How Scribes Removed Muhammad's prophecies from the Gospel of John

In this section, we present a textual problem that faced Bible interpreters and for which they have not and will not find a solution to this day; unless they admit that their Bible has been corrupted!

Gospel of John 7:52
”They answered and said to him, ‘Are you also from Galilee? Search and see; no prophet has arisen from Galilee.’”

Our question to Christians and those seeking the truth is:
Is this statement true? Has no prophet actually arisen from Galilee?

Antonius Fikry says in his interpretation of the text:

(What the Pharisees said here, that no prophet arose from Galilee, is wrong. Deborah was from Galilee, from the tribe of Naphtali, and Elijah the prophet was from Teshebah, which is in Naphtali (1 Kings 1:17), and Elisha was from Abel-meholah in Galilee (1 Kings 16:149). Nahum was from Galilee, and Anna the prophetess, who was present during the days of the anointing, was from the tribe of Asher (Luke 3:63), and Jonah the prophet was from Galilee. Isaiah prophesied about Christ that he would be from Galilee (1:9).)

This was the opinion of the interpreter John Gill, who said:

(If the Pharisees meant that no prophets came from Galilee in the past, then this is 👈 a historical error according to the Old Testament.)

So, according to the commentators, the Jews’ claim that the Old Testament does not contain any reference to a prophet coming from Galilee is certainly wrong.
Prophets appeared in Galilee, which confirms the existence of problems in the text!

The question is:
Did the Pharisees make a mistake and ignore what was in their holy book, to the point that they challenged anyone to produce a text that said that no prophet would emerge from Galilee?!!

👈 Or was the text carrying another correct meaning?
The Jews were talking about the mission of another prophet whose characteristics and place of mission they knew… an awaited prophet?!!

By reviewing the text in the best and oldest manuscripts of the Bible, we found that most of the ancient manuscripts, such as the Sinaiticus Codex and the Vaticanus Codex, contain the following text:

Search and see that no prophet arises out of Galilee

Search and see; no prophet shall come out of Galilee.

Manuscripts:

The Sinaiticus Codex and the text of John:
“No prophet has arisen from Galilee”

👈 Note that the text of John (“No prophet has arisen out of Galilee”) in the oldest manuscripts does not speak of a prophet emerging in the past. On the contrary, it merely confirms that no prophet—any prophet—will emerge from Galilee in the future.

Also, most of the Arabic versions and translations - with the exception of Al-Fandyk and Al-Hayat - such as:

Even most of the old translations… mentioned the text with the same meaning:

Also most of the English translations - except for the King James Version (KJV) - such as:

The text contained the same meaning:

(Examine the Scriptures, and see that no prophet arises out of Galilee)

And all the cash versions such as:

The text contained the same meaning:

(ἐγείρεται)

👈 According to manuscripts, all critical translations, and most English and Arabic versions, the text speaks of a future prophet not coming out of Galilee in the future (a future prophecy), not in the past.

This is according to the Van Dyke Version and the King James Version, which relied in their translation on the worst kind of text: Erasmus’s text, or the “received text” (textus receptus).

🔥 What’s surprising is that there’s another reading in the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of John. This reading confirms that the Jews were speaking of the “awaited prophet,” not of any prophet emerging from Galilee.

👈 This reading appears in:

Papyrus 66 is, of course, one of the earliest examples of the text of the Gospel of John. As such, it has its own significance.

Indeed, the text in Papyrus 66 contains the definite article “the” before “prophet” (προφητησ).

This confirms that the Jews were awaiting the advent of a prophet.

Moreover, they knew the location of his mission and knew him by his characteristics, just as they knew their own children.

🔥 So there are at least three manuscripts (Papyrus 66, Papyrus 75 and Sahidic Coptic) that carry the reading (ο προφητης – the prophet); this reading supported by the oldest evidence makes the meaning of the text that: the awaited prophet – the prophet of the end of time – does not come out of Galilee and that the place of his appearance is mentioned in the books.

Bruce M. Metzger and Bart D. Ehrman say in their book The Text Of The New Testament: Its Transmission when talking about the oldest papyrus of the Gospel of John known as (P66):

“In 7.52 the presence of the definite article in a difficult passage now supports what scholars had long thought was the required sense, namely ‘Search [the Scriptures] and you will see that 👉 the prophet does not rise from Galilee.’”

Bruce Metzger and Bart Ehrman speak here about the presence of a definite article before the word (προφήτης – prophet), so the phrase becomes:

(Search the scriptures and you will see that 👈 the prophet does not come out of Galilee)

This reading is the only reading that explains the meaning of the text and removes the problem and the imagined error in it.

👈 Therefore, we find Dr. Priest Fahim Aziz saying in his book Introduction to the New Testament:

(Reading John 7:52 from Papyrus 66 solves the problem that has long puzzled commentators (Search and see whether a prophet has arisen from Galilee); although prophets did arise from Galilee, the writer added the definite article, so it became “the prophet”; and he is the “prophet” whose coming Moses promised the people. This prophet is the one who does not come from Galilee.)

We also read in the margin of the Net Bible version, in which many theologians and researchers of the Bible texts participated, including Daniel Wallace, commenting on the text:

(At least one early and important ms (P66) places the article before “prophet” (ὁ προφήτης, Jo prophets), making this a reference to the “prophet like Moses” mentioned in Deut 18:15.)*

– Translation of what was mentioned above:
At least one of the oldest and most important manuscripts, “Papyrus 66,” has the definite article before “prophet,” which makes the text speak of “the prophet,” who is like Moses mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:15.

We read from the Gospel of John 1:25 John’s testimony about God’s good news of a prophet who would come at the end of time, whose coming the Jews were waiting for:

(And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20And he confessed and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” 21So they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah? ” And he said, “I am not.” “Are you the prophet?” And he answered, “No.”)

According to the text, John appeared, and Christ appeared. The prophecy of the appearance of the awaited prophet “Elijah” remained.

We will not delve much into who Elijah is; in light of the differences and contradictions in the texts due to the continuous attempts at distortion, the interpreters of the Bible differed about the person of Elijah; and whether it is the name of a person or an attribute of more than one person…

What concerns us is the existence of a prophet named Elijah whom the Jews were waiting for and whom Christ preached in more than one place.

Matthew 11:14
”And if you are willing to accept it, this is Elijah who is about to come. 15He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

This final prophet, Christ said that he would come after him:

John 14:16
”And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever,”

John 15:26
”But when the Comforter comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will testify of me,”

John 16:7-8
”I tell you the truth, it is expedient for you that I go away. For if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go away, I will send him to you. 8And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and concerning judgment.”

This final prophet’s call to the world will be to convict the world concerning sin and to guide to all the truth. His call will be final until the Day of Judgment. He will remain with you forever and will speak only by God’s command and will tell with prophecies and unseen matters, and glorifies Christ, for He bears witness to me:

John 16:13-14
”When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak, and He will declare to you things to come. 14He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.”

Clear and explicit texts confirm that there is a final prophet who will come after Christ, and He will be the owner of a complete law that will last until the Day of Resurrection.

Will Christians accept these texts and search for the prophet to whom these characteristics apply? Or will they try to distort and falsify these texts and interpret their meanings?!!!

“He is the one who comes after me, who is preferred before me, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie.”

By reviewing this text in the oldest and best manuscripts of the Bible, we found that the addition:

It is also not found in:

The first presence of this strange addition was in the Alexandrian manuscript from the fifth century AD.

(ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος 👇 οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ἄξιος ἵνα λύσω αὐτοῦ τὸν ἱμάντα τοῦ

While it appeared in the Alexandrian manuscript that contained the addition, the text was as follows:

n τοῦ ὑποδήματος )

Based on the text found in the oldest and best manuscripts of the Greek New Testament; the critical versions completely ignored this addition, and deleted it from all their critical editions!

The addition (which has gone before me = ὃς ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν) is not found in:

and other critical versions that relied on the oldest and best manuscripts of the New Testament;

ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 1:27
Greek NT: Nestle 1904

ἐγὼ ἄξιος ἵνα λύσω αὐτοῦ τὸν ἱμάντα τοῦ ὑποδήματος.

As for the traditional Greek versions that were translated from the received text of Erasmus,

they mentioned the addition as it is…
ἐρχόμενος, 👉 ὃς ἔmicro ἄξιος ἵνα λύσω αὐτοῦ τὸν ἱμάντα τοῦ ὑποδήματος.

By referring to the English translations of the Bible; we found almost unanimity on deleting this addition from the text (is preferred before me = who came before me);

this anomalous addition was deleted from versions:

The text in all of them was as follows:
(He is the one who comes after me, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie)

As for the versions that depend in their translation on the received text; the addition was mentioned as is:

The text in them was as follows:
(He it is, who comes after me is preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose)

👇
And of course.. the versions that deleted the addition were based on the best and oldest approved manuscripts and followed the path of textual criticism scholars and owners of famous critical versions.

If we go back to the modern Arabic versions and translations; we will find that the only version that mentioned the addition is the Van Dyck version, which relies in its translation on the received text of Erasmus…

The text in it was as follows:
(He it is, who comes after me, who has become preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to untie)

As for all the modern Arabic translations such as:

they deleted the addition in recognition of its lack of authenticity.

and the text in all of them was as follows:
(He who comes after me, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to untie)

And so on… despite the absence of this addition in the oldest and best manuscripts of the New Testament, and despite the unanimous agreement of textual critics on its inauthenticity and their deletion of it from their critical copies…

and despite the fact that this addition was deleted by most modern copies and translations in various languages; because they were certain that it was just an addition added by a copyist in the fifth century in an attempt to glorify the status of Jesus and to deny the appearance of a prophet after Christ who would be greater and more perfect than him and the owner of a final law until the Day of Judgment!

However, it is still present among the traditional copies of the Bible that relied in their translation on the received text… the worst of all, and many Christians still believe that it is part of the text of the Holy Bible!!

In this context we mention the testimony of Father Dionysius St. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth and one of the main church leaders in the second century AD, complains about the distortion of the Bible by copyists:

“When my fellow Christians invited me to write letters to them, I did as they asked. These messengers of Satan are full of tares, they delete things and add things. They have torment reserved for them. No wonder then if some of them dared to distort my humble works since they conspire to tamper with even the word of the Lord Himself.”

From the book Misquoting Jesus — p. 53 by Bart D. Ehrman
Corruption of Bible

Core Issue
The phrase “He who comes after me…” in Gospel of John 1:15 shows clear textual instability across early manuscripts—raising the question of whether its meaning was later adjusted to avoid theological implications.

“This was he of whom I said, He who comes after me has become before me…”

This reading explicitly ties the statement to John the Baptist:
“of whom I said…”

“This was he who said, He who comes after me has become before me…”

• “I said about him”

And replaces it with:

• “he said”

“This was the one who comes after me who has become before me.”

This removes attribution entirely:

The transmission shows a clear directional trend:

This is not random variation. It reflects intentional smoothing:

“He who comes after me…”

then:

Who is this figure being anticipated?

“And bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad.”

The instability in John 1:15 aligns with a broader pattern: