Hi Trebb,
The point about “Muhammad is used just 4 times in the Quran and that too as a title”
is just one of the points why I state that there was no Muhammad.
I appreciate your response, but I maintain my position that the historical figure of Muhammad, as depicted in later Islamic traditions like the Sirah, Hadiths, and standardized Quran, did not exist as a distinct 7th-century Arabian prophet. Instead, the evidence suggests that “Muhammad” originated as a title—meaning “the praised one” or “praiseworthy one”—likely applied in early Arab-Christian contexts, possibly referring to a prophetic figure like Jesus in Ebionite (Judeo-Christian) traditions, where Jesus was viewed not as divine but as a human prophet. This title was later retrofitted into a biographical narrative during the Abbasid period (post-750 CE) to consolidate religious and political authority in the expanding Arab empire.
My view aligns with scholarship on early Islamic origins, which emphasizes the lack of contemporary evidence and the apparent evolution of Islamic doctrine from pre-existing monotheistic traditions in the region.
Let me list out the the key points supporting my perspective, drawing on historical, numismatic, epigraphic, and textual analysis. I think these will reinforce the proof of the absence of a historical Muhammad and point to a later invention of the prophetic biography:
1. Absence of any contemporary mentions of a prophet Muhammad in the First Century of Arab Rule:
In the period immediately following the Arab conquests (roughly 632–732 AS), there is no reference to
- a prophet named Muhammad,
- a holy book called the Quran, or
- a religion known as Islam
in any surviving documents, inscriptions, or accounts from the highly literate Byzantine, Persian, or Arab contexts.
This is striking given the administrative sophistication of the era; the Arabs were interacting with literate empires and producing records, yet nothing mentions these foundational elements.
For instance, early Arab administrative papyri from Egypt (e.g., from the 640s–650s AD) refer to the conquerors simply as “Saracens” or “Hagarenes” without any Islamic terminology. This silence suggests that the conquests were not driven by a new prophetic religion but were opportunistic expansions following the Byzantine-Sassanid wars (602–628 AS), where Arabs served as proxies for BOTH sides and filled the power vacuum when these two superpowers crushed each other to exhaustion.
References:
- Robert G. Hoyland’s *Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam* (1997) documents this lack of contemporary non-Muslim references to Muhammad until the mid-8th century. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Seeing-Islam-Others-Saw-Evaluation/dp/0878501258 (Wikipedia summary of historicity debates)
2. Umayyad Coins featuring Christian Symbols:
The coins minted by the early Umayyad caliphs (661–750 AD), such as those under Mu’awiya (r. 661–680 AD) and Abd al-Malik (r. 685–705 AD), often bore crosses with no Islamic slogans or references to Muhammad. For example, a coin from Bishapur (dated 661–662 AD) shows a cross on steps, and others depict a standing figure holding a cross. This contradicts the traditional narrative of an immediate establishment of a distinct Islamic faith; instead, it indicates that the early Arab rulers operated within a Christian or syncretic monotheistic framework, possibly as anti-Trinitarian Christians or Judeo-Christians, before a separate “Islamic” identity was formalized.
Reference:
- Tom Holland’s *In the Shadow of the Sword: The Birth of Islam and the Rise of the Global Arab Empire* (2012) discusses these coins as evidence of continuity with pre-Islamic symbols. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Sword-Birth-Global-Empire/dp/0385533659 .
3. Lack of Inscriptions mentioning Muhammad:
There are no inscriptions from the first century of Arab rule—whether produced by the Arabs themselves, their Byzantine or Persian adversaries, or the conquered populations in Syria, Egypt, or Mesopotamia—that reference a prophet Muhammad. The earliest potential reference is the Dome of the Rock inscription in Jerusalem (691–692 CE), but even here, “Muhammad” appears in a context that revisionists interpret as a title praising a divine or prophetic figure (possibly Jesus), not a proper name. The inscription reads phrases like “Muhammad is the servant of God and His messenger,” which aligns with Christological titles in Ebionite traditions, emphasizing unity of God against Trinitarianism.
Reference:
- Christoph Luxenberg’s *The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran: A Contribution to the Decoding of the Language of the Koran* (2007) argues for “Muhammad” as a title. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Syro-Aramaic-Reading-Koran-Contribution-Decoding/dp/3899300882 ).
4. “Muhammad” as a Title in the Quran:
This is not the ONLY reason I stated that Mo didn’t exist, but is one of the reasons. The term “Muhammad” appears only four times in the Quran (3:144, 33:40, 47:2, 48:29), and in each instance, it functions as a title (”the praised one”) rather than a personal name, often in generic or honorific contexts. This sparsity contrasts with the Quran’s frequent use of other prophetic names and suggests it was not originally tied to a specific historical individual. Revisionists propose it referred to a messianic or prophetic ideal, possibly borrowed from Syriac Christian hymns where similar titles praised Jesus.
Reference:
- Yehuda D. Nevo and Judith Koren’s *Crossroads to Islam: The Origins of the Arab Religion and the Arab State* (2003) explores this titular usage. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Crossroads-Islam-Origins-Religion-State/dp/1591020840 (Islam StackExchange on Muhammad as title for Jesus).
5. The late compilation of Islamic texts:
The Quran was not codified in its current form until around 150 years after the supposed death of Muhammad (traditionally 632 AD), with the earliest complete manuscripts dating to the 8th–9th centuries (e.g., the Sana’a manuscript fragments from ~670–750 AD show variants). The Sirah (biography) by Ibn Ishaq was written circa 767 AD (over 130 years later) and survives only in edited recensions, while Hadiths were compiled even later (e.g., Sahih al-Bukhari in 846 AD). This chronological gap allows for significant retrojection of narratives to legitimize Abbasid rule after overthrowing the Umayyads in 750 AD.
Reference:
- Patricia Crone and Michael Cook’s *Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World* (1977) posits that Islamic traditions were constructed post-conquest. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Hagarism-Making-Islamic-Patricia-Crone/dp/0521211336
6. Mecca’s absence in early historical records:
Traditional Islamic accounts place Muhammad in Mecca, described as a major trade hub, yet there is no archaeological or documentary evidence for Mecca as a significant settlement in the 6th–7th centuries. Ancient trade routes bypassed the Hijaz region, and no contemporary maps or texts mention it until the 8th century. This suggests the Quranic “Mecca” may be a later attribution, possibly conflated with Petra or another northern site.
Reference:
- Dan Gibson’s *Qur’anic Geography* (2011) argues for a northern origin of Islam. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Quranic-Geography-Dan-Gibson/dp/0973364289
7. Islam’s evolution from Judeo-Christian sects:
The early Arab religious movement appears to have roots in Ebionite or Nazarene sects—Judeo-Christian groups that rejected Jesus’s divinity but revered him as a prophet. Terms like “Muhammad” (praised one) and Quranic emphases on monotheism echo these traditions. The absence of distinct Islamic markers in early conquests supports the idea that “Islam” crystallized later, with Muhammad invented as a foundational figure to distinguish it from Christianity and Judaism.
Reference:
- Robert Spencer’s *Did Muhammad Exist?: An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins* (2012) synthesizes this evidence. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/1610171918 .
8. Sparse and ambiguous Non-Muslim sources:
While some mid-7th-century non-Muslim texts (e.g., the Armenian chronicler Sebeos, ~661 CE) mention a “Mahmet” leading Arabs, these are vague, secondhand, and lack biographical details matching the Sirah. These I hold refer to a generic leader or title, not the prophetic figure, and no source predates the late 7th century with specificity.
Reference:
- https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/8574 .
This position is not about denying the Arab conquests or the eventual emergence of Islam but about recognizing that the traditional narrative was shaped centuries later for ideological purposes. While mainstream scholarship affirms Muhammad’s existence based on later Islamic sources, revisionist approaches highlight these evidentiary gaps as indicative of myth-making.
I encourage you to examinine the primary sources critically.
Uncle!