Apostate prophet the prosecutor; why did the Jews reject Muhammad's prophethood?

In answer to the video "Did Allah Really Send Prophets to the Entire World?"

Rabbinic literature recognizes the prophethood of 7 non-Israelite, non-Jewish men (Talmud, B. B. 15b) besides those whom they did not recognize but were nevertheless true prophets. That is not to speak of the others they rejected or murdered throughout their history, more notoriously during the near collapse of their nation's spirituality as they vastly reverted to idol worship after Solomon's reign. They began slaying any person claiming prophethood and speaking against their practices. They had done the same under the reign of Ahab.

These non-Israelite prophets they recognize are Job (Ayyub in the Quran, Iyov in Hebrew), as well as the following personalities mentioned in the book of Job; Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, Zophar the Naamathite, Elihu son of Barakel the Buzite. They also recognize the prophethood of Balaam and his father. 

The Torah mentions Balaam in Numbers23 even though he is blamed for having advised the Moabites to seduce the Israelites encamped in their land, into idolatry Numb25. The Moabites willingly accepted in order to bring about God's curse upon the Israelites and stop their advance in Canaanite territory. Balaam would later be killed in battle with the Midianites who were also part of the conspiracy, and whom oral tradition asserts he aided with magic and sorcery, making the Midianite kings "fly". Despite what he is accused of, Balaam, a prophet recognized as such by Jews and non-Jews, has still his divinely inspired message to the Jews, revered in prayers to this day Numb23-24. 

Jonah or Nahum were Israelite prophets who preached to non israelites. Obadiah was, according to tradition, an Edomite convert to Judaism who admonished his own non-Jewish people. The Israelites Jeremiah and Ezekiel prophecied to the non-Jewish nations that had destroyed and plundered the Jews, announcing the inevitability of their doom. All this to corroborate that even within accepted Jewish tradition, prophethood to non-Jews or by non-Jews isnt a strange thought.

It is also to be noted that God in the Torah is reported to have announced several covenants with Abraham, and none of them is related to prophethood being the sole prerogative of one branch or another. Many Jews therefore, including the most learned among them, as related in both Quranic and non Quranic sources, accepted the prophethood of Muhammad and those that rejected him didnt do so for racial reasons. Although the bestowal of prophethood outside of their fold did cause them anger and jealousy, their essential opposition consisted in that he, like Jesus and countless others as related in both the Hebrew Bible and the NT, brought a message that wasnt to their liking. Others admit to Muhammad's prophethood in light of the Biblical criteria of what constitutes a prophet or not, but are not ready to heed his message and so invent the excuse that although he is a true prophet, his message does not concern them; he is a prophet to the Ishmaelites only.

In Deuteronomy 18, the prophecy states that, despite Moses' similarities with the prophet to come after him, from the Israelites' brethren, his essential difference with him would be in how God's commands or laws would be communicated to the people. Moses received the law through direct communication with God himself or as the Quran says, "God spoke directly to Moses". In the case of the "Prophet like unto Moses", God would not communicate in this manner, but would inspire His words into the mouth of this Prophet. 

During the time of the prophet Muhammad, the Israelites would try and obscure, denigrate and discredit him and his followers by saying that God spoke to Moses directly, but not to Muhammad, so why should they believe him 28:48? Yet, not only did they majoritarly disbelieve in both Moses and Aaron despite the miracles witnessed and the manner in which Moses received revelation, preferring even to remain in Egypt and die in slavery, but also the very prophecy within their own books outlines that such would be the type of divine communication with the awaited one and they were bound to follow him and if anyone of them fails to do so God himself "will make him answer for it".

But now that the prophet came to them, not with praises but with a severe condemnation for their transgressions and their consequent removal of being the torch-bearers of divine truth, they would put forward polemics after the other, as already shown above, in order to justify their disbelief in him. They claimed for example, that their following a prophet was contingent upon him reviving the institution of sacrifices and burnt offerings

3:183"Surely Allah has enjoined us that we should not believe in any messenger until he brings us an offering which the fire consumes".

They made that demand, yet they knew that the practice was unrelated to the reality of prophethood but rather to whether a Temple was standing and functioning in Jerusalem. It obviously wasnt the case since its 2nd destruction followed by their scattering, abasement and slaughter at the hands of pagan nations sent by God Himself to inflict retribution upon them. They were trying to ensnare the prophet by making him perform a sacrifice followed by its consumption with fire, a seemingly easy thing to do if one wasnt aware of the condition for the religious validity of such an offering, ie a standing Temple.

Not only did the prophet reject their demand despite it being an apparently easy "challenge" to overcome, but also pointed to the reality that they slayed or rejected the prophets sent to them and who upheld these laws to the letter, prophets who were telling them to adhere to their own Laws at a time where the Second Temple was standing, and burnt offerings were a daily practice.

Thus their attitude towards the prophets, and the prophet Muhammad, could not be attributed to their lack of conformity with Mosaic Law, and neither was their excuse for testing the truthfulness of a prophet ever part of the criteria outlined in their books

"Indeed, there came to you messengers before me with clear arguments and with that which you demand; why then did you kill them if you are truthful? But if they reject you, so indeed were rejected before you messengers who came with clear arguments and scriptures and the illuminating book".

The reply strikes at their challenge from 2 aspects, it is invalid scripturally as other similar "challenges" were, and judging by their historical trend towards prophets, it lacked any sincerity. In other words it was just an excuse to keep rejecting and maintain their position and worldly benefits. So the Quran takes that opportunity, not to provide any proof for Muhammad's prophethood which they knew well were true as he fulfilled the criteria of the HB itself, neither to address the issue of miracles, but to show them again how they lack integrity and use false pretexts to satisfy their whims.

Their books record that not only did they reject or kill prophets that practiced burnt offerings, but they even almost killed a prophet whose sacrifice was consumed by the fire of God Himself. In the days of the prophet Elijah, when they had already "abandoned the LORD's commands and have followed the Baals" and despite Elijah's sacrifices being consumed by "the fire of the LORD" in front of them, he still had to flee for his life because

1kings18,19"The Israelites have rejected your covenant, torn down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too".

Polytheism was so widespread among the Israelites in that time that any person claiming prophethood and speaking against their spiritual degeneration would be put to death.