Historical Errors in the Quran

Mary as part of the Trinity

Mainstream Christian doctrine has never held Mary to be a part of the Trinity. The Qur'an, however, apparently implies as much, leading some to conclude that Muhammad misunderstood Christian doctrine.

This alternative formulation of the trinity is present even more clearly in Quran 5:72-75, which makes no mention of the holy spirit and takes measure to disprove the divinity of Jesus and his mother by pointing out that they, like normal human beings, also ate food.

A common interpretation advocated by Muslim scholars today is that this refers to a fringe Arab Christian sect known as the Collyridians. However, this sect were only mentioned in a 4th century CE book on heresies. The most plausible alternative interpretation proposed so far relates these verses to a Byzantine theological dispute and contemporary war propaganda (for details, see the Qur'anic Trinity section of the article Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature).

Mary as Miriam

Mary the mother of Jesus was born in the first century BCE and was not related to Moses and his family whose story is set 1500 years earlier. Miriam was the sister of Moses and Aaron and daughter of Amram (Imran). The Quran appears to confuse these two characters, as it describes Mary, the mother of Jesus, as the "Sister of Aaron" and her mother as the "wife of Imran" in context where the "Imran" being discussed is evidently Miriam's father. A possible source of this confusion is the fact that both Miriam and Mary had the same name in Arabic, or were at least similar enough sounding for the original distinction to have been lost or neglected (the word used in either case in the Quran is the same and is pronounced maryam).

Some modern academic scholars cite evidence that this could be a case of typology (deliberate literary allusion between characters - see main article). This may be the best explanation, although the verses would still be misleading as historical statements. Sahih Muslim 25:5326 seeks to explain the coincidence based on alleged customary forms of address (to explain "sister of Aaron") or naming customs (to explain why Imran named his daughter Mary), depending on interpretation of the hadith. Either interpretation only reduces part of the coincidence. Even if a naming custom could increase the odds that this father-daughter pair would share names with some earlier biblical family, a further coincidence would still be required if her father happened to be named the same as the father (Imran) in the particular biblical family alluded to when his daughter is addressed as "sister of Aaron". Another attempted explanation is that simply by coincidence this Imran actually had a son called Aaron as well as a daughter named Mary.

Ezra as the son of God in Jewish doctrine

Historically, Judaism has been a strict form of monotheism. The Quran, by contrast, describes the Jews as practitioners of polytheism by stating that they hold Uzair (Ezra) to be the son of God. This is compared directly with the Christian doctrine which hold Jesus to be the son of God. This appears to be a confusion resulting from conflating the alternative senses in which Jewish and Christian theologians have employed and understood the word "son".

The afterlife in the Torah

The Quran states that the warnings of hell are in the most ancient of scriptures, listing Moses's (elsewhere listed as the Torah, e.g. Quran 5:44) and the prophet Abraham's.

However, despite the 'warning' being essentially the most important point of the scriptures, alongside worship of one God, and is mentioned many times in the Quran - the Torah itself contains no references to hell (or heaven). Instead a highly ambiguous vision of the afterlife in 'Sheol' is provided that includes both Jews and non-Jews, that does not come close to matching any Islamic description.^[1] While apologists argue the Torah has been corrupted, this corruption would have been enormous, happening across many different people in the community and different time periods to change such a fundamental aspect of the religion, with no clear reason as to why.

This apologetic view also goes against scholarly consensus that ideas of rewards for the good and punishment for the evil only developed during Second-Temple Judaism, found in scriptures written centuries post the torah; particularly due to its interactions with the Hellenistic Greeks, and the theological problems of it's righteous members (Jews) dying and facing oppression for their belief for no reward.^[2] As Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman, who wrote a book on the subject Journeys to Heaven and Hell,^[3] stated in an article for Time Magazine.

There is also no known scripture given to Abraham.

Massive wall of iron

See: Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance The Qur'an presents a version of the Syrian legend of Alexander the Great as a great king who helps a tribe of people build a massive wall of iron between two mountains. The Quran then states, along with the hadith, that this wall and the tribes it traps will remain in place until the Day of Judgement. Modern satellites and near comprehensive exploration of the Earth's surface, however, have yet to reveal any trace of such massive structure.

The trumpet blowing in Quran 18:99 is referred to many other times in the Qur'an as happening on judgement day (see Quran 27:87, Quran 69:13 and Quran 39:68), with the word 'yawm' يوم being used in Q18:99 and 18:100, meaning on that day^[4] specifically.

Another passage confirms that this wall was supposedly still intact and that its future opening will be associated with other apocalyptic events.

See the full context of the other verses as mentioned above with the trumpet blowing on judgement day:

Dhul-Qarnayn/Alexander the great as a monotheist

We find in Surah Al-Kahf, (Quran 18:83-101), a story about a powerful prophet of Allah 'Dhul-Qarnayn' (meaning 'The Two horned one'), who along with other tasks, builds the massive wall of iron mentioned above. This is a retelling of a common antiquity story based of Alexander the Great.^[5] However, this is not the real/historical Alexander, who was a polytheist with no relation to the Judaeo-Christian religion,^[6] but rather a legendary version later recast as monotheist by Christians, who's connections and evidence for this can be seen in the main article.

David invented coats of mail

Historians commonly credited the invention of coat mail (not to be confused with scale armor) to the Celts in the 3rd century BCE.^[7]. Mail has also been found in a 5th century BCE Scythian grave, and there is a cumbersome Etruscan pattern mail artifact from the 4th century BCE.^[8] The nature of coat mail is such that it should persist for several millennia, and such advantageous military technologies would spread rapidly, so it is unlikely that coat mail would have originated much earlier, undiscovered by archaeologists. While, older translations of the Bible mention Goliath and David wearing a "coat of mail" in 1 Samuel 17:5 and 17:38 respectively, this is a well known mistranslation for a word meaning armor in general.

In the Qur'an, by contrast, David in the 10th century BCE is taught by Allah how to make long coats of mail (sabighatin سَٰبِغَٰتٍ^[9]) after Allah made the iron (al hadid ٱلْحَدِيدَ) malleable for him and told him to measure the chainmail links (as-sardi ٱلسَّرْدِ) thereof.^[10] A second passage adds that people should be thankful for this knowledge which has been passed down since David and protects them today.

Chainmail seems to have been familiar to the early Muslims. Muhammad is narrated as using a metaphor of two coats of iron (junnataani min hadeedin جُنَّتَانِ مِنْ حَدِيدٍ), one owned by a generous person and the other by a miser in whose coat every ring (halqat حَلْقَةٍ^[11]) becomes close together (Sahih Muslim 5:2229). Ibn Kathir in his tafsir for 34:11 has narrations in which Mujahid and Ibn Abbas use that same arabic word meaning rings (الحلقة) to explain the Quranic verse^[12].

Crucifixions in ancient Egypt

The first historical reference to crucifixion as a method of execution is from 500 BCE, when the technique began being used in several middle eastern cultures. The Qur'an, by contrast, tells of crucifixions at the time of Moses (approximately 1500 BCE) as well as Joseph (approximately 2000 BCE).

Ancient Egypt has been subjected to extensive study by archaeologists. While there exists hieroglyphic evidence of people impaled through upright stakes in ancient Egypt, this remains distinct from the palm-tree crucifixions described in the Quran, as palm trees are of too great girth to be used to vertically impale an individual.

The same verb for crucifixion is used in Quran 4:157 regarding Jesus. Two other verses, Quran 38:12 and Quran 89:8, use another word to call Pharaoh "owner of the pegs" or "stakes". Sometimes this is claimed to refer to impalement and even mistranslated as such. However, the context in Quran 89:6-11 shows that it refers to unspecified rock-hewn monuments (most likely columned temples, obelisks or possibly even the pyramids).

Moreover, there is no ancient Egyptian evidence of cross amputation (punitive removal of a single hand and foot on alternate sides). It seems that here again a contemporary punitive practice has been transferred in the Quran to ancient Egypt. A parallel using the same Arabic words occurs in Quran 5:33, which commands crucifixion or cross amputation among a range of punishment options (both of which became part of Islamic jurisprudence). In the exceptionally cruel combination of both punishments put in the mouth of Pharaoh (see also Quran 7:124 and Quran 26:49), the victim would need to be fastened to the palm tree and / or nailed through the remaining two extremities.

Professor Sean W Anthony notes this anachronism and why it may have occurred when asked about it in his Reddit r/AcademicQuran AMA.

Samarians in ancient Egypt

The Qu'ran states that Moses dealt with a Samarian during his time. However the Samarians did not exist until well over half a millennium after Moses is supposed to have existed.

Oxford Bibliographies (an academic website) says the following:

The likely root of the Quranic confusion is the story in the Bible, Hosea 8:5-8 or 1 Kings 12:25-29 where there is mentioned a golden calf (or two of them) created in Samaria after the time of Solomon. One modern perspective holds that the Qur'an might be referring to Zimri, son of Salu (Numbers 25:14). However, the Quranic character is referred to three times in Quran 20:85-88 as l-sāmiriyu with the definite article, "the Samiri", so this is a descriptive title rather than a proper name.

The singular Pharaoh

Geographically, the Coptic land of Egypt is adjacent to Arabia. Thus, most Arabs were aware of the preservation method applied by the ancient Egyptian to their pharaohs. Pharaohs were preserved intact using methods such as salt to dry the body (hence, salt in the body of Ramesses II does not suggest that he drowned in the dead sea). There were many pharaohs from numerous dynasties who were preserved in this way. The Qur'an, by contrast, only speaks of "Pharaoh" (fir'awn) singularly, as a proper noun without the definite article, suggesting that its author was unaware of the multiplicity of pharaohs.

Pharoah as a name and not a title

Just like the Bible, the Qur'an contains the story of Moses in ancient Egypt where he is the main antagonist and the ruler of Egypt. Both use the respective name 'pharoah' (fir'awn in Arabic)^[13], however in the Qur'an the word is used as a person's name and not a title as it should be.

The term “Pharaoh,” or parʿo, means “Great Palace/house” in ancient Egyptian, and although he word came to be used metonymically for the Egyptian king under the New Kingdom (starting in the 18th dynasty, c. 1539–c. 1292 BCE), and by the 22nd dynasty (c. 943–c. 746 BCE) it had been adopted as an epithet of respect, but it was never the king’s formal title though.^[14] Silverstein (2012) notes that it is an idiosyncratic Biblical usage to refer to the ruler of Egypt in this way – as gives an example just as one nowadays might say that “the White House” has issued a statement when referring to the US president.^[15]

The Bible understands “Pharaoh” to be a regal title while the Qurʾān takes Firʿawn to be a more sharply defined historical character.^[16] Pharoah is not used with the definite article 'al'/the for 'the pharaoh', as it is always used for singular specific kings correctly (see: mentions of King on QuranCorpus), which most official translations reflect (though Ali Ahmed and Muhammad Sarwar add 'the' in).

To show how odd this is with a more commonly used example of 'king', for example, take the following verse:

Would be changed to:

Instead of 'the king said..'

Gabriel Said Reynolds notes this, as does Sean W Anthony on Twitter who also explains his reasoning when asked; It's a relatively simple inference. The Qur'an only calls the enemy of Moses "Pharoah" and *never* calls him the "pharoah of Egypt", "one of the pharoahs", etc. Also one has the phrase آل فرعون like آل موسى, etc. This is consistent w/ usage of "Pharoah" as a name in hadith, too.

To take another verse we see where a singular noun 'lord' (rabbi) is used without the definite particle 'al', it is followed by (of) the worlds (l-ʿālamīna) to designate the title.

If replaced with another title like 'Queen' in Q43:46 we get the odd 'Certainly We sent Moses with Our signs to Queen and his elite… '

The idea that this is a mistake has further support by the fact that some prominent Christian Preachers post-bible but pre-Islam like Gregory of Nyssa (d. 394) make the same mistake.^[17] It is also sometimes written this way in the Syriac bible (the Peshitta) in Acts 7:13, believed to be published 2nd century CE.^[18]

Nabatean rock tombs at al-Hijr as homes and palaces from before the time of Pharaoh

The Qur'an frequently lists destroyed peoples of the past, particularly the peoples of Noah, Lot, Pharaoh's army, Midian, Aad and its successor, Thamud. The destruction of Thamud after they disbelieved their prophet Salih is mentioned many times, either by an earthquake Quran 7:78 or a thunderous blast (for example Quran 54:31).

Its destruction is also alluded to by a believer from the family of Pharaoh:

The companies / factions (l-aḥzābu) is a term used collectively for the list of destroyed cities also in Quran 38:12-14.

Thamud is a term used by experts for a people or peoples of a particular region over a number of centuries (8th century BCE to the 4th century CE), but the Qur'an speaks only of a particular destruction of Thamud after the warnings of their prophet Salih went unheeded. It describes them as the builders of well known palaces and homes, skillfully carved from the mountains, clarified in the Quran and hadith as a place in Arabia known as al Hijr (the rocky tract), or Mada'in Salih today.

The errors in the Quran here are two-fold: It is now known that these were actually elaborately carved tombs, not homes or palaces, and that they were made by the Nabateans from the 2nd century BCE to the 2nd century AD, not before the time of the Pharaohs^[19]. Petra in Jordan was the Nabateans' more famous city before al Hijr. There are over 100 tombs at al-Hijr, some very large, and many of them small, believed even by a 14th Century CE Arab traveller to contain the bones of the people of Thamud in their houses.^[20]. Nabatean inscriptions forbid opening the tombs, reusing them or moving the bodies. The town of al-Hegra where the people lived some distance from the surrounding rock tombs was built of mud-brick and stone.^[21]

The Quran says Thamud carved palaces from its plains, and homes from its mountains:

These ruins were well known to Muhammad's listeners:

Al-Hijr is widely accepted as this location. It is also mentioned once by name in Quran 15:80-83 ("the companions of al-Hijr") and its description and destruction matches that for Thamud.

Al-Hijr is also identified in hadiths as the "al Hijr, land of Thamud" (al hijr ardi Thamudi الْحِجْرِ أَرْضِ ثَمُودَ):

Countable currency in ancient Egypt

Surah Yusuf mentions that the caravan that rescued the eponymous prophet from the pit sold him to an Egyptian "for a low price, a few dirhams". Leaving aside the fact that dirham^[24] coins did not exist in ancient Egypt, a more fundamental problem is that the price is indicated as having been some kind of discreetly countable currency: darāhima maʿdūdatin ("dirhams counted"). The word maʿdūdatin occurs throughout the Quran denoting something discreetly numbered, for example "[Fasting for] a limited number of days" in Quran 2:184. Thus, it is not describing a weight of valuable material, but a countable currency. Such a thing did not exist in ancient Egypt. Rather, there were stone weights, particularly the denben, for measuring amounts of precious metals and to price other goods that could be barter traded, but not itself nor units of metal used as a means of exchange.^[25] Professor Sean W. Anthony notes this anachronism in this Reddit r/AcademicQuran AMA.

The Exodus of the Israelites in Egypt

In various passages the Quran narrates at length the story of Moses and the plagues striking Egypt, the captivity of the children of Israel, and their escape in the Exodus. There is even a glorious pre-history alluded to such that they were kings (mulūkan, compare with mulūka in Quran 27:34) and had extraordinary possessions (Quran 5:20). Historians consider that there is no historical evidence in support of the Exodus events as described, though some theorize that a historical kernal of the Egyptian control over Canaan in the late Bronze age and early Iron age served as an inspiration for the stories. The academic view on the history of ancient Israel and Judah is converging on their emergence within the central hill country of Canaan in the early Iron age, a time of small settlements and lacking signs of violent takeover, but rather a revolution in lifestyle.

The Israelites inherit Egypt as well as Israel/Palestine

Along with the traditional story of the Exodus, Nicolai Sinai^[26] notes in his paper “Inheriting Egypt: The Israelites and the Exodus in the Meccan Qurʾān”, the Qur'an has many verses that unequivocally state that the Israelites took over the land of pharaoh and his followers, i.e. Egypt (which many traditional Islamic scholars have agreed with).^[27]

That the Israelites take over the land of Pharaoh rather than migrating elsewhere is also implied by the end of the brief Moses pericope in:^[28]

Similarly, the Moses narrative in Q 28 is preceded by the following summary:^[29]

Also Sinai remarks:

He notes that starting with the earlier Meccan Quran, there are no references whatsoever to an Exodus, with no indication that Moses lead the Israelites out of captivity.^[30] The only purpose of the sea in the story appears to be to set a trap for the Egyptians to drown them.^[31]

Later verses imply that only after taking the Pharaoh and his people's land, they eventually settled in another land.^[32] The Qurʾān’s Blessed Land would appear to fuse Egypt, the Sinai, and Palestine into one sacred landscape that is understood to provide the setting for biblical history and all of which, it seems, the Israelites came to inherit.^[33]

While as mentioned above, there was no evidence the Israelites came from Egypt, who never mention the event,^[34] this adds another layer of historical difficulty of the Jews actually taking over Egypt having no historical or archaeological evidence for what would be a momentous event where we would expect to see it.

This interpretation was first noticed in Western scholarship by orientalist Aloys Sprenger in 1869, who attributed it to a supposed simple mistake by Prophet Muhammad.^[35] However, Sinai notes a clear reason for this repacking of biblical material to suit different theological concerns, relating Muhmmad's immediate life. Primarily in the Meccan period of the Qur'an before banishment to Medina, Muhammad aligning with principle of istikhlāf, understood as a general rule of God’s compensatory intervention in the world in this context, i.e. the followers of god will be given the lands and property of the unbelievers who will be destroyed.^[36] There are consistent stories told that god will intervene with a supernatural destruction to those who reject monotheism after a call from a prophet, with the so-called 'punishment stories' dominating here, and direct references that this will happen to the Meccans,^[37] in line with the principle of messenger uniformitarianism.^[38] And the true believers will survive and inherit their land,^[39] which this story seeks to validate as part of a repeated pattern in history. However in later parts of the Qurʾān we see that actual events followed a different course: the Qur'anic community was “expelled” from its “homes” (Q 3:195 and elsewhere) and forced to “emigrate” (hājara) to Medina^[40] - who Muhammad now identifies his followers with the Israelites leaving Egypt, and comes up against Jewish traditions who recognize this story - with many Meccan verses extended and undergoing revisions during this period.^[41] Critics contend this creative adaption of biblical material to suit current needs, has simply added another historical inaccuracy into the Qur'an.

Noah's worldwide flood

The Quran contains a version of the worldwide-flood story widespread in ancient near-Eastern mythology and most famously found in the Bible. Since geological evidence suggests such a flood never took place,^[42] some modern Muslim scholars have reinterpreted the account in the Quran as referring to a more limited, local flood. Key elements in the tale, however, militate against this rereading. Elsewhere in the Quran whenever the heavens and earth are mentioned together, it means in their entirety. In this story waters are released from both of them.

Another such detail is the storage of "two of each kind" of animal aboard the ship, since it is not clear what purpose this would serve if the flood were local. Similarly, the purpose of the boat itself appears unclear in this reading - as with the ample warning time that Noah was given, he and his family could have simply evacuated the area that was to be flooded. The relevant passage also states plainly that nothing, not even a tall mountain, could save an individual from drowning on that day except for Allah - this seems to contradict the idea that individuals and animals could have escaped the flood simply by evacuating the flooded area. Noah is recorded praying to God, "O my Lord! Leave not of the Unbelievers [kuffar], a single one on Earth!" - the flood is an answer to this prayer, which likewise suggests that the flood described is a global flood that drowns all those not chosen by Allah to persist aboard the ark.

Not to mention all major traditional Islamic scholars, who dedicated their lives to studying the meaning of the Quran, unanimously took the language in these verses to mean referring to a global flood, including (but certainly not limited to) Al-Jalalayn / Al-Mahalli and Al-Suyuti, Ibn ‘Abbâs, Ibn Kathir, Al-Tabari, Muqatil ibn Sulayman, Al-Razi and Al-Qurtubi etc.^[43]

Flood waters boiled from an oven

The Qur'an further describes the flood waters as boiling from an oven. There is no scientific nor historical evidence for a large flood of this nature. This element is not found even in more ancient versions of the story (Epic of Gilgamesh, Atra hasis, and Ziusudra). Its ultimate origin appears to be a highly tenuous rabbinical exegesis in the Babylonian Talmud, based on a word in an unrelated verse that means heat or wrath.^[44]

Note that in his translation, Yusuf Ali mistranslates the Aramaic loan word for the oven (alttannooru ٱلتَّنُّورُ)^[45] as "fountains". The Arabic verb translated "gushed forth" (fara فَارَ) means "boiled" in the context of water in a cooking pot^[46], as well as in the other verse where it is used, Quran 67:7.

Noah's ark holding every species

Part of the legend of Noah's Ark is that a pair of every living species was stored on board. Modern science has revealed, however, that there are over a hundred thousand species of animals including penguins, polar bears, koala bears, and kangaroos that live spread across the entire planet and each of which require different climates, habitats, and diets. These discoveries appear to render the idea that all animals could have been kept on board a single ship impossible.

Arabian idols from the time of Noah

Five gods from the time of Noah are mentioned in one verse. Strangely, according to Ibn Abbas these happened to be idols worshipped by Arab tribes at the time of Muhammad. It is far fetched even on the Quran's own terms to place Arab idols back in the time of Noah, not least since all the disbelievers of Noah's time were supposedly destroyed by the flood.

John the Baptist's original name

The name "John" comes from the Hebrew name Yohanan. Several figures in the Old Testament bore this name. The name has also appeared throughout history. There existed a high priest named Johanan in the 3rd century BCE and a ruler named John Hyrcanus who died in 104 BC. These people existed before John the Baptist, who was a contemporary of Jesus. The Qur'an, by contrast, asserts that nobody before John the Baptist (Yahya in Arabic) bore his name.

The Quranic verse seems to be a distorted echo of the naming of John the Baptist in the New Testament:

Supernatural destruction of cities

The Quran state that outside the vicinity of Arabia there existed cities and tribes destroyed by Allah for rejecting his messengers and Islam. In each specific example presented in the Qur'an (the people of A'ad, Thamud, Midian, Lut (Lot), and the Pharoah's army), the destruction of the disbelievers is sudden and total. Archaeological research, by contrast, has revealed that historical cities and tribes were only gradually ruined by natural disasters, famine, wars, migration, or neglect, often taking years or decades to unfold. In this respect, the Quran appears to have adopted and adapted contemporary Arabian myths regarding the destruction of neighboring cities, some of which may not have existed.

In the Qur'an, the people of Thamud are killed instantly by an earthquake Quran 7:78 or thunderous blast Quran 11:67, Quran 41:13-17, Quran 51:44, Quran 69:5. The people of A'ad are killed by a fierce wind that blew for 7 days Quran 41:13-16,Quran 46:24-35,Quran 51:41, Quran 69:6-7. The people of Midian (Midyan) are killed overnight by an earthquake Quran 7:91, Quran 29:36. The towns of Lot (Lut) are destroyed by a storm of stones from the sky Quran 54:32, Quran 29:34. The actual locations of these towns or tribes is unknown. Midian in particular was a wide geographical desert region rather than a particular location or city, which makes archaeological investigation difficult.

Critics have also asked why it is that various other polytheistic cultures worldwide did not encounter similar fates as those outlined in the Quran, especially if there is 'no change in the way of Allah' (Quran 33:62)

The suddenness of Allah's punishment is stressed repeatedly in Surah al-A'raf:

Humans lived for hundreds of years

The oldest verified human life was a little over 120 years. Based on fossil records and testing on human remains, anthropologists have concluded that human life spans are increasing rather than decreasing in both the long- and short- run. By contrast, the Qur'an states that Noah lived for almost 1,000 years. The idea of humans living for hundreds of years in the past is accompanied by the many hadiths, including accounts in Sahih Bukhari, which describe Adam as being 90 feet tall. The general doctrine appears to be that ancient humans were both gigantic as well as long-living.

Ancient Mosque in Jerusalem

Muslim scholars maintain that a long extant, ancient mosque was present in Jerusalem during Muhammad's life time. Historical research has, however, found this not to be the case.^[47]

This was also not the furthest place of Abrahamic monotheistic worship at the time of Muhammad.^[48]

Hāmān in ancient Egypt

The Quran places a man called Hāmān (هامان) as an enemy of the jews being a court official, military commander, and high priest of the Pharoah in ancient Egypt in the time of Moses. A man also called Hāmān הָמָן with similar characteristics, also appears in the biblical Book of Esther where Haman is a counsellor of Ahasuerus, king of the Achaemenid Persian Empire and an enemy of the Jews, more than a millennia apart in different parts of the world. He appears alongside another character Qorah who also rebels against Moses at a different time in the bible:

This may have been done for literary/storytelling purposes:

Mecca as a safe sanctuary

The Quran references Mecca as a safe haven while swearing an oath.

While it may have appeared to have been secured at the time, the city has seen many violent events, such as the 683 and 692 Sieges of Mecca, when Ibn al-Zubayr rebelled against the Umayyad caliphate rulers. And more recently the Grand Mosque Seizure attack - making this description redundant.

Kings of Israel before Israel

Moses is the founder of Israel in both the Bible and the Qur'an leading them out of Egyptian bondage, and providing them with laws making the foundation of Judaism.^[49] Durie (2018) notes that basic biblical narrative material is repurposed in the Qur'an, but sometimes with little awareness of chronological knowledge or wider details,^[50] which given the almost no direct extended citations of the text, suggests Muhammad's information most likely from oral exposure of popular tales rather than detailed readings of the bible.^[51]

Some examples he cites of the Qur'an showing little interest in historical narrative have already been listed here; such as Moses taking Egypt, the Samaria in Moses's time, Hāmān moving time periods, and also the Mariam/Mary change. One aspect not yet mentioned that he notes to support that Muhammad was missing an understanding of the stages of the formation of Israel and it's timeline is Moses telling the people of Israel that god had given them prophets and kings, before the kingdom existed in the first place.

Every people had a Muslim warner/prophet

We are told that every 'umma' أمة (people/nation) was sent a messenger.

The word for people/nation 'umma' (أمة) is generally interchangeable with words town/city ('madeena' مدينة), and village ('qarya' قرية) in the context of warner's being sent in the Quran.^[52] They generally mean a group of people residing in a particular place, so people/nation is used for that as well rather than as how we might interpret a nation/people in modern times. For example in Q28:23.

Some people sometimes get more than one messenger.

We see this too with the Jews having many prophets (though many classical commentaries have interpreted the other prophets in the previous verse (Quran 36:14) as being Jesus's followers, who is also a Jewish prophet),^[53] and the Arabs with Abraham coming before Muhammad (Quran 3.96 - 3.97). Some of these messengers are extremely powerful kings such as Suliman, who were are told a kingdom like his will not be given to anyone else (Quran 38:35), and Dhul Qarnayn (Quran 18:84), who is given authority over the earth and rides to the rising and setting of the sun.

Despite these prophets supposedly visiting all pre-Islamic people and some ruling mighty empires, there is no trace of their monotheistic mission in any society (the two rulers mentioned only appear in biblical writings^[54] and separate Christian literature (see: Dhul-Qarnayn and the Alexander Romance) written centuries after the events supposedly happened; and are absent from contemporary writings and archaeological evidence). This is extremely odd that the entire administration of the empires (or surrounding one's) had not a left a trace of a monotheistic religion or their message as a warner - which assumingly they would as prophethood became the rulers life's purpose.

In fact, we see the opposite, with pretty much all ancient societies being polytheistic, henotheistic, animistic, manistic (ancestor worship), shamanistic, pantheistic, heliolithic, folk religion or a combination thereof. This includes all major empires from the ancient world such as, but not limited to, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, African, Americas, European, Greek, Nordic, Roman, Chinese, Indian etc. Essentially all ancient cultures were polytheistic, with the idea of monotheism only gradually and slowly appearing as an innovation,^[55] (rather than appearing and reappearing constantly).

This also begs the question on how societies for most of human history are to be judged if the message seemingly got lost before anyone ever recorded it, if the sole purpose of man (and jinn) is to worship Allah specifically (Quran 51:56).

Interestingly, all of the stories told in the Quran are of well-known Jewish-Christian prophets (see: Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature) and three local Arabian prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'aib. There are none mentioned outside the Near-East and Arabia of antiquity, and nothing about the entire hunter-gather section of humanity which lasted most of the 300,000 years humans have existed,^[56] with the stories taking place in towns that match contemporary one's to Muhammad's time.

Critics argue this missed opportunity to explain the history of the world and what happened elsewhere with the prophets (i.e. the Quran only recalls local tales like a human with knowledge limited to the vicinity would, where it would have looked to someone in living in Arabia at the time, that monotheism was all over the world as the surrounding Byzantine (Roman), Sasanian (Persian) Empires in the North and former Himyarite Kingdom and Aksumite Empire in the South were (See: Pre-Islamic Arab Religion in Islam#General Judeo-Christian Monotheism in Arabia)), along with the lack of historical evidence of these other messengers where we would expect it, is damning.

Suliman's missing kingdom

The Quran tells us of a powerful prophet 'Suliman' (Suliman is the Arabised version of king Solomon in the Hebrew bible. He is also the son of David (Dawood) Quran 27:16), who was granted a kingdom the likes of which would never be seen after.

He is said to have controlled many jinn who created buildings/structures (Quran 34:12-13), and had army of birds (and jinn) he could speak to (Quran 27:16), and travelled to other nearby kingdoms (notably the Queen of Sheba in Yemen) which he could travel in 'the blink of an eye', and get under his control (Quran 27:38-40).

Despite these claims in the Quran (as well as hadith and commentaries) of an extremely powerful and at least somewhat imperialistic kingdom in the Near-east/Israel/Palestine region built with supernatural abilities, of which we would expect to see an exceptionally large and unique kingdom in the archaeological record, material evidence for Solomon’s reign, as for that of his father, is scant.^[57] There are also no known writings or stories from surrounding kingdoms in the Near-East and beyond about his reign, of which there were many thriving civilizations across e.g. Egypt, Arabia, Persia and Mesopotamia.

Instead the closest and main source of information about comes from the bible, with primarily in the First Book of Kings and the Second Book of Chronicles,^[58] with the former believed to be written around (c. 550 BC)^[59] and the latter around 350–300 BC.^[60] The other sources are rabbinic commentaries composed many centuries after that (see: Parallels Between the Qur'an and Late Antique Judeo-Christian Literature#Jinn help Solomon build temples).

Solomon is supposed to have lived around 1000BC, when there bible which most sources of his life come from,^[61] making these sources extremely late, so that only bible literalists, rather than official academics, hold this kingdom's descriptions to be literally true. For a brief summary of scholars in this area, this Smithsonian magazine article: An Archaeological Dig Reignites the Debate Over the Old Testament’s Historical Accuracy where it is made clear remains do not match these descriptions, with the lack of structures being found making many doubt the existence of any kingdom at all during this time period, and the previous time period it seems Egyptians ruled over the area in discussion. And despite the promising title of the Smithsonian article, the society in question is suggested to be a more complex nomadic one in the area likely belonging to the Edomites (put forward by Israeli archaeologist Erez Ben-Yosef at Tel-Aviv University), that may have inspired the biblical stories, rather than one corresponding to the supernaturally build vast Islamic structures and wide reaching monotheistic rule.

As Aren Maeir (Israeli archaeologist and professor in the Department of Land of Israel Studies and Archaeology at Bar-Ilan University) says assessing his work, "Because scholars have supposedly not paid enough attention to nomads and have over-emphasized architecture, that doesn’t mean the united kingdom of David and Solomon was a large kingdom—there’s simply no evidence of that on any level, not just the level of architecture.”

And in The Bible Unearthed, a 2001 book by the Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein, of Tel Aviv University, and the American scholar Neil Asher Silberman; Archaeology, the authors wrote, “has produced a stunning, almost encyclopedic knowledge of the material conditions, languages, societies, and historical developments of the centuries during which the traditions of ancient Israel gradually crystallized.” Armed with this interpretative power, archaeologists could now scientifically evaluate the truth of biblical stories. An organized kingdom such as David’s and Solomon’s would have left significant settlements and buildings—but in Judea at the relevant time, the authors wrote, there were no such buildings at all, or any evidence of writing. In fact, most of the saga contained in the Bible, including stories about the “glorious empire of David and Solomon,” was less a historical chronicle than “a brilliant product of the human imagination.”

This makes the Quran's claim he had the greatest kingdom not to be bestowed on anyone after him extremely implausible. Especially in light of the much larger empires covering huge portions of the world that came after, such as the British Empire, French Empire, Mongol Empire, Umayyad Caliphate, Russian Empire, Qing Dynasty, Abbasid Caliphate, Spanish Empire, Ottoman Empire, etc. whom we have far more evidence for.

Surah of the elephant

The Quran contains a surah relating to Allah destroying an army via birds throwing stones of baked clay at them. This account is allegedly based on the pre-Islamic Yemeni/Hymarite Christian King Abraha attempting to invade Mecca with an army of elephants for the purpose of destroying the House of Allah (The Holy Ka'aba), to bring pilgrims to his own church in the capital Sanaa. But their plan backfired when Allah destroyed the army with a flock of birds and baked clay, thus their plans were foiled.

Historians believe that while there was a somewhat similar invasion of Abraha into Arabia at a similar time, almost every key part of the Islamic traditions surrounding the surah found in hadith, seerah, and tafsir are incorrect; starting with the date in Islamic tradition typically ascribed to the birth year of Muhammad (570CE) known as 'The Year of the Elephant',^[62] while much more contemporary evidence places it around 552CE (see Scientific Errors in the Hadith - Year of the Elephant (and the battle's location)), and to separate parts of Northern and Central Arabia, with one of Abraha’s armies went northeastward into the territory of the Ma‘add tribal confederacy, while another went north-westward towards the coast, rather than Mecca.^[63]

Other than the historically inaccurate traditions, as Angelika Neuwirth 2022 notes, along with the magical birds, the Elephant itself may also be mythical.^[64]

Historian Christian Robin 2015 has also noted that they cannot historically be the same invasion as in the Islamic traditions,^[65] however states it is plausible that an elephant attacked Mecca citing elephants with mahouts (riders) inscriptions in the Najrān region (~800km South from Mecca).^[66] However as Sean W. Anthony points out the petroglyphs of elephants are undated and no evidence connects them with Abraha. Petroglyphs of non-local things such as boats have also been found in Arabia.^[67] Nothing connects them with Mecca either. And Michael Charles 2018 has argued that the use of elephants was plausible, based on reports from Islamic traditions/Arab Historians, combined with the fact that Ethiopian Axumite Empire that ruled Himyar (modern Yemen) was a tributary of at the time, having access to Elephants, and that Yemen was fertile at the time.^[68] However as others have pointed out, there are serious problems that make this doubtful.

Daniel Beck 2018 notes, there are many epigraphy records from that period as well as both before and after Abraha's reign, which do not mentioned the elephants in invasions, nor are they recorded by contemporary historians / sources such as Procopius, who wrote a detailed book on current wars and warfare Polemon (De bellis; Wars)^[69] and documented Abraha's rise to power, who never mentioned the use of elephants which which would have been notable if they were used.^[70] The earliest inscriptions of the war mention non-Meccan enemies and no explicit reference to Mecca, the Ka'aba or the Quraysh tribe, and it would be the first African bush elephant used in warfare for over six centuries, and the last known one ever.^[71] No other record in the literate regions from Yemen, the Axumite Empire, to Persia report a sudden death of an army in Mecca either which would be relevant to them.^[72]

There are also practical and logistical issues with the account, which sees it difficult to accommodate an elephants(s) in the hot desert environment of South and Central Arabia. Elephants require significant amounts of food and water 149-169 kg (330-375 lbs) of vegetation daily,^[73] in fact typically sixteen to eighteen hours, or nearly 80% of an elephant’s day is spent feeding.^[74] Elephants consume grasses, small plants, bushes, fruit, twigs, tree bark, and roots,^[75] and drink 68.4 to 98.8 litres (18 to 26 gallons) of water daily, potentially up to 152 litres (40 gallons).^[76] On top of that elephants have especially weak feet unsuited for desert terrain.^[77] They also unlike most hairless mammals have no natural defense against the sun, so must regularly bathe themselves in mud to avoid sunburn.^[78] This is even more difficult to imagine with some traditions having more than one elephant.^[79]

Therefore critics argue it is most likely an exaggeration by Arab poets^[80] and storytellers as word of far-off battles spread, then turned into salvation history by Muhammad as a reason to follow his message (i.e. Allah saved their town), and fear him, to convince them to heed his warnings.

And finally, there is no archaeological evidence for the dead soldiers (numbered in tens of thousands in some Islamic traditions)^[81] in bits of baked clay as found in the Qur'an. Critics argue that this, along with the contemporary records showing a different story of a similar attack in the region, the severe lack of evidence for elephant(s) including no mentions from contemporary historians or inscriptions, no recording of the Meccan invasion, the muddling of the dates, along with practical problems, makes the whole account unreliable.

Historian Arthur Jeffrey, citing Italian orientalist Carlo Conti Rossini, states that the Axumites did not use war elephants, and suggests that the Abraha-elephant legend developed from a misunderstanding of the name of Abraha’s royal master, Alfilas, which when the ending was dropped, sounded like al-Fil, ‘the elephant.’ ^[82]

The Historical Jesus

The Qur'an includes references to Jesus (called as Isa in Islam), acknowledging him as a prophet of Allah and the Messiah. Unlike the Christian Bible, the Qur'an portrays Jesus as a human being similar to other messengers, not the son of God (E.g. Quran 4:171, Quran 17:111 and Quran 2:116). He was also allegedly not actually crucified Quran 4:157.

It states that Jesus preached the Gospel (Injeel) but suggests it has been corrupted, and though what these means exactly is debated (see: Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars: Corruption of Previous Scriptures and Corruption of Previous Scriptures), however the current mainstream Sunni view is that the Christian Scripture (known as the New Testament which contains 4 'gospels'), does not reflect Jesus's original Islamic teachings.^[83]

While Muslims reject the Christian view of Jesus based on theological grounds, secular Biblical scholarship (separate to Islamic studies) has also long sought to reconstruct the historical Jesus through critical methods rather than faith-based one's, of which the results differ greatly from the Qur'anic portrayal.

Imminent Apocalyptic Preacher

Analysis of the sources written closest to Jesus's life, has lead to a consensus view that Jesus and his original followers believed the 'apocalypse',  i.e. judgment day in Islam, would happen within his lifetime.^[84]

As biblical scholar Albert Schweitzer famously pointed out in his seminal 1906 work 'The Quest of the Historical Jesus', Jesus’s failed prophecy was not a one-off or trivial tradition but a core part of his preaching.^[85] Only in later writings did this message begin to be subverted for a metaphorical kingdom of Earth of those who join Jesus's followers believing in salvation and the resurrection; I.e. only the later books in the New Testament cannon began to reinterpret these apocalyptic messages as the expected return of Jesus didn’t materialize, suggesting a more spiritual interpretation of the "Kingdom of God." This reinterpretation is seen as an attempt to reconcile early Christian beliefs with the reality that the world didn't end as expected.^[86]

Jesus was estimated have lived between before approximately 4BCE,^[87] and died around the year of 30 CE (for Jesus’ crucifixion).^[88] The books that make up the New Testament, documenting Jesus's life and teachings, (and believed by Christians to be divinely inspired writings to cover his teachings, death and salvation) are in mostly consensus to be written in order of seven authentic letters of Paul followed the first Gospel, Mark (~C. 70 C.E), two more inauthentic (source) letters from Paul, followed by The Gospel of Matthew and then The Gospel of Luke, (both~ 80-90 C.E.), five more inauthentic letters attributed to Paul, followed by The Gospel of John (~90-100 C.E.), with the Book of Revelation and several more letters after that.^[89] These books/letters and their approximate dates are in order as follows:

New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman also reports that the great majority of biblical scholars hypothesize there was also an earlier but lost earlier Gospel known in scholarship 'Q' (named after the German word for “source” Quelle) to have existed, based off shared stories between the Gospels of Luke and Matthew which do not come from the earliest Gospel of Mark, which may shared sayings appear to come from.^[90] It is believed they both used Mark as a key source too.^[91]

Ehrman (2001) notes, through careful examination of the earliest and most likely authentic material (e.g. multiply and independently attested, avoiding anachronisms, dissimilarity (unlikely to be added by later Christians)^[92] and matching the contemporary context), we can see early Christians believed in and recorded the beliefs and saying of Jesus's imminent apocalyptic sayings.^[93] Allison (2009) comes to the same conclusion using different methods.^[94]

Beginning with the earliest writings on Jesus, the authentic letters of Paul, we see some explicit references, Paul writes (~C. 49 C.E.):

I.e. Paul considers himself and his contemporaries to be among those who will still be alive when Christ returns. Paul further advises time is short as the world in its present form is passing away (~C. 54-55 C.E.).

This sense of urgency of the end being imminent is continued in the Gospels (which did not use Paul as a source),^[95] in fact, the very first words Jesus utters in the first gospel (Mark ~70CE) to be written are:

Jesus tells his followers that they will not die before the Kingdom of God comes into power and judgment by the Son of Man occurs. (The Son of man was a cosmic judge for the hour.)^[96]

Along with direct statements, we have other guidance given at odds with the the Qur'anic Jesus. E.g. as Ehrman (2001) notes, Jesus's followers are told to essentially give away all of their possessions, which makes far more sense in an imminent apocalyptic environment where they would not need them over a long-term life, let alone a sustainable long-term society. If the Jesus truly was the Qur'anic one, it is difficult to imagine why his early followers would have believed such things so contrary to Islam.

(Allison (2009) also notes Luke 14:33 where his followers are told they can't become his disciple if they don't give up all of their possessions,^[97] and Jesus sends forth missionaries without staff, food, or money: Mark 6:8-9; Matt. 10:9-10; Luke 10:4.^[98] Followers are also commanded to never refuse someone who wants to borrow money from you. (Matthew 5:42)^[99]).

These direct statements continue in the next Gospel, the Gospel of Matthew (~80-90CE).

Further statements include.

In the next Gospel of Luke, we continue to see early apocalyptic traditions, however as Ehrman (2001) and Sanders (1993) note, we also begin to see a slight 'de-apocalypting' of the message in Luke,^[100][101] who edits some of the earlier traditions from Mark and the earlier lost 'Q' source, so that it is no longer Jesus's generation, but the next generation that the eschaton will arrive.^[102]

Jesus tells his audience to be ready because the Son of Man (and accompanying judgement) will arrive at any moment, rather than e.g. death could arrive at any moment.

These are very unlikely to be added by Christians after the fact, as of course didn't happen, so would not naturally be words one would want attributed to their saviour.^[103]

What we do see is in the The Gospel of John writing (~90-100CE), several decades later again, and after the 40-50 years later after the first and second generations began passing away, the message of Jesus is de-apocalycised much further.^[104] In fact, the imminent apocalyptic message is completely absent in John, as it became more apparent the prophecy was not happening, and so 'kingdom of heaven' only now becomes a metaphor for Jesus's ministry.^[105]

So we can trace the development of a Jewish preacher who believed the eschaton was imminent, being changed over time the further away from his message the writer is. Later apocrypha works written after the Gospel of John, and even further away from the time of Jesus, go further in it's denial, and explicitly condemn the view.^[106] We can therefore see the the earliest sources of Jesus and his followers do not align with the Qur'anic portrayal, who of course could not have preached this given Allah would know it was not the end of the world.

The historical John the Baptist

John the Baptist whom Jesus closely preached with and is mentioned many times in the New Testament, is incidentally mentioned in the Quran. Unlike the Islamic John however, along with Jesus, he was also considered to have been an imminent apocalyptic preacher by academics. As Sanders (1993)^[107] and Ehrman (2001) note:

We have seen that in the earliest sources of his life, John the Baptist was an apocalyptic preacher who focused on repentance in preparation for the coming judgment of God, and baptized Jesus early on.^[108] Jesus, who initially associated with and followed John before starting his own ministry,^[109] spoke of him positively throughout his life. Despite differences in emphasis—John's fiery call to repentance and Jesus’ message of hope and the coming restoration—both shared the belief in an imminent divine judgment and the importance of preparing for it.^[110]

Modern Academic Scholarship has questioned the traditional Islamic account (from the sirah (biographies), tafsirs (commentaries) and hadith (sayings/traditions of the prophet), which were recorded far later than the time of revelation) of the Quran's creation to varying degrees. While these are heavily debated in academia, those scholars who propose the largest differences are roughly categorised as the Revisionist school of Islamic studies. While these are not typical historical errors in the sense of the Quran contradicting historical fact, they do undermine the reliability of both Sunni and Shia traditions on the interpretation of the Quran. Some of their issue's with the traditional account, particularly around the area of preaching are mentioned below.

Sodom and Gomorrah being located near Mecca and Medina

The prophet Lūṭ,/(Biblical 'Lot') is a Jewish prophet also mentioned in the Bible as well as the Qur'an, who warns the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (סְדֹם (Səḏōm) and עֲמֹרָה ('Ămōrā)) of imminent destruction if they do not repent their sinful ways, who do not and so are quickly destroyed by God (as well as Admah, Zeboiim and Zoar (Bela) in the Bible, making up the five "cities of the plain"). These are believed to be located in North-West Arabia^[111] for example, near the "Lot's Wife" pillar of salt, on Mount Sodom, Israel (as in the biblical account his wife is turned into a pillar of salt), and placing Gomorrah located near the southern end of the Dead Sea, south of the peninsula of Al-Lisan.^[112]

Traditional Islamic scholars have seemingly agreed with the placement in Northern Arabia too, as Patricia Crone notes in her 2008 article What do we actually know about Muhammad?'...the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.'^[113]

In relation to other cities

The following verse also mentions the destruction of other towns from previous prophets with Hūd who preached to ʿĀd and Ṣāliḥ to Thamūd. ʿĀd and Thamūd are associated with northern and mid- Arabia, but it is only (the ruins of) the people of Lūṭ (Lot), located much further near the Dead Sea, which are stated as being 'not far from you'. A simple reading of this would imply that ʿĀd and Thamūd (and therefore the Arabian peninsula), were further away than the Dead Sea from this verse's initial preaching/audience.

So the claim is that for this to make sense to those being spoken to at the time of revelation, this would place at least part of Muhammad's preaching in that vicinity (as many in the Revisionist school of Islamic Studies do), rather than strictly in Mecca and Medina where orthodox Islamic views found in the biographies and hadith place him.

The Romans in a nearby land

The Quran claims that the Romans (Byzantines) have been defeated in the nearest (part of) the land.

To be notable enough to have gained a mention in the Quran, this could refer to large scale defeats by the Persians at Jerusalem in 614 CE or Damascus in 613 CE, and many other battles in the Byzantine-Sasanian War of 602-628, which primarily took place in Northern Arabia/Africa/Mesopotamia. But neither of these locations can be considered to be “nearest” land to Mecca or Medina, which are both hundreds of miles away.^[114] Leaving a site much further North the more fitting to this verse.

Destroyed towns nearby Mecca

In addition to Lot above, in a surah said to be revealed in Mecca in the traditional account,^[115] a verse brings the attention of the audience to the destruction of the towns and people's around them.

And as Patricia Crone mentioned in her 2008 article What do we actually know about Mohammed? 'There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia.', while they are not known to be around Mecca, though archaeological digs there are currently limited.^[116]

The Battle of Badr

Muslim tradition expands upon vague mentions in the Quran to create an extremely important and detailed historical memory of the 'Battle of Badr', with 'Badr' being mentioned once by name in the Quran (Quran 3:123).

According to Islamic Traditions:

Traditional exegetes commenting on this verse unanimously date the battle falling during Ramadan,^[117] and link it to other verses such as Quran 8:41 (which it is not mentioned by name in). However, as British historian Tom Holland notes (citation 50: refencing Crone (1987a), pp. 226–30: The papyrus fragment is Text 71 in Grohmann), an earlier (than the Islamic historians/exegetes) manuscript mentions the Battle of Badr, but does not lists a date in Ramadan, which raises questions on the traditional interpretation of these verses.

Islamic Scholar Gerard Hawting also discusses these issues in his 2015 paper 'Qur’ān and sīra: the relationship between Sūrat al-Anfāl and muslim traditional accounts of the Battle of Badr'.^[118]

Other scholars have noted parallels between the details from previous Judeo-Christians stories, e.g. Austrian orientalist Hans Mzik, notes the similarities in his 1915 paper 'The Gideon-Saul Legend and the Tradition of the Battle of Badr', which may have been used to shape the account, such as the number of fighters for Muhammad.

The battle is introduced in a prophetic dream in reports with similar details and symbolism,^[119] and other parallels are found in reports surrounding the battle.

Mismatches in law between the Quran and later Islamic texts

As Islamic scholar Michael Cook notes, there are many differences in religious law between the Quran and the later recorded biographies and 'sahih/authentic' traditions. For example, in regards to stoning adulterers (read the primary texts in: Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Stoning), where there are many recordings of the prophet ordering stoning as punishment, whilst the Quran only prescribes 100 lashes.

Unknown words in the Quran

The traditional account contains an extremely detailed and comprehensive collection of oral tradition of biographical reports, hadith and other traditions, supposedly originating from the time of the prophet with unbroken isnads (chains of narrations), from the statement being said to being recorded in writing, to explain the Quran's meaning. However not only are there often contradictory explanations for verses among classical Islamic scholars, there are even unknown words in the Quran. Michael Cook notes that taking the traditional account as history, this should not have happened.

It should be noted that even in the cases that Cook notes may be used for rhyme, this purpose and meaning is still debated, as one can see in Angelika Neuwirth's 2022 commentary on the Qur'an.

Unknown religion in the Qur'an

Just as puzzling is a religious group called the 'sabians/sabeans' الصابئون al-Ṣābiʾūn. They are mentioned three times in the Quran, twice listed as being able to enter paradise, alongside the 'people of the book', i,e. the Jews and Christians.

And once generically alongside all other religions, see Quran 22:17.

We are not told of any of their religious practices in the Quran itself, however as 'people of the book' Islamic rights and laws apply differently to them than those who are not (see: Dhimma). They are a theologically distinct group who may have a chance of reaching paradise. So despite their identity being of high importance even to law, it does not seem to have reliably reached the earliest commentators, who have heavily disputed it since. In fact the ambiguity over their identity allowed many different groups to self-identify as Sabian's for self-legitimisation and avoid persecution under Muslim rule.^{[120] [121]}

Both classical Islamic scholars and modern academics have searched for a clear identity to this religious group, with no consensus yet found. We see candidates from pagans, polytheists, angel worshippers and those who leave and enter their religion,^[122] Jewish-Christian sects (such as the Elchasites),^[123] Manichaeans,^[124] Samaritans,^[125] among many others, e.g. see Ibn Kathir's commentary on them.^[126] This would suggest that the historical context of the Qur'an (and therefore meaning), initially passed through oral methods, is not as well preserved as traditionalist scholars believe, with even the religious environment of preaching being unknown.

• Part 42: Noah's Flood and Part 13: Christian Teachings in the Quran - islamwhattheydonttellyou164 - YouTube videos