A Response to the paper:
Did Jesus and Isaiah prohesy the coming of Muhammad?
In order to understand the prophecies made by the Lord Jesus Christ
on the subject of the comforter that he proclaims to follow him
(John 14:15-31, 16:1-6), a fair and correct interpretation can only
be obtained by noting similar references made with regards to this
prophecy in the Bible. It is therefore amazing that our Muslim
apologists such as Mr Meherally tend to gloss over biblical
references which claim the fulfilment of the aforementioned
prophecies of the Paraclete. Acts 1:7-9 and most notably the
fulfilment Acts 2:1-4, 2:33, John 20:22, this reference allows for
no other interpretation than that of the Holy Spirit being the
Paraclete (or comforter) mentioned by Jesus, any conjectures and
twists of the Bible which suggest that these references concern
Muhammad are therefore a pointless exercise.
From a Christian position there is no more cause for debate on this
subject. We must then assume an Islamic position for this claim and
consider the evidences that the Muslims bring forward to suggest
that Muhammad was to follow Jesus and why indeed are Muslims so
interested in the Biblical prophecies in John 14 & 16.
In order to answer the last point, we need to consider an important
verse in the Quran
"Those who follow the Apostle, the unlettered Prophet whom
they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) in the Law
and the Gospel." Surah 7:157 [2]
Islam claims to be the final and perfected religion that supersedes
both Judaism and Christianity and so naturally follows on from these
religions and this verse makes this point clear that both the Law or
Taurat (Old Testament in the Christian Scriptures) and Gospel or
Injil (New Testament in the Christian Scriptures) will bear witness
to the primacy of the 'apostle' Muhammad and therefore the religion
of Islam. The claim here is a very important one, the authority that
Muhammad has been given is that he is continuing God's revealed plan,
and that his claim to be a messenger of God is not based purely upon
his own claims. It is no great surprise therefore that Muslim writers
such as Mr Meherally search the Christian Scriptures in order to find
these alleged predictions.
The central issue here for the writing of the paper can now be turned
on it's head, rather than a Da'wah (outreach/invitation) to the
Christians, Mr Meherally is now stating the case for it's defence as
to whether Islam is a continuation of God's revelation to the
Christians and the Jews or whether "nearly 1.2 billion Muslims" [1]
are following the claims based on the authority of the new teaching
of a single man.
Now let us consider the evidences that Mr Meherally proposes.
The first point made was with regards to the following scripture
"And I will ask the Father and he will give you another
Counsellor, to be with you forever" John 14:16
Meherally suggests that the use of the literal translation of the
ending would be "to be with you into the age". I am not a scholar of
Greek and would accept the statement, but Meherally does not give a
reason for making this point, so whatever argument there is, is not
made clear and so cannot be addressed. One factor we do need to
consider is why do translators consider the ending, "to be with you
forever" a worthy translation. Let us consider the following question
asked to Jesus by one of his disciples
"when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your
coming at the end of the age?" Matthew 24:3
It is very clear the 'end of the Age' is synonymous with the second
coming of Jesus, later in the passage we read,
"They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky
with power and great glory." Matthew 24:30
It is therefore abundantly clear that the Paraclete will therefore
abide with us who are baptised until the second coming of Jesus
("into the age" = 'to be with you until my [Jesus] second coming').
It would be inconceivable to consider the prophecy applying to
Muhammad, as he as well as every other human being does not have such
a long life span. The Holy Spirit on the other hand is a person who
has never died and abides with those today who are in communion with
him.
Meherally then goes onto state that this verse coupled with the Old
Testament (Law or Taurat) reading of Deuteronomy 18:18 speaks of
"another male figure" [1], again Meherally provides no reasoning or
reliable basis for this conjecture. The great prophecy made by Moses
in this passage simply mentions the coming of his successor, I would
assume that Meherally is somehow trying to somehow support his view
of the Paraclete by simply quoting this reference and again missing
out any detail of the prophecy and how it hangs in context with the
Biblical message.
Let us consider what the Bible has to say on the prophecy made in
Deuteronomy 18:18
"He [Jesus] must remain in heaven until the time comes...
...for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago
through his holy prophets. For Moses said, 'The Lord your
God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your
own people." Acts 3:21-22
This passage makes it clear that the one spoken of in the Deuteronomy
18:18 prophecy is the Lord Jesus Christ.
Meherally's next point seeks to negate the concept of the Holy Spirit
by quoting the following verse,
"the Paraclete shall not come to you; but if I go
I will send him to you." John 16:7
Meherally then goes onto reason that the Holy Spirit was already in
existence (Genesis 1:2) and therefore asks how could this therefore
be the same Holy Spirit that Jesus was to send. Mr Meherally needs to
re-read the verse and understand what is being said and what is not
being said. The Lord Jesus Christ stated that if he did not go away
(ascend to heaven), then "the Paraclete SHALL NOT COME TO YOU" John
16:17 (emphasis mine). This statement does not negate the
pre-existence of the Holy Spirit, rather Jesus is speaking of sending
the Holy Spirit onto the people and he will make a dwelling with them
into the age, not that Jesus is somehow bringing about the existence
of the Holy Spirit.
The next point is drawn from John 15:26 in that it refers to two
independent entities, because the Paraclete is referred to as the
Spirit of Truth as it takes the pronoun "he" and the Holy Spirit
takes the pronoun "it". Firstly the claim is not substantiated,
there are a number of passages where the Holy Spirit is refered
to with the pronoun "he",
"The Holy Spirit also testifies about this. First he
says...." Hebrews 10:15
"But the Spirit himself intercedes for us..." Romans 8:26
In reference to Meherally's comment on the following verse
"But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit" John 14:26
Meherally makes a great fuss about the fact that in the Codex
Syriacus refers to this verse as "But the Paraclete, the Spirit"
again the point is not clearly made, but Meherally somehow assumes
that this disqualifies the Holy Spirit as being the object of
reference without stating how. So why is it translated as "Holy
Spirit" ? It is of even greater interest to realise that their are
manuscripts of the Gospel of John that predate the aforementioned
Codex, these manuscripts contain the text "Holy Spirit" , this also
ties in with later on in the gospel of John when Jesus tells the
disciples to receive the Holy Spirit John 20:22. This fact rules out
any confusion made by Meherally to question the identity of the
Paraclete as so clearly presented in John 14:26.
From the following passage,
"This, then is how we can tell the difference between the
Spirit of truth and the spirit of error." 1 John 4:6
Meherally goes on to claim that both spirits are human beings, again
the point is short and provides no evidence for the reasoning.
Meherally would benefit from re-reading the verse carefully before
jumping to any conclusions, and more importantly to read the verse in
the context of the entire passage.
Let us consider the following preceding verse,
"the Spirit who IS IN YOU is more powerful than the spirit
IN THOSE who belong to the world." 1 John 4:4
the text clearly speaks of the spirits being something that dwells
within a human being, by Meherally's reasoning a human being can
therefore dwell within another human being, this is of course is
complete nonsense. The point we have to realise is that a spirit is
very distinct from a human being and are not one and the same thing
(John 3:3-8), the verse refers of course to a spirit indwelling
within a person.
Meherally in trying to form some sort of conclusion states, "History
records that prophet Muhammad was known for his truth and honesty,
long before he received his revelations." [1].
Meherally again offers no support for this claim, we need merely to
look at Muslim history to see that Muhammad like any other human
being had his imperfections,
"Have We not expanded thee thy breast? And removed from thee
thy burden [transgression], which did gall thy back?"
Surah 94:1-3
The following prayer is made by the prophet of Islam,
O God, wash my iniquities with snow-water. Al Bukhari
Muhammad was never described as a man without sin, in comparison to
Jesus of whom the Bible states,
"[He] committed no sin, nor was guile found in his mouth"
1 Peter 2:22
"and in him there is no sin" 1 John 3:5
The Quran also testifies,
"I am only a messenger of thy Lord that I may bestow
on thee [Mary] a faultless son [Jesus]." Surah 19:19 [2]
Surely the one to follow Jesus should be of equal faultlessness to be
the successor of one without sin.
The next section of Meherally's argument is the most interesting one,
as the descriptions the Lord Jesus Christ gives of the Paraclete,
that could never apply to Muhammad or any other human being are
conveniently bolstered up by the Quran instead.
This tactic completely confuses Meherally's argument, as one is not
sure whether to consider the Paraclete to be a human being or a book,
or by virtue of claiming that both entities fit the description we
are left to assume that Muhammad and the Quran are one and the same
thing.
Let us consider some of the confusion presented by Meherally's
approach
"he shall take mine and shall disclose it to you."
John 16:14b
Meherally in response states, "Note: Muhammad did declare himself a
Prophet/Messenger of God..." [1]
In response to the first part of the same verse
"He shall glorify me," John 16:14a
Meherally's response, "Note: the Quran glorifies the birth of
Jesus..." [1].
In a single verse, in which he refers to the same entity, the
Paraclete, Meherally has pointed to two different entities in a
last ditch attempt to wrest some sort of conclusion that Islam
is the religion predicted in the scriptures at the beginning of
time.
References
[1] Did Jesus and Isaiah prophesy the coming of Muhammad? -
Akbarally Meherally
[2] The meaning of the glorious Quran - M.M.Pickthall
PC
Index to the claimed prophesies on Muhammad
Answering Islam Home Page