I recently participated in two debates with Muslim apologist Ijaz Ahmad (of Calling Christians) on the debate topics, “Is the New Testament God’s Word?” as well as “What Do the Qur’an and Islamic Tradition Say About the Bible?” The debate video for the second of these two videos is up, which you may view here.

Here are the materials that I used during the debate, for those who are interested in them.

Presentation notes for my opening statement

Powerpoint slides for my opening statement and rebuttal

Some supporting documents that I cited


3 thoughts on “Debate: “What Do the Qur’an and Islamic Tradition Say About the Bible?” (vs. Ijaz Ahmad)

  1. Mabuhay Luis

    Pls allow me to add some insight about Ijaz’s claim on the word ‘Muhaymeen’ to be translated as some sort of a ‘Filter. This claim actually can be easily refuted since:

    1)In Quran and even in ALL AUTHENTIC Hadiths there are absolutely no information concerning the names of two sons of Adam in Surah 5:27-31 however ‘strangely’ out of nowhere ALL quranic tafseers/interpretation claim the names are Cain and Abel which is an undeniable proof Muslim know those names solely through the bible. Based on this, it seems rather than quran filtering the Bible , in reality instead the Bible is the one who ‘filters’ and ‘educates’ the quran on what is right and correct which totally inline with Allah’s order for Muhammad to ask guidance from Torah and Eenjeel.

    2) The same with Benjamin the youngest son of Jacob , Quran and Hadiths absolutely have no record on his name ,quite odd since muslim regards Benjamin as prophet and again out of nowhere every tafseer identifies the unnamed brother of Joseph in Surah Yusuf 58-69 as Benjamin. It’s pathetic enough when the name of a respected prophet could only be identified from a ‘supposedly corrupted’ book.

    3) Eve has no name in Quran although she is identified through hadith still this shows a)quran can’t function as filter since this supposedly filter had already proven to be defected. b) It is a surety that info in the hadith about Eve’s name derives from Torah.

    To sum it all up; how could a ‘supposedly’ corrupted book be trusted blindly by muslim for being the sole reference to understand missing pieces in quran? and how could quran function in this sense as filter to decide whether names like Cain and Abel nor Benjamin are the correct identification then? this proves the ‘filter theory’ is just simply illogical nonsense.

  2. Good point. I did allude to this fact that Islam is highly dependent upon the Biblical worldview for its narrative history. In hindsight, if I had done the debate differently, I would have pressed this point more. But thank you for your input. To be honest, the idea that “muhaymin” means “filter” just seems really far-fetched. And as I said in the cross-examination, even if I were to grant that that is what the word means, a “filter” does not necessarily mean that the thing being filtered has been textually corrupted. As with all the “corruption” verbs in the Qur’an, they more naturally lend themselves to a distortion of meaning, rather than of text. Ijaz unwittingly made that point for me when he spoke about a stoning incident as the occasion of revelation for Q 5:41ff–a story that clearly teaches that the previous scriptures were intact, and were merely being misinterpreted and ignored.

    – Luis

  3. Hi, Luis thanks for your respond on my comment

    speaking about Ijaz, i notice how in the debate he demanded repeatedly that you should provide him with some evidence in Quran or from tradition which would confirm the authenticity of bible. And as I’ve laid out previously there are several undeniable proofs available. Furthermore . interestingly when we look carefully upon the manner in how the bible and several missing pieces and unidentified characters in Quran is connected, we will see that the ‘confirming act’ as muhaymeen( borrowing this term from muslim) here is rather being executed by the bible instead of Quran.

    For example, majority of translations of Sura al-Maidah:27-31 mention Qayn/Qabeel and Habeel to identify two nameless Adam’s sons. And since no statement in Quran nor authentic Hadith can confirm this identification and even more than that Quran at Surah Yunus : 94 clearly ordered any muslim to rely upon the guidance of Jews&Christians (along with their Bible of course) whenever muslim confuse in their own islamic teaching then unavoidably the only point of guidance and reference here is Bible which judges and confirms the identification of those two nameless sons of Adam >> in other words Bible is functioning as ‘muhaymeen’ here.

    The same with cases such as to identify Eve as the nameless Adam’s wife (Sura Baqarah :35) and Sarah to identify the nameless Abraham’s wife (Surah Hud:71-73), although in these cases muslim might argue authentic hadiths do mention Eve and Sarah’s name however confronted with the facts :

    (a) Islam has never explicitly stating hadith as ‘muhaymeen’ HOWEVER INSTEAD
    (b) Islam explicitly ordered any muslim to rely on Bible whenever they confused as being stated in Quran S.Yunus: 94 , ” “And if thou were in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the book from before thee…”

    (c) Already proven before that Quran does rely on Bible as sole and only reference in case of identifying Adam’s two nameless sons in Quran.

    (d) hadiths where Eve and Sarah are mentioned, are not Qudsi hadith which is the highest form of hadith claimed to be originated from Allah Himself , which means these hadiths are man originated

    (e) Bible along with its story of many biblical characters had been circling around the world from England to India and from Ethiopia-Arabian peninsula up to eastern Europe.

    Then the most possible conclusion for any reasonable muslim is : Even the content of these hadiths must be also originated from Bible, and Bible’s status in this matter at least for muhammad and the early muslims was still the muhaymeen , the one which determines / judges whether the name of Sarah and Eve mentioned in those hadiths are the right names.

    Lastly sorry for commenting with such lengthy explanation but i hope some of this explanation might be helpful in your future debate.

    Salamat brother

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s