Prophet Muhammad's Name Found in the Bible?

you wont get any serious answer my friend...I posted the same question weeks ago and I got the same answers...Christians will always deny this fact....but believe me...deep inside they know that prophet Muhammad is the last prophet...and Islam is the true religion....specially those who deeply studied christianity....thats why God wont forgive them in the judgement day,...because they keep denying the truth and insist on something they know is wrong...

and for those who is saying that Muhammad was a common name...well it wasnt at all...he was the first one on earth whose named "Muhammad" at that time...please educate urself and dont blindly repeat.

and Mia: who said that we say that Muhammad the first verse in al Fatiha has the name of Muhammad! it doesnt! I am a native arabic speaker and Im telling you it doesnt! Al-hamdu is so different from Muhammad...!! the verse is thanking God and praising him...nothing to do with Muhammad...please please people dont copy paste things that you dont really know....read about Islam Mia and you will see the big difference between what they taught you in the church and the reality of Islam...all the best

.

;If you believe that, the English version comes out as , “The whole of him is MUHAMMAD. This is my beloved, and this is my companion, O ye daughters of Jerusalem.”

Some of you arabs really do LIE about your false religion that was invented by the Roman Church for THIER selfish purposes.

WHO GAVE YOU THE RIGHT TO CRITISIZE GOD's HOLY BIBLE ???

.

EDIT

You say

>>I haven't got any serious and logic answers yet !!!!

You are entitled to your opinion, but you have got a closed mind.

Islam does not encourage free thinking, I have no desire to free you from your bonds, and even if I did I do not see how it is possible once you have been indoctrinated - What people like you fail to realize is that if Christianity or Buddhism had gotten you first you would argue to death that all others were wrong, and there could be no logic prevail against it... You do not see clearly that indoctrination with an idea is akin to loosing ones virginity - You can not replace the hymen once it is broken... You can not put new wine into an old wine skin because it will burst.

I have all confidence that I am more educated in Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and psychology than many people on this site - but one of G-d's unbreakable rules is that you can not win an argument with a person that knows less than you. It is one of life's great irony's.

Because you do not understand or accept the truth I tell you as a logical answer, only testifies of your lack of understanding, it does not change the clear fact that my answer is indisputable unless you resort to anecdotes and semantics. Your statement that the generic name Mohammad is in some version of a Bible is just an anecdote. It does not even demonstrate the loosest connection to Islam;s founder Mohammad.

Who said it was the prophet. Muhammed is a common name and was back then. And muhammed the prophet couldnt be founf in their because islam was made last. And he wasnt even born at the time of the bibles creation. And now you're denying every logical answer by saying the church is evil. Jesus was named a saint in the qu'ran. Im jewish and i know that. But then again you're probably just going to deny this because you're an idiot.

Here it is in Hebrew http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YsA45CuvFk

First, the name is not there.

But even if you insist on saying that it is there, remember that King Solomon is losing the Shullamite maiden to this guy, which means that the guy being spoken of would have to be alive during the same time as King Solomon.

The prophet Mohammad of Islam was not born until a few centuries after Jesus. We know this because it was a Christian monk who told Mohammad that he was a prophet, and there would be no Christian monks until after there was a Christianity. So even if you insist on saying that the scripture mentions a Mohammad, it is clearly not the same Mohammad. So it proves nothing even if we blindly accept your assertion despite how wrong it is.

Whether the Islamic Mohammad is a prophet or just another individual, that scripture is not speaking about him.

This is not true. This is not true of the specific passage you quoted nor is the name mentioned anywhere throughout.

"His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem." Song of Solomon 5:16

I'm not Christian, I just don't care for dishonest proselytizing.

"Some refer chapter 5:16, of the Song of Songs, to Muhammad, simply because in the Hebrew the word mahamaddim, "delights," "delightfulnesses," occurs there, and is derived from the same root. But we find that the word in Hebrew is a common, and not a proper noun (i.e. not a name), as the use of the plural here shows.The same word occurs again as a common noun in Hosea 9:6,16; 1 Kings 20:6; Lamentations 1:10,11; 2:4; Isaiah 64:10; 2 Chronicles 36:19; Ezekiel 24:16,21,25. In the last passage (Ezekiel 24:16, "the desire of thine eyes") it is applied to a woman, Ezekiel's wife (compare verse 18), and to the sons and daughters of the idolatrous Jews (verse 25). It would be just as wise to apply the word to Muhammad HERE as in the Song of Songs.

In Arabic many words are formed from the same root , but they do not on that account denote Muhammad. An ignorant Muslim might just as well assert that Muhammad's name occurred in Surah 1, Al Fatihah, verse 1: Al hamdo lillahi Rabbi 'lalamin ("Praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds"). In the same way a Hindu might assert that the name of Ram or some other of his deities was mentioned in the Qur'an, because in Sura 30, Ar-Rum, verse 1, we read " the Romans have been overcome," where Arabic dictionaries give "Rum" as if derived from the root "ram". This kind of argument is unworthy of men of learning and judgement."

If bible was sent from GOD, definitely GOD will know about the last prophet.

If it was written by man, then no chance of it.

Both Arabic and ancient Hebrew were Semitic languages, they're going to share many basic elements. Finding a name similar to Muhammad's in the Bible wouldn't surprise me at all.

No, it doesn't. And this specious claim is made at least once a day on R&S, and probably more often than that.