This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Muhammad and the Bible article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article was nominated for deletion on 14 October 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Stfg, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on 13 February 2012. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for ((copyedit)). The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining! |
On 1 April 2018, it was proposed that this article be moved from Muhammad in the Bible to Muhammad and the Bible. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Index
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Mahammaddim is the actual Biblical Hebrew word found in a passage which some Muslims claim is a reference to Muhammad, as discussed indirectly above in the #Song of Songs 5:16 section in this page, and in more details somewhere on the talk page or talk page archives of the "Song of Songs" article... AnonMoos (talk) 07:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
AbbasWafadar Again, the page you added [2] says nothing about Muhammad in the Bible. It is not a good source here per WP:SYNTH/WP:OR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Also, per "Promote the Gospel of Christ through the learning, study and application of God's word.", biblehub is not a WP:RS. Being online is not the same as should be used on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
See also WP:EW and WP:BRD. So, let's give talkpage discussion a chance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Fair enough about Mahammadim but why did you revert ALL OF MY EDITS? You literally reverted everything I added, you could've just removed the Mahammadim line?. Also you forgot to mention that I added this source too [3] , which clearly talks about Muhammad in Song of Songs. Can my edits please be re-added. AbbasWafadar (talk) 12:42, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I do admit that my Mahammadim edits might have been unconstructive but what about my other edits. There were only Christian historian thoughts so I added Muslim and Jewish historians thoughts. I added Paraclete in the third paragraph with reliable citations. Why were these edits removed? Can these edits please be re-added. AbbasWafadar (talk) 14:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
OK. Your (AbbasWafadar) last article edit [4], reverted by me, changed the lead from
Arguments that prophecies of Muhammad exist in the Bible have formed part of Muslim tradition from the early history of Muhammad's Ummah (Arabic: أُمّة community). A number of Christians throughout history, such as John of Damascus and John Calvin, have interpreted Muhammad as being the Antichrist of the New Testament.
Muslim theologians have argued that a number of specific passages within the biblical text can be specifically identified as references to Muhammad, both in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and in the Christian New Testament. Several verses in the Quran, as well as several Hadiths, state that Muhammad is described in the Bible. On the other hand, scholars have generally interpreted these verses as referring to the community of Israel or Yahweh's personal soteriological actions regarding the Israelites or members of the faithful community, such as in the cases of Isaiah 42. The apocryphal Gospel of Barnabas, which explicitly mentions Muhammad, is widely recognized by scholars as a fabrication from the Early Modern Age. Some Muslim theologians also claimed the Paraclete (Greek New Testament) as Muhammad, although scholars identify it with the Holy Spirit.
to
Muhammad in the Bible refers to arguments that prophecies of Muhammad exist in the Bible. It has formed part of Muslim tradition from the early history of the Ummah (Arabic: أُمّة, lit. 'Community'). Early Muslim historians, such as Ibn Ishaq, have believed that, due to some prophecies, Muhammad was accepted as a prophet in Medina.[1] Early Christian historians throughout history, such as John of Damascus, interpreted Muhammad as being the Antichrist of the New Testament. Early Jewish historians, did not regard Muhammad as a prophet, but did view him as a savior for the Arabs.[2][3][4]
Muslim theologians have argued that a number of specific passages within the biblical text can be specifically identified as references to Muhammad, both in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and in the Christian New Testament. Several verses in the Quran, as well as several Hadiths, state that Muhammad is described in the Bible. On the other hand, scholars have generally interpreted these verses as referring to the community of Israel or Yahweh's personal soteriological actions regarding the Israelites or members of the faithful community, such as in the cases of Isaiah 42. The apocryphal Gospel of Barnabas, which explicitly mentions Muhammad, is widely recognized by scholars as a fabrication from the Early Modern Age. Some Muslim theologians also claimed the Paraclete (Greek New Testament) as Muhammad, although scholars identify it with the Holy Spirit.
The word "Mahammaddim" (Hebrew: מַחֲּמַדִּ֑ים) is mentioned once in the Bible, which is believed by some Muslim theologians to be a reference to Muhammad.[5][6] Many Muslim writers have maintained that the Paraclete in the Bible is a prophecy about Muhammad.[7][8]
References
Now God had prepared the way for Islam in that they (the Arabs of Medina) lived side by side with the Jews who were people of the Scripture and Knowledge, while they themselves were polytheists and idolaters... the Jews used to say to them: 'A prophet will be sent soon, his day is at hand.' ... so when they (the Arabs of Medina) heard the Apostle's message they said one to another: 'this is the very Prophet of the Jews'. Thereupon, they accepted his teachings and became Muslims.
:1
was invoked but never defined (see the help page).We dealt with the "Mahammaddim" part above.
IMO your first sentence is ok, pretty much equal, or a little better, to the previous version.
"Early Muslim historians, such as Ibn Ishaq, have believed that, due to some prophecies, Muhammad was accepted as a prophet in Medina.[1]" IMO, as written this seems off topic, and per the text in the WP-article this seems to refer to profecies in the Quran. Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but that's how I read it.
"Early Christian historians throughout history, such as John of Damascus, interpreted Muhammad as being the Antichrist of the New Testament." IMO not an improvement. John was earlier, but Calvin and Luther "weightier", since they founded significant Christianity branches of their own. Also they are not early Christians.
"Early Jewish historians, did not regard Muhammad as a prophet, but did view him as a savior for the Arabs.[2][3][4]" I see no support for this in Roth p218[5] (also, "historian" is probably not a good description of anyone mentioned in the current lead). The Bustan Al-ukul I don't get easy access to, so I can't see what Natan'el al-Fayyumi wrote about Muhammad in the Bible. Quote, anyone? Dito Gan ha-Sekhalim.
I'll stop here for now and wait for others comments. Per WP preference (WP:PRIMARY and WP:AGEMATTERS), it's good if we can avoid sourcing the old writer's directly, but context matters. Basically, we want a modern historian to tell us what Ibn Ishaq et al think, rather than try to interpret their words ourselves. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:19, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Noting that AbbasWafadar been blocked as a sockpuppet. Oh well, AGF is the law of the land. But a little disheartening. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:02, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Come to think of it, it would be good to have a couple of WP:RS that connects GoB to the article-topic. I read somewhere the idea that it's part of the "uncorrupted/original" Bible, and therefore proves that Muhammad was in the Bible, but I can't find it in a good source atm. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
This should not be listed on Wikipedia. The thought that the name "Muhammad" can be interpreted from the Hebrew word "muhammadim" the root word for which is "machmad" or like something desired, is nonsensical. This is about the love between Solomon and his bride. Adding Muhammad in here would be absolutely ridiculous. Even suggesting it could be an interpretation should not be anywhere on the page. Sure, maybe some desperate people try to interpret it as such, but to even give it mention is a disgrace to the Old Testament. 32.214.74.121 (talk) 21:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Looking for help in providing appropriate references to add a section:
START
TITLE: Notable passages in Bahá'í interpretation The Bahá'í Faith claims there are several passages within the Old and New Testament prophesying Muhammad, Ali and the other eleven of the Twelve Imams, as well as the rise of the Islamic nation.
SECTION 1: Old Testament
Genesis 17:20, God promises Ishmael twelve princes and a great nation. The twelve princes are considered by Baha'is to be the Twelve Imams, and the great nation is interpreted as one of the fruits of Muhammad's revelation; a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi states, "it is not the City State, but the National State which Muhammad's teachings fostered." Additionally, references to Paran made in Deuteronomy 33:2, Genesis 21:21, Numbers 12:16, and Numbers 13:3 are considered references to Muhammad's Revelation.
SECTION 2: New Testament
According to ʻAbdu'l-Bahá, the eleventh and twelfth chapters of the Book of Revelation prophecy the dispensation of Muhammad, Ali, and the Umayyad Caliphate, the latter of which is described as an enemy of the religion of Muhammad and is considered the beast and the dragon mentioned in Revelation. 'Abdu'l-Bahá claims that the two witnesses are Muhammad and Ali while the prophecy of "forty-two months" and "a thousand two hundred and three score days" is the 1260 year duration of the Qur'anic Dispensation, as Baha'is hold that in the Islamic year 1260 AH, or 1844 AD, which is the year the Báb's revelation began, was the end of that era. He further states that at the end of Muhammad and Ali's testimony, "the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit", who are the Umayyads, went to war with 'Ali and his descendants, and saught to kill members of the lineage of Muhammad because they feared the advent of the Mahdi. The seven heads of the dragon are considered to be the seven dominions and kingdoms of the Islamic world under the reign of the Umayyads: Syria, Persia, Arabia, Egypt, the dominion of Africa (Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria), Andalusia, and the Turkish tribes of Transoxania; the ten horns are the ten names of the fifteen Umayyad rulers: Abu-Sufyan (the former chief of Mecca and founder of the dynasty), Mu'awiyah, Yazid, Marwan, 'Abdu'l-Malik, Al-Walid, Sulayman, Umar, Hisham, and Ibrahim. Further, 'Abdu'l-Bahá states that the three woes refer to Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá'u'lláh. Book of Ezekiel 30:1-3 is referenced as the explanation for the word Woe: "The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Howl ye, Woe worth the day! For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near." In other words, the day of woe refers to the woe of "the heedless, the sinners, and the ignorant".
END
References provided include letters from Shoghi Effendi and 'Abdu'l-Bahá, both of whom are considered interpreters of Baha'i religious texts authored by the religion's founders and authors, the Bab and Baha'u'llah. As this section is intended to provide the religion's official perspective, these were the primary sources used, as their statements are considered official positions by that religion. Additional sources may be found at the UC Merced website by Stephen N. Lambden: https://hurqalya.ucmerced.edu/journals/bsb. Trying to find other sources as well, but could use some help if these three are not sufficient. Looking for clarity. Thanks! FortisVault (talk) 17:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
I removed this section, recently added:
The Bahá'í Faith claims there are several passages within the Old and New Testament prophesying Muhammad, Ali and the other eleven of the Twelve Imams, as well as the rise of the Islamic nation.[1]
Genesis 17:20, God promises Ishmael twelve princes and a great nation. The twelve princes are considered by Baha'is to be the Twelve Imams, and the great nation is interpreted as one of the fruits of Muhammad's revelation; a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi states, "it is not the City State, but the National State which Muhammad's teachings fostered."[2]
Additionally, references to Paran made in Deuteronomy 33:2, Genesis 21:21, Numbers 12:16, and Numbers 13:3 are considered references to Muhammad's Revelation.
According to ʻAbdu'l-Bahá, the eleventh and twelfth chapters of the Book of Revelation prophecy the dispensation of Muhammad, Ali, and the Umayyad Caliphate, the latter of which is described as an enemy of the religion of Muhammad and is considered the beast and the dragon mentioned in Revelation.[3] 'Abdu'l-Bahá claims that the two witnesses are Muhammad and Ali while the prophecy of "forty-two months" and "a thousand two hundred and three score days" is the 1260 year duration of the Qur'anic Dispensation, as Baha'is hold that in the Islamic year 1260 AH, or 1844 AD, which is the year the Báb's revelation began, was the end of that era.[4] He further states that at the end of Muhammad and Ali's testimony, "the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit", who are the Umayyads, went to war with 'Ali and his descendants, and saught to kill members of the lineage of Muhammad because they feared the advent of the Mahdi. The seven heads of the dragon are considered to be the seven dominions and kingdoms of the Islamic world under the reign of the Umayyads: Syria, Persia, Arabia, Egypt, the dominion of Africa (Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria), Andalusia, and the Turkish tribes of Transoxania; the ten horns are the ten names of the fifteen Umayyad rulers: Abu-Sufyan (the former chief of Mecca and founder of the dynasty), Mu'awiyah, Yazid, Marwan, 'Abdu'l-Malik, Al-Walid, Sulayman, Umar, Hisham, and Ibrahim.
Further, 'Abdu'l-Bahá states that the three woes refer to Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá'u'lláh. Book of Ezekiel 30:1-3 is referenced as the explanation for the word Woe: "The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Howl ye, Woe worth the day! For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near." In other words, the day of woe refers to the woe of "the heedless, the sinners, and the ignorant".[5]
References
I'm not against mentioning Bahai if there is some coverage on this in independent scholarship, I think I actually looked for that at one point, but this is exclusively based on internal religious writing. And the amount of it is not WP:DUE IMO. I'm no Baháʼí scholar (or any scholar) but the writings of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá appears to fall under WP:RSPSCRIPTURE as well, though some scripture quoting is of course reasonable on this topic. I have no view on the WP:RS-ness of the other refs cited, though "sic" is not a good way to write a ref. @Cuñado, @Gazelle55, other interested, do you feel like having an opinion? Ping also @FortisVault who added the section and commented on my talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
I just noticed I was pinged here 8 days ago. I generally avoid using Shoghi Effendi as a source on Baha'i topics. In this case, it would be easy to argue that the entire section is UNDUE and just delete it. I have developed a stack of reliable sources on the Baha'i Faith and I could easily put together sources and reword the section. If at least one person thinks that's worth it, let me know. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC)