Home > Islam's negative effect on the world
The Qur'an was written slowly over 23 years until Mohammed's death. As new things came up, Mohammed received a new revelation. They were also usually tied to what was happening directly in Mohammed's personal life with some ayah which ONLY relate to him:
[ Surah Al-Ahzab, 33:37 (his marriage to Zainab) and Surah At-Tahrim, 66:1-5 (domestic issues) Surah Al-Ahzab, 33:50 grants him special marriage privileges, which are self-serving. These can be seen as tailored to his needs, suggesting it reflects his thoughts rather than eternal divine speech. ]
This indicates that the revelations of the Qur'an are based mostly around Mohammed's life and not predetermined before creation as the eternal word of Allah. This clashes with other Islamic teaching but it opens up a question. If Mohammed was never poisoned, dying early, would more of the Qur'an have been revealed (addressing new circumstances or clarifying existing issues) or would it still remain with the exact amount of information as we have now?
If the answer is yes and there were more surahs to be given had Mohammed lived longer, then the Qur'an is incomplete as there was more revelation of the eternal speech of Allah yet to be given to Mohammed. If the answer is no, and the Qur'an is complete and would have remained unchanged even if Mohammed lived another 10 years, then why is the Qur'an so unclear about its own ending? Why is there no beginning or end to the Qur'an in content? This seems to undermine the Quran's credibility, at best, as a clear book and exposes it as the ramblings of Mohammed, at worst, which he used for his own personal gain.
Either the Qur'an is incomplete and Allah failed to give all of his eternal speech to mankind due to failing to protect the prophet from the people (which he promised to do in Surah 5:67), or the Qur'an is not clear and Allah is a horrible communicator which contradicts his own claims about the clarity of both his speech and the Quran.
If we look at the ending of 5, 9, or 110 which most scholars agree is the final surah of the Quran, there is no clear ending given in any of them. This indicates there is no clear ending to the Quran. Let's compare the Qur'an with the bible.
The Bible has a narrative structure with a clear beginning and end (Genesis to Revelation, from creation to new creation) with a consistent message and logical ordering of the books.
In contrast, the Qur'an is organized by surah length, not chronology, with Surah Al-Fatiha (1) at the beginning and Surah Al-Nas (114) at the end, lacking a linear narrative or even a consistent sorting mechanism as it is inconsistent in even surah length based sorting (surah 26 is the 2nd longest, surah 37 is the 5th longest surah and surah 56 being the 21st longest surah for example, almost none of the surahs actually match the stated sorting method).
This lack of a definitive narrative arc might suggest that it lacks a planned completion, potentially due to Muhammad's death interrupting the process or that Mohammed had never planned an ending to begin with.
Also, several historical accounts and hadiths suggest parts of the Qur'an may be missing. A notable example is Aisha's claim, reported in Abu Ubaid's Kitab Fada'il-al-Quran, that Surah 33 (Al-Ahzab) originally had 200 verses but was reduced to 73 in Uthman's compilation. Another hadith from Ubayy ibn Ka'b suggests Surah 33 was once as long as Surah Al-Baqarah (286 verses). These accounts, found in sources like Musnad Ahmad and Sahih Bukhari, indicate potential loss, possibly due to the deaths of memorizers in battles like Yamama or the compilation process.
Other examples include claims of missing verses on stoning for adultery, mentioned in hadiths but not in the current Quran, and references to lost surahs, such as one about "two valleys full of riches." Critical scholarship, such as studies on the Sana'a manuscripts, shows textual variants as well.
All of this together shows that the Qur'an is incomplete in content and thus not the word of God to be trusted according to Islam's own standards.
Premise 1: If the Qur'an were the complete, eternal speech of Allah, it would be structurally coherent, independent of human compilation, and free of personal bias toward one individual.
Premise 2: The Qur'an lacks a clear narrative structure, was compiled by humans after Muhammad's death with evidence of missing or abrogated verses, and includes content specific to his personal life.
Premise 3: A text reliant on human effort, showing signs of incompleteness, and reflecting one man's circumstances cannot fully claim divine perfection or eternity.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Qur'an is not the complete, eternal speech of Allah but a product influenced by Muhammad's life and human intervention.
Premise 1: If a text is the eternal word of Allah, it must be complete, clear, and independent of human contingencies.
Premise 2: The Qur'an is incomplete, unclear, and contingent on Mohammed's life.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Qur'an is not the eternal word of Allah.
Premise 1: If the Qur'an is the eternal word of Allah, then it must be complete and clear.
Premise 2: The Qur'an is either incomplete or unclear.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Qur'an is not the eternal word of Allah.
Likely Response:
Surah 5:3 was given during the farewell address and shows that the Qur'an was complete.
"Today I have perfected your religion for you, completed My blessing upon you, and chosen as your religion islam"
Muslims claim that Sahih Muslim, Book 15, Hadith 159 links Surah 5:3 to the farewell sermon, dated to 9 Dhul-Hijjah 10 AH (March 632 CE). Also, Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith 3366 ties Surah 110 to the Prophet's awareness of his impending death, suggesting it as the last Surah.
This has some strange details though, if the rest of Surah 5:2-4 is about the same topic, as is most of 5:3, then this wouldn't make any sense to say JUST this section of the ayah is from the farewell address and none of the rest of the content from surah 5 is.
Why not make Surah 5:3 the last surah by itself? Why is it awkwardly sandwiched between dietary laws? Surely, if it was the last word revealed by Allah during the final hajj, then it should have merited its own Surah. Especially since Surah 110 is so short and written after 5. This would make more sense to make, 5:3 Surah 115 which would both show Allah's divine providence as the shortest surah would also be the last one made (which one would expect if an all-knowing, most-wise being created a book).
Here is a better version of 5:3 as its own standalone surah:
This is the final revelation from Allah, the most merciful, the all wise
Today I have completed your religion. Sealing it, free from corruption. O Messenger, you have faithfully delivered all that was given to you of the book. Cursed is anyone who changed the words of this book.
Those who follow the words of this book will live more righteously in this life and enjoy the garden from which rivers flow in the hereafter. Allah, the most merciful, the all-wise
I wrote this in 3 minutes while walking home. Why couldn't Allah have been as clear or more clear than this made up surah?
If 5:3 was a late revelation meant to signal Islam's completion, its placement near the Surah's start, amid earlier verses, undermines its finality. A truly "perfected" religion might have a clearer structural marker, like the Bible's Revelation concluding with warnings against alteration (Revelation 22:18-19) and a prayer for Jesus to come back. Instead, it sits amid dietary rulings, followed by earlier verses on unrelated topics, suggesting a humanly arranged text rather than a divinely fixed one.
Surah Al-Ma'idah begins with instructions on lawful and unlawful foods (5:1-5), and 5:3 fits this context by addressing dietary rulings: "Prohibited to you are dead animals, blood… but whoever is forced by necessity…" before declaring, "This day I have perfected for you your religion." Scholars like Al-Tabari suggest 5:3 was placed here to emphasize the completion of dietary laws and Islam's core framework, tying it to the Surah's opening focus on obligations.
But this weakens the context of 5:3 being the final revelation which seals the Quran. As the context it is used in suggests not finality of the entire book but of this one topic, what is and isn't halal.
The verse's focus on dietary laws and pilgrimage rites, rather than a comprehensive closure of all Islamic teachings, limits its scope. If further guidance (e.g., Surah 110 or 9) was needed, the religion's framework was still developing. Surah 9:5 and, 9:29, which some classical scholars (e.g., Ibn Kathir) say abrogated earlier peaceful verses.
Muslims may argue that 5:3 refers to the perfection of Islam's core principles (e.g., monotheism, prayer), not every detail, and that abrogation refines, not contradicts, the religion. This just doesn't make sense. Ongoing revelations and textual changes suggest an evolving, not finalized, system.
Considering the timeline of Quranic revelations, Surah 5:3's declaration that the religion of Islam was completed appears inconsistent with subsequent events. It was followed by the revelation of Surah 110 (An-Nasr), widely regarded as the final complete Surah, and Surah 9 (At-Tawbah), which includes abrogating verses like 9:5 (the "Verse of the Sword") that altered earlier teachings. These later revelations suggest that Islamic doctrine continued to evolve after Surah 5:3.
Since 5:3 seems to predate Surah 110 and parts of Surah 9 (e.g., 9:5, revealed in 9 AH but applied later), its claim of perfection is questionable, as further guidance was needed. The non-chronological placement of 5:3 obscures this timeline, suggesting a lack of deliberate closure. This at least makes it unclear, which as stated earlier, disproves Islam.
The reliance on companions to arrange verses post-Muhammad, as with 5:3's placement, reinforces the argument that the Qur'an reflects human effort, not an eternal, unchanging divine speech. Reports of textual variants (e.g., Sana'a manuscripts) or lost verses (Aisha's claim about Surah 33 in Abu Ubaid's Kitab Fada'il-al-Quran) further question divine inspiration.