John 14:16 and 14:26, which refer to a Paraclete ("comforter"), have been read by Muslims as a prediction that Muhammad will succeed Jesus.

"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever." (John 14:16)

"But the Comforter (Paraclete) whom the Father will send in my name, he shall speak to you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (John 14:26)

What does Christianity say about the role of Mohammed in the Bible? What is relationship between Christianity and Islam?

  • 2
    whose interpretation are you looking for here? Generally it's hard to nail down a single interpretation of a verse across christianity (though to be honest this might be a rare exception). Generally the Paraclete is regarded to be the Holy Spirit rather than some future person. But I'm unsure enough on this not to just close this outright.
    – wax eagle
    Commented Jun 21, 2013 at 4:09
  • <Mod Notice>: Comments are not the place to debate issues. Comments that hash out theological issues between commentors rather than being directly related to improving this post will be removed.
    – Caleb
    Commented Jun 22, 2013 at 8:47
  • 1
    Tangentially related: Is the name of Prophet Muhammad mentioned in the Bible?
    – Caleb
    Commented Jun 22, 2013 at 8:58

4 Answers 4



Muḥammad has absolutely no role in Christianity, and there is no explicit mention of him in the Christian Bible.

The Comforters

The first «παράκλητος» (“Comforter”) was the Lord Jesus Christ.

In 1 John 2:1, it is written,

1 My little children, I write these things to you so that you do not sin. And if anyone sins, we have a comforter with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

Αʹ Τεκνία μου ταῦτα γράφω ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε καὶ ἐάν τις ἁμάρτῃ παράκλητον ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον TR, 1550

Furthermore, the Lord Jesus Christ mentions «ἄλλον παράκλητον» (“another Comforter”).

In John 14:16-17, it is written,

16 And I shall ask the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, so that he may dwell with you forever, 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him, neither does it know him, but you know him, for he dwells with you, and he shall be in you.

ΙϚʹ καὶ ἐγὼ ἐρωτήσω τὸν πατέρα καὶ ἄλλον παράκλητον δώσει ὑμῖν ἵνα μένῃ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ΙΖʹ τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας ὃ ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν ὅτι οὐ θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ γινώσκει αὐτό ὑμεῖς δὲ γινώσκετε αὐτὸ ὅτι παρ᾽ ὑμῖν μένει καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται TR, 1550

The Greek word ἄλλον (“another”) implies that there is an original Comforter. As mentioned, the original Comforter is the Lord Jesus Christ. The one who is “another Comforter” is the Holy Spirit.

In his commentary on 1 John 2:1, Henry Alford wrote,1

Alford, p. 432, 1 John 2:1

In addition, regarding the Spirit of truth, the Lord Jesus Christ told the apostles that “he dwells with you, and he shall be in you.”2 The Greek verb «μένει», translated as “dwells,” is conjugated in the present tense, meaning that the Spirit of truth was dwelling with the apostles, right then, and right there, in the present. Muḥammad was not born for another 500-600 years. Therefore, Muḥammad could not be the other Comforter, the Spirit of truth. In addition, even Muslims would never admit that Muḥammad is actually in them. On the other hand, the Holy Spirit dwells in Christians.3

The reason that the Spirit of truth was dwelling with the apostles in the present, although the Holy Spirit would not be given until Pentecost,4 is because the Holy Spirit is also the Spirit of the Son, Jesus Christ.5 The Lord Jesus Christ was dwelling with the apostles, and there exists a divine community between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – the Holy Trinity.

The Prophecy of Joel

Many Muslims assert that the Holy Spirit cannot be the “Spirit of truth” or the “Comforter” because the Holy Spirit had always been with the faithful. However, there is no evidence that everyone who had faith in God prior to Pentecost possessed the Holy Spirit. Rather, God gave the Holy Spirit to whom He willed.

The prophet Joel prophesied of a time when God would pour out His Spirit (i.e., the Holy Spirit) upon all flesh, meaning both Jews and Gentiles, bondmen and freemen, men and women, children and adults, rather than upon select individuals. Logically, if God would in the future pour out His Spirit upon all flesh, then it had not been done so prior to that time.

In Joel 2:28-29, it is written,

28 And it shall come to pass afterwards, I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions. 29 And in those days, I shall also pour out My Spirit upon the servants and upon the handmaids.

כח וְהָיָ֣ה אַֽחֲרֵי־כֵ֗ן אֶשְׁפֹּ֤וךְ אֶת־רוּחִי֙ עַל־כָּל־בָּשָׂ֔ר וְנִבְּא֖וּ בְּנֵיכֶ֣ם וּבְנֹֽותֵיכֶ֑ם זִקְנֵיכֶם֙ חֲלֹמֹ֣ות יַחֲלֹמ֔וּן בַּח֣וּרֵיכֶ֔ם חֶזְיֹנֹ֖ות יִרְאֽוּ׃ כט וְגַ֥ם עַל־הָֽעֲבָדִ֖ים וְעַל־הַשְּׁפָחֹ֑ות בַּיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵ֔מָּה אֶשְׁפֹּ֖וךְ אֶת־רוּחִֽי׃ WLC

In the New Testament, the apostle Peter confirms that this event occurred at Pentecost.

  • Acts 2:1

1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all of one accord in one place.

  • Acts 2:4

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

  • Acts 2:16-18

16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel, 17 “And it shall come to pass in the last days,” said God, “I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams. 18 And in those days, I shall pour out My Spirit upon My servants and upon My handmaidens, and they shall prophesy.”

The Inadequacy of any Future Revelation

If indeed the Lord Jesus Christ is God as the majority of Christianity confesses, then any future revelation is inadequate compared to the revelation which came from the Lord Jesus Christ, God incarnate.

The reason is simple. A messenger is sent by, and delivers a message or revelation on behalf of, someone greater in authority. In the case of Moses, a man, he was sent by Yahveh, God, to deliver Yahveh’s message and revelation to the people of Israel.6 However, because Moses was a man, this left open the possibility that someone “greater than Moses” (i.e., a greater man) could come thereafter to deliver another message or revelation on behalf of Yahveh to the people of Israel. Of course, the one “greater than Moses” was the Lord Jesus Christ.7

Had the Lord Jesus Christ been just a man, the possibility would then exist that someone “greater than Jesus” could come after him with another message or revelation on behalf of Yahveh to the people of Israel. But, because the Lord Jesus Christ is God incarnate, “the same yesterday, today, and forever,”8 no later message or revelation from someone who is just a man can supercede the message and revelation given by the Lord Jesus Christ, God the Son, on behalf of God the Father.

Since Muḥammad is just a man, and in addition, he claimed to have received the Qurʿān, not directly from God, but from the angel Gabriel, his message and revelation can in no way supersede that of the Gospel delivered by the Lord Jesus Christ, God incarnate, who spoke only what God the Father gave him to speak.9

A Contrary Gospel

There is one more thought that I feel is necessary to include. In Gal. 1:8-9, the apostle Paul wrote,

8 But if we, or an angel from heaven, preach [a gospel] to you other than what we have preached to you, let him be anathema! 9 As we said before, so now I say again — if anyone preaches [a gospel] other than what you have received, let him be anathema!

Ηʹ ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίζηται ὑμῖν παρ᾽ ὃ εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν ἀνάθεμα ἔστω Θʹ ὡς προειρήκαμεν καὶ ἄρτι πάλιν λέγω εἴ τις ὑμᾶς εὐαγγελίζεται παρ᾽ ὃ παρελάβετε ἀνάθεμα ἔστω TR, 1550

Since the revelation of Muḥammad which he claimed to have received from an angel contradicts the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ that was later preached by the apostle Paul and the other apostles, Muḥammad is considered anathema, or “accursed.”


Alford, Henry. The Greek Testament. Vol 4. Boston: Lee, 1878.


1 p. 432
2 John 14:17: «παρ᾽ ὑμῖν μένει καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται»
3 2 Tim. 1:14
4 Acts 2:4
5 Rom. 8:9
6 Exo. 3:15
7 Heb. 3:3
8 Heb. 13:8
9 John 12:50

  • 2
    Anathema is "outside of our communion" and only indirectly "accursed" so perhaps that final clause is an overstatement. Love the depth and detail of this answer. +1 and wish it could be more. Commented Sep 21, 2016 at 0:20

From a Christian perspective, there is no role for Mohammed in the Bible. "The comforter" is believed to be the Holy Spirit.

From Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

and he shall give you another Comforter. This is no inconsiderable proof of a trinity of persons in the Godhead; here is the Father prayed unto, the Son in human nature praying, and the Holy Ghost the Comforter prayed for; who is the gift of the Father, through the prevalent mediation of the Son, and is another "Comforter"; distinct from the Messiah, to whom reference is here had! One of the names of the Messiah, with the Jews, is (u), "a Comforter"; such an one Jesus had been to his disciples; and now he was about to leave them, and for their support under their sorrows, he promises to use his interest with his Father, that he would give them another Comforter, meaning the Spirit, who performs this his work and office, by taking of the things of Christ, and showing them to his people; by shedding abroad the love of the Father, and of the Son, into their hearts; by opening and applying the precious promises of the Gospel to them; by being a spirit of adoption in them; and by abiding with them as the seal, earnest, and pledge of their future glory; and with this view Christ promises to pray for him,

I realize that Islam has other perspectives, but of course, on this site we're not here to answer what is true, just what Christianity (or segments of Christianity) teaches. From a Christian perspective, Mohammed is not even a factor, Biblically speaking. He came along after the last book of the Bible was written, and from a Christian perspective, he's not who was being predicted in these verses. From a Christian perspective, these verses speak of the Holy Spirit.


I would not be so sure to exclude any reference to Muhammad from the Bible. In fact there is a fairly mainstream historical view of Revelation that directly includes him as the leader of a Saracen invasion that invaded Christianity like a 'locust plague' in the seventh century. A review of the symbol and the history arguably describes the prophecy in an uncanny manner.

The location of the Saracen invasion is arguably tied into these verses as well as a few verses before:

The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces. Their hair was like women’s hair, and their teeth were like lions’ teeth. They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle. They had tails with stingers, like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months. They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon and in Greek is Apollyon (that is, Destroyer). (Revelation 9:7-11, NIV)

According to this view it is argued that:

the hieroglyphic itself as by the words of explanation accompanying, that to the Arab cavalry hordes, emerging from the smoke of the hellish exhalation, there would be opened a fearful career of conquest over Roman Christendom: one in which, as just hinted before, they would fly, as it were, with locust-wings, destroy what opposed them with the strength of lions’ teeth, and torment the subjugated Christian inhabitants as with the poison of a scorpion-sting.—And was there then a correspondence with this in the facts of the subsequent Saracenic history?—It was in the year 629 that the Saracens under Mahomet himself first issued from the desert into Syria, with proclamation of war against Christendom. (Horae Apocalypticae; or, A commentary on the Apocalypse, critical and historical; including also an examination of the chief prophecies of Daniel 1862, Vol 1, P449)

The reason for matching the symbol to this period is not only because it historically follows in order after the opening of the previous seals, but it seems alone answers the peculiarities of the symbol in an exacting manner. The image matches the 'swarming numbers' of the Muslim invaders. Their historical progress of attacking Christianity almost immedietly after the birth of their religion was noted for "progress rapid, far-ranging, and irresistible". Furthermore, historically they were known to be "wide wasters of the herbage and vegetation." "The horse-like appearance seemed to imply that they would be hordes of cavalry; the likeness to the lion, that they would be savage destroyers of life; and the scorpion-likeness, that of the men in Roman Christendom, whose lives they spared, they would be the tormentors, even as with a scorpion’s poison-sting."

Furthermore the locust is peculiarly Arabic, even biblically, as in the plague under Moses the locusts came from an 'east wind.' Arabia being east of Egypt. The scorpion is also native to the Arabian desert. Arabia is also regarded by as the "original country of the horse" and that in it's wild wildernesses are the "haunts also of the lion."

Even more striking the locust was human in the appearance with male faces but "hair as the hair (the long hair) of women, with crowns as of gold on their heads, (or, it might be, gold-adorned turbans) and breast-plates like iron." The history of Muhammad and the early Muslim Saracens also war iron breast plates. Clearly the symbol can be seen like a hand to a glove, a mixture of meaningful symbolism pinned to literal realities.

But it is further said that the locusts issued out of the smoke of the bottomless pit. The historical argument also finds meaning here:

Who knows not of the sudden rise of Mahommedism in Arabia, just at the very time we speak of:—that most extraordinary invention of fanaticism and fraud; which being, as it was, from beginning to end a lie, in its pretensions superseding the Gospel of the Lord Jesus, in its doctrines inculcating views of the blessed God dark, cruel, and unholy, and in its morals a system of pride, ferocity, superstition, sensualism,—indicated too well, to any one who had eyes to see, that it had indeed its origin from hell, and was an emanation, like the pestilential smoke in the vision, from the pit of the abyss? (Horae Apocalypticae; or, A commentary on the Apocalypse, critical and historical; including also an examination of the chief prophecies of Daniel 1862, Vol 1, P442)

So maybe after all, Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible, just not in the way that Muslims might approve of? As a Christian this view is not very persuasive unless a historical view of Revelation is adopted.


The total canon of the Bible had been set hundreds of years before Muhammad was even born. The first council of Nicea took place in 325 AD, long before the Prophet of Islam was even a gleam in his daddy's eye. The Prophet was born in 570AD. So, as you can see, there is no possible way that Muhammad, the prophet of Islam could have been mentioned in or have any role whatsoever in the Christian Bible.

Now, insofar as the Qu'ran is concerned, Jesus is highly revered as a prophet of Allah (God) in that book. But Jesus, Moses, Abraham, Noah and even Adam are considered true Muslims. How that can be I don't know but that's what most Muslims believe.

  • 3
    "So, as you can see, there is no possible way that Muhammad, the prophet of Islam could have been mentioned in or have any role whatsoever in the Christian Bible."...unless the Bible contains prophecies. Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 14:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .