Is Muhammad foretold in the Bible?

[Servant19]

Hi. To interject, you are incorrect on three counts, in your posts to PP.

1. There is a difference between judging what is around us - good and bad - and making a judgement over a person’s soul. Indeed, we are said to judge things for good or bad. How else would people take proper responsible care of their children otherwise or any person, or themselves, for that matter.
2. Not doing the above leads people into moral and religious relativism that says that anyone can believe and do and express anything and there is no obligation to guide that person towards a more informed outlook and enlightened understanding - ‘anything goes’, which I already expressed a while back but very unsatisfactorily had various parts of my posts ignored (also expressed) by a certain poster.
3. (In bold) - you are making judgments as to why the person you’re arguing with is expressing his opinion of a certain subject and you are reading these as “patronisation”, “superior attitude” and “prejudice”, when in actual fact. the only judgment you could be entitled to make is to say about consequences i.e:- “marginalisation”, because this is the only term, which does not describe personal judgement. “Paternalism” is about groups not individuals, unless you are saying that the Church as a whole, does this.

Hi FC

I don’t believe I judged anyone’s soul. I judge the action and the words spoken/written.

All souls belong to God.

I don’t believe the Church has ever stated that ALL other religions are deficient…

.

 

[Servant19]

Start a thread?

MJ

Feel free Martin

.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

The topic please

 

[Peter_Plato]

Of course, these judgements are clear…patronisation, paternalism, marginalisation, superiority attitudes and prejudice.

I will judge acts such as these just as society has judged them in the past with the way indigenous populations have been persecuted. These acts are judged and are as clear as the judgements on murder and arson. They are all clear. No ambiguity…

But to judge ALL other religions as being deficient, is similarly clear.

No one in this thread can name one deficient teaching in the Baha’i religion and I challenge everyone to find one.

To tell me that a religion is deficient because the MYSTERY of the Trinity is elaborated with an alternative perspective lacks humility, charity or the fruits of the Spirit.

Otherwise such acts, and those that condone such acts lacking charity, thought and beauty will be judged for what they clearly are. No ambiguity…

I suppose that you are judging Christianity as “deficient” because the MYSTERY of the foretelling of Muhammad is not elaborated as it is by the alternative perspective of Baha’i and therefore your judging of Christianity also lacks humility, charity or fruits of the Spirit because you have determined that Christianity has been deficient and Baha’i is superior.

It seems to me that where the beliefs of religions are irreconciliable with each other then one of them must be mistaken and deficient to the extent that it is. There is no ambiguity there, either.

I am not clear how your insistence that Muhammad was foretold in the Bible adds any clarity whatsoever to the MYSTERY of the Trinity since Muhammad simply denied the Trinity altogether. How is that an “elaboration of the MYSTERY” or “an alternative perspective?”

Either Christian teaching on the Trinity is correct or it is not and Muhammad was right. One view or the other is the correct one OR they are both incorrect. There is no logical way to “elaborate” on them in such a way as to make them both true no matter how hard you try. Ergo, one is deficient. No ambiguity there either.

I trust the words of Jesus above the teaching of Muhammad or anyone else – plainly and simply because he is God. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind about that. Therefore, prophecies about Muhammad are irrelevant since he had this one absolutely crucial detail wrong. Again, no “alternative perspective,” no “elaboration” and no ambiguity are possible.

 

[Elizium23]

I really feel like our Baha’i friends’ end goal is to convert some of us to believers. If so, I sincerely hope that they go instead to a Baha’i forum to do it. This is a Catholic forum where we discuss Catholic teachings, yes, even on the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum, and the Catholic answer has already been given: no, Mohammed is not in the slightest mentioned in the Christian Bible.

 

[ffg]

Interesting read.

I agree with the above not so insignificant detail.

If one is to consider any portion of the Bible as evidence for Muhammad, one must look at Muhammad’s consideration of Jesus.

If Muhammad didn’t think Jesus is God, then that is evidence that nothing in the Bible refers to Muhammad.

An over-simplified potential understanding of the purpose of the Bible is the revelation that Jesus is God.

Something like - The OT points to Jesus, the NT reveals Jesus.

Others mentioned in good light in the Bible point to Jesus as the source of Good News, never pointing outside of the Bible.

 

[TonyBS]

I really feel like our Baha’i friends’ end goal is to convert some of us to believers. If so, I sincerely hope that they go instead to a Baha’i forum to do it. This is a Catholic forum where we discuss Catholic teachings, yes, even on the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum, and the Catholic answer has already been given: no, Mohammed is not in the slightest mentioned in the Christian Bible.

No person converts a Heart Elizium, but God within your Self.

The question as if “Is Muhammad foretold in the Bible”. may not as well have been asked on this forum if your reasoning is used.

It is obvious as a Catholic you do not believe this as it is not in your teachings.

Thus it is to others that do believe this to be so, to produce passages and evidence as to where and why they consider this to be so.

That has been done and both sides are now available.

I do not think any other person in this thread has ever stated that a Catholics view is “deficient”. I would apologize if it could be proven we have.

You will have to study “Frame of Reference” and inattentional Blindness. Combine the two and you can be rest assured no one is "Wrong’. Why, as each is seeing, experiencing and learning from life in their “Frame of Reference”.

This is what Christ bounty is to us, this is how some see Muhammad in the Bible and others will not. Christ wants to us all to continually to change our “Frame of Reference”, to understand we all fall short in the Love of God, but we are all One under the One and only God. Why then do we not accept each other.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[Elizium23]

As Catholics, we accept the Bible not because Gutenberg set the type and bound it up into a book, but because Jesus gave authority to the Church to assemble and interpret the Scriptures for us.

As Catholics, we reject the so-called “revelations” of Mohammed and Baha’is because they lacked authority and they introduced heresies which are foreign to the correct understanding of God. The only body with the authority to determine what is or is not Divine Revelation has spoken clearly and given us the Sacred Scriptures.

There is no need to add to or deviate from the Sacred Scriptures already handed down to us, because Jesus Christ is fully alive and active in the world today, through the agency of His Church. The Church provides a living Magisterium and Sacred Tradition which augment and interpret Sacred Scripture. Since the Mohammadean “revelations” and Baha’i “teachings” contain doctrines that are fundamentally opposed to Christian teachings, they can be safely rejected and regarded as suspect by Christian believers. We can confidently and positively reject any kind of claim that Mohammed is mentioned in the Bible, because with his so-called “revelations” he made it patently clear that he was a false prophet and leading people away from God.

 

[TonyBS]

Interesting read.

I agree with the above not so insignificant detail.

If one is to consider any portion of the Bible as evidence for Muhammad, one must look at Muhammad’s consideration of Jesus.

If Muhammad didn’t think Jesus is God, then that is evidence that nothing in the Bible refers to Muhammad.

An over-simplified potential understanding of the purpose of the Bible is the revelation that Jesus is God.

Something like - The OT points to Jesus, the NT reveals Jesus.

Others mentioned in good light in the Bible point to Jesus as the source of Good News, never pointing outside of the Bible.

Dear FFG - That is One conclusion a person could make. Consider it is not the only conclusion.

Personally the timing of Muhammads Revelation was as to God doeth as He Willeth.

At the begining when the Doctrine of the Trinity was being formulated as a future guide to mankind, Muhammad came and said do not make of God a Trinity. he confirmed there is only One God, and that the connection of God, the Holy Spirit and of Christ exists and the purpose is to know and Love God.

Yes this is a challenge. From another point of view all these complexities can be balanced, but each person must look for this themselves.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[Elizium23]

Yes this is a challenge. From another point of view all these complexities can be balanced, but each person must look for this themselves.

No, this is a false hermeneutic. Only Protestants try to interpret Sacred Scripture individually.

Catholics believe in a living Magisterium that correctly interprets the Bible. We do not rely on each and every person’s fallible interpretations of doctrines, that is a recipe for disaster, and daily we see that disaster played out by all kinds of splits and divisions and sects outside the Catholic Church.

 

[TonyBS]

As Catholics, we accept the Bible not because Gutenberg set the type and bound it up into a book, but because Jesus gave authority to the Church to assemble and interpret the Scriptures for us.

As Catholics, we reject the so-called “revelations” of Mohammed and Baha’is because they lacked authority and they introduced heresies which are foreign to the correct understanding of God. The only body with the authority to determine what is or is not Divine Revelation has spoken clearly and given us the Sacred Scriptures.

There is no need to add to or deviate from the Sacred Scriptures already handed down to us, because Jesus Christ is fully alive and active in the world today, through the agency of His Church. The Church provides a living Magisterium and Sacred Tradition which augment and interpret Sacred Scripture. Since the Mohammadean “revelations” and Baha’i “teachings” contain doctrines that are fundamentally opposed to Christian teachings, they can be safely rejected and regarded as suspect by Christian believers. We can confidently and positively reject any kind of claim that Mohammed is mentioned in the Bible, because with his so-called “revelations” he made it patently clear that he was a false prophet and leading people away from God.

As you are free to do so and we would wish you strong faith and Love

I think Pope Francis is a godsend. God bless this Pope. I would watch with great interest over the coming years as to what He has to contribute to the World of Unity.

Regards Tony

 

[TonyBS]

No, this is a false hermeneutic. Only Protestants try to interpret Sacred Scripture individually.

Catholics believe in a living Magisterium that correctly interprets the Bible. We do not rely on each and every person’s fallible interpretations of doctrines, that is a recipe for disaster, and daily we see that disaster played out by all kinds of splits and divisions and sects outside the Catholic Church.

I am agreeing with you, an independent search is not to make up ones own understanding by self interpreting scripture, the search is to find the Source of the Authority to Interpret.

Thus in Christ I would agree with you, it is through Peter and then onward to and through the Church.

For Muhammad it would be through Ali and the Imams.

Large Subject full of complexities, but to us, this is why Muhammad as shown in Revelation, is the Logical sequence after Christ. His message balances views we were to have in the Future.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[MartinJordan]

I am agreeing with you, an independent search is not to make up ones own understanding by self interpreting scripture, the search is to find the Source of the Authority to Interpret.

Thus in Christ I would agree with you, it is through Peter and then onward to and through the Church.

For Muhammad it would be through Ali and the Imams.

Large Subject full of complexities, but to us, this is why Muhammad as shown in Revelation, is the Logical sequence after Christ. His message balances views we were to have in the Future.

God Bless and Regards Tony

Are you saying Muslims will agree that it is through Peter and the onward to and through the Church about Christ our Lord?

If so, can you give the Muslim teaching on this. References from Tradition Muslim sources say from 690 A.D. Please.

MJ

 

[TonyBS]

Are you saying Muslims will agree that it is through Peter and the onward to and through the Church about Christ our Lord?

If so, can you give the Muslim teaching on this. References from Tradition Muslim sources say from 690 A.D. Please.

MJ

Martin I could not see why they would not agree, this I found on Wiki - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_in_Islam

"Peter, known also as Simon Peter or Simon Cephas, was, according to Muslim tradition and exegesis, one of the original disciples of Jesus.[1] Although Jesus’s disciples, as that of the other prophets, have not played a major role in Islamic theology, the disciples of Jesus are notable in that they are the only group of disciples specifically identified in the Quran.[2] Peter’s figure, especially in Shia theology, is important as he is generally regarded as the first Imâm (Leader) after Jesus,[3] and therefore is in accordance with the Christian (specifically the Roman Catholic) view of Peter as the ‘Prince of the Apostles’.

Sorry do not have time to do more research at the moment, but the link has references you could follow.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[MartinJordan]

Martin I could not see why they would not agree, this I found on Wiki - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_in_Islam

"Peter, known also as Simon Peter or Simon Cephas, was, according to Muslim tradition and exegesis, one of the original disciples of Jesus.[1] Although Jesus’s disciples, as that of the other prophets, have not played a major role in Islamic theology, the disciples of Jesus are notable in that they are the only group of disciples specifically identified in the Quran.[2] Peter’s figure, especially in Shia theology, is important as he is generally regarded as the first Imâm (Leader) after Jesus,[3] and therefore is in accordance with the Christian (specifically the Roman Catholic) view of Peter as the ‘Prince of the Apostles’.

Sorry do not have time to do more research at the moment, but the link has references you could follow.

God Bless and Regards Tony

Now this is something I was not aware of. Thanks. Glad to see Roman Catholics are taken seriously.

What about the Sunni’s? I ask this only for the sake of the number of adherents of Shia (about 163 million I gather) and Sunni’s exponentially larger representation world wide.

But let’s get back to the thread…

Awaiting Islamic sources that discuss Christian scriptures like Mark 12. And use the verses like Hasantas has done.

MJ

 

[ericc]

Hi eric,

Yes, the 622AD coincides with the conquest of Jerusalem and the flight of the Prophet Muhammad to Medina. Historically this is verified by the Byzantine-Sassanian, where Jerusalem was conquered by Persians in 622Ad and a few years later taken over completely by the Islamic Rushidun Caliphate:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Sasanian_War_of_602%E2%80%93628#Byzantine_counter-offensive

Hope that helps

.

Ericc - Servant has supplied one response above.

Dates Had to look at the net, but a quick look found;

As for 1260AH it is Lunar Years that are made up of 354.37 days +

As for 1844 it is Solar Years made up of 365.2425 days +

Historically, They are the same corresponding year.

As if 1260 is always refereed to as 354 Days, I can not say. The sum I showed above was just done by using numbers rounded down to the nearest day.

The result was of interest, so it was shared.

God Bless and Regards Tony

Unfortunately history says Jerusalem came under the gentiles in 136 AD in the Bar Kochbar revolt. Jews were barred from Jerusalem after the war and that would be when gentiles take over. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt

According to this source en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jerusalem Jerusalem were conquered many times. Not one has the date of 622AD. The closest to that date is 637AD en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%28637%29 when the city was surrendered to Caliph Umar in April 637. Before this date , Jerusalem was still under Patriarch Sophronius. Mohammed died before this date. The gentiles didn’t control Jerusalem for 1260 years from 622 AD. It is from 136AD. Romans are gentiles. The Byzantine Christians are gentiles too. Persians as well. In fact Jews helped the Persians to conquer Jerusalem. Also note that the Persians took over Jerusalem in 614AD and not 622AD. myjewishlearning.com/article/palestine-under-persian-byzantine-and-arab-rule/#, jewishmag.com/161mag/persian_conquest_jerusalem/persian_conquest_jerusalem.htm. Your history is wrong and hence your prophecy couldn’t be right.

My question on Mohammed and Ali is still outstanding. Assuming that they are your witnesses, Rev 11:8-12, says they died and their dead bodies would not be buried for 3.5 days. And after 3.5 days , these 2 witnesses rose up to heaven. None of these happened to Mohammed or Ali correct? Mohammed was promptly buried and he didn’t rise to heaven in a cloud. So these 2 witnesses can’t be Mohammed and Ali. And the question outstanding is why Ali and not Abu Bakr or Umar or even Uthman. And why should anyone accept your interpretation of Rev 11? You could be wrong and not infallible.

 

[TonyBS]

Unfortunately history says Jerusalem came under the gentiles in 136 AD in the Bar Kochbar revolt. Jews were barred from Jerusalem after the war and that would be when gentiles take over. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt

According to this source en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jerusalem Jerusalem were conquered many times. Not one has the date of 622AD. The closest to that date is 637AD en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%28637%29 when the city was surrendered to Caliph Umar in April 637. Before this date , Jerusalem was still under Patriarch Sophronius. Mohammed died before this date. The gentiles didn’t control Jerusalem for 1260 years from 622 AD. It is from 136AD. Romans are gentiles. The Byzantine Christians are gentiles too. Persians as well. In fact Jews helped the Persians to conquer Jerusalem. Also note that the Persians took over Jerusalem in 614AD and not 622AD. myjewishlearning.com/article/palestine-under-persian-byzantine-and-arab-rule/#, jewishmag.com/161mag/persian_conquest_jerusalem/persian_conquest_jerusalem.htm. Your history is wrong and hence your prophecy couldn’t be right.

My question on Mohammed and Ali is still outstanding. Assuming that they are your witnesses, Rev 11:8-12, says they died and their dead bodies would not be buried for 3.5 days. And after 3.5 days , these 2 witnesses rose up to heaven. None of these happened to Mohammed or Ali correct? Mohammed was promptly buried and he didn’t rise to heaven in a cloud. So these 2 witnesses can’t be Mohammed and Ali. And the question outstanding is why Ali and not Abu Bakr or Umar or even Uthman. And why should anyone accept your interpretation of Rev 11? You could be wrong and not infallible.

Dear Ericc - Yes I am always most likely wrong and always fallible

The Sources that fulfilled what was promised in the Bible were not. Thus all we have to do is look harder and the connections will be found.

Thus we will leave it at your summary and let all pursue what they wish in regards to this subject.

Regards Tony

 

[friardchips]

Anything new yet, Tony, because this is prostelytizing. I had JWs come round to the door the other day doing the same thing.
"Tony:

I must say if one does take a look, it is amazing!

post 12

I think this is where I will finish my discussion on this subject as ample has been given if one wishes to look further.

post 13

Look and ye shall find

post 20

Each of these can be found in the Bible if one looks and if one does, the History of Mankind unfolds with uncanny accuracy if one does Includes them.

post 21

Thus we will leave it at your summary and let all pursue what they wish in regards to this subject.

last post

The counter-arguments have weighed in with a decent amount of material for you to be satisfied that the Op’s question has been answered and that people have surely looked and not found! It is what it is, or isn’t.

I can quote from my Biblical commentary and Bible notes if you think these might help?

Would you like me to cite the commentaries as I don’t mind taking the time to do this if you think it will bring benefit to your understanding?

F.C.

 

[Servant19]

Unfortunately history says Jerusalem came under the gentiles in 136 AD in the Bar Kochbar revolt. Jews were barred from Jerusalem after the war and that would be when gentiles take over. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt

According to this source en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jerusalem Jerusalem were conquered many times. Not one has the date of 622AD. The closest to that date is 637AD en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%28637%29 when the city was surrendered to Caliph Umar in April 637. Before this date , Jerusalem was still under Patriarch Sophronius. Mohammed died before this date. The gentiles didn’t control Jerusalem for 1260 years from 622 AD. It is from 136AD. Romans are gentiles. The Byzantine Christians are gentiles too. Persians as well. In fact Jews helped the Persians to conquer Jerusalem. Also note that the Persians took over Jerusalem in 614AD and not 622AD. myjewishlearning.com/article/palestine-under-persian-byzantine-and-arab-rule/#, jewishmag.com/161mag/persian_conquest_jerusalem/persian_conquest_jerusalem.htm. Your history is wrong and hence your prophecy couldn’t be right.

My question on Mohammed and Ali is still outstanding. Assuming that they are your witnesses, Rev 11:8-12, says they died and their dead bodies would not be buried for 3.5 days. And after 3.5 days , these 2 witnesses rose up to heaven. None of these happened to Mohammed or Ali correct? Mohammed was promptly buried and he didn’t rise to heaven in a cloud. So these 2 witnesses can’t be Mohammed and Ali. And the question outstanding is why Ali and not Abu Bakr or Umar or even Uthman. And why should anyone accept your interpretation of Rev 11? You could be wrong and not infallible.

This is a simple misunderstanding eric…

The passage does not indicate that this is the ONLY time that Jerusalem comes under Gentile rule. The 1260 years is used to draw a parallel between the duration of Islam and the consequent fall of Jerusalem during the Islamic Dispensation. The time span is similar.
It is the 1260 of the Islamic Dispensation which is significant. When the 1260 years ended, it has been noted that Jerusalem was flourishing again.

In regards to Muhammad and Ali rising up to heaven, they both did, under the allegorical cloud.

The cloud reference in Catholicism is not a literal cloud, official teaching is that Jesus ascended in the theological cloud representative of God, the cloud that guided Moses.

.

 

[Peter_Plato]

The cloud reference in Catholicism is not a literal cloud, official teaching is that Jesus ascended in the theological cloud representative of God, the cloud that guided Moses.

Well, no actually.

The cloud references in the Old Testament, New Testament and in Catholicism are not merely that Jesus ascended in the "theological cloud,” but very clearly that Jesus is God.

In the Old Testament it is God and God alone who is above the clouds.

Yahweh is the One who “rides" the clouds because he is above them:

“Sing praises to God and to his name! Sing loud praises to him who rides the clouds. His name is Yahweh — rejoice in his presence!” Psalm 68:4

“Let all that I am praise Yahweh. O Yahweh my God, how great you are! You are robed with honor and majesty. You are dressed in a robe of light. You stretch out the starry curtain of the heavens; you lay out the rafters of your home in the rain clouds. You make the clouds your chariot; you ride upon the wings of the wind.” Psalm 104:1-3

“This message came to me concerning Egypt: Look! Yahweh is advancing against Egypt, riding on a swift cloud. The idols of Egypt tremble. The hearts of the Egyptians melt with fear.” Isaiah 19:1

When the prophets, like Daniel, speak of “coming ON the clouds of heaven,” they are referring to God.

“As my vision continued that night, I saw someone like the Son of Man coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, honor, and sovereignty over all the nations of the world, so that people of every race and nation and language worshiped him. His rule is eternal—it will never end. His kingdom will never be destroyed.” Daniel 7:13-14

“But in the end, the holy people of the Most High will be given the kingdom, and they will rule forever and ever… until the Ancient of Days—the Most High—came and judged in favor of his holy people. Then the time arrived for the holy people to take over the kingdom.… Then the sovereignty, power, and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be given to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will last forever, and all rulers will serve and obey him.” Daniel 7:18, 22, 27

“Rejoice, O people of Zion! Shout in triumph, O people of Jerusalem! Look, your King is coming to you. He is righteous and victorious, yet he is humble, riding on a donkey—riding on a donkey’s colt. I will remove the battle chariots from Israel and the warhorses from Jerusalem. I will destroy all the weapons used in battle, and your king will bring peace to the nations. His realm will stretch from sea to sea and from the Euphrates River to the ends of the earth. Because of the covenant I made with you, sealed with blood, I will free your prisoners from death in a waterless dungeon… Yahweh will appear above his people; his arrows will fly like lightning! The Sovereign Yahweh will sound the ram’s horn and attack like a whirlwind from the southern desert. Yahweh of hosts will protect his people, and they will defeat their enemies by hurling great stones. They will shout in battle as though drunk with wine. They will be filled with blood like a bowl, drenched with blood like the corners of the altar.** On that day Yahweh their God will rescue his people, just as a shepherd rescues his sheep.** They will sparkle in his land.” Zechariah 9:9-11, 14-16

“And Yahweh will be King over all the earth. On that day there will be one Yahweh — his name the only one… In the end, the enemies of Jerusalem who survive the plague will go up to Jerusalem each year to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, and to celebrate the Festival of Shelters. Any nation in the world that refuses to come to Jerusalem to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, will have no rain.” Zechariah 14:9, 16-17

These are precisely the words Jesus uses to describe himself and his coming.

“Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, ‘Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?’ But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ ‘I Am,’ said Jesus. ‘And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.’ The high priest tore his clothes. ‘Why do we need any more witnesses?’ he asked. ‘You have heard the blasphemy.’” Mark 14:60-64