From the first suras to the last, the Quran presents itself as a book that “confirms” what came before it. It speaks respectfully of the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel. It says that Moses, David, and Jesus were all genuine messengers of God. It even declares that if Muhammad is in doubt, he should ask “those who were reading the Scripture before” him. On paper, this sounds like an invitation to Jewish and Christian agreement: one God, one unfolding story, one line of prophets.

But when we actually compare the Quran with the Bible, we find something very different. The Quran simultaneously praises the earlier Scriptures and then quietly rewrites them. It borrows names and scenes, trims away the parts that contradict Muhammad, imports folklore from later Jewish and Christian traditions, and then declares that this modified version is what God “really meant” all along. Where the Bible’s message is clearest—about sin, sacrifice, the Messiah, and the crucifixion—the Quran does not confirm; it corrects, denies, or flattens.

Jehovah does not contradict Himself. He does not send one set of prophets to write an inerrant body of Scripture, preserve it carefully over centuries, and then send a seventh-century merchant to say, in effect, “Actually, they all got the main points wrong.” Either the Bible is true and the Quran is a later counterfeit, or the Quran is true and Jehovah allowed His people to live on distorted revelation for over a thousand years. Both cannot be the Word of the same God.

When we look at the details—historical errors, confused identities, shallow caricatures of the Trinity, denial of the crucifixion, and the invention of extra-biblical “scriptures” no one has ever seen—the verdict becomes obvious. The Quran does not confirm the Bible. It contradicts it, corrects it, and then blames Jews and Christians for refusing to abandon the very books the Quran claims to honor.

Embracing Torah and Gospel—Then Contradicting Almost Every Major Story

The Quran’s approach to earlier revelation follows a pattern. First, it asserts that the Torah and the Gospel were true revelations from God. Second, it accuses some Jews and Christians of hiding or misreading parts of those books. Third, it retells major biblical events in ways that conveniently support Muhammad’s claims. In doing so, it fundamentally changes the message of Scripture.

The Torah, as preserved in the Bible, begins with creation, the fall, the spread of sin, the call of Abraham, the covenant promises, the exodus from Egypt, and the giving of the Law. Each major event advances Jehovah’s plan to bring a Redeemer who will crush the serpent, bless all nations, and provide a once-for-all atonement for sin. The prophets expand this by pointing to a suffering yet victorious Messiah who will be pierced, bear our sins, and yet see the light of life again.

The Quran takes pieces of this story but rearranges them around a different center. Adam and Eve are mentioned, but the fall is minimized; there is no doctrine of inherited sin that makes a final sacrifice necessary. Abraham appears, but the emphasis falls not on the covenant leading to Christ, but on Abraham as a proto-Muslim who supposedly performed Islamic rituals and helped found the line of prophets culminating in Muhammad. Moses appears frequently, but the exodus becomes mainly a lesson in obeying a generic “messenger” of Allah rather than a stage in Jehovah’s covenant with Israel that points forward to the Lamb of God.

Most decisively, Jesus is stripped of His cross and resurrection. In the Bible, everything leads to the crucifixion and empty tomb. The Law’s sacrifices foreshadow His offering. The prophets predict His suffering and glory. The Gospels climax in His death for sins and bodily resurrection. The apostles interpret all Scripture in that light. The Quran acknowledges Jesus as a prophet and even a “Word” from God, but it denies the crucifixion and omits the resurrection. It offers no atoning sacrifice, only a vague promise that Allah can forgive whom He wills without any holy basis for that forgiveness.

This is not confirmation. It is revision.

If a later book wanted genuinely to confirm the Bible, it would repeat the core storyline and doctrines: creation, fall, covenant, promise of Messiah, incarnation, substitutionary death, resurrection, and the offer of salvation by grace through faith. Instead, the Quran recycles names and a few episodes while flattening or denying the very truths that make the Bible unique. It echos certain moral themes—monotheism, judgment, the call to repentance—but builds a completely different way of salvation on top of them: obedience to Muhammad and submission to his law.

Jehovah’s revelation unfolds progressively, but never by contradiction. Later prophets expand earlier truth; they do not erase it. The New Testament fulfills the Old by bringing its sacrificial symbols into reality in Christ. The Quran does the opposite: it empties those symbols of meaning and then claims to honor them. That is not how the true God works.

Mary Confused with Miriam, Haman in Pharaoh’s Court, and Other Howlers

If the Quran were truly correcting corrupted biblical texts, we would expect it to show deeper historical accuracy, not less. Instead, it introduces blunders that no writer familiar with the Bible and basic chronology would make.

One of the most obvious mistakes is the confusion between Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron. The Quran calls Mary “sister of Aaron” and places her family in a context that clearly echoes Old Testament priestly language. Muslim apologists try to argue that “sister of Aaron” is a purely spiritual title, but within the narrative it sits alongside other clues that show the author has merged two different women separated by over a thousand years.

In the Bible, Miriam is the sister of Moses and Aaron, living around the fifteenth century B.C.E. She sings after the crossing of the Red Sea and dies during the wilderness wanderings. Mary, the mother of Jesus, lives in the first century C.E., in Nazareth and Judea. No biblical writer ever suggests they are the same or even directly related beyond distant national lineage.

The Quran, however, pulls priestly and Levitical language from the Old Testament and applies it to Mary as if she were being dedicated like a temple servant, then explicitly calls her “sister of Aaron.” That is precisely the sort of mix-up one would expect if a seventh-century storyteller had heard Jewish and Christian tales secondhand and blurred the details. It is not what we expect from the omniscient Creator who inspired both the Torah and the Gospel.

Another major error is the placement of Haman, a figure from the book of Esther, into Pharaoh’s court alongside Moses. In the Bible, Haman is a Persian official under King Ahasuerus (probably Xerxes I), living many centuries after the exodus. He plots to exterminate the Jews in Persia but is thwarted by Esther and Mordecai. Pharaoh, on the other hand, is an Egyptian ruler at the time of Moses, long before the Persian Empire.

The Quran puts a “Haman” next to Pharaoh, ordering the construction of a lofty tower so that Pharaoh might ascend and glimpse the God of Moses. Again, Muslim apologists strain to argue that this is a different Haman, but the combination—same name, high-ranking official, persecutor of God’s people—signals that the author has conflated distinct biblical narratives. This is exactly what we see in many later Jewish and Christian legends, where storytellers reshuffle elements from Scripture without careful attention to historical setting.

These are not minor slips in trivia. They reveal that the Quran is not drawing directly from pure, uncorrupted Torah and Gospel, but from a pool of mixed oral traditions and legendary expansions. The God who guided the hand of Moses and inspired the book of Esther does not suddenly forget His own timeline when speaking in Arabic.

Jehovah’s Word demonstrates consistent internal chronology. From Abraham to David to the exile and beyond, names, places, and empires line up with archaeology and independent historical data. The scattered errors belong to human interpreters, not to the text itself. The Quran’s mistakes, by contrast, are embedded in the revelation itself. That alone is enough to show that it cannot be a divine corrective to Scripture.

Crucifixion Denied, Trinity Misunderstood, Ezra Called Son of God

The most decisive clash between the Quran and the Bible occurs where the Bible is most central: the person of Christ and His saving work.

The New Testament declares that Jesus is the eternal Word made flesh, fully God and fully man. He lives a sinless life, dies on the cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for sins, and rises bodily from the dead. His death fulfills the Law’s sacrificial system; His resurrection vindicates His claims and guarantees the resurrection of those who belong to Him. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, yet one God. This is not a philosophical puzzle added later; it is the way Scripture itself speaks.

The Quran rejects this at every turn.

First, it denies the crucifixion. It states that Jesus was not killed or crucified but that it was made to appear so. Some commentators say someone else was substituted; others leave the “illusion” vague. Either way, the Quran claims that those who say Jesus died on the cross are following conjecture.

This is not a correction of uncertainty; it is a rejection of unanimous apostolic testimony and overwhelming historical evidence. Every New Testament writer treats the crucifixion as a fact. Early non-Christian sources—Jewish and Roman—confirm that Jesus was executed under Pontius Pilate. The earliest Christian preaching centers on Christ crucified and risen. To deny the cross is to cut out the heart of the Gospel. A spirit that does that is not the Spirit of God.

Second, the Quran badly caricatures the Trinity. It repeatedly speaks as if Christians worship a triad of Father, Mother, and Son, or as if “three” simply means three gods alongside one another. It condemns the idea that Allah has a literal consort and offspring. But that is not what any orthodox Christian creed teaches. From the beginning, Christians confessed one God in three Persons, not three gods, and never included Mary as part of the Godhead. Yes, some popular devotion in later centuries gave Mary exaggerated honor, but official doctrine never made Her a divine Person.

When a book claiming to come from God misrepresents the central doctrine of the faith it is correcting, that alone is fatal. Jehovah does not misunderstand His own revelation. If the Quran came from the same God who inspired the New Testament, it would address the Trinity accurately, even while rejecting it. Instead, it attacks a straw-man “three” that no careful Christian theologian holds.

Third, the Quran asserts that Jews of Muhammad’s time claimed that Ezra was the son of God. This is simply false. No historical Jewish group, prophetic or rabbinic, ever worshiped Ezra as divine or called him God’s son in the sense of deity. They honored him as a leader and scribe who helped restore the Law after the exile, but nothing more. The Quran’s charge reflects either a complete misunderstanding of Jewish beliefs or a polemical distortion designed to paint Jews as just as guilty of “shirk” (associating partners with God) as Christians.

These examples—crucifixion denied, Trinity distorted, Ezra misrepresented—show that the Quran is not in dialogue with the Bible but with a caricature of it. It fights shadows and then claims victory. That might persuade those who never read the Scriptures, but anyone who knows the Bible sees that the Quran’s criticism never lands on the real target.

Jehovah inspired the New Testament to reveal His triune nature, the deity and humanity of Christ, and the salvation accomplished at the cross. Any later book that contradicts those truths is, by definition, not from Him.

The Mysterious “Forgotten Scriptures” That Somehow Match 7th-Century Syrian Christian Tales

Faced with these contradictions, some Muslim apologists retreat to another explanation. They admit that the Bible as we now have it does not match the Quran’s version of events but claim that earlier, pure “Torah” and “Gospel” once existed and were later corrupted or lost. According to this story, the Quran confirms those original, hidden books, not the existing Jewish and Christian Scriptures.

This move creates more problems than it solves.

First, the Quran itself repeatedly speaks of the Scriptures in the hands of Jews and Christians in Muhammad’s own day as genuine revelations of God. It calls them “the people of the Book,” urges them to judge by what God has sent down to them, and even tells Muhammad that if he is in doubt, he should consult those who have the previous Scripture. No hint is given that their scrolls and codices had been fundamentally rewritten. Their problem, the Quran says, is selective reading, hiding some passages, or misinterpreting, not possessing completely fake texts.

Second, the historical evidence from both Jewish and Christian manuscripts shows that the Old and New Testaments were remarkably stable long before the seventh century. Hebrew scrolls from the Dead Sea, dating centuries before Christ, match the traditional Masoretic text closely. Greek New Testament manuscripts from the second and third centuries contain the same Gospel message that later copies preserve. If a radically different Torah or Gospel existed, there is no trace of it in the actual manuscript record.

Third, when we look at the specific stories the Quran tells that differ from the Bible, they almost always correspond not to some ancient lost Scripture but to later Jewish midrash, apocryphal Christian gospels, and Syriac Christian legends circulating in late antiquity. For example, some Quranic stories about Jesus speaking from the cradle or forming birds from clay appear not in the canonical Gospels but in second- or third-century apocryphal writings. Other details match Syriac homilies and liturgical stories that embellished biblical accounts for devotional use.

This suggests that Muhammad or his sources picked up these tales from Jews and Christians he encountered—monks, storytellers, or traders—and then wove them into the Quran as if they were the original, divinely given versions. Instead of restoring lost revelation, the Quran canonizes legendary expansions.

Jehovah does not lose His Word. Jesus and the apostles treated the Old Testament available in their day as the very speech of God and never hinted that its core narratives had been replaced. They corrected misinterpretations, yes, but they never suggested that Moses or the prophets had been altered beyond recognition. The Quran’s claim of hidden, forgotten Scriptures conveniently matching its own stories is historically empty. It explains away contradiction by appealing to books no one has ever seen.

Ultimately, this strategy collapses into circularity. Muslims say, “The Bible disagrees with the Quran, so it must be corrupted.” When asked for proof of a different original, they answer, “The Quran tells us there was one.” The Quran becomes both judge and witness in its own case. That is not how honest inquiry works.

Abrogation Within the Quran vs. the Claim of Perfectly Preserving Previous Books

One of the Quran’s boldest claims is that it comes to “confirm” and “guard” the previous Scriptures. Yet within its own pages, the Quran admits that it contains verses that replace and override earlier ones. This doctrine is called naskh—abrogation.

According to traditional Islamic teaching, some earlier revelations given to Muhammad were later canceled or modified by later revelations. A milder instruction can be replaced by a stricter one; a general allowance can be narrowed or revoked. Muslim jurists have long debated which verses abrogate others, but they agree on the principle: Allah can send down a verse, then send another that causes the first to be forgotten or nullified.

This raises an obvious question. If Allah feels free to abrogate His own recent statements, why should we believe He would never allow major parts of the Torah and Gospel to stand if they no longer fit His plan? If the Quran itself contains verses erased or superseded, how can it claim to be the guardian of earlier books?

The Bible knows nothing like this. Jehovah does not send false starts. He does not reveal a moral command, then contradict it later. His covenant may progress—from the shadow of sacrifices to the reality of Christ—but He never reverses Himself. When Jehovah says He hates lying lips, He does not later send a prophet to announce that lies are acceptable for a new dispensation. When He forbids idolatry, He does not later allow some nations to worship carved images as long as they pay taxes.

By contrast, the doctrine of abrogation allowed Muslim scholars to reconcile earlier, more peaceful-sounding verses about patience and “no compulsion in religion” with later, harsher commands to fight unbelievers until they submit. Rather than admit that the Quran speaks inconsistently, they appealed to a divine right to rewrite. Allah initially tolerated some practices, then later forbade them; He initially urged restraint, then commanded expansion by the sword.

That same mindset lies behind the claim that the Torah and Gospel were altered. If Allah can upgrade His own words in the space of a few years, then wiping out or “correcting” earlier Scriptures over centuries becomes thinkable. The problem is that this picture of God does not match the God of the Bible, who binds Himself by His own promises and cannot lie.

When the Quran asserts both that it confirms previous Scriptures and that Allah routinely abrogates His own revelations, it undercuts its own authority. Either Jehovah speaks consistently from Genesis to Revelation, with organic development but no doctrinal reversals, or we are dealing with a different god who changes messages according to convenience.

Final Nail: A “Confirmation” That Repeatedly Calls Jews and Christians Liars for Following Their Own Books

In the end, the Quran’s attitude toward Jews and Christians moves from cautious friendliness to open hostility. Early suras speak respectfully of “people of the Book.” Later passages, especially from the Medinan period, accuse many Jews and Christians of deliberate distortion, concealment, and stubborn rejection.

Repeatedly, the Quran insists that those who refuse to accept Muhammad are not merely mistaken but deceitful. It claims that some “twist their tongues” when reading Scripture, that they hide passages pointing to Muhammad, and that they have “forgotten” a portion of what was revealed to them. It portrays their refusal to accept the Quran’s version of events—especially about Jesus—as willful rebellion against evident truth.

Yet from the standpoint of Jews and Christians, they were simply doing what Jehovah commanded: holding fast to the written Word He had entrusted to them. The Law warns Israel not to add to or subtract from Jehovah’s commandments. The prophets rebuke any attempt to mix God’s Word with human inventions. The New Testament tells believers to test every spirit and reject any message that denies Christ’s bodily coming or contradicts the Gospel they had already received.

When Muhammad appeared with stories that disagreed with Moses, the prophets, and the apostles, the proper response of faithful Jews and Christians was to reject him. To do anything else would have been disloyalty to Jehovah. The Quran calls this loyalty “kufr”—ingratitude and unbelief. It demands that they throw over centuries of inspired Scripture in favor of a single man’s new revelations.

This is the final nail in the “confirmation” claim. A genuine confirming revelation does not require the recipients of previous revelation to deny everything Jehovah has already taught them. When John the Baptist proclaimed Jesus as the Lamb of God, he did not ask Israel to abandon the Law and the prophets; he showed how Christ fulfilled them. When the apostles preached, they argued from the Scriptures to prove that Jesus is the Messiah. They did not accuse Moses of getting the story wrong.

The Quran, however, must constantly tell Jews and Christians that they are liars for trusting their own books. It demands that they accept a version of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus that those same books contradict. It insists that the very Scriptures it calls “light” and “guidance” are unreliable whenever they differ from Muhammad. This is not the voice of the same God; it is the voice of a rival.

For anyone weighing these claims honestly, the path forward is clear. Either you believe that Jehovah inspired the Scriptures, protected them through centuries, fulfilled them in Christ, and then watched while a later prophet called His people liars for believing Him—or you accept that Muhammad spoke from another source.

The Bible does not need the Quran. It stood complete when the apostle John wrote Revelation at the end of the first century C.E. It presents the full story of creation, fall, promise, redemption, and final restoration. The Quran came much later, borrowing names and fragments but denying the cross, muddling history, and attacking the Trinity. A book that does that cannot be a “confirmation.” It is a contradiction—one that leaves its followers without a Savior who truly died and rose, and thus without any solid hope of eternal life.

Jehovah still calls all people, including Muslims, to turn from false prophets and trust in His Son. The same Scriptures the Quran half-praises and half-condemns are the very ones that can lead a humble reader to salvation in Christ. The choice is not between two equal revelations; it is between the living Word of God and a seventh-century remix that tries to silence it.

You May Also Enjoy

The Genocide of Banu Qurayza: 600–900 Men Beheaded in One Day (627 C.E.)

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS