There is an unnecessary trend to downplay the role of Muhammad in preaching the Qu’ran, so much so they he’s a legendary figure.
The premise of this article is that there is a lot of information about Muḥammad in the Qur’an: namely that which the Qur’an considered important and wanted to make known about him.
The Qur’an quotes the Meccans mocking the fact that this messenger eats (see Q. 23:33) and strolls in the markets (aswāq); to be taken seriously he should instead have an angel with him to be the warner. The Qur’an then pronounces the most emphatic of statements about the corporality (embodiment) of the messengers found in the Qur’an: We have not made them a corporeal body ( jasadan) that does not eat, and they are not immortal (Q. 21:8). The messengers are full human beings: they eat and are mortal; their bodies are real.
The concept of prophecy, a human speaking for God, has itself to be argued for, explained, and outlined: a case has to be made for it, it cannot be taken for granted. Indeed the Qur’an at first does not use the Arabic cognate for prophet in Hebrew (n-b-y), instead holding to the simpler concept of a messenger (r-s-l). The Qur’an has to argue that a messenger from God can be a human being, one who is not an angel and who is not immortal.
Muḥammad was preaching a deuteronomistically-inflected new religion, but it hardly made him preach a Judaism or a Christianity. He was coming with a new kerygma, and it was all his own.
If Muḥammad’s humanity is a constant theme in the Qur’an, it was one feature of a rather limited and very contradictory ministry. This powerlessness was, moreover, a unique characteristic of Muḥammad, distinct even from other messengers as presented in the Qur’an—for they healed the sick, resurrected the dead, split the sea, controlled the jinn, were not burned by fire, and ultimately could make their God answer their prayers. Far more importantly, God destroyed their enemies, while Muḥammad’s people continued to live and mock him.
The Qur’an is consistent and categorical about limiting the role of the messenger of Mecca, despite what looks like contradictory evidence in that his preaching itself transcended the normal bounds of a human life. He is not a soothsayer (kāhin), yet he is predicting the end of the world; he is not a poet (Q. 21:5, Q. 37:36, Q. 52:30, and esp. Q. 69:41), yet he comes with a proclamation the compositional like of which his audience had never seen; he is not possessed (majnūn, see esp. Q. 37:36, Q. 51:52, Q. 68:2 and 51, and Q. 81:22), yet he is talking to the divine. He is claiming powers, yet refusing to be different; he is not an angel and will bring no angels to vindicate him, yet he claims to carry a message from his God. No wonder they would not forsake their gods. Why would the Qur’an follow this curious strategy? On the basis of the textual evidence within the Meccan suras, Muḥammad seems to be a ‘prophet’ to a people that do not understand the concept of prophecy. The conflict with his people is a generated crisis that was only created by the fact of Muḥammad’s prophetic mission.
Messengership in the Qur’an:
