What dose the bible say about Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)

[Dr. Zakir Naik]

My question is, that what dose the bible prophecise about the comming of Prophet Muhammad(SAWM)?

[HughDP]

Sorry ... duplicated this somehow ... not sure what happened.

[Tilia]

Sorry ... duplicated this somehow ... not sure what happened.

Just edit it out.

[Dr. Zakir Naik]

So the Bible says that a/the prophet/Prophet is to be one of the Israelites' brothers. The Mohammedans say that Muhammad fits the description, even though he was not an Israelite. Now we have a fellow here who thinks that is worth mentioning. Or rather, says that it is worth mentioning. Perhaps he is hoping that everyone here has severe brain damage, or is only two years old if not.

But perhaps it is worth mentioning, to show how seriously the world should take these wretched people. But for their cowardly bombs, surely nobody of intelligence would.

The following post is not meant to hurt the feelings of any Christian Brother or Sister. Tilia, since he has written a few things about Prophet Muhammad, and is actively participating in the debate, so I don’t have to be very liberal with him, but for others, I apologize in advance.

Point # 1: Read the post before you post. All your illogical arguments are already answered there.

Point # 2:

So the Bible says that a/the prophet/Prophet is to be one of the Israelites' brothers.

WHERE DOSE THE BIBLE SAY THIS?!? You’re assuming it your self. Like your ancestors, you’re putting your own words in the Bible.

Point # 3:

Perhaps he is hoping that everyone here has severe brain damage, or is only two years old if not.

Its not I who is hoping so, its you who has believed so. The fastest spreading religion on the face of the earth is Islam. The fastest growing religion in America is Islam. The fastest growing religion in UK is Islam. Overall, in the whole world, the fastest growing religion is Islam. You think all those accepting it have a brain damage?

Or do you think people who are following bible have a brain damage?

The bible which tells them to:

To eat SH*IT and drink PISS. 2 KINGS 18:27 and ISAIAH 36:12.
To eat cake with SH*IT. EZEKIEL 4:12-15

And to believe and learn stuff like:

A TALKING ass. NUMBERS 22:27-28
FOUR footed fowls. LEVITICUS 11:20
Birth of females a DOUBLE pollution (In the sight of those who are most active in fighting for women rights?!?) LEVITICUS 12:1,2,5
Shamgar KILLS 600 with an ox goad JUDGES 3:31
Samson KILLS A THOUSAND with the jaw bone of a donkey. JUDGES 15:15-16
A SEVEN HEADED leopard REVELATION 13:1-2
David SLEEPS with a young virgin l KINGS 1 1:1,3
The uncircumcised to be "CUT OFF" (to be killed). GENESIS 17:14

A hissing God ISAIAH 5:26, 7: 18, ZECHARIA 10:8
A "roaring" God ISAIAH 42:13, JEREMIAH 25:30
A "barber" God ISAIAH 7:20
A God "riding" a cherub 2 SAMUEL 22:11
A God murders 50,070 for looking into a box SAMUEL 6:19

Hmmm, is that why so many Christians are becoming (or behaving as) atheists?

Or to learn tactics of Raping their own family members?

" . . he took hold of her (Thamar, his sister, not to be confused with Tamar in "c" above,, and said unto her, Come lie with me (have sex with me), my sister. "And she answered him, Nay, my brother (Amnon, one of the sons of David, the man after God's own heart) do not force me . . . "But he would not listen to her, and since he was stronger than she was, he overpowered her and RAPED her (his sister). " 2 Samuel 13:5-14

"That night they (both the daughters of Lot) gave him (their father Lot) wine to drink and the older daughter had INTERCOURSE with him ... "The next day the older daughter said to her sister, I slept with him last night. now let's get him drunk again tonight, and you sleep with him. Then each of us will have a child by our father. So that night they got him drunk and the younger daughter had INTERCOURSE with him ... "In this way both of Lot's daughters became PREGNANT by their father. " GENESIS 19:33-35 (From the "Good News Bible- In Today's English").

So they set up a tent for Absalom (another son of King David) on the palace roof, and in the sight of everyone, Absalom went in and had INTERCOURSE with his father's concubines " 2 SAMUELS 16:22



Or a person who reads such words in his religious scripture:

"The BAST*ARD shall not enter the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation . . . DEUTERONOMY 23:2
And a BAST*ARD shall dwell in Ashdod . .ZECHARIAH 9:6"
But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then ye are BASTARDS and not sons. " HERREWS 12:8


Don’t you think the brain damaged is a person who still follows the scripture which has contradictions such as:

Two separate lists of the ancestors of Jesus (PBUH); a. Matthew 1:1-16 and b. Luke 3:23-38. These two lists consisting of sixty-six names, there is only one name which is common to both and that is of Joseph the carpenter, and he should never have been mentioned since he was never responsible for the conception of Jesus (pbuh).

"For God is NOT the author of confusion . ." I CORINTHIANS 14:33
" . . I make peace, and CREATE EVIL . . ." ISAIAH 45:7


Is that mentally normal person in your sight??

Can he not see that the entire world’s religious scriptures are pointing towards following no one but Prophet Muhammad (SAWM)?

"Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem."

MUHUMMED (PBUH) MENTIONED BY NAME IN THE BIBLE: "his mouth is most sweet: yea, he is (Muhummed-im) altogether lovely, this is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem. SONG OF SOLOMON 5:16

(From the original Hebrew manuscript the word "MUHUMMEDIM", is translated as "altogether lovely' which is actually the word MUHUMMED with "im" added. "IM" is the plural of respect in the Hebrew language, If you translate ‘All together lovely’ into Arabic, it means “MUHAMMAD!!”)

Now, can you still believe a person following Christianity is yet a normal person?!?

Did I make my self clear?

[Dr. Zakir Naik]

Doctor. I have read your post (a few times) and it is quite comprehensive, but I think you've missed my point.

Brother, that point you’re talking about is irrelevant.

I am not a Christian; nor am I a Muslim. My point is this: for every point an Islamic scholar raises, an equally versed Christian scholar (and that isn't me) will find a way to refute it. Likewise, for every point a Christian scholar raises, an equally scholarly Muslim can find a way to repute it.

But you’ve seen this in practice right now, you posted Christian scholar’s reply in this thread, and you saw how illogical they were in front of a Muslims’ reply? I’m not a scholar brother, I’m just a student of comparative religion.

The last line you wrote, that an equally scholarly reason is found by the scholar of the opposite religion, I cannot agree with that. The reason most people are not converting to Islam is not that they don’t have a scholarly explanation, but the reason is that they are being brainwashed about Islam again and again by the Media. You see BBC, CNN, all the time speaking about things that don’t even exist.

Islam is without doubt the best religion but the media is in the hands of the westerners who are afraid of Islam. The media is continuously broadcasting and printing information against Islam. They either provide misinformation about Islam, misquote Islam or project a point out of proportion, if any.

When any bomb blasts take place anywhere, the first people to be accused without proof are invariably the Muslims. This appears as headlines in the news. Later, when they find that non-Muslims were responsible, it appears as insignificant news’ item.

If a 50 year old Muslim marries a 15 year old girl after taking her permission, her parent’s permission, it appears on the front page but when a 50 year old non-Muslim rapes a 6 year old girl, it may appear in the news in the inside pages as ‘Newsbriefs’. Everyday in America on an average 2,713 cases of rape take place but it doesn’t appear in the news, since it has become a way of life for the Americans.

I am aware that there are some Muslims who are dishonest, unreliable, who cheat, etc. but the media projects this as though only Muslims are involved in such activities. There are black sheep in every community. I know Muslims who are alcoholics and who can drink most of the non-Muslims under the table.

Inspite of all the black sheep in the Muslim community, Muslims taken on the whole, yet form the best community in the world. We are the biggest community of tee-tattlers as a whole, i.e. those who don’t imbibe alcohol. Collectively, we are a community which gives the maximum charity in the world. There is not a single person in the world who can even show a candle to the Muslims where modesty is concerned; where sobriety is concerned; where human values and ethics are concerned.

If you want to judge how good is the latest model of the "Mercedes" car and a person who does not know how to drive sits at the steering wheel and bangs up the car, who will you blame? The car or the driver? But naturally, the driver. To analyze how good the car is, a person should not look at the driver but see the ability and features of the car. How fast is it, what is its average fuel consumption, what are the safety measures, etc. Even if I agree for the sake of argument that the Muslims are bad, we can’t judge Islam by its followers? If you want to judge how good Islam is then judge it according to its authentic sources, i.e. the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith.

If you practically want to check how good a car is put an expert driver behind the steering wheel. Similarly the best and the most exemplary follower of Islam by whom you can check how good Islam is, is the last and final messenger of God, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Besides Muslims, there are several honest and unbiased non-Muslim historians who have acclaimed that prophet Muhammad was the best human being. According to Michael H. Hart who wrote the book, ‘The Hundred Most Influential Men in History’, the topmost position, i.e. the number one position goes to the beloved prophet of Islam, Muhammad (pbuh). There are several such examples of non-Muslims paying great tributes to the prophet, like Thomas Carlyle, La-Martine, etc.

To me, Nostradamus' books are just as valid in terms of prohecies as the Bible or the Qu'ran, but - as I said - I'm neither Muslim nor Christian, so those religious texts mean little to me beyond academic interest in such influential literature.

His books are merely based on prophesizing by the use of Theory of Probability; this is why they are not called the word of God.

There must be some prophecies in the bible which have fulfilled. There are possibilities why not? But what about the unscientific portion, what about the unfulfilled ones, can we attribute them to God?

Indeed, it's 20 years since I read the Bible in its entirety and I've never read anything but extracts from the Qu'ran.

And I think I know which extracts you might be talking about.

In brief, I'm challanging every person on this website, to bring me a SINGLE verse from the Qur'an which you feel is un humanic! A one single verse.

The verses you might have read in some anti-Islamic book (which are being printed at perhaps a thousand books per day) are explained. Perhaps you've read Arun Shuri's book? Brother, all the quotations you might have read from the Qur'aan are listed in Arun Shourie's books as he has written so many books against Islam. If you read the latest book on the world of Fatwas, Shariah in action, latest book. It was released in Bombay just a week ago I feel. Just a few days ago and I was able to read that book and there if you read the book cover on the book cover he has given a beautiful name of a certain arabic quotation of the Qur'an which was from: Ch. 48, Surah Fatah, Verse No. 29 (The one you may think is wrong), which says Muhammad (Peace be upon him) is the messenger of Allah and those who follow him are firm and unyielding, are uncompassionate towards the believers but have love between the believers full stop. Full stop where there is no full stop again quoting out of context giving the impression that Muslims, we are merciless against the unbelievers. He is quoting out of context. If you read the context it starts from Surah Fatah, Ch. No. 48, Verse No. 25, which says that: 'Those unbelievers were the ones who did not agree with the revelation of the Qur'an and they prevented you from entering the sacred mosque and prevented you from sacrificing the animals and prevented you from reaching the place of sacrifice'. These
unbelievers prevented the Muslims from performing the pilgrimage, I want to know that suppose any Christian is prevented from entering the Vatican city will he love that person? Will he embrace him? But natural he will not like the person. If suppose a Hindu is prevented from entering the place of his pilgrimage, Banaras will he like it?
No! The same way if you read in context it says that those people who prevented you from entering Makkah, the sacred mosque and prevented you from sacrificing the animal you have to be firm with them and love those people who are the believers.

Quoting out of context and in that book as I told you if you read on page no. 571 and page no. 572, he quotes his favorite verse, very favorite, his pet verse of Surah Tauba, Ch. No. 9, Verse No. 5 (The one you might call as 'unjust'), which says that after the four forbidden months have passed seize the unbeliever in brackets indicating seize the Hindus seize the unbelievers and slay them but if they give charity if they pray then let them go indicating that every Muslim whenever he finds a Hindu slay him kill him but if he accepts Islam let him go. Again he is quoting out of context. The context is from Surah Tauba, Ch. No. 9, Verse No. 1. There was a peace treaty between the pagans of Mecca and the Muslims. This treaty was unilaterally
broken by the pagans so Allah gives a warning. Put things straight in four months or a declaration of war. And during war it says that during war when you fight when you find these unbelievers who have broken the peace treaty seize them and kill them. Suppose the president of America says to the soldiers of American to the American
soldiers that during the war between Vietnam and America where ever you find a Vietnamese kill him it will if I quote that today and say that the American president said... 'Kill the Vietnamese where ever you find him'. It will sound that he is a butcher I am quoting out of context. In context but natural the leader of the army or the president will always say that when the enemy comes do not get scared fight. It boosts up the morale. So what is wrong if Qur'an says that.

And then on page no. 572 from Verse No. 5, he jumps to Verse No. 7, 8, 9. Verse No. 6 is skipped. You know why? Verse No. 6, gives the answer. It says that if any of these pagan if any of these mushriks, these unbelievers, if they ask for asylum give it to them so that they will hear the word of Allah (SWT) and escort them to safety.. Qur'an does not say give them asylum, do not let them go. Qur'an says escort them to a place of safety. These mushriks even though they do not accept Islam if they want asylum, do not just leave them escort them to a place of safety which army general will say that when the enemy wants if he wants to leave escort him to a place of safety. Which army? I want to know which general of any army today will say that if the enemy wants peace do not leave him, escort him to safety. This is what the Qur'an says, quoting out of context! His favorite topic, that Muslims are merciless, out of context, all verses out of context.

And his second favorite topic and these verses similarly. These verses were also quoted by people like Taslima Nasreen. People ask me why do not I have a debate with Arun Shourie. I had a debate on the topic of Taslima Nasreen organised by the Bombay Union of Journalists. Press debate, organised by them and in that debate when I told them, I want to video record the debate, the Bombay Union of Journalists did not give me the permission. And you know what was the topic! The topic was
'Is Religious Fundamentalism a Stumbling block to the Freedom of Expression'. Talking about freedom of expression but hypocrites they do not allow me to tape, why?. I promised them, I will give you an unedited copy of that cassette to view, they did not allow me. After a lot of pressure, finally they allowed it and you know what happened? By the grace of Allah (SWT) all the people were out at making Islam
the scapegoat, making Waqqas a scapegoat, with help of Allah Alhamdulillah, it was not my genius, it was his help that the debate was a very successful one, so successful. So successful that not a single paper reported. Not a single paper! In that debate from the Christian side was Fr. Periera, from the Hindu side was Dr. Vedyas, from the Islamic side I was there and there was Mr. Ashok Shahane who translated the book 'Lajja' into Marathi. The topic was Taslima Nasreen. If this cassette was not there who would have known about it? Today Hundreds of Thousands of people have seen it not only in Bombay, throughout the world Hundred Thousands. If this thing was not recorded who would have known about it? And his second topic about women Arun Shourie. All the answers are given in the Post 'Women's rights in Islam - Modernizing or Outdated'. It clarifies most of the misconceptions that people including Arun Shourie have about this.. Regarding some people, who say that would I like to have a debate? Is he worth debating? Is he worth debating? He is not worth debating and if he wishes, he can come for debate. I am all games Ahlan wasahlan. Ahlan wasahlan but in public. . I will debate in public with a live video recording in public not just in a closed room.

[Tilia]

Point # 2:

So the Bible says that a/the prophet/Prophet is to be one of the Israelites' brothers.

WHERE DOSE THE BIBLE SAY THIS?!?

In the verse you quoted, twice. Can you not even read properly, 'Doctor'?

Now do you have any sensible claims for prophecy of Muhammad in the Bible? That is the thread topic, is it not? Why don't you get and stay on topic; or would that cramp your style beyond endurance?

If not, why don't you stop insulting the intelligence of people here, and take up a more socially acceptable pastime?

[HughDP]

Doctor. I have read your post (a few times) and it is quite comprehensive, but I think you've missed my point.

Brother, that point you’re talking about is irrelevant.

To you maybe, but not to me. The beauty of freedom is being able to choose what we do and don't consider relevant in matters of faith. I make my choices and you make yours.

I am not a Christian; nor am I a Muslim. My point is this: for every point an Islamic scholar raises, an equally versed Christian scholar (and that isn't me) will find a way to refute it. Likewise, for every point a Christian scholar raises, an equally scholarly Muslim can find a way to repute it.

But you’ve seen this in practice right now, you posted Christian scholar’s reply in this thread, and you saw how illogical they were in front of a Muslims’ reply?

I disagree. I saw nothing more logical or illogical about one reply over another - merely different interpretations. Get a devout scholarly Christian and a devout scholarly Muslim to debate these issues and the chance of agreement is very, very slim indeed. Both will believe they're right and both will believe their views represent some ultimate truth.

The last line you wrote, that an equally scholarly reason is found by the scholar of the opposite religion, I cannot agree with that. The reason most people are not converting to Islam is not that they don’t have a scholarly explanation, but the reason is that they are being brainwashed about Islam again and again by the Media. You see BBC, CNN, all the time speaking about things that don’t even exist.

This smacks of arrogance to me. Your making out that somehow only you and other Muslims have the intelligence to cut through media hype and ascertain things for themselves.

Islam is without doubt the best religion

In your opinion.

but the media is in the hands of the westerners who are afraid of Islam. The media is continuously broadcasting and printing information against Islam. They either provide misinformation about Islam, misquote Islam or project a point out of proportion, if any.

Well personally I have no fear of Islam nor any other religion.

When any bomb blasts take place anywhere, the first people to be accused without proof are invariably the Muslims. This appears as headlines in the news. Later, when they find that non-Muslims were responsible, it appears as insignificant news’ item.

You don't have to tell me that. I don't blame the Islamic faith for terrorist acts commited either in its name or by its practicioners. I blame individuals, whatever their faith or culture.

If a 50 year old Muslim marries a 15 year old girl after taking her permission, her parent’s permission, it appears on the front page but when a 50 year old non-Muslim rapes a 6 year old girl, it may appear in the news in the inside pages as ‘Newsbriefs’. Everyday in America on an average 2,713 cases of rape take place but it doesn’t appear in the news, since it has become a way of life for the Americans.

Well, speaking personally, I've seen lots of cases of rape in the (UK) press recently and none have involved Muslims.

As I said though, I would try not to judge people on anything but their individual characteristics wherever I can.

I am aware that there are some Muslims who are dishonest, unreliable, who cheat, etc. but the media projects this as though only Muslims are involved in such activities. There are black sheep in every community. I know Muslims who are alcoholics and who can drink most of the non-Muslims under the table.

Quite. There is a good and bad in every society, race and faith.

Inspite of all the black sheep in the Muslim community, Muslims taken on the whole, yet form the best community in the world. We are the biggest community of tee-tattlers as a whole, i.e. those who don’t imbibe alcohol. Collectively, we are a community which gives the maximum charity in the world. There is not a single person in the world who can even show a candle to the Muslims where modesty is concerned; where sobriety is concerned; where human values and ethics are concerned.

I disagree.

If you want to judge how good is the latest model of the "Mercedes" car and a person who does not know how to drive sits at the steering wheel and bangs up the car, who will you blame? The car or the driver? But naturally, the driver. To analyze how good the car is, a person should not look at the driver but see the ability and features of the car. How fast is it, what is its average fuel consumption, what are the safety measures, etc. Even if I agree for the sake of argument that the Muslims are bad, we can’t judge Islam by its followers? If you want to judge how good Islam is then judge it according to its authentic sources, i.e. the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith.

I don't want to 'judge' Islam at all. It simply 'is' as far as I'm concerned. I'm happy to debate issues where I'm able to (for the purposes of learning or interest) but I don't want to 'judge' it.

If you practically want to check how good a car is put an expert driver behind the steering wheel. Similarly the best and the most exemplary follower of Islam by whom you can check how good Islam is, is the last and final messenger of God, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Besides Muslims, there are several honest and unbiased non-Muslim historians who have acclaimed that prophet Muhammad was the best human being.

I'm sure there are several honest and unbiased non-Christian historians who have acclaimed that Jesus was the best human being too.

According to Michael H. Hart who wrote the book, ‘The Hundred Most Influential Men in History’, the topmost position, i.e. the number one position goes to the beloved prophet of Islam, Muhammad (pbuh). There are several such examples of non-Muslims paying great tributes to the prophet, like Thomas Carlyle, La-Martine, etc.

So?

To me, Nostradamus' books are just as valid in terms of prohecies as the Bible or the Qu'ran, but - as I said - I'm neither Muslim nor Christian, so those religious texts mean little to me beyond academic interest in such influential literature.

His books are merely based on prophesizing by the use of Theory of Probability; this is why they are not called the word of God.

But if I don't believe in God, I can't believe in 'The Word of God' can I?

There must be some prophecies in the bible which have fulfilled. There are possibilities why not? But what about the unscientific portion, what about the unfulfilled ones, can we attribute them to God?

Indeed, it's 20 years since I read the Bible in its entirety and I've never read anything but extracts from the Qu'ran.

And I think I know which extracts you might be talking about.

In brief, I'm challanging every person on this website, to bring me a SINGLE verse from the Qur'an which you feel is un humanic! A one single verse.

The verses you might have read in some anti-Islamic book (which are being printed at perhaps a thousand books per day) are explained.

I think I can make my own mind up whether or not a source has some particular stance on or agenda relating to its subject matter.

Perhaps you've read Arun Shuri's book? .... etc.

I know there are books out there that provide both pro and anti views on all religions. It is up to each of us to make up our own minds about what we agree with and what we don't.

[Tilia]

do you think people who are following bible have a brain damage?

I think that anyone who reckons the Bible is riddled with errors and even immoralities, but then tries to prove that Mumammad is prophesied in it, either needs urgent brain surgery, or deserves beating to death.

[Tilia]

MUHUMMED (PBUH) MENTIONED BY NAME IN THE BIBLE: "his mouth is most sweet: yea, he is (Muhummed-im) altogether lovely, this is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem. SONG OF SOLOMON 5:16

(From the original Hebrew manuscript the word "MUHUMMEDIM", is translated as "altogether lovely' which is actually the word MUHUMMED with "im" added. "IM" is the plural of respect in the Hebrew language

That is nonsense. The suffix 'iym' simply signifies plurality, not respect. What greedy little inventors are Mohammedans!

The plural is sometimes used as an intensifier, so 'mamtaq' is 'sweet', but 'mamtaqiym' can be either 'sweetnesses' or 'very sweet'- or maybe both. The context allows for either, or both (and since this applies to Christ alone, it means both!) Similarly for 'machmad', which means either 'desirable' or 'desirable thing', so 'machmadiym' means 'very desirable' or 'desirable things'. So the (wonderfully poetic) saying may be translated:

Chikow mamtaqiym, wakulow machmadiym.
His mouth (is) very sweet, full of desirable things. or
His mouth (is) sweetnesses, all of them very desirable.

which bears similarity to Psalm 119:103:

'How sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth!'

[McCulloch]

Moderator Intervention

I think that anyone who reckons the Bible is riddled with errors and even immoralities, but then tries to prove that Mumammad is prophesied in it, either needs urgent brain surgery, or deserves beating to death.

... What greedy little inventors are Mohammedans!

Tilia, You could have found a more civil and respectful way to have made your point.

[Tilia]

Now, can you still believe a person following Christianity is yet a normal person?!?

Did I make my self clear?

Definitely. Mind out for moderators, though.