Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Do Jesus, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, etc. fit the criteria for being Prophets?

According to the Torah (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 and 18:18-22), the criteria for a person to be considered a prophet or speak for God are that they must follow the God of Israel (and no other god), they must not describe God differently than He is known to be from Scripture, they must not advocate change to God's word or state that God has changed His mind and wishes things that contradict His already-stated eternal word, and the things they do speak of must come to pass.

Thus, any divergence from the tenets of Biblical Judaism espoused by Jesus/Muhammad/Joseph Smith/etc. would disqualify him from being considered a prophet.

Agree or not?


Asked by IhartU at 7:45 AM on Aug. 29, 2010 in Religious Debate

Level 27 (31,412 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (16)
  • All of them altered the Judaic religion to suit their own inner motives. None of them made prophecies (at least, no prophecies that ever came to be). All were arrogant in their presumption of privileges above and beyond other people. All thought they were immortal and untouchable. All of them were wrong. Prophets correctly divine future events. None of these mortals ever did that. So, no. They were NOT prophets.

    Answer by witchqueen at 11:19 PM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • Only Jesus fits the true Prophet.

    Answer by Shaneagle777 at 8:47 PM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • just guys that are a part of religious history. Personally feel George Washington and Abe Lincoln did as much for us as a nation.

    Answer by Zoeyis at 7:46 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  •  It clearly states the criteria for being a Prophet and all three of the mentioned broke the rule about changing what was already written. As for Christianity, they totally deviate from the angry and vengeful God of the Jews and change him into some hippie God of Love.


    Comment by IhartU (original poster) at 7:56 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • It depends on who's requirements you're going by. Jesus, for example, is considered a prophet by Muslims, but not usually by Jews. John Smith is considered one by Mormons yet is rejected by other Christians and by Muslims, as Muhammad was the "seal" of the prophets.
    Muhammad is accepted by Muslims but rejected by Jews and Christians.
    Yet there are other inclusive religions, like Baha'i, that accept the validity of most of the prophets of the differing religions...

    So it really depends who you ask and which definition and requirements you're using.

    I personally believe that all prophets/saints/sages/etc are teachers and show us a glimpse/offer us an understanding of the Divine/Ultimate Reality/Truth/God/etc.

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 9:21 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • *JOSEPH SMITH, LOL, forgive me, I haven't had my coffee yet, and my kid just watched Pocahontas the other day. *facepalm* can't believe I did that.

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 9:22 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • bandgeek521... since all Abrahamic religions came from Judism, those are the requirements I'm speaking of. Islam might have their own list of things that makes one a Prophet, but what they have done is change the word that was not supposed to be changed and added to it, and because of that, they are automatically placed under the category of being 'false'- as is Christianity and Latter Day Saints. How can they toss out what God said in the OT about the signs of being a Prophet or the Messiah, replace it with something else, ignore it altogether or mistranslate the verses to make their new version fit and think that's okay?

    Comment by IhartU (original poster) at 9:33 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • I guess because they don't think they're changing anything. I know in Islam its believed that Judaism and Christianity started out right, but over time have been altered and therefore God sent the Quran to correct all of the alterations that happened, to get people back on track with His original message. And Christians didn't think they were changing anything, they really did see the "signs" that Jesus was Messiah and believed he didn't come to change the law, but to fulfill it.

    In reality, it doesn't come down to the black and white of the letters on the page, but the interpretations of the texts, really... We see within all three of these religions many different interpretations and understandings. That's actually a huge part of Judaism, that revelation isn't something that happens just once, but is an ongoing process, and we must continually dig trough the scripture to find new understandings...

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 9:47 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • changing what was already written

    The problem with that is there is even debate amongst different sects of Judaism about what was "already written". It's more subtle than the kinds of changes you'll find in the NT or then the KJV version when they started chopping out entire books, but they never had a set in stone standard to compare a prophet to in the first place.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 11:23 AM on Aug. 29, 2010

  • I always believed that a prophet was considered a prophet if he 1) believed that Jehovah God was the one true God and 2) his prophecies came true and were never changed. So that would definitely cut out Joseph Smith since the Mormon church is constantly changing what it believes and what is "truth" to their truth. 100 years ago (probably even less in some Mormon circles) they believed and taught that black people were Satan's fallen angels. Joseph Smith made several "prophecies" that were never fulfilled and had to be changed, including the time of Jesus' return.
    I don't know much about Muhammed though, what his prophecies were.
    I'm not saying this to be a stuffy Christian or anything, seriously I just want to discuss.

    Answer by Laura2U at 11:35 AM on Aug. 29, 2010