Islam critiqued puts the prophecy back in the picture; context of the prediction?

In answer to the video "A Prophet Like Moses"

The essential part of this prophecy which will lead us to the true identity of the prophet is its context of revelation.

The prophecy and the covenant concerning that prophet, the unconditional obedience to him and support to his mission once he is identified, was made on the Day of Horeb at Mt Sinai. That mountain by the way, contrary to the arbitrary, baseless designation in the south central Sinai Peninsula, points rather towards the present day Saudi Arabian mountains. But that is another discussion.

The day that prophecy was made, was when Moses received the Torah for the Nation of Israel, giving real birth to the Israelite community. This means that the primary purpose of this event was the establishment of a new nation commissioned by God to fulfill certain objectives under a new Law sent to humanity.

This is the most important aspect of the covenant God established with the Israelites regarding this Prophet and the Quran reminds them of it 3:81-82,86 when Allah made a covenant with the people, through the prophets, commanding them to accept the prophet about whom they prophesied

"Certainly what I have given you of Book and wisdom--then an messenger comes to you verifying that which is with you, you must believe in him, and you must aid him".

The people of the book bore witness to that pledge

"He said: Do you affirm and accept My compact in this (matter)? They said: We do affirm. He said: Then bear witness, and I (too) am of the bearers of witness with you".

The prophecy clearly relates the statement of Moses to the promise granted to the righteous among the offspring of Abraham per both the Torah and the Quran, which includes the Ishmaelites. It also relates it to how the offspring of Abraham are commissioned with assisting this Prophet

Deut18"you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from their people". 

It is clearly strange that the prophecy appears very late in the text, at chapter 18, well after the event of Horeb when it actually took place, and when Israel received the law, which means it is actually out of context. Why is it narrated well after Israel had fought battles and the events of Horeb were over, and not recorded with the actual incident of Horeb when it was taking place? How much of those events were obscured, nobody knows.

The prophecy is disconnected from the flow of the discourse hence the difficulty, for those approaching the text and assuming it to follow a chronological order of events, to understand to whom the words of the prophecy apply to. This peculiarity of the Torah however only confuses Christians who are largely unfamiliar with the Hebrew scriptures. Jewish scholars on the other hand have long ago accepted this difficulty, as encapsulated by their rabbis' saying

"There is no earlier or later in the Torah".

The reality is the original prophecy was made in the context of Moses receiving a law that would establish a nation, the only difference being this new community would not receive the divine law like they did when God manifested it directly to Moses and the Israelites, but through an intermediary. This is due to the Israelites themselves requesting not to hear God's voice anymore nor witness the dreadful conditions which were created at the foot of Horeb. The dreadful manifestation had the purpose of instilling in them the importance of the covenant, which included the support of the prophet like unto Moses when he comes Ex20:19,Deut5:23-27,18:16.

So this time, instead of manifesting the new covenant through a dreadful event, Divine Words will be put in the mouth of the Prophet who would be appointed to that office, and he will recite the divine law before the people. As related in Ex20, what was collectively revealed to the Israelites were the 10 commandments, not random revelation. It is the revelation of law which they didnt want hearing directly anymore, fearing they would die. They requested to indirectly hear the law, through Moses. And effectively, Moses began going back and forth between God and them whenever subsequent instructions came. This is the proper context in which the prophecy of the future prophet was uttered; receiving law will from now on will only come through an intermediary between God and the people. Besides law, revelation could still occur without an intermediary, as described for example in Numbers11 which happened after the prophecy of Deut18. The further corroborate the textual corruption and displacement of the prophecy, in the dead sea scrolls, it is actually placed in its proper context in Exodus 20.

The fact that this prophecy was made at Horeb shows how important the covenant God established with the Israelites regarding this Prophet was, and how true the Quran is when it says that they mix truth with falsehood. The events of Horeb were threatening and forceful, compelling the reluctant Israelites to enter into a national covenant. The Quran depicts their shameful, ungrateful attitude that led up to that moment. It is in that context that the prophecy of a new nation under a new law they will be bound to follow, was made; due to their pattern of disobedience, they will ultimately be deposed of their spiritual eminence among the nations. God was telling them that in His mercy, they will not be left without guidance. If they follow and support that prophet from among their brethren, they will be part of something far greater.

It becomes all the more obvious that the idea of a Prophet simply being sent within Israel makes no sense because Prophets were always sent to Israel speaking in the name of God through the 'spirit of God' before and after the prophecy of Horeb, prophets like Jeremiah

Jer1:9"Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth".

It can't refer to simply revelations, because their subsequent prophets did not promulgate any new laws, as was the case at Sinai in the context of the prophecy. Jesus for example adhered to the law of the Torah to the minutest detail and ordered his followers to do the same. None of them and no prophet after Moses established a new nation, Jesus said that he was sent to the Lost Sheep of Israel.

 After Moses's death and Joshua's apointment for prophethood Deut31, the HB says there never arose a Prophet like unto Moses Deut34. This means that him being "like unto Moses" is an indicator still awaiting fulfillement, even after an Israelite prophet appeared on the scene. That indicator cannot be what is stated in the rest of Deut34:10-12, such as God speaking face to face with the prophet, since the prophecy of Deut18 itself says in which manner he would receive revelation

"I will put My words in his mouth and he shall speak to them all that I command him".

Neither does the indicator has anything to do with prophetic miracles the like of which Moses performed, since the 2nd criterion of the prophet has to do with divine judgement of those that reject him.  

By Jesus' time and their successive humiliations at the hands of their enemies, that prophetic, legislating and governing figure that is to to establish a new nation under a new law, which they will be bound to follow and support, became garbled with a davidic royal, supposed to bring back their own former glory above the nations, as well as re-introduce their own law that became obsolete with the loss of their right to exercize it. This is seen by their vague allusion to "the prophet" on one side and "the messiah" on the other, when they came questionning John the Baptist as to his identity.

They knew this prophet was still awaited but lost the purpose of the prophecy related to him, as well as the indicators that would lead them to recognize him. However, the evidence, as is being shown, was not blotted out entirely hence some among the most learned Jews in the prophet Muhammad's time claiming to

"recognize him as they know their own sons".

There is a reason why Moses, their most prominent leader and prophet, never says a word about that messiah supposed to re-establish them as a nation under God. And yet this messianic king is the most anticipated religious figure of the entire Jewish scriptures? Moses predicts the Israelites' future disobedience and destructions, as well as rehabilitation, but never speaks in that context of the royal messiah supposed to achieve what they would later claim will be precisely his role Deut31-32. Simply put, this end times savior is a post-mosaic development meant at consoling the exiled Jews. There is no notion of a messianic salvific figure anywhere in the 5 books of Moses. There is no notion of a messianic salvific figure anywhere in the 5 books of Moses. This is significant because the Torah, in terms of authority ranks higher than other parts of the Hebrew scriptures. In orthodox judaism, the books that comprise the bible are arranged in descending order of inspiration. First the Torah considered word for word divinely inspired, then the books of the various prophets which God motivated the prophets to write without telling them exactly what to write, then lastly the ketuvim or writings in which God had no direct influence. Given the cosmic importance of the messiah, we should expect a mention of the person, or even the concept in the Books of Moses, but nothing.