Counter-Questions for Muslims

When the Answers Fall Apart

What Happens When the Ummah Faces the Questions It Tries to Avoid?

---

📍 Introduction: Turning the Tables

Muslim apologists are trained to ask questions.

• “Where did Jesus say ‘I am God’?”

• “How can three be one?”

• “Why are there so many Bible versions?”

But rarely are they put under the same microscope. When they are, the answers collapse — not because of bias or bigotry, but because of internal contradictions, unverifiable claims, and special pleading.

This post delivers precision-targeted counter-questions — questions that strike at the heart of Islamic theology, history, and textual integrity. These are not insults. They’re invitations to critical thought. But once asked, they cannot be un-asked.

---

❓ 1. If the Qur’an says God’s word cannot be changed, then how were the Torah and Gospel corrupted?

Qur’an 6:115 – “No one can change His words.”
Qur’an 18:27 – “There is no changer of His words.”

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Muslims claim that the earlier scriptures were changed. But the Qur’an says God’s word cannot be changed. That means either:

• The Torah and Gospel weren’t changed, or

• The Qur’an is wrong.

You can’t have it both ways.

---

❓ 2. If the Injeel was a real book revealed to Jesus, where is it?

• No copy.

• No manuscript.

• No historical reference.

• No verse where Jesus is “given a book.”

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Muslims claim the real Injeel was “lost” and that the New Testament is not it. But no one in the 1st century ever mentioned a missing Arabic “book” given to Jesus.
If the Injeel existed, where’s the trail?
If it didn’t, why does Islam claim it did?

---

❓ 3. If Islam is the final religion, why did Allah fail to preserve the earlier ones?

Did Allah fail to protect the Torah and Gospel from corruption?
If so, what makes you believe He succeeded this time?

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

You can't claim God is sovereign and powerful, but also claim He lost control of 75% of His earlier revelations. If God’s previous words got corrupted, why should we trust He preserved the Qur’an?

This question cuts Islam’s credibility off at the root.

---

❓ 4. If Muhammad is the best example for all time, why did he do what would now be considered immoral?

• Married a 6-year-old (Sahih Bukhari 5133)

• Owned slaves (Sahih Muslim 1665)

• Ordered assassinations (Ibn Ishaq 550–551)

• Allowed wife-beating (Qur’an 4:34)

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Defending Muhammad forces Muslims to defend things they reject in every other context.
If these actions are wrong today, they were wrong then too — unless morality changes with time, which would make Islam subjective, not divine.

---

❓ 5. Why does the Qur’an contradict itself?

Examples:

• Did Pharaoh drown or survive? (Compare 10:92 with 28:40)

• Is alcohol good or bad? (Compare 16:67, 2:219, and 5:90)

• Is there compulsion in religion or not? (2:256 vs 9:29)

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Muslims say “abrogation” solves this — that later verses cancel earlier ones.
But that means the Qur’an contains cancelled, obsolete content.
If God is perfect, why couldn’t He get it right the first time?

---

❓ 6. Why is Allah referred to as “We” if He is one?

Allah says: “We created man from a clot” (Qur’an 96:2)
“We gave Moses the Book” (Qur’an 2:87)

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Muslims claim this is the royal we — but Arabic has no such historical usage.
And if God is one person, the use of plural invites confusion, not clarity.

If Christians are ridiculed for the Trinity, why does Allah talk like a triune being?

---

❓ 7. If Islam is a religion of peace, why did its founder lead 29 battles in 10 years?

• Muhammad led military raids, enslaved captives, and imposed jizya on non-Muslims.

• Qur’an 9:29 explicitly commands fighting “those who do not believe.”

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Either:

• Muhammad’s Islam was not peaceful, or

• Islam changed after him — in which case, modern Muslims follow something else.

---

❓ 8. Why are women’s rights so restricted in Islam?

Examples from Sharia:

• Testimony is half a man’s (Qur’an 2:282)

• Inheritance is half a brother’s (Qur’an 4:11)

• Husband can beat wife (Qur’an 4:34)

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Muslims say Islam gave women rights “for its time.”
But then those rules are not eternal.
If they were for 7th century Arabia, they cannot be universal divine commands.

You cannot say, “Islam is timeless” and then say, “It made sense back then.”

---

❓ 9. If Hadiths are so unreliable, how do you know how to pray, fast, or do Hajj?

The Qur’an does not detail:

• How many times to pray

• What words to say in prayer

• How to perform Hajj rituals

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

Rejecting Hadiths means rejecting:

• The entire method of worship

• Most of Sharia

• Islamic history itself

But accepting Hadiths means accepting:

• Child marriage

• Beheadings

• Talking trees and flying horses

You can't have “Sahih” authority when convenient — and disown it when it gets uncomfortable.

---

❓ 10. If Islam is the final revelation, why did it borrow from Judaism, Christianity, and even paganism?

• Jewish laws = in Qur’an and Hadith

• Biblical stories retold (often with errors)

• Pagan rituals like the Kaaba circumambulation preserved

💥 Why It Destroys the Answer:

A final revelation shouldn’t need to plagiarize, modify, or contradict what came before.
It should be new, distinct, and consistent — not a patchwork of repurposed myths.

---

🧠 Final Thought: These Questions Don’t Need Anger — They Need Answers

None of the above questions are personal attacks. They’re logical challenges to a system that claims to be perfect, final, and unchanged. And yet...

Perfect things don’t need excuses. Final revelations don’t need revisions. Unchanged messages don’t need censorship.

When the answers Muslims give require contradiction, circular reasoning, or blind faith, it’s not a defense.
It’s a red flag.

Disclaimer This post critiques Islam as an ideology, doctrine, and historical system — not Muslims as individuals. Every human deserves respect; beliefs do not.