If Muhammad Were a Biblical Prophet he Would Have Done This

The Last Supper

In my last post, I talked a lot about how Muhammad never mentioned that a covenant with Ishmael existed.  The idea of a covenant seems foreign to Islam, however they’re very important in the Bible, in both the Old and New Testament.  They actually show why Muhammad is not a Prophet by Biblical standards.

In the book of Genesis we have several covenants.  In the book of Exodus, we have a very specific covenant given to Moses and the Israelites on Mount Sinai where they receive the Law of God, also known as the Torah.  This is the last covenant in the Old Testament.  Exodus is only the second book of the OT.  We have over 30 books left.  What do we see?

We see the people of the covenant go astray and God sends them prophets.  These prophets are there to bring Israel back on track with the covenant.  We see this with Jeremiah, Ezekial, Isaiah and many other prophets.  All of these prophets call Israel away from idolatry and other sins and back to true worship.  Some were more successful and some were less successful.

In the NT we have Jesus establishing the new covenant.  The details of this is given at the last supper recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke and First Corinthians.  Let me just give one verse.  Mark 14:24 reads:

This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many,” he said to them.

This is the new covenant that was foretold in Jeremiah 31.  The other sources listed above give additional details which one can check for referencing.

While I mentioned in my last post that nowhere in Islamic sources does it claim that Ishmael was part of a covenant, it also doesn’t say that Muhammad brought a new covenant.  He simply claimed to be a prophet.  Not every prophet comes with a covenant.  Certainly Jesus and Moses did but most prophets don’t.  The prophets of the OT called the Israelites back to the covenant that they had with Moses.

In my Canada Day dialogue at the dawah booth that can be found below, we actually discussed this.  I told the Muslim that Jesus commanded His followers to baptize.  I asked him if he was baptized and when he said no, I asked him why.  He asked if Moses baptized and this is where I got into the covenant discussion.

I specifically asked one of the people at the dawah booth if Muhammad brought a new covenant.  He said that he brought a new message.  All prophets come with a new message but only a few come with a new covenant and if Muhammad never claimed to bring one, he should have been calling his followers back to the last covenant.  He should have instructed them to continue observing rites like baptism and the Eucharist which Jesus Christ commanded his followers to observe.

Now, there is no indication in the New Testament that another prophet was coming, but if another one did come, the Christians at the time, knowing the OT would have expected this man to call them back to the covenant of Jesus Christ.  Instead he introduced a bunch of new laws and rituals without dissolving the covenant of Christ and instituting his own.  That is one of the numerous reasons that I reject Muhammad as a prophet on Biblical grounds.