Islamic Archives

Home » Bible » Answering Objections to the Name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Song of Songs 5:16

Answering Objections to the Name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Song of Songs 5:16


Taken from here:

Muhammad in Bible.pngWhen dealing with the fact that  Bible passage in the Song of Songs or  Shir haShirim 5:16  שיר השירים  ה:טז in Hebrew  where the word “Machamadim” מַחֲמַדִּים is clearly shown, christian apologists like James White in his debate with Br. Zakir Hussain titled “Is Muhammed Prophesied in the Bible?” typically respond that it can not refer to Prophet Muhammad (p) based on the following arguments:

  1. The context of the  whole Song of Solomon is about human love or  human sexual desire.
  2. The word is in adjective form and can be found in other places in the Bible.
  3. The word is in plural form

White even boldly claim that this is the weakest argument the muslims have on finding prophet Muhammad in the Bible.


Let us have a closer look if these arguments are valid.


Human sexual desire or God’s beloved man?

To address his first argument, nowhere in Jewish and Christian tradition reads this particular passage solely to its literal meaning of a romantic sexual poetry  between man and woman.

In Judaism,  the Song was taken not to be sexual desire but God’s love for Israel.

The Rabbis at Yabneh accepted the Song into the canon — to believe Rabbi Aqiba, without much hesitation — because they read it both pseudepigraphically, as stemming from King Solomon himself, and allegorically, as a depiction of God’s love for Israel rather than man’s love of sexual partnership.

(Anselm C. Hagedom (editor); Perspectives on the Song of Songs p107)

Christians also followed suit after Jewish exegetes began to read the Song allegorically, as having to do with God’s love for his people.  Christian exegetes treat the love that it celebrates as an analogy for the love between God and the Church.

The surface or “literal” subject matter of the Song was the love that joins bride and her betrothed, asexual longing that the Song celebrates cheerfully. Understood in that way, how– ever, the Song had little to say directly about the relation between God and “us”;and that relation of course defines the basic interest — the agenda — that Jews and Christians alike brought, and bring, to their reading of the ScripturesHence the traditional resort to allegory in interpretation of the Song: the love that it celebrates is treated as figure or analogy for the love between God and the people of Godthe Church.  

[Richard A. Norris Jr ; The Song of Songs: Interpreted by Early Christian and Medieval Commentators p1]

Therefore it is clear that intellectual tradition in Judeo-christiandom understood  the context of Song of Songs, not about human love or  human sexual desire  but rather as an allegory of the relationship between God and His special person or people.

Bear in mind centuries of Judeo Christian interpretation battle, why can not the muslims allow their own understanding of the text?  Why can’t muslims read the Song of Songs befitting an allegory of God’s love for someone really special, someone really who will glorify and exalt God in a manner  like anyone has ever seen before which to Muslims this can only refer to Prophet Muhammad (p), the last messenger of God who has proclaimed and spread the genuine truth about God:  the One and Only all-powerful God, guarding the false belief of  polytheism of multiple gods or god in three persons.

Just an ordinary hebrew adjective ?

It is obvious that James White has little or no familiarity in Hebrew or in any other Semitic languages. Anyone with has proficency in Semitic language must recognize that etymologically , there is no so called adjective in Arabic or in  Hebrew. In semitic  thinking the quality of a noun is described by another noun — either conrete or abstract. The main idea of an expression is stated first and it is then qualified by what immediately follows. For example “A big house” is, in the Semitic parts of speech, “a house (the main idea), a big (one)” (qualifying it) – בַּיִת גָּדוֹל (bayiṯ gāḏôl) in Hebrew  or بيت كبير (bayt kabîr) in Arabic.

In particular when we analyse the Song of Songs 5:16


Screenshot from 2018-03-23 15-25-55.png

So it is clear from the passage above the word Machamad מַחֲמַדִּ֑ function as a masculine noun not an adjective, and it refer to a person, a man. The word itself comes from the stem חמד (hamad) which occurs all over the Semitic spectrum but with slightly differing meanings; in Arabic it means praiseworthy but in Hebrew it means something precious or desirable.

Some interesting point to note:

  • Most strikingly this particular form could not refer to a figure whom christians refer to Jesus  because he was  mentioned in Isaiah as a man whom would not be desired לֹֽא  נֶחְמְדֵֽהוּloneḥmaḏê-hū (Isaiah 53:2).
  • This passage also mention about “his mouth” which was full of sweetness.How can an “adjective” has mouth? So this passage must be talking about a person, a man.
  • The passage tells us that  this maḥămad is beloved (man), how can an adjective can be a beloved of anyone?
  • The masculine noun take form of what in Hebrew called Maqtal . Here hebrew root-verb חמד (hammedis given with the pre-fix מ (mem)  מחמד (mahmad)  literally denoting a place or agent of preciousness. This correspond with Arabic construct  اسم المشتق  Ism al-Mushtaq, in which the word  محمد Muhammad  takes its form.

Far from  a mere sounds similarity  or wrong part of speech, Muslims have strong case to relate the name of prophet Muhammad to its hebrew root-verb חמד (hammed)  in Song of Songs 5:16 to  a prophecy  about an individual to come, a mystery man, not about an adjective  whom God loves and desires.

The same way the word Islam relates its root-verb שלם (shalem), meaning to be whole or complete — hence the familiar words שלוםshalom, meaning peace, and Islam, meaning to be at peace or to be complete

But the word Machamad-dîm is in plural..

This can not refer to single person Muhammad or can it?

If we look at the passage  and the overall structure in the Song of Songs, it consistently retains singular in meaning for the actors involved in the plot.

Jewish and Christian translation all give singular meaning:

His mouth is sweetness itself; he is altogether lovely (Machamad). This is my beloved, this is my friend, daughters of Jerusalem. (New International Version)

His mouth is sweetness itself; he is  desirable (Machamad) in every way. Such, O women of Jerusalem, is my lover, my friend. (New Living Translation)

His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is  altogether lovely (Machamad). This ismy beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem. (King James Bible)

His mouth is most sweet; Yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem. (JPS 1917)

The style the Biblical Hebrew use for this particular passage is called the ‘majestic plural’. It is a plural word to refer honorifically to a single person or entity  such plural forms are most commonly used when referring to the God  also  it can also be used when referring to a human.

Here is one beautiful example: in Genesis 24:9

Screenshot from 2018-03-23 15-27-47.png

Here although all the translations render this passage to… “his master”… the hebrew word used is in plural adonaw אֲדֹנָ֑יו which literally means “his masters” not in singular form אֲדֹנוֹ  adonó which means “his master”

Having said that the word מַחֲמַדִּ֑ים Machamad-dîm must denotes something not just an ordinary noun, it must refer something of godly and holy qualities.What more interesting is out of 12 variations from the hebrew root-verb חמד (hammed) taking this  majestic plural form, exists only one occurrence throughout the Bible. This boost prophetic significance for holy prophet Muhammad in this   particular passage.

Also for those with familiarity with the rule of Tajweed will notice that Muslims pronounce the word Muhammad  as Muḥammadin in the genitive case or Majrur  when reciting the  Qur’an and it sounds almost exactly when a rabbi recite מַחֲמַדִּ֑ים Machamaddîm in original Hebrew

Furthermore Song of Songs 5:10 says:

This verse and the preceeding verse (v. 11)

רֹאשׁ֖וֹ כֶּ֣תֶם פָּ֑ז קְוּצּוֹתָיו֙ תַּלְתַּלִּ֔ים שְׁחֹר֖וֹתכָּעוֹרֵֽב

11 His head is as the most fine gold, His locks are curled, And black as a raven.

This amazingly also match Prophet Muhammad’s physical description as found in hadith sources (light skin and black and wavy hair).

Then the Song of Songs verse 5:15 compares this prophetic mystery man to the land of “Lebanon” which is the land of the Arabs.

 שׁוֹקָיו עַמּוּדֵי שֵׁשׁ, מְיֻסָּדִים עַל-אַדְנֵי-פָז; מַרְאֵהוּ, כַּלְּבָנוֹן–בָּחוּר, כָּאֲרָזִים.

15 His legs are as pillars of marble, set upon sockets of fine gold; his aspect is like Lebanon, excellent as the cedars.

This undeniably implies that the mystery man would be an from Arab lineage.

On the contrary to being the weakest  evidence , Song of Songs 5:16 give very strong evidence for the prophecy of prophet Muhammad (p) in the Bible.

What more can one ask for proof?, we have his very name mentioned letter by letter and it is referred in such a special unique form.

So the muslim translation of Song of Songs 5:16 should render like the following:

His mouth is full of sweetness; he is Muhammad in every way. Such, O women of Jerusalem, he is my beloved, my friend.


الَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْرِفُونَهُ كَمَا يَعْرِفُونَ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ ۖ وَإِنَّ فَرِيقًا مِّنْهُمْ لَيَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ

Those to whom We gave the Scripture know him (Muhammad)  as they know their own sons. But indeed, a party of them conceal the truth while they know [it]. (Q 6:20)

Sadaqa Allaahu al-‘Azeem ≡ Almighty God has spoken the truth




  1. Anonymous says:

    ty bro 👍


  2. […] Answering Objections to the Name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Song of Songs 5:16 […]

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Zozeph Francisco says:

    Yes, i knew it that Muslims are all copy paste i challenge you to show me where in your Quran it said that Muhammad is prophesied in Songs of Songs. Show me from the mouth of Allaha or Muhammad if it is no then you Muslims know more than your Allaha and your prophet proving that Allaha and Muhammad are nut case. Please reply

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hey friend,
      I remind myself first, and you that we should aim to have a discourse of respect and civility. As it says in your Bible,

      1 Peter 3:15 (ESV)

      15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,


  4. Zozeph Francisco says: (Jesus or Muhammad – Refuting Zakir Naik on Muhammad in the Bible)

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: