Answering Islam - A Christian-Muslim dialog

This Fact Will Never Change –

The Words of God Are Unchangeable! Pt. 1

Sam Shamoun

Zawadi recently added an appendix to his article in an attempt to cover up all the damage that his gross mistakes and dishonest handling of sources have caused to his integrity and to the truth claims of Islam.

Zawadi starts off his “rebuttal” by lying in order to avoid admitting the obvious. Zawadi denies that his article was aimed at refuting my exegesis of Q. 6:115 and Q. 18:27:

Oh so Shamoun is the only Christian to put forth this argument then? So there is no one else (*,*,*,*) because Shamoun is so special, right?

We invite the readers to take a look at all of Zawadi’s links so they can see for themselves that not a single one deals exclusively with Q. 6:115 and 18:27. All of these articles quote a plethora of Quranic texts to prove that Muhammad testified to the incorruptibility and reliability of the Holy Bible.

In fact, the first two links along with the last one do not even quote Q. 18:27 at all, while the third link doesn’t even mention Q. 6:115! That means that none of these articles actually cite both of these verses in order to establish that the Quran testifies to the textual incorruptibility of the Holy Bible! They quote one or the other, but not both together.

This certainly confirms (at least in my mind) that Zawadi was dealing specifically with my discussion of these particular Quranic verses. Zawadi needs to, therefore, man up to it and admit the fact that he was trying to rebut my article, but didn’t want to mention or link to it directly. He seemingly knew that linking to it would have done more damage than good, since his readers would then be able to read my exposition for themselves and see just how shallow Zawadi’s reply truly is.

Zawadi tries to deny that his point regarding anyone being able to take any book on earth and changing it undermines the Quran’s perfect preservation:

I did not say that the Qur'an's situation is the same as the Bible in that it is possible for the Qur'an to be corrupted. I said that scribbling the ink off a book doesn't mean that one has erased and nullified the words of God completely out of existence, since the words are there in the Preserved Tablet. Allah on the other hand has made a promise that the Qur'an would be preserved for us (Surah 15:9). A unique claim not made for any other scripture.

It is apparent that Zawadi is trying to cover over his blunder since his initial argument did imply that the Quran could be changed just like any other book. Notice his words once again:

One could easily change and distort texts by picking up a book and a pen, but they could not change the original true texts and revelations which is with Allah on al-Lawh al-Mahfudh (preserved tablet) since the speech of Allah is uncreated and no one can ever make it go lost completely. Removing the words from the books here on earth does not mean that God's words have become totally lost but lost here on earth only.

Now if Zawadi is right that anyone can easily change and distort texts by picking up a book and a pen, so that God’s Words can be lost here on earth, then this means that the Quran can also be changed and corrupted as well.

Moreover, of what use is it to speak of God’s Words being preserved on a heavenly tablet when we no longer have access to them on earth? How can such words be of any benefit to us when we do not have access to them?

The only words that we have access to are the ones preserved in the Books which are with us. However, if these Books can be (and actually have been) corrupted then how can any of them be trusted to guide and instruct us concerning faith and salvation?

Does Zawadi even make sense at this point? Does he even understand what he is saying?

More importantly, Q. 15:9 doesn’t say that Allah has promised to preserve the Quran; that is simply Zawadi’s interpretation of the verse. Rather, the text says that Allah will protect the Reminder which he has sent down, a Reminder that also includes the previous Books in the possession of the Jews and Christians.

Therefore, if Zawadi is going to be consistent then he is going to have to admit that no one can change any of the Books of God that are with us here on earth.

We will have more to say about Q. 15:9 in our section on Ibn Kathir.

Zawadi still doesn’t understand how al-Tabari’s exposition of Q. 6:115 actually proves that none of God’s books can ever be corrupted. He responds:

What kind of argument is that? What does knowing what God's previous prophecies were have anything to do with the fact that Allah's prophecies are always fulfilled? Who says that we must know what these prophecies are? We know some of these prophecies (e.g. the coming of Prophet Muhammad) in the Qur'an and some we won't know since they aren't relevant to us (e.g. prophecies that have already been predicted and fulfilled before the revelation of the Qur'an that no longer concern us).

The message that this Qur'anic verse is trying to communicate to us is that things always happen the way God says that they would and no one could stop that from happening. This has absolutely nothing to do with preservation of previous revelations!

Let me highlight some of Zawadi’s words here so the readers can see what he obviously couldn’t.

What does knowing what God's PREVIOUS PROPHECIES were have anything to do with the fact that Allah's prophecies are always fulfilled?

We KNOW some of these prophecies (e.g. the coming of Prophet Muhammad)

prophecies THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PREDICTED AND FULFILLED BEFORE the revelation of the Qur'an that no longer concern us

The message that this Qur'anic verse is trying to communicate to us is that things always happen THE WAY GOD SAYS THAY THEY WOULD HAPPEN and no one could stop that from happening

Since Zawadi is oblivious to the fact that his own statements presuppose the reliability and incorruptibility of the Scriptures it seems that I am going to have to break this down for him one step at a time.

How does Zawadi even know that God has made any promises at all? And how does he know that some of these prophecies have already been fulfilled?

Where is he getting this information from? Did God speak to him directly and inform him of his promises and predictions?

Is he not receiving this from the Scriptures which he believes were revealed by God, such as the Torah, Psalms, the Gospel and the Quran?

If so, does he not realize that the only way he can be certain whether the prophecies and promises contained in these very same Scriptures are truly from God is if these revelations remained uncorrupt?

If, in principle, every book on earth can be changed, how does he know that Q. 6:115 and 18:27 are part of the original Quran, the one in heaven? Perhaps human scribes who thought such statements would make a nice addition inserted them later? And so all his argument crumbles.

Does he not understand that his comments actually presuppose the accurate transmission and preservation of the previous Scriptures?

Can he not grasp how his statements only make sense if the Scriptures, which contain the promises that God has made and which he intends to keep, have remained unchanged?

Can he not see that if these Books have been changed then he has no sure way of knowing whether any of the promises contained therein are actually from God?

Is it really hard for him to comprehend that if the Scriptures have been tampered with then he cannot conclusively prove that the prophecies that are found within them were not put there by corrupt scribes who tried to pass them off as God’s revelations?

Hopefully, Zawadi will finally get it and understand that his exegesis of Q. 6:115 and 18:27 actually confirms the reliability and incorruptibility of the previous Scriptures.

As if Zawadi couldn’t get anymore desperate he next goes on a tirade about why I didn’t mention the fact that Ibn Kathir believed that the Holy Bible has been corrupted or what he had to say concerning passages such as Q. 5:15, 6:34, and 15:9.

Zawadi is clearly trying to obfuscate here, and is bringing up red herrings in order to divert attention away from the real issues and to mask his dishonesty and incompetency.

The reason why I didn’t quote Ibn Kathir’s commentary on these passages is because they are irrelevant to my discussion of the meaning and application of Q. 6:115 and 18:27.

However, since Zawadi himself cited Q. 18:27 we would assume that if he was going to quote Ibn Kathir’s explanation of any specific passage, then it would naturally have to be his exegesis of this particular verse. The last thing we would expect Zawadi to do is refer to Ibn Kathir’s interpretation of Q. 85:21-22, especially when that passage was never brought up by either Zawadi or myself!

Furthermore, there are gross problems with Ibn Kathir’s exegesis of Q. 15:9 and his position regarding the Holy Bible being corrupt, none of which seems to be of any major concern to Zawadi.

To begin with, Q. 15:9 does not say that Allah will only preserve the Quran. In fact, the word Quran is not even mentioned! Rather, what that verse says is that Allah will preserve the Reminder which he has revealed:

Lo! We, even We, reveal THE Reminder (al-thikra), and lo! We verily are its Guardian. S. 15:9 Pickthall

According to the Quran itself, this Reminder also includes the previous Scriptures which God sent down for mankind. Case in point:

And We sent not before you (O Muhammad) but men to whom We inspired, so ask the people of the Reminder (ahla al-thikri) [Scriptures - the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel)] if you do not know. S. 21:7 Hilali-Khan – cf. Q. 21:48, 105; 40:53-54

Here, Muhammad is told to ask the people of the Reminder just in case he has any doubts whether the messengers before him were men. According to Muslim scholars, the Reminder that is spoken of here is actually the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians, specifically the Torah and the Gospel:

And We sent none before you other than men to whom We revealed (read nūhī or yūhā, ‘[to whom] it is revealed’) and [We sent] not any angels. Ask the People of the Remembrance, those with knowledge of the Torah and the Gospel, if you do not know, this; for they will know it. Since you are more likely to believe them than the believers are to believing Muhammad. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn; bold and italic emphasis ours)

(And We sent not (as Our messengers) before you other than men) human beings like you (whom We inspired) to whom We sent angels just as We have sent to you. (Ask the followers of the Reminder) the people of the Torah and the Gospel (if you know not) that Allah sent only human messengers? (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs)

Now Zawadi may argue that, in light of verse 6, Q. 15:9 can only be referring to the Quran:

And they say: O YOU whom the Reminder (al-thikru) has been revealed! you are most surely insane: S. 15:6 Shakir

Here, the revelation that Muhammad received is expressly called the Reminder, which makes it certain that Q. 15:9 is also referring to the Quran.

On the contrary, verse 6 proves the exact opposite. It shows that Q. 15:9 cannot refer to the Quran alone, but must extend to all the Scriptures which God has sent down such as the Torah and the Gospel.

The fact that Q. 15:9 does not use the precise wording of verse 6 is highly significant, e.g. Q. 15:9 does not say that Allah is going to protect "the reminder which was revealed TO YOU [i.e. Muhammad]," nor does it say that he will protect "THIS reminder." Either of these expressions would leave absolutely no doubt that the Reminder here can only be referring to the Muslim scripture. Instead, the citation mentions THE Reminder, a statement which cannot be limited to just the Quran.

In fact, the verses that immediately follow right after verse 9 provide further substantiation that the Reminder here includes more than the Quran:

We verily sent (messengers) before thee (arsalna min qablika) among the factions of the men of old. And never came there unto them a messenger but they did mock him. S. 15:10-11

The author(s) mention(s) those that Allah sent and who were mocked like Muhammad, messengers who experienced trials similar to him. The reference to these apostles suggests that Allah’s promise to save the Reminder would also include the Revelation which he gave those who were sent before Muhammad.

To put this in simpler terms so that Zawadi doesn’t miss it, the context supports the view that the author of the Quran wanted to highlight the point of Allah protecting the entire Revelation which he gave to all his prophets, to the detriment of the unbelievers who mocked and slandered his messengers and who wanted nothing more than to destroy their Message.

It shouldn’t be hard for Zawadi to fathom that the word Reminder can be used in more than one sense or have a different referent even within a couple of verses from each other, since this is precisely what we find in the following citation:

And We did not send before you (arsalna min qablika) any but men to whom We sent revelation -- so ask the followers of the Reminder (thikri) if you do not know -- With clear arguments and scriptures; and We have revealed TO YOU the Reminder (thikra) that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them, and that haply they may reflect. S. 16:43-44 Shakir

Notice how some of the Muslim scholars interpreted the above citation:

And We did not send before you anything other than men, to whom We revealed, and [sent] not angels: 'So ask the followers of the Remembrance, those knowledgeable in the Torah and the Gospels; if you do not know', that, then they know it, and you are more likely to believe them than the believers are to believe Muhammad (s), (Tafsir al-Jalalayn; bold and underline emphasis ours)

[We sent them] with clear signs (bi'l-bayyinat is semantically connected to an omitted [verb], namely, We sent them with clear arguments, and the Books and We have revealed to you the Remembrance, the Qur'an, that you may make clear to mankind what has been revealed to them, therein, in the way of [what is] lawful and unlawful, and that perhaps they might reflect, upon this and take heed. (*; bold emphasis ours)

(And We sent not (as Our messengers) before thee) O Muhammad (other than men) human beings like you (whom We inspired) with commands and prohibitions and signs. (Ask the followers of the Remembrance) the followers of the Torah and the Gospel (if ye know not!) that Allah always sent human messengers. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs; bold emphasis ours)

(With clear proofs) with commands, prohibitions and signs (and writings) the events of the scriptures of the people of old; (and We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance) We have sent Gabriel with the Qur'an (that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them) that with which they were commanded in the Qur'an, (and that haply they may reflect) upon what they were commanded in the Qur'an. (*; bold emphasis ours)

Here is another example:

Or have they taken for worship (other) aliha (gods) besides Him? Say: "Bring your proof:" This (the Qur'an) is the Reminder (thikru) for those with me and the Reminder (wa thikru) for those before me. But most of them know not the Truth, so they are averse. S. 21:24 Hilali-Khan

This is how the two Jalals explained this verse:

Or have they chosen besides Him, exalted be He, other than Him, gods? (herein is an interrogative meant as a rebuke). Say: 'Bring your proof, for this - but such a thing is impossible. This is the Remembrance of those with me, namely, my community, and that [Remembrance] is the Qur'an, and the Remembrance of those before me, of communities, namely, the Torah and the Gospel and other Books of God, not a single one of which contains the statement that with God there exists another god, in the way that they claim - exalted be He above such a thing. Nay, but most of them do not know the truth, the affirmation of God's Oneness, and so they are disregardful', of that discernment that leads to [knowledge of] it. (Tafsir Al-Jalalayn; bold and italic emphasis ours)

Just in case Zawadi thinks that we are making too much of a big deal of the difference in the wording, we only need to remind him what his fellow colleague and Arabic tutor, Jalal Abualrub, wrote in response to Zawadi’s former employer, Osama Abdallah, concerning Q. 15:9:

1. Here is a question to ask of Osama: Since Allah called the Torah ‘Dhikr,’ then, WHAT EVIDENCE DOES HE HAVE THAT AYAH 15:9 [Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr and surely, We will guard it], IS EVEN ABOUT THE QURAN RATHER THAN THE TORAH?

a. Read Ayah 15:9 TO TRY AND FIND DIRECT EVIDENCE IN THAT IT IS ABOUT THE QURAN. (Jalal Abualrub, If You Love Allah, Then Follow Muhammad, p. 42; capital emphasis ours)

As Abualrub correctly noted, there is nothing in the immediate context which rules out that the Reminder here may actually be referring to the Torah; and yet there is every indication that it does include a promise to preserve all of the Scriptures which God revealed through those whom he sent.

Abualrub provides additional support that Q. 15:9 isn’t speaking only of the Quran since he uses this very reference to prove that Allah will also preserve the Sunna:

Thirty-Sixth: Allah promised to protect the Dhikr from corruption, by protecting every letter of the Quran in addition to its Bayan (meaning; explanation; implication).

Allah said…

{Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e., the Qur’an) and surely, We shall guard it (from corruption)} (15:9).

Thirsty-Seventh: Dhikr comprises of the Qur’an and the Prophet’s Sunnah, the Qur’an’s practical Bayan. (Introduction to: Muhammad The Prophet of Mercy – Muhammad’s Role in Islam, by Jalal Abualrub, edited by Alaa Mencke [Madinah Publishers and Distributors, First Edition: June 2007], p. 53; underline emphasis ours)

Hence, even though Abualrub defines the Reminder in Q. 15:9 as the Quran, he still feels that this passage also includes the promise to protect Muhammad’s Sunna.

Therefore, if Abualrub believes that Q. 15:9 includes a promise to preserve Muhammad’s Sunna, despite the fact that it is never mentioned anywhere in the Quran, how much more does this promise apply to the Judeo-Christian Scriptures as well? This is especially so when we keep in mind that the Muslim scripture itself calls these Scriptures the Reminder which Allah sent down!

In light of the foregoing, Zawadi must accept that Allah has sworn in Q. 15:9 to save all of the Scriptures which he sent down as a reminder for mankind. This, again, proves that the previous revealed Books could not have been corrupted according to the Quran, and must therefore still exist today.

Zawadi quotes Ibn Kathir’s claim that the Arabic Torah shows evidence of alteration, textual corruption, changes, additions etc. Ibn Kathir also derides the canonical Gospels on the same grounds.

We have already dealt elsewhere with Ibn Kathir’s assertion in respect to his exegesis of Q. 3:78, which we will simply repeat here. There he wrote:

Mujahid, Ash-Sha'bi, Al-Hassan, Qatadah and Ar-Rabi' bin Anas said that,

<who distort the Book with their tongues.>

means, "They alter (Allah's Words)."

Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn 'Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah's creation CAN REMOVE THE WORDS OF ALLAH FROM HIS BOOKS, THEY ALTER AND DISTORT THEIR APPARENT MEANINGS. Wahb bin Munabbih said, "The Tawrah and Injil REMAIN AS ALLAH REVEALED THEM, AND NO LETTER IN THEM WAS REMOVED. However, the people misguide others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves. Then,

<they say: "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah;>

As for Allah's books, THEY ARE STILL PRESERVED AND CANNOT BE CHANGED." Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this statement. However, if Wahb meant the books that are currently in the hands of the People of the Book, then we should state that there is no doubt that they altered, distorted, added to and deleted from them. For instance, the Arabic versions of these books contain tremendous error, many additions and deletions and enormous misinterpretation. Those who rendered these translations have incorrect comprehension in most, rather, all of these translations. If Wahb meant the Books of Allah that He has with Him, then indeed, these Books are preserved and were never changed. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

Despite quoting the position of two renowned Muslims who candidly admitted that the Books of Allah can never be corrupted, and that the Torah and the Gospel therefore remain unchanged, Ibn Kathir still disagrees. He does so on the grounds that Arabic versions of the Holy Bible showed textual tampering in the form of additions and deletions!

This is equivalent to someone today claiming that the Quran has been corrupted due to the fact that the various English translations show evidences of disagreement, and that two particular versions omit Q. 9:128-129 (*, *, *, *)!

The scholarly thing to do is to examine the original languages of the Holy Scriptures to see if the text has remained intact. Once this is done, it will soon be discovered that the Holy Bible, much like the Quran, contains variant readings. However, these variants do not prove wholesale corruption to the Biblical text. To claim otherwise would actually prove that the Quran, not just the Holy Bible, has been thoroughly corrupted since it too has come down to us with variations, additions, omissions etc. (*, *).

More importantly, Zawadi doesn’t see (or deliberately chooses not to) that if Ibn Kathir is right about the Holy Bible being corrupted then this proves that the Quran is wrong. Keep in mind that Q. 6:115 and 18:27 both emphasize the fact that none can change the words of Allah. Neither text says that this refers only to the words revealed in the Quran; nor do they explicitly say that none can change the Quran.(1) Rather, both verses emphatically testify that no one is able to change the words of Allah. This would naturally extend to all the revelations that the Quran explicitly mentions, such as the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel.

However, if Ibn Kathir is correct that these previous Books have been corrupted then this means that the Quran is mistaken, and if it is mistaken then Muhammad was a false prophet.

This also implies that Allah is either a liar or an incompetent and impotent deity. He is a liar because he did not preserve his words even though he said he would. Or, he is incompetent because no matter how hard he tried to protect his revealed words he simply was incapable of doing so, since finite and imperfect human beings were able to change his words thereby thwarting his purposes in revealing them.

And Zawadi actually had the nerve to think that Ibn Kathir’s statements concerning the corruption of the Holy Bible was somehow relevant in establishing his point!

Here is what Zawadi says concerning my quoting from a commentary that is attributed to Ibn Abbas:

I have no idea how this commentary helps Shamoun, since it only specified the Qur'an as those whose words are not altered. I also wish to remind Shamoun that the commentary Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsr[sic] Ibn 'Abbas is not independently reliable (see here) and can only be cited if one has authentic narrations from Ibn Abbass confirming the point being made.

But let's assume that Ibn Abbass said this. This shows that Ibn Abbass understood this verse to be referring to the Qur'an (obviously in context with verse 114 right before it) only and not the previous revelations.

Two immediate responses. First, it is irrelevant to my point whether these are the actual words of Ibn Abbas or not, or whether there are other narrations that corroborate them. What is relevant is that whoever compiled or produced this work could easily see, and readily acknowledged, that the words which the Quran says can never be changed include the Books that Allah has revealed.

Second, Zawadi doesn’t see that if this passage is speaking of the Quran then by logical necessity it must also include all of the Books of God, and here is why.

Q. 6:114-115 speaks of Allah’s words never changing in a context which mentions the Book that was given to Muhammad. This means that there is a direct connection between the two, e.g. the Book is what is being referred to as the words of Allah.

Now the question that arises is why is this Book identified with Allah’s words. The answer is rather simple: the Book that Muhammad allegedly received is supposedly the revelation of Allah which conveys Allah’s words to mankind.

At the same time, however, the Quran mentions that the Book was also sent down to the Jews and Christians:

The Jews say, 'The Christians stand not on anything'; the Christians say, 'The Jews stand not on anything'; yet they recite the Book. So too the ignorant say the like of them. God shall decide between them on the Day of Resurrection touching their differences. S. 2:113 Arberry

Ye shall certainly be tried and tested in your possessions and in your personal selves; and ye shall certainly Hear much that will grieve you, from those who received the Book before you and from those who worship many gods. But if ye persevere patiently, and guard against evil, - then that will be a determining factor in all affairs. S. 3:186 Y. Ali

And this is a blessed Book (the Qur'an) which We have sent down, so follow it and fear Allah (i.e. do not disobey His Orders), that you may receive mercy (i.e. saved from the torment of Hell). Lest you (pagan Arabs) should say: "The Book was only sent down to two sects before us (the Jews and the Christians), and for our part, we were in fact unaware of what they studied." S. 6:155-156 Hilali-Khan

So if you (O Muhammad) are in doubt concerning that which We have revealed unto you, [i.e. that your name is written in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] then ask those who are reading the Book [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] before you. Verily, the truth has come to you from your Lord. So be not of those who doubt (it). S. 10:94 Hilali-Khan

Now according to the Quran itself, the Book of the Jews and Christians includes the revelations that Allah sent down to them, namely the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel. Therefore, if the Torah, Psalms, and the Gospel are the Books which Allah revealed then this makes them his words. And if they are his words then they can never be corrupted.

However, the only Scriptures that the Jews and Christians have ever possessed are the writings of the Old and New Testaments. This means that these Scriptures must be the original, uncorrupt Words that God revealed.

Let us take this step by step in order to help Zawadi comprehend the logic behind our argument.

A. Allah’s words can never be changed.

B. These words include the Books that Allah sent down.

C. The Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are Allah’s Books.

D. The Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are therefore Allah’s Words.

E. Since Allah’s words can never be changed this means that the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel have never been, and can never be, corrupted.

In fact, this is exactly the same reasoning employed by some of Zawadi’s own scholars to prove that the Torah can never be changed:

Abu Dawood narrated in his collection that Ibn Umar said:

A group of Jewish people invited the messenger of Allah to a house. When he came, they asked him: O Abu Qassim, one of our men committed adultery with a woman, what is your judgment against him? So they placed a pillow and asked the messenger of Allah to set on it. Then the messenger of Allah proceeded to say: bring me the Torah. When they brought it, he removed the pillow from underneath him and placed the Torah on it and said: I BELIEVE IN YOU AND IN THE ONE WHO REVEALED YOU, then said: bring me one of you who have the most knowledge. So they brought him a young man who told him the story of the stoning.

The scholars said: if the Torah was corrupted he would not have placed it on the pillow and he would not have said: I believe in you and in the one who revealed you.

This group of scholars also said: Allah said:

"And the word of your Lord has been accomplished truly and justly; there is none who can change His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing." (Q. 6:115)

And the Torah is Allah’s word. (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Ighathat Al Lahfan, Volume 2, p. 351)

Notice how these Muslim scholars appealed to Q. 6:115 to establish their premise that the Torah has never been corrupted, even though they all knew that within the immediate context this text is referring to the “revelation” given to Muhammad. They obviously saw what Zawadi refuses to see, namely, this verse also includes the rest of the Books of Allah, such as the Torah, since they too are his revealed Words.

This concludes the first part of our rebuttal. Please continue reading with part 2.


(1) Astonishingly, even though the Quran nowhere explicitly says that the text of the previous Scriptures have been changed, it does however testify to its own textual corruption!

(Of just such wrath) as We sent down on those who divided (Scripture into arbitrary parts), - (So also on such) as have made Qur'an into shreds (as they please). S. 15:90-91 Y. Ali

The foregoing passage not only shows that the promise of Q. 15:9 cannot be limited to the Quran alone, it actually indicates that this specific promise doesn’t even apply to the Muslim scripture at all! These verses make it clear that Allah actually allowed certain individuals to change the Quran during the very lifetime of Muhammad!

Hence, if Allah didn’t bother or was unable to protect it at the time of Muhammad then how can Muslims know for certain that he did so after he allowed it to be changed?

What this means is that Muslims have absolutely no guarantee that the Quran has actually been preserved at all.

For a thorough examination of this specific text we recommend this article.