This list has the purpose just to document the differences between Bible and Qur'an and that is "in itself" no indication which one is the truth. The most important question of how to discern which Book is the true word of God will have to be answered but is be discussed in other pages of this web site. But the fact that the Qur'an claims to confirm the earlier revelations although it contradicts them in many important as well as less important things, is already an indication that something in the Qur'an has gone wrong indeed.

There are many instances where the Qur'an teaches about people or events recorded in the Bible, but gives inaccurate data concerning them, whether places or date or other inconsistencies.

This part of the contradictions list is important though, because the Qur'an explicitely claims to confirm the earlier revelations and this list shows that the Qur'an does indeed substantially contradict them.

A Muslim's Response by Randy Desmond
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:51:28 PDT

The above arguement assumes that some of the revelations mentioned in the Qur'an, which were received by some of the earlier prophets, are in the Bible in untouched and unchanged form. That is not so. For example, the Qur'an mentions the Injil (Gospel) as a revelation given to Jesus (Peace be upon him) but the Bible does not contain the "Gospel of Jesus". What it does contain are Gospels according to Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John.

So how can one say the Qur'an contradicts earlier revelation contained within the Bible if we do not have that revelation in tact to compare it with? What we can do, however, is search the documents, such as the Bible, which are derivative works of the original revelations and see how it compares. If then we find "contradictions", is it not possible that those "contradictions" may be from those who composed the derivative works themselves and not from the Qur'an?

As for accusations of inaccurate data regarding historical events, it is interesting to note that in the Qur'an the Eqyptian tyrant which Moses (Peace be upon him) had to deliver the Israelites from was named Fir'aun. Notice the distinct 'n' at the end of the name. "Well, it turns out that Herodotus, an early greek historian (440 B.C.), comments upon the leaders of the Egyptians in his day and before his day as Fir'aun (not Pharaoh).

That is one example of very accurate data, and as we go through these web pages we will see, God willing, that all proposed questionable historical data in the Qur'an is, in fact, not questionable but actually quite accurate.

For reference, the information regarding the Egyptian ruler was obtained from Gary Miller's "The Basis of Muslim Belief" published by Islamic Affairs Division, Prime Minister's Department, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The authenticity of the Bible and the Gospels in particular is discussed elsewhere on this web site. I know about the mysterious "Gospel of Jesus" that Muslims talk about constantly. But there is just not the least shred of evidence such a gospel ever existed. In contrast, the canonical Gospels are clearly attested as first century documents. Arguing on the basis of something which has no evidence for its existence is very weak.

Well, the Bible doesn't claim harmony with the Qur'an. The Qur'an claims to be in agreement with the earlier revelations and it is an embarrassement to the Qur'an that these agreeing revelations just cannot be found anywhere. And it is very clear that the Bible today is the same as the Bible at Muhammad's time. We have complete New Testament copies dating 250 years before Muhammad. How come the Qur'an disagrees with what it explicitely claims to agree with? Nowhere does it talk about unavailable Christian scriptures. It always speaks about the scriptures which are WITH the Christians. And those are clearly the same as today. Show me any evidence to the contrary.

"Pharaoh" is not a name but just the Egyptian word/title for "king". But since I am not talking about "Pharaoh" versus "Fir'aun" anyway, I am not sure what the point is. Whether Muhammad's name is transliterated Muhammad, Mohammed, or Mahomet which I have all seen in various books is rather insubstantial. The question is what is reported about him. There might just have been different transliterations in different languages. Or even into the same language as with "Muhammad" in English.

And Randy responds again:

The original statement was to "just document the differences between the Bible and the Qur'an and that is "in itself" no indication which one is the truth. ... But the fact that the Qur'an claims to confirm the earlier revelations although it contradicts them..."

So I addressed that in my response. I pointed out that the Qur'an mentions there is a revelation given to Jesus (Peace be upon him) called the Injil (Gospel). The Bible does not have this. So when you say that the Qur'an contradicts earlier revelation, I have to wonder how could the Qur'an contradict this if the Injil is not even there in the Bible as originally revealed?

And for saying that the Gospel of Jesus did not exist is erroneous to what the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John are. They are the gospels of Jesus according to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, are they not?

The point about mentioning Fir'aun and Pharoah is to illustrate that perhaps the Qur'an is more accurate in historical data even though it may not seem to fit with what we think is accurate data. Let's cite another example to illustrate the point that the Qur'an may be a much more accurate source for historical data than other sources. Where is Noah's ark resting place? Mount Ararat, according to the Bible. Mount Judi, according to the Qur'an. Where has it been found? Mount Judi. Do a net search on Noah's ark and you can find more information about this.

To recap what has been proposed and what it has been responded with, The original statements of this page question the Qur'an's compliance with earlier revelations. It was then pointed out that revelations mentioned within the Qur'an may not even be in the Bible, and if it was in the Bible it may have been changed from its original form - thus the reason there would appear contradictions. Another one of the original statements is that the Qur'an gives inaccurate data regarding historical events. But the statement is unsupported (It is assumed, however, that there will be attempts to support these points in other web pages at this site). Therefore, two examples were cited which reflect the accuracy of the data of Qur'an with respect to historical findings.

Hm, well, I found three references to Noah's Ark. Who is lying most?
["Muslim" hoax?], ["Christian" hoax?] and [Christian denial] ... I have the impression that so far I want to side with the third position.

Back to the index

Last edited: September 23, 1996