Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 2: Chapter 33
15 Dec. 2015
MUHAMMAD MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE?
No, according to the Bible.
Muhammad had no valid proofs for being a prophet or a messenger for a god, and also neither valid proofs for the very existence of his claimed god, nor for that this claimed god in case was not a made up pagan god (after all Muhammad took over the old Arab pagan god Il, al-Ilah, al-Lah/Allah), and used many claims and "signs" and some "proofs" - all invalid as proofs - claiming to show that he was not only a real prophet/messenger for a real god, but the grates such one for the one and universal only existing god. Among these claims was his claim that he was clearly mentioned in the Bible, both in OT and NT (7/157).
Because of this claim in the Quran (also mentioned in Hadiths), Islam is forced to find Muhammad in the Bible - both in OT and NT. The trouble is that he very easy to see is not clearly mentioned. The only place Muhammad clearly is mentioned in the Bible, is in verse 61/6 in the Quran - in the real Bible neither Jesus nor anyone else ever mentions him. And remember here two facts: For one thing both science and Islam strongly have proved that the Bible is not falsified - and thus that Muhammad is not falsified out of that book - by being unable to find even one proved falsification in the some 45ooo relevant scriptures and fragments older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his preaching) - lots of claims, but not one with a valid proof behind it. Guess if Islam had lectured any soul on Earth about it if there had been even one proved case! And for another thing the old Jewish prophets NEVER used proper names when prophesying about distant future (sometimes a title, but never a proper name), but suddenly in the Quran - 61/6 - it is claimed that Jesus uses one of the standard variations of the name Muhammad (Ahmad). A curious fact.
Circumstantial and perhaps empirical proofs, but very strong ones.
It is an undisputable fact that Muhammad is nowhere clearly mentioned - not to mention named - in the Bible, neither by Jesus nor by anybody else. Not even Islam or Muslims claim this today.
But Islam is forced to find him there - both in OT and NT. If not, something is seriously wrong in the Quran. And Islam normally prefers to flee from difficult facts instead of facing them. Here the way out is to look for a Muhammad hidden away in Biblical texts. They claim to find him, but by means of quoting out of the context (Islam claims that you cannot understand points in the Quran except as part of a full context, but they happily quotes out of contexts themselves when that is profitable - one rule for Loki and one for Thor), twisting of texts, and unusual meanings of words (f.x. the brother of a Jew normally also is a Jew, but Islam claims that Moses meant that the brother of a Jew is an Arab).
The only ones able to find Muhammad in OT, not to mention in NT, are Muslims driven by need, wishful thinking, and blind belief, and religiously educated Muslims, who thus know the real facts, but also Islam's rules for use of "lawful" dishonesty.
######AN ADDITIONAL AND REVEALING POINT FROM VERSE 7/157: The Arab word used here in the Quran is "Maktub" which literally means "written". In the Quran this word is used only in 7/157, and The Oxford Dictionary of Islam specifies the exact meaning of this verse like this: "Maktub (= Written). The term frequently carries the meaning 'decreed' or 'established'. Occurs once in the Quran at 7/157, (######*)a verse stating that Muhammad is clearly mentioned or 'written' in the Torah and the Gospels'".
We stress: "clearly mentioned".
What is 100% sure is that Muhammad is not clearly mentioned in the Bible - one more error in that book. It also is symptomatic for Muslims that most translators of the Quran drop the word "clearly" - honesty is not always an essential part of Islam. (In this case they use an al-Taqiyya - a lawful lie - or a Kitman - a lawful half-truth - to make the error less visible. But this kind of lies frequently are no sin in Islam, especially not when you are promoting or defending the religion.)
But it tells something about Muslim scholars that they are able to do a lot of such "adjustments" - falsifications of what Allah and Muhammad and the Quran tell are clear and easy and correct texts, told and explained in detail by an omniscient god - without starting to ask questions. Just like it tells something about modern, well educated, Muslims who have got to see at least a large number of the errors, contradictions, etc., but are able to accept literally hundreds of "explanations away" in spite of what Allah(?) says about the quality of the texts, without starting to ask questions.
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
###001 2/42d: “- - - nor conceal the Truth when you know (what it is) (= not falsify the Bible*)”. The contents of this and the entrance above: This is said by Muslims aimed at the Jews who did not want to misunderstand 5 Mos. 18/15 (and 18/18) to mean that this verse foretells Muhammad - (translated from Swedish): “A prophet from among your own people, from your brothers, the Lord, your God, let come to you. Listen to him”. That means God is saying: “I will let a prophet come forth from among your brothers - - -”.Muslims say “brothers” here mean the Arabs, and that the Bible here talks about Muhammad. But very honestly: The brother of Jews is another Jew, especially as it is said he shall come “from among your own people” - the Jews’ own people. (We use the word Jew, because that is the normal word today, even if the word is much younger than the time of Moses. Also Yusuf Ali uses it). This simply may be foretelling about Jesus, but Muslims has “adjusted” the meaning.
That Moses with "brothers" meant fellow Jews, becomes even more clear when one knows that 5. Mos. is a long speech Moses made to and about his fellow Jews (see 5. Mos. 1/1), and that he during this speech used the word "brother/brothers" figuratively at least 29 places meaning their fellow Jews (+ 2 places meaning the descendants of Esau, to whom the Jews recognized relationship. It is here worth mentioning that in these two cases Esau's descendants were specified, and they are the only 2 places in that speech where it is not clear that Moses by the word "brothers" meant fellow Jews - and nowhere are Arabs said to be relatives of the Jews - nowhere in all the Bible). Several places Moses even uses the expression "brother Israelites".
Actually the word “brother” or similar is used in figurative meaning at least 99times in OT according to our last leafing through the Bible, nearly always meaning another Jew or other Jews (1 exception: A king talks to another king. A very few other exceptions: About Lot’s people and about Edomites - descendants of Esau, the brother of the patriarch Jacob), and absolutely never about Arabs. Arabs and Arabia are mentioned something like 15 times in the OT – without exception either in neutral forms or as enemies, never as friends or relatives (see further down). Worse – and never mentioned by Muslims: The word "brother" is used in the Quran at least 30 times, and always about fellow (Muslim) Arabs (one exception, where the main point is that the bad hypocrites stick together). There simply exists no place neither in the Bible nor in the Quran expressing brotherhood between Jews and Arabs (but many to the contrary). Besides 5. Mos. 15. and 18. continues into 21. (NEVER mentioned by Muslims) which explains that #######one will recognize the Lord’s prophet on that they make prophesies, and correct prophesies. Muhammad never made real prophesies – he did not even pretend to or claim to have that gift, not one single time in the entire Quran. Aishah also tells in the Hadiths (Al-Bukhari) that "the ones claiming Muhammad could foretell the future, were wrong". (He simply was no real prophet, but borrowed that imposing and impressive title.) On the contrary he was busy explaining away why he was unable to make miracles (prophesying is a kind of miracle - seeing the unseen (in the oldest times the name for a prophet even was "a seer")). Muhammad thus could not – also because of 5. Mos. 18/21. – be Yahweh’s promised prophet. And as he in reality was no prophet at all – he had as mentioned not that gift, and could neither be "a prophet like me (Moses*)" – nor could he be a special prophet as he in reality was no prophet (well, there are made other definitions for a prophet, but without being able to make true prophesies you are no real prophet), and the claim is out of the question.
It simply is a case of a word (brother) which is possible to give more than one meaning, and a religion in dire need from lack of proofs for their presumed god and their presumed prophet, and from sheer necessity because they falsely were promised to find proof or at least indications in the Bible, cling to a meaning which is not intended in the Bible, and foreign to the Bible’s normal use of the word, and then quote it out of context (f.x. 5. Mos. 18/21 even makes Muhammad impossible as an explanation here), but full of wishful thinking.
Also the word "Arabs" or similar is not at all mentioned in the 5 Books of Moses (except that he lived in Midian some years - - - and fought the Midianites a bit later - Midian is on the west of the Arabian peninsula, though Midianites also spread to parts of Sinai. (But NB~ one does not know for sure that the Midian of Moses was in Arabia - it may have been in Sudan. The Bible gives no information about this. But to go to Midian/Madyan in Arabia he had to cross the forbidding deserts in Sinai and then cross to Arabia, whereas to go to Sudan he just could go up the fertile Nile Valley.) But you can find the word "Arab" or similar at least these places in OT:
- 4. Mos. 31/2-10: (if you here read "Arabs") (enemies of the Jews).
- Judges 6/1: Midianites (if you here read "Arabs") (enemies of the Jews).
- Judges 6/11: Midianites (if you here read "Arabs") (enemies of the Jews).
- Judges 6/14: Midian's (if you here read "Arabs") (enemies of the Jews).
- Judges 6/16: Midianites (if you here read "Arabs") (enemies of the Jews).
- 1. Kings 10/15 (revenue to King Solomon).
- 2. Chr. 9/14 (revenue - tax? - to King Solomon.
- 2. Chr. 17/11 (tribute to King Jehoshaphat of Jerusalem).
- 2. Chr. 21/16 (enemies of the Jews).
- 2. Chr. 22/1 (enemies of the Jews).
- 2. Chr. 26/7 (enemies of the Jews).
- Neh. 2/19 (enemies of the Jews).
- Neh. 4/7 (enemies of the Jews).
- Neh. 6/1 (enemies of the Jews).
- Isaiah 13/20 (just mentioned - in a neutral way).
- Isaiah 21/13a (a prophesy against Arabia).
- Isaiah 21/13b (from the same prophesy as just above).
- Jer. 25/24 (must drink the cup of Yahweh's Wrath).
- Ez. 27/21 (made business with the city of Tyre).
- Ez. 30/5 (another prophesy against Arabia).
- Judges 8/24: Ishmaelites (if you here read "Arabs", but they likely were not) (neutral connection).
- Judges 8/24: Ishmaelites (if you here read "Arabs", but they likely were not) (enemies of the Jews).
- Psalms 83/6: Ishmaelites (if you here read "Arabs", but they likely were not) (enemies of the Jews).
All together 20 + 3 times if you include "Medianites", etc., (but not the Ishmaelites as thy according to the Bible lived too far from Arabia to be Arabs), always either in neutral words, in negative words or in strongly negative words (enemies). There nowhere any hint of friendship, not to mention brotherhood. As bad: Also in the Quran there are nowhere any words about brotherhood between Jews and Arabs.
To be complete: The word also is mentioned in NT - though no Arab or Arabia is mentioned in the Gospels - in Acts 2/11, Gal. 1/17 and Gal. 4/25, each time in neutral form. All together 3 time in NT (perhaps + 1-2 - se the next sentences) + 20 in OT = 23 places. And a small PS for completeness: Muslim sources claim that the word "nomad" in Jer. 3/2 really should have been translated "Arab" - in case a neutral mentioning. They also claim that the name "Kedar" in f.x. Song 1/5, Is. 60/7 = "Arab". Now Kedar was the second son of Ishmael (1. Chr. 1/29), who all lived near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18), so it is unlikely they were the forefathers of the Arabs (this even more so as Arabia was settled earlier - may be as early as 3ooo-4ooo BC (earlier along the coast - the Neolithic period there is reckoned from ca. 5ooo BC)) - if Ishmael ever lived, he lived around 1800 BC, and in case was just one of tens of thousands of forefathers) - but the descendants of Ishmael in case were enemies of the Jews (1. Mos. 25/18).
##Islam will have to produce strong proofs if they want anyone to believe that Moses meant Arabs and Muhammad in 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18. After all it is they who produce this unlikely claim, and then it is up to them to prove it – not up to others to disprove it. (But then Islam lives on unproved claims and statements and blind belief - demand proofs from a Muslim in a debate, and you often win the debate, because he has not one single real proofs about central claims - a lot of arguments, but not one of them based on real proofs when you debate central religious facts - or claimed facts).
To be blunt: The claim not true. One simply has carefully cherry-picked a couple of quotes, taken them out of context, omitted all the points in the texts proving the claims are wrong, and finally twisted the surrounding facts to make the quotes fit the answer Islam desperately - and the word is literally meant - needs, as the Quran as mentioned claims Muhammad is mentioned both in OT and in NT and he simply is not there, a fact they cannot afford to admit, because this will prove that things are much wrong with the Quran and thus with Islam. Muslims often claim that you cannot understand texts in the Quran unless you know all the Quran or at least all the relevant surahs. But they themselves frequently cherry-pick sentences, omit the contexts and texts proving the claimed meaning of the quotes wrong, and with some twisting get "strong" "evidence" for what they want to believe, is true.
*002 2/42e: “- - - nor conceal the Truth when you know (what it is)”. A bit ironic: The non-Muslims - here primarily the local Jews - shall tell the truth, whereas Muslims can use al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), deceit (because the good idol Muhammad used it), and even broken oaths (verse 2/225, 3/54, 5/89, 16/91,66/2). And doubly ironic as the Jews told the truth when they told what OT said - it was Muhammad who relied on incorrect apocryphal (made up) tales, legends and even fairy tales, and thus got on to a wrong track. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)
####003 2/76b: "- - - what Allah hath revealed to you - - -". This rather obscure sentence many Muslim scholar claims refer to the Islamic claim that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible, here likely referred to 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18 (and conveniently omitting f.x. 18/1-2 and 18/20-21). The Quran clearly states that Muhammad is mentioned on both the OT and in the Gospels (NT) and easy to find there, and then Islam HAS to find him there, because if not the Quran is wrong, and a book from a god cannot be wrong - so if there is a mistake, this proves it is not from a god.
What is absolutely sure, is that Muhammad is not easy to find anywhere in the Bible - he is nowhere openly mentioned. Then Islam has to look for him in hidden places, in spite of the Quran's claim that he is easy to find both in OT and in NT. And the most frequent claim in OT is 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18, where Moses in a speech to Jews tells them that once there shall come a prophet like himself "from among their brothers". It is clear from the context that he meant from among the Jews, but Islam - the religion of the truth and the religion which claims you cannot understand the Quran unless you see the verses in context - drops the contexts and claims: "The Arabs are the brothers of the Jews - this is about Muhammad!"
We may add that they also drop a few other facts:
- The word "brother" or similar is used figuratively far more than 300 times in the Bible (at least 351 times according to our latest leafing through the book), and not one of these in connection to Arabs - practically always about members of a closed group (mainly Jews in OT - a few times including their recognized relatives the Edomites - and mainly fellow Christians in NT, though in NT a few times meaning all humanity as potential Christians).
- Of these the word at least is used at least 99 times in OT (see below in this comment) - also here mainly about members of a closed group: The Jews, sometimes included the Edomites as mentioned just above - and not a word about Arabs in such connections. Except for 1 reference to Lot (Abraham talking to his nephew - a very closed group) and 6 references to Edomites, which the Jews reckoned to be (distant) relatives as they were descendants of Esau, brother of Jacob and son of Isaac and thus inside the extended group, there are 5 exceptions from the rule that "brother" is about Jews in OT: The nomad Jacob talking to some shepherds (a closed group as he too was a shepherd and intended to mean "good friends"), 3 cases of one king talking to a fellow king (a very closed group) where the word means "good friends", and the sons of Ishmael who after all at that time were so closely related to the sons of Isaac, that they made a closed group (this relationship later was dismissed by the Jews for several reasons, the main of which may have been the enmity the sons of Ishmael showed towards their relatives, but also the fact that they were 3/4 Egyptian - both Ishmael's mother, Hagar (1. Mos. 16/1), and his wife (1. Mos. 20/20) were from Egypt - and thus not Jews, not to forget they were outside the covenant Yahweh made with Isaac which were to be the lasting covenant with Yahweh (1. Mos. 21/12), and also not to forget the fact that they lived so far off - near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) - that the connection for natural reasons (strengthened by their enmity) was severed and forgotten. But not one word about the slightest relationship to Arabs - this even more so as it is highly unlikely the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael, as his descendants as mentioned settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) and not in Arabia. (Also science tells "it is practically sure Abraham never came to Mecca" - and then Ishmael had no connection there). In addition modern DNA science has shown that what we call Arabs, was - and is - not a coherent tribe, but a mixture of people from neighboring countries who drifted into Arabia and its desert and settled there when the domestication of the camel around 3ooo-2500 BC made life for humans possible there, and later on. Before that only a few tribes lived in the coastal areas and hardly any in the desert in inland Arabia. (The costal areas were settled in the same way may be around 7ooo BC). Plus there were f.x. all the females slaves who were forced to sex, and thus making children - and mixing up the blood even more.
- 5. Mos. is a speech Moses made to and about his fellow Jews, included some about their future. He used the words "brother/brothers" at least 31 times in his speech. With 2 exceptions (2/4 and 2/8) it is about members of the closed group the Jews - in spite of the wishful claims from Islam. Also the 2 exceptions are from a closed group including the Jews, but a somewhat extended one, as they include Edomites - descendants of Esau, the brother of Jacob (Esau also was called Edom). Esau was within the linage of the covenant which according to the Bible was promised by Yahweh, as he was the son of Isaac, through whom Yahweh according to the Bible said that linage should go (1. Mos. 21/12) and thus recognized as distant relatives of the Jews. Ishmael, from which the Arabs claim (most likely wrongly, as Ishmael and his descendants as mentioned settled near the border of Egypt and not in Arabia according to the Bible 1. Mos.25/18 - and in addition was outside this linage, and once more in addition placed themselves outside the group/family (1. Mos. 25/18)) they were and even more so became members of the outside. And not one word about the slightest relationship to Arabs in the entire speech or anywhere else in the whole Bible - and also nowhere in the Quran.. And not least: According to modern DNA tests Arabs are a mixed race - descendants of people drifting into the peninsula from all directions when it was settled + from millions of imported slaves from all around, included lots and lots from Africa.
- The word is used 3 times in 5. Mos. 18, the short chapter Islam takes its quotes from (verses 2, 15 and 18), each time clearly meaning "your fellow Jews" like nearly all the other places in his speech. Not one word about the slightest relationship to Arabs.
- Worse: Arabs and Arabia is mentioned something like 15 times (see below in this comment) in OT according to our latest leafing through the book. Without exception the connection is neutral or negative or even very negative (enemies) - not one single positive connection, not to mention any close relationship, let alone brotherhood.
- Even worse: The words "brother" "brethren", and "brothers" also are used figuratively at least 33 times in the Quran (see further down in this comment) - not one time linking Jews and Arabs. (There is one after a fashion exception: Hypocrites and Jews are linked - but that is something else). Also here the word is used within closed groups - like in the Bible. And not one word in all the Quran about Jews and Arabs being brothers. Not even a whisper.
- Worst: Moses in his speech said "a prophet like me". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet was a person who could see at least parts of the unseen, and thus a person who:
- Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
- Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
- Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
Besides: Even if we pretend Muhammad was a real prophet, he was extremely different from Moses.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for any person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said which did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens if it is nothing spectacular). But he did not guess the future correctly often - actually he statistically and according to the laws of probability should have "hit the mark" far more often by sheer chance than he did - there just are a few cases where Muslims will claim he foretold something correctly, and few if any of them are "perfect hits". But then the Quran makes it pretty clear that even though he was intelligent, he had little fantasy and that he also was nearly unable to make innovative thinking. (Nearly all his tales and his ideas in reality were "borrowed" ones - though often twisted to fit his new religion. Definitely not a problem any omniscient god would have had.)
The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, that he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2 above), and finally that both he and Islam said and says that Muhammad was unable to see the unseen (extra revealing here is that the old Biblical title for a prophet, was "a seer" - one who saw the unseen (see further down)) and also that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran” (prophesying is a kind of miracle - seeing what is hidden or has not yet happened). (This fact that Islam admits there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the revelation of the Quran" also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in the Hadiths, are made up stories). We also should add that his favorite wife (and infamous child wife) Aishah, according to Hadiths (f.x. Al-Bukhari) states that anyone saying Muhammad could foresee things, were wrong.
Verse 7/188b also is very relevant here: "If I (Muhammad*) had knowledge of the Unseen (= what is hidden and what has not happened yet*), I should have - - -". IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT MUHAMMAD DID NOT HAVE THE PROPHETS' ABILITY TO SEE "THE UNSEEN" - he was no real prophet.
Also relevant here is as said that the original title of the Jewish prophets was not "prophet", but "seer" - one who saw at least parts of the unseen. (F.x. 1. Sam. #9/9, 1. Sam. 9/11, 1. Sam. 9/18, 1. Sam. 9/19, 2. Kings. 17/13, 1. Chr. 9/22, 1. Chr. 26/28, 1. Chr. 29/29, 2. Chr. 9/29, 2. Chr. 16/7, 2. Chr.16/10, 2. Chr. 19/2, 2. Chr. 29/25, Amos 7/12, Mic. 3/7 - some places the two titles even are used side by side in transition periods). Muhammad thus so definitely was no seer - prophet - even according to his own words; he had no "knowledge of the unseen".
Many liked - and like - the title prophet, and there have been made other definitions for this title - the most common of these are "one who brings messages from a god", or "one who represents a god", or "one who acts/talks on behalf of a god". But the fact remains: Without being able to prophesy, he or she is no real prophet. A messenger for someone or something or himself - ok. An apostle - ok. But not a real prophet.
###This is a fact no Muslim will admit: Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet or seer. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why. It also is anybody's guess why he more often used the far less imposing title "Messenger" - a messenger boy is something far smaller than a prophet. Did he know or suspect that it was not true, and that explanations for the lack of prophesies from a self proclaimed prophet would be difficult to explain? Like the reason why he so seldom claims he is found in the Bible, may have been that he knew or suspected it was not true?
Besides: To belong in a special line of prophets, the teachings and the prophesies of course must be in line with the other prophets in that line, because a god follows a steady course and teaching (one of the proofs for that something is wrong with the Quran - Allah changes too much back and forth in his claimed teachings, and especially so if he had been identical to Yahweh: From rather harsh up to Jesus, then mild under the new covenant, then harsher, but reasonably mild under Muhammad in Mecca, and finally a full and partly immoral and unjust war god in Medina from ca. 622 - 624 AD when Muhammad started to need warriors to gain riches (mainly for bribes) and power). If not, one either belongs to another line - another god with another teaching/religion - or one simply is a false prophet (there have been many more false prophets than real ones through the times). Muhammad's religion was far from both the OT and even much further from NT, and in addition he was unable to make prophesies - even if he had been a prophet, he is far too far from the teaching of Yahweh and Yahweh’s Jewish prophets. He is not in that line of prophets and not speaking for the same god - too much is different. The Quran simply may be one of the many apocryphal - made up - manuscripts/books more or less loosely built on biblical traditions and "adjusted" to fit the religious teaching of sects more or less distant from the mother religion - the Quran in case is one of the more distant ones.
Also see 30/40h below.
The claim in reality is logical rubbish and taken far out of the context. But it is the only "real" claim they try to cling to (there are some others, but they are even more far out) - they have to, because if not the Quran is wrong and thus not from a god and Islam a made up religion. Also see the chapter "Muhammad in the Bible" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - https://www.1000mistakes.com - and 2/77a and 7/157e below.
If the Quran simply belongs among the apocryphal books, many things are easy to understand, and it at least belongs in that line and tradition, even if it is further "out" than most of the others. Muhammad also fits the picture of the leader of an apocryphal sect, admittedly more immoral and bloody than most of the others.
The word "brother", "brothers", "brotherhood" used figuratively in OT:
- 1. Mos. 13/8: Abraham said so to Lot, his nephew. A much closed group.
- 1. Mos. 25/18: Ishmael’s sons lived in hostility to "all their brothers". This may mean they fought each other or that they were hostile to the Jews - in both cases they at this time were members of a much closed group: Close relatives - Ishmael was the brother of Isaac. From the context we think the latter meaning is intended. But this relationship for several reasons over time drifted into nothing. It also is highly unlikely the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael, as the only somewhat reliable source about these - the Bible - tells they settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) and not in Arabia (not to mention in Mecca). Also science says "it is practically sure that Abraham never was in Mecca" - so Ishmael had no connection that way, too. And not least: Ishmael and his descendant were outside the covenant between the Jews and Yahweh - a covenant made to Isaac (1. Mos.21/12). At the time the Books of Moses were written - at least 1000 years before Muhammad - there also was no reason for the writer to place Ishmael and his sons a wrong place.
- 1. Mos. 29/4: Here in the meaning "dear friends" indicating peaceful intention. The nomad Jacob to some fellow shepherds.
- 3. Mos. 21/10: Fellow Jews - fellow priests even.
- 4. Mos. 20/3: Fellow Jews.
- 4. Mos. 20/14: Moses to the Edomites (= fellow descendants of Isaac and reckoned to be (distant) relatives of the Jews).
- 5. Mos. 1/16: Fellow Jews.
- 5. Mos. 1/16: Fellow Jews ("brother Israelites").
- 5. Mos. 1/28: Fellow Jews (the spies into Canaan).
- 5. Mos. 2/4: Edomites - fellow descendants of Isaac.
- 5. Mos. 2/8: Edomites - fellow descendants of Isaac.
- 5. Mos. 3.18: Fellow Jews ("brother Israelites").
- 5. Mos. 3/20: Fellow Jews.
- 5. Mos. 10/9: Fellow Jews - the 11 other tribes of Jews are the brothers of the Levites (12. tribe).
- 5. Mos. 15/2: Fellow Jew "- - - fellow Israelite or brother - - -" = fellow Jew = brother.
- 5. Mos. 15/7: Fellow Jews ("your (Jewish*) brothers").
- 5. Mos. 15/7: Fellow Jews ("your poor brother (Jew*)").
- 5. Mos. 15/9: Fellow Jews (your needy (Jewish*) brother).
- 5. Mos. 15/11: Fellow Jews.
- 5. Mos. 17/15: Fellow Jew (their king had to be "from among your own brothers" = a Jew).
- 5. Mos. 17/15: Fellow Jew (take no king who is not a Jew - "not a brother Israelite").
- 5. Mos. 18/2: Fellow Jews (Levites "shall have no inheritance among their brothers" - among the 11 other Jewish tribes).
- 5. Mos. 18/15: Fellow Jew ("a prophet like me (Moses*) from among your own brothers" - note the similarity of the expression with f.x. 17/15 and 18/2 - also see the texts of the two under 17/15).
- 5. Mos. 18/18: Fellow Jew ("a prophet like you (Moses*) from among their own brothers". Identical to 18/15, except here Yahweh is speaking.
- 5. Mos. 19/18: Fellow Jew - this is from Moses' speech to and about his Jews like all in 5. Mos.
- 5. Mos. 19/19: Fellow Jew - see 19/18 just above.
- 5. Mos. 20/8: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 22/1: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 22/2: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 22/3: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 22/4: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 23/7: Edomites - see 4.Mos 20/14 above.
- 5. Mos. 23/19: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 23/20: Fellow Jew ("a brother Israelite").
- 5. Mos. 24/7: Fellow Jew ("his brother Israelite").
- 5. Mos. 25/3: Fellow Jew.
- 5. Mos. 33/16: Fellow Jews ("Joseph" here means the tribe - actually the 2 half-tribes Manasseh and Ephraim - and thus figurative meaning).
- 5. Mos. 33/24: Fellow Jews - the other 11 Jewish tribes.
- Joshua 1/14: Fellow Jews - ahead of the other Jews.
- Joshua 1/14: Fellow Jews - help other Jews.
- Joshua 14/8: Fellow Jews - the other spies to Canaan.
- Joshua 22/3: Fellow Jews.
- Joshua 22/4: Fellow Jews.
- Joshua 22/7: Fellow Jews.
- Joshua 22/8: Fellow Jews.
- Judges 1/3: Fellow Jews (the tribe of Simonites were the "brothers" of the tribe of Judah.
- Judges 1/17: Fellow Jews - see Judges 1/3 just above.
- Judges 9/3: Fellow Jews - Abimelech was the "brother" of the people in Shechem.
- Judges 9/18: Fellow Jews - see Judges 9/3 just above.
- Judges 18/8: Fellow Jews - other members of the Jewish tribe Dan.
- Judges 18/14: Fellow Jews - see Judges 18/8 just above.
- Judges 20/23: Fellow Jews - Benjaminites were the brothers of the other 11 Jewish tribes.
- Judges 20/28: Fellow Jews - see Judges 20/23 just above.
- Judges 21/6: Fellow Jews - see Judges 20/23 above.
- 1. Sam. 30/23: Fellow Jews - David's men.
- 2. Sam. 1/26: Fellow Jew - a close Jewish friend of David.
- 2. Sam. 2/26: Fellow Jews.
- 2. Sam. 2/27: Fellow Jews.
- 2. Sam. 19/12: Fellow Jews.
- 2. Sam. 19/41: Fellow Jews - the Judah tribe was the brother of the other Jewish tribes.
- 2. Sam. 20/9: Fellow Jew.
- 1. Kings 9/13: An exception: Greetings between 2 kings - but a closed group: Kings.
- 1. Kings 12/24: Fellow Jews.
- 1. Kings 13/30: Fellow Jew.
- 1. Kings 20/32: Similar to 1. Kings 9/13.
- 1. Kings 20/32: Similar to 1. Kings 9/13.
- 1. Chr. 13/2: Fellow Jews.
- 1. Chr. 15/16: Fellow Jews - fellow Levites actually.
- 1. Chr. 15/17: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
- 1. Chr. 15/17: Fellow Jews - the Merarites of Levi.
- 1. Chr. 15/18: Fellow Jews.
- 1. Chr. 23/30: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
- 1. Chr. 24/31: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
- 1. Chr. 24/31: Fellow Jew (fellow Levite).
- 1. Chr. 28/2: Fellow Jews - David's men and underlings.
- 2. Chr. 11/4: Fellow Jews.
- 2. Chr. 19/10: Fellow Jews.
- 2. Chr. 29/15: Fellow Jews (fellow Levites).
- 2. Chr. 30/7: Fellow Jews.
- Ezra 3/8: Fellow Jews.
- Ezra 6/20: Fellow Jews (the priests).
- Ezra 7/18: Fellow Jews ("your brother Jews").
- Ezra 8/24: Fellow Jews.
- Nehemiah 5/1: Fellow Jews ("their Jewish brothers").
- Nehemiah 5/8: Fellow Jews ("our Jewish brothers").
- Nehemiah 5/8: Fellow Jews.
- Nehemiah 10/29: Fellow Jews.
- Nehemiah 13/13: Fellow Jews.
- Isaiah 66/5: Fellow Jews (must be Jews as believing in Yahweh, at least officially).
- Isaiah 66/20: Fellow Jews - bringing them from other countries they have lived.
- Jeremiah 7/15: Fellow Jews - from the Jewish tribe Ephraim.
- Jeremiah 22/18: Fellow Jews.
- Ezekiel 11/14: Fellow Jews - your brothers included all Israel.
- Hosea 2/1: Fellow Jews. 96 Amos 1/11: Edom (descendants of Esau - see 4. Mos. 20/14 above) will be punished for sins against Jews.
- Obadiah 1/12: Similar to Amos 1/11 just above.
- Micah 5/5: Fellow Jews.
- Zech. 10/14: Fellow Jews - Judah and Israel (the southern and the northern Jewish country).
There may be a few more. For one thing we may have overlooked one or a few, and for another there are a number of cases where it is not clear whether it is meant literary or figurative, and these cases we have omitted if we were not pretty sure it was meant figuratively.
Also worth noticing here is that the few times - f.x. only 2 in Moses' speech = 5. Mos. - when Jews are not intended, the intended group always is named or clearly indicated. No Arab is named or intended anywhere in his speech - or anywhere else neither in the Bible nor in the Quran in such connection.
Are anybody able to find Arab brothers of the Jews here? - especially when you know there are no such ones also in the Quran, and that the some 15 times Arabs and Arabia are mentioned in OT, they either are mentioned in neutral words, in negative words, or as enemies, and never as friends, not to mention close friends or relatives.
In the Quran the word "brother"/"brothers"/"brethren"/"brotherhood" is used figuratively at least these places:
- 2/220: Fellow Muslims (orphans).
- 3/103: Fellow Muslims.
- 3/156: Fellow non-Muslims.
- 3/168: Fellow Muslims (but some of them hypocrites).
- 5/106: Fellow Muslims.
- 7/65: Fellow members of the 'Ad tribe.
- 7/73: Fellow members of the Thamud tribe.
- 7/85: Fellow members of the Madyan tribe.
- 7/202: Fellow non-Muslims.
- 9/11: Fellow Muslims.
- 11/50: Fellow members of the 'Ad tribe.
- 11/61: Fellow members of the Thamud tribe.
- 11/84: Fellow members of the Madyan tribe.
- 15/47: Fellow Muslims in Paradise.
- 17/27: Spendthrifts = brothers of Satan.
- 21/92a: Fellow Muslims.
- 21/92b: Fellow Muslims.
- 26/106: Fellow members of Noah's tribe.
- 26/124: Fellow members of the 'Ad tribe.
- 26/142: Fellow members of the Thamud tribe.
- 26/161: Fellow members of "Lot's people" (he was not of them, but the rule all the same is valid as the Quran pretends he was).
- 27/45: Fellow member of the Thamud tribe.
- 29/26: Fellow member of the Madyan tribe.
- 33/5: Fellow Muslims.
- 33/6: Fellow Muslims.
- 33/18: Fellow Muslims - though hardly the strongest believers.
- 46/21: Fellow members of the 'Ad tribe.
- 49/10a: Fellow Muslims.
- 49/10b: Fellow Muslims.
- 49/12: Fellow Muslim.
- 50/13: See 26/161 above.
- 59/10: Fellow Muslims.
- 59/11: Hypocrites are the brothers of Jews and Christians.
Also in the Quran there are some cases where it is unclear whether the word is meant literally or figuratively. We have omitted the ones where we are not reasonably sure it is meant figuratively.
As you see it nearly always is talk of members of a closed group - like in the Bible. The only two exceptions are spendthrifts who are brothers of Satan/Iblis - impossible to read like "the Arabs are the brothers of the Jews" - and "hypocrites are the brothers of the Jews, the Christians and the Sabeans" ("the People of the Book") - also very difficult to read like "the Arabs are the brothers of the Jews".
To complete the lacking connection between "brother" and "Arabs":
The word "Arab" or similar is not at all mentioned in the 5 Books of Moses (except that he lived in Midian/Madyan some years - the Bible's Midian is on the Sinai peninsula ###or in Sudan). But you can find it at least these places in OT:
- Judges 6/1: Midianites (if you here read "Arabs") (enemies of the Jews).
- 1. Kings 10/15 (revenue to King Solomon).
- 2. Chr. 9/14 (revenue - tax? - to King Solomon).
- 2. Chr. 17/11 (tribute to King Jehoshaphat of Jerusalem).
- 2. Chr. 21/16 (enemies of the Jews).
- 2. Chr. 22/1 (enemies of the Jews).
- Neh. 2/19 (enemies of the Jews).
- Neh. 4/7 (enemies of the Jews).
- Neh. 6/1 (enemies of the Jews).
- Isaiah 13/20 (just mentioned - in a neutral way).
- Isaiah 21/13 (a prophesy against Arabia).
- Isaiah 21/14 (from the same prophesy against Arabia as just above).
- Jer. 25/24 (the kings of Arabia must drink the cup of Yahweh's Wrath).
- Ez. 27/21 (made business with the city of Tyre).
- Ez. 30/5 (another prophesy against Arabia).
All together 15 times, always either in neutral words, in negative words or in strongly negative words (enemies). There nowhere any hint of friendship, not to mention brotherhood. As bad: Also in the Quran there are nowhere any words about brotherhood between Jews and Arabs, as shown above.
####There only is one conclusion possible: The Arab brothers in Moses' speech to and about his fellow Jews, is a made up claim invented by Islam to save their "holy" book and their religion. To be right is more essential to Islam and its leaders, than to find out what is really the truth, and al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) is an ok means to use. This no matter what price all Muslims will have to pay if there is a next life and the Quran is a made up book and Islam thus a made up religion - and the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is from no god to say the least of it.
004 2/77a: "Know they not that Allah knoweth what they conceal and what they reveal?". This is a rather obscure verse, but Muslims frequently claim - but do not agree on - that it is about the old Islamic claim that Muhammad was mentioned in the Bible, but that the Jews and the Christians have falsified it or at other points refuse to see what they claim is the real, though obscure, meaning of some verses in the book. Once more the old facts:
- Islam has not one single valid proof for Allah - it does not exist, even though uneducated or dishonest Muslims often try to claim the opposite. Serious Muslim scholars admit this, though they normally do not tell their congregations.
- Islam has not one single valid proof for Muhammad's connection to a god - which is the likely reason why they cling so strongly to the claimed "miracles" connected to Muhammad in the Hadiths, even though the Quran very clearly proves Muhammad was not connected to any miracle (then friends and foes did not have to ask for proofs, and he himself did not have to explain away his/Allah's lack of miracles - even the learned scholars of Islam admits that "the only miracle connected to Muhammad, is the Quran". The lack of proof for his connection to a god, also is a main reason why Muslims reacts so strongly to skepticism to Muhammad - he is the weak link in Islam, and if this link is broken, Islam is a false religion. They thus cannot afford the slightest doubts about Muhammad or his integrity. After all for Islam belief is more essential than to find out if the belief may be true.
- Muslims feel dire need to find proofs for both Allah and for Muhammad's connection to a god. No matter how strong the belief, it is not the same as a proof.
- In addition the Quran in clear words tells that Muhammad is foretold both in OT and NT (7/157e), and then Muslims HAVE to find him no matter what or how - if not something is wrong with the Quran and hence with the religion.
- It is very clear that Muhammad is not openly mentioned anywhere in the Bible - not even Muslims claim that.
- Consequently they go searching for him hidden in the texts - and it is so urgent for them to find him, that wishful thinking is far more central than objectivity.
For more see the chapter "Muhammad in the Bible?" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.1000mistakes.com. Also see 2/76b above and 7/157e below..
005 3/70d: “Why do ye (mainly Jews*) reject the Signs of Allah, of which ye are (yourselves) witnesses?” They rejected the “Signs” – the teaching of Muhammad (the Quran as a book did not exist yet). The word “Sign” here may refer to two statements:
- Islam say Muhammad is foretold in the Bible, and especially refers to 5 Mos. 18/15 and 18/18. But the brother of a Jew is a Jew, not an Arab, and the Jews’ fellow countrymen also are Jews, not Arabs. Islam also never mention the next few verses – f.x. number 18/21 about real and false prophets, and where Muhammad do not qualify as a real prophet. See the chapter about “Muhammad in the Bible?” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". Wrong.
- The other claim here is that when Jesus talked to his disciples about a helper that should come to them, Muslims claim that this meant Muhammad, even though they have to twist their “explanation” not a little (they need at least one “foretelling” from GT and one from NT, because it is said that Muhammad is foretold in both) - and even though Muhammad was born 500 years after the disciples were dead, he should be the helper of the disciples of Jesus according to Islam! (Jesus was talking about The Holy Spirit which came to the disciples some days later at Pentecost (Acts 2/2-4)).
- The Quran refers to one or two learned Jews whom Islam claims accepted Mohammad as a prophet. (This may or may not be true). But it is in no way correct to say that “ye” (all or most of the Jews) did so. On the contrary – may be a thousand Jews were killed and murdered and many more made slaves or had to flee the area, because they refused to accept Islam as their religion. Wrong - there is a huge difference between one/a few and most/all.
See 7/157d+e below.
Islam only has produced claims and twisted logic for this – well, claim. They will have to produce documentation or proofs if they want to be believed by others than the brainwashed and the naïve. Similar claims in 2/42 – 2/101 – 2/146.
What was wrong with them, Muhammad told, was that they had distorted or thrown away parts of the OT (he claimed), so that it did not tell the same story as the Quran – which it, he claimed, surely had done when it was sent down from Allah (As mentioned no part of the Bible is “sent down”, except the 10 Commandments. It is all written by humans – may be inspired by god, but written by humans. What comes closest to having been “sent down” except for the 10 Commandments, are the laws of Moses, which the Bible tells Yahweh told to Moses, and Moses wrote them down later.) See 2/75b, 2/76b and 2/77a above, and especially 7/157d+e below.
Worse: Not even Islam has ever found a proof for that the Bible is falsified - not even a single point of proved falsification they have found in it (guess if they had referred to it if they had found anything!). Mistakes, yes, but no proved falsifications. The same goes for science: No proved falsification found.
#006 3/71i: "- - - while ye (the Jews in and around Medina*) have knowledge?" Just here Muhammad most likely refers to his claims that the Jews had falsified the Bible and that they knew that it was falsified. (Quite a claim by the way: He claimed that they believed in something they knew was a falsification!! - a psychological impossibility.)
Alternatively Muhammad here claims the Jews (and the Christians) knew he was mentioned in the Bible - a claim Muhammad did not repeat often, perhaps because he suspected or knew it was not true.
007 3/187d: "And remember Allah (Yahweh*) took a Covenant from the People of the Book (= Jews and Christians*), - - - but they threw it away - - -".
Many Muslims claim this in reality is about the claimed mentioning of Muhammad in the Bible. But so what, when there is no such mentioning and never was? It is very obvious that there is no clear mentioning of Muhammad there. Then Muslims make a number of claims about hidden references, but the cherry-picking of words and the twisting of meanings are too obvious and too wrong. See the chapter about the claims about Muhammad in the Bible in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" or in 7/157e below.
#######008 7/157d: “(Muhammad, whom they – the people of Moses*) ‘find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) – in the Law and the Gospel - - -‘“. The Law existed when Moses made this speech. But how could the people of Moses find the Gospels (remember that this is from a speech Moses made to his people some 1300 - 1335 years before Jesus was even born)? – the Gospels did not exist until some 1400 years later!! Another strong mistake and another strong contradiction.
EVEN THE VERY FACT THAT THE QURAN STATES THAT MUHAMMAD IS MENTIONED IN THE BIBLE - BOTH IN THE LAW (THE BOOKS OF MOSES) AND IN THE GOSPELS - IS ONE OF THE BIG PROBLEMS FOR ISLAM, BECAUSE HE IS NOT THERE. BECAUSE OF THIS THEY HAVE TO CHERRY-PICK WORDS AND TWIST CONTEXTS AND LOGIC TO "FIND" HIM - IF THEY DO NOT FIND HIM, THAT MEANS THE QURAN IS WRONG ON A VERY SERIOUS POINT, AND THEN THE BOOK CANNOT BE FROM A GOD, AS NO GOD MAKES THAT KIND OF MISTAKES. AND LIKE SO OFTEN FOR ISLAM THE MAIN THING IS NOT HONESTY, BUT TO "FIND" THE ANSWER THEY WANT.
Some Muslim writers try to cover up this blunder (that this was said to the people of Moses) by adding in brackets "(later on)". But for one thing this is not what the Quran says (another case where Islam admits there is a mistake in the Quran?). And for another: Even if it had been true that Moses meant "later on", the word "Gospel" had no meaning for his listeners, as no Gospel existed and the word as a name was meaningless to his followers. A clear case of trying to explaining away a logical and historical mistake.
Also beware that the expression "The Law of Moses" may be misleading. Moses according to the books got the laws in Sinai. Much later they were included in "the Books of Moses" when they were written, and therefore these books also often were called "the Law". It may well be these books Muhammad referred to. But in that case: The verses Muslim (wrongly) claim is about Muhammad (5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18) are not in the Law proper which are the only scriptures said to be written down then (the rest of the so-called "Books of Moses" are written some centuries later according to science), and could thus not have existed at the time of Moses.
There is a chance the Quran suddenly has changed subject - the book is of that quality. In this case we get 7/157e.
######AN ADDITIONAL POINT: The Arab word used here in the Quran is "Maktub" which literally means "written". In the Quran this word is used only in 7/157, and The Oxford Dictionary of Islam specifies the exact meaning of this verse like this: "Maktub (= Written). The term frequently carries the meaning 'decreed' or 'established'. Occurs once in the Quran at 7/157, #####a verse stating that Muhammad is clearly mentioned or 'written' in the Torah and the Gospels'".
What is 100% sure is that Muhammad is not clearly mentioned in the Bible - one more error in that book. ######It also is symptomatic for Muslims that most translators of the Quran drop the word "clearly" - honesty is not always an essential part of Islam. (In this case they use an al-Taqiyya - a lawful lie - or a Kitman - a lawful half-truth - to make the error less visible. But this kind of lies frequently are no sin in Islam, especially not when you are promoting or defending the religion.)
009 17/108b: "Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled!” This refers to Muhammad's claim that he is foretold in the Bible, according to Islam. As there is no foretelling about him there (see 7/157e above), this claim simply is wrong. (It also is a made up claim - even the Quran makes it clear that the Jews - there were few Christians around - did not believe him, and thus did not say things like this).
010 17/108c: “And they (Jews and Christians) say: “Glory to our Lord! Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled!” As for the likeliness that this is true, see 17/107a above. But Islam (in this case “The Message of the Quran”) tells that it may refer to all the mentioning of Muhammad in the Bible (of which we have found none that is not just wishful statements which are obviously wrong – see “Muhammad in the Bible?” in http://1000mistakes.com ), but that it most likely means joy for finally getting the Quran, which Allah had promised and now finally had sent. There is no reference to a promise of something like the Quran in the Bible, and Jews and Christians at all times did reckon the Quran to be so wrong and so distant from the Bible, that it was not even heresy. Verse 107 and 108 simply are fairy tales made up to back up Muhammad - a not unusual technique to use by emerging new sects or religions. It may be based on a few converts at that time, or free fantasy - dishonesty happens when new religions and sects are made. And later.
011 17/109: “They (Jews and Christians*) fall down on their faces in tears (when they hear the Quran*)”. As honest as 17/107 and 17/108 above - but then dishonesty is a part of Islam (f.x. al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie, Kitman - the lawful half-truth, etc., broken words/promises/oaths (if necessary against expiation), and betrayal/deceit all are accepted "if necessary" or "if it will give a better result").
This is one more of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran. Perhaps one or a very few did this, even though it is highly unlikely and not documented (except that a few converted to Islam, but not necessarily through tears), but "they" (= all or at least the majority) simply no.
#012 46/10d: (A46/12): "(This refers to*) 'a prophet like himself'". This is quoted from a speech Moses made to his fellow Jews. There are nearly identical quotes in 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18. Islam and Muslims claim the word "brothers" refers to Arabs, even though obviously the brother of a Jew is another Jew, even though the connections of the texts, the fact that OT nearly always meant other Jews when talking about the "brothers" of some Jews, the fact that Arabs and Jews never are named or indicated to be brothers neither in the Bible nor in the Quran, etc. - obviously a wrong claim judging from the contexts. See the text about "Samples of claims about Muhammad in the Bible" under 7/157e above. The claim is based on a strong need to find Muhammad in the Bible, as the Quran wrongly states he is foretold there, not on reality. But if Muslims do not find him there, the Quran is wrong once more, and Islam cannot afford mistakes in the Quran - it means that something is wrong with Islam. (Remember in addition that Muhammad in reality was no real prophet - he was unable to make prophesies. The claim is nonsense).
##########013 61/6f: “- - - (Jesus said: I am*) giving the Glad Tiding of a Messenger to come after Me, whose name shall be Ahmed (another form of the name Muhammad*) - - -”. This is quite a funny verse, as you meet Muslims who insist it is copied from the Bible. Worse: You find it quoted in books like it was from the Bible, without a word about the fact that it only is to be found in the Quran. There is not anything remotely like this in the Bible, and neither in the some 13ooo relevant scriptures or fragments found through the times older than 610 AD – included some 300 from the Gospels, and also not in the some 32ooo other relevant known manuscripts older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his preaching) with quotes from the Bible. #####It is only to be found in the Quran. #####Also you do not find a single case in OT where a prophesy about distant future mentions a clear name (sometimes title or something, but never a clear name). But here - o wonder! - is most conveniently the unmistakable name given - an Arab version of the name Muhammad even!
And it is worth remembering that it is quite common for makers of new sects or religions to connect themselves to a mother religion and bend that one some to fit one's purpose - or even high-jack (parts of) it. The founder of the Amaddijja-Muslims is really one of the latest examples, and Mormons tell Jesus visited America during his last days on earth. Such things give roots, credence and weight to a movement.
Jesus told his disciples that the Holy Spirit (also named the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Truth, the Spirit of the Lord, or only the Spirit, etc. – like Allah and like Muhammad it has more than one name) should come shortly - which it did. And he told he himself should return once upon a time “to judge the living and the dead“. But not a single word about any other - and not to mention one with a foreign name the Jews would question.
We know of one place where Muhammad is mentioned: In the Barnabas Gospel - a most apocryphal (made up) book - according to one of our sources it may even be written at the caliph’s court in Baghdad (not very strange if it then mentions Muhammad), but it also may be one of the many falsifications made by Muslims in Spain from around 800 AD on. You need to make up proofs only if you have no real ones. Muslims sometimes tell you this “gospel” is a real one.
But the standard explanation Muslims follow - without proofs: The Bible is falsified and names indicating Muhammad taken out by bad conspiracies - people in that area has a strong tendency to look for and believe in conspiracy theories (We have a private theory that the reason is that they never in their history have been used to relatively reliable information). But in that case:
- The life of the first Christians had been entirely different - and their time scale had been entirely different if any of them had heard about another prophet to be expected before the return of Jesus “to judge the living and the dead”. (They would know the return of Jesus would take much longer time than they now believed, to give the “prophet” time to work. They thought Jesus would be back in a short time - some years.)
- The contents of the NT had been different - not least the letters had been different. It simply is a fairy tale made up to strengthen Muhammad’s claim to be a prophet - like some other self-proclaimed prophets. (Rather ironic, as he did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies – he did not even claim or pretend he had it – he was no real prophet. A messenger for someone or something perhaps, but not a real prophet).
- The Muslims only back their claim on one Greek word used in the Bible: “parakletos” which means “helper” – Jesus before he left Earth, promised to send his disciples a helper – the Holy Spirit (which arrived some days later – at Whitsun - according to the Bible (a story that is not negated in the Quran)).
- Islam claims “parakletos” is a misspelling for another Greek word “periklytos”, which means “the highly praised”. In Aramaic “the highly praised” means “Mawhamana” of which the second part of that word as a verb is “hamida” (= to praise) and as a noun “hamd” (law or praise). If you then continue to Arab the names Muhammad and Ahmad (another version of the name Muhammad) both derives from “hamida” or “hamd” according to Islam. Which to Islam and all Muslims is a strong proof for that “parakletos” in reality is misspelled and means “Muhammad” in the Gospel after John (f. x. John 14/16). Not a very convincing proof to say the least of it – and in addition:
- The word “periklytos” that Islam claims is misspelled – the only possibility they have to get the answer they want and desperately need (they need it desperately, because the Quran clearly tells that Muhammad is foretold also in the NT - - - and he is not there) – does not exist at all in the Bible, not to mention in the NT. It is not used one single time.
- The word “periklytos” also is not found one single time in any of the some 13ooo relevant manuscripts and fragments science knows from before 610 AD. Neither in one single place or time, nor in one single of the many manuscripts.
- Worse: Neither is it found in any of the some 300 copies or fragments of Gospels older than 610 AD or in other manuscripts referring to the Gospels.
- Neither is it found in quotes from the Bible found in some 32ooo other old manuscripts.
- The word “periklytos” simply never was used in the old scriptures that became the Bible. The word that is used everywhere is “parakletos” – “helper” (and a helper was what the disciples needed). This goes for each and every known copy.
- Beside: How could it be possible to falsify – as Islam claims – the same word the same way in thousands and tens or hundreds of thousands of manuscripts – and how to find each and every “periklytos” in each and every of the many different manuscripts – spread over all those countries? – and on top of all: In a time with little travel and hardly any media. Islam has a tough job proving their claim – and remember: It is the ones making claims that have to prove them, not others to disprove it. This often is forgotten when Muslims throw loose claims and statements around.
- There also are huge numbers (some 32ooo) of non-religious manuscripts or fragments which refer to the Bible. Whenever this word pops up in those manuscripts it without exception is written "parakletos". Islam must explain how it was possible to find and to falsify all these papers, and not least how it was possible to erase the ink and write another word in such a way that it is impossible for modern science to find traces of falsifications.
- Arabs think it is logical that parakletos and periklytos may be mixed – in the old Arab alphabet and scriptures this just meant that someone had guessed the not written vowels wrong. But not so for Greek, as Greek already and a long time before had a complete alphabet where all letters were written. This kind of misspelling therefore is not logical in Greek.(NT was originally written in Greek.)
- Muslims try to explain that it could not be a question of the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit already was present. And the Holy Spirit was present or visited Jesus. But it was not part of the disciples – and that was what happened at Whitsun according to the Bible: They each got personal contact with the Spirit, and that is quite a change of a situation.
- Muslims also say that as two different names for the Spirit is used (the Spirit of Truth and the Holy Spirit (you actually also have the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of God (1. Mos. 1/2), the Spirit of the Lord, and only the Spirit)) it proves that John does not mean the Holy Spirit, when he uses the name “the Spirit of truth” – “the Spirit of truth” must mean the Muhammad that lies to his followers in the Quran (“miracles will make no-one believe”, f. x.) and advised his people to even break their oaths if that gave a better result. In addition to all the other wrong logic here, this claim is just as logical as to claim that the 99 names of Allah means there are 99 different gods, or the 200 or more names of Muhammad means there were 200 or more of him. The spirit simply is named by different names (at least 6) – and in addition it is absolutely clear that in the whole Bible there only is one spirit with a special connection to Yahweh.
- There only is one conclusion – the conclusion science has made long ago – possible to make in this: This Islamic claim – like many others – either is a lie (an al-Taqiyya?) or wishful thinking. And still “the raisin in the sausage” is not mentioned:
- Jesus promised his disciples a helper – a parakletos. If he had meant Muhammad, how could Muhammad be their helper when they were all dead 500 years before he was even born?? It simply is nonsense or wishful thinking.
- Further the spirit according to the same verses in the Bible that Muslims quote, could not be seen. Muhammad was not difficult to see.
- And another “raisin”: Also in the same verses it is said that the Spirit should be with them forever. Muhammad definitely was not with them forever – he was not even with them.
- Not to mention: How do you make Jews and Christians agree on how to falsify the Bible? - f.x. the foretelling about Messiah/Jesus? - and when did they do it? Muslims like to blame Nicaea, but for one thing the agenda for that meeting is well known, and "adjustments" of the Bible was not even mentioned (but some Muslims in 2009 or 2010 screamed that they could prove that 56 points (if we remember the number correctly) in the Bible had been changed at that meeting - the word "proofs" sometimes come easy to some Muslims), and as bad: There was not one single representative for the Mosaic (Jewish) religion present. (Besides the differences between the Bible and the Quran are so many and so fundamental, that 56 falsifications had been just a droplet in the Pacific.)
- In the thousands of manuscripts older than 610 AD - the first point of time when Christians - and also the Jews - could get a reason for such a falsification - how was it possible to erase the word parakletos with the primitive means of that time, and fill in the word periklytos instead, in such a way that modern science is unable to find physical traces from the erasing, unable to find chemical differences in the ink that was used, and unable to see any difference of the letters (all people written differently)?
- There only is one conclusion – the conclusion science has made long ago – possible to make is this: This Islamic claim – like many others – either is a lie (an al-Taqiyya?) or wishful thinking.
Wishful thinking? – or a bluff? – or a lie/al-Taqiyya? At least science long ago as mentioned has proved from the old manuscripts that it is not true – the Bible never was falsified on this point either. Worse: Islam has proved the same because they, too, have been unable to find such a proved falsification in spite of intensive searching. (But Islam HAS to find him somewhere there, if not the Quran is wrong on this for Islam very essential point - and then something is seriously wrong with Islam). Also see 7/157.
(We should mention that also the apocryphal (made up) “Gospel of Barnabas” sometimes still is used as an argument, because there Muhammad is clearly mentioned (no surprise if the theory that it is made at the court in Baghdad is correct. The same if it is one of the many Islamic forgeries from Spain from around 800 AD and somewhat later). The sorry fact, though, is that a made up gospel is a made up gospel (there are a number of them) – and it tells something about Islam’s lack of arguments that they continue to insist that may be it is not made up, and therefore is a proof for Muhammad, when science is unanimous: It is one of the false ones. The only thing the “Gospel of Barnabas” in reality proves, is that Islam has no real documentation for their claim that Muhammad is mentioned in the NT, as they have to resort to this kind of argumentation).
But the most solid proof for that the Bible is not falsified, comes from Islam itself. If they had found one single solid proof for falsification of the Bible among all the many thousands of old manuscripts that exist, THEY HAD SCREAMED TO HOLY HEAVEN ABOUT IT – and no-one has till now heard such a scream – not even after 1400 years!!!.Sub-total Chapter 33 = 13 + 3.241 = 3.254.
>>> Go to Next Chapter
>>> Go to Previous Chapter
This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".