Objection · Case 10 · Islam
No serious Muslim scholar holds that the Bible was corrupted after Muhammad. Isn’t this a straw man?
One objection from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.
Response
Fair. The after Muhammad view is a popular-level position rather than a scholarly one, and it should be described that way. The scholarly Muslim positions are textual corruption before Muhammad (Ibn Hazm’s view) or interpretive corruption; the manuscript evidence answers the first, and the exegetical burden answers the second. This exhibit exists because the popular version is what you will actually hear in conversation, not because it is the strongest form of the claim.
About this exhibit
This objection is to The response that the corruption came later.
A second response is that Christians altered the text after Muhammad. Fairly put, this keeps the Qur’an consistent by placing the change after its endorsement. The problem is evidential: such a…