Home > Arguments for the Bible's corruption
"The Torah was indeed oral for hundreds of years, passed down from Moses (peace be upon him) before being written, and the Injeel given to Jesus (peace be upon him) followed the same prophetic pattern. The Qur'an says, ‘And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming what came before him of the Torah; and We gave him the Injeel, in which was guidance and light' (Surah Al-Ma'idah, 5:46). Allah revealed it to Jesus as a spoken message, not a book he wrote—prophets delivered guidance orally first.
In Islam, we see this with the Qur'an too, initially oral, but preserved in writing during the Prophet Muhammad's (peace be upon him) life: ‘Indeed, it is We who sent down the Reminder' (Surah Al-Hijr, 15:9). The Injeel wasn't a biography or scripture Jesus left; it was Allah's word he preached—‘The Messiah, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger' (Surah Al-Ma'idah, 5:75). Later writings strayed, but the Qur'an keeps the truth he spoke: worship Allah alone."
The Bible is the best preserved book in history, because Jews and Christians produced one copy after another, spreading them into all parts of the world. Thousands of very early manuscripts have been discovered, and they all show a remarkable degree of consistency. Despite this large wealth of manuscript evidence, there is not a single piece to support the islamic narrative. Not one. This claim can only be found in islamic apologetics. Should we therefore believe the vast amount of evidence before our eyes, or a claim that doesn't even have a single piece of evidence to back it up? The burden of proof is on muslims to produce evidence of an original Injeel; if they can't, then there is no reason to entertain such a baseless claim.