Prophet like Moses,” then according to the pattern, he should complete his entire prophetic mission in his lifetime, just as Moses did. He should not need to “return” to finish what he started.
  • The fact that Jesus must return to fulfill the judgment and restoration aspects of Deut. 18:18 proves that he does not fit the Mosaic pattern of a prophet who completes his mission in one historical lifetime.

This argument is devastatingly simple: If Jesus is the Prophet like Moses, why does he need a second coming to do what Moses did in one lifetime? The very need for a “second coming” is an admission that Jesus did not fulfill the prophecy the first time.

A very important aspect of the prophecy awaits, that all the kindred of the Earth will be blessed ‘. This is not going to happen if during Jesus ‘2nd coming’, he is going to be judge, jury, and executioner.

According to Christians when Jesus returns there will be condemnation and judgment.

This Jesus is portrayed as blood thirsty warmonger who says things like:

“And these enemies of mine who were unwilling for me to rule over them, bring them here and kill them right in front of me.”-Jesus (Luke 19:27)

“He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.” (Revelation 19:13)

It is very clear that Christians await a second coming of Jesus because they feel he has unfinished business. However, in Islam there is nothing that Jesus needs to do that was not already accomplished by the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw). Unfortunately the vast majority of Muslims believe that Jesus (as) will return and they believe in these estachological views in a way similar to Christians. 

However, in our school and as we have shown. Jesus is dead and he will not return.

The way will the kindred of all the earth be blessed by the seed of Abraham is through his line from Ishmael to the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) and the message of Islam.

Conclusion.

Therefore, the very need for a second coming is an admission that Jesus did not fulfill Deuteronomy 18:18 in his first coming. The prophecy remains unfulfilled, and Muhammed who completed his mission in one lifetime fits the description perfectly. Rather then the Earth awaiting Jesus who comes in a robe of blood and a sword in hand the kindred of the Earth continue to be blessed by the guidance and teachings of Islam.

According to the New Testament the Jews in the time of Jesus were awaiting 3 distinct individuals.

If what the New Testament says is true concerning Jewish expectations then it represents a sort of collective belief that they had. Presuambly beliefs they inherited from their learned people. In this collective belief the Messiah, Elijah and ‘That Prophet’ are three distinct individuals.

Answer: No!

We read the following: John 1:19-21, 25

“And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who are you?’ And he confessed and did not deny, but confessed, ‘I am not the Christ.’ And they asked him, ‘What then? Are you Elijah?’ And he said, ‘I am not.’Are you the Prophet?’ And he answered, ‘No.’ And they asked him, and said to him, ‘Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?'”

Three questions were asked:

1. I am not the Christ.

2. Are you Elias? And he said I am not.

3. Are you That Prophet? And he answered, “No.”

And they asked him, and said unto him, why baptize then if you be not the Christ, nor Elias, neither That Prophet?

According to those text the Jews were waiting for three distinct persons.

1) They were looking for the Messiah (Christ)

2) They were looking for Elias

3) They were looking for That Prophet (That prophet, notice, is not a personal name.)

We also know that…

1) The Christ (Messiah) became Jesus.

2) That Elias was later revealed to be John the Baptist.

3) However, we are still looking for That Prophet. Which is distinct from the Christ (Messiah)

The Argument in light of the above information.

 The Jewish leaders did not believe “The Prophet” and “The Messiah” were the same person. They were expecting two separate figures. This is confirmed by their question: “Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” They clearly understood these to be three distinct roles/persons.

Why This Strengthens The Case for Muhammed (saw).

  1. Christians claim Jesus is both the Messiah and “The Prophet” like Moses (Deuteronomy 18:18).
  2. However, the Jewish leaders in John’s Gospel, who were experts in the Hebrew Scriptures, they did not equate “The Prophet” with “The Messiah.” They expected two separate figures.
  3. If the original audience of the Hebrew Scriptures understood “The Prophet” of Deuteronomy 18:18 to be a distinct figure from the Messiah, then the Christian claim that Jesus fulfilled both roles is an interpretive innovation, not a straightforward reading of the text.

The Christian Gospels themselves are the source of this information. This is not a Muslim claim about what Jews believed; it is a New Testament claim about what the Jews were expecting. It is for the Christian to reflect if the New Testament represented the Jewish position correctly.

Conclusion: “The Prophet” of Deuteronomy 18:18 remains unfulfilled in Jesus. The Jewish leaders were right to expect a distinct figure, a prophet like Moses who would come and deliver a new law, lead a people, and establish a nation. That prophet was Muhammed.

To us, we believe that if Jew or a Christian with a sincere heart were to read a Seerah (a history of the life of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed) they would see clearly where the Prophet Muhammed (saw) was foretold in the Old Testament. 

As concerning Christ Jesus as a Muslim the Qur’an validates our belief in him.  If we had only the data of the New Testament to validate our belief that Christ Jesus was foretold in the Old Testament that belief would be completely shattered.

The New Testament records a very difficult and strange interaction between prophet Jesus and prophet John.

“For he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born.” (Luke 1:15)

“After Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and preach in the towns of Galilee. When John, who was in prison, heard about the deeds of the Messiah, he sent his disciples to ask him, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?” Jesus replied, “Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor.” (Matthew 11:1-5)

There are lots of issues with this:

  1. John is a Prophet. He is filled with the Holy Spirit (even before he is born). Why does the Holy Spirit not know who Jesus is? How can a Prophet from God not recognizes another Prophet from God?

 2. Why does Jesus inform John about things he (John) already heard? It is like this: John was informed Jesus performed a light show. So John wants to know if Jesus is a Prophet of God. So Jesus says, ‘Tell him I preformed a light show’. Isn’t John already aware of this?

“When John, who was in prison, heard about the deeds of the Messiah.”

“Jesus replied, “Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor.” 

Basically go back and inform John about things John is already informed about! What?

3. Why does Jesus give information to John that could also be true of a false messiah?

“For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.” (Matthew 24:24)

How does Jesus feel that this information would be convincing to John?

Jesus is essentially saying to John: “I am the Messiah because I perform miracles.” But Jesus also warns that false messiahs will perform miracles. Therefore, miracles are not a reliable test of prophetic authenticity. John, being a prophet, should have known this. Why would Jesus offer a test that even Jesus himself says is unreliable?

It is very obvious that much to keen eyes that much of the information in the New Testament is convoluted.

Addressing the single biggest objection to Deuteronomy 18:18 being a reference to Muhammed (saw).

The objection is that Muhammed (saw) cannot be a prophet like Moses because the text says: “from among their brothers.” They take that to mean that Muhammed (saw) has to be an Israelite.

How do Torah believing Jews translate the text?

“I will set up a prophet for them from among their brothers like you, and I will put My words into his mouth, and he will speak to them all that I command him.”

Source: (https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9982)

However, notice the deception in some Christian translations.

“I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him.”

Source: (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018%3A18&version=NIV)

The NIV inserts “fellow Israelites” to force an ethnic interpretation that is not present in the Hebrew text. This is a clear example of translational bias, where the translator’s theological presuppositions override the literal meaning of the text.

Where is the word Israelites at in the Hebrew?

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/deuteronomy/18-18.htm

The fact that “brethren” can mean non-Israelites in other contexts means it could mean non-Israelites in Deuteroromy 18:18.

There is a clear contradistinction between children of Israel and brethren.

The Hebrew phrase miqirbəkha literally means “from your midst” or “from within your proximity.”

In Deuteronomy 17:15, the same phrase is used: “you may indeed set over you a king whom the LORD your God will choose. One from among your brethren (miqirbəkha me’akhekha) you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother.”

In Deuteronomy 17:15, the “from among your brethren” clearly means ethnic Israel because the verse explicitly excludes a foreigner. But in Deuteronomy 18:18, there is no such exclusion. The text simply says “from among you” without specifying ethnic boundaries. If there was a large Jewish community in Medina at the time of Muhammed (as there historically was), then Muhammed could be said to have come “from among” the people of Israel. Not as an Israelite himself, but from within their midst geographically and socially.

“Brethren” can include non-Israelites.

“Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing with which his father had blessed him, and Esau said in his heart, ‘The days of mourning for my father are approaching; then I will kill my brother Jacob.” (Genesis 27:41)

This establishes that “brother” can refer to a non-Israelite descendant of Abraham (Edomites are not Israelites.

“So Abram said to Lot, “Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herders and mine, for we are (achim) brothers.” (Genesis 13:8)

Lot is Abraham’s nephew, not his brother, and the Moabites and Ammonites (Lot’s descendants) are non-Israelite nations.

Notice the deception with the NIV translation.

“So Abram said to Lot, “Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herders and mine, for we are close relatives.” (Genesis 13:8 NIV)

Soure: (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2013%3A8&version=NIV)

“Do not detest an Edomite, because he is your brother.” (Deuteronomy 23:7)

This is a direct command to consider an Edomite (a non-Israelite, descendant of Esau) as a brother.

Therefore, when Deuteronomy 18:18 says God will raise up a prophet from “among your brethren,” it cannot automatically mean “an Israelite.” The Torah itself defines “brethren” in a way that includes at least one non-Israelite group (Edomites).

If Edomites are brethren, then Ishmaelites (descendants of Abraham’s firstborn son) are even more obviously brethren.

“Brethren” (aḥim) is not synonymous with “children of Israel”.

“And they shall bring all your brethren (aḥeichem) for an offering unto the Lord out of all the nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the Lord, as the children of Israel (bənei yisra’el) bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the Lord.” (Isaiah 66:20)

The Distinction:

  • “Your brethren” (aḥeichem) = The group being brought from the nations.
  • “The children of Israel” (bənei yisra’el) = The group making the offering.

The “brethren” are not the same as “the children of Israel.” They are being brought to the children of Israel. If they were the same group, the text would be redundant: “They shall bring all the children of Israel as the children of Israel bring an offering.” That makes no sense. The distinction is clear: the “brethren” are a separate group from the children of Israel.

Here the difference between Children of Israel and brethren is shown.

“But over your brethren the children of Israel (aḥeihem bənei yisra’el), you shall not rule one over another with rigor.” (Leviticus 25:46)

The Distinction:

  • “Your brethren” (aḥeihem) = The broader kinship group.
  • “The children of Israel” (bənei yisra’el) = The specific ethnic/national group.

The text defines “your brethren” more specifically as “the children of Israel” in this context. But notice: it does not say “your brethren are the children of Israel” as a general rule. It says “your brethren the children of Israel” in this specific context. The fact that the phrase needs to be specified shows that “brethren” is not automatically synonymous with “children of Israel.” If it were, the specification would be unnecessary.

Conclusion.

  • The immediate context does not explicitly define “brethren.” It assumes it.
  • Even if the context suggests Israelites, the word “brethren” itself is broader. The text does not say “children of Israel.”
  • If the text meant “children of Israel,” it would have said so. The fact that it chose “brethren” leaves the door open.

So, in light of this, the Deuteronomy 18:18 passage would have said Children of Israel and not Brethren.

This is why the deception with the NIV was so deceptive in it’s translation.

Final thoughts.

We ask the sincere reader: If Christians can see Jesus in passages that do not mention his name and that, when read in context, clearly refer to something else then is it not reasonable for Muslims to see Muhammed (saw) in passages that describe a prophet like Moses? We have shown that Deuteronomy 18:18 does not exclude a non-Israelite prophet, that the New Testament itself records Jewish expectations of a distinct ‘Prophet,’ and that Jesus himself by Christian admission has not yet fulfilled the full scope of the prophecy. The one who completed the Mosaic pattern in a single lifetime was Muhammed (saw).

Christians apply an inconsistent hermeneutic to the Old Testament. They read Jesus into passages where his name does not appear (Psalm 22) while ignoring passages that damage their theology (Psalm 51). They accuse Muslims of reading Muhammed (saw) into the text while doing the same thing themselves. They insert “fellow Israelites” into Deuteronomy 18:18 when the Hebrew says “brethren.” They claim Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of the prophet like Moses while admitting he must return to finish the job.

The Islamic alternative is compelling: Deuteronomy 18:18 describes a prophet like Moses who completes his mission in one lifetime. He brings law, leadership, conquest, and natural death. That prophet is Muhammed. The reader is invited to reflect on this with an open heart.

You may also be interested in the following:

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

No Objective Criterion: Why 1 Kings 22 and 2 Kings 3 Undermine Trust in Biblical Prophecy and the God of the Bible

“That is because Allah He is the Truth (Al Haqq) -the Only True God of all that exists, Who has no partners or rival, the ultimate reality, and what they (those who associate) invoke besides Him, it is Batil (falsehood) And verily, Allah He is the Highest, The Most Great.” (Qur’an 22:62)

“No! We hurl the Truth against Falsehood, and it crushes it. Behold, falsehood does perish! Woe to you for the false things you ascribe.” (Qur’an 21:18)

﷽ 

The Bible claims to be a repository of divine revelation delivered through prophets. Yet within its own pages lie passages that raise a devastating question: How can anyone know, with objective certainty, whether a prophet speaks for God or for a deceiving spirit?

Two passages—1 Kings 22 (the lying spirit sent to deceive Ahab’s prophets) and 2 Kings 3 (the Moabite king’s child sacrifice to Chemosh that apparently succeeded)—demonstrate that the Bible provides no reliable, objective criterion for distinguishing true prophecy from false. Consequently, confidence in the God of the Bible and the reliability of the prophetic tradition is not rationally justified.

The Lying Spirit of 1 Kings 22

In 1 Kings 22, King Ahab of Israel seeks prophetic guidance before attacking Ramoth-gilead. Four hundred prophets unanimously predict victory. King Jehoshaphat of Judah asks for another prophet. Micaiah son of Imlah is summoned. After initial sarcasm, Micaiah delivers a startling revelation:

“I saw the Lord seated on his throne, with the whole host of heaven standing to his right and to his left. The Lord asked: Who will deceive Ahab, so that he will go up and fall on Ramoth-gilead? And one said this, another that, until this spirit came forth and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will deceive him.’ The Lord asked: How? He answered, ‘I will go forth and become a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets.’ The Lord replied: You shall succeed in deceiving him. Go forth and do this. So now, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours; the Lord himself has decreed evil against you.” (1 Kings 22:19–23)

This Is A Huge Problem.

This passage establishes several disturbing facts:

  1. The Lord initiates deception. He does not merely permit a lying spirit to act; he asks for volunteers to deceive Ahab.
  2. The lying spirit acts with divine authorization. The Lord commands, “Go forth and do this.”
  3. The 400 prophets are sincere but deceived. Nothing in the text suggests they are frauds. They experience genuine prophetic ecstasy. They believe they speak for God. They are wrong.
  4. The deception works. Ahab hears the prophesied victory, believes it, goes to battle, and dies.

The Objective Criterion Problem

If a prophet can be sincerely inspired by a lying spirit sent by the Lord, then the prophet’s subjective experience of inspiration is worthless as a test of truth. The 400 prophets felt exactly as true prophets feel. They spoke with confidence. They may even have performed signs (Zedekiah’s iron horns in verse 11). Yet they were deceived.

This means that any prophet at any time could be in the same position. There is no internal marker—no distinctive feeling, no special certainty, no accompanying miracle—that guarantees the message comes from the Lord rather than from a divinely commissioned lying spirit.

Possible Counter-Arguments and Responses

These objections are usually the response of those Christians who believe in Glossolalia, or speaking in tongues. Often other Christians will ask them how do they (Pentacostal, Evangelical) know that they do not have a lying spirit? These interesting internal Christian debates have helped in what follows.

Counter-argument 1: The lying spirit was sent as judgment against Ahab because he had already rejected the truth. The 400 prophets were not typical prophets; they were court prophets who told Ahab what he wanted to hear.

Prima Qur’an Response: This does not solve the objective criterion problem. Even if the 400 prophets were corrupt, the text says the lying spirit entered their mouths. The deception was real. More importantly, how would an observer know, in advance, which prophets are corrupt and which are true? Ahab had no objective way to know that Micaiah was the true prophet and the 400 were deceived until after the battle—when Ahab was dead. The test of fulfillment (Deuteronomy 18:21–22) works only in hindsight.

Counter-argument 2: Deuteronomy 13 provides a test: even if a prophet’s sign comes true, if he leads people to other gods, he is false. The 400 prophets did not do that.

Prima Qur’an Response: Deuteronomy 13 is a necessary test, but not a sufficient one. It catches only prophets who explicitly advocate idolatry. What about prophets who speak in the name of the Lord but are deceived? What about prophets who give military or political advice that leads to disaster? The lying spirit speaks in the name of the Lord. The 400 prophets say, “The Lord will give it into the power of the king” (verse 6). They do not advocate other gods. Yet they are false. Deuteronomy 13 does not identify them.

Counter-argument 3: The test of fulfillment eventually caught the false prophets. Ahab died. Their prophecy failed. That is the objective criterion.

Prima Qur’an Response: This is true but useless for anyone who must make a decision before the event. Ahab needed to know before the battle whether to attack. The 400 prophets gave him confident assurance. Micaiah gave him a warning. Ahab chose the majority. He had no objective way to decide which group was telling the truth. The test of fulfillment only works after the fact—after lives have been lost. A decision-making criterion that only works retroactively is not a criterion for decision-making at all.

The God of Chemosh in 2 Kings 3

In 2 Kings 3, the Moabite king rebels against Israel. Jehoram of Israel, Jehoshaphat of Judah, and the king of Edom form a coalition to attack Moab from the south. They run out of water. The prophet Elisha is consulted. He prophesies:

“Thus says the Lord: Dig ditches in this wadi. For thus says the Lord: You will see neither wind nor rain, yet the wadi will fill with water, and you will drink—you, your cattle, and your pack animals. And this is easy in the Lord’s sight; he will also deliver Moab into your power. You will destroy every fortified city and every choice city, cut down every good tree, stop up all the springs, and ruin every fertile field with stones.” (2 Kings 3:16–19)

The next morning, water comes. The Moabites see the water red in the sunlight, mistake it for blood, assume the allied kings have turned on each other, and rush out to plunder. The Israelites rise up and defeat them, pursuing them into Moab.

Then the text continues:

“When the king of Moab saw that the battle was going against him, he took with him seven hundred swordsmen to break through to the king of Edom, but they failed. Then he took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him, and offered him as a burnt offering on the wall. And great wrath came upon Israel, so they withdrew from him and returned to their own land.” (2 Kings 3:26–27)

Another Massive Problem.

The plain reading of the text is devastating for any claim that the Lord alone is God or that other gods have no real power:

  1. Elisha, a true prophet of the Lord, prophesied total victory. He said Moab would be delivered into Israel’s power. He described complete destruction: every city destroyed, every tree cut down, every spring stopped.
  2. The Moabite king offers his son to Chemosh. This is not a private ritual; it is a public act of desperate propitiation, performed on the wall for both armies to see.
  3. Something happens. The text does not explain the mechanism, but the causal sequence is unmistakable: sacrifice —> great wrath —> Israel withdraws.
  4. Israel does not achieve the prophesied victory. They do not destroy Moab’s cities. They do not cut down its trees. They withdraw. They go home.

The most natural reading is that Chemosh, the Moabite god, was propitiated by the child sacrifice and responded by protecting Moab and driving Israel away.

Score card: Chemosh 1 Yahweh 0.

People May Ask: Does This Mean Chemosh Exists and Has Power?

If the biblical text reports that a sacrifice to Chemosh produced a military victory against an army that had the blessing of the Lord (through Elisha), then one of three conclusions follows:

  1. Chemosh is a real god with real power. The Lord is not the only God, or at least not the only effective God. The Bible contains henotheism (many gods, but Israel must worship only one) rather than monotheism (only one God exists).
  2. The Lord caused the wrath to punish Israel for some unstated sin. But the text does not say this. Elisha’s prophecy was unconditional: “The Lord will deliver Moab into your power.” If the Lord then caused Israel’s defeat, Elisha was a false prophet by Deuteronomy 18’s test. That creates an even larger problem.
  3. The “wrath” was psychological—Israelite morale collapsed at the horror of child sacrifice. But the text does not say that either. It says wrath came upon Israel (qetseph gadol ‘al Yisra’el). The same language is used elsewhere for divine wrath. And psychological collapse is still an effect caused by the sacrifice—an effect that a non-existent god could not produce.

Possible Counter-Arguments and Responses

We have not seen good objectives or responses to the above. However, Christian apologetic is often predictable. Here are some of their possible counters as well as our response.

Counter-argument 1: The withdrawal was temporary. The text does not say Moab won the war. It only says Israel withdrew from that particular siege. Moab remained a vassal or was later subdued.

Priama Qur’an response: This is special pleading. The text presents the withdrawal as a direct consequence of the wrath. Elisha’s prophecy promised total destruction of Moab’s cities. That did not happen. The text does not record any later Moabite subjugation in this campaign. The plain reading is that the sacrifice worked and Israel failed to achieve its objective.

Counter-argument 2: The “great wrath” was from the Lord against Moab, not against Israel. So the wrath came upon Moab, causing the Israelites to withdraw because Moab was now protected by divine wrath.

Prima Qur’an response: The wrath comes after the sacrifice. If the wrath is against Moab, why does Israel withdraw? Israel would press the attack if Moab were under divine wrath. The withdrawal makes sense only if the wrath is against Israel—or if the wrath is Chemosh’s wrath against Israel. The simplest reading remains the most natural: the sacrifice propitiated Chemosh, and Chemosh acted.

Counter-argument 3: Chemosh may have real power, but that power is demonic and subordinate to the Lord.

Prima Qur’an Response: This does not solve the problem; it relocates it. If Chemosh is a demon acting under the Lord’s permission, then the Lord permitted a demon to defeat his own prophet’s prophecy. That means the Lord allows his own true prophets to be publicly humiliated and his people to be defeated by demonic powers. On what basis could anyone then trust a prophetic word? The Lord might have authorized a lying spirit to deceive the prophet (as in 1 Kings 22) or authorized a demon to defeat the army (as in 2 Kings 3). There is no objective way to know.

Counter-argument 4: The story is not about Chemosh’s power but about the horror of child sacrifice. The Israelites withdrew because they were morally repulsed, not because Chemosh did anything.

Prima Qur’an Response: The text does not say this. It says “great wrath came upon Israel.” That is theological language. The author could have written “they were horrified” but did not. Moreover, if the withdrawal was purely psychological, then the Moabite king’s strategy worked—not because Chemosh necesarilyh exists, but because human psychology responded to the horror. That still means the sacrifice was effective. And it means the Lord’s prophet (Elisha) did not foresee this psychological effect, despite having just predicted total victory. That makes Elisha a false prophet by the standard of Deuteronomy 18.

The Real Problem: The Collapse of Objective Criteria

The Bible provides several tests for prophets. Each fails when subjected to the evidence of these passages.

Test One: Fulfillment (Deuteronomy 18:21–22)

“If a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord and the word does not come true, that word was not spoken by the Lord.”

The Problem: This test only works after the fact. Ahab needed to decide before the battle. Moreover, 2 Kings 3 shows that even a true prophet (Elisha) can prophesy victory that does not come to pass. Either Elisha was not a true prophet (contradicting the text’s presentation of him) or the test fails. And if a lying spirit can make false prophets succeed (1 Kings 22), then even fulfilled prophecy is not proof of divine origin. A demon could produce a fulfilled prediction to deceive.

Test Two: Theological Orthodoxy (Deuteronomy 13:1–5)

“If a prophet arises and gives you a sign or wonder, and the sign or wonder comes true, but he says, ‘Let us follow other gods,’ you must not listen.”

The Problem: This test catches only prophets who explicitly advocate idolatry. The 400 prophets in 1 Kings 22 spoke in the name of the Lord. They did not advocate other gods. Yet they were deceived. A lying spirit can speak perfectly orthodox theology while leading people to destruction. Theological orthodoxy is no guarantee of truth.

Think about it. The above text says that a there can be a false prophet who can give signs and wonders.

In fact, they have Jesus say as much here:

“For there shall arise false christs and false prophets and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Matthew 24:24)

The only thing that makes that prophet false is that he is doing these things either by the power or in the name of another god. This is no objective criteria at all. It puts both on an even playing field.

Test Three: Track Record and Character

The Problem: Ahab knew that Micaiah had a track record of negative prophecies. He still chose to believe the 400. Track record is probabilistic, not certain. And 2 Kings 3 shows that a prophet with an impeccable track record (Elisha) can prophesy a victory that does not occur. If Elisha can be wrong (or overridden by Chemosh), then no prophet’s track record guarantees future accuracy.

Test Four: The Prophet’s Willingness to Suffer

The Problem: Micaiah was willing to die for his message. So were many false prophets in other religions. Martyrdom proves sincerity, not accuracy. A sincerely deceived prophet (like the 400) might also be willing to suffer if he believed his message was from God.

The Theological Consequences

The arguments above are sound, then the following conclusions follow:

1. There is no objective, reliable criterion for distinguishing true prophecy from false in real time.

A person standing at the gate of Samaria with Ahab has no rational basis to choose between Micaiah and the 400 prophets. Both groups speak in the name of the Lord. Both may be sincere. One group is deceived. There is no external test available before the event that resolves the question.

2. The Lord can and does authorize deception.

The text of 1 Kings 22 is unambiguous: the Lord commissions a lying spirit to deceive prophets. This means that any prophet at any time could be the vehicle of divine deception. The reader of the Bible has no guarantee that any given prophetic book was not produced under the influence of a divinely sent lying spirit.

3. Other gods (or the spiritual entities behind them) have real power.

The plain reading of 2 Kings 3 is that Chemosh responded to child sacrifice with military effect against an army blessed by the Lord’s prophet. Whether Chemosh is a god, a demon, or a literary device, the narrative presents a rival deity successfully opposing the Lord’s plan. This undercuts any strong monotheism that claims the Lord alone acts in history. It also supports henotheism which is presented throughout the Bible.

4. Biblical prophecy is not a reliable basis for knowledge about God.

If prophecy can be deceived by divine design, and if rival deities can thwart prophetic predictions, then the prophetic corpus of the Bible cannot be trusted as a secure foundation for theology. The claims of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the minor prophets rest on the same prophetic mechanism that produced the 400 deceived prophets of 1 Kings 22. There is no external verification available to the modern reader that distinguishes true biblical prophets from false ones.

Possible Responses from Believing Scholarship.

Response 1: The Canonical Context

Believing scholars argue that the Bible as a whole provides its own hermeneutic. The lying spirit episode is a judgment on Ahab’s hardness of heart. The Chemosh episode shows the horror of child sacrifice, not Chemosh’s power. When read in the full canon—from Genesis to Revelation—these episodes do not undermine trust but reinforce the sovereignty of the Lord who uses even deception and foreign gods for his purposes.

Prima Qur’an response: This response assumes what it needs to prove—that the canon as a whole is trustworthy. The question at issue is whether the prophetic mechanism itself is reliable. Citing other biblical passages does not solve the problem because those passages come through the same unreliable prophetic mechanism. This is circular reasoning.

Response 2: Divine Accommodation

Some theologians argue that the Bible accommodates itself to ancient Near Eastern ways of thinking. The authors of 1 Kings and 2 Kings believed that other gods existed and that the Lord could use lying spirits.

Prima Qur’an Response: If the Bible accommodates false beliefs (that other gods exist, that the Lord sends lying spirits), then on what basis can any part of the Bible be trusted as accurate? Accommodationism is a slippery slope. If the Bible is wrong about the existence of Chemosh and the mechanism of divine deception, it could be wrong about anything. The reader is left with no objective criterion for deciding which parts are accommodation and which are truth.

Response 3: Existential Trust

Some theologians argue that faith does not rest on objective criteria. Faith is a leap. The absence of certainty is the condition for authentic trust. The objective uncertainty of prophecy is not a bug but a feature.

Prima Qur’an Response: This is an honest attempt at a response but it concedes the argument. If faith requires a leap without objective evidence, then the claim that “the Bible is reliable” is not a rational conclusion but a personal commitment. The skeptic who demands objective grounds for belief is not refuted; they are simply told that faith does not provide what they seek. That is a defensible position on the basis of faith alone, but it abandons any claim to rational demonstration.

Conclusion

The Bible itself provides no objective, reliable criterion for distinguishing true prophecy from false. The lying spirit of 1 Kings 22 demonstrates that sincere prophets speaking in the name of the Lord can be deceived by divine commission. The God of Chemosh in 2 Kings 3 demonstrates that rival deities (or the spiritual powers behind them) can successfully oppose armies blessed by the Lord’s true prophets.

These passages strike at the heart of biblical authority. If the prophetic mechanism is unreliable, then the prophetic books of the Bible are unreliable. If the Bible cannot provide a rational basis for trusting its own prophets, then the God of the Bible cannot be known with certainty through the Bible.

This does not prove that God does not exist. It proves something narrower but still devastating: the Bible does not give its readers a reliable, objective method for knowing that its prophets speak truth rather than a lying spirit. For anyone who demands rational grounds for belief, this is sufficient reason to withhold trust.

May Allah guide the sincere among the Jews and the Christians so that they do not enter the hellfire.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The False Prophecies of Jesus.

“When the angels proclaimed, “O Mary! Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary; honoured in this world and the Hereafter, and he will be one of those nearest.” (Qur’an 3:45)

﷽ 

This article is to warn people against Jesus the son of the Father. This article invites people to believe in Jesus the Messiah!

“So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus, who is called the Messiah?” (Matthew 27:17)

There are two different Jesus here. There is Jesus, the Son of the Father (Bar-Abbas) and there is Jesus who is called the Messiah.

“For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Matthew 24:24)

“When the angels proclaimed, “O Mary! Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary; honoured in this world and the Hereafter, and he will be one of those nearest.” (Qur’an 3:45)

“For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.” (2 Corinthians 11:4)

Jesus, who is called “Son of the Father” in the New Testament. The one that has autobiographies written about him in the so-called Gospels. That one is a Dajjal, a Liar and an impostor. That Jesus is the Anti-Christ. The word Anti-means in place of.

Jesus, who is known as The Christ, The Messiah, The Word of Allah, The Servant and Messenger of Allah that is captured in the New Testament, that preached the Gospel. That is the Muslim Jesus.

It is this False Jesus that was known by his many, many failed prophecies.

The many many false prophecies of Jesus.

“But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.” (Deuteronomy 18:20)

Now, for Muslims, there is no issue if Jesus died a natural death or was killed by his enemies. As mentioned in the Qur’an, the NT and the TNCH all have no problem with the admission that people have, can and did kill the Prophets of Allah.

The real dilemma for the Jew, Agnostic, atheists, and other religions (not Muslim) is that Jesus (according to the records of the New Testament) simply made so many false prophecies that one would be hard-pressed to take anything he said seriously.

We will be quoting the text of the New Testament, which we as Muslims know to be a false Jesus and a false portrayal of who he was. Anything from this point that seems demeaning of the status of Jesus is only directed at the conclusions one would reach if we were to believe the New Testament.

Jesus gives a three-fold failed prophecy. He made three failed prophecies in one go!

“They will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” (Mark 16:18)

This has to be one of the biggest and most embarrassing failed prophecies. It is a three-fold failed prophecies. So this text makes Jesus (as) give three failed prophecy.

  1. You will pick up snakes with your hands, and it will not hurt you at all.
  2. You will drink deadly poison, and it will not hurt you at all.
  3. You will place hands on sick people and they will get well.

The following is a link to a Christian who put his faith in Jesus false words and paid for it with his life.

“It will not hurt them at all.” We would say that having your finger amputated because you got bit by a poisonous snake more than qualifies as hurt.

Not only this but they have died handling snakes!

https://abcnews.go.com/US/snake-handling-pentecostal-pastor-dies-snake-bite/story?id=22551754

The Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox dare not to take Jesus up on this prophecy.

Those Christians who do not hold Mark 16:18 to be inspired scripture breathed a huge sigh of relief. However, the Orthos and Catholics run from it until this very day.

However, there are a great many Christians who believe that the above text is spurious, non-canonical and, in fairness, we cannot hold them to this challenge, nor would this text prove that Christ Jesus is false—not to them at least.

Other Christians will say that this is a prophecy of Jesus and not an instruction.

“Jesus told him, “It is also written: Do not test the Lord your God.” (Matthew 4:7).

But we say if that is the case, it is a prophecy that is unfalsifiable. Let us say that some mean-spirited individual poured strychnine into the chalice of an Orthodox Bishop or Catholic Priest and his congregation drank from it and all dropped dead. This would only strengthen the faith of other sects of Christians that those who dropped dead were not true Christians anyway. They had no true communion with God.

Notice the three points.

  1. You will pick up snakes with your hands, and it will not hurt you at all.
  2. You will drink deadly poison, and it will not hurt you at all.
  3. You will place hands on sick people and they will get well.

If it is meant that all three of these are a means of testing God, then Jesus himself would be guilty of violating point 3. That is because he did put his hands on the sick people and they were healed.

This is not happening today by any Christian denomination under the sun. Which country on the Earth have Christians put hospitals out of buisness? None.

The One and Only Sign Jesus Ever Gave That He Was The True Messiah Turns Out To Be A Failed Prophecy.

“Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.”  He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matthew 12:38-40)

There has been so much Christian ink poured into trying to save this failed prophecy. Because no matter how you slice it, it does not add up.

Since Jesus says ‘For as’ and Muslims like Ahmed Deedat, Zakir Naik and others say that ‘as’ is a reference to Jonas being alive whereas Jesus was dead. So now some Christians have wised up and tried another angle. This new angle is not rather Jesus or Jonah being dead or alive, which they (these Christians admit) is not the same. Rather, if we allow metaphor, it references entombment. 

Rather, this is a reference to the enotmbment or the condition of the body being alive or dead is really irrelevant, as Jesus’ emphasis is on the time factor.

However, some Christians (Protestants) were ready to stake a stand and kick in the teeth of the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox and the Roman Catholics and show that Jesus did not indeed make a false prophecy. Rather, these traditional churches were not guided by the Holy Spirit and they were false. Thus was born the idea that Jesus died on a Wednesday and not on a ‘Good Friday’.

No matter the game of cat and mouse the various Christian sects want to play with one another, the embarrassment still stands:

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

“Will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Jesus was actually never put ‘in the earth’ , much less the heart of the Earth!


Jesus failed the prophecy with regard to how many times the Rooster would crow before he would be betrayed.

“Jesus answered him, “Will you lay down your life for my sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times.” (John 13:38)

It is very clear that Peter would not deny him until the rooster crows three times. Mark tells us otherwise. The rooster crowed after the first denial and not the third.

“Now as Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came.  And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, “You also were with Jesus of Nazareth.” But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are saying.” And he went out on the porch, and a rooster crowed.” (Mark 14:16-68)

This whole failed prophecy is a contrived concocted mess!

Jesus failed prophecy about a man being with him in paradise that day.

“Then Jesus said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43) What a flat lie and a failed prophecy!

“Jesus said unto her, “Touch Me not, for I am not yet ascended to My Father.” (John 20:17)


Jesus, accordingly, was in the tomb for three days and three nights! So there was no ‘today you will be with me in Paradise’. Furthermore, many Orthos and Catholics believe that Jesus was actually in hell during that time!

Jesus’ false prophecy about the unity of the body of Christ.

“I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They, too, will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.” (John 10:16)

This one is a Phat L. Out of all the world’s religions, there is perhaps none on Earth that is so fractious and has done so much violence to those deemed dissenters and heretics, as has the Christian faith tradition. Love thy brother and turn the other cheek went out of style long before bell-bottoms and vhs.

In fact, the most non-violent Christian groups tend to live in isolation or have the fewest numbers on the planet. Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, Shakers, Society of Friends.

Contrary to the above failed prophecy, the prophecy of the Qur’an still reigns true.

“And from those who say, “We are Christians” We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)

Want to prove Islam false? Simple. Unite and become one flock with one shepherd.

Jesus failed prophecy to the high priest.

“Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!” (Matthew 26:64-65)

That is a failed prophecy. It never took place.

Failed Prophecy of Jesus Promising Followers Immense Wealth By Bribing Them.

“So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life.” (Mark 10:29-30)

Which Christian has left his wife and received 100 wives in return?

Jesus falsely predicted that his followers would outshine him in works.

“Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.” (John 14:12)

Which follower of Jesus ever turned water into wine? Which follower of Jesus walked on water? Which Christian was dead supposedly for three days and three nights and came back to life?

Jesus gives a clear false prophecy about broken promises and shattered dreams that clearly shows that he is a false prophet.

“And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.  If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.” (John 14:13-14)

This is easily shown to be divorced from reality. Even if we were to ask in the name of Yeshua, Immanuel, there are millions of requests that go out in the name of Jesus/Yeshua that are simply not answered.

Jesus either gives a failed prophecy or has a real dark sense of humor.

I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.” (Revelation 3:11)

I am coming soonish…

At least the Jehovah’s Witnesses got tired of waiting (2000 plus years) and they made Jesus return in 1914.

Jesus gives a failed prophecy about Christians walking in the light.

“When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” (John 8:12)

Under Christianity, Europe was literally in what is known as the dark ages. It was not until contact with Muslims and the re-introduction of ancient Greek and Roman archives, coupled with the findings of the Arabs, Persians, Indians, among others, that Europe actually and ironically experienced the renaissance—the rebirth.

Jesus falsely predicted that his words would endure, but we have evidence that Jesus said things that we do not have records of.

“Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)

We don’t have a record of the questions Jesus asked them. If Christians say that “will pass away” means cease to be true or binding as opposed to preserved, then they have made our argument for us. That Allah’s words can change not in the sense of passing away or being true but in the sense of being preserved.

This is false because of the following:

“And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.” (Luke 2:46)

The failed prophecy that C.S Lewis called this “The Most Embarrassing Verse in the Bible.”

“Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” (Mathew 16:28)

https://www.behindthegospels.com/p/surprised-by-cs-lewis-the-most-embarrassing

Jesus made a false prophecy that no sign would be given to ‘this generation’ .

“He sighed deeply and said, “Why does this generation ask for a sign? Truly, I tell you, no sign will be given to it.” (Mark 8:12)

But this is also a false prophecy because signs were indeed given.

“Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.” (John 20:30)

The apostles performed many signs and wonders among the people. And all the believers used to meet together in Solomon’s Colonnade.” (Acts 5:12)

“Now Stephen, a man full of God’s grace and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people.” (Acts 6:8)

“Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw.” (Acts 8:13)

They performed signs, so Jesus’ prediction that no sign would be given to that generation proved false.

“But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.” (Deuteronomy 18:20)

It is precisely all these false and failed prophecies that are attributed to Jesus coupled with the view that his enemies killed him that ultimately give an image of a false Prophet. We seek protection with Allah (swt) from this. We seek protection from those who ascribe false things to the Blessed Prophets Jesus (as) or Muhammed (saw).

May Allah (swt) guide the sincere Christians to abandon Jesus the Son of the Father and embrace Jesus the Messiah!

May Allah (swt) guide the Christians to the truth so that they do not burn in the hellfire.

May Allah Guide the Ummah!

May Allah Forgive the Ummah!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized