The Dilemma Stated
Browse all parts & issues
The argument runs as follows. (1) The Quran affirms the inspiration and continuing authority of the Torah and the Gospel that existed in the seventh century, commanding contemporary Christians to judge by the Gospel “with them.” (2) The Bible of the seventh century is, in all text-critical essentials, the Bible we possess today: Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (fourth century), the great papyri (second–third centuries), and the Dead Sea Scrolls (pre-Christian, for the Hebrew Bible) all predate Muhammad by centuries and contain the same books teaching the deity of Christ, His crucifixion, His resurrection, and salvation by atonement. (3) The Quran denies precisely these central teachings — it denies the crucifixion (Quran 4:157), denies that Jesus is the Son of God (Quran 9:30; 112:3), and denies the atonement (Quran 53:38). The dilemma follows:
- If the Bible is the preserved Word of God, then Islam is false, because the Quran contradicts the Bible’s core message about Jesus.
- If the Bible is corrupted, then Islam is still false, because the Quran — claiming to be the speech of an all-knowing God — affirmed, endorsed, and commanded obedience to a corrupted text, and asserted that no one can change God’s words.
Either way, the critic argues, the Quran cannot be the word of an omniscient God. The argument has been developed in published form by writers such as David Wood and discussed by both Christian and Muslim respondents (see the sources collected at islamicdilemma.net and Ad Lucem Ministries).
Common Muslim Responses
The mainstream Muslim answer is the doctrine of tahriftahrifThe doctrine that Jews and Christians corrupted the earlier scriptures — invoked to explain why the Quran both affirms the Torah and Gospel and contradicts them.Full glossary →: the previous scriptures were genuinely revealed but were subsequently corrupted by Jews and Christians. Proof texts offered include Quran 2:79 (“Woe to those who write the Scripture with their own hands, then say, ‘This is from Allah’”), 3:78, 4:46, and 5:13 (they “distort words from their places”). On this view, the Quran confirms the original Torah and InjilInjilThe Gospel, as named by the Quran — spoken of as a revelation given to Jesus and present among Christians in Muhammad's day.Full glossary →, not the texts circulating in the seventh century, and the commands to “judge by the Gospel” refer either to what remains of the truth within it or to the original revelation. A more sophisticated modern variant holds that the Injil was a single book given to Jesus that is now lost entirely, so that the four Gospels were never the Injil at all.
Counter-Rebuttal
Critics reply that the tahrif response collides with the Quran’s own wording. First, the corruption proof texts describe distortion “with their tongues” (Quran 3:78) — misreading, mispronouncing, concealing — and 3:78 explicitly says they do this “so that you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture,” which presupposes an intact Scripture against which the distortion is measured. Second, Quran 5:43 says the Jews of Medina have the Torah “in which is the judgement of Allah” — present tense, about physical books in seventh-century Arabia. Third, Quran 10:94 tells Muhammad to resolve his own doubts by asking the People of the Book, which would be incoherent advice if their scriptures were corrupt. Fourth, the claim that the “real Injil” is lost is an article of faith with no manuscript, patristic, or historical evidence: no fragment, citation, or memory of any such book exists, whereas the four Gospels are attested within decades of Jesus.
Classical Muslim scholarship itself was divided. The thoroughgoing textual-corruption thesis is largely a development associated with Ibn Hazm (d. 1064), four centuries after Muhammad, formulated in polemical context. Earlier and later authorities — al-Tabari on several verses, al-Razi, and in the modern period Muhammad Abduh, who wrote that the charge of textual corruption “makes no sense at all,” since Jews and Christians scattered across the world could never have coordinated identical changes — located the corruption in interpretation, not text. The manuscript record settles the empirical question: the Bible Muhammad’s contemporaries possessed is the Bible we can read today in manuscripts that predate him. Whatever the Quran was confirming in 600s Arabia, we still have it — and the Quran contradicts it.