Reassess­ing The Bina­ry : Chris­t­ian Depic­tions of Jesus and Muhammad

Com­par­ing reli­gious fig­ures can be a com­plex endeav­or, often fraught with deeply ingrained beliefs, his­tor­i­cal inter­pre­ta­tions, and the­o­log­i­cal con­sid­er­a­tions. The com­par­i­son between Jesus Christ in Chris­tian­i­ty and Muham­mad in Islam is a top­ic that has cap­tured the imag­i­na­tion of the­olo­gians, his­to­ri­ans, and laypeo­ple alike. The debates often revolve around the lives, teach­ings, and lega­cies of these foun­da­tion­al fig­ures. How­ev­er, these com­par­isons can some­times be over­sim­pli­fied or mis­rep­re­sent­ed, par­tic­u­lar­ly when viewed through the lens of one reli­gious tra­di­tion over the other.

Recent­ly, an argu­ment sur­faced¹ that aims to dif­fer­en­ti­ate between these two fig­ures, Jesus and Muham­mad, in ways that only favours Christianity :

The argu­ments made here appear to be con­trast­ing Chris­tian­i­ty and Islam by focus­ing on their respec­tive founders : Jesus ^(P) and Muham­mad ^(P). This par­tic­u­lar argu­ment is framed in a way that appears to strong­ly favour Jesus and Chris­tian­i­ty over Muham­mad and Islam, mak­ing sev­er­al points that are pre­sent­ed as crit­i­cisms of Muham­mad ^(P) and his teach­ings. It is imper­a­tive, how­ev­er, to crit­i­cal­ly assess these points, not to fur­ther the divide but to seek clar­i­ty and truth.

Tak­ing into account the com­plex­i­ty of these argu­ments and the broad­er con­text of reli­gious dis­course, let’s now move on to address each point systematically.

Jesus and Muham­mad : Assess­ing Chris­t­ian Polemics

Before delv­ing into the intri­ca­cies of the argu­ments pre­sent­ed in Chris­t­ian polemics against Prophet Muham­mad ^(P), it’s imper­a­tive to con­tex­tu­al­ize the dis­course. The com­par­i­son between Jesus Christ in Chris­tian­i­ty and Muham­mad in Islam has been a top­ic of pro­found the­o­log­i­cal, his­tor­i­cal, and cul­tur­al sig­nif­i­cance. The nar­ra­tives sur­round­ing these foun­da­tion­al fig­ures often inter­sect and diverge, shaped by cen­turies of inter­pre­ta­tion, belief, and schol­ar­ly inquiry.

In recent times, a par­tic­u­lar strain of Chris­t­ian polemics has emerged, seek­ing to dif­fer­en­ti­ate between Jesus and Muham­mad in ways that osten­si­bly ele­vate Chris­tian­i­ty while den­i­grat­ing Islam. These argu­ments, often dis­sem­i­nat­ed through var­i­ous media chan­nels, assert con­trast­ing aspects of the lives, teach­ings, and lega­cies of these revered fig­ures. How­ev­er, a crit­i­cal exam­i­na­tion reveals com­plex­i­ties, nuances, and his­tor­i­cal con­texts that chal­lenge over­sim­pli­fied comparisons.

Let us now break down the arguments :

Death and Res­ur­rec­tion : The point here is that Jesus died and was res­ur­rect­ed, which is con­sid­ered a mirac­u­lous event in Chris­t­ian belief, while Muham­mad died and did not res­ur­rect. This com­par­i­son, while high­light­ing a fun­da­men­tal belief in Chris­tian­i­ty, over­looks the dif­fer­ent roles and sig­nif­i­cance attrib­uted to prophets in Islam. Res­ur­rec­tion is not a met­ric used in Islam to deter­mine a prophet’s legit­i­ma­cy or impor­tance. The empha­sis in Islam­ic tra­di­tion is on the mes­sage deliv­ered by the prophet, rather than mir­a­cles as proof of divine favor.

Teach­ing on Ene­mies : Jesus is quot­ed as say­ing ​“love your ene­my,” which is part of the Chris­t­ian ethos of for­give­ness and love. The argu­ment asserts that Muham­mad’s teach­ings advo­cate killing or sham­ing non-believ­ers, although this is a sim­pli­fi­ca­tion and inter­pre­ta­tion that many Mus­lims would dis­pute. It’s cru­cial to con­sid­er the his­tor­i­cal and tex­tu­al con­text of these teach­ings, rec­og­niz­ing that both reli­gious tra­di­tions have ele­ments of peace, com­pas­sion, and for­give­ness. Sim­plis­tic inter­pre­ta­tions risk under­min­ing the com­plex­i­ty and depth of these traditions.

Par­adise : Jesus’s teach­ings focus on ​“Eter­nal Life” as the ulti­mate reward, while the argu­ment states that Muham­mad promis­es ​“72 vir­gins for men” and posi­tions women as ​“sex slaves” in par­adise. This por­tray­al gross­ly over­sim­pli­fies Islam­ic teach­ings about the after­life, which are far more nuanced and empha­size spir­i­tu­al ful­fill­ment over phys­i­cal plea­sures. Such inter­pre­ta­tions are con­test­ed and wide­ly debat­ed among schol­ars and prac­ti­tion­ers of Islam, reflect­ing a diver­si­ty of thought with­in the tradition.

Per­son­al Qual­i­ties : Jesus is described as ​“with­out sin,” while Muham­mad is accused of var­i­ous moral fail­ings includ­ing pedophil­ia, adul­tery, and being a war­lord. This sec­tion con­tains asser­tions that are high­ly con­tentious and that many Mus­lims would con­sid­er mis­rep­re­sen­ta­tions or mis­un­der­stand­ings of their faith and his­to­ry. It’s impor­tant to approach these claims with a crit­i­cal eye, under­stand­ing the his­tor­i­cal con­text and the val­ues of the times in which these fig­ures lived. The accu­sa­tion of moral fail­ings against Muham­mad often ignores the con­text with­in which his actions occurred, includ­ing the norms and prac­tices of 7th-cen­tu­ry Arabia.

Mir­a­cles : Jesus is cred­it­ed with var­i­ous mir­a­cles includ­ing mul­ti­ply­ing bread, rais­ing the dead, and walk­ing on water. Muham­mad is stat­ed to have not per­formed mir­a­cles, which is not entire­ly accu­rate accord­ing to Islam­ic tra­di­tion. Islam attrib­ut­es sev­er­al mir­a­cles to Muham­mad, includ­ing the rev­e­la­tion of the Quran, which is con­sid­ered a mir­a­cle of lit­er­ary and spir­i­tu­al sig­nif­i­cance. The dif­fer­ence in the nature and role of mir­a­cles in each tra­di­tion high­lights the diver­si­ty in how divine inter­ven­tion and prophet­hood are understood.

Ulti­mate Divin­i­ty : The argu­ment con­cludes by affirm­ing the divin­i­ty of Jesus and sug­gest­ing that all will even­tu­al­ly rec­og­nize this. This state­ment reflects a core Chris­t­ian belief in the divin­i­ty of Jesus, a belief that is not shared by Islam, which views Jesus as a revered prophet but not divine. Such the­o­log­i­cal dif­fer­ences are cen­tral to the iden­ti­ty of each reli­gion and reflect diver­gent under­stand­ings of God, prophet­hood, and salvation.

It’s impor­tant to note that the com­par­i­son is framed in a way that is clear­ly designed to favor one reli­gious tra­di­tion over the oth­er and con­tains sev­er­al points that are sub­ject to inter­pre­ta­tion, debate, or that rely on a par­tic­u­lar the­o­log­i­cal per­spec­tive. The argu­ments also employ a num­ber of assump­tions and inter­pre­ta­tions that are not uni­ver­sal­ly accept­ed. For instance, the view that Muham­mad is a ​“false prophet” is clear­ly a mat­ter of reli­gious belief, not an empir­i­cal fact. Like­wise, the state­ment that Jesus died ​“so that the sins of all Mus­lims will be for­giv­en” is a the­o­log­i­cal claim that reflects a spe­cif­ic inter­pre­ta­tion of Chris­t­ian doctrine.

Response to Polemics on Jesus and Muhammad

In this com­pre­hen­sive analy­sis, we aim to dis­sect and inter­ro­gate the asser­tions made in Chris­t­ian polemics against Muham­mad ^(P). By scru­ti­niz­ing each argu­ment against the back­drop of schol­ar­ly research, his­tor­i­cal under­stand­ing, and the­o­log­i­cal nuance, we endeav­or to uncov­er deep­er truths and dis­pel mis­con­cep­tions. Through this process, we seek to fos­ter a nuanced under­stand­ing of the com­plex­i­ties involved, encour­ag­ing respect­ful dia­logue and engage­ment with the diverse per­spec­tives sur­round­ing these sig­nif­i­cant reli­gious figures.

Death and Resurrection

The argu­ment opens with a con­trast­ing view of Jesus and Muham­mad con­cern­ing death and res­ur­rec­tion. In Chris­tian­i­ty, Jesus’ res­ur­rec­tion is a cor­ner­stone of faith, seen as proof of his divin­i­ty and the promise of eter­nal life for believ­ers. In Islam, how­ev­er, the absence of a res­ur­rec­tion in Muham­mad’s life sto­ry is not a the­o­log­i­cal con­cern. Prophets in Islam are revered not for mirac­u­lous feats but for their teach­ings and exem­plary lives. There­fore, com­par­ing these two on the grounds of res­ur­rec­tion is like com­par­ing apples and oranges ; each reli­gious tra­di­tion has dif­fer­ent cri­te­ria for val­i­dat­ing their respec­tive prophet­ic figures.

The sig­nif­i­cance of Jesus’ res­ur­rec­tion in Chris­tian­i­ty can­not be under­stat­ed, serv­ing as a foun­da­tion­al event that under­scores his role as the Sav­ior and the son of God. This event is cel­e­brat­ed around the world dur­ing East­er, mark­ing a moment of pro­found spir­i­tu­al renew­al and hope for believ­ers. It encap­su­lates the vic­to­ry over death and sin, offer­ing a path­way to eter­nal life through faith in Jesus.

In con­trast, Islam’s empha­sis on Muham­mad’s life and teach­ings reflects a dif­fer­ent approach to divine guid­ance, focus­ing on the Quran as the ulti­mate mir­a­cle and source of spir­i­tu­al wis­dom. Muham­mad’s role is seen as that of the final prophet, whose life exem­pli­fied the prin­ci­ples of Islam and whose teach­ings con­tin­ue to guide mil­lions of Mus­lims around the world. The dis­tinc­tion in how res­ur­rec­tion and prophet­ic mis­sion are viewed high­lights the unique the­o­log­i­cal land­scapes of Chris­tian­i­ty and Islam²

Teach­ing on Enemies

The argu­ment con­trasts Jesus’ teach­ings of love and for­give­ness, encap­su­lat­ed in phras­es like ​“love your ene­my,” against a por­tray­al of Muham­mad advo­cat­ing vio­lence against non-believ­ers. While Jesus’ Ser­mon on the Mount indeed includes rad­i­cal calls for love and for­give­ness, Muham­mad’s teach­ings are far more nuanced than the argu­ment sug­gests. The Quran con­tains numer­ous vers­es pro­mot­ing peace, tol­er­ance, and com­pas­sion, such as ​“There is no com­pul­sion in reli­gion“³. More­over, Muham­mad him­self lived by these prin­ci­ples, sign­ing treaties and form­ing alliances with non-Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ties dur­ing his life­time. This por­tray­al fails to con­sid­er the con­text with­in which each fig­ure spoke and the mul­ti­ple inter­pre­ta­tions their words have gar­nered over the cen­turies. It is essen­tial to rec­og­nize the his­tor­i­cal cir­cum­stances under which Muham­mad’s teach­ings evolved, includ­ing peri­ods of con­flict and the estab­lish­ment of a nascent Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ty amid hos­tile sur­round­ings. These con­di­tions neces­si­tat­ed guid­ance that addressed both peace and self-defense.

The Quran and Hadith lit­er­a­ture reflect a com­pre­hen­sive approach to deal­ing with ene­mies, empha­siz­ing restraint, jus­tice, and for­give­ness along­side the right to defend one’s com­mu­ni­ty against aggres­sion. This bal­anced per­spec­tive is often lost in sim­plis­tic por­tray­als that focus sole­ly on vers­es relat­ed to con­flict, with­out acknowl­edg­ing the broad­er eth­i­cal frame­work with­in which they are sit­u­at­ed. Jesus’ com­mand to love one’s ene­mies and Muham­mad’s empha­sis on mer­cy and jus­tice are not mutu­al­ly exclu­sive but rep­re­sent com­ple­men­tary dimen­sions of a more nuanced under­stand­ing of eth­i­cal behav­ior in chal­leng­ing circumstances.

Both teach­ings offer pro­found insights into the nature of for­give­ness, com­pas­sion, and the pur­suit of peace, chal­leng­ing fol­low­ers to look beyond imme­di­ate griev­ances towards a high­er stan­dard of moral conduct.

Teach­ing About Paradise

The third point of con­tention is the rep­re­sen­ta­tion of par­adise in both reli­gions. While Chris­tian­i­ty speaks of ​“Eter­nal Life,” the argu­ment sug­gests Islam offers a mate­ri­al­is­tic and gen­der-biased ver­sion involv­ing ​“72 vir­gins for men” and sub­ju­ga­tion for women. This is an over­sim­pli­fi­ca­tion. Islam­ic escha­tol­ogy involves com­plex the­o­log­i­cal dis­cus­sions, often empha­siz­ing spir­i­tu­al rather than mate­r­i­al rewards. Addi­tion­al­ly, the Quran speaks of equal rewards for both gen­ders, sug­gest­ing that men and women will both find ulti­mate ful­fill­ment in the after­life. The con­cept of par­adise in Islam is rich­ly tex­tured, with descrip­tions that are meant to con­vey the idea of ulti­mate reward and ful­fill­ment beyond human comprehension.

The often-cit­ed fig­ure of ​“72 vir­gins” is based on a hadith whose authen­tic­i­ty and inter­pre­ta­tion are sub­jects of schol­ar­ly debate. It is cru­cial to approach such top­ics with a nuanced under­stand­ing, rec­og­niz­ing the sym­bol­ic nature of many of these descrip­tions and the diverse inter­pre­ta­tions with­in the Mus­lim schol­ar­ly tra­di­tion. Chris­tian­i­ty’s vision of eter­nal life also encom­pass­es a range of inter­pre­ta­tions, cen­ter­ing on a per­son­al rela­tion­ship with God and the promise of reunion with loved ones in a state of eter­nal peace and joy.

Both reli­gions offer visions of the after­life that seek to pro­vide com­fort and hope to believ­ers, empha­siz­ing the ulti­mate jus­tice and mer­cy of God. The dif­fer­ences in these descrip­tions reflect the var­ied ways in which reli­gious tra­di­tions con­cep­tu­al­ize the divine and the des­tiny of human souls, invit­ing fol­low­ers to reflect on the moral and spir­i­tu­al dimen­sions of their lives in antic­i­pa­tion of the life to come.

Per­son­al Qualities

Next, the argu­ment accus­es Muham­mad of var­i­ous moral fail­ings, includ­ing pedophil­ia and war­mon­ger­ing, con­trast­ing this with Jesus’ sin­less nature. While it is doc­tri­nal­ly accu­rate that Chris­tians believe Jesus was with­out sin, the accu­sa­tions against Muham­mad lack his­tor­i­cal and cul­tur­al con­text. For exam­ple, his mar­riage to Aisha ^(R) occurred with­in the socio-cul­tur­al norms of 7th-cen­tu­ry Ara­bi­an soci­ety, and was not con­sid­ered inap­pro­pri­ate. Fur­ther­more, Muham­mad’s mil­i­tary cam­paigns are gen­er­al­ly under­stood with­in Islam as defen­sive in nature, aimed at pro­tect­ing his com­mu­ni­ty from exter­nal threats. These argu­ments often fail to con­sid­er the his­tor­i­cal con­text and the chal­lenges of lead­ing a com­mu­ni­ty under con­stant threat, result­ing in a sim­plis­tic por­tray­al of Muham­mad. Muham­mad’s actions, includ­ing his mar­riages and mil­i­tary engage­ments, must be exam­ined with­in the socio-polit­i­cal envi­ron­ment of the time, which was marked by trib­al con­flicts and the neces­si­ty of form­ing alliances.

The Prophet’s mar­riages, for instance, were large­ly aimed at cement­ing polit­i­cal alliances and inte­grat­ing diverse tribes into the emerg­ing Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ty. Addi­tion­al­ly, the Quran­ic rev­e­la­tions and the Hadiths depict a leader who sought peace and rec­on­cil­i­a­tion, advo­cat­ing for jus­tice, mer­cy, and the wel­fare of the com­mu­ni­ty. Com­par­a­tive­ly, Jesus’ min­istry occurred under dif­fer­ent cir­cum­stances, focus­ing on spir­i­tu­al teach­ings and the estab­lish­ment of a new covenant between God and human­i­ty. His mes­sage of love, for­give­ness, and redemp­tion res­onat­ed deeply in a con­text of Roman occu­pa­tion and Jew­ish expec­ta­tions of a Messiah.

Jesus’ sin­less­ness is a the­o­log­i­cal affir­ma­tion of his divine nature and mis­sion, which con­trasts with Islam­ic views of prophet­hood, where prophets, while high­ly esteemed, are not con­sid­ered divine or free from human frail­ties. This dis­tinc­tion reflects dif­fer­ing the­o­log­i­cal frame­works regard­ing human nature, sin, and redemp­tion in Chris­tian­i­ty and Islam.

Mir­a­cles

Last­ly, the argu­ment con­tends that while Jesus ^(P) per­formed mir­a­cles, Muham­mad ^(P) did not. This is incor­rect. With­in Islam­ic tra­di­tion, Muham­mad is cred­it­ed with sev­er­al mir­a­cles, includ­ing the Night Jour­ney and Ascen­sion (Isrā’ and Mi’raj). Though they may not be as cen­tral to Islam­ic belief as the mir­a­cles attrib­uted to Jesus in Chris­tian­i­ty, they are nonethe­less an inte­gral part of Muhammad’s prophet­ic biog­ra­phy. The mir­a­cles of Jesus, such as heal­ing the sick, rais­ing the dead, and trans­form­ing water into wine, are sig­nif­i­cant with­in Chris­t­ian the­ol­o­gy, under­scor­ing his divine nature and author­i­ty. These acts of pow­er and com­pas­sion are seen as signs of God’s king­dom and Jesus’ mes­sian­ic identity.

In con­trast, the mir­a­cles asso­ci­at­ed with Muham­mad, includ­ing the rev­e­la­tion of the Quran, are under­stood with­in Islam as signs of his prophet­hood and the authen­tic­i­ty of his mes­sage. The Quran itself is con­sid­ered a mir­a­cle, giv­en its lin­guis­tic, lit­er­ary, and spir­i­tu­al depth. The dis­tinc­tion in the nature and role of mir­a­cles reflects dif­fer­ent the­o­log­i­cal emphases in Chris­tian­i­ty and Islam. While Chris­tian­i­ty places a sig­nif­i­cant focus on the mirac­u­lous as evi­dence of Jesus’ divin­i­ty, Islam empha­sizes the mir­a­cle of the Quran and Muham­mad’s exem­plary life as proof of his prophet­hood. Both approach­es offer insights into the ways in which divine inter­ven­tion is under­stood and expe­ri­enced with­in these reli­gious traditions.

Ulti­mate Divinity

The clos­ing argu­ment — ​“Every knee shall bow and con­fess with their mouth that Jesus is Lord“⁴ — speaks less to the empiri­cism of reli­gious com­par­i­son and more to the the­o­log­i­cal com­mit­ments of the one mak­ing the claim. This sen­ti­ment encap­su­lates a cen­tral Chris­t­ian belief but is not shared by Mus­lims, who revere Jesus as a prophet but not as divine. The affir­ma­tion of Jesus’ lord­ship and divin­i­ty is a foun­da­tion­al aspect of Chris­t­ian faith, reflect­ing the belief in the Trin­i­ty and the unique role of Jesus in sal­va­tion his­to­ry. This doc­trine dis­tin­guish­es Chris­tian­i­ty from oth­er Abra­ham­ic faiths, empha­siz­ing the incar­na­tion, cru­ci­fix­ion, and res­ur­rec­tion of Jesus ^(P) as cen­tral events in the divine plan for human redemption.

In con­trast, Islam affirms the one­ness of God (Tawhid) and the prophet­hood of Muham­mad as the seal of the prophets. Mus­lims hon­or Jesus as one of the great prophets, acknowl­edg­ing his vir­gin birth and his role as the Mes­si­ah, but they do not attribute divin­i­ty to him. This the­o­log­i­cal diver­gence is fun­da­men­tal to the iden­ti­ty of each reli­gion, shap­ing its beliefs, prac­tices, and under­stand­ing of sal­va­tion. The dec­la­ra­tion of Jesus as Lord is thus a pro­fes­sion of faith that has pro­found impli­ca­tions for Chris­tians, sig­ni­fy­ing their alle­giance to Christ and their belief in his redemp­tive work. For Mus­lims, the empha­sis is on the sub­mis­sion to the one God and fol­low­ing the guid­ance pro­vid­ed through the Quran and the exam­ple of Muham­mad ^(P).

Con­clu­sions

In the pur­suit of under­stand­ing and appre­ci­at­ing the rich tapes­try of reli­gious tra­di­tions, it is imper­a­tive that we approach com­par­isons between revered fig­ures such as Jesus and Muham­mad with nuance and sen­si­tiv­i­ty. While the incli­na­tion to draw par­al­lels between foun­da­tion­al reli­gious fig­ures is nat­ur­al, it’s imper­a­tive to con­front the bias­es and mis­rep­re­sen­ta­tions inher­ent in many of these comparisons.

The argu­ments put forth by some Chris­t­ian cir­cles often seek to dimin­ish Islam while exalt­ing Chris­tian­i­ty, per­pet­u­at­ing a nar­ra­tive of supe­ri­or­i­ty that only serves to deep­en divi­sions. An accu­rate com­par­i­son demands not only an appre­ci­a­tion for the mul­ti­fac­eted lives and teach­ings of Jesus ^(P) and Muham­mad ^(P) but also a res­olute defense against the vil­i­fi­ca­tion of the Prophet ^(P). We must chal­lenge these polemics with unwa­ver­ing deter­mi­na­tion, expos­ing their dis­tor­tions and false­hoods, while affirm­ing the dig­ni­ty and integri­ty of Islam in the face of adversity.

Only through a stead­fast com­mit­ment to truth and jus­tice can we hope to coun­ter­act the tide of mis­in­for­ma­tion and prej­u­dice direct­ed towards Islam. It is incum­bent upon us to cham­pi­on the val­ues of tol­er­ance, respect, and under­stand­ing, reject­ing big­otry and intol­er­ance wher­ev­er they arise, and uphold­ing the hon­our and rev­er­ence due to the Prophet ^(P) and the Islam­ic tradition.

And only God knows best !

1. A cur­so­ry exam­i­na­tion by this author has dis­cov­ered that this par­tic­u­lar text has been spread across social media — Face­book and YouTube — by Chris­t­ian inter­net trolls, with the intent to malign the char­ac­ter of Prophet Muham­mad, peace be upon him[↩]
2. It is imper­a­tive to acknowl­edge that the Qur’an affirms Jesus’ deliv­er­ance from the per­ilous plot against his life, notably the cru­ci­fix­ion (Q 4:157). Con­se­quent­ly, with­in the Mus­lim per­spec­tive, attribut­ing Jesus’ demise to the cross would sig­ni­fy a devi­a­tion from God’s divine plan for his prophet­ic endeav­or among the chil­dren of Israel, depict­ing it as an egre­gious fail­ure. For fur­ther insights, refer to Gabriel Said Reynolds, ​“The Mus­lim Jesus : Dead or alive?” in Bul­letin of SOAS, Vol. 72, Issue 2 (2009), pp. 237 – 258[↩]
3. Qur’an 2:256[↩]
4. See Philip­pi­ans 2:10 – 11[↩]