Christian polemicists seized on Muhammad’s wounds as proof he lacked divine protection

Evidence

In much of this, the Christian author compares (explicitly or implicitly) Muhammad with Jesus: Christ shunning sex and worldly power, Muhammad eagerly pursuing both; Christ prophesying true things, Muhammad failing to foresee his defeats in battle; Christ producing miracles, Muhammad none. He carries this contrast into his description of Muhammad’s death. Muhammad, he says, ordered that his companions not bury him after his death, for angels would come within three days to carry his body up to heaven. At his death, his disciples did as he had ordered: “after they had waited for three days, his odor changed and their hopes of his being taken up to heaven disappeared. Disappointed by his illusory promises and realizing that he had lied, they buried him.” — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 395 (#expands, via linked claim)

The Christian monk then explains “the signs of prophecy which oblige one to recognize the title of prophet and of apostle to him who shows them.” The Muslim notion of rasûl differs from Christian and Jewish notions of “prophet.” The Christian author does not acknowledge this, again suggesting that his real audience is fellow Christians and not his fictitious Muslim correspondent. The two signs of prophecy are revelation of things unknown (past and future) and performance of miracles. Muhammad foretold nothing, whereas the Hebrew prophets, Christ, and the apostles did. Muhammad produced no miracles, as the Koran expressly states; the miracles attributed to him are false. — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 394 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

Related

• Medieval Christian polemicists judged Muhammad by Christian criteria for prophecy (similarity 0.89)
• Medieval Christian polemic weaponized Muhammad’s unascended body against his prophethood (similarity 0.87)
• Ancient criteria of prophecy were applied selectively to predetermine Muhammad’s failure (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval polemicists read Ismael’s biblical disinheritance as prophecy of Islam’s enmity. (similarity 0.86)
• Medieval Christians judged Muhammad by criteria his own theology did not claim (similarity 0.86)
• Christian polemicists privileged Muhammad’s self-denial of miracles as their key evidence (similarity 0.83)
• Modern Western scholars retained medieval judgements about Muhammad. (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christian writers uniformly stressed Muhammad’s orphaned poverty (similarity 0.83)
• Medieval Christians read Muhammad’s human fallibility itself as disproof of prophecy (similarity 0.83)
• The Jesus–Muhammad binary already structured medieval Christian polemic in full form (similarity 0.83)
• Christian polemicists explained Muhammad’s prophethood as a fraudulent bid for kingship (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christians held Muhammad’s lack of miracles as decisive against his prophethood (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christian polemicists investigated Muhammad’s claims carefully rather than dismissing them (similarity 0.82)
• Muhammad’s alleged false prophecy legitimized Christian political rule over Muslims (similarity 0.82)
• Medieval Christian polemicists read military defeats as disproof of prophets (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Medieval Christian polemic weaponized Muhammad’s unascended body against his prophethood #expands (0.85) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 395
• Medieval Christian polemicists judged Muhammad by Christian criteria for prophecy #expands (0.85) — John V. Tolan, Saracens, 394
• Christian polemicists measured Muhammad against Hebrew prophecy criteria he was not claiming to meet #expands (0.80)