What Does the Quran Say About the Bible

1. The Premise: Quran Acknowledges the Bible

"The Quran acknowledges the Bible as a divine revelation while also critiquing alterations made to its original message."

Critical Response:
This foundational claim is already fraught with contradiction. If the Bible was a legitimate divine revelation, why is it treated with suspicion? Either:

  • God’s word is incorruptible, which undermines the doctrine of tahrif (textual corruption), or

  • The Bible is corrupt and untrustworthy, in which case why does the Quran continually affirm it as guidance and light?

The Quran cannot have it both ways without eroding its own theological coherence.

2. Recognition of the Torah and Gospel

"The Quran respects these holy books as part of the divine guidance sent to humanity before the final revelation..."

Critical Response:
The Quran affirms the Torah and the Injil as valid and inspired scriptures (Qur’an 5:44-46), and even commands Jews and Christians to judge by them (Qur’an 5:47). If these books were already corrupted during Muhammad’s time, this command becomes nonsensical.

Furthermore, historical evidence from early Qur'anic commentaries (e.g. Tabari, Ibn Kathir) shows that Muslims initially viewed the Jewish and Christian scriptures as authentic. The doctrine of corruption only grew later, out of necessity to resolve contradictions between the Qur’an and the Bible.

3. What Does the Qur’an Say About Christianity?

"The Quran acknowledges Christianity as a faith rooted in divine revelation..."

Critical Response:
While the Qur’an references Christian figures and some doctrines, it misrepresents key theological concepts (e.g. the Trinity as Allah, Jesus, and Mary in 5:116). Moreover, the Qur’an misunderstands Christian monotheism by repeatedly accusing it of shirk (polytheism), failing to grasp the Trinitarian framework which defines itself as monotheistic.

So, any "acknowledgement" is superficial and laced with theological errors.

4. Doctrine of Textual Corruption (Tahrif)

"Tahrif refers to the alterations and distortions that have occurred in religious texts..."

Critical Response:
The concept of tahrif suffers from internal inconsistency. The Qur’an accuses Jews and Christians of misinterpreting or “hiding” parts of scripture (tahrif al-ma’na), not physically altering the text (tahrif al-nass). Yet, many modern Muslims interpret this as textual corruption.

There is no historical evidence of a massive post-Jesus textual alteration of the Torah or Gospel. On the contrary, we have pre-Islamic manuscript evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Codex Sinaiticus, etc.) proving the continuity of the Biblical text—long before the Qur’an emerged.

5. Paul the Apostle and Doctrinal Changes

"Paul began to disseminate doctrines that deviated from the original teachings of Jesus..."

Critical Response:
Blaming Paul is a convenient scapegoat unsupported by historical scholarship. The core doctrines Paul taught—justification by faith, resurrection, the divinity of Christ—are consistent with early Christian creeds and predate Paul’s letters (e.g., the Philippians hymn, 1 Cor. 15:3–7).

Also, Islam’s portrayal of Jesus (as merely a prophet, not crucified) has no historical credibility. Virtually all scholars—Christian, Jewish, secular—agree on the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical fact.

6. Quranic Verses on Scripture Distortion

"Among the Jews are those who distort words from their proper places..." (5:13), "Woe to those who write the Scripture with their own hands..." (2:79)

Critical Response:
These verses speak of some individuals distorting words, not the entirety of the Bible being corrupted. Surah 2:79 criticizes scribes manipulating scripture “for a small price”—it does not establish a sweeping claim that every Jewish and Christian scripture is false.

Moreover, if true scripture was lost, then:

  • Why does the Quran confirm previous revelations?

  • Why are People of the Book praised in multiple places (e.g. 3:113–114)?

7. Quranic Rejection of Crucifixion

"They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him..." (4:157)

Critical Response:
This is a direct contradiction of all historical records—Jewish, Roman, and Christian—that agree Jesus was crucified. Denying the crucifixion puts Islam at odds not just with Christianity but with virtually all mainstream historical scholarship.

This undermines the Quran’s claim to “confirm” earlier scriptures (2:41, 3:3). Instead of confirmation, we see rejection and revisionism.

8. Misinterpretations and Excesses in Religion

"O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion..." (4:171)

Critical Response:
This is an example of circular reasoning. The Quran labels Christian belief in Jesus’ divinity as “excess” because it contradicts Islamic theology—but Islamic theology itself depends on post hoc revelations that appeared 600+ years later.

Such verses project Islamic doctrines back onto earlier scriptures, then fault Jews and Christians for not conforming to them.

9. Call for Interfaith Dialogue

"Say, O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us..." (3:64)

Critical Response:
While the verse seems to advocate for interfaith dialogue, the condition is complete submission to Islamic monotheism. The "dialogue" offered is actually an ultimatum: reject your beliefs and accept tawhid—or be accused of shirk.

This is less about dialogue and more about assimilation into Islam, which contradicts the narrative of mutual respect.

10. Respect for People of the Book

"We make no distinction between any of them..." (2:136), "Act justly toward them..." (60:8)

Critical Response:
These verses are often quoted out of context. The Qur’an also contains verses that:

  • Call Jews “apes and pigs” (5:60)

  • Curse Christians and Jews (9:30)

  • Demand subjugation of non-Muslims under jizya (9:29)

The supposed respect is conditional—so long as non-Muslims are submissive and don’t challenge Islam. Otherwise, these “People of the Book” are treated as second-class under Sharia.

11. Quran’s Claims to Confirm Previous Scriptures

"He has revealed the Torah and the Gospel..." (3:4)

Critical Response:
This presents an impossible contradiction: If the Torah and Gospel were revealed by God, and the Quran came to confirm them, then any contradiction between them invalidates one of the two. And since the Torah and Gospel predate the Quran by centuries and have manuscript support, the burden of proof lies with the newer revelation—which fails to provide it.

🔥 Conclusion: A House Divided

The Islamic narrative about the Bible and earlier scriptures is built on contradictions:

  • It affirms the Torah and Gospel yet denies their central teachings.

  • It accuses Jews and Christians of corruption yet quotes their books as valid revelations.

  • It claims to confirm prior scriptures while replacing and rewriting them.

This theological sleight of hand collapses under scrutiny. The Qur’an attempts to appropriate Biblical authority while simultaneously nullifying its message—a tactic that undermines its own claim to divine consistency and truth.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Problematic Elevation of Hadith Over the Qur’an: A Critical Polemic Response to “Why Do Islamic Scholars Sometimes Prioritize Hadith Over Qur’anic Verses?” Introduction: The Qur’an or the Hadith — Which Truly Commands Authority? Islamic scholarship claims the Qur’an is the ultimate, unaltered word of God. Yet, the very same scholars often insist that hadith—the human-recorded sayings and actions of Muhammad—sometimes override or clarify the Qur’an itself. This contradictory stance raises serious questions about textual integrity, theological consistency, and the real source of Islamic law and morality. If the Qur’an is “the Book about which there is no doubt” (Qur’an 2:2), why do we find thousands of rulings and laws being sourced primarily from hadith, often at the expense of clear Qur’anic principles? This post critically examines the logic, consequences, and hidden assumptions behind this practice. 1. The Qur’an’s Primacy Is Undermined by Overreliance on Hadith While t...
Read more
The Line of Prophets – A Continuation of the Message Isa (Jesus) – The Honored Messiah and Servant of Allah In the Islamic tradition, few prophets occupy as revered and central a place as ʿĪsā ibn Maryam (Jesus, son of Mary) . He is one of the five Ulū al-ʿAzm — the elite messengers distinguished for their endurance and unwavering resolve — along with Nūḥ, Ibrāhīm, Mūsā, and Muḥammad (peace be upon them all). His life, miracles, and eschatological role are discussed across over ninety verses in fifteen different surahs of the Qur’an, and he is referred to by name twenty-five times. Islam presents ʿĪsā not as divine, nor as the Son of God, but as a messenger of Allah , a spirit from Him (rūḥ minhu) , and His word cast upon Mary (kalimatuhu alqāhā ilā Maryam) . He was sent specifically to Banī Isrāʾīl (the Children of Israel) to revive the message of pure tawḥīd (monotheism), to confirm the Torah, and to deliver the Injīl , a scripture filled with light and guidance. A Miraculo...
Read more
  Before Islam: Decoding the Earliest Sources on Muhammad’s Movement Islamic tradition paints a vivid picture: in 610 CE, Muhammad received divine revelations in a Meccan cave, birthing Islam—a fully formed monotheistic faith with scripture, rituals, and law. Yet, the earliest non-Muslim records—Syriac, Greek, and Armenian chronicles from the 7th century—tell a starkly different story. They mention no “Islam,” no “Qur’an,” and no prophet preaching a new creed. Instead, Muhammad’s followers appear as “Hagarenes,” “Ishmaelites,” or “Saracens”—vague monotheists or tribal raiders acting under divine sanction. This evidence challenges the claim of a coherent religion descending from heaven, suggesting a fluid insurgency later mythologized into divine revelation by Abbasid scholars. This post dives into these sources, their context, and their implications, testing Islam’s narrative against the Qur’an’s own standards—proof ( Surah 2:111 ) and consistency ( Surah 4:82 ). The Islamic Narrat...
Read more