The Prophet's Name

[Islam is the truth]

The Prophet’s Name



The Hebraic Versions of Torah still carry the name of Muhammad without ambiguity. In the song of songs, chapter 5,Verse 16,we read:


Which means: “ His speech is the most pleasant. He is the Great Muhammad, this is my beloved, and this my friend.” The Hebraic word clearly indicates the name of Muhammad but Jews and Christians refuse to admit that and insist that it is not a proper name but an epithet describing the Prophet, claiming that it means “altogether lovely”.


“His mouth is most sweet; yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved and this is my friend.”


Then, who can be described as having all virtuous characteristics but Muhammad, the great Prophet, Allah’s beloved and favored Messenger?


In the New Testament, the Prophet’s name occurs in several positions. In the Book of John 16:7, we read Jesus’ words while addressing his Disciples:


“Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the comforter (“periclytos” in Greek) will not come unto you.”


The word “comforter” is translated from the Greek word “paracletos” which had been used to replace the original word “periclytos” meaning “Muhammad” or “Ahmad” in Arabic. The two Greek utterances have little difference in pronunciation as well as in spelling; therefore, the scribes could have easily used one word for the other in some versions. Jews and Christians have preferred the corrupted version to the true one.


There is a Gospel known by the name the Gospel of Barnabas, which the church banned in 492 AD by the order of Pope Gelasius. It was confiscated everywhere. But there was still a copy of that Gospel in the library of Pope Sixtus V. Fortunately a certain Roman Monk called Framarino managed to bring it out. He had found the letters of Ireneus, where the came upon the name of the Gospel of Barnabas mentioned as a reference. His curiosity urged him to look for that gospel. When he became a close friend to Pope Sixtus V, he got that copy of the gospel and found in it that there would come a time when it would be claimed that Jesus is Allah’s son, and this misconception would continue till Muhammad, Allah’s Messenger comes, to set things right.


In the Gospel of Barnabas, (220:4), we read: “And this mocking shall continue until the advent of Muhammad the Messenger of God, who, when he shall come, shall reveal this deception to those who believe in God’s Law.”


Framarino was converted to Islam and published among people this Gospel, which the church had opposed.


The name of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) has clearly been mentioned in the scriptures of Jews and Christians throughout history. Muslim scholars used to use this fact in their disputes with the priests and learned Jews.


In the Book of Isaiah, we read: “I make your name Muhammad. O Muhammad, the holy one of the Lord! Your name has been there always.” This quotation is taken from “Al-Din wa Al-Dawala” written by ‘Ali ibn Raban Al-Tabari (who had been Christian and then embraced Islam). He died in 247 AH.


We read, in the Book of the Isaiah also: “We heard, from the extremes of earth, the voice Of Muhammad.”


In the Book of Habakkuk, we read : “God came from Tayman, the Holy one from the Mount of Paran. Mohammed’s splendor has covered the heavens, and the earth is filled with his praise.” That is also mentioned in “Al-Din wa Al-Dawlah” of Ali ibn Raban al Tabari. It is also mentioned by Ibrahim Khalil Ahmad, previously a Christian priest who embraced Islam later and included the above Verse in a book he wrote in 1409 AH.


In Isaiah also we read : “What I will give him will not be given to anyone else. Ahmad will praise Allah newly. He comes from the best land; the wilderness and its inhabitants will rejoice. They will celebrate the Oneness of Allah at every elevated place and glorify Him on every hill.”


This is mentioned by Abdullah Al-Turjuman, whose name had been Anslam Tormida. He had been a Spanish priest before he was converted to Islam. He died in 832 AH.


Jubayr ibn Mut’im said: “ I heard Allah’s Messenger (Peace be upon him) saying: ‘I have various names: I am Muhammad, and I am Ahmad, and I am Al-Mahi with whom Allah obliterates disbelief, and I am Al-Hashir at whose feet people will be gathered, and I am Al-‘Aqib.’’’ Allah (SWT) says: (And Remember, the son of Mary, said: ‘ O children of Israel! I am the Messenger of Allah (sent to you) confirming the Torah (which came) before me, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me whose name shall be Ahmad.’ When he came to them with clear signs, they said, ‘ This is evident sorcery.’)(61:6)


Professor Abdul-Ahad Dawud Al-Ashuri, the former archbishop of Mosul, who was converted to Islam, says (in his book “Muhammad in the Bible”): “The statement popular among Christians: “Glory be to Allah in the heavens and peace be on earth and happiness be among people” was originally: “Glory be to Allah in the heavens, Islam be on earth, and Muhammad is for people.”


The name of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) occurred in the Hindu Scriptures. In the Sama Veda, we read: “Ahmad acquired Shari’ah (religion law) from his Lord. This Shari’ah is full of wisdom. I receive light from him just as from the sun.”


In Athrava Veda (another Hindu Scripture), Kanda 20, Sukia 127, Mantra 1-3, we read: “O people! Listen to this carefully! Muhammad will be raised among people…. His greatness will be praised even in paradise and it will be subjected to him, and he is the Muhammad.”


In Bhawishya Purana (another Hindu scripture ) parv 3, Khand 3, Adhya 3 , Shalok 5-8, we read: “Just then an illiterate man with the epithet Teacher, Muhammad by name, comes only with his companions. The angel will purify him with the five things.”


The five things of purification are obviously the five daily prayers that cleanse a Muslim of his sins.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reference : "ILM AL IMAN" by ABD ALMAJEED ALZENDANEE

[ronniv93]

The Hebraic Versions of <b>Torah</b> still carry the name of Muhammad without ambiguity. In the song of songs, chapter 5,Verse 16,we read:

Song of Songs, or Song of Solomon, is not part of the Torah.

The Hebraic word clearly indicates the name of Muhammad but Jews and Christians refuse to admit that and insist that it is not a proper name but an epithet describing the Prophet, claiming that it means “altogether lovely”.

It's not a refusal to admit anything. It's simply the truth.

In the New Testament, the Prophet’s name occurs in several positions. In the Book of John 16:7, we read Jesus’ words while addressing his Disciples:
“Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the comforter (“periclytos” in Greek) will not come unto you.”

Well, anything in the New Testament is <b>obviously</b> not part of the Torah.


And the Greek word is NOT "periclytos", nor has it ever been. This a fabrication and a lie for people to claim that this was the original word. It is PARAclytos. You would think that out of the THOUSANDS of ancient manuscripts we have, at least ONE might have "periclytos" if this theory were true. But NOT ONE does.


Why do people claim corruption when there is no proof of such.

There is a Gospel known by the name the Gospel of Barnabas, which the church banned in 492 AD by the order of Pope Gelasius.

This is also, obviously, not a part of the Torah. And this statement is false anyway. The document known as the "gospel of barnabas" is not known to have existed before the Middle Ages and it's only found in Latin. It is an obvious forgery and false document.

In the Book of Isaiah, we read: “I make your name Muhammad. O Muhammad, the holy one of the Lord! Your name has been there always.” This quotation is taken from “Al-Din wa Al-Dawala” written by ‘Ali ibn Raban Al-Tabari (who had been Christian and then embraced Islam). He died in 247 AH.

Isaiah is not part of the Torah either.


And can you provide an exact chapter and verse for this. I have never seen this passage in Isaiah.

We read, in the Book of the Isaiah also: “We heard, from the extremes of earth, the voice Of Muhammad.”

I repeat my exact same comments from above:


Isaiah is not part of the Torah either.


And can you provide an exact chapter and verse for this. I have never seen this passage in Isaiah.

In the Book of Habakkuk, we read : “God came from Tayman, the Holy one from the Mount of Paran. Mohammed’s splendor has covered the heavens, and the earth is filled with his praise.” That is also mentioned in “Al-Din wa Al-Dawlah” of Ali ibn Raban al Tabari. It is also mentioned by Ibrahim Khalil Ahmad, previously a Christian priest who embraced Islam later and included the above Verse in a book he wrote in 1409 AH.

Habakkuk is not part of the Torah either.


In any case, Muhammad's name is not in this book either. Please provide the chapter and verse in this book which has it.

In Isaiah also we read : “What I will give him will not be given to anyone else. Ahmad will praise Allah newly. He comes from the best land; the wilderness and its inhabitants will rejoice. They will celebrate the Oneness of Allah at every elevated place and glorify Him on every hill.”

Again, Isaiah is not part of the Torah.


And please provide the chapter and verse where the name "Ahmad" and "Allah" are used in the (as you put it) Hebraic Version.


It is things like this that are a real turnoff, because this stuff is false.... simply not true. How can I trust or believe what people say when they say things that obviously are incorrect?

[umm Zachariah]

Hi Ronniv93,


Just some food for thoughts, due to one of your responses to Islam is the Truth's post.


''And the Greek word is NOT "periclytos", nor has it ever been. This a fabrication and a lie for people to claim that this was the original word. It is PARAclytos. You would think that out of the THOUSANDS of ancient manuscripts we have, at least ONE might have "periclytos" if this theory were true. But NOT ONE does.''


Whether it is a peri or a para it is perhaps interesting. But I find something else much more interesting in this.


Since the Christian belief is that Jesus on the cross redeemed the believers from the curse of the original sin, and that his spirit, grace and presence in the Eucharist would be FOR EVER with them, left them in NO NEED of no consolation nor of the coming consoler at all. BUT on the other hand, IF they nedded such a comforter, then all the Christian presumptions and pretensions concerning the sacrifice fall to the ground. So the question for me arises - which way is it? A or B?


Regards

[ronniv93]

Hey umm_Zachariah,


I'm not sure I understand your question, but I'll try to give you some sort of reply. If I've simply misunderstood you somewhere, please let me know.


Jesus' death, as we believe, redeemed us from the <b>penalty</b> of our sins, which is eternal separation from God. We are now free from condemnation. Because no human being can ever be good or perfect enough for an infinitely holy and pure God. Every person on earth sins or has sinned. The only person who never sinned was Jesus.


When you use the word Eucharist, I assume that's referencing Catholics. Well.... this is one reason I'm not Catholic. I don't understand their belief that the bread and wine actually become Jesus' blood and flesh. I don't believe that His spirit, grace, presence, flesh, blood, etc. are IN the bread and wine. (All the churches I've been to just use grape juice, not wine). Communion for Protestants is symbolic only.


But this "Comforter" is more than a consoler. The Greek word means helper, advocate, one who pleads the case of, etc. It doesn't do away with Jesus' sacrifice. The Holy Spirit dwells within all believers continually and serves many different functions. So in no way does the Spirit negate the sacrifice of Jesus at all.

[umm Zachariah]

Hi Ronniv93,


Thanks for your explanation. I was already a bit off topic in my post and now your is that even more.


So let me put it this way "And I will ask the Father, and he shall give you another Periqlytos, that he may stay with you for ever".


Christians tell me that this Periqlytos is the Holy Spirit. At the same time they also tell me that this same spirit is one of the unities in the trinity. And I am also told that the trinity is the same as the one God.


Christianity also teaches that God is Everlasting, has no beginning nor end, just like Islam teaches.


Still what is explained to me by Christians concerning this verse is that it is the Holy Spirit, one of the unities in the trinity that is to be sent for. And the question arises - HOW can THAT spirit be sent for or shall be given, since it is already there, and always have been, according to Christianity?


Regards