Why we can trust Paul way more than Muhammad
The comparison between Paul and Muhammad is important since both men claim to affirm the previous scriptures.
Muhammad says,
“Say, “Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel — it is [none but] he who has brought the Qur’an down upon your heart, [O Muhammad], by permission of Allah , confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers.”
(Surah 2:97)
And again,
“And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is with you…”
(Surah 2:41)
Paul, on the other hand also claims he affirms the previous scriptures,
“But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets.”
(Acts 24:14)
And again,
“ Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.”
(Romans 3:31)
The problem though is that the message of Paul and Muhammad massively contradict each other especially regarding Jesus, so much so that today our Muslim friends accuse Paul of corrupting the previous scriptures and inventing Christianity. So one of them has to be wrong, one of them has to be misrepresenting and/or perverting the message of the previous scriptures. Who between them can we trust then?
We go through a number of criteria comparing Paul and Muhammad.
A. Education and training
Paul was trained in the Hebrew scriptures from his youth. He studied under Gamaliel, one of the most reputable rabbis of his day. He was also a religious scholar and advanced very highly within the Judaism of his time. He testifies as follows,
“I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the strictness of our fathers’ law…”
(Acts 22:3)
And again,
“And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.”
(Galatians 1:14)
Even Festus at his trial in front of Agrippa screams at him,
“…Paul, you are beside yourself! Much learning is driving you mad!”
(Acts 26:24)
Even Paul’s enemies attested that he is a man of much learning and it really shows in the logical and coherent nature of his epistles and his interspersing of Hebrew scripture themes and quotations in his exegesis of the gospel.
Muhammad on the other hand was unlearned according to the Quran,
“Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write…”
(Surah 7:157)
Now note, this is Allah Himself saying this about Muhammad. Muhammad may have been educated in other ways, e.g. he was a trader at some point and that requires some level of informal “street level” education at the very least, but whether this is a skill that transfers neatly into scriptural exegesis is another matter.
In terms of education and training, it would appear Paul is better placed to exegete scripture.
B. Proximity to the relevant time and culture
Paul is a Jew, not just a Jew, a Jew trained in the Judaism of his day. So not only was Paul from the culture that gave us the Hebrew scriptures, he was also trained in those scriptures as well as the TRADITIONS of the culture of the scriptures.
“…being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers”
(Galatians 1:14)
And again,
“ circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee;”
(Philippians 3:5)
Not only that, Paul was a contemporary of both Jesus Christ and the apostles of Jesus Christ because he lived in the 1st century AD. He also met the apostles of Jesus,
“Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.”
(Galatians 1:18–19)
“and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship”
(Galatians 2:9)
Paul spoke Hebrew — so would have been familiar with the Hebrew scriptures in their original language — as well as the 1st century lingua franca of Greek so would also have been familiar with the Septuagint.
“And when they heard that he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, they kept all the more silent.”
(Acts 2:22)
Muhammad on the other hand was born in Arabia around 632 AD, he started his prophetic career when he was about 40. So he was more than 6 centuries after the fact and from a foreign culture. He met none of the apostles of Jesus and was not a contemporary of Jesus. Muhammad also did not speak Hebrew or Greek but only Arabic. This is very interesting because our Muslim friends tend to over and over again tell critics of Islam that they do not know what they are talking about because they do not speak Arabic yet they trust the representations of Muhammad who did not speak Hebrew or Greek on the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.
But I digress…
Paul is once again better placed here because he was familiar with the Hebrew scriptures, steeped in the Jewish culture and was closer to the eye witnesses then Muhammad was.
C. Consistency of message with that of Jesus and His eye-witness apostles
Paul writes,
“Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you — unless you believed in vain.
For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve…
Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.”
(1 Corinthians 15:1–4, 11)
Paul claimed to be preaching the exact same message that the apostles of Jesus Christ taught. The Apostles got the message from Jesus Himself who taught about His death and resurrection for the sins of mankind,
“Then He [Jesus] said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”
(Luke 24:46–47, square brackets mine)
And again,
“ just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
(Matthew 20:28)
Now why could Paul make that claim? He could do so because he fact checked the message he was preaching against that of the apostles of Jesus.
“And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain.”
(Galatians 2:2)
And what was the outcome?
“But from those who seemed to be something — whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man — for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.”
(Galatians 2:6–9)
The key apostles James, Peter and John all approved the gospel Paul was communicating to the Gentiles.
Muhammad on the other hand did not preach the same gospel as Jesus or the original apostles who were eye witnesses of Jesus. According to Muhammad, Jesus never died on the cross,
“And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.”
(Surah 4:157)
Also, Muhammad explicitly rejects the idea of substitutionary atonement which is the heart of the gospel,
“And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. And if a heavily laden soul calls [another] to [carry some of] its load, nothing of it will be carried, even if he should be a close relative.”
(Surah 35:18)
The question for Muhammad though is on what basis does he contradict the teaching of the gospel and the Torah which both contain ideas of substitutionary atonement (see Isaiah 53 for example)? Was Muhammad’s message fact checked at any point? No! And if Allah revealed the gospel and the Torah as Muhammad’s revelation claims,
“He has sent down upon you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming what was before it. And He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.”
(Surah 3:3)
Why do the teachings of Muhammad and Allah’s book contradict what it claims to confirm? Note that the Quran says it confirms what the Jews and Christians have WITH them,
“And when there cometh unto them a messenger from Allah, confirming that which they possess…”
(Surah 2:101)
On the strength of manuscript evidence, we know that the Torah and the Gospel in the seventh century during the time of Muhammad are the same ones we have today so why does Muhammad’s message not line up with the Gospel and the Torah we have today?
Paul however had no such issues because he fact checked his message and was preaching exactly what the other apostles were preaching.
D. Fidelity to the previous scriptures
Paul relies solely on the Hebrew scriptures in his exegesis of the gospel message, his writings are rich with themes and references from the Hebrew scriptures. For example, the picture of Abraham painted in Romans 4 is entirely based on the picture of Abraham we get in Genesis.
“Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed — God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did; who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.” And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah’s womb. He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform. And therefore “it was accounted to him for righteousness.”
(Romans 4:16–22)
Notice how many portions of scripture he cites in the above excerpt.
“No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you a father of many nations.”
(Genesis 17:5)
“Then He brought him outside and said, “Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.”
(Genesis 15:5)
“And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.”
(Genesis 15:6)
Let us compare this to Muhammad’s account of Abraham,
“There has already been for you an excellent pattern in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people, “Indeed, we are disassociated from you and from whatever you worship other than Allāh. We have denied you, and there has appeared between us and you animosity and hatred forever until you believe in Allāh alone” — except for the saying of Abraham to his father, “I will surely ask forgiveness for you, but I have not [power to do] for you anything against Allāh. Our Lord, upon You we have relied, and to You we have returned, and to You is the destination.”
(Surah 60:4)
And again,
“And the request of forgiveness of Abraham for his father was only because of a promise he had made to him. But when it became apparent to him [i.e., Abraham] that he [i.e., the father] was an enemy to Allāh, he disassociated himself from him. Indeed was Abraham compassionate and patient.”
(Surah 9:114)
Where exactly is Muhammad getting this from? What portion of scripture is he quoting? We have an inkling about Muhammad’s sources of revelation from the Quran,
“And those who disbelieve say, “This [Qur’ān] is not except a falsehood he invented, and another people assisted him in it.” But they have committed an injustice and a lie.
And they say, “Legends of the former peoples which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon.”
(Surah 25:4–5)
And again,
“When Our verses are recited to him, he says, “Legends of the former peoples.”
(Surah 68:15)
Muhammad was accused of reciting fables and legends and passing them off as revelation. So much so that he was called “an ear” because he believed whatever anybody told him,
““And among them are those who abuse the Prophet and say, “He is an ear.”
(Surah 9:61)
Paul on the other hand relied on the Hebrew scripture and fact checked his message to confirm it. We can know what Paul is alluding to from the Hebrew scriptures, we cannot say the same for Muhammad. Paul was thus more faithful to the Hebrew scriptures than Muhammad.
E. Overall Character
This is perhaps the easiest criteria to justify. With Paul, we are dealing with a person who was very careful to fact check even his own revelations with the apostles to ensure he disseminates truth. He also lived a righteous life according to the law of Moses,
“…concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.”
(Philippians 3:6)
With Muhammad, we are talking about a man who had multiple wives, cheated on them with sex slaves, endorsed sex with female captives of war, married a six year old child and had sex with her when she was nine, tortured a man for money, beheaded about six hundred men in one day, took his adopted son’s wife after causing the divorce by lusting after her, was bewitched by black magic, delivered satanic revelation mistaking it for divine revelation, said a man can lie to his wife, forced people to convert to his religion or face death, ordered the murder of those who criticized and mocked him, raided caravans, ordered apostates from his religion to be put to death…to mention a few things. Pretty much any human being in the world is a better character than Muhammad.
This is a relevant criteria because we need to ask who is more likely to make things up? Who is less likely to be interested in truth? Paul or Muhammad? Paul’s better character seems to indicate heis likely to be more truthful than Muhammad.
F. Outcome of revelation
Both Paul and Muhammad claimed to have revelations which then drove them to spread their respective messages till their deaths. So we can compare the outcome of the revelation of both men based on two sub-criteria.
First, what impact did the revelation have on their lives?
Paul’s revelation caused him to do a complete 180-degree turn from being an ardent persecutor of those preaching the gospel message to an even more ardent preacher of the same message himself.
“And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ. But they were hearing only, “He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith which he once tried to destroy.” And they glorified God in me.”
(Galatians 1:22–24)
Paul’s revelation also caused him to appreciate the grace of God and recognise his former ways as evil and repugnant,
“And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord who has enabled me, because He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry, although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. And the grace of our Lord was exceedingly abundant, with faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief. However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him for everlasting life.”
(1 Timothy 1:12–16)
Muhammad’s revelation on the other hand caused him to hate and become murderous towards those preaching the message that Paul and the apostles of Christ taught,
“Fight against those who do not believe in Allāh or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allāh and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth [i.e., Islām] from those who were given the Scripture — [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allāh”; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allāh.” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before [them]. May Allāh destroy them; how are they deluded?”
(Surah 9:29–30)
And again,
“Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah ? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.”
(Surah 9:111)
Notice how Muhammad’s revelation explicitly misrepresents the previous scriptures. There is nothing in the Torah or the Gospel that promises paradise to people who kill and are killed for the sake of God. This leads nicely into the second point. What did they stand to gain from their revelation?
Aisha, Muhammad’s child bride, had the following to say about his revelations,
“Narrated Aisha:
I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) and I used to say, “Can a lady give herself (to a man)?” But when Allah revealed: “You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).’ (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.”
(Sahih Bukhari, Book 65 Hadith 310)
Muhammad’s revelations were always so convenient for him. In context of the above hadith, Aisha was commenting on the portion of the Quran that gives special exception to Muhammad to have more than four wives, make allowed for him women (relatives) who would be forbidden to any other Muslim and to exchange the nights of any of his wives for any other of his wives. Why this special sexual exemption for Muhammad?
Muhammad when he was fifty two also had a revelation from his god that Aisha, then six years old (or younger), was to become his wife,
“Narrated `Aisha:
Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said (to me), “You have been shown to me twice in (my) dreams. A man was carrying you in a silken cloth and said to me, ‘This is your wife.’ I uncovered it; and behold, it was you. I said to myself, ‘If this dream is from Allah, He will cause it to come true.’ “
(Sahih Bukhari, Book 67 Hadith 16)
In fact, according to Al-Qurtubi’s Tafsir on Surah 33:50, the prophet had sixteen privileges, I highlight only the privileges, which in my subjective view, are suspiciously advantageous to Muhammad,
Second: To (forcefully) take a fifth of a fifth or just a fifth (of the spoils of war).
Fourth: To take more than four women.
Fifth: To marry, (or have sexual intercourse), with a woman who dedicates herself to the prophet).
Sixth: To marry, (or have sexual intercourse)without the presence (or permission) of a legal guardian.
Seventh: To marry without a dowry.
Eighth: To marry (and have intercourse) during a state of ritual consecration and purification.
Ninth: The annulment of an oath he may make to his wives.
Tenth: If Muhammad looks at a woman (and desires her) THEN IT IS NECESSARY FOR HER HUSBAND TO DIVORCE HER AND FOR MUHAMMAD TO MARRY HER.
Ibn Al A’raby said, “This is what the servant of the two holy mosques has also said, as was clear to the scholars FROM THE STORY OF ZAID which also had this meaning.”
Eleventh: That the prophet released Safiyyah (from her captured status) and he considered her release as her dowry.
Fifteenth: His marriage is still considered effective after his death.
Sixteenth: If he divorces a woman she remains prohibited to everyone and may not be married, “Nikah,” to someone else.
Notice how many of the above privileges relate to sex and money. Compare this to what Paul gained from his revelation,
“Are they ministers of Christ? — I speak as a fool — I am more: in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequently, in deaths often. From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness — …”
(2 Corinthians 11:23–27)
And again,
“But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.”
(Philippians 3:7–11)
Paul’s motive seems to be to attain to a better and eternal life. Hence he writes to the Colossian church,
“If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth.”
(Colossians 3:1–2)
Muhammad’s motives according to even Aisha’s observations seemed to be the here and now. A cursory reading of the eleven privileges earlier stated would seem to corroborate her observations.
Paul was also given a messenger of the flesh to buffet him to prevent him from being exalted as a result of his revelations,
“And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.”
(2 Corinthians 12:7–10)
Jesus did not take it away when he besought Him to. Muhammad on the other hand had a god who absolutely hastened to satisfy his desires and gave him privileges over and above every other Muslim. Paul lost all his prestige and standing and suffered as a result of his revelation so the chances that he was making things up or was not sincere are significantly lowered. Muhammad’s revelation gave him an abundance of both sex and money which potentially compromises his motives because he had a lot of earthly gain for his revelation.
Conclusion
Paul was more learned than Muhammad, closer to the culture than Muhammad, more familiar with the Hebrew scriptures and the relevant languages than Muhammad, more careful to fact check his message than Muhammad (who delivered satanic revelation without fact checking), closer to the events around Jesus and His message than Muhammad, more faithful to the Hebrew scriptures than Muhammad, had better character than Muhammad and unlike Muhammad, gained nothing from the message he preached. Every possible indicator would agree that Paul on so many (and in fact on any conceivable) levels is way more trustworthy than Muhammad.
Also check out:
