Muhammad vs. Jesus

A Study in Audience Reception, Authority, and Influence

When Muslims present the Quran, they often highlight its literary beauty, claiming it is inimitable, melodious, and a miracle in its own right. According to popular Islamic apologetics, the Quran’s recitation in Arabic—particularly by skilled reciters with “angelic voices”—evokes awe and spiritual resonance. Modern adherents are told that its eloquence itself proves divine inspiration.

But there is a question that must be asked: how did Muhammad’s original audience—the very people who first heard these revelations—react to them? And when compared with Jesus’ contemporaries, what does this reveal about authority, originality, and influence in these two major religious movements?

A careful examination of both textual sources and historical accounts exposes a stark contrast between the reception of Muhammad and the reception of Jesus. This analysis will explore audience responses, the perception of authority, and the social and theological ramifications of these reactions.

1. Audience Reception of Muhammad

The Quran itself records multiple instances where Muhammad’s contemporaries expressed disbelief, skepticism, and outright disdain for his message. Consider the following passages:

“And when Our verses are recited to them, they say, ‘We have heard. If we willed, we could say [something] like this. This is not but legends of the former peoples.’” (Surah 8:31)

“And those who disbelieve say, ‘This [Qur’an] is not except a falsehood he invented, and another people assisted him in it.’ But they have committed an injustice and a lie. And they say, ‘Legends of the former peoples which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon.’” (Surah 25:5)

“When Our verses are recited to him, he says, ‘Legends of the former peoples.’” (Surah 68:15)

“And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, ‘This is not but legends of the former peoples.’” (Surah 6:25)

These passages indicate that at least a portion of Muhammad’s audience perceived his revelations as recycled stories from earlier traditions, not fresh insight. They accused him of plagiarism, suggesting that he merely repeated tales he had heard from others, and that his so-called divine revelations were nothing more than legends. The Quran itself recounts this accusation multiple times, framing it both as a criticism from contemporaries and as a challenge to Muhammad’s authority.

Further, Muhammad was mocked and derided:

“And among them are those who abuse the Prophet and say, ‘He is an ear.’” (Surah 9:61)

The phrase “He is an ear” implies that Muhammad was a passive transmitter, merely repeating what others fed him. Surah 25:5 reinforces this by suggesting that his detractors believed he had “another people” assisting him—implying collusion or plagiarism rather than divine inspiration.

These passages collectively paint a picture of Muhammad’s original reception: a mix of skepticism, dismissal, and even ridicule. While Muslims today highlight the Quran’s literary elegance, it is important to note that the 7th-century Arabs themselves were not universally impressed. For them, the Quran did not appear new, revolutionary, or authoritative—it appeared derivative.

2. Audience Reception of Jesus

By contrast, the reception of Jesus during His ministry was markedly different. Contemporary Gospel accounts consistently describe amazement and astonishment among His audience. The synoptic Gospels repeatedly emphasize that Jesus taught with authority, a quality that set Him apart from the scribes and religious teachers of His time:

“And so it was, when Jesus had ended these sayings, that the people were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” (Matthew 7:28–29)

“And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue. And many hearing Him were astonished, saying, ‘Where did this Man get these things? And what wisdom is this which is given to Him, that such mighty works are performed by His hands!’” (Mark 6:2)

“Then He went down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and was teaching them on the Sabbaths. And they were astonished at His teaching, for His word was with authority.” (Luke 4:31–32)

“And again He entered Capernaum after some days, so that many gathered together, and there was no longer room to receive them, not even near the door. And He preached the word to them.” (Mark 2:1–2)

“…they said to Him, ‘The things concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a Prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people.’” (Luke 24:19)

Jesus’ audience pressed to hear Him speak, marveling at both His wisdom and His actions. Unlike Muhammad, who was accused of being derivative, Jesus was recognized for his originality, authority, and unparalleled mastery of the Scriptures. His teaching elicited astonishment, curiosity, and devotion—not skepticism or ridicule.

3. Authority and Originality

A crucial distinction emerges from the audience reactions to Muhammad and Jesus: perceived authority and originality.

Muhammad:
- Accused of plagiarism, repeating stories, and lacking originality.
- His audience mocked him, suggesting he was merely “an ear” or that his revelations were “legends of former peoples.”
- Authority was questioned, and the Quran had to frame disbelief as a consequence of divine intervention—“We have placed over their hearts coverings”—to explain resistance.
Jesus:
- Described as teaching “with authority,” a recognition that His words were novel, compelling, and trustworthy.
- He astonished His audience, drawing crowds to hear Him preach.
- Authority was inherent, recognized by observers regardless of prior expectations or social standing.

This distinction highlights a theological and sociological difference: Muhammad’s authority was disputed and required divine justification within the text, whereas Jesus’ authority was recognized spontaneously by those who heard Him.

4. Societal and Cultural Implications

The reception of a religious teacher affects the society around them. Muhammad’s contested authority may help explain certain features of early Islam:

Reliance on force and enforcement: Opposition to Muhammad was met not only with theological rebuttal but also with military campaigns, sanctions, and later codified punishments. Authority was enforced through social and political power, as seen in early Medina.
Textual framing of disbelief: The Quran repeatedly emphasizes divine causation for unbelief—heart coverings, deafness, and blindness—potentially to reinforce Muhammad’s credibility against critics.
Consolidation through social cohesion: By emphasizing obedience to Allah and the Prophet, early Islam created a strong communal identity that compensated for the lack of universal immediate acceptance.

In contrast, Jesus’ authority relied on intrinsic recognition. His teachings inspired spontaneous admiration and voluntary following. This type of reception fosters a culture where authority is acknowledged rather than enforced, and conversion or discipleship is largely voluntary.

5. Literary and Cognitive Reception

From a literary perspective, the difference is also striking:

Quran:
- Some contemporaries perceived repetition of familiar stories, reducing the perceived novelty.
- The recitation was poetic and structured, but meaning was questioned by skeptics.
- Cognitive reception was polarized: believers found divine inspiration; skeptics found only recycled tales.
Gospels:
- Jesus’ teaching, parables, and miracles elicited immediate recognition of wisdom and authority.
- Even those critical of Him admitted His unmatched knowledge.
- Cognitive reception was largely positive among ordinary audiences, though political and religious authorities resisted His message.

6. Modern Implications

Understanding the historical reception has contemporary relevance:

Islamic apologetics: Claims of Quranic miracle and divine eloquence often ignore the fact that Muhammad’s contemporaries were not uniformly impressed. The “miracle of the Quran” is more a post-hoc assessment than a reflection of 7th-century reception.
Christian evangelism and influence: Jesus’ authority and originality, recognized by His audience, helped explain the rapid spread of Christianity in the centuries following His ministry. Admiration for His wisdom and deeds fostered voluntary discipleship and community growth without enforced compliance.
Perceptions of credibility: Audience reception shapes perception. Muhammad’s early audience cast doubt on his originality; Jesus’ audience acknowledged it. This has theological and social ramifications for understanding how authority is perceived and legitimized.

7. Caveats and Contextual Nuance

While the contrast is stark, a rigorous analysis must acknowledge complexity:

Muhammad had supporters: Khadijah, Abu Bakr, and others clearly found the message compelling. Opposition was not universal.
Jesus faced opposition too: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Roman authorities challenged Him, ultimately plotting His execution. Not all contemporaries were impressed.
Social and historical context matters: 7th-century Arabia and 1st-century Judea were very different societies, with different literacy rates, religious frameworks, and political pressures. Comparisons must factor in these contexts.

Even with these caveats, the audience reaction contrast remains significant: widespread astonishment and voluntary admiration characterized Jesus’ reception, while skepticism and ridicule dominated Muhammad’s early reception.

8. Conclusion

The historical record, as presented in scripture, reveals a fundamental difference in audience reception between Muhammad and Jesus:

Muhammad’s contemporaries often regarded him as a recycler of old tales and questioned his originality. His authority was not immediately recognized; the Quran itself frames unbelief as divinely imposed to explain resistance.
Jesus’ contemporaries were astonished at His teaching, recognized His authority spontaneously, and marveled at both His wisdom and His deeds. His reception was marked by voluntary admiration, not enforced legitimacy.

This contrast has profound implications:

Authority: Jesus’ authority was intrinsic; Muhammad’s required divine justification.
Originality: Jesus’ teachings were unprecedented; Muhammad’s were, at least to some contemporaries, reminiscent of older stories.
Societal impact: Voluntary recognition of authority fosters organic influence; contested authority often leads to enforcement mechanisms.

Ultimately, while Muslim apologetics emphasize the Quran’s literary beauty and miraculous nature, the reception by Muhammad’s contemporaries tells a different story—one of skepticism, accusations of plagiarism, and disbelief. By contrast, Jesus’ ministry elicited astonishment, recognition, and voluntary discipleship.

For students of history, religion, and theology, the lesson is clear: authority and impact cannot be claimed; they must be observed in the responses of those who first heard the message. On this measure, the record favors Jesus, whose word was received with astonishment and awe, over Muhammad, whose recitations were met with suspicion and derision by many in his original audience.

Critiquing Islam 2.0

Sunday, September 14, 2025