Muhammad as a False Prophet in Light of Galatians 1:8

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

In Galatians 1:8, the Apostle Paul issues a solemn warning to the church:

“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed.” (NASB)

Paul’s words establish the immutability of the gospel of salvation: justification by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone (Galatians 2:16). Any alteration—whether presented by a human authority, a supposed prophet, or even an angelic being—is to be rejected as heresy. The Galatians had been troubled by Judaizers, who insisted that Gentile believers must adopt the Mosaic Law, thus undermining the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Paul therefore denounced such teaching as a corruption of the true gospel.

Muhammad and the False Gospel

Measured against Paul’s standard, the message of Muhammad represents precisely the “other gospel” that the apostle condemned. The Qur’an denies the divine Sonship of Jesus (Qur’an 4:171), explicitly rejects His deity (Qur’an 5:72–73), and repudiates His crucifixion and atoning work (Qur’an 4:157). In so doing, Islam dismantles the core of Christian soteriology: that God reconciled humanity to Himself through the incarnate Son, crucified and risen for our salvation.

Furthermore, Muhammad claimed to have received revelations from the angel Jibril (Gabriel). Yet Paul’s warning in Galatians 1:8 specifically anticipates such a scenario: even if an angel were to preach another gospel, it is to be regarded as accursed. Thus, Muhammad not only fulfills Jesus’ prediction of false prophets (Matthew 24:11, 24) but also stands under the Pauline condemnation for promulgating a counterfeit gospel.

Historical Christian Responses to Muhammad

Early Christian encounters with Islam consistently identified Muhammad as a false prophet. John of Damascus (c. 675–749), one of the first Christian theologians to engage Islam systematically, described Muhammad as a “false prophet” who concocted his teachings by borrowing from Judaism and Christianity while distorting their truths. In his work Heresies, John of Damascus classifies Islam as the “heresy of the Ishmaelites,” noting its denial of Christ’s divinity as the hallmark of its error.

During the Middle Ages, Christian scholars and apologists such as Peter the Venerable (1092–1156) and Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) also addressed Muhammad’s claims. Peter the Venerable, in his Summa totius haeresis Saracenorum, characterized Islam as a Christian heresy designed to seduce believers away from the truth of Christ. Aquinas, in Summa Contra Gentiles, argued that Muhammad’s doctrine lacked divine confirmation through miracles and prophecy, but rather spread by violence, thus marking it as human deception rather than divine revelation.

Christian Apologists and the False Gospel of Islam

Modern Christian apologists have likewise situated Muhammad within the framework of Paul’s warning in Galatians. Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb, in Answering Islam, argue that Islam must be rejected because it offers a radically different Christ: not the eternal Son of God, but a created prophet inferior to Muhammad. Josh McDowell highlights that Christianity and Islam present mutually exclusive truth claims: if Jesus is the divine Son who died and rose again, then Islam’s denial of this makes its message inherently false.

Apologists consistently point out that the Qur’an’s appeal to angelic mediation in revelation mirrors precisely the scenario Paul anticipated. By rejecting the crucifixion, resurrection, and deity of Christ, Islam dismantles the only gospel that saves. Therefore, Muhammad’s teachings must be understood not as a continuation of biblical truth, but as a false gospel condemned by apostolic authority.

Conclusion

From a biblical, historical, and apologetic standpoint, Muhammad fulfills the description of a false prophet anticipated by Jesus and condemned by Paul. His message directly opposes the apostolic gospel by denying Christ’s Sonship, deity, and redemptive work. Historical Christian theologians, from John of Damascus to Aquinas, consistently recognized this contradiction and labeled Islam as heretical. Contemporary apologists reaffirm this judgment, emphasizing the incompatibility between the gospel of Christ and the message of Muhammad.

In light of Galatians 1:8, Muhammad must therefore be considered accursed for preaching “another gospel,” one that leads not to salvation but to deception. The church today, as in Paul’s time, must hold fast to the one true gospel: the good news of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, crucified and risen for the redemption of the world.

---