Did this Muslim apologist say Muhammad is a false prophet?

[fernmessagenotgood]

Or am I interpreting the Biblical criterion for a true prophet wrongly? Muhammad broke the Sabbath laws which Muslims don't believe Jesus overturnd since they don't believe he was god (I'm assuming Jesus did this; see below). This is taken from something I am writing (by the way I never claimed to have any real knowledge of either religion):

It sounds too good to be true, but I was watching a debate between David Wood and Sami Zaatari*, and to my astonishment, Sami unwittingly proved Muhammad is a false prophet, showing how little knowledge he has of the Bible. Why? In this debate he says he is using the Biblical criteria (below) for a prophet and at the same time claims Muhammad meets these criteria. At the same time however, he also acknowledges that the original Koran 53:21 (popularly known as the Satanic Verses) were uttered by Muhammad, claim this proves he is a prophet of god. What he doesn’t know, and this is what makes his lack of knowledge evident, that as soon as Muhammad first uttered the names of Al-Lat and Al-‘Uzzá and Manāt he proved he was a false prophet according to the Biblical criterion.

This is the debate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F897ENtvsk
Timings:
At 0:34:37 Sami says: “Since David is a Christian, I will argue from Biblical standards – how do we judge a true prophet?”
At 0:54:56 Sami says: “If you want to accept the first part of the story you have to accept the second part.”
At 0:55:37 Sami says (in reference to the Satanic Verses): “Now this story, although many scholars say it’s not authentic, I’m not gonna do that; because I don’t need to. This story proves Muhammad is a prophet. In fact I hope the scholars say the story is true because it proves he is a true prophet.”

If the video is removed I have the clips saved on my computer. At first I thought Sami was a decent debater, however since he said he is using Biblical criteria in reference to Muhammad, so will I. There are a number of verses that show Muhammad is a false prophet but there are a few verses in particular that I want to focus on. A verse Muslims often like to quote, which they claim refer to Muhammad is one from a passage in Deuteronomy known as “The Prophet”. The prophecy can only refer to an Israelite, but that’s another story.
Deuteronomy (18: 15): “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him.”

So according to the Muslims this verse is one of the uncorrupted ones. It’s quoted so much them it has to be. So a verse of the Bible suddenly becomes uncorrupted if the Muslims can twist to make it seem like it is refer to their religion? Hmmm, ok. They can either they go with Sami says and acknowledge the original Koran 53:21 or they deny the event the Muslim sources they mention cannot be trusted. However they have a problem if they go with what Sami is saying. A couple of verses after Deuteronomy 18: 15 (in the same passage) there is another verse and it goes like this:
Deuteronomy (15:20): “But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.”
The uncorrupted (original) Koran 53:21 goes like this: “Have ye thought upon Al-Lat and Al-‘Uzzá and Manāt, the third, the other? These are the exalted gharāniq, whose intercession is hoped for.”

According to the Bible Muhammad should be “put to death”, however it goes further than that. How inconsistent does the Muslim want to be? The passage known as “The Prophet” is telling people what to look for in this future prophet. Deuteronomy 18:20 is part of this description, so if the former part is supposed to be referring to Muhammad we have a contradiction. To be consistent Muslims, should accept the whole of the Biblical passage. Consistency is something Muslims lack.
Deuteronomy 18:5 “For the Lord your God has chosen them and their descendants out of all your tribes to stand and minister in the Lord’s name always.”

But there’s more. Muhammad also broke one of the Sabbath Laws by uttering the names of these Pagan goddesses. Since Muslims don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus, they also do not believe that he could have conducted such a blasphemous act as overturn the Sabbath laws (Matthew 5:17-19?). Only somebody who claims to be god could have had that authority (unless of course Jesus didn't overturn these laws, which allowed Muhammad to utter the names but Koran 10:64* says the Bible is the uncorrupted word of Allah when taken in conjunction with Koran 5:68*). It is true that the Koran states the Bible is the uncorrupted word of god, and I’ll get to that later. The Sabbath Law he broke is as follows:
Exodus (23:13): “Be careful to do everything I have said to you. Do not invoke the names of other gods; do not let them be heard on your lips.”
But Muhammad invoked the names of other god on his lips, therefore breaking the Sabbath Law. As Sami Zaatari says at 54:11 of this debate with Sam Shamoun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1fOE-PTRvc
"I'm glad you have more to say, you haven't proven nothing yet."
5:68 “Say O People of the Scripture! Ye have naught (of guidance) till ye observe the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto you from your Lord...”
And Koran 10:64 says: “Theirs are good tidings in the life of the world and in the Hereafter - There is no changing the Words of Allah - that is the Supreme Triumph.”

Which is a double negative, so that means that I have proven something – thanks for that Sami. As we see, or rather hear, in the debate, Sami has a very narrow-minded view of the Bible, and takes the verses at face value, and with that in mind I think Sam won the debate, not least because of Sami’s use of a double negative. I could say: “If Muhammad is a true prophet of Allah then he should have said “I am a true prophet of Allah and Jesus is not the son of god” in the same sentence”. Of course he does not say this and it is a very narrow-minded view, not that it matters, because I have already proven Muhammad is false anyway.

And the Koran tells people to read the Bible if they doubt Muhammad (5:68 for example), and by reading the Bible, we discover Muhammad cannot be a true prophet or the Hadith are corrupted.

[Peter]

A verse Muslims often like to quote, which they claim refer to Muhammad is one from a passage in Deuteronomy known as “The Prophet”. The prophecy can only refer to an Israelite, but that’s another story.
Deuteronomy (18: 15): “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him.”

So according to the Muslims this verse is one of the uncorrupted ones. It’s quoted so much them it has to be. So a verse of the Bible suddenly becomes uncorrupted if the Muslims can twist to make it seem like it is refer to their religion? Hmmm, ok.

Their wishfulness is only exceeded by their ignorance of scripture.

Jhn 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

The very passage they cite condemns them, for not hearing Jesus (let alone for suggesting that a Messianic prophecy is about a 7th century blasphemer):

Acts 3:22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23 And it shall come to pass, [that] every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. 24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. 25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. 26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

We have a whole forum section dedicated to their nonsense, that is most popularly propagated by their Greek sophist styled entertainer Ahmed Deedat, or his self-admitted disciple Naik.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=33.0
I just pinned that particular topic "sticky".
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=219.0

Regarding Deedat, can you tell me if you can see this video? Maybe a cookie in my computer allows me to see it. It got over a million views, and then it's like it got shut off a couple months ago::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN-_20sjHVI
The traffic stopped about the time that Google took over youtube.

[fernmessagenotgood]

Regarding Deedat, can you tell me if you can see this video? Maybe a cookie in my computer allows me to see it. It got over a million views, and then it's like it got shut off a couple months ago::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN-_20sjHVI
The traffic stopped about the time that Google took over youtube.

I was able to watch the video. Perhaps you can download it and then reupload it using websites that allow YouTube video downloading, maybe upload it again as unlisted so only those with a link can see it, so there's less of a problem of copyright because not everyone can view the video.

[Peter]

Regarding Deedat, can you tell me if you can see this video? Maybe a cookie in my computer allows me to see it. It got over a million views, and then it's like it got shut off a couple months ago::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN-_20sjHVI
The traffic stopped about the time that Google took over youtube.

I was able to watch the video. Perhaps you can download it and then reupload it using websites that allow YouTube video downloading, maybe upload it again as unlisted so only those with a link can see it, so there's less of a problem of copyright because not everyone can view the video.

No copyright problem as I think the clip at the end is covered by "fair use". The views just went up to 1,066,000 in a steady incline, and then the counter stopped there.