The 'Perfect' Literary Style of the Qur'an Myth

How perfect is the literary style of the Quran really?

On the whole, while many parts of the Qur'an undoubtedly have considerable rhetorical power, even over an unbelieving reader, the book, aesthetically considered, is by no means a first-rate performance. ...let us look at some of the more extended narratives. It has already been noticed how vehement and abrupt they are where they ought to be characterized by epic repose. Indispensable links, both in expression and in the sequence of events, are often omitted, so that to understand these histories is sometimes far easier for us than for those who learned them first, because we know most of them from better sources. Along with this, there is a great deal of superfluous verbiage; and nowhere do we find a steady advance in the narration. Contrast, in these respects, "the most beautiful tale," the history of Joseph (xii.), and its glaring improprieties, with the story in Genesis, so admirably executed in spite of some slight discrepancies. Similar faults are found in the non-narrative portions of the Qur'an. The connection of ideas is extremely loose, and even the syntax betrays great awkwardness. Anancloutha are of frequent occurrence, and cannot be explained as conscious literary devices. Many sentences begin with a "when" or "on the day when," which seem to hover in the air, so that the commentators are driven to supply a "think of this" or some ellipsis. Again, there is no great literary skill evinced in the frequent and needless harping on the same words and phrases; in xviii., for example, "till that" (hatta idha) occurs no fewer than eight times. Muhammad, in short, is not in any sense a master of style.

Nöldeke, Theodor. "The Qur'an," Sketches from Eastern History. Trans. J.S. Black. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1892.

The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not—there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on.

Professor Gerd R. Puin, Saarland University

"It is by no means the universal opinion of unprejudiced Arabic scholars that the literary style of the Qur'an is superior to that of all other books in the Arabic language. Some doubt whether in eloquence and poetry it surpasses the Mu'allaqat by Imraul Quais, or the Maqamat of Hariri, though in Muslim lands few people are courageous enough to express such an opinion."

C.G. Pfander, The Mizanu'l Haqq ( Balance of Truth') p.264

"When we read the Old Testament in the original Hebrew, many scholars hold that the eloquence of Isaiah, Deuteronomy, and many of the Psalms, for instance, is greater than that of any part of the Qur'an. Hardly anyone but a Muslim would deny this, and probably no Muslim who knew both Arabic and Hebrew well would be able to deny it."

C.G. Pfander, The Mizanu'l Haqq ( Balance of Truth') p.266

January 15th Demonstration: Western Peace v Islamic Peace

Gnostic Gospels vs Synoptic Gospels

This Weeks Reading List

I just picked up two excellent books that I can't wait to get into first hand:

1. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam - Patricia Crone

2. Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World - by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook

I haven't begun Meccan Trade as yet but Hagarism has done a lot to confirm my own ideas regarding Islam. Anyone acquainted with the Bible, heretical scripture and the Jewish talmud would be well aware of the borrowing of stories present in the Qur'an. But Crone and Michael go beyond this to explain a possible narrative of how this came about using the best available sources to them.

I will follow up with an extended review after I complete the books.

The Myth of Perfect Preservation: Examining a Variant

Muslims often claim that a sign that the Qur'an is from God is that today's copy is perfectly preserved (16:8) from the eternal tablets (85:22) and this is a sign that it is from Allah. In this brief post I will put aside the evidence from the ahadith mentioning lost and variant surahs and take one example from the physical evidence.

The Uthman Quran or Today's Quran

Brief history:

The Uthman Quran, also known as Tashkent Qur'an, Osman's Koran and Samarkand Codex, is believed by many Muslims to be one of Uthman's original editions which is testified by the blood stains found on the Quran from Uthman's assassination. Then we have today's common Qur'an - a 1924 Egyptian version mass produced early last century.

One Page Examined:

(Click to see full sized)

Take note of the textual variants marked in line 2 (37:103), line 4 (37:105), line 6, line 7 (37:106) and line 8 of the Uthman Quran.


One Variant Examined:

At the start of line two we see a variant - this variant occurs in Surah 37 aya 103.

(Uthman Quran variant from line 2, page 652)

Transliteration: wa ma ‘aslamA
Translation: And they did not submit (i.e. become Muslims)

(Current 1924 Standard Quran Edition)

Transliteration: falammA‘slamA
Translation: When they too submitted (i.e. became Muslims)

Conclusion

We see that the old Uthman Quran shows a stark contradiction to the Quran in use today in surah 37 aya 103. Similarly, in that single page of 8 lines there were 5 variants to the Quran used today.

If we hold the Muslim view that a text cannot be considered inspired in light of textual variants (as they charge against the Bible), they cannot consider their own text to be inspired as it is evidently 'corrupted' and contains numerous textual variants. However, unlike with New Testament scholarship the study of textual variants in Islam is a subject of taboo as they hold onto the claim that the Quran is unchanged through transmission.

This is a dilemma for the Muslims that must be addressed.

The Lengths Muslims Will Go

There are hundreds of scientific myth floating around the internet in regard to Islam. Muslims often appeal to them after being deceived by other high profile Muslim evangelists such as Zakir Naik. Anyone quasi familiar with science and the Qur'an can see the flaws in this sort of argumentation. The Qur'anic ayat is removed from its context, manipulated and then parallelled to a poor outdated and incorrect paraphrasing of a scientific concept. At other times, the historical context of the Qur'an is thrown out altogether. We may have a scientific concept predating the Qur'an by thousands of years yet Muslims will insist that the Qur'an testified this before anyone else.

A few days ago I came across one of the worst arguments I have seen in this respect.

"But recently we have discovered, that there are pain receptor present in the skin, which is responsible, Qur’an mentions Surah Nisa, Chapter No. 4, Verse No. 54, that as to those who reject our signs, we will cast them into the hell fire and as often as the skin is roasted, we shall change it with new skin so that they shall feel the pain. Indirectly Qur’an is saying, there is something in the skin, which is responsible for the pain."
(Do note, the above aya usually appears as aya 56 not 54)

The author is claiming that the above aya demonstrates scientific foreknowledge of receptor cells in the skin. I must conceded - the author of the claim is correct in one regard. The aya does in fact indirectly claim that there is something in the skin responsible for pain. But, my challenge is - find me a book out there that does NOT make the claim that roasting your skin in fire would cause pain.

I did not need the Qur'an to tell me that if my skin gets burnt it would hurt. In fact, I learnt this lesson as a child. Is this evidence of my own divine providence? Surely, I hope an individual as errant as myself (or the Qur'an) does not deserve this title.

1 Thessalonians 5:12-24

We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves. And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all. See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it.

1 Thessalonians 5:12-24 (ESV)

Dr James White vs Dr Bart Ehrman - Does the Bible Misquote Jesus?

On January 21st there will be a debate between Dr James White and Dr Bart Ehrman, author of 'Misquoting Jesus'. The topical thesis of debate will be, "Is the New Testament inspired in light of textual variation?'

More information is available: http://sovereigncruises.org/AO2009/debate.htm

I will review the debate after the event but do keep Dr James White in your prayers that he can speak with conviction and honesty to defend the Word of God.

Hamas in Their Own Voices

A brief look at the Palestinian hatred towards Israel, America, Christendom and the West in general.

The Difficulty of Obtaining Resources

Here I can walk into any bookstore and I will be greeted with a plethora of anti-Christian writings and writings critical of the development of Christianity and the Bible. In your average bookstore they range from the moderately scholarly such as Bart Ehrman's pop-critical evaluations of the New Testament to the grossly biased works of Dawkins or Hitchens. Compare this to what your local bookstore holds in relation to Islam.

Not one bookstore in the country holds Christoph Luxenberg's the 'Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Qur'an'. Not one bookstore holds a title of Robert Spencer's 'The Truth about Muhammad' but some can order it in by request.

But I thought this was of no real issue to me as I have access to some of the greatest academic libraries in the country. As a patron of five university libraries - 2 of which are ranked in the top 100 World universities and 4 with a Middle Eastern and Islamic studies department - I thought it wouldn't be a problem. But to my surprise not one of the universities held a copy of Luxenberg's book.

If anyone is aware of an online published version of Christoph Luxenberg's 'The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Qur'an' or a bookstore holding it do not be afraid to leave a message!

Qur'anic Abrogation - Surah 2:106

I was just observing a discussion regarding Qur'anic abrogation. Many Muslims attempt to avoid any sort of doctrine whatsoever, while others admit that verses were 'caused to be forgotten' and replaced. The first position obviously goes against the various Qur'anic verses and Islamic traditions. However, I was shocked at the way the Muslim attempted to interpret the ayat.

For example, Surah 2 aya 106 was raised:

And for whatever verse We abrogate or cast into oblivion, We bring a better or the like of it; knowest thou not that God is powerful over everything?
Surah 2:106 (Arberry)

The Muslim response to this was:

there is no verse in the Holy Qurán that's abbrogated or has been cancelled out! That verse that says that, is talking about past commandments given to past prophets, commandments contained in the Bible!

There is either no honesty or ignorance by our Muslim brother in making this claim. In appeal to the tafsir writers we see the picture.

Tafsir Ibn Abbas:

Then Allah mentions what was abrogated of the Qur'an and that which was not abrogated, as a direct reference to the claim of the Quraysh who said to the Prophet: O Muhammad! Why do you command us to do something and then forbid it, saying: (Such of Our revelations as We abrogate) We do not erase a verse that was acted upon before and which is now not acted upon (or cause to be forgotten) or leave unabrogated so that it is acted upon, (We bring one better) We send Gabriel with that which more profitable and easier to act upon (or the like) in reward, benefit and action. (Knowest thou not) O Muhammad (that Allah is Able to do all things?) of the abrogated and unabrogated.

Within the Qur'anic context it is clear that the ayat is not referring to the Bible but internal abrogation of the Qur'anic text. One thing that our Muslim brothers and sisters dislike to be reminded of is what the Qur'an actually has to asy about the Bible:

And believe in that I have sent down, confirming that which is with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And sell not My signs for a little price; and fear you Me.
Surah 2:41 (Arberry)

The Name of Jesus: Yasu, Isa and Yeshua

I am honestly at a loss of words on how to categorise this apologetic rebuttal. I will let you share in the perplexity (but please do mind the vulgarity.)

Claim:

The letter J was not invented until the 17th century. Before the 1611 the King James Version was known as the King Iames Version.
Christians refer to Prophet Isa as Jesus
So when all you christians are spewing 'Jesus Jesus' on the second coming, do you think the Prophet Isa will know that you are calling him????

Response:

I find this a poor attack- and this was by no means the first time the author has employed it. In his mind, this claim apparently destroys the entire integrity of Christian beliefs and the Bible.

Jesus is the latinised version of the Greek Iesous from Yeshua. But to the Christian, professing Jesus' name in our own tongue is no stumbling block - in Acts 2 the disciples ministered in all tongues.

so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Phil 2:10-11 (ESV)

But all this aside, if our Muslim friend holds onto the view that Jesus will not recognise a translation of his name how would he recognise the Muslim's calling 'Isa? In Arabic, the Christian communities have always referred to Jesus as Yasu - coming from the Hebrew and Aramaic roots. However, in the 7th Century with the advent of Koranic literature Yasu was now 'Isa among the Muslims.

In the words of Professor James A. Bellamy:

“The fact that Isa has no satisfactory derivation and no pre-Koranic history should have alerted scholars to the possibility that the word is a MISTAKE”.

Professor James A. Bellamy, 'Textual Criticism of the Koran', Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol 121 No 1 (Jan-Mar).

The Myth of Perfect Preservation: Examining a Variant

Muslims often claim that a sign that the Qur'an is from God is that today's copy is perfectly preserved (16:8) from the eternal tablets (85:22) and this is a sign that it is from Allah. In this brief post I will put aside the evidence from the ahadith mentioning lost and variant surahs and take one example from the physical evidence.

The Uthman Quran or Today's Quran

Brief history:

The Uthman Quran, also known as Tashkent Qur'an, Osman's Koran and Samarkand Codex, is believed by many Muslims to be one of Uthman's original editions which is testified by the blood stains found on the Quran from Uthman's assassination. Then we have today's common Qur'an - a 1924 Egyptian version mass produced early last century.

One Page Examined:

(Click to see full sized)

Take note of the textual variants marked in line 2 (37:103), line 4 (37:105), line 6, line 7 (37:106) and line 8 of the Uthman Quran.


One Variant Examined:

At the start of line two we see a variant - this variant occurs in Surah 37 aya 103.

(Uthman Quran variant from line 2, page 652)

Transliteration: wa ma ‘aslamA
Translation: And they did not submit (i.e. become Muslims)

(Current 1924 Standard Quran Edition)

Transliteration: falammA‘slamA
Translation: When they too submitted (i.e. became Muslims)

Conclusion

We see that the old Uthman Quran shows a stark contradiction to the Quran in use today in surah 37 aya 103. Similarly, in that single page of 8 lines there were 5 variants to the Quran used today.

If we hold the Muslim view that a text cannot be considered inspired in light of textual variants (as they charge against the Bible), they cannot consider their own text to be inspired as it is evidently 'corrupted' and contains numerous textual variants. However, unlike with New Testament scholarship the study of textual variants in Islam is a subject of taboo as they hold onto the claim that the Quran is unchanged through transmission.

This is a dilemma for the Muslims that must be addressed.

Science Myths: Muhammad or Science?

The Islamic community constantly reminds the world of how their holy books and their prophet Muhammad were scientific geniuses well ahead of their time. Many people take this claim as truthful without asking for evidence – if so many people are repeating it, it must be true? Others who ask for evidence are provided with the worst works to ever be produced in the English language – poor paraphrasing of scientific concepts loosely linked to incoherent and archaic English translations of the Qur’an.

Then there are those who go straight to the sources – to see what Muhammad really knew about science. For those belonging to the last group, this is for you.

Muhammad’s Scientific Knowledge

1. The first humans were 60 cubits tall. That is roughly 90 feet tall or 27metres.

The Prophet said, "Allah created Adam, making him 60 cubits tall. When He created him, He said to him, "Go and greet that group of angels, and listen to their reply, for it will be your greeting (salutation) and the greeting (salutations of your offspring." So, Adam said (to the angels), As-Salamu Alaikum (i.e. Peace be upon you). The angels said, "As-salamu Alaika wa Rahmatu-l-lahi" (i.e. Peace and Allah's Mercy be upon you). Thus the angels added to Adam's salutation the expression, 'Wa Rahmatu-l-lahi,' Any person who will enter Paradise will resemble Adam (in appearance and figure). People have been decreasing in stature since Adam's creation."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 543

2. House flies – 1 wing causes disease, 1 wing cures disease

The Prophet said "If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 537

3. Fevers are caused by the hellfire

I used to sit with Ibn 'Abbas in Mecca. Once I had a fever and he said (to me), "Cool your fever with Zam-zam water, for Allah's Apostle said: 'It, (the Fever) is from the heat of the (Hell) Fire; so, cool it with water (or Zam-zam water)."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 483

4. Eating dates renders all poisons (and magic) ineffective

Allah's Apostle said, "He who eats seven 'Ajwa dates every morning, will not be affected by poison or magic on the day he eats them."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 65, Number 356
(Also in hadith number 663)

For a consistent argument, the Muslim must accept all their sources. These difficulties must be rationalised before they cherry pick.

Science Myths: Medicinal Properties of Honey and the Qur’an

Once again, Muslims appeal to the claim of ‘science’ in the Qu’ran

Claim:

Only a couple of centuries ago man came to know that honey comes from the belly of the bee. This fact was mentioned in the Qur’aan 1,400 years ago in the following verse:

“There issues From within their bodies A drink of varying colours,
Wherein is healing for men.” [Al-Qur’aan 16:69]

We are now aware that honey has a healing property and also a mild
antiseptic property. The Russians used honey to cover their wounds in World War II.

The wound would retain moisture and would leave very little scar tissue.

Thus the knowledge contained in the Qur’aan regarding honey, its origin and properties, was far ahead of the time it was revealed.

Response:

What we see here are two main claims:

1. The Qur’an was revolutionary in claiming that honey comes from the belly of bees;
2. The Qur’an was revolutionary in suggesting a medicinal use for honey.
   

Thus, the Qur’an was inspired by Allah as these scientific miracles, 1400 years before their time, are testament to.

This claim would be impressive, yet still logically unsound, if it was true. But as with Islamic attempts at proselytisation – it is mere conjecture. A deception employed by Muslims in order to gain converts and raise the prominence of their religion and the Qur'an.

Firstly, I will cover point number one regarding the claim that “only a couple of centuries ago man came to know that honey comes from the belly of the bee.” Secondly, I will cover point two regarding the documented historical use of honey as a medicine prior to the advent of Islam and conception of the Qu’ran. Thirdly, I will challenge the claim that this is proof of the divine origins of the Qur’an.

I. Honey from the Belly of the Bee

The claim, as above, is that the Qur’an prior to the scientific endeavor of any man stated that honey comes from the ‘belly of the bee’. The Qur’anic verse of Surah An-Nahl (16) goes:

And suck from all fruits and flit about the unrestricted paths of their Lord. A drink of various hues comes out of their bellies which contains medicine for men. In this is a sign for those who reflect.
Surah 16:69 (Ahmed Ali)

Here we can see that the claim is found in the Qur’an. However, what are the sources of this claim. By no means was the Qur’an the first to make (or repeat) this claim. Without going into any exegesis for the original source of transmission or the introduction of this idea to the Arab peninsula I will simply quote a prominent work predating the Qur’an by almost a millenium:

“but honey is a liquid that cometh from the stomach and belly of the bee”

The Works of Aristotle by Aristotle (384-322BC)

Aristotle made mention of this fact in passing as it was a well known theory at the time that honey came from the stomach or ‘belly’ of the bee. Hence, the uniqueness of this claim being one in the Qur’an has no factual basis as it is simply in harmony with Greek science from almost a millennium earlier.

II. Medicinal Properties of Honey

The claim that the Qur’an, in harmony with science, attributes healing properties to honey is not usually in doubt:

And suck from all fruits and flit about the unrestricted paths of their Lord. A drink of various hues comes out of their bellies which contains medicine for men. In this is a sign for those who reflect

Surah 16:69 (Ahmed Ali)

Note, the general rendering of “feehi shifaon lilnnasi” in English is “having/containing healing properties for men/mankind.”


However, in the historical and geographical context of Muhammad and the Qur’an there is nothing special, unique or revolutionary about this claim. We could turn back to Aristotle of the 4th Century BC Greece and his works outlining multiple medical uses of honey and its effect on the healing process. However, we can also go further back into the past.

For 4000 years writes have described medicinal, pharmaceutical and health-giving properties attributed to honey. Traditional medicine used honey for treating many disorders… (Komolfare, 1995 cited in ‘The World History of Beekeeping and Honey Hunting', Eva Crane)


Records of people covering wounds with honey stretch back to ancient Egypt and as Dioscorides reported in 50 AD, honey is “good for all rotten and hollow ulcers”. (‘Wound-healing Properties of Honey – more than 4,500 years of results’)


Famous ancient physicians who used honey include Aristotle (384-322 BC), who mentions pale honey "good as a salve for sore eyes and wounds", and Dioscorides (c.50 AD) who mentions it for ulcers. (‘The History of Honey as Medicine’)

As is evident, within the ancient world the use of honey for medicinal purposes was by no means a new science. For thousands of years prior to Muhammad making mention of this in the Qur’an, we have documented evidence of the medical use of honey in healing. Thus, the claim of the Qur’an revolutionizing the field of medicine in advance of scientific discovery is truly false.

III. Evidence for Divine Origin

As is evident, there was nothing unique of the claim that honey comes from the ‘belly’ of the bee or that honey can be used for heeling properties. Both of these facts were well known facts. However, if the Muslim insists in favour of their assertion, they must also accept Aristotle's work, among others, as being from Allah.


Further References:

The Healing Hand: Man and Wound in the Ancient World by Guide Marjno, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1975
‘The World History of Beekeeping and Honey Hunting’ by Eva Crane, 1999
The Works of Aristotle by Aristotle, Project Guttenberg

Quick Apologetics: Muhammad in the Bible

Muslims often cite what they believe to be examples of Muhammad in the Bible. However, they cannot be blamed for this as it is an act of necessity. Muhammad claimed that he was foretold in the Bible so Muslims are bound to find examples and present it as proof to the Christians and Jews that Muhammad was a statement of their own beliefs and thus a legitimate prophet.

Here I will briefly outline the absurdity of some of these claims so that you can be ready to give a defence to this deceptive handling of your text. By the end of your argument you can always question your opponent - if the Qur'an claimed Muhammad could be found in the Bible when he actually isn't, is it possible to trust the Quran?

NB: I have derived the basis for the Islamic argument which I rebut from Zakir Naik. His answers are often posed and copy/pasted.

Index:

1. Deuteronomy 18
2. Song of Solomon 5
3. John 14/15/16 and the Comforter

Old Testament

1. Muhammad is foretold in Deuteronomy 18:18

The LORD said to me: "What they say is good. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death
Deuteronomy 18:17-20

Claim:

1. "From among their brothers" means from among the brother tribes of Israel and they claim here refers to the Ishmaelites. Muhammad was an Ishmaelite hence verse is talking about him.
2. Muhammad was like Moses.

Response:

1. Deuteronomy 18:18 states that the prophet will come "from among their brothers". In this verse God is talking to Moses and the Jews - such phraseology can only be applied to the fact that the language is inclusive of the people they are addressing.
   
   This is clarified within the Biblical context:
   

   be sure to appoint over you the king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your own brothers. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not a brother Israelite.
   Deuteronomy 17:15
   

   The above verse confirms the context of the usage of brothers. From among your brothers means from among your own people - not a foreigner (or Ishmaelite) - but an Israelite.
   
   Therefore, the verse directly excludes Muhammad as he was not from among the Israelites.
   
   
2. As we have seen, the verse requires the person be from among the Israelites Muhammad does not meet the criteria in this respect nor was Muhammad similar to Moses in this respect.
   
   Moses brought in the age of the Law. Jesus fulfilled the law and brought in the Messianic age.

2. Muhammad is foretold in Song of Solomon 5:16

Claim:

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned by name in the Song of Solomon chapter 5 verse 16:

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

In the Hebrew language im is added for respect. Similarely im is added after the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to make it Muhammadim. In English translation they have even translated the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as "altogether lovely", but in the Old Testament in Hebrew, the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is yet present.

Response:

1. The transliteration of the Hebrew of Song of Solomon 5:16 is actually incorrect. No such Hebrew word 'Muhammadim' appears in the text. The transliteration would read "Machmadim" (pronounced Mahk-Mawd-Im). The word 'Machmadim' is the plural of 'Machmad' meaning “a desirable thing, a precious thing” from the root word “chamad” meaning desirable. Hence the reason why this word is translated as it is in the respective English translations.
   
   
2. If we were to use the word 'Machmadim' as it were Muhammad's name and a reference to him we would find the scriptures making no sense. Another example of Muhammad in the Bible would include"
   

   but about this time tomorrow I will send my servants to you, and they will search your house and the houses of your servants; and whatever is MUHAMMAD, they will take in their hand and carry away.’ ”
   1 Kings 20:6

As is evident, this claim of Muhammad being in Song of Solomon 5:16 results from a false transliteration of the Hebrew. If we were to accept the claim that the word was Muhammad we would find many occurrence of Muhammad where it just doesn't make sense. (E.g. 1 Kings 20:6)

New Testament

Claim:

The claim goes that the Comforter/Helper/Advocate/Counsellor (depending on its English translation) or the Parakletos as it appears in the Original Greek is Muhammad and that Jesus foretold his coming. Within John 14-16 the word is used a number of times.

Response:

John 14:26 is probably the greatest response to use to this claim

But the Helper (Parakletos), the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
John 14:26 (ESV)

1. The Comforter is identified as the Holy Spirit. "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit..." (John 14:26)
2. The Comforter is sent by the Father in Jesus' name, "whom the Father will send in my name". (John 14:26) If the Comforter is Muhammad, then he was sent in Jesus' nam which would make Jesus God.
   
3. The Comforter will teach all things and help the disciples remember all that Jesus taught, "he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you."
   (John 14:26). Did Muhammad help the disciples remember what Jesus taught them?

To further this - examine the nature of the Comforter

1. The Comforter cannot be seen by the world "The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him" John 14:17
2. The Comforter will abide in the disciples, "He abides with you and will be in you." John 14:17
3. The Comforter will convict the world for not believing in Jesus, "because they do not believe in ME" (John 16:8-9)
4. The Comforter will be with the people forever, "that He may be with you forever" (John 14:16).

As is evident, the Comforter cannot be Muhammad as:

• It is identified as the Holy Spirit (John 14:26)
• Muhammad doesn't fit any of the attributes of the Comforter (John 14:16/17/14:16/etc)

[For more on Muhammad in John see Muhammad in the New Testament Revisited]

Conclusion

As is evident, these popular myths propagated by Muslims have no credibility. They rely on deception or removing the verse (or even phrases) from the context of the verse/chapter/book/testament/Bible in order to prove a point.

After debating the topic of Muhammad in the Bible numerous times I can say with full confidence that there is no reference of Muhammad as a true prophet of God within the Bible.

Bitesized Video Responses:


Deuteronomy 18:18 & Song of Solomon Response by Jay Smith [PhD Student at the London School of Theology]


John 14/15/16 and the Parakletos/Comforter by Jay Smith [PhD Student at the London School of Theology]


John 14-16 and the Comforter by Dr James White


Further Reading:

Answering Jamal Badawi: Muhammad in the Bible By Sam Shamoun
Who is the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18:18 By Silas
Two Short, Sound, Simple Proofs that Muhammad Was a False Prophet By David Wood

Quick Apologetics

Within the genre of the Muslim-Christian polemic accustomed myself to composing detailed essay styled rebuttals and apologetics. Although these are effective in putting the myths against Christianity to rest, the form may be inconvenient to many for a few reasons.

Firstly, the amount of detail may be confusing and unnecessary for the general Christian audience and secondly, long detailed arguments do not necessarily translate well into short meaningful responses in general apologetics for the average Christian and Muslim.

With these limitations in mind I have began to author my apologetics in a short bitesized manner for easy use in general conversation such as in person, when witnessing or even on facebook!