Prophet Muhammad (sawa) is Prophesied in The Bible

Well i'll just get started right away...now why is this topic so important for Islam? Is this just argued for by Muslims, because they just want to provide "additional" evidence for Muhammad's prophet-hood beyond what the Qur'an provides as evidence for Muhammad? No, in the Qur'an itself, Muhammad, or whoever authored the Qur'an, made the claim that Muhammad's coming as a prophet, was prophesied in the previous scriptures, namely the Torah and the Gospel...."Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong." (7:157, Pickthall translation)"And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One (Ahmad[i.e Muhammad])." (61:6, Pickthall translation)I want to focus attention to what Surah 7:157 says, it says that we Christians and Jews find Muhammad in the scriptures that we have access to, so Pro can't argue that Christians have removed these prophecies, because that's not what the verse says.But I just want to be clear...this has to be met, this challenge has to be met, Julia has to successfully meet the challenge of Surah 7:157. If Muhammad was wrong about this, then Muhammad is a false prophet (claiming something that's not true while claiming to speak under inspiration, that's a clear mark of a false prophet).With that said, I will respond to what Julia tried to argue:1. Julia argued that in John 1:19-21, the Jews were looking for 3 individuals: Elijah, the Christ, and the Prophet. And suggested Muhammad was that prophet they were looking for.My response: If the prophet to come was an Arab...why are they asking John the Baptist if he was the prophet? Was he an Arab? No, he was an Israelite, the Jews were aware that this prophet to come was going to be an Israelite, not someone from Arabia. And you must realize that the Jews were wrong in thinking the prophet was someone other than the Christ. Because later in the same chapter, Phillip recognizes that the prophet who was to come was Jesus of Nazareth. So Jesus was the Christ AND the prophet, the Jews were just wrong in assuming they were two different individuals.Therefore, Muhammad can't be that Prophet, because he wasn't an Israelite, like the Jews were expecting, and Jesus is that Prophet according to his disciple Phillip.2. Julia quoted Deuteronomy 18:15-18 and said that there was prophet who was to come like Moses and tried to give similarities between Moses and Muhammad to show that Muhammad was that prophet like Moses.My response: Remember, I don't have to prove Jesus is the prophet like Moses, I only have to show it's not Muhammad. Julia has completely missed the point of EVERYTHING Moses was trying to say. All of the similarities she gave are completely irrelevant to how Deuteronomy defines the term "like Moses". Here is what Deuteronomy says concerning what it means to be like Moses:1) You must be an Israelite (Deuteronomy 17:15)2) You must get your revelations from God face to face (Deuteronomy 34:10)3) You must perform signs and wonders (Deuteronomy 34:11) Muhammad did not meet even one of these criteria, he completely struck out.That he wasn't an Israelite is obvious. That he didn't speak to God face to face is evident from the fact that he claimed to receive his revelations from Angel Jibreel. That he didn't do miracles is written all over the Qur'an (6:37, 6:109, 10:20, 13:7, 28:48).Therefore, Muhammad is not the prophet of Deuteronomy 18:15-18.That's all I got from Pro, now onto my next set of points...I will now deal with an amazingly silly accusations that were just made by Julia towards Jews and Christians.Julia said that "However, Christians , knowingly or unknowingly, disagree and claim that the Promised Prophet is Jesus Christ (a.s), the Messiah, the Son of Mary to conceal the truth."My response: We Christians aren't hiding anything...unless you can provide me with your evidence of what we are hiding, instead of just baselessly accusing us of doing so. You can't throw the Bible under the bus just because it disagrees with your theology. EVEN if the Bible has been corrupted, that doesn't mean that it originally supported Islam. Again, if you're going to accuse Christians of supposedly "hiding" the prophecies of Muhammad, provide the evidence that we are doing so.Now I will move onto some additional points Julia brought up:Julia said "So if the prophet mentioned in Deuteronomy is Jesus, the Christians must admit that Jesus was nothing more than a prophet."My response: Julia just committed the fallacy known as "false dilemma". A false dilemma is when you offer two possibilites, and present it as if those are the only two possible possibilities to chose from, when in fact, there are more options. Also known as the "either or" fallacy. Julia said that if Jesus was the prophet like Moses than he can't be God, the other option was that if Jesus was God, then he can't be a prophet.What Julia fails to take into consideration is that we Christians believe that God took on human flesh and appeared in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. And we believe that God is a Trinity. Jesus is the Son, he is not the Father, nor the Holy Spirit. A prophet is simply a messenger who speaks the message of God to human beings. Jesus being incarnated as a man, was a prophet, because he was teaching his disciples the message from the Father, so just because Jesus is God, does NOT mean that he also can't be a prophet, because we aren't Unitarians, we are Trinitarians.Julia said: "Among their brethren" clearly refers to a nation other than the Israelites; otherwise it should have been "amongst yourselves."My response: Again, if Julia is going to quote any text, she must allow the text to define its terms, Deuteronomy (the book she is quoting) doesn't define "brethren" the way Julia defines it.Deuteronomy 17:15 explicitly defines "brethren" as a fellow Israelite, not a foreigner, and ironically, the text itself says that a foreigner is NOT a brethren, so her interpretation is directly refuted in the chapter immediately before chapter 18.Julia said "What could be a more beautiful explanation of the phrase "put My words in his mouth"? That God was putting the words in the mouth of Prophet Muhammad; that he was repeating what was exactly dictated to him."My response: Like I said before, if you're going to quote a text, allow it to define its terms. What "putting my words into his mouth" means is not when an mysterious Angel comes to Muhammad and force feeds him words from the Qur'an ( his first encounter is portrayed like this, he was forced to read the Qur'an by the mysterious visiter). That's not what's in view in Deuteronomy, for God to put his words into his mouth means that the prophet will speak everything he hears from God directly, not through dreams, not through visions, much less through an angelic medium. The proof for this is Exodus 33:11, which confirms that Moses spoke with God face to face, much like a man talks with his friend face to face. So to summarize, Muhammad is not the prophet of John 1:19-21, because he was not an Israelite, like the text said. Muhammad is not the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18, because he was not an Israelite, didn't speak to God directly, and din't do miracles like Moses did, all of which was required of the prophet who was to be like Moses.