Who was Muhammad? Is every word and action attributed to him verifiable, or were some biographical details added in the years following his death? This is a question that must be asked when examining the records of almost any historical figure, and the issue is as complex as it is significant. The life of Muhammad is obviously an essential part of Islam —not just for understanding its origins but also because his life serves as the foundation for Islam’s legal code (Sharia law).

This chapter recounts the traditional view of Muhammad’s life, as it would be told by most Muslims or found in a general book on Islam, which would emphasize both Muhammad’s actions and his character. It then examines the historical record as it stands today and highlights arguments of both Muslim and non-Muslim scholars on the identity of the historical Muhammad. The chapter concludes with discussion questions for a group study as well as suggestions about how to approach a conversation between a Christian and a Muslim.

The Traditional View of Muhammad’s Life

The following pages recount the view of Muhammad as accepted by Muslims in general. According to this traditional view, Muhammad was born in the year 570 AD in the city of Mecca. His parents were ‘Abdu’llah ibn ‘Abdu’l-Muttalib and Amina bint Wahab of the Quraysh, the tribe that served as caretakers for the Kaaba shrine.  Muslims believe that this was a very important responsibility because Mecca relied on trade for survival, and veneration of the purported 360 gods housed in the shrine was its primary attraction. According to the Muslim sources, Abdullah died before Muhammad was born, and his mother died when he was six. Muhammad then lived with his uncle Talib and his cousins, and he was said to be an honest boy and a hard worker. Later he accompanied his uncle on some caravan journeys where he learned about other beliefs and traditions. It was during one of these journeys that a Nestorian monk named Bahira told Muhammad that he was chosen by God to be a prophet (which the monk deduced from an unusual mole on Muhammad’s back). In the years to follow, Muhammad became known for his integrity, honesty, and wisdom, which earned him the title Al Amin, or “the trustworthy one.”^[1]

These qualities enabled him to be employed as a camel driver for a wealthy widow, named Khadija, who was Muhammad’s cousin and 15 years his senior. In time his exemplary character won over Khadija, and they were married in 595 AD when Muhammad was 25. Relieved of financial pressure, Muhammad had time to go up into the mountains near his home and contemplate the injustices that he saw around him, such as widespread paganism, the live burial of infant girls, discrimination (especially in regard to women), and fighting among the different tribes. In 610 AD, as he sat in a mountain cave called Hira, where he often had dreams, an angel came and stood before him with writing on a piece of cloth and commanded him to read. However, Muhammad, like most of the people at that time, did not know how to read. When Muhammad said that he could not read, the angel embraced him and forced the air out of his lungs, and then commanded him again to read. Again, Muhammad said he did not know how to read. This sequence occurred three times before the angel finally told him what the words were on the cloth.

“Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created-
Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood:
Proclaim! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful,
Who taught (the use of) the pen,
Taught man that which he knew not.” (Qur’an 96:1-5)

This passage was the first revelation of what has become known as the Qur’an, which is a term related to the command to read, or to recite.

Muhammad was initially terrified by this vision —even to the point of contemplating suicide, some accounts say —but his wife Khadija recognized his experience as being from Allah. She encouraged him to visit her cousin Waraqah ibn Newfal, who some believe may have been a Christian. Upon hearing of Muhammad’s experience, Waraqah concluded that it was a genuine experience from God and testified that Muhammad must be a prophet from God.

Muhammad eventually accepted this call and began preaching against paganism, discrimination, and injustice (613 AD). His main message was that there was only one God, named Allah and that all people should submit to this God. Initially, Muhammad faced much resistance and persecution. His first convert was his wife, followed soon thereafter by a merchant and trusted friend, Abu Bakr. Through the next 20 years Muhammad continued receiving revelation from Allah through the angel Gabriel, sometimes in visions, sometimes while in a trance, and sometimes from a man claiming to be Gabriel. Muhammad faithfully proclaimed the message he received, but the people of Mecca strongly opposed his teachings. The major reason for this was that the concept of submission to one God struck at the very heart of the city’s economy. If the Kaaba’s gods were no longer revered, the flourishing trade in Mecca would be jeopardized. The resistance grew to the point that even his own relatives decided that Muhammad needed to be dealt with.

However, Muhammad was warned about the impending treachery and escaped to a city 200 miles north of Mecca called Yathrib (later called Medina), where some of the city leaders had invited him to become the chief arbiter between the Arabs and the Jews. This “emigration” to Medina is known as the “Hijrah,” and marked the beginning of Islam and the Islamic calendar (622 AD). Various conflicts had been raging in Medina for decades, but the five main tribes were finally unified when they assented to a series of articles that Muhammad drew up. This agreement was called the Constitution of Medina, and it served as the blueprint for later treaties that would stipulate the roles of believers and non-believers, especially for Muslims with the “People of the Book” (Jews and Christians).

Although the agreement at Medina initially procured peace, Jewish scholars soon began to criticize Muhammad for plagiarizing his messages from other sources. Ridicule followed by animosity arose between the Jews and the Muslims, and over the years, as Muhammad and his followers gained more power, the Muslims eventually banished two of the three largest Jewish tribes from the city and seized the vacated properties for themselves.

In addition to these tribal contests of power in Medina, Muhammad and his followers simultaneously became involved in skirmishes with tribes of other cities. During the flight to Medina, when the Muslims were essentially defenseless fugitives, Allah had given Muhammad permission to lead offensive battles in times of need. Soon, Muhammad and his men expanded the application of this message to allow raiding Meccan caravans, justifying their actions with the words from Allah.^[2] The raids allowed the Muslims to acquire wealth and power, but they also initiated conflict between the Quraysh tribe of Mecca and the Muslims of Medina. In time this led to armed battles between the two groups.

During this period in Medina, Muhammad ordered at least 87 raids, although he himself was only personally involved in 27 of them.^[3] These raids brought in needed funds for the believers as well as helping them to increase the ranks and were used as a measure of faithfulness to Allah. Over the 10 years Muhammad was in Medina, these raids, also known as maghazi, increased revenue greatly, and Muhammad’s leadership and his role as a prophet were solidified. Of the many maghazi raids and battles, there were four that became an integral part of the story of Muhammad’s life, as not only the growth of his nascent religion but also his political and religious leadership was demonstrated in all of them.

The first took place in the spring of 624 near the town of Badr when a group of Meccans attacked Muhammad and 300 of his men in retaliation for an earlier caravan raid. Though the Muslims were outnumbered 3:1, they soundly defeated the Meccans, killing 70 and taking 70 prisoners for ransom, while only losing 14 of their own.^[4] This victory was interpreted as confirmation of Allah’s favor, and it strengthened Muhammad and his followers’ position over the Jews in Medina, especially when the Jewish Banu Qaynuqa tribe was accused of violating the Constitution of Medina. The tribe was promptly banished from the city and their property was confiscated.^[5]

The second military encounter between the Meccans and the followers of Muhammad took place the following March of 625, outside of Medina on the slopes of Mount Uhud. This battle was a deliberate attempt by the Meccans to destroy Muhammad and his followers, and though the Muslims had an initial tactical advantage, they suffered defeat due to poor discipline. Only a false rumor of Muhammad’s death kept the Muslim army from being decimated by the Meccan generals, who considered Muhammad’s death to be sufficient victory. Once Muhammad had revived from his wounds, he explained to his demoralized army that disobedience and a desire for loot had led them out of Allah’s will and protection. This became a standard theme or doctrine: fighting for Allah’s glory brought victory while fighting for selfish gain would be divinely punished by defeat. A further example of Muhammad’s combined role of prophet and warrior occurred a few months after this when Muhammad received a revelation from Gabriel that a certain Jewish tribe (the Banu Nadir) was plotting to assassinate him. The Muslim army besieged the tribe, which surrendered two weeks later, and the Banu Nadir were subsequently banished and their lands and goods were seized.

The third notable conflict occurred in March of 627 when the Meccans called for a “rematch” and Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Meccan army, set out for Medina with 10,000 men. When the Muslims heard about the threat, they began to make preparations. However, they could only muster 3,000 men. Fortunately, a Persian convert suggested that the Muslims dig a trench between the two mountains near the entrance to the city. In a short time, with Muhammad working beside his men, the Muslims dug a trench nearly 2 kilometers in length. When the Meccans arrived, the ditch was too wide for their horses, and they could only pitch volleys of arrows and engage in small skirmishes outside the city. After 27 days, the confederacy gave up this inglorious battle and left abruptly in the morning. The Muslims were left to rejoice in what they considered a victory. Hearing a rumor that some of the Jews of the Banu Qurayza tribe had plotted with these enemies, Muhammad acted quickly to remove this last tribe of Jews from the city.^[6]

These conflicts moved toward resolution beginning in 628 when Muhammad and 1,400 of his men marched to Mecca for the annual pilgrimage and negotiated a peace agreement with the city leaders that would allow them to attend the hajj rituals. This agreement, called the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, called for a 10-year truce between the two cities beginning the following year, at which point each party would agree to peaceful relations with each other conducted with honesty and honor. Although some of the Muslims were initially angry at Muhammad’s leniency in the agreement, since they felt it brought humiliation upon the prophet, Muhammad assured them in private that it would bring them victory in the end. Indeed, the treaty was only active for two years and actually benefited the Muslims. This benefit arose in 630 AD when a Quraysh-allied tribe violated the terms by attacking a tribe allied with the Muslims. In a response justified by the treaty, Muhammad marched on Mecca at the time of the next hajj with an army of 10,000 Muslims and local allies. The Meccans capitulated without a fight, and Muhammad then demonstrated his mercy by having only a small number of his opponents killed and sparing the remaining inhabitants of the city. He also destroyed the idols in the Kaaba and rededicated it to Allah alone. Muhammad did not force anyone to convert, but many did, since it had become apparent to even Muhammad’s staunchest opponents, such as Abu Sufyan, that the power had shifted over to the Muslims.

For the next two years, Muhammad led his followers in a campaign to unite all the Arabian tribes in a universal tribe, or ummah. By the time of his death in 632, most of the tribes in Arabia had sworn their allegiance to Muhammad and converted to Islam. The many conflicts, of which the three described above are some of the most famous, are said to demonstrate Muhammad’s prestige in battle as well as his merciful conduct toward his adversaries and his devotion to the cause of Allah. The Hadith is said to attest to Muhammad’s life as being marked by generosity, his elevation of the status of women, his ability to unify people with a vision that reached beyond the divisions of tribe or region, and his ability to motivate his followers to victory in battle. By the end of his life, Muhammad had realized his dream of bringing peace to his war-torn people, and even more importantly, he was used to initiate the true path of Allah that would grow to be the second largest religion in the world. Turning now from the traditional story of Muhammad’s life, the next section examines scholar’s views and critical arguments on the subject.

The Counterview According to Historical Documents and Archeological Evidence

The traditional view of Muhammad, summarized above, is the account that almost every Muslim knows by heart. Most Muslims would also sincerely believe that there is overwhelming evidence for Muhammad’s life. One modern author presents the most common Muslim understanding of the historical documents of Muhammad’s time:

 “The life of Muhammad is known as the Sira and was lived in the full light of history. Everything he did and said was recorded. Because he could not read and write himself, he was constantly served by a group of 45 scribes who wrote down his sayings, instructions and his activities. Muhammad himself insisted on documenting his important decisions. Nearly three hundred of his documents have come down to us, including political treaties, military enlistments, assignments of officials and state correspondence written on tanned leather…. Within a few decades of his death, accounts of the life of Muhammad were available to the Muslim community in written form. One of the earliest and the most famous biographies of Muhammad, written less than [sic.] hundred years after his death, is Sirat Rasul Allah by ibn Ishaq.”^[7]

The issue, then, that must be considered is whether the documents that describe the life of Muhammad are complete and authentic in comparison to other ancient documents, or whether the written record overall is too unreliable to make categorical claims of validity. Muslims and many modern non-Muslim scholars argue for the former, while others —including Christian scholars —have made a case for the latter. The arguments generally revolve around historical records penned by Muslims, records penned by non-Muslims, and archeological evidence in the form of coins and inscriptions.

Historical Documents Written by Muslims

The first major issue that should be considered in evaluating the historical identity of Muhammad is the strength or weakness of documents from his time. Four types of historical documents that have been written by Muslims are used to support the traditional view: early biographies of Muhammad, the Hadith, the Qur’an, and copies of the treaties made during Muhammad’s lifetime. Muslims and other traditional scholars see these sources as being trustworthy and argue that any chronological gaps can be explained by an oral culture and the effects of time. Scholars who take the opposite side claim that too many discrepancies and unknown factors exist to accept all the claims about Muhammad’s actual life or even his true identity.

Early biographies of Muhammad’s life support the traditional view of Muhammad and the early days of Islam by providing information outside of the accounts in the Qur’an and Hadith, which are not chronological or narrative works. The very first biography of Muhammad is attributed to ibn Ishaq (d. 767), but this significant work only survives in a shortened version written down by another author, ibn Hisham, before his own death in 827 AD.  Although this biography provides invaluable supporting evidence about the life of Muhammad, non-traditional scholars point out several flaws in this source. First, the actual copy of this work that can be studied today was not penned until almost 200 years after Muhammad’s death. Patricia Crone remarks that this is comparable to “reconstructing the origins of Christianity on the basis of the writings of Clement or Justin Martyr in a recension^[8] by Origen.”^[9] Second, the Muslim historians who wrote after this date — including the eminent chroniclers Ibn Sa’ad (d. 845), Baladhuri (d. 892), al-Tabari (d. 923), and Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) — used this early work as the basis for much of their own material. This situation places a heavy weight on the accuracy of not merely the work of ibn Ishaq, but also of his copier ibn Hisham.

In writing the first biography of the prophet, ibn Ishaq (Ibn Hisham), interestingly presents a rather different version of Muhammad than that of the standard narrative. While today Muhammad is considered the most perfect man who has ever lived,^[10] it was not until the 13th century that this idea actually arose. The idea originated with Ibn Arabi, a Sufi mystic, who said that Muhammad was “Al-Insan al-kamil,” or the perfect man. Ibn Ishaq (through ibn Hisham), however, presented a much different picture of the prophet. Seeking to give context to the Qur’an and some of the traditions circulating at that time, ibn Ishaq’s biography, according to historical scholar D.S. Margoliouth, summarized Muhammad as follows:

The character attributed to Muhammad in the biography of Ibn Ishaq is exceedingly unfavorable. In order to gain his ends he recoils from no expedient, and he approves of similar unscrupulousness on the part of his adherents, when exercised in his interest. He profits to the utmost from the chivalry of the Meccans, but rarely requites it with the like. He organizes assassinations and wholesale massacres. His career as tyrant of Medina is that of a robber chief, whose political economy consists in securing and dividing plunder, the distribution of the latter being at times carried out on principles which fail to satisfy his follower’s ideas of justice.

He [the prophet Muhammad] is himself an unbridled libertine and encourages the same passion in his followers. For whatever he does, he is prepared to plead the express authorization of the deity. It is, however, impossible to find any doctrine that he is not prepared to abandon in order to secure a political end … This is a disagreeable picture for the founder of a religion, and it cannot be pleaded that it is a picture drawn by an enemy.^[11]

A key example of Muhammad’s unscrupulous actions presented by ibn Ishaq involved the aftermath of the Battle of the Trench when some of the Jews in the tribe of the Banu Qurayza were accused of treason. Muhammad chose to follow the advice of one of the non-Jewish tribal leaders and have all of the Banu Qurayza punished. The men were taken out to a newly dug trench in the middle of the city and beheaded, eight at a time. When it was all over 600-800 men filled the trench. The women and the children were then sold into slavery or exchanged for weapons.^[12] Apparently, in the time of ibn Ishaq, these kinds of actions were considered proper and praiseworthy. However, there is evidence to show that today these kinds of stories of Muhammad are often marginalized in order to uphold the preferred image of the perfect man.^[13]

The second type of historical documents that inform and support the traditional view are the Hadith or the collected sayings of Muhammad. Neither Muhammad nor any of his close associates are known to have recorded any of the prophet’s words, but, according to some Muslim scholars, a group of scribes is believed to have traveled with him and written down everything he said.^[14] However, the earliest copies of Hadith available are included in collections by scholars such as al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and abu-Da’ud, and date from the end of the 9th century or later. Again, this creates a gap of over 200 years between the times that Muhammad allegedly spoke the words and the first copies that are currently known.

Treaties are the third type of historical documentation. According to the traditional view, the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah and the Constitution of Medina represent significant events in the development of Islam and Muhammad’s life. Written copies of these exist, but unfortunately, the earliest of them does not pre-date ibn Hisham’s mention of these documents in the early 9th century. In other words, there is no mention of these documents until the biography itself. This makes it difficult to determine with any accuracy whether the copies changed in content or form at any time, and theoretically makes it possible that ibn Hisham could have gotten many or most of the details wrong in his account, and then the later copies would have reflected those errors. At any rate, the historical strength of the major treaties as corroborative documentation is lessened because of this two-century gap.

Finally, the Qur’an itself, which Muslims claim was written down within 20 years of Muhammad’s death, is said to support the traditional view to some extent because it includes Muhammad’s name and certain events that are linked to the life of the prophet. Non-traditional scholars point out, however, that the name “Muhammad” only occurs four times in the text, and three of those times could just as easily refer to a position or title as to an actual person.^[15] The events linked to the life of the prophet mentioned in the Qur’an are also somewhat vaguely identified and have no known contemporary supporting evidence. Because of this, it has been suggested that the Hadith (sayings of Muhammad) were actually derived from early commentaries on the Qur’ān, beginning sometime in the latter half of the 8th century, as believers tried to make sense of various passages in the Qur’ān; and then this material was used to write the Sira (history of the Prophet’s life), as well as explain the Qur’an in a more sustained narrative form.^[16]

A number of these Muslim documents, therefore, exhibit a common feature ­­— a chronological gap of at least 100 years between the time in which they should have been created and the date of the earliest known copy. Should this be considered a serious flaw in the historical reliability of Muhammad’s life and the origins of Islam? Several considerations must be noted.  First, traditional scholars point out that the Arabic culture of the 7th century was an oral one, and writing functioned mainly as a way to validate what a person should remember from oral communication. People were expected to memorize rather than to read, and much of the education process was carried out through rote memory. Thus, these scholars conclude, it is perfectly reasonable to assume an accurate passing on of knowledge orally until the time that it could be set down on paper. A 100‑200-year gap is thus not only understandable but perhaps the most logical outcome.

However, an additional consideration which Christian and non-traditional scholars emphasize is that an oral culture only addresses the issue of a lack of written documentation. It does not answer the question of how reliable the transmission was originally or what kinds of adaptations it underwent as it was passed on. Written versions of texts permit a better analysis, allowing scholars to study alterations and gauge how much the text really changed over years of being re-told and passed on to different peoples and places. The closer to the date of origin a copy can be dated, then, the more likely it is to be the authentic version. Ultimately, therefore, it is certainly possible that many of these stories concerning Muhammad circulated orally for a long time, but the lack of seventh-century documents makes it very difficult to validate many of the claims made by ninth-century Muslim sources.

Archeological Evidence of Muhammad

Archaeological evidence reveals that the earliest reference to Muhammad by Muslims^[17] is in the form of inscriptions on coins.^[18] Around 687 AD, fifty-five years after Muhammad’s death, a rival of the caliph Abd al-Malik named ibn Zubayr minted a coin bearing the phrase “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” After defeating Zubayr, Abd al-Malik began minting his own coins in 691 with the same phrase.^[19] Looking more closely at these early Arabic coins mentioning Muhammad, a curious detail is that a number of them feature figures holding crosses, which would seem to indicate a Christian influence. Later coins dispense with both the figures and the crosses. This has caused some scholars to wonder if there was a conscious effort to erase any traces of Christianity from these later coins, indicating a deliberate transition to Islam.^[20]

The other early evidence of Muhammad’s existence is in an inscription on a building. In the late 7^th-century, around the same time as the coins were minted, Abd al-Malik had the Dome of the Rock built and prominently inscribed on the walls what is known as the Shahada, or the basic Islamic creed, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.” This inscription is considered by many to be an exceptionally solid piece of evidence that verifies that a specific person named Muhammad not only existed but was also the acknowledged prophet of the new religion of Islam.

The traditional Muslim view is that when “Muhammad” appears in any historical documents or inscriptions, it is the name of an actual person. However, specialists in the fields of historical documents, epigraphy (inscriptions), and numismatics (study of coins) have expressed concern over this traditional interpretation. They argue that the evidence strongly suggests that the Arabic word “Muhammad” in these inscriptions, both on the early coins and the walls of the Dome of the Rock, is actually a title that may refer to Jesus Christ and not the prophet of Islam. This is because the root of the term “mu-hammad” is “Ahmad,” which means, “praise.” Therefore, “Muhammad” could be translated as “the one (mu-) who is praised (Ahmad),” or the “chosen one.”^[21] Thus, when the Dome of the Rock inscriptions proclaimed that “there is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah,” the inscription could be referring to someone besides Muhammad the prophet. Taking this a step further, some scholars have even argued that these inscriptions may very well be evidence of a transitional phase in the development of Islam, in which elements of Judaism and Arian Christianity held sway. In this case, the inscriptions would refer to Jesus as the “praised one” of God.^[22]

Traditional and Muslim scholars object to this view by pointing out that many of the inscriptions on the walls of the Dome of the Rock reflect a rejection of Jesus as the Son of God (Allah “has no associate”) as well as a strong refutation of the Christian concept of the Trinity (“say not three”). They argue that the term “Muhammad” could not refer to Jesus as the “chosen one,” or “praised one” because of this clear rejection of the Trinity. However, this argument only refutes the idea of the inscriptions referring to an orthodox understanding of Jesus. Heretical Christian views of Christ would actually agree with such rejections of the Trinity. Thus, this “Jesus” may not be referring to the Jesus Christ of orthodox Christianity, nor the later Isa of Islam, but rather the Jesus of an intermediate monotheism where “Jesus” is praised as the chosen messiah but not the Son of God. ^[23] Robert Spencer concurs and concludes, “It is therefore possible that the Dome of the Rock inscription is a surviving expression of the theology of a heretical Christian group that viewed Jesus solely as a divine messenger, not as the Son of God or Savior of the world.”^[24]

Whatever the origins of these inscriptions, within five years (696 AD), the removal of figures and crosses from the coins seems to indicate that Abd al-Malik consciously began transforming the title referring to Jesus into a proper name for the prophet of a new religion. Thus, while the material evidence supports Muhammad as the acknowledged prophet of Islam, it also leaves room for questions concerning the development of Islam and the exact origins of historical references to the name “Muhammad.”

Historical Documents by Non-Muslim Sources

While historical documents written by Muslims before the time of Abd al-Malik are scarce, there are a number of extant documents from the 7th century written by non-Muslims that DO provide early information concerning Muhammad and the origin of Islam. However, these documents often give a very different view of events and chronologies compared to the Muslim traditional account. For example, a document dated around 634 AD, called the Doctrina Jacobi,^[25] mentions a prophet among the Saracens, riding on a horse leading his men, proclaiming the advent of the anointed one, the Christ who was to come, and preaching an apocalyptic message based on Jewish legalism. However, he is unnamed, and if this refers to Muhammad, then the date would indicate that he was still alive two years after the traditional date of his death. This prophet also claimed to have keys to the kingdom, which Muhammad never mentioned. Some scholars believe this is probably a different prophet or this may hint that the true origin of the Muslim prophet began as an apocalyptic leader of a Jewish-Christian heretical religion that promoted Jesus Christ as the Messiah but not as the Son of God.^[26] Robert Spencer even speculates that the unnamed prophet of the Doctrina Jacobi may have been one of several religious figures later subsumed into a single figure under the name of Muhammad.^[27]

Another account, attributed to Thomas the Presbyter^[28] (written about 640 AD in Syriac), tells how nomadic Arabs, or “tayyaye d-Mhmt,” invaded and took Syria in 635-636, storming monasteries and even killing a number of monks. If the Syriac word “Mhmt” refers to Muhammad, then Thomas could be the first to mention Muhammad by name. However, there is evidence that this document was revised in the 8th century, and since we do not have the original manuscript, the name of Muhammad could have been inserted in later copies of the document.^[29] It is also possible that these early references to a “Muhammad” may be references to the Jesus of an intermediate monotheism who was worshiped as the Messiah of the Old Testament but not as the Son of God of the New Testament.

In addition, around 687, a Christian named John bar Penkaye wrote that Muhammad was a guide and teacher for those who followed him. Though he does not use the word “prophet,” this reference to “Muhammad” fits well with what we know of the rise of Abd al-Malik during this time and his proclamation of Muhammad as the prophet after 691. As noted above, the name “Muhammad” was unknown in any of the writings of the Arabs. In addition, there was no mention of a book called the “Qur’an” or a religion known as “Islam.”^[30] Thus, the written testimony of the non-Muslims seems to corroborate the view that Muhammad as a person and prophet developed in the time of Abd al-Malik, perhaps from a composite drawn from some of the earlier religious figures mentioned, or perhaps from a deliberate effort to transform the “Jesus” of an intermediate monotheism into a distinct prophet of a new Arab religion.

One of the Christian eyewitnesses of these events was John of Damascus, who served as the chief tax collector for Abd al-Malik around 700 AD. Writing several decades later (743 AD) in a treatise called the Heresy of the Ishmaelites, John indicates that he is aware of Muhammad (“Mahmed”) as a person, though he refers to him as a “false prophet” leading the “coercive religion of the Ishmaelites.” He also indicates that this false prophet “fabricated his own heresy” after conversing with an Arian monk.^[31] This assessment corresponds well with the view that Islam developed from a heretical monotheism of a Jewish-Christian cult, and that by the time John wrote his treatise Muhammad had been fully transformed from a title representing Jesus Christ as the “praised one” in an intermediate monotheism to a full-blown prophet of a new Arab religion.

Implications

What difference do these critical arguments make? First of all, the traditional narrative is not an inerrant record, as many modern summaries often imply. Documents purportedly written during the time of Muhammad do not, as far as can be discovered, exist today, and the documents we do have – copies from at least a century later – offer fragmentary accounts that can contradict the traditional narrative as well as support it. Also, the archeological evidence of the 7th century that refers to Muhammad is limited, and the inscriptions can be interpreted in several ways. Thus, reliable evidence that Muhammad really did live when and how the Sira and the Hadith claim that he did is not nearly as plentiful as most people assume that it must be. In fact, there is enough evidence to reasonably question numerous details about the traditional account of Muhammad. Some would even go so far as to reject entirely the traditional narrative on the basis of flawed information.

Depending on how strongly the evidence is questioned, other issues must, in turn, be raised for consideration: Where did the traditions all come from? How much of Muhammad’s teaching can be historically verified? Is the basis for the Qur’an really revelation to a single person? This opens up the door to considerations that the Qur’an came instead from many sources over a long period of time, undermining the authority of Islam and precluding any claims of divine origin.

Apologetic Conclusions

What is the overall conclusion here for our apologetic approach with Muslims? No one can know perfectly all the answers about Muhammad’s exact identity or whether Islam as a religion was still developing from a transitional monotheism decades after Muhammad’s death. However, it is known that there are good arguments based on real evidence that Muhammad’s life and teachings are not what is commonly believed. As Christians, we want to take that evidence and use it first to consider the various implications of a different origin of Islam, and second to apply those implications to how we view the life of Muhammad and how we view our role in engaging Muslims.

Building Bridges to Understand

When discussing Muhammad, it is important for a Christian to not speak disrespectfully of him or of Islam. This prevents the conversation (and maybe the relationship) from being rejected. Thus, try to couch your discussion firmly in the more neutral realm of evidence – saying something like, “This is what the traditional view states, but other evidence suggests something else.” Let the evidence raise good questions rather than trying to force them yourself.

A good way to reach out to Muslim friends and colleagues in regard to Muhammad is to compare him to Jesus Christ. Discussing the differences between evidence for the life of Jesus and the life of Muhammad is a good conversation to have but should be done respectfully and carefully. (The chart below highlights some of the major differences and should help you focus your discussion.) This comparison should not be done to denigrate Muhammad, but rather to demonstrate that the Jesus Christ of the Bible is a much greater person than the “Isa” described in the Qur’an. This bridge toward understanding – using evidence to discuss the differences between Jesus and Muhammad – should always be used with the goal of showing Muslims the personal nature of Jesus in Christianity. Muslims need to know how Jesus Christ should be our focal point because he is the only one who can teach us the truth and lead us to the Father (John 14:6). Christians, on the other hand, need to understand what Muslims believe about Muhammad, as well as what details historical records do and do not support, in order to wisely discuss the life of Muhammad. This allows us to defend what we believe by answering the questions that Muslims ask as well as offer piercing questions that will help Muslim friends realize that their assumptions are not always true. Keep in mind that at the end of the conversation you want to leave them with a clearer understanding of Jesus Christ.

Study Questions:

1. What are the major sources Muslimsuse in order to learn about the life of Muhammad? What is problematic about these sources?
2. What are some of the points of evidence you would use in discussing the life of Muhammadwith your Muslim friends?
3. Read an online article concerning the life of Muhammadfrom a Muslim  What are some of the things that are mentioned that would be difficult to support historically?
4. Muslimshold Muhammad in high esteem, and many are offended when non-Muslims are critical of their prophet. How would you be able to balance Truth and Love in a discussion with them concerning Muhammad?
5. Class Activity: After reviewing the Comparison Chart between Muhammadand Jesus Christ, how would you use this information in your witness to Muslims? If you are in a class setting, break up into partners and practice what you would say to a Muslim. Critique each other and then share your results with the rest of the class.

Comparison between Jesus and Muhammad

Jesus	Muhammad
1.     Born of a virgin (Mt. 1:18-25, S. 19:20)	1.     Born normally from a mother and father (Ibn Hisham, 68-69)
2.     Read the Scriptures (Lk. 4:16-21?)	2.     Was illiterate (S. 7:157)
3.     Fulfilled over 300 prophecies from the Old Testament	3.     Was not mentioned in any prophecy in the Old Testament
4.     Prophecies of Jesus are recorded in the Bible (Matt. 24)	4.     Gave no prophecies in the Qur’an
5.     Performed miracles (Mk. 3:9-10; S. 3:49)	5.     Never did miracles (S. 29:50)
6.     Jesus is the Word of God (Jn. 1:1; S. 4:171)	6.     The Qur’an was considered the word of Allah and Muhammad was only a messenger (S. 3:144)
7.     Jesus is the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity (Lk. 9:35; Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19)	7.     Muhammad is only considered a messenger of Allah (S. 3:144)
8.     Jesus said, “For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matt. 26:52)	8.     Muhammad was a warrior; involved in at least 27 battles (Ibn Hisham, Sirat Rasul Allah)
9.     Jesus received and heard the direct voice of God (Mk. 1:10-11)	9.     Muhammad heard only from the angel Gabriel (note: Galatians 1:8)
10.   Mentioned by name in the Qur’an 25 times in over 90 verses.	10.   The word “Muhammad” is found only 4 times in the Qur’an. (Q. 3:144; 33:40; 47:2; 48.29)
11.    Mentioned in the Bible hundreds of times.	11.    Muhammad is not mentioned in the Bible (contrary to S. 7:157; S. 61:6)
12.   Jesus was a prophet according to Deuteronomy 18:14-22	12.   Muhammad was not a prophet according to Deuteronomy 18:14-22
13.   The message of Jesus supported the Old Testament (Matt. 5:18)	13.   The message of Muhammad often contradicted the Old and New Testament
14.   Was sinless (Jn. 8:46; S. 19:19)	14.   Was sinful (S. 40:55; 47:19; 48:1-2)
15.   Died to save sinners (Jn. 1:29; 10:18)	15.   Could not save himself (S. 46:8-9)
16.   Rose from the dead on the third day just as he predicted (Mk. 8:31-38; Lk. 23-24)	16.   Died and was buried in Medina (al-Tabari 9:208)
17.   Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev. 19:16), and is coming again for his followers (Matt. 24:27)	17.   Muhammad was the prophet of Islam and cannot save any of his followers (S. 46:9)
18.   Jesus is the only way to the Father (Jn. 14:7) and the only one who can save (Acts 4:12)	18.   Muhammad denied the Father, and he denied that Jesus is the Son of God. (See 1 John 2:22)

Online Guided Bible Study Courses

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION

[1] Ziauddin Sardar and Zafar Abbas Malik, Introducing Islam (Cambridge: Icon Books, 2001), 9.

[2] Q22.39: “To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged; and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid.” Q2:217: “They ask you concerning fighting in the sacred months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, ‘Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-Al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing.”

[3] David Cook, Understanding Jihad (University of California Press, 2005), 6.

[4] Sahih Bukhari 4:52:276.

[5] Tabari, vol. VII, 86.

[6] Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, ed. Alfred Guillaume (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1955), 450-469.

[7] Ziauddin Sardar, Introducing Islam, 30.

[8] Recension: a revised edition of a text; parts of an earlier text adapted and included in a later one.

[9] Patricia Crone, Slaves On Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 202.

[10] Maududi calls Muhammad the “greatest revolutionary,” and goes on to say of Muhammad that, “In the cavalcade of world history, the sublime figure of this wonderful person towers so high above all the great men of all times that they appear to be dwarfs when contrasted to him.” A.A. Maududi, Towards Understanding Islam (U.K.I.M Dawah Centre).

[11] D.S. Margoliuth, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, volume 8, Ed. James Hastings (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915), 878.

[12] Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, ed. Alfred Guillaume (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1955), 450-469.

[13] See W.N. Arafat, “New Light on the Story of Banu Qurayza and the Jews of Medina” (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1976), 100-107; and Ahmad Barakat, Muhammad and the Jews (New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House, 1979); Daniel Janosik, “The Real Story Behind the Massacre of the Banu Qurayza” (CSIOF Occasional Papers, No. 3, 2012).

[14] Sardar, Introducing Islam, 30.

[15] Q. 3:144; 33:40; 47:2, 48:29.

[16] Fred Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing, (New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1998), 24-25.

[17] Note: Muslims were not known by this name at this time. For the first 100 years they were called Saracens, Ishmaelites, Hagarenes by others. They referred to themselves as “mum’nin” (believers), and sometimes the “Muhajirun” (emigrants, or those on pilgrimage). They did not refer to themselves as “Muslims” until the middle of the 8^th century.

[18] The specific field of Archaeology that studies coins is called “numismatics.”

[19] Karl-Heinz Ohlig, ed., Early Islam: A Critical Reconstruction Based on Contemporary Sources (NY: Prometheus Books, 2013), 72-75.

[20] Karl-Heinz Ohlig and Gerd-R. Puin, eds., The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into its Early History (NY: Prometheus Books, 2010); Volker Popp in Ohlig, Early Islam, 68-87.

[21] Ohlig, The Hidden Origins of Islam, 63-64; Robert Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins (Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2012), 45-46, 55-56.

[22] This transition may be reflected in the Qur’an as well. There is a difference between the first three times when the term “Muhammad” is mentioned as a title (Q. 3:144; 33:40; 47:2), and the final time when “Muhammad” is used in reference to a particular person (Q. 48.29). Yehuda Nevo, a Jewish Archaeologist, believes that this reference to Muhammad as a person may have been written in the 8th century, and therefore documents a transition from a time when the title “Muhammad” was used in reference to Jesus as the “chosen one,” and a later time when the term “Muhammad” is used in reference to the prophet of a new religion.

[23] Yehuda Nevo, and Judith Koren, Crossroads to Islam: The Origins of the Arab Religion and the Arab State (NY: Prometheus Books, 2003), 258-267.

[24] Robert Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist?, 56.

[25] Robert Hoyland, Seeing Islam as Others Saw It (Princeton, NJ: Darwin Press, 1997), 55-60.

[26] Yehuda Nevo, Crossroads to Islam, 208-209.

[27] Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist?, 22-23.

[28] Hoyland, Seeing Islam as Others Saw It, 118-120.

[29] This apparently became a common practice, as we shall see with other examples. This would be understandable since it would be easy for us to discuss the Muslims in Medina with Muhammad when actual history demonstrates that the early followers of Muhammad were not called “Muslims” until after 691 AD.

[30] Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist?, 25.

[31] Bonifatius Kotter, Die Schriften Des Johannes Von Damaskos, II, translation by author (NY: Walter De Gruyter, 1981).