One thoughtful argument made by Muslim apologists is that Muhammad (PBUH) passes the Bible's own test for exposing a false prophet, especially the test in Deuteronomy 18:20-22. The argument is not that the Torah alone proves every Islamic doctrine, nor that a single passage settles all Jewish-Christian-Muslim disagreements. It is a narrower claim: if Deuteronomy gives criteria by which a false prophet may be detected, Muhammad (PBUH) does not fail those criteria.

To assess that honestly, we should first state the argument at its strongest, then give the strongest reply, and finally say what the argument really establishes - and what it does not.

The biblical test in Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy 18:20-22 warns against two kinds of false prophecy. First, a prophet must not speak in the name of other gods. Second, if someone claims to speak from God and the prediction does not come true, that person has spoken presumptuously. The famous line is: "when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken" (Deuteronomy 18:22).

Proponents of the argument summarize the test like this:

  • The prophet must call to the true God, not to idols or rival deities.
  • The prophet's prophecies must not fail.

On this reading, Muhammad (PBUH) passes both. He preached uncompromising worship of the God of Abraham, rejected idols, and called people to repentance, prayer, charity, moral accountability, and the Last Day. And, the argument continues, no authentic and clear prophecy of his was falsified; rather, a number were fulfilled in striking ways.

The first test: worship of the God of Abraham

Muhammad (PBUH) did not invite Arabia to a new tribal deity. He called people away from idols and toward the Creator of the heavens and the earth: the God of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and all the prophets, peace be upon them. This is why the Qur'an repeatedly presents Islam not as a novelty, but as a restoration of pure Abrahamic monotheism.

For a Jewish or Christian reader, the word "Allah" can sometimes sound foreign. But linguistically, Allah is the Arabic word for God, used also by Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews. The theological claim of Islam is not that there is another god alongside the God of the Bible, but that the one God alone deserves worship, without partners, images, sons, rivals, or intermediaries.

So on the first Deuteronomic criterion - not speaking in the name of other gods - the Muslim case is strong. Muhammad (PBUH) was not a pagan prophet. He destroyed idolatry in Arabia and restored worship directed to the one Creator. A critic may disagree with Islamic theology, but it is difficult to say fairly that Muhammad (PBUH) called people to worship "other gods" in the ordinary sense of the phrase.

The second test: prophecies that did not fail

The second criterion is more empirical: did the claimed prophecy come true? Here Muslims point to several examples. We should use the strongest and clearest ones, not weak reports or exaggerated popular claims.

The safe entry into Makkah

One of the most important examples is Qur'an 48:27. The background is the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. The Muslims had set out for Makkah expecting to perform pilgrimage, but were blocked by the Quraysh and had to return without completing the rites that year. In that painful moment, the Qur'an declared that the Prophet's vision of entering the Sacred Mosque would be fulfilled:

"Certainly Allah has showed to His Messenger the vision in truth. You will surely enter al-Masjid al-Haram, if Allah wills, in safety, with your heads shaved and hair shortened, not fearing. He knew what you did not know and has arranged before that a near victory." (Qur'an 48:27)

This was fulfilled when the Muslims entered Makkah safely for the postponed pilgrimage, and then more fully when Makkah itself came under Islam without the revenge-bloodbath that many would have expected in seventh-century tribal Arabia. The verse is not a vague statement that good things would happen someday; it concerns a concrete religious act in a specific place after a specific crisis.

A fair sceptic may note the phrase "if Allah wills." In Islamic usage, however, this is not an escape clause that empties the prediction of meaning. The verse still says, "You will surely enter," and then explains that Allah knew what the believers did not know. The first Muslim audience clearly understood it as reassurance that the promised entry would occur.

The treasures of Persia and Byzantium

Another striking report concerns the two superpowers surrounding Arabia: the Persian Sassanian Empire and the Byzantine Roman Empire. At the time of the Prophet (PBUH), the Muslims were not a world empire. They were a persecuted and then embattled community in western Arabia. Yet he foretold that the treasures of these empires would come into Muslim hands.

The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: "When Khosrow is ruined, there will be no Khosrow after him; and when Caesar is ruined, there will be no Caesar after him. By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, you will surely spend their treasures in the cause of Allah." (Sahih al-Bukhari, 3618; sahih)

Within a generation, the Sassanian Empire collapsed, and the Muslims conquered its heartlands. The Byzantine Empire did not disappear immediately - it continued for centuries - so this part must be stated carefully. Muslim scholars commonly understood the report in relation to Caesar's dominion and treasures in the lands reached by the early Muslims, especially Syria and surrounding territories, not as a claim that no Byzantine emperor would ever exist after Heraclius. The core prediction that the wealth of these mighty empires would be spent by the Muslims in Allah's cause was fulfilled in a historically conspicuous way.

This matters because it was not an obvious prediction in worldly terms. A small Arabian community was being told that the wealth of the great imperial powers would fall into its hands. That is very different from a vague moral hope.

The strongest reply

The strongest Jewish or Christian reply is not simply, "We do not like Muhammad." It is more serious than that. It says: Deuteronomy 18 is not the Bible's only test. Deuteronomy 13 warns that even if a sign or wonder occurs, a prophet who leads people after other gods must be rejected. Therefore, successful predictions alone are not enough. The message must also be faithful to prior revelation.

A Jewish critic may argue that Muhammad (PBUH) cannot be accepted because Islam does not uphold the Torah in the way rabbinic Judaism understands covenant law. A Christian critic may argue that Islam denies central Christian doctrines such as the divinity of Christ, the crucifixion as atonement, and the Trinity. From within those frameworks, they may say that Muhammad (PBUH) fails a broader canonical test, regardless of fulfilled predictions.

Another strong reply concerns sources. A sceptic may say: the Qur'anic prophecy is early and public, but many hadith prophecies were written down in collections generations later. How do we know they were not shaped after the events? Muslims answer through the science of isnad, narrator criticism, comparison of routes, and the high standard of collections such as Sahih al-Bukhari. But an outsider may not automatically grant the whole hadith methodology. That difference should be acknowledged rather than ignored.

Finally, critics may challenge interpretation. For example, if the statement about Caesar were read as "no Byzantine emperor will exist after this man," then history would contradict it. Muslims do not read it that way, and the fulfilled element about imperial treasures is clear. Still, this shows why careful interpretation matters. A good argument should not rest on careless wording.

A Muslim answer

The Muslim response is that Deuteronomy 13 actually strengthens, rather than weakens, the case when applied fairly. Muhammad (PBUH) did not call people away from the God of Abraham to idols. He called them away from idols to the God of Abraham. Islam's disagreement with Jews and Christians is not over whether Abraham's God should be worshipped, but over later theological claims, scripture, law, and the identity and mission of Jesus, peace be upon him.

Muslims would also say that the Qur'an presents itself as a criterion over previous communities' disputes, not as a submission to every later interpretation of Judaism or Christianity. If a person assumes from the beginning that rabbinic Judaism or Nicene Christianity must be the final measure of all prophecy, then of course Islam will be rejected. But that is not a neutral application of Deuteronomy 18; it is applying Deuteronomy through a later theological framework that Islam itself contests.

On the question of prophecy, the Muslim case is not that every popular da'wah claim is sound. Some alleged "prophecies" circulated in weak reports should not be used. The stronger claim is more disciplined: among the authentic and clear prophecies of Muhammad (PBUH), Muslims do not find a demonstrated failure, and they do find striking fulfillments - including the safe entry into Makkah and the fall of Persian power into Muslim hands.

What this argument does and does not establish

What it establishes: If Deuteronomy 18:20-22 is used as a test to identify a false prophet, Muhammad (PBUH) cannot be dismissed on the grounds that he called to other gods or that his clear prophecies failed. He preached the one God of Abraham and left behind fulfilled prophecies that deserve serious attention.

What it does not establish by itself: It does not force every Jewish or Christian reader to accept Islam without examining other questions: the Qur'an, the preservation of earlier scriptures, the nature of Jesus, abrogation, law, and the reliability of hadith transmission. Nor does it mean that every claimed prophecy in popular Muslim literature is automatically authentic or well interpreted.

The fair conclusion: Deuteronomy 18 is not a complete proof of Islam on its own, but it is a powerful challenge to a common dismissal. If the Bible's own diagnostic test is invoked, then Muhammad (PBUH) does not look like the false prophet his opponents often assume him to be. He looks like a prophet calling humanity back to the God of Abraham - with prophecies that history did not refute.

For a sincere seeker, that should at least open the door to a deeper question: if Muhammad (PBUH) cannot be dismissed by the biblical test for false prophecy, then perhaps his message deserves to be read on its own terms.