Khalid Yasin: What Jesus said about Muhammed

Perhaps Khalid Yasin has a better understanding of his new profession of faith in Islam. It appears he was seriously mistaken about the faith he states he once had in Jesus. His professed faith in Jesus may sound good, but it is in total opposition and without substance to what Jesus said and did during his lifetime ministry.


Mr Yasin enumerates four points of what Jesus said to his disciples:

1. I'm going to send you the Admirable one, Muhammed
2. your minds are not prepared for all the questions you have
3. you will know him because he will speak of me
4. that which he hears from God will remain forever

Yes, Jesus did say all these things which Mr Yasin enumerates. However, his efforts to gloss over them and apply these in the manner in which he does is less than genuine. As an example on his first point, and the single point which is the focus of this comment, Mr Yasin makes a deft application of the Comforter/Counselor as a direct reference to Muhammad. I am familiar with the linguistic efforts by some to extract a rendering of "Muhammed" from Jesus' words which he spoke to the disciples concerning the Comforter, that is, the Holy Spirit, in chapters 14 thru 16 of the gospel according to John. Research in the original Greek language is certainly important, but the truth is Christian as well as Islam scholars can be just as convoluted in their extraction of words and meanings which often do little or nothing to clarify for those who hunger and thirst for righteousness.

There are several very clear, simple enlightenments on Mr Yasin's first point in plain English.

First, the terms Comforter/Counselor and Spirit/Holy Spirit/Spirit of truth are used by Jesus in the same sentence, same context, to equate all these as one and the same being of which Jesus speaks.

Second, the grammatical tenses indicate the coming of the this individual being was in the future from the time Jesus spoke these words. Some have stated the Holy Spirit was already present and therefore it cannot be the Spirit/Holy Spirit/Spirit of God. They cite King David and Zacharias and Elizabeth John the baptizer's parents as examples. True. The scripture testifies they spoke through the Spirit/Holy Spirit/Spirit of God in them. However, this does not began to compare with the promise of the Holy Spirit as spoken by Jesus. Jesus reiterated this prophecy of promise as spoken by the prophet Joel and which was fulfiled on Pentecost (Acts 2). This was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit on sons and daughters, on all who believed in Jesus and obeyed him as Lord and Savior when Peter preached that first gospel sermon on Pentecost. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit of promise was no longer, as in the case of King David's or Zacharias and Elizabeth's, to a mere few individuals, but to all who are faith in Jesus.

Third, the present tense use by the apostle Peter in Acts 2 makes it clear to his audience that what they were amazed by was the fulfillment of what Jesus promised. Thereafter in the New Testament, the grammatical tense with reference to the Holy Spirit is of a fulfilled present reality as the One who dwells in the heart of the believer. The coming of the Comforter/Counselor/Spirit/Holy Spirit/Spirit of God, all synonyms of one another, was to accomplish two things, which Mr Yasin acknowledges, in the disciples: 1) to bring to their remembrance the things Jesus had taught them, and 2) to guide them into all truth.

Here's just one simple question to help further clarify the matter of the fulfillment of Jesus' words concerning the Comforter/Holy Spirit:

For John indeed baptized in water, but you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days from now. Acts 1:5

Question: What part of Jesus' words not many days from now would lead one to believe He meant His words would be fulfilled six centuries later with Muhammed? Is that the clear, simple understanding of the passage? Does that make any sense? No. It does not make sense.

Mr Yasin is free to take whatever understanding and stake whatever belief he chooses.  However, it is an understanding completely in opposition to the words spoken by Jesus. Regardless of any one reader's belief or conviction the application of the passage by Mr Yasin to anyone other than the Holy Spirit or a time other than the first century in the manner in which Mr Yasin applies it makes no clear, simple sense of the passage.