Muslims consider certain Christian texts (Injil) from the 7th century sacred. But a study reveals that the Quran refers to the Syriac Peshitta, identical to the current Gospel. A hard dilemma for Islam.

---

 

Not everyone knows that the Quran recognizes Christian texts as divine scriptures and authentic revelations from God.

But how is that possible? Christian texts explicitly contradict the contents of the Quran, starting with the divinity of Christ, the crucifixion and his resurrection.

The response of Islamic doctrine has always been that the Gospel known today, containing teachings incompatible with Islam, would not be the original one circulated in the 7th century, but would have been modified and corrupted over time.

Two researchers have instead shown that the texts Christians read in the time of Muhammad were exactly the same as those we still read today. This creates a dreadful dilemma: does the Quran value texts that contradict the foundations of Islam?

 

What the Quran says about Christian texts

Let’s take a step back and start from the beginning.

The Quran, the holy book of Islam, in several surahs refers to the Injil, an Arabic term that denotes the Gospel given by God to Jesus (Īsā).

For the Quran and for Muslims, the Injil is an original divine revelation, a holy book, similar to the Torah given to Moses.

The Quran speaks of the Injil as an authentic scripture, a written document available to Christians at the time of Muhammad and which they were to follow as a sacred text, exhorting them to «judge according to what God has revealed to you» (Sura 5:47).

In another passage, the Islamic text reports: «And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming what was before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Injil, in which there is guidance and light» (Sura 5:46).

And again, in surahs 3:3-4 and 5:68 it is reiterated that God revealed the Torah and the Injil before the Quran and that these scriptures have a guiding role for believers.

As already mentioned, Muslims today maintain that when the Quran refers to the Injil it is speaking of Christian texts different from today’s Gospel, which contains texts different from the original, corrupted or altered over time. This is called the doctrine of Tarif.

On the other hand, it would be absurd to claim that the Quran indicated the Gospel as a sacred and divine scripture, in which Jesus is the only son of God, risen and ascended to heaven. Evidently Christians at the time of Muhammad read texts coherent with Islam that did not contain these assertions.

 

The research: the Injil of the Quran is the Syriac Peshitta

As noted by YouTuber Cameron Bertuzzi, in 2017 researchers from North-West University (South Africa), Henk G. Stoker and Paul Derengowski, however contradicted the doctrine of Tarif.

Publishing in the African Online Scientific Information Systems (also here), through a thorough historical and philological investigation the scholars showed that Christians in Arabia in the 7th century owned well-defined Christian texts substantially identical to those used today.

These are the Syriac Peshitta, that is the version of the Gospel in use among Syriac-speaking Christians in the Middle East (Syria, Mesopotamia and Arabia). It is to this that the Quran refers as a sacred and divine scripture, giving it the name “Injil“.

By the 4th century the canon of the Scriptures was already essentially defined but not all Christian communities in the world used exactly the same texts. Although the content was largely similar, regional, linguistic and canonical differences meant that Syriac Christians read one version, Copts in Egypt another, and Latins in the West yet another.

And this leads us to Arabia. At the time of Muhammad, in the early 7th century, Christianity was already present in that region for centuries, brought into the Arabian Peninsula by monks, merchants and missionaries. Jews and Christians were active in Medina and their scriptures were read, taught and debated openly.

 

The Syriac Peshitta is identical to today’s Gospel

The Syriac Peshitta was the dominant version, copied, memorized and preached in the churches from Syria to Arabia. It comprised 22 books of the New Testament, including the four Gospels and the letters of Paul. It excluded only the Second Epistle of Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of John, the Epistle of Jude and the Revelation of John.

Its manuscript tradition is extraordinarily stable, as acknowledged by Bruce Metzger, one of the leading New Testament philologists: «Syriac scribes devoted great care to the transcription of the Peshitta version. There is an extraordinary agreement among manuscripts of every age, there being on average no more than one significant variant per chapter»¹B. Metzger, “The early versions of the New Testament, Clarendon 1977, p. 49.

The theologian Kurt Aland and his philologist wife, Barbara Aland, describe it as «the Syriac version of the New Testament most attested and transmitted in a consistent way»²K. Aland, B. Aland, The text of the New Testament, Eerdmans 1989, p. 194.

The Syriac Peshitta was the official version used by both the Notaries and the Jacobites, the Christian communities that Muhammad encountered.

 

The dilemma for Islam: the Quran points to the Gospel as divine

This discovery radically undermines the doctrine of Tarif and the Islamic narrative about the corruption of the Scriptures.

Here is what scholars state:

«If it is true that the Peshitta is so well attested and preserved, then what the Syriac Christian Church knew of the Gospel in the sixth and seventh centuries of Muhammad’s earthly existence is exactly what Christians know today. It is not something completely different as Muslim apologists would like to make us believe».

They then continue rather incisively:

«Since the Syriac Peshitta was the biblical version that Muhammad recognized during his life, it follows that this version — or any among other similar versions — should be required reading for Muslims, ancient and modern. Consequently, the Bible should constitute the basis of Muslim faith and doctrine. There should be no variation, because God would be the author of both».

We know, however, that the Quran and the Gospel openly contradict each other. If therefore the Peshitta was indeed the Injil cited by the Quran, as scholars believe, this would have enormous consequences and would pose a crucial dilemma for Muslim believers.

It would mean that the text written by Muhammad, under the dictation of Allah, considered the Christian Gospel an authentic revelation, but at the same time contradicted many of its own statements.

Two options would then present themselves for Islamic doctrine:
1) Accept the Peshitta as an authentic divine revelation, admitting the contradiction of the Quran and therefore of the word of God;
2) Reject the Peshitta as a genuine revelation, thus contradicting what the Quran says about it, namely a sacred and divine scripture.

If the Injil has not been altered, then the Quran recognizes as sacred and divine the Gospel that denies its own teachings.

It is fair to note that Stoker and Derengowski are cautious in their conclusions.

They do not assert with absolute certainty that the Syriac Peshitta was the Injil of Muhammad’s contemporaries and what they read. However they maintain that, based on the available evidence, it is by far the most plausible candidate.