It is no surprise to most, that Christians and Muslims disagree on quite a lot. Muslims believe that Mohammad was a true prophet of God and that he recorded the very word of God in the Quran. Of course, as Christians we reject this idea entirely on the simple grounds that much of what is recorded in Quran is in direct contradiction to that which is recorded in the scriptures. What many Christians, and Muslims, don’t know however, is that what the Quran (believed to be written in the sixth century) actually says about the Bible, which was already written and in widespread circulation by the time of the Quran’s writing.
Big Picture: The big picture is that the Quran in multiple places explicitly affirms the “gospels and the Torah” as authoritative and reliable in the same vein as the Quran. In other words, according to Mohammed, he affirmed the trustworthiness of the Torah and the Gospels. Some modern Muslims are surprised to learn that the Quran teaches this. Others however have been taught that the gospels we now have in our Bible have been corrupted and changed over the years, and therefore do not represent the gospels that were around in the days of Mohammed. This is problematic for the Muslim however, because of the overwhelming manuscript evidence which clearly demonstrates the opposite. We have many manuscripts, that predate the life of Moses, available to us today. Taken together, these manuscripts clearly demonstrate that the Gospels Mohammed was referencing were the same Gospels we have in our Bible today.
Therefore, the Muslim is left in an impossible dilemma. Either the Quran is true (which Muslims believe) and therefore the Torah and the Gospels are also true. If that is the case, then the many examples of statements found within the Quran that contradict the clear and plain teaching of the Gospels, are evidence that the Quran is inconsistent and contradictory at best. Or the Quran is false for claiming the Torah and the Gospels are reliable and authoritative. Either way, the Quran is false.
The simplest way to demonstrate this argument is with the following syllogism. If all three of these steps in the following syllogism are true, then the dilemma holds.
- The Quran repeatedly affirms the inspiration and reliability of the Torah and Gospels.
- The manuscript evidence demonstrates that the Torah and Gospels in wide circulation in Mohammed’s day are accurately reflected in our modern Bibles.
- The Quran overwhelmingly makes statements in contradiction to the teachings of the Torah and Gospels.
Step 1: The Quran repeatedly affirms the inspiration and reliability of the Torah and Gospels
This is perhaps the simplest and most straightforward step to demonstrate. All we need to do is provide direct quotations from the Quran. It is important to repeat here, that many modern Muslims have never read these verses before, or seriously considered the repercussions of them.
Quran 29:46 “Do not argue with the people of the book unless gracefully, except with those of them who act wrongfully. And say, “We believe in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to you (referencing the Gospels). Our God and your God is One. And to Him we submit.
Quran 3:3 “He has sent down upon you [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming what was before it. And He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.
Quran 5:68 “Say, “O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.”
Quran 5:46-47 “And we sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and we gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous. And let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed—then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient.”
Quran 10:94 “So if you are in doubt [O Muhammad], about that which we have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.”
Taken together, these verses from the Quran clearly communicate that the Torah and the Gospels are God’s inspired word, are trustworthy, and as far as Moses understood, in complete accordance with what was revealed in the Quran. At no point in the Quran is it ever suggested that the Gospels had been changed, altered, or corrupted in any way. It is repeatedly stated that they are trustworthy and reliable witnesses of God’s revelation. In fact, one of the main arguments made in the Quran for the reliability of Mohammad as a prophet, is that his teachings were in alignment with the previously given scriptures (what the Quran refers to as the Torah and the Gospels).
Argument 2: The manuscript evidence demonstrates that the Torah and Gospels in wide circulation in Mohammed’s day are accurately reflected in our modern Bibles.
The scientific study of ancient manuscripts is called Textual Criticism. It is a deep and fascinating field of study, in which many scholars, across many religious backgrounds participate. Our scientific support of ancient texts is regularly being updated as new manuscripts are discovered and shed light on previous understandings. In the case of the Bible, the manuscript evidence is enormous, in comparison with other ancient documents. The table below is a quick snapshot that demonstrates the sheer volume of manuscripts evidence in support of the scriptures in comparison with other ancient documents. This is not the reason for a Christian’s belief. However, it is helpful to know that the Christian is on very solid ground when making the claim that they believe the scriptures we hold in our hands today are an accurate presentation of the scriptures as they were originally recorded.
If you are reading this and you are new to manuscript studies, it is helpful to remember that one of the challenges with maintaining high-quality manuscripts over thousands of years, is that the paper and the skins these manuscripts were often written on, fade and are easily destroyed over time (just as modern day books fade). So, for example, in many manuscripts the middle sections of books are preserved but the outer sections, closer to the covers (if in the form of a bound book) have been corrupted or destroyed. This is expected, not just in biblical manuscripts, but in all ancient manuscripts. What is not expected, is the overwhelming load of biblical manuscripts still in legible form so many centuries after they were written. This is extraordinary.
The following table compares the manuscript evidence for the Greek New Testament compared to other ancient documents. Not only is the “time gap in years”, which measures the distance in years between the original writing and the composition of the manuscripts we have in existence, incredibly small, but the number of manuscript copies is extraordinary.
Manuscript Evidence for the Greek New Testament
| Author | Work | Date composed | Earliest Manuscript | Time gap in years (smaller is better) | Manuscript copies (more is better) |
| Homer | Iliad | 800BC | 400BC | 400 | 1,800+ |
| Herodotus | Histories | 480-425BC | 900AD | 1,350 | 109 |
| Plato | Tetralogies | 400BC | 895AD | 1,300 | 210 |
| Caesar | Gallic Wars | 58-44BC | 900AD | 950 | 250+ |
| Livy | History of Rome | 59BC-17AD | early 5th century | 400+ | 90 partial, 60 full |
| Thucydides | History of Peloponesian War | 460-400BC | 3rd century BC | 200 | 96 |
| New Testament | 50-100AD | 130AD | 50 | 23,000+ |
In the discussion at hand, we are particularly interested in the demonstrating that the manuscripts of the gospels that were widely circulated in the days before and during Mohammad, are unchanged. The following table presents 14 separate major Greek NT manuscripts held in libraries around the world, all of which predate the life of Moses.
| Manuscript | Approx. date | Gospel material |
| P52 | 2nd century, often c. 125–150 | John 18 |
| P90 | 2nd century | John 18–19 |
| P104 | 2nd century | Matthew 21 |
| P64/P67 | late 2nd century | Matthew |
| P66 | c. 200 | Large portions of John |
| P75 | late 2nd/early 3rd century | Large portions of Luke & John |
| P45 | 3rd century | Portions of all four Gospels |
| P4 | 3rd century | Luke |
| P22 | 3rd century | John |
| P28 | 3rd century | John |
| P39 | 3rd century | John |
| P46 | c. 200 | Primarily Paul, not Gospels |
| Codex Vaticanus | 4th century | Nearly entire Bible, including Gospels |
| Codex Sinaiticus | 4th century | Nearly entire NT, including all four Gospels |
There is an important note here. The argument is not that all of these manuscripts perfectly preserve the scriptures in the exact same way with no variations. Rather, the argument that thoughtful textual scholars make, is that when we examine all of these different manuscripts, they fit together like a great puzzle. As we compare and contrast the variations among them, we are able to discern what the original source document said with great accuracy. In other words, the more manuscripts, and the older the manuscripts, the higher probability of confidence regarding the text of the original source.
The sum of the story is that when the Quran references that the Gospels are reliable and authoritative, they are referring to the same gospels that we have in our hands today. At no point, does the Quran ever hint that the Gospels have at some point become corrupt. Mohammad did not believe that, nor did any of his early followers. The assumption of Mohammad himself, and of his early followers, was that the contents of the Torah and the Gospels were scripture, and were therefore authoritative.
What Muslims Argue
When this dilemma is presented to Muslims, those who have read the passages that speak glowingly of the Bible will say that the “original gospels” were authoritative scripture, but those “original gospels” have been changed at some point. As I have just demonstrated above, this is an argument not rooted in the demonstrable facts of history.
However, it is worth mentioning how and why that argument came into existence. It seems to be the case that in the first century after Mohammed, no Muslim argued that the Gospels had been changed or corrupted. Muslim scholars before the eleventh century (such as al-Qāsim ibn Ibrāhīm al-Rassī in 860AD and Alī ibn Rabban al-Ṭabarī in the 9th century) often used Biblical texts to make their arguments. But they never made the case that the Gospels had been changed.
“We both find in the four Gospels a variety of witnesses. We both accept the knowledge found in the four Gospels.” - Al-Rassī
Martin Accad, writing of the early Muslim scholar Ibn Qutayba (889AD) writes that:
"The author (Ibn Qutayba) tends to use the Gospel text as are liabhle witness to support his own inclination in the authentication of the Hadith... He [Ibn Qutayba] often cites it [the gospels] after he has quoted other traditions, apparently using it as his final word on the matter... The injil is an authoritative document, part of the revealed books."
The argument that the gospels had been corrupted did not come until the 10th-11th centuries. In 1025 Abd al-Jabbār argued that Paul had corrupted the original teachings of Jesus. Again, this is a claim against Paul, not against the Gospels. There is also al-Maqdisī who is one of the relatively early Muslim writers identified by scholars as holding a genuine textual-corruption position. A Muslim scholar named Ibn Hazm, roughly 400 years after Mohammad was the first to develop a systematic argument that the Jewish and Christian Scriptures had be altered. He specifically attacked all four gospels. He is the first to truly systematize this idea.
One scholarly survey of early Muslim writers concludes that only al-Maqdisī and Ibn Hazm among the writers examined clearly held that the biblical text itself had been corrupted.
"Concerning the manifest contradictions and clear falsifications in the book the Jews call the Torah, and the rest of their books, as well as in the four gospels, confirming thereby their alteration and corruption, such that it is other than that which Allah, The Sublime, revealed to them." Ibn Hazm (al-Fiscal, vol. 1, p. 116)
So how and why did this argument develop in Muslim history? It seems to be the case the Bible had not been translated into the local language of Mohammad when the Quran was written. And so Mohammad, likely unaware of the contents of the four Gospels, could say they were reliable and in line with Quranic teaching and nobody would know any different because there was no way to read them to discern. The earliest followers of Mohammad simply took his word, and what they perceived to be God’s word in the Quran, that the Gospels were in line with Mohammad’s teaching. It wasn’t until centuries later that Muslims began expanding and having personal interaction with the Gospels in their own language that they realized there were stark contradictions between the Gospels (which Moses had said were from God and reliable) and the Quran. It was at that point, that Muslim scholars began circulating the idea that the Bible had been corrupted.
Concluding Thoughts
The Quranic Dilemma is a legitimate massive problem for Muslims. The history reveals that early Mohammad himself believed the Gospels to be true, and early Muslim scholars referenced all four gospels as if they were authoritative books. As a Christian, seeking to love Muslims into the Kingdom of God, this argument carries much weight. Use it wisely. Steward this information, not as one looking to win an argument, but as one hoping to turn many followers of Mohammad away from false religion, and towards Christ.
See This Resource for Helpful Quotes
1https://uodiyala.edu.iq/uploads/PDF%20ELIBRARY%20UODIYALA/EL45/The%20Bible%20in%20Arab%20Christianity%20%20David%20Thomas.pdf
https://s3.amazonaws.com/bible-quran-video/Documents/Gospels-in-Muslim-Discourse-Accad.pdf
