The Instigator
Esiar
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Mindplay
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Muhammad is Not Mentioned In The Bible

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Esiar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/12/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 969 times Debate No: 68210
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (1)

 

Esiar

Pro

Requirements For Opponent:

-To accept that the modern Bible counts. There are no records of the Bible changing, proof of that being the Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, and the thousands of New Testament manuscripts (The earliest being from only the 2nd century, a few generations after Jesus died) that agree with eachother. You might be able to point out errors in the modern Bible's, but all of those could be fixed by looking back at the originals.

-To use the King James Version. The Greek New Testament (The Textus Receptus) in which the KJV is translated off of is more accurate than the ones like the NIV, ESV, etc. are translated off of, because it is based off of more manuscripts. Translations like the NIV and ESV have obvious contradictions, and heretical (In terms of Christian doctrine) parts which the KJV doesn't have.

Note: If you do not agree with any of the above statements, don't go to this debate, but make a new debate with me as the opponent.

Round 1 - Show where Muhammad is in the Bible
Round 2 - Rebuttal
Round 3 - Rebuttal
Round 4 - Rebuttal
Round 5 - Conclusion

Surah 7:157 says, "Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel.".

The Torah is: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
The Gospel is: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (This is what they considered it to be)

So, first you have to show me an example of Muhammad being mentioned in : Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and/or Deuteronomy, then show another one in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and/or John.
Mindplay

Con

First of all let me thank my worthy opponent for this opportunity to debate.

I will begin by finding references of Mohammed in the Bible which include but are not limited to:

Deuteronomy 18:18-20

"I will raise up for them a prophet from among their brethren like you, and will put My words in his mouth; and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And whoever will not hearken to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him. But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die."

Here God is speaking to Moses foretelling of the prophet like Moses, Muhammed. Comparisons between the two prophets are quite common both in the Qur'an and Islamic tradition.

Deuteronomy 33:2

"He said, The Lord came from Sinai and dawned from Seir upon us; he shone forth from Mount Paran; he came from the ten thousand of holy ones, with flaming fire at his right hand."

In short, Sinai is Moses, Seir is Jesus, and Paran is Muhammed. Mount Paran was considered to be the mountain of Ishmael, the father of the Arabic people in the Bible. The "ten thousand holy ones" are considered to be the ten thousand Companions of Muhammed.

Isaiah 42:1-4

"Behold! My Servant, whom I uphold; My Elect One, in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles. He shall not cry out, nor raise His voice, nor cause His voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench. In truth He shall bring forth justice. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till He has established justice in the earth; and the islands shall wait for His law."

This is in reference to Mohammed as believed to be the Chosen Servant of God. Christians maintain that Jesus is the begotten Son of God, not the Servant of God, and is used improperly.

Isaiah 42:10-13

"Sing unto the Lord a new song, and His praise from the ends of the earth, you who go down to the sea, and all that is therein, the islands, and the inhabitants thereof! Let the wilderness and its cities lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar inhabits. Let the inhabitants of Sela sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains. Let them give glory to the Lord, and declare His praise in the islands. The Lord shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up jealousy like a man of war: He shall cry, yea, roar; He shall prevail against His enemies."

"The new song" is the Muslim call to prayer. Mount Sela, the mountain of Medina, and Kedar, the forefather of Muhammad, only continue to cement the ties to Islam and Muhammed. The end of the quote also prophesies the Muslim Conquests.

Other Bible quotes that refer to Muhammed and Islam are Isaiah 54:1-3, Isaiah 40:3, Genesis 49:10, and Habbakuk 3:3. I will use them if the need arises.

The Gospels contain much fewer references as they mainly focused on the life of Jesus.

John 15:26

"When the Advocate is come whom I will send to you from the Father's presence--the Spirit of Truth who comes forth from the Father's presence--He will be a witness concerning me."

This is thought to be Muhammed.

That concludes references of Muhammed from the Bible when seen from an Islamic perspective. If this perspective fails to convince my opponent I will use a Christian perspective. I await your reply.
Debate Round No. 1
Esiar

Pro

Deuteronomy 18:18 - In this verse, God is re-telling what Moses said in Deuteronomy 18:15, which says, "The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken"?

From the midst of thee:
Muhammad did not come from the midst of Israel.

Like unto me:
Deuteronomy 34:10-12 tells us what "Like Moses" means. It says, ""And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, in all the signs and the wonders, which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land, 12"and in all that mighty hand, and in all the great terror which Moses shewed in the sight of all Israel.".

Someone like Moses must know God face-to-face, and preform many miracles. Muhammad doesn't fit this criteria.

Isaiah 42:1-4 - This is the part I don't understand how this can apply to Muhammad: "He shall not cry out, nor raise His voice, nor cause His voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench. In truth He shall bring forth justice. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till He has established justice in the earth; and the islands shall wait for His law."

Is this saying that Muhammad brought justice in truth? http://www.answering-islam.org...

That doesn't sound like justice in truth to me... Also, this isn't in the Torah like 7:157 says.

Isaiah 42:10-13 - The context of this would be Isaiah 45:5-13, which says:
5"Thus saith God the Lord,
he that created the heavens, and stretched them out;
he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it;
he that giveth breath unto the people upon it,
and spirit to them that walk therein:
6"I the Lord have called thee in righteousness,
and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee,
and give thee for a covenant of the people,
for a light of the Gentiles;
7"to open the blind eyes,
to bring out the prisoners from the prison,
and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
8"I am the Lord: that is my name:
and my glory will I not give to another,
neither my praise to graven images.
9"Behold, the former things are come to pass,
and new things do I declare:
before they spring forth I tell you of them.
10"Sing unto the Lord a new song,
and his praise from the end of the earth,
ye that go down to the sea, and all that is therein;
the isles, and the inhabitants thereof.
11"Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voice,
the villages that Kedar doth inhabit:
let the inhabitants of the rock sing,
let them shout from the top of the mountains.
12"Let them give glory unto the Lord,
and declare his praise in the islands.
13"The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man,
he shall stir up jealousy like a man of war:
he shall cry, yea, roar;
he shall prevail against his enemies.

The context is talking about the New Testament, and the second coming. Verses 6-7 say, "I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.". This was clearly fulfilled in the time period the Acts of the Apostles took place.

Verse 13 says, "The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man, he shall stir up jealousy like a man of war: he shall cry, yea, roar; he shall prevail against his enemies.". This can't be talking about Muhammad, because it says God is the one who will go forth as a mighty man. This sounds more like Revelation 19 than Muhammad. And, again, this isn't in the Torah.

John 15:26 - This is speaking of the Holy Spirit. John 14:26 shows that the Advocate/Comforter is the Holy Spirit, and John 14:18 and 14:10 show that the Holy Spirit is equated with Jesus and the Father.
Mindplay

Con

Deuteronomy 18:18

"From the midst of thee, of they brethren" - the Arabic peoples are considered the distant brethren of the Israelites. especially at that time. Sons of Ishmael and all that.

Deuteronomy 33:2

I see you have not attempted to disprove me here, whether on purpose or through oversight.

Deuteronomy 34:10-12

Muhammed, it is said, saw God twice just as Moses spoke to God twice. ( Jami` at-Tirmidhi Chapters on Tafsir, English reference: Vol. 1, Book 44, Hadith 3278, Arabic reference: Book 47, Hadith 3589) Muhammed also compared himself and Ali to Moses and Aaron.

Isaiah 42:1-4

We are not here to debate Christianity vs Islam. There are many instances where Christianity could be shown in a poor light as well, not to mention we would have to argue on morality as well. My point here was that the term "Servant" fits Muhammed much more aptly than Jesus and the argument still stands.

Isaiah 42:10-13

This is just a difference in perspective and my previous allusions to Mount Sela and Kedar bind Muhammed and Islam closer to the text than Christianity and the Acts of the Apostles. And God works through people, who is to say the tremendous success of the Muslim conquests in such a short time was not the work of God?

John 15:26

Some of the names given to Muhammed were the "intercessor" or "advocate". Once again this is just a matter of perspective. In Islam Jesus is equated with Muhammed as one of the great prophets.

John 16:12-13

"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."

Here the Advocate is described how the Prophet, Muhammed, was in Deuteronomy 18:18. The Qur'an 53:3-6 "Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed, taught to him by one intense in strength - one of soundness" seems to fulfill these prophecies in John and Deuteronomy.
Debate Round No. 2
Esiar

Pro

Deuteronomy 18:18 - It doesn't matter what brethren means. It doesn't fit the criteria given in Deuteronomy 18:15, that the prophet will be from the midst of the Israelites.

Deuteronomy 33:2 - This is speaking about God, speaking in the past-tence, and it is a blessing to Israel.

Isaiah 42:1-4 - Like I said, Muhammad doesn't fit the part about bringing forth justice in truth[1], and this isn't in the Torah.

Isaiah 42:10-13 - Again, it says God (Not God through a prophet) will go forth as a mighty man. In terms of the Qur'an and Bible, Revelation 19 is the fulfillment. Even if Muslim conquest WAS the work of God, God did not go forth as a mighty man, but someone claiming to be a prophet of God. This also isn't in the Torah.

John 15:26 - You must understand the Bible with the Bible, you cannot use Islamic names given to Muhammad and apply them to the Bible. The Advocate is the Holy Spirit (John 14:26), he is equal with God (Acts 5:3-5), equal with Jesus (John 14:18), and he knew the disciples, and was going to indwell them (John 14:17). It cannot be Muhammad.

John 16:12-13 - Again, the Spirit of Truth is the Holy Spirit. John 14:26 says the Advocate is the Holy Ghost, and John 15:26 says that the Advocate is the Spirit of Truth. You have to use the Bible with the Bible: You cannot use Islamic understanding to understand the Bible.
Mindplay

Con

Deuteronomy 18:15-18

"The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; According to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

Once again, we see brethren twice. We know the sons the Ishmael, the Arabs, are the distant brethren of Israelites. From this we can infer that the prophet being discussed was Muhammed, an Arab. Dismiss it all you want the argument still stands.

Deuteronomy 33:2

It still mentions Mount Paran which has ties to Islam and Muhammed.

Isaiah 42:1-4

I am dropping this one as I do not want to be drawn into a debate based on the merits of Islam and Christianity which is not the purpose of this debate.

Isaiah 42:10-13

God has used humans as his instruments many times throughout the Bible. That is what is being meant when it says God will go forth as a mighty man.

John 15:26; John 16:12-13

Now we come down to the issue of perspective and interpretation again. You say you cannot use Islamic understanding to understand the Bible yet there are so many different understandings used. Which one is the right one? The Lutheran one? The Jewish one? The Catholic one? And the list goes on. Unless we decide which one is the right one there is no point to continuing this debate. For the sake of simplicity which understanding are you using and I will attempt to use that one. Regardless I have already shown Muhammed is in fact in the Bible when interpreted from an Islamic perspective with certain tie ins that do not make the proofs entirely subjective.
Debate Round No. 3
Esiar

Pro

Deuteronomy 18:15-18 - It doesn't hold up, because how you're defining "brethren" doesn't fit within the context. One cannot be from the midst of the Israelites like Deuteronomy 18:15 says, but be an Arab like you claim "brethren" means. There's a different language, race, culture, etc. For your interpretation to work, you'd have to throw out a part of the verse, since it clearly states that the prophet is from the midst of Israel, when Muhammad is from Mecca.

"Brethren" was usually used to mean fellow Israelites. Deuteronomy 17:14-15 says, "When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.". In here, "among thy brethren", is used to mean a fellow Israelite.

Deuteronomy 1:16 doesn't make "brethren" and "stranger" (foreigner) mean the same thing.

Although Deuteronomy 2:4 uses the word differently, we can figure out if it means a fellow Israelite, or a non-israelite, with the context. The first part of Deuteronomy 18:15 says, "The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me", so we know that this prophet is raised up to the Israelites, from the midst of the Israelites, will preform many miracles, and know God face-to-face (Deuteronomy 34:10-12). Muhammad wasn't from the midst of the Israelites like Moses said the prophet would be, so Muhammad isn't the prophet.

Deuteronomy 33:2 - It isn't talking about an unlettered prophet, and it isn't a prophecy: It's a blessing.
Isaiah 42:10-13 - It says God will go forth as a mighty man. That means exactly what it says, not anything else.

John 15:26; John 16:12-13 - None of it is subjective, because Jesus told us the answer. I'll combine John 14:26, 15:26, and 16:12-13 to make it obvious: "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me. "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."

You cannot use Islamic understanding to understand the Bible, you must use the Bible to understand the Bible. Using Islamic understanding to understand the Bible is like using Mario's controls to play Call of Duty.
Mindplay

Con

Mindplay forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Mindplay

Con

Mindplay forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Esiar 2 years ago
Esiar
I forgot to include this:
[1] - http://www.answering-islam.org...
Posted by Esiar 2 years ago
Esiar
"is there any evidence Deuteronomy was changed at some point from 600-today?"

Not according to the Septuagint, I'd say.
Posted by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
Long story short, Pro is trying to debate a truth.

It's like me starting a debate saying "Apples exist." Well, of course they exist.
Overall this is a pointless debate.
Posted by adomman 2 years ago
adomman
We seem to be stuck on several things.
1) is there any evidence Deuteronomy was changed at some point from 600-today?
2) can we make strong conclusions from lack of evidence
3) Just because someone is giving a contrary truth (labeled as heresy) does not guarantee that either
3a) The "heresy" is completely false and uncredibile
Or 3b) The "heresy" is completely true and credibile
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
@Esiar

- I don't wanna start a debate since I have one hanging on my shoulders.
- Plus, I am more into philosophical debates.

I hope you find a good adversary though. :)
Posted by Esiar 2 years ago
Esiar
Well, you've yet to explain why Deuteronomy contains it like you said.

If you want to discuss it furter, start a debate.
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
- I meant 'abundant evidence in the Islamic History', the Church is obviously not gonna admit that.

- Here is my argument:
1. There is good reason to doubt that the Bible of the Church contains all the facts.
2. There is good reason to believe that the Bible & the manuscripts would not contain facts about Muhammad.
3. There is ample evidence in Islamic History & in other places that point out to the fact that Muhammad was mentioned.
=> Now, 3. is a historical fact, & it is not contested by the manuscripts since 1. & 2. are both based on historical facts.
=> Thus, a manuscript based argument is a weak one.

> Plus, in the Samaritan Bible, it talk about Muhammad not by identification, but by description, & in their exegesis, the Samaritans recognise that it is in fact Muhammad.

=> Therefore, there is strong reason to believe Muhammad was mentioned in the Bible, & there is strong reason to believe that the Church manuscripts are not good proof for the opposite.
Posted by Esiar 2 years ago
Esiar
Sorry: I should have said, "There is no abundant evidence that Muhammad was mentioned in the Bible because "what they have (Had)) of the Torah and Gospel that are (was) with them" is the same Torah and Gospel we have now, and no one has been able to point to a real place in them where Muhammad was mentioned. When they do, It's always not taking in all the facts into consideration."
Posted by Esiar 2 years ago
Esiar
No, you get manuscripts you can't prove ever existed, that you say were burned by the Church, that you say had Muhammad menioned in it. There is no abundant evidence that Muhammad was mentioned in the Bible because "the Torah and Gospel that are (was) with them" is the same Torah and Gospel we have now, and no one has been able to point to a real place in them where Muhammad was mentioned. When they do, It's always not taking in all the facts into consideration.
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
@Esiar,

- Manuscripts are expected to conform with the what is in the Bible today, because the Church executed the 'heretics' who held other views & burned their books. There were even 'heretics' in the 1st century who believed Jesus (pbuh) wasn't resurrected, & that' a fact. Point being, there is good reason to believe that the Church enforced its own views, & excluded & eradicated the views of other Christians that opposed them. & so, & since they don't hold the view that there might be a prophet coming, any other denomination that may have had that view would have thus been systematically disposed of.
=> All that leaves a huge room of doubt, & with other evidence pointing out to the fact that Muhammad was indeed mentioned (such as the case of the Arab jews, & the Samaritans, & the Daniel followers in Palestine, & the christians of Nineveh). There is just abundant evidence in Islamic History.

==>> When you add all that up, you come to the Conclusion that Muhammad was in fact mentioned in the Bible.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
EsiarMindplayTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture