I read that: Deut. 18:15 is about Muhammad because he was similar to Moses, i.e. he brought law to, and war against non-believers, etc. The same is true of Isa. 2:2-3, which is about Mecca, not Zion, because millions of pilgrims visit Mecca but nothing like that happens at Jerusalem. Isa. 42:4 is not about Jesus because he couldn’t establish justice. Zep. 3:9 alluded to Muslim Salah because they worship shoulders to shoulders. What are your responses?
My response is that these arguments are really rather obviously bogus and that no one who is not a Muslim would ever fall for these rather obviously bogus claims. Such arguments only work in closed loop discussions amongst Muslims, but fall apart under the slightest bit of clear-minded open discussion with non-Muslims in the room. So, let me begin.
Consider Deuteronomy 18:15. Would anyone who is not a Muslim even give the slightest consideration to this rather weak theory? First of all, the prophesied prophet is to be “from among you.” In other words, the prophet is to be a fellow Jew. In case there was any doubt at all, in Deuteronomy 18:18 God tells Moses that this prophet will be like Moses, and that he will be “from among their fellow Israelites.” Muhammad was not a Jew. He was not qualified to be this prophet like Moses. To make the prophet like Moses be Muhammad requires that we ignore what the prophecy says.
Then there is the fact that his prophet was to be like Moses. What about Jesus who was so much like Moses. As a child, a king thought that a Jewish baby would replace him, so the king decided to kill all the male Jewish children. This is Moses and this is Jesus. Moses was called out of Egypt, and Jesus was called out of Egypt. Moses gave them bread and Jesus gave them bread. Moses met God on Sinai, Jesus met God on the Mt. of Transfiguration. Moses offered a sacrificial Passover Lamb. Jesus is a sacrificial Passover Lamb. I could go on. The list of parallels is a long one. You can read about this in my book From Shadow to Reality (available at www.ipibooks.com).
How is Moses like Muhammad? I can think of nothing. Not really. Muhammad did not bring a law or a new covenant to anyone. He brought a new religion, but not a set of laws. Muhammad did make war, but this was aggressive war of conquest against political enemies, and it certainly was not in order to take any sort of promised land. Really, this claim that Muhammad is an Israelite or a prophet like Moses is so obviously wrong that, like I said, no one who is not already a Muslim would even consider it.
As for Isaiah 2:2-3 it is about Jerusalem and this is so obvious. The passage says that the going to the Mountain of the Lord will involve going to the temple of the God of Jacob. This is so obviously the Jewish temple, that anyone claiming differently is obviously not interested in the truth. Besides it says that the law will go out from Zion!!! Yet this person says it is not Zion but Mecca. Please do not bother to try to make any Jew or Christian believe this bogus theory that this is about Mecca! What conceivable reason is there to propose that the temple of the Lord is in Mecca, given that Islam does not even have temples. Millions of pilgrims go to Mecca, but millions of pilgrims go to Jerusalem every year, as do millions of pilgrims go to Santiago de Compostella in Spain, as do millions of pilgrims go to Bodh Gaya in India. What possible evidence is there that Isaiah is talking about Mecca? Please! This is downright silly.
About Isaiah 42:4 Jesus certainly has established justice on the earth. He has brought justification to many (Romans 3:26). This is a prophecy about a person who did not shout or cry out or raise his voice in the streets. This applies perfectly to the humble pacifist Jesus, as any Muslim knows, but it certainly is not about Muhammad who was a warrior and a general and certainly not a man of peace!! That Muhammad brought justice to the nations is debatable, but that Jesus brought justice with God to his followers is certainly true.
As for Zephaniah 3:9, where is Muhammad in this? What? This is clearly cherry-picking. The phrase shoulder to shoulder is a common one in many different cultures. This is merely a cherry-picked coincidence.
The idea that Muhammad is prophesied in the Hebrew Bible is a non-starter, honestly. Like I said, in an open debate with either Jews of Christians or even with atheists or other non-believers, no one would believe these rather ridiculous claims. I think that Muslim apologists would do their followers a favor to not make these claims that actually make Islam look foolish. Again, that Muslims can convince Muslims of these claims, when they do not even offer a look at the context of these passages is not surprising, but a fair look at the evidence shows that it is really quite foolish and actually makes Islam less believable.