[ I understand someone is working on this section according to WIP indication. Please forward this material. Maybe something can be useful.]

Muhammad is not the prophet in Deuteronomy (18:15-18). "I will raise up for them (Israel) a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him". The term "brethren" means fellow Israelites. For the Jewish Levites were told in the same passage that "they shall have no inheritance among their brethren" (verse 2). Elsewhere in this book, the term "brethren" also means fellow Israelites, not foreigners. God told the Jews to chose a king "from among your brethren", not a "foreigner" (Deut. 17:15). Israel never chose a non-Jewish king. There are other characteristics of the "Prophet" to come that don't fit Muhammad. These include things like speaking with God "face to face" (Deut. 34:10) and performing "signs and wonders" (34:11). Muhammad admitted that he did not perform miracles (2:118; 3:183). Muhammad never claimed to speak to God directly but got his revelations through an angel (25:32).

Neither did Jesus describe Muhammad as the comforter. People fail to realize that the Comforter and the Holy Spirit are the same (John 14:26). The comforter is neither an angel nor Muhammad. "He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 3:11) would not make sense if you substituted the name of Muhammad in place of the Holy Spirit. Muslims do not believe in baptism.

Jesus said that he would send the comforter to his disciples as they waited in Jerusalem (John 14:16, Luke 24:49) ... not 600 years later. Also, the comforter was invisible (John 14:17). Muhammad was not. The comforter's work was not to gather armies and gain victories with earthly weapons, but to convict men of sin, the very essence of sin being disbelief in Christ (John 16:9).

Jesus also told his apostles that the Comforter would be "in you" (John 14:17). Muhammad could not have been "in" Jesus' apostles, since they lived six hundred years before him and knew nothing about him. Neither was their teaching in accord with Muhammad's. So he could not have been "in" Jesus in some sort of spiritual or doctrinally compatible way.