(Ricky W;27026)
A'udzubillaahiminasysyaithonirrojiimBismillaahirrohmaanirrohiimYour possibilities it might be logic as well, yes that could be one of the possibilities that might what it is. However if we saw what Jesus has said in John, it would be more clearly state, that the prophet was not Jesus(pbuh).Let us see what i meant by seeing these verses below :John 16:16:13 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.This verse clearly state Jesus(pbuh) was not the prophet that Deuteronomy 18 has said, why ? If we see the language structure that Jesus(pbuh) has said, he using word he instead of I. Which is from we can tell that the prophet was male, but not Jesus (pbuh).16:14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.16:15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.This verse give us more better view that the prophet was not Jesus(pbuh) himself.
Dear Ricky,Upon your request, I'm going to take what I previously said as my basis, and continue to explain to you these other associated arguments, which are the most basic of Muslim apologetics.Just so every Christian understands and can keep up, one of the most common apologetic arguments from Muslims concerning Christianity, which is also one of the oldest within Islamic tradition, is to claim that Deuteronomy 18 speaks of Muhammed. This is supported in a few ways. First, the passage is seen as indicative not of the prophet coming from an Israelite tribe, but of him coming from the brothers of the Jews, who are presumably, it is thought, the Ishmaelites. Another support comes from the understanding that the prophet is to be like Moses, and there are compiled lists showing how Moses and Muhammed are more alike than Moses and Jesus {though the lists often use things like "neither were born of virgin birth" or other such things, drawing off of the particularities of Christ}. Another common way to support it, is to suggest that the scriptures hold testimony, if we look at them properly, that Jesus foretold Muhammed.Where does this come from? Well;"O Children of Israel! I am a messenger of Allah to you, confirming what is before me from the Tawraat, and announcing tidings of a messenger to follow me whose name shall be Ahmad!" ~ Surah 61:6This, the Qur'an teaches, is the teaching of Jesus. He is the main speaker in this instance. So, it is believed that Jesus prophesied another prophet after him. It is often pointed out that Muhammed comes from the root Ahmad, and thus Jesus' prophecy obviously wasn't directly mentioning Muhammed by name. {This is essential to the argument in it's most sophisticated form.}Alright, so now that we're done the preamble;The passage In John needs to be taken into it's context. Let's bring it up again with some context.First, it is important to understand that the Gospel of John is retrospective and in the form more akin to that of a sermon than a historical account. As such, it is looking back on the ministry of Christ, and relating it to the devout Christian, bringing all the meaning it can."Now I am going to him who sent me, yet none of you asks me, 'Where are you going?' Because I have said these things, you are filled with grief. But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned. 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 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. He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you. " ~John 16:5-15Christ had just resurrected, and was promising to his followers "the comforter". Who was this?Many times Muslims bring up that the biblical text shows that it is a masculine tense and since the Holy Spirit itself should be feminine this must refer to somebody/something else. Sometimes, though more rarely, it is claimed that Christians changed this passage, intentionally or not, such that the reading now {Parakletos}, was originally "Periklutos" in the Greek {Periklutos = the praised, or Praised One}. {Ahmed root = praised one}.Now, I don't know Greek, but from what I understand, the Grammar shift from changing that one word, would have made the sentence grammatically incorrect. Basically, from one word to another, one would have to slightly restructure the sentence to even allow it to make sense. That, as far as I'm concerned, rules out scribal error. However, the tradition in the Church that this passage is meant to be about the Holy Spirit is unanimous. There is no question about it in Church teaching in early Christianity. This passage is thought to be fulfilled in the Pentecost. The Comforter is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, by the by, is referred to in the male tense in the New Testament, because only in the Hebrew does it have a feminine form. The masculine form can't be taken to indicate that it must be a prophet, for that's not fair exegesis at all. If I practiced that exegesis with the Qur'an, then God would be plural and Triune {oh the irony
}.The Gospel of John, recall, is being retrospective. It's reflecting on Jesus' teaching and very obviously here is referring to the Holy Spirit whom the apostles were told would come to them.It is perhaps valid to note that in John's Gospel Jesus did breath on them and said that by this they received the spirit, and has no account of Pentecost. while that's a fair point, once again I'd like to stress that John's Gospel is retrospective, and makes no attempt to be perfectly chronological, or sych up with the synoptic Gospels. If one studies the Gospel of John on it's own and looks closely, they will notice that John's Gospel does not paint the cross as the instrument of salvation at all, and instead we are made clean "by Jesus' words" and very simply by his words. Much of the language is that of a sermon {almost a pastoral}, and needs to be understood that way.Keeping in context, let's observe another part of John's Gospel which speaks of this "Comforter", to see if we can figure out more conclusively from the text itself who/what this is."I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever—
the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you." ~ John 14:16-20So, what do we know of this "comforter" now, when we observe the word in the context of the whole Gospel narrative? Well, first, it is worthy to note that on both these occasions Jesus is speaking privately to his apostles. Here he speaks more clearly that he will not leave them as orphans without a guide. Surely nobody would claim that Muhammed came soon enough to guide the apostles. What else do we discover? Well, we find that whoever the comforter is, he already "Lives with you". Meaning, he presently lives with the apostles, and then the passage goes on to say how he will come to live within them. Surely, Muhammed is no longer a possibility by now.This is all I have time for at the moment. To recap, I've shown that Deuteronomy 18 is conclusively speaking about a prophet from within Israel, as we can surmise both from the passage itself, and from Deuteronomy 34:10-12. I've shown that Jesus is not ever recorded foretelling a coming prophet of any kind {at least, not within the Ingil}. Ricky, you voiced your concerns privately to me that you didn't feel I was going to properly answer to you. I admit I'm now pressed for time, so I apologize if this is true. However, in the case that it is, please feel free to re-post, or post, anything you would like me to address.In Hope,~Tyrel