Islam

Islam claims to be the final revelation from God (Allah) and that the Gospels and the Torah, while acknowledging that they are previous revelations from Allah, they have become corrupted. Islam has a plethora of exposed areas in it's belief system that non-Muslims can exploit using Islam's most trusted sources. Let's pick at a few of them shall we?

Critique of Muhammad
There are many cases where Muhammad seemed to claim divine revelation when it suits him in his current situation:

Warlord?
Muhammad has been seen in both the Quran and in the hadith to be a man who was indifferent to warfare in the name of his religion and also for his own personal gain.

Surah at-Tawba 9:29 states:


 * "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowedge not the religion of truth among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) until they pay the Jizyah (tax( with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Surah 9 is full of these ideas (see verses 14, 73, 111 and 123). What is more, all around this verse in Surah 9 states that if the unbelievers repent, they will be spared, but if they do not, then they will be killed. The "context" argument does not make the verse look good and, if anything, makes it look worse. What is worse is that Surah 9 was one of the last chapters of the Quran to be revealed. The rule of abrogation states that if two verses contradict each other in the Quran, the most recent one supersedes the old one. So you can forget the peaceful verses of Surah 109. This is the new Islam that Muhammad revealed in his last years.

Sahih Muslim states:


 * "...the Messenger of Allah said: "I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah."

- Abdullah b. Umar

The famous Battle of Khaybar showed Muhammad plunder a Jewish settlement and take sex slaves.

The hadith also note that there were at least ten different poets that Muhammad had killed because they wrote about him in derogatory ways.

Some may try to point out the wars found in Numbers, Deuteronomy and Joshua are no better than what we find here. I address this argument here.

Slave Owner?
I don't think that anyone could possibly make the claim that Muhammad was some kind of abolitionist, but apparently there are people who think this. Here are just a few examples found in the hadith that show Muhammad was more than happy with purchasing and owning slaves.


 * "I came and behold, Allah's Messenger was staying on a Mashroba (attic room) and a black slave of Allah's Messenger was at the top if its stairs. I said to him, "(Tell the Prophet) that here is `Umar bin Al- Khattab (asking for permission to enter)." Then he admitted me."

- Umar


 * "Allah's Messenger was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah's Messenger said, "Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!"

- Anas bin Malik


 * "We were with the Messenger of Allah in the year of Khaibar, and we did not get any spoils of war except for wealth, goods and clothes. Then a man from Banu Ad-Dubaib, who was called Rifa'ah bin Zaid, gave the Messenger of Allah a black slave who was called Mid'am. The Messenger of Allah set out for Wadi Al-Qura. When we were in Wadi Al-Qura, while Mid'am was unloading the luggage of the Messenger of Allah, an arrow came and killed him. The people said: 'Congratulations! You will go to Paradise,' but the Messenger of Allah said: 'No, by the One in Whose hand is my soul! The cloak that he took from the spoils of war on the Day of Khaibar is burning him with fire.'"

- Abu Hurairah


 * "There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man)."

- Jabir

Here we can see not only Muhammad owning slaves, but buying one Arab slave for two black slaves, showing what he thought of Africans.

Miracle Worker?
Muslims talk about how Muhammad performed many miracles during his lifetime: he shot water out of his fingers, summoned bread for his followers to eat, and was also granted the gift of foresight and prophecy. However, these are only found in the hadith. Muhammad never explicitly performs miracles in the Quran.

There are several verses in the Quran that state that Muhammad was asked by the unbelievers why he could not perform miracles (6:37. 10:20, 11:12, 13:7 & 27). These passages state over and over again that Muhammad is only a "warner" and that Allah could send a miracle, but conveniently chooses not to.

The Quran makes various other excuses about why Muhammad was unable to perform miracles. Surah al-Isra 17:59 states that nothing stops Muhammad from giving evidence of his prophetic nature, however because the "people of old" denied the signs that were sent beforehand, Muhammad chose not to. This is a lame excuse. Also, Surah al-Ankaboot 29:50-51 shows that, once again, Muhammad is only a warner and does not perform miracles and that the Quran is all the proof you need that Islam is true. Once again, these are weak arguments on Islam's part.

Surah al-Qamar 54:1-2 supposedly shows that Muhammad split the moon in two to prove that he was a prophet from Allah. However, reading the verse, it appears that the context and genre of the verse is some form of apocalyptic literature:


 * "The House has drawn near, and the moon has been cleft asunder (the people of Makkah requested Prophet Muhammad SAW to show them a miracle, so he showed them splitting the moon). And if they see a sign, they turn away, and say: This is continuous magic."

It does not say that Muhammad himself has split the moon. Notice how the translator has to add in parenthesis an explanation as to what is going on which clearly goes against what the actual verse is talking about. Look at the verses again. It is quite clear that this is apocalyptic and prophetic in genre. It is not describing Muhammad actually splitting the moon as a miracle; that is just Islamic tradition added in later with different interpretations.

It also goes against the verses mentioned earlier where the polytheists, Jews and Christians are questioning Muhammad and his followers on why Muhammad cannot perform miracles. So Muslims are at a crossroads here: either Muhammad did perform a miracle and there is a contradiction in the Quran... or Muhammad did not perform a miracle, was unable to prove that he was a prophet, and the various collections of hadiths (which are essential components of Islamic theology and history) must be thrown out the window.

Now, Muslims will say that the verse of Muhammad splitting the moon was inferring such and that is all we need, but Muslims are always the ones asking where Jesus claimed to be God in those exact words. They argue in exact-words criterion, which means so can I. The text does not say that Muhammad split the moon, in those exact words, so therefore it didn't happen.

Feminist?
Modern feminist movements have occaisionally tried to paint Islam as a religion for women's rights and Muhammad as a sort of proto-feminist. This view is so absurd, it almost hurts for me to have to write this to prove that Muhammad was anything but a feminist.

Disobedient Wives
Surah Al-Baqara 2:223 gives us a fine example of Islamic feminism. The verse states:


 * "Your wives are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth when or how you will..."

A tilth is essentially a patch of ground that farmers plough in order to sew their seeds. Can you see the issue with this verse? 'Go to your wives and have intercourse with them however or whenever you please.'

The hadith are not silent on this issue either:


 * "The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Do not do that. If I were to command anyone to prostrate to anyone other than Allah, I would have commanded women to prostrate to their husbands. By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad! No woman can fulfill her duty towards Allah until she fulfills her duty towards her husband. If he asks her (for intimacy) even if she is on her camel saddle, she should not refuse.’”

- Abdullah bin Abu Awfa


 * "...the Messenger of Allah said: “When a man calls his wife to fulfill his need, then let her come, even if she is at the oven.”

- Talq bin Ali

This is also affirmed in a very graphic passage in Sunan Abu Dawud which gives the origin of where thie above Quran verse came from, however, I cannot post here because of it's lewd nature. Please go read it for yourself.

Affirmation of Domestic Abuse
The Quran states in Surah an-Nisa 4:34:


 * "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom you fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them."

Many Muslims have attempted to justify such a verse. islamicstudies.info states that:


 * This does not mean that a man should resort to these three measures all at once, but that they may be employed if a wife adopts an attitude of obstinate defiance. So far as the actual application of these measures is concerned, there should, naturally, be some correspondence between the fault and the punishment that is administered. Moreover, it is obvious that wherever a light touch can prove effective, one should not resort to sterner measures. Whenever the Prophet (peace be on him) permitted a man to administer corporal punishment to his wife, he did so with reluctance, and continued to express his distaste for it. And even in cases where it is necessary, the Prophet (peace be on him) directed men not to hit across the face, nor to beat severely nor to use anything that might leave marks on the body.

No matter what kind of reason they give for this, always remember that, if Islam is true, there is an eternal passage in Heaven that states it is okay for a man to hit his wife if she is disobedient. Check down below under Quran vs Bible to see how these views contradict the Bible's teachings of husband and wife.

Testimony of a Woman
When talking about legal issues and cases of justice, Surah Al-Baqara, once again, states in Chapter 2 Verse 282:


 * "...And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, that if one of them (the two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for evidence)..."

This idea is repeated in the hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari


 * "The Prophet said, 'Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?' The women said, 'Yes.' He said, 'This is because of the deficiency of a woman's mind.'"

- Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri

So in legal cases under Islamic theocracy, the testimony of a woman is literally half of that of a man. Last I checked this was not typical feminist mantra.

The Jewess
Although his death in not recorded in the Quran, it was recorded in the various hadiths. I'll let them tell the story:


 * "A Jewess brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep to the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, 'Shall we kill her?' He said, 'No.' I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of Allah's apostle."

- Anas bin Malik
 * "... a Jewess from the inhabitants of Khaybar poisoned a roasted sheep and presented it to the Apostle of Allah, who took it's foreleg and ate it... He said to her: 'Have you poisoned this sheep?'... She said: 'Yes.'... The Apostle of Allah then forgave her, and did not punish her."

- Jabir Ibn Abdullah
 * "Anas reported that a Jewess came to Allah's messenger with poisoned mutton and he took of what had been brought to him. When the effect of the poison was felt by him, he called for her and asked her about it, whereupon she said: 'I had determined to kill you.' Thereupon he said: 'Allah will never give you the power to do it. He (the narrator) said that they (the companions of Muhammad) said: 'Should we not kill her?' Thereupon he said: 'No.'"

So these historical records consistently show us how a Jewish woman poisoned Muhammad, but he seemingly forgives her for it. Interesting. There is a great amount of consistency between these accounts, so there's not much reason for doubt concerning their historicity.

However, Muhammad wasn't dead yet...


 * "The Prophet said to her (the Jewess): 'What motivated you to do the work you have done?' She said: 'If you were a prophet, it would not harm you. But if you were a king, I should rid the people of you. The Apostle of Allah then had ordered regarding her and she was killed."

Oh... so Muhammad went back on his forgiveness of the Jewess who poisoned him and had her executed. A bit of a sudden change of heart there, huh? This is a very revealing moment in Muhammad's life. Having been poisoned by his enemy, he initially forgives them, but then quickly goes back on his word and kills the woman who poisoned him. In the face of someone like Jesus, who was beaten, flogged, stripped naked and hung on a cross, yet still forgave his enemies, it seems like one is just more worthy of following than the other.

Implications of his Last Words
However, Muhammad still wasn't dead yet. He still had one last thing for the world to hear before he departed:


 * "On his deathbed, Allah's Apostle put a sheet over his face and when he felt hot, he would remove it from his face. When in that state, he said: 'May Allah's curse be on the Jews and Christians for they build places of worship over the graves of their prophets." (By that) he intended to warn (the Muslims) of what they (Jews and Christians) had done."

Even after killing his own killer, Muhammad just had to squeeze out that last bit of bitterness before he died. He just had to show his hatred and wish a curse upon the Jews and the Christians before he died. He seemingly brings this out of nowhere too, just looking for an excuse to curse them for building synagogues and churches on the graves of prophets.

But here's the kicker: Where is Muhammad buried today?... under the Al-Masjid an-Nabawi - one of the largest mosques in the world! Muhammad himself built it! So Muhammad's last words are to curse the religious folk who build holy sites above the graves of prophets, and his followers bury their prophet under a holy site? Muhammad has indirectly cursed everyone of the Abrahamic religions: Jews, Christians and Muslims alike!

Does this sound like a guy you want to follow? In the shadow of Jesus' sacrifice for the sin of the world, there can be no comparison.

Perfect Preservation?
I will submit to my Muslim friends that the Quran has some pretty decent preservation over the 1400 years of it's existence.

However, Islam teaches that the Quran will be guarded from corruption. Jesus says that his word will endure forever, but mentions nothing about the corruption of the Bible as a physical text. He even mentions false teachers and prophets who will deceive many (Matthew 7:15). Paul, John, James and Jude already seemed to have contended with these folk by the end of the first century. False teachers will arise, the people will we led astray, Bible translations will be corrupted. We can see all of that in the religion of the Jehovah's Witnesses and their version of the Bible. Islam, on the other hand, says that the Quran will never be corrupted because the angels will "guard it from corruption."

Islamic Apologist Mazhar Kazi went so far as to claim that:


 * “Muslims and non-Muslims both agree that no change has ever occurred in the text of the Quran… it is a miracle of the Quran that no change has occurred in a single word, a single [letter of the] alphabet, a single punctuation mark, or a single diacritical mark in the text of the Quran during the last fourteen centuries.”

I, as a Christian, who believe that the Bible is the Word of God, would never even make such a claim about the Bible. Not even a punctuation mark has been removed? Not even Christianity teaches that. 1 Peter 1:25 says that the Lord's word will endure forever, but this is not a claim that the word will not undergo corruption and tampering by false prophets. I do not believe that the Bible has changed significantly. I believe that the New Testament and the Old Testament are reliable, but perfect preservation of physical material is not something that Christianity teaches. Islam, however, does. This opens doors for us to critique the preservation of the Quran.

Abu Bakr's Battle Strategy
Surah 15:9 states that Allah's angels will guard the Quran against all corruption. Abu Bakr, the first Caliph after Muhammad's death, then had an amazing idea: if Allah will preserve parts of the Quran, then he could make some of his warriors memorise parts of it and send them into battle. These Muslim warriors were called ''Huffaz. ''They would be the only ones who memorised the passage and so Abu Bakr concluded that Allah would guarantee them victory on the battlefield to ensure the Quran survived. However, things didn't really go to plan...


 * "Many (of the passages) of the Quran were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Quran, nor were they found with even one (person) after."

- Ibn Abi Dawud

So Abu Bakr sends these Huffaz into battle and "many" passages were lost by those who had memorised them, but died during the Battle of Yamama. Therefore, parts of the Quran have been lost forever, therefore the Quran has not been perfectly preserved, therefore Allah and his angels did not guard the Quran from corruption, therefore Islam is false.

Even Umar, the second Caliph, is noted to have said:


 * "Let none of you say, “I have learned the whole of the Koran,” for how does he know what the whole of it is, when much of it has disappeared? Let him rather say, “I have learned what is extant thereof.” 

- Ibn Umar

I could just stop there. But oh boy do I have more on this...

Failure of the Reciters
Umar was also recorded as having said:


 * "Ubaiyy was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites. Ubaiyy says, 'I have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever. But Allah said None of Our Revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We substitute something better or similar."

- Anas bin Malik

So Umar acknowledges that Ubaiyy, a personal companion of Muhammad himself, is the best of all the Quran reciters, yet he has chosen to leave out some of what Ubaiyy has recited? Ubaiyy was clear that he heard it from the mouth of Muhammad and was not willing to give up what he said, but Umar removed some of his recitations anyways. The claim that the Quran has been perfectly preserved cannot be upheld when Islam's own sources state that the compilers of the Quranic material we have today deliberately left out parts of it from the "best reciters."

Speaking of the "best reciters" of the Quran, here's another passage from another hadith that


 * "Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: 'If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.'"

- Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad

So the "best reciters" of the Quran and Abu Musa both fail to recount a missing Chapter of the Quran that is no longer part of the text. What is worse is that the passage was said to be about as long as Surah Bara'at, which is 129 verses long. Abu Harb also records that Abu Musa recalled another passage that was totally forgotten:


 * "And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection"

Muslim apologists cannot make the claim that the Quran has been perfectly preserved when Islamic sources admit that several chapters - constituting potentially hundreds of verses - have been lost to the sands of time.

Uthman's Burnings
During the time of Uthman, the third Caliph, it was found that there were many differences in the various Qurans that were written down, from Sham to Iraq. Already, Muslims have a problem here. They claim that Allah's guardians will protect the Quran from corruption, but the hadith admits that there were many versions of the Quran just 20-30 years after Muhammad's death. And what was Uthman's response?...


 * "Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to `Uthman, O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Qur'an) as Jews and the Christians did before. So `Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you....`Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. `Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt."

- Anas bin Malik

If the Quran was perfectly preserved, right down to the letter as Mazhar Kazi claims, wouldn't all these copies that Uthman collected be exactly the same? Because he burned the rest, it is quite clear that there were many differences in the texts within a few decades of Muhammad's death.

Aisha's Sheep
This may be the funniest thing I've ever read in the hadiths. I just have to share it to show that Islam's own history shows that the Quran has not been protected from corruption as it claims. The hadith records that Aisha, the wife of Muhammad, (one of them at least), said this:


 * “The verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”

Be sure to read that one again to really comprehend it: a verse was revealed to Muhammad and Aisha kept the paper under her pillow, but a sheep came into the tent and ate it, losing the passage forever. It should be noted that this passage was the passage about how Allah revealed to Muhammad that a woman should breastfeed a male servant ten times - later abrogated to five times - to avoid sexual tension in the home. The Quran is meant to be eternal in Heaven, so why was in initially revealed to be ten times, then five times? I wonder what ulterior motives Muhammad had concerning this verse...

Remember this well: we don't have the full Quran because a sheep ate the only existing copy of an entire chapter.

From what we have seen from both the loss of this passage and the loss of the other chapters from the failure of the reciters to remember it, we can conclude that at least 4 Chapters of the Quran have been lost over the last 1400 years, with only fragments of them surviving from quotations in the hadith.

Contradictions Between the Texts
As stated up above, Islam teaches that a husband should scourge his wife if she is rebellious and disobedient. This is not how the God of the Bible works. Ephesians 5:25 states that husbands must love their wives like Christ loved the church and be willing to give their lives for their spouses. Concerning emotional abuse, Deuteronomy 22:13-19 states that if a man shames or dishonours his wife and falsely accuses her of anything, the man is to be punished. Concerning sexual abuse, Deuteronomy 22:25 states that a man who forces a woman to have sex with him should be executed. All three of these are in direct contrast the the verses discussed up above, showing that the God of the Bible cannot be the God of the Quran.

Jesus says "whoever lives by the sword dies by the sword" (Matthew 26:52). As stated up above, Muhammad and Allah encouraged war against the unbelievers.

The Bible teaches that Jesus is the Son of God (Matthew 16:16, Mark 15:39, Luke 1:35, John 1:49) who died on the cross (Matthew 27:50, Mark 15:37, Luke 23:46, John 19:30). The Quran states that Jesus was only a prophet (Surah an-Nisa 4:171) and did not die on the cross (Surah an-Nisa 4:171). Not only does the Quran conflict with the Bible - a supposed previous revelation from God - but also fails with secular history.

Scientific Facts in the Texts
Muslims sometimes claim that the Quran and the hadith have scientific facts written in them thousands of years before they were verified by modern science. Christians also make such claims. Let's compare the two to see which one is the more reliable.

Muhammad states this about disease:


 * "The Prophet said If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."

- Abu Hurairah

The Bible states this about disease:


 * "And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in the water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days." (Leviticus 14:8)

The Bible clearly talks about washing and quarantining one who has a disease, whilst the hadith talk about dunking a fly into a drink in order to purify the drink once the fly has already contaminated the drink. One is clearly scientific and the other is not.

Muhammad states this about water purity:


 * "I heard that the people asked the Prophet of Allah: Water is brought for you from the well of Buda'ah. It is a well in which dead dogs, menstrual clothes and excrement of people are thrown. The Messenger of Allah replied: Verily water is pure and is not defiled by anything."

- AbuSa'id al-Khudri

The Bible says this about water purity:


 * "And when he that has an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean." (Leviticus 15:13)

So one says that water cannot be defiled by anything, the other says that running water should be used for bathing. Which one is the more scientifically accurate?

The Quran says this about astronomy:


 * "And indeed we have adorned the nearest heaven with lamps, and we have made such lamps as missiles to drive away the devils, and have prepared for them the torment of the blazing fire." (Surah al-Mulk 67:5)

The Bible says this about astronomy:


 * "He stretches out the north over the empty place, and hangs the earth upon nothing." (Job 26:7)

So the Quran states that the "lamps" of the heavens are missiles and whenever we see a shooting star it is Allah or his angels taking the stars and throwing them at demons to drive them away from earth. The Bible states that the earth hangs upon nothing, which sounds a lot like gravity (there are also mentions of natural laws in Job 38:33 and Jeremiah 33:25, showing that it's not God that has utter sovereign control over natural laws, but he is the one who set them into motion).

The Quran also has a passage during the story of Dhul Qarnayn in Surah al-Kahf 18:84-86 where the sun sets "in a muddy spring." Muhammad also affirms this in Sunan Abu Dawud when it says:


 * "I was sitting behind the Messenger of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: 'Do you know where this sets?' I replied: 'Allah and his Apostle know best.' He said: 'It sets in a spring of warm water.'"

- Abu Dharr

The Bible also has scientific facts concerning ocean currents (Psalm 8:8), the law of conservation of energy (1 Timothy 6:7), the biological description of sauropod dinosaurs (Job 40) and accurate dimensions of a sea-worthy vessel (Genesis 6:14-16). Which of the texts sounds the most scientifically accurate?

Preservation of the Bible
There's not enough space for me to discuss why the Bible is reliable. However, read here for the implications of the Dead Sea Scrolls and here for information on why the New Testament is reliable.

Implications of a Corrupted Bible for Islam
Muslims claim that both the Torah (Tawrat) and the Gospel (Injil) have been corrupted and that the Quran is the final revelation of the Word of God.

However, if this is the case, then Judaism, Christianity and Islam are false. Because Allah said that he would defend his word from corruption (Surah 15:9), and if Allah is the same Allah of the Old Testament and the New Testament (supposedly), then how and why did he let his previous revelations become corrupted?

If the Torah and Gospel have been corrupted, as Islam claims, but the Quran has also been corrupted, as we have proven above, it would seem that Allah is pretty bad at his job in preserving his word.

Muhammad in the Bible?
A major Muslim argument for Islam is that Muhammad is supposedly prophesied in the Bible. We can easily debunk these: The Lord promises to send a prophet like Moses down the line. Muslims have claimed that this is in reference to Muhammad. But this cannot be as the passage says the prophet will come from the Israelites, not the Ishmaelites (whom Muhammad and all other Arabs are descended from). "Brothers" in this passage is the Hebrew word ă-ḥê-hem, meaning kinsmen, countrymen or brethren. This is not a description of someone who will descend from Ishmael's bloodline, but someone who will descend from Jacob's bloodline. Muslims claim that because Muhammad was illiterate and could not write, this verse is evidence that the Quran was divine revelation to an illiterate man. What this passage is really talking about is the attitude of Israel to God after the Babylonian Exile. In context, God is conveying judgement through Isaiah when he says in verse 9, "they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink," and in verse 10, "For the Lord has poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep and has closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers the seers have he covered. This verse is talking about how Israel has become blind through his idolatry and sin and that they have hardened their hearts. Believe it or not, Muslims have tried to use this verse as a "prophecy of Muhammad" by cutting out the first two words of the passage to make it look like this verse is a prophecy of a man who would be a military leader that looks a lot like Muhammad. By removing "The LORD" from the passage, Muslim apologists like MercifulServant have essentially committed Shirk (idolatry) of Muhammad as Allah. It is quite clear that this passage is referring to the Holy Spirit, not to Muhammad: Ultimately, all these claims are ludicrous at best. It also shows the hypocrisy of Muslim apologists that claim the Bible has been corrupted, but are more than willing to use parts of it to justify their own religion. Oops.
 * Deuteronomy 18:18 - "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him." 
 * Isaiah 29:12 - "And when they give the book to one who cannot read, saying, 'Read this,' he says, 'I cannot read.'" 
 * Isaiah 42:13 - "The Lord goes out like a mighty man, like a man of war he stirs up his zeal; he cries out, he shouts aloud, he shows himself mighty against his foes." 
 * John 14:16-17 - "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you." 
 * Jesus says that the "Helper" will be with the apostles. Muhammad was born almost 500 years after all the apostles had died.
 * The "Helper" would be with the disciples "forever." Muhammad died around 632 AD.
 * The world cannot see or know him. Muhammad was a human and visible to the naked eye.
 * And finally, John 16:7 states that Jesus himself will send "the Helper," proving that Jesus is God. If Muslim apologists want to continue claiming that Muhammad is "the Helper," then they must concede that Jesus is also God because Jesus is the one who sends "the Helper."

Illiterate Muhammad Writing the Quran
A key aspect of the Islamic idea that the Quran was a miracle comes from the fact that Muhammad was illiterate, yet was able to write up a large text seemingly without any help or training in writing. It's important to note that parts of the Bible were written by supposedly illiterate people as well, yet they were able to write pretty well. Does this prove that the Bible is inspired? If not, then it doesn't prove the Quran is inspired either.

Muhammad is noted in history as being a merchant who, although not exactly a learned man, was somewhat familiar with the Judaeo-Christian texts and could have at least written and read in basic Arabic.

Not to mention, the Quran isn't exactly a literary miracle. Just read all of Surah Al Kafirun and you'll see that the Quran is no marvel of prose writing or poetry excellence.

Even after all this, some scholars say that Muhammad didn't even write the Quran, that his words were recited and written down by his followers. Others say that neither wrote it, and that it is a pseudonymous work (although this is in the minority of cases. Whatever or whoever the truth author of the Quran is, it is undeniable that the compilation process of the text is lost to history

Jesus Never Claimed to be God
Seeing as both Muslims and Jehovah's Witnesses claim this, I address it in a separate page.

Academic Sources


Ancient Sources
