“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.
- Jesus was not telling the truth.
- 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.
Using the methodology of Matthew We can establish a prophecy concerning Muhammed (saw) in the Old Testament.
“Then the book will be given to the one who is illiterate , saying, “Please read this.” And he will say, “I cannot read .” The Lord says: “These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught.” (Isaiah 29:12-13)
Anyone who has studied Islam knows that this is a prophecy concerning the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) in the cave of hira when the angel Gabriel came to him.
Contextomy: How New Testament writers quote the Old Testament for prophecies.
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)
- John has Jesus explicitly demote Moses: “It was not Moses who gave you the bread.”
- John has Jesus elevate himself: “I am the bread of life.”
- 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.
- 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!
- Christians claim Deut. 18:18 (“a prophet like Moses”) is about Jesus.
- 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.
- Therefore, even by Christian admission, the full scope of Deut. 18:18 has not yet been accomplished in Jesus’ first coming.
- 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).
- Christians claim Jesus is both the Messiah and “The Prophet” like Moses (Deuteronomy 18:18).
- 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.
- 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:
- 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.
Prima Quran 