This article will document some of the most common reasons given by Muslims for Islam's veracity, and offers a short response to each one.
Click to jump to a specific section:
The argument that the Quran is so miraculously amazing that it cannot be reproduced comes from the Quran itself (Surah 10:38, 11:13-14, 17:88, and 52:34):
Surah 2:23-24
23 And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a sûrah like it and call your helpers other than Allah, if what you say is true.
24 But if you are unable to do so - and you will never be able to do so - then fear the Fire fuelled with people and stones, which is prepared for the disbelievers.
The Quran is, in reality, very easy to reproduce, and has been in works like The True Furqan. However, since the "challenge" must be judged by Muslims, is regarded as blasphemous to even attempt, and has a foregone conclusion - "you will never be able to do so" - it's a foolish, pointless challenge. Even if the Quran were impossible to reproduce, that would do nothing to prove it is from God, but rather it would prove that it is unique.
Muslims, also, will wax poetical telling us that the Quran is so incredible that it is regarded by Muslims and non-Muslims alike as the greatest work of literature in Arabic, nay - in any language:
The Qur’an: A Literary Masterpiece That Transcends Generations
The Qur’an, the holy book of Islam, is widely regarded as a literary masterpiece. Its profound impact on Arabic literature, its eloquence, and the timeless message it conveys have captivated both scholars and believers for centuries.
The Qur’an was revealed in the Arabic language, and it showcases unparalleled linguistic excellence. The book’s language is pristine, with a flawless blend of eloquence, rhythm, and precision. Despite being revealed more than 1400 years ago, the Qur’an’s linguistic beauty remains unmatched. Its expressive metaphors, captivating narratives, and compelling arguments demonstrate the ingenuity of its composition, leaving a lasting impact on those who delve into its verses.
This argument does not work on me, because I have read the entire Quran. It is the single most horrible scripture of any religion that I have ever read.
The literary issues with the Quran are as follows, and can be verified by anyone who simply sits down to read Surah 1-5:
The fact that anyone can make the argument that the Quran is a literary masterpiece shows the depth of self-deception that someone can be goaded into by their beliefs.
The argument that the Quran is divine because it contains no contradictions also comes from the Quran itself:
Surah 4:82
82 Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have certainly found in it many inconsistencies.
To begin, the lack of contradictions in a book does not make that book divine. There are math books, fictional books, tutorial books, historical books, and books in other genres, which do not contain self-contradictory information. That does not mean they are from God.
Secondly, the Quran does have contradictions, even according to Muslims. The aforementioned doctrine of abrogation (Surah 2:106, 16:101) is a divine cop-out for contradictory "revelations" that Muhammad delivered, teaching to always favor whatever is latest, if there is contradiction.
One example of this would be the punishment for adultery. First, the Quran's prescribed punishment for an adulterous woman involves her being placed under house arrest for the rest of her life (Surah 4:15). Then, the punishment of stoning was prescribed, which is now lost (Sahih al-Bukhari 6830). Then, the punishment of being flogged 100 times was given, and this is what is authoritative today (Surah 24:2).
The doctrine of abrogation is a great example of how ad-hoc Muhammad's revelations were. If the Quran was Allah's eternal word, written on a tablet in Heaven (Surah 85:21-22), Allah wouldn't need to make little edits as he went along, to tweak doctrines that he didn't quite get right the first, or second, or third time.
One of the most common Muslim claims about the Quran is that it is perfectly preserved, and exists in one form only, and this constitutes proof that it is divine in origin:
The Preservation of the Glorious Quran
The Glorious Quran is the pure word of God. There is not a single word therein that is not divine. The Book has been handed down to our age in its complete and original form since the time of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.
The Book that God revealed to him for the guidance of mankind exists today in its original language without the slightest alteration in its vocabulary.
What is the Quran? - Intro to the Clear Quran, Mustafa Khattab
The Quran is the holy book of Islam. It is a collection of revelations that were received by the Prophet Muhammad over the course of twenty-three years in the 7th century CE. There is only one version of the Quran, perfectly preserved in written and oral records around the world for nearly 1400 years.
The above statements are deceptive, or ignorant. The Quran has not been perfectly preserved, even according to Islam's own sources - the subject of this article.
There is not "one version" of the Quran. The text of the Quran used by most Muslims today wasn't standardized until 1924 in Cairo, Egypt. There are more than 30 Arabic versions of the Quran, containing thousands of textual variants between them, as collated by Hatun Tash and the team at DCCI Ministries. There are also textual variants within the manuscript traditions for each of these Arabic versions.
In addition, even if the Quran were to be perfectly preserved, that would not be proof of its divine origin. It would be proof of a dedicated following, or good text transmission practices. With the advent of computing, there will be millions of books written every year which will be perfectly preserved going forward.
Many Muslims claim that the Quran contains advanced knowledge of scientific discoveries that would have been impossible to know in the 7th century:
Miracles of the Quran
The Quran contains scientific knowledge that could not have been known 1400 years ago. It ranges from basic arithmetics to the most advanced topics in astrophysics. You are invited to go through those miracles and judge for yourself.
While this short section cannot hope to address all of the verses claimed to teach some scientific fact, if one does bother to investigate such claims, they will find that one of two things are true:
However, not only does the Quran contain no scientific miracles whatsoever, it does contain scientific errors, and so does the Hadith. Here are five quick examples, along with articles covering them in more detail:
Muhammad did not have advanced scientific knowledge. This is an exceptionally weak, demonstrably false argument.
Anyone who engages with Muslims on the popular level will find that one of the most common proofs that they submit for the truthfulness of Islam - no doubt something they personally find very compelling - are variations of the following:
Firstly, I don't grant either of these claims - at least not without asterisks. There are not anywhere near 2 billion Muslims, and Islam spreads via birthrates, not conversions by intelligent, rational adults. This is almost ubiquitously stated in all of the studies that they will link to in order to validate their claim.
For example:
Why Muslims are the World's Fastest-Growing Religious Group
The main reasons for Islam’s growth ultimately involve simple demographics. To begin with, Muslims have more children than members of the seven other major religious groups analyzed in the study. Muslim women have an average of 2.9 children, significantly above the next-highest group (Christians at 2.6) and the average of all non-Muslims (2.2). In all major regions where there is a sizable Muslim population, Muslim fertility exceeds non-Muslim fertility.
Actual converts of conviction to Islam are rare, and often paraded around, precisely for that reason.
Further, there are not 2 billion Muslims. That figure includes government-reported census data in Sharia nations, often boasting a 95-99% Muslim population, which is comical. These figures are not representative, because many become silent apostates, due to the penalty for leaving the false religion of Islam being death (Sahih al-Bukhari 3017, etc.), not to mention the huge range of other temporal penalties that public apostasy opens one up to in most of these nations.
This is evidenced in an article here, where we see that a non-government poll from Iran - which officially reports to be 99% Muslim - reported less than 50% of its respondents as identifying as Muslim. There is no reason to believe that the case isn't similar in other Sharia nations. Adding to this all of the cultural or nominal Muslims, and Islam becomes a much smaller religion.
However, even if we granted both of these claims, they mean nothing. Christianity is still the world's largest religion. Does that prove anything? Nope. At one point, Communism was growing so fast, that it went from not formally existing, to dominating some of the largest nations on earth, in less than 150 years. Does that prove anything? Further, there are over 1 billion Hindus, and over 1 billion people who profess no formal adherence to any religion. Does that make those positions correct? Of course not.
If you are Muslim, you are asserting that all 2 billion Christians, 1 billion Hindus, and 1 billion religiously-unaffiliated people are wrong, and basing their lives on lies and falsehood. Therefore, you must concede that it is possible for a huge amount of people to be deceived. And, that is precisely what has happened with Islam.
The frequency at which this claim is used is actually evidence that Islam truly has no compelling evidence to offer. Therefore, its adherents latch on to meaningless arguments like this, in order to justify to themselves why they remain in a false religion.
The argument that prophecies of Muhammad are found in the Bible is from the Quran itself:
Surah 7:157
157 Those who follow the Messenger, the Unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel in their possession. He directs them to righteousness, and deters them from evil, and allows for them all good things, and prohibits for them wickedness, and unloads the burdens and the shackles that are upon them. Those who believe in him, and respect him, and support him, and follow the light that came down with him—these are the successful.
Muslims, eager to prove the above verse true, have submitted various Bible verses over the centuries which are allegedly a fulfillment of this passage. This has resulted in some of the most egregious, dishonest twisting of Scripture ever performed by anyone.
Firstly, note that Muhammad himself did not give the reference to what supposedly mentioned him. In the New Testament, Old Testament verses that Christ fulfilled are often quoted in the text of the New Testament, as the event is being narrated. Muhammad did not do this, because he could not do this - he had only an oral familiarity with a few Bible stories, being otherwise totally ignorant of its contents.
Secondly, why do Muslims tell us that our Bible - the one which Muhammad constantly professed he was affirming (Surah 3:3-4, 5:43-48, 5:68, etc.) - is totally corrupted, and then at the same time, rip verses out of it that they think prophesy of Muhammad? What is their criteria for determining that the verses they are using are not part of the corruption, which according to them, was so wholesale that literally every single chapter of the Bible has been radically changed or fabricated, as discussed in the last section of this article?
Thirdly, to keep this section to a reasonable size, we can look at the two most common passages used to support Muhammad, and from them, learn the type of nonsensical, lying eisegesis practiced by Muslims looking to affirm their fake prophet. If you would like a more complete treatment of this claim, refer to the article Is Muhammad Prophesied in the Bible?
The most common passage used by Muslims in the Old Testament is:
Deuteronomy 18:15, 18-19
15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Muhammad was not the prophet like unto Moses for the following reasons:
The most common passage used by Muslims in the New Testament is:
John 14:16, 26
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Muhammad was not the Comforter for the following reasons:
This "evidence" for Islam is by the far the most ridiculous, deceptive, dishonest one that Muslims attempt, and it requires them to heinously twist the Word of God, trying desperately to find something that is not there, anywhere.
Muslims claim that Muhammad is God's messenger because of remarkable prophecies that he made, which later came to pass:
The Prophecies of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ
Some of the greatest and most convincing testimonies to the prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ are the numerous occasions on which he correctly predicted future events. Only one to whom God had granted access to the realm of the unseen could have, time and again, accurately foretold the future.
Firstly, this proof, as well as the following section on miracles, are non-starters. They are Biblically irrelevant, in light of Deuteronomy 13:1-5, in which God says that even if someone performs a miracle, or gives a prophecy, they are still a false prophet, if they preach another God. Muhammad certainly preached another God - a false, childless, Unitarian God called "Allah", not Yahweh (Exodus 3:15), who is the Father (Deuteronomy 14:1, John 1:12, etc.). Jesus gave the same principal (Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22), as did the Apostles (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12).
Secondly, even according to Muhammad, fulfilled prophecies do not of themselves prove that someone is a true prophet of God:
Sahih al-Bukhari 5762
Narrated `Aisha:
Some people asked Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) about the foretellers. He said, "They are nothing". They said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Sometimes they tell us of a thing which turns out to be true." Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "A Jinn snatches that true word and pours it Into the ear of his friend (the fore-teller) (as one puts something into a bottle) The foreteller then mixes with that word one hundred lies."
This is also narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari 6213, 7561, and Sahih Muslim 2228a-c.
Above, we see that people came to Muhammad, and asked him about people who foretell the future. After he dismisses them, they retort that what they prophesied sometimes comes true. He dismisses them anyway. Therefore, even according to the false prophet Muhammad, fulfilled prophecies aren't of themselves a valid way to determine if someone is a true prophet.
However, to address the Muslim claims made above of Muhammad's prophetic prowess, the reality is that Muhammad was a prophetic disaster, as covered at length in this article. He taught that the end was imminently near, and prophesied a host of bizarre, false, impossible things in the Hadith, which have not come to pass, and never will.
Also, the quintessential example of prophecy in the Quran, Surah 30:2-5, referenced by all Muslims, was - according to Muhammad's companions - a retroactive prophecy. This is discussed in its own article here.
In the same vein as the "scientific miracles" in the Quran and Hadith, none of the alleged fulfilled prophecies of Muhammad are remarkable. They are either vague, obvious, or truisms, which anyone could have predicted, or they weren't far enough removed in time from what they were predicting to preclude fabrication, or they are specific predictions which haven't been fulfilled at all, and require a gold medal showing in mental gymnastics to reinterpret them into something that they don't even say, in order to pretend they've been fulfilled. Every single one without exception is invalidated under one of these basic criticisms.
Also, virtually all of the alleged fulfilled prophecies are from the Hadith, and not the Quran. In the Quran, Muhammad repeatedly claimed to have no knowledge of the unseen (Surah 6:50, 7:188, 10:20, 11:31, 27:65), and therefore, the Quran is bereft of future prophecy. The Hadith, on the other hand, were compiled hundreds of years after Muhammad died - long after anyone could scrutinize him - and in the case of some of the prophecies in question, hundreds of years after they were allegedly fulfilled. In the next section, we will touch on why that's such a problem.
In summary, there is nothing like Isaiah 53 in Islam, nor Abraham offering Isaac as symbolic of Christ, nor the Passover Lamb, or anything of the like. Islam is prophetically bankrupt.
This argument for Islam is one of the more interesting claims of Muslims, because it actually contradicts the Quran, and highlights a major contradiction between the Quran and the later Hadith narrations, which came about 200 years after Muhammad died, at the earliest.
In the Quran, Muhammad frequently revealed verses which vindicated himself as a prophet despite the fact that he performed no miracles or signs, which evidently, people were asking him for:
Surah 6:37
37 They ask, “Why has no sign been sent down to him from his Lord?” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Allah certainly has the power to send down a sign—though most of them do not know.”
Surah 10:20
20 They ask, “Why has no sign been sent down to him from his Lord?” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “˹The knowledge of˺ the unseen is with Allah alone. So wait! I too am waiting with you.”
Surah 13:7
7 The disbelievers say, “If only a sign could be sent down to him from his Lord.” You ˹O Prophet˺ are only a warner. And every people had a guide.
Above, after being asked for a sign, and questioning why Muhammad didn't have a single sign, what does Allah say? Does he say "I already gave you lots of signs"? No, rather Allah tells Muhammad that he is "only a warner". In other words, his role is not to perform miracles, but to warn, and that's why he did no miracle.
In one passage in particular, Allah says that the Quran alone is to be regarded as sufficient for those asking for a sign:
Surah 29:48-51
48 You ˹O Prophet˺ could not read any writing ˹even˺ before this ˹revelation˺, nor could you write at all. Otherwise, the people of falsehood would have been suspicious.
49 But this ˹Quran˺ is ˹a set of˺ clear revelations ˹preserved˺ in the hearts of those gifted with knowledge. And none denies Our revelations except the ˹stubborn˺ wrongdoers.
50 They say, “If only ˹some˺ signs had been sent down to him from his Lord!” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Signs are only with Allah. And I am only sent with a clear warning.”
51 Is it not enough for them that We have sent down to you the Book, ˹which is˺ recited to them? Surely in this ˹Quran˺ is a mercy and reminder for people who believe.
Unless the Quran later became insufficient, why would anything in the above statement change? Muhammad had not performed a miracle, because he was sent with the Quran as a warner, which is "enough", or other translators say, "sufficient".
Allah also says that the reason that Muhammad performs no signs is (conveniently) because those who came beforehand rejected them:
Surah 17:59
59 Nothing keeps Us from sending the ˹demanded˺ signs except that they had ˹already˺ been denied by earlier peoples. And We gave Thamûd the she-camel as a clear sign, but they wrongfully rejected it. We only send the signs as a warning.
There are many such passages in the Quran testifying that Muhammad was only sent with a warning, which corroborate the message of the above verses (Surah 2:118, 11:12, 22:49, 26:115, 38:70, 46:9, etc.).
However, according to Muslims today, and the Hadith collections, Muhammad was like unto the second coming of Christ in regard to his miraculous ability - which makes all of the above verses pretty nonsensical.
For instance, we see:
We're left to wonder why people in the Quran were asking him for signs, when according to the above, he was prolifically performing signs - at least according to oral narrations gathered 200-300 years after he died.
Commenting on this development, Henry Heydt, in his book "A Comparison of World Religions", referring to the Persian historian Mirkhvand, says:
A Comparison of World Religions, pg. 32
Although (Muhammad) himself disclaimed working miracles, Mirkhond wrote in the fifteenth century a life of Muhammad including some fifty pages of miracles he was supposed to have performed.
To get to his 50 pages of miracles, Mirkhvand, of course, was using Hadith, and maybe some earlier biographies. If we expand our sources outside of the six canonical Hadith collections, 50 pages wouldn't suffice at all. We would need hundreds of pages.
So, why is all of that so absent from the Quran? And why is he denying the ability to perform signs so often in the Quran, when asked to? Why doesn't he say "Watch me walk past this tree, and listen to it greet me"? Or, "I just did 5 miracles last week, what are you talking about"? Rather, he describes himself repeatedly as a "plain warner".
Taking into account all of the above, I don't believe that Muhammad performed any miracles, because that was his sheepish testimony in the Quran, when he was faced with people during his life, who could actually watch him. I see in the later narrations fantastic embellishments, invented long after Muhammad was dead, and not subject to scrutiny by people who could actually observe him.
This tendency toward embellishment is evident if we look at the account of the compilation of the Hadith narrations themselves, in which Bukhari was said to have sorted through 600,000 narrations for his Sahih, discounting 99% of them. What does that tell you about the truthfulness of the people he was interviewing, and their willingness to believe and repeat legends for which they had no veracity? And how does he know for sure what's true, or what's not true, 200 years after the fact? Could anyone today reasonably tell which oral narration of Abraham Lincoln was reliable? Less time has passed between us and him, than passed between Muhammad and Bukhari.
The later traditions chronicling Muhammad's miracles show that the Hadith fundamentally cannot be trusted, and include lots of legendary tales that had begun to develop of the miraculous exploits of Allah's "plain warner".
And, as mentioned in the section above, this argument is, Biblically speaking, dead on arrival, because miracles do not of themselves vindicate someone as a true prophet (Deuteronomy 13:1-5, Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22: 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12).
Muslims assert that evidence for Muhammad's prophethood can be found in his impeccable moral character:
The Character of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ
God combined in Muhammad ﷺ the most illustrious qualities, as evidence that he was in fact authorized by the Divine. His character sparkled from every angle, and this was noticed both by those who experienced him firsthand and those who later read his biography. They all found in Muhammad ﷺ a lifestyle of extraordinary sincerity, conviction, and virtue that posed a formidable challenge to any doubter in his prophethood.
To begin, regardless of how moral or sincere someone may be, that does not mean they are a divine prophet. They could be sincerely deceived. Self-deception is the worst kind of deception, because you are sincerely doing wrong, believing that it's right. Every single religious official of any religion would claim sincerity, and they believe that what they are doing is correct, and godly. They may even do many kind and humanitarian things for others. All of this says nothing about whether their religion is correct.
Next, once we actually look at Muhammad's life, we see an abundance of wickedness and sin:
Of course, from a Christian perspective, the worst thing he did was tell constant, egregious lies about God and Jesus Christ, and deceive people with his Monotheistic brand of 7th century Arabian Paganism, because that has perpetuated misery, falsehood, and suffering for 1,400 years.
He was not a moral man, or a kind man. He was a wicked, evil sinner, who started a violent, war-mongering false religion.
When examined, all of the proposed reasons to join Islam fall apart. There is not a single good reason to be Muslim, which is why the above reasons - many of which are laughably weak, or outright lies - have to be parroted.
Islam is not a compelling religion, because it's not true. It was a late invention of a single man in the 7th century, who borrowed extensively from local Arabian Paganism, Jewish legends, Christian and Gnostic apocrypha, and Biblical stories, and then combined them with his own deranged thoughts and opinions, to form his religion of Islam, which is submission to him, because he is Allah, according to himself:
Surah 4:80
80 He who obeys the Apostle obeys God: but if any turn away We have not sent thee to watch over their (evil deeds).
Sahih al-Bukhari 2956, 2957
Narrated Abu Huraira:
That he heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) saying, "We are the last but will be the foremost to enter Paradise." The Prophet added, "He who obeys me, obeys Allah, and he who disobeys me, disobeys Allah.