Part 7 – Islamic Apologetic Evasions and Their Collapse

Introduction: When Theology Meets the Brick Wall of Logic

The “Islamic Dilemma” is not a small peripheral issue in Islamic theology—it’s a direct challenge to the Quran’s credibility. The problem is simple: the Quran affirms the Torah and Gospel as inspired, preserved, and authoritative scriptures, yet it also contradicts them on core doctrines. This leads to a fatal binary: either the Torah and Gospel were preserved (making the Quran false because it contradicts them) or they were corrupted (making the Quran false because it affirms them).

Faced with this airtight problem, Muslim apologists have developed a set of evasions—rhetorical maneuvers and reinterpretations intended to neutralize the dilemma without actually addressing it head-on. These range from linguistic games and selective quotation to historical revisionism and outright dismissal of inconvenient evidence.

In this post, we will dissect these evasions one by one, expose why they fail, and show how each collapse under historical evidence, textual analysis, and simple logical consistency.

---

Evasion 1: “The Corruption Was Only in Interpretation, Not Text”

The Claim

Many Muslim apologists argue that when the Quran accuses Jews and Christians of “tahrif” (often translated as “corruption”), it refers only to tahrif al-ma’na—corrupting the meaning through misinterpretation—not tahrif al-nass—changing the actual text. In this view, the Bible’s wording was preserved, but Jews and Christians misunderstood or misapplied it.

Why It Fails

1. The Quran’s Language Contradicts This Limitation

   • In Surah 2:75, the Quran speaks of a group who “alter the words after they had understood them.” This is not simply misunderstanding—it’s intentional alteration after comprehension.

   • Surah 5:13–15 accuses some People of the Book of “distorting the words from their places.” This phrase (yuharrifuna al-kalima ‘an mawadi'ihi) is used by classical tafsir scholars to mean changing the actual location or arrangement of words, which implies textual manipulation, not mere interpretive error.

2. Islamic Tradition Undercuts This Defense

   • Early Islamic commentators like Ibn Abbas and Mujahid explicitly interpreted “tahrif” in some cases as actual textual alteration.

   • If the Quran only meant misinterpretation, then Surah 5:47’s command for Christians to “judge by what Allah has revealed therein [the Gospel]” would make no sense—why command them to judge by a book you believe they cannot interpret correctly?

3. It Creates a New Contradiction

   • If the Bible’s text was preserved, then Islam collapses because that text flatly contradicts the Quran on the crucifixion (John 19), the deity of Christ (John 1:1–14), and salvation by grace (Ephesians 2:8–9).

Verdict: This evasion fails because it is both textually inaccurate and logically self-defeating.

---

Evasion 2: “The Gospel Means a Lost Book Given to Jesus”

The Claim

Another common escape is to claim that the “Injil” the Quran refers to is not the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament but a single, now-lost, divine book given directly to Jesus—like a Qur’an of the New Testament era.

Why It Fails

1. No Historical or Archaeological Evidence

   • There is not a shred of manuscript evidence for such a book. Not one fragment, quotation, or mention from first-century history refers to an “Injil” separate from the known Gospels.

   • Early Christian writings (1st–2nd century) unanimously refer to the message of Jesus being passed orally and recorded in the Gospels we have, not in a single lost book.

2. The Quran’s Commands Become Impossible

   • Surah 5:47 commands Christians to “judge by what Allah has revealed therein” regarding the Gospel. If the Gospel is lost, then this command is impossible to obey.

   • The Quran gives no hint that the Injil had vanished—it speaks of it in the present tense as something in the possession of Christians at the time of Muhammad.

3. The “Lost Gospel” Claim is a Late Invention

   • This explanation does not come from the Quran itself but from later Muslim scholarship trying to reconcile contradictions with Christian scripture. It is theological damage control, not original doctrine.

Verdict: This is historical fiction invented centuries after the fact, unsupported by any evidence.

---

Evasion 3: “The Bible We Have Today Is Totally Corrupted”

The Claim

Some Muslim polemicists take the opposite approach: they deny the Bible’s reliability altogether, claiming it has been completely altered to the point that little or nothing remains of the original revelation.

Why It Fails

1. Contradicts the Quran’s Own Words

   • Surah 3:3 says Allah revealed the Torah and Gospel “as guidance for mankind.”

   • Surah 6:115 says, “None can change His words.”

   • Surah 5:47 and 5:68 instruct Christians and Jews to follow their scriptures—commands that make no sense if those scriptures had been erased or replaced.

2. Defies Historical Manuscript Evidence

   • The Dead Sea Scrolls (2nd century BC–1st century AD) show the Old Testament’s remarkable textual stability over a thousand years.

   • The Codex Sinaiticus (c. AD 325) contains the entire New Testament and matches today’s Bible with only minor copyist variations, none of which alter core doctrines.

3. Undermines Islam’s Own Prophetic Lineage

   • If God failed to preserve the Torah and Gospel, then the Islamic claim of divine preservation for the Quran loses credibility—why would Allah protect one revelation but fail utterly with the others?

Verdict: This defense destroys Islam’s own theological foundation while ignoring overwhelming manuscript evidence.

---

Evasion 4: “Those Verses Only Apply to the ‘True Believers’ of the Past”

The Claim

Some argue that when the Quran praises or affirms the Torah and Gospel, it is speaking about their state during the time of Moses and Jesus, not about the versions present in Muhammad’s era.

Why It Fails

1. The Quran Speaks in the Present Tense

   • Surah 5:47 and 5:68 use present-tense imperatives—commands to Christians and Jews living during Muhammad’s time to follow their scriptures.

   • There is no past-tense limitation in these verses, nor any statement that these scriptures had since been lost or changed.

2. It Creates a Timeline Contradiction

   • If the Torah and Gospel were perfect in the past but corrupted by Muhammad’s day, when exactly did this “corruption event” happen? The Quran never records it, leaving Muslims to invent a timeline that doesn’t exist in scripture.

3. It Weakens the Quran’s Authority

   • If the Quran can only affirm a past version of a scripture and not the present one, its authority as a final revelation is undercut—it becomes historically irrelevant rather than universally applicable.

Verdict: This is an artificial time-limit placed on Quranic verses to dodge contradiction.

---

Evasion 5: “The Quran Only Affirms the Original Revelation, Not the Book”

The Claim

A more abstract defense is that when the Quran affirms the Torah and Gospel, it means the original revelation given to Moses and Jesus—not necessarily the written books we have today.

Why It Fails

1. The Quran Treats the Revelation as a Physical Scripture

   • Surah 5:47 commands Christians to judge “by what Allah has revealed therein,” clearly referring to a tangible book, not an abstract memory of revelation.

   • Surah 7:157 speaks of the Torah and Gospel as existing texts accessible to the People of the Book.

2. It Still Doesn’t Solve the Contradiction

   • Whether “Torah and Gospel” mean original revelation or current scripture, the fact remains that Islam affirms them while contradicting their content.

3. It Renders the Quran’s Commands Meaningless

   • If the physical books were corrupt, then the Quran’s instructions to follow them were, by definition, commands to follow corrupted texts—a theological absurdity.

Verdict: This evasion is a semantic dodge that collapses when applied to actual Quranic wording.

---

Evasion 6: “The Quran Corrects the Bible”

The Claim

Some Muslims say that the Quran does not reject the Torah and Gospel but merely corrects distortions and clarifies truth, much like an updated edition of a book.

Why It Fails

1. Correction Implies Error

   • If the Bible contains core theological errors (like the deity of Christ), then the Quran’s affirmation of it as divine revelation becomes a contradiction.

   • Surah 5:47 does not say “judge by the Gospel as corrected by the Quran”—it says “judge by what Allah has revealed therein.”

2. The Scope of Correction Is Too Vast

   • The differences between the Bible and Quran are not minor clarifications—they are fundamental doctrinal contradictions, such as whether Jesus was crucified (Bible: yes, Quran: no).

3. It Reduces God to an Ineffective Communicator

   • If God needed to “correct” His revelation because it was misunderstood or corrupted beyond recognition, this calls into question His ability to preserve His own message—an ability Islam insists upon.

Verdict: This argument fails because it replaces the concept of divine preservation with a perpetual game of theological repair.

---

Why All Evasions Fail: The Core Problem Remains

The common thread in all these evasions is that they attempt to preserve the Quran’s claim of divine consistency while avoiding its implications. But none can erase the central fact: the Quran affirms scriptures that contradict it on fundamental points.

• If those scriptures were preserved → Islam is false because it contradicts them.

• If those scriptures were corrupted → Islam is false because it affirms them.

This is not a problem of interpretation or translation—it is a structural contradiction embedded in the Quran’s own claims.

---

Conclusion: The Inescapable Dilemma

Islamic apologetics can twist definitions, invent lost books, or dismiss evidence, but the fatal flaw remains. The Quran itself has locked Islam into an impossible theological position. No matter how the dilemma is approached, the outcome is the same: the Quran’s words and historical reality cannot both be true.

The “Islamic Dilemma” is not just an abstract debate point—it’s a reflection of the fact that when a religion claims to confirm earlier revelations, any contradiction with those revelations becomes a matter of life or death for its truth claims. In the case of Islam, the contradiction is not only present—it is fatal.