The Phantom Gospel
What Muslims Really Think About the Gospels
Introduction: Belief in a Book That Doesn’t Exist
Islam demands belief in “the Gospel” (Injil) revealed to Jesus (Isa). But when Christians point to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, Muslims say:
“Not those Gospels. The real one was lost long ago.”
So let’s get this straight:
-
Muslims must believe in a Gospel...
-
…but not the ones we have.
-
The Gospel was revealed…
-
…but not preserved.
-
And Jesus taught it…
-
…but never wrote it down.
It’s theological sleight-of-hand—affirming a book no one has ever seen, then using that to reject the ones that actually exist.
1. The Claim: “Jesus Received a Book from Heaven”
Islam teaches:
Allah revealed the Injil to `Isa, just as He revealed the Torah to Moses and the Qur’an to Muhammad.
But unlike the Qur’an:
-
There is no textual fragment of the Injil
-
There is no manuscript in any language
-
There is no quotation of it by Muhammad
-
There is no claim by Jesus in any document that he wrote or received a book
The Islamic concept of the Injil doesn’t match historical reality. It’s a theological construct designed to affirm prophethood while rejecting the New Testament.
2. The Standard Rebuttal: “The Gospels Are Not Revelation”
Islam Q&A insists:
“The four Gospels were written after Jesus’ ascension and are not revelations from God.”
This is partly true—they are not dictations like Muslims claim the Qur’an is. But here’s the problem:
-
The Qur’an never defines what “Injil” is
-
The Qur’an never says Jesus was given a physical book
-
No first-century source—Christian, Roman, Jewish—ever refers to a literal Injil book
So Muslims believe in a Gospel that:
-
Never existed in written form during Jesus' life
-
Was never referenced by Muhammad
-
Isn’t quoted by any early Christians
-
Can’t be identified today
And yet this invisible Gospel is used to invalidate the ones that have been preserved for 2,000 years.
3. The Historical Bait-and-Switch
Islam Q&A quotes:
-
Ibn Hazm
-
Ibn Taymiyyah
-
Encyclopaedia articles
-
Secondary legends from 300 years later
Their argument:
“The New Testament is full of contradictions and was written long after Jesus. So it can’t be from God.”
But this is intellectual double-dealing. Why?
Because the Quran itself:
-
Was compiled decades after Muhammad’s death
-
Was preserved without original manuscripts
-
Contains variant readings (Qira’at) and even missing verses (per Hadith)
-
Was transmitted by oral tradition, just like the Gospels
If the NT is dismissed for being post-event, compiled by others, and not directly revealed—the Qur’an should be rejected by the same criteria.
4. Transmission and Translation — The Islamic Double Standard
“The Gospels were translated, edited, and passed around without protection. Therefore, they’re unreliable.”
Okay, then let’s ask:
-
Was the Quran ever translated? (Yes.)
-
Were Qur’anic variants normalized? (Yes — by Uthman.)
-
Were early recitations lost? (Yes — per Hadith.)
-
Were Islamic Hadiths compiled centuries later? (Yes — and they form half of Islamic law.)
So why is translation + time a disqualifier for the New Testament but not for the Qur’an or Hadith?
Simple: special pleading.
5. The Myth of Early Christian Disunity as Discredit
They claim:
“The first 300 years of Christianity were chaotic, secretive, and fragmented.”
Yes—and that’s exactly what happens to movements under persecution.
But:
-
Christianity left behind thousands of manuscripts
-
We have quotations of the Gospels from early Church Fathers as early as the 2nd century
-
Despite differences, the core content of the Gospels is uniform worldwide
-
The canon of the New Testament was functionally stable by the late 2nd century
Meanwhile, Islam:
-
Was politically dominant within two decades of Muhammad’s death
-
Still saw violent disputes about Qur’an preservation (e.g., Ibn Mas'ud vs. Uthman)
-
Lost many verses (see Hadith: stoning verse, suckling verse, etc.)
Chaos doesn’t prove corruption. And Islamic history is just as chaotic.
6. The Core Issue: A Book With No Author vs. Books With Eyewitnesses
Islam claims:
“The Gospel was revealed to Jesus, but no one has it now.”
But what do we have?
-
Four Gospels written within the lifetimes of eyewitnesses
-
Consistent testimony about Jesus’ death, resurrection, and teachings
-
Manuscripts older than anything we have for the Qur’an
-
External sources confirming Jesus' crucifixion (Tacitus, Josephus, etc.)
And Islam offers…
-
A Quran that came 600 years later
-
A claim of a lost book never cited
-
A denial of the crucifixion based on one vague verse (Qur’an 4:157)
-
And no original Gospel, manuscript, or quotation from Jesus
Conclusion: Faith in Fiction, Rejection of Fact
Islamic theology demands belief in an Injil it can’t demonstrate, and uses this belief to disqualify the Gospels that history preserves.
The Gospels:
-
Are rooted in time, space, and human testimony
-
Were quoted, copied, and preached from the start
-
Stand in continuity with Old Testament prophecy and New Testament fulfillment
The Islamic "Injil":
-
Has no author
-
Has no manuscript
-
Has no historical footprint
-
And is only referenced after it was supposedly lost
So what do Muslims think of the Gospels?
“We believe in the Gospel. Just not the one you have. We believe in the real one. The one we’ve never read. The one no one has. The one that vanishes the moment we try to define it.”
That’s not reverence. That’s theological vapor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------About the Author
Mauao Man is a blog created by a New Zealand writer who believes in following the evidence wherever it leads. From history and religion to culture and society, Mauao Man takes a clear, critical, and honest approach — challenging ideas without attacking people. Whether exploring the history of Islam in New Zealand, the complexities of faith, or the contradictions in belief systems, this blog is about asking the hard questions and uncovering the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment