by Lewis Loflin
Critics often scrutinize the historical foundations of Christianity, yet Islam tends to receive less of the same skepticism from certain circles. This article examines the historical evidence—or lack thereof—for Mohammed, contrasting it with figures like Jesus and Paul, and explores the origins of the Koran.
Few dispute that Jesus, Paul, and James were real historical figures. Paul, in particular, left behind a body of writings that form the backbone of Christian theology. The question for Christianity often centers on faith—whether one accepts Paul’s claims of mystical visions or divine encounters with a risen Christ. Personally, I find Paul’s frequent misquotes and reinterpretations of the Old Testament problematic, leading me to question his authority. But his existence and influence are well-documented.
In contrast, what do we know about Mohammed? There are no contemporary historical references to him during his supposed lifetime (d. 632 CE). Unlike Paul, he left no direct writings. His reported revelations, delivered through an angel, often echo earlier Jewish, Christian, and Zoroastrian traditions—sometimes with notable distortions. This raises questions: was there anything truly original in these teachings, or were they adaptations of existing ideas?
Ibn Warraq, in his analysis of Koran Origins, highlights a key issue:
The traditional accounts of Muhammad’s life and the rise of Islam, including the Koran’s compilation, rely entirely on Muslim sources. The earliest biography we have, by Ibn Ishaq, was written in 750 CE—over a century after Muhammad’s death.
This gap invites skepticism. Will Durant, in Christian, Jewish, Zoroastrian Sources of the Koran, further notes the Koran’s heavy reliance on Judaic traditions:
The Koran’s style mimics the Hebrew prophets, and its content adapts Judaic doctrines, tales, and themes. Its monotheism, prophecy, and concepts like the Last Judgment closely resemble Jewish ideas, though it diverges by claiming the Messiah had already come.
Mohammed reportedly interacted with Medina’s large Jewish population, later expelling or eliminating them. Durant suggests he drew extensively from the Talmud, observing that Allah mirrors Yahweh, and the Koran’s angels, resurrection, and heaven align more with Talmudic than Old Testament teachings. A quarter of the Koran’s stories echo Talmudic narratives, often with variations already present in pre-Islamic Jewish literature.
The Koran also borrows from Persian Zoroastrianism—ideas like the perilous bridge to paradise, houris (eternal companions), and a detailed eschatology. Christianity’s influence appears slighter and less direct. Durant notes Mohammed’s apparent confusion of Mary, mother of Jesus, with Miriam, sister of Moses, suggesting he knew Christian scriptures only secondhand, possibly through Persian Nestorian lenses.
The first chapter of the Koran, a core Islamic prayer, is deeply Judaic in tone. While some elements may stem from a shared Semitic heritage, others—like angels, devils, and the resurrection—likely traveled from Babylonia and Persia through Judaism, and perhaps directly from Persia to Islam.
For more on these connections, see Judaism Meets Zoroastrianism.
The ultimate issue is one of evidence and belief. Should we accept claims of divine revelation based solely on the testimony of later followers? I argue no. Without contemporary records or original writings, Mohammed’s historical existence remains uncertain, and the Koran appears as a synthesis of earlier traditions rather than a wholly new revelation.
Acknowledgment: I’d like to thank Grok, an AI by xAI, for helping me draft and refine this article. The final edits and perspective are my own.
Quoting Thomas Paine:
I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.
Excerpts from Will Durant's The Age of Faith Pages 162-186 Pub. 1950
