Thi is one of the most frequently used "evidence" verses for the Islamic Dilemma because it makes a claim that is so specific and so intimate that it leaves no room for the modern Islamic defense of "general corruption." See also The Obvious as Your Son Dilemma.
Surah 2:146:
"Those unto whom We have given the Scripture recognize as they recognize their sons. But lo! a party of them knowingly conceal the truth."
The Quran claims that the evidence for Muhammad (or the Qibla change) is so clear in the Bible that a Jew or Christian should recognize it as easily as they recognize their own child.
For evidence to be that clear, it must be explicit. It cannot be a vague "hint" or a hidden code. It would have to be names, places, and specific dates.
When we look at the 7th-century manuscripts (which the Quran says they were "reading" in 2:44), we find no such explicit recognition. There is no "Muhammad" in the Torah, and no "Mecca" in the Gospel.
Since the evidence isn't there, the Quran is making a demonstrably FALSE claim about what the People of the Book "KNEW."
This verse is a death blow to the theory that the Bible was already corrupted by the 7th century.
If the Bible had been corrupted or "lost" its original message, the People of the Book would have been confused, not certain. You cannot "recognize your son" in a face that has been surgically altered or replaced by a stranger.
To "recognize" the truth of the Quran based on their Scripture, that Scripture must have been perfectly intact and clear. If it was intact, then we have it today. And if we have it today and it doesn't say what the Quran says it says, the Quran is false.
Note that the verse says they conceal (yaktumūna) the truth.
You conceal something that is currently in your possession. You don't "conceal" a book that was destroyed 300 years ago.
By accusing them of concealment, the Quran admits the textual evidence was present. If the evidence was present and they were just hiding it, then any 7th-century Jew could have opened his Torah and proven Muhammad right.
History shows the Jews of Medina used their Torah to prove Muhammad wrong—which is why the relationship turned violent.
Surah 2:146 says we recognize Muhammad 'as we recognize our own sons.' This means the evidence in our Bible must be unmistakable.
Do you have a son? Do you need a 'hidden code' to know it's him, or is it obvious?
If it's obvious, show me where in the Torah or Gospel it is that obvious.
If you can't find it, then the Quran's claim that we 'know it as our sons' is a false statement.
If the Quran is wrong about what we know from our own book, it cannot be the Word of the God who gave us that book."
By using the "son" analogy, you highlight the absurdity of the Islamic claim. It turns the Bible into a witness that, when called to the stand, remains completely silent on the very thing it is supposed to be shouting from the rooftops.