Tahrif

Taḥrīf (Arabic: تحريف, transl. 'distortion') or corruption of the Bible, is a term used by most Muslims to refer to believed alterations made to the previous revelations of God—specifically those that make up the Tawrat or Torah, the Zabur or Psalms, and the Injil or Gospel. The term is also used to refer to what Muslims consider to be the corrupted Jewish and Christian interpretations of the previous revelations of God, known as “Tahrif al-Mana”. This concept holds that earlier revelations have been misinterpreted rather than textually altered.

Origin

The origins of Tahrif are debated. In the 8th century, Muqatil ibn Sulayman claimed in his tafsir on al-Baqara 2:79 of the Quran that the Jews had distorted the Tawrat and removed mention of Muhammad in the Quran in his Tafsir, 2:79. Some academics doubt this as a true mention of tahrif. The 9th century Zaydi scholar al-Qasim al-Rassi claimed that the Jews and Christians had misinterpreted the interpretations of the Tawrat, Zabur, and the Injil. This concept is referred to as tahrif al-mana. However, al-Qasim al-Rassi did not believe the Bible to be only misinterpreted, but instead to have an inauthentic transmission.

According to Camilla Adang, the early quranic exegete al-Tabari believed that there was a genuine Tawrat of Moses that had been lost and then restored by Ezra alongside a different Torah created by the rabbis and ignorant Jews. Tabari suspected that the Jews of his time were using this different Tawrat instead of the authentic Mosaic one, which is why Tabari made the distinction of referring to the Torah of his time as "The Torah that they possess today" Tabari says elsewhere in his Tafsir of Quran al-Baqara 2:42 that the Jews had introduced falsehood with their own hands in the Torah.

Some companions of the Prophet such as Uthman (according to Tafsir Ibn Kathir 2:79) and ibn Abbas made some statements that imply he believed the scriptures of ‘the people of the book’ were distorted. In Sahih al-Bukhari, he is quoted saying:

Ibn ʿAbbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur'an) which has been revealed to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!

— Sahih Bukhari 7363

The corruption of the Biblical text was elaborated more extensively by ibn Hazm in the 11th century, who popularized the concept of tahrif al-nass "corruption of the text". Ibn Hazm rejected claims of Mosaic authorship and posited that Ezra was the author of the Torah. He systematically organised the arguments against the authenticity of the Biblical text in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament of his book: chronological and geographical inaccuracies and contradictions, theological impossibilities (anthropomorphic expressions, stories of fornication and whoredom, and the attributing of sins to prophets), as well as lack of reliable transmission (tawatur) of the text.

Ibn Hazm explains how the falsification of the Torah could have taken place while only one copy of the Torah existed, kept by the Aaronic priesthood of the Temple in Jerusalem. Ibn Hazm's arguments had a major impact on Muslim literature and scholars, and the themes that he raised concerning tahrif and other polemical ideas were modified slightly by some later authors. The Twelver Shia scholar ibn Babawayh narrated a debate between Ali al-Rida and the catholicos where Ali al-Rida, the 8th Imam of the Twelvers, claimed that the existing Gospels were created and changed after the original Gospel was lost.

Tahrif has also been advocated by Quranist Muslims such as Rashad Khalifa, who believed that previous revelations of God, such as the Bible, contained contradictions due to human interference.

Types

Amin Ahsan Islahi writes about four types of tahrif:

1. To deliberately interpret something in a manner that is opposite to the author's intention. To distort the pronunciation of a word to such an extent that the word changes completely.
2. To add to or delete a sentence or discourse in a manner that distorts the original meaning. For example, according to Muslim tradition, the Jews altered the incident of the migration of Abraham so that no one could prove that Abraham had any relationship with the Kaaba.
3. To translate a word that has two meanings in the meaning that is against the context. For example, the Aramaic word used for Jesus that is equivalent to the Arabic: ابن ibn was translated as "son" whereas it also meant "servant" and "slave".
4. To raise questions about something clear to create uncertainty or change it completely.

Arguments and evidence

Many Muslim scholars maintain that the original revelations given to Moses (Tawrat) and Jesus (Injil) were genuine divine scriptures, but that these texts were later subject to human alteration—through omission, reinterpretation, or textual modification. This belief is rooted in Quranic assertions that certain groups among the People of the Book "distort the words from their [proper] places" (Qur'an 4:46; 5:13), and that some key messages—especially concerning the coming of Prophet Muhammad and the nature of monotheism—were obscured or altered.

Muslim thinkers have historically argued that references to the coming of Muhammad were originally present in earlier scriptures but were either removed or reinterpreted over time. Notably, this perspective has been echoed, though in different terms, by several Western scholars. Geoffrey Parrinder, for instance, notes in his work Jesus in the Qur’an (1965) that “some early Christian sects, such as the Ebionites, viewed Jesus as a prophet and not divine, and rejected later formulations of the Trinity.” This aligns with the Islamic claim that early followers of Jesus held a more humanized and prophetic understanding of his mission, which was later supplanted by Hellenized theology.

Similarly, Hans Küng, a Swiss Catholic theologian, argued that “the doctrine of the Trinity was not formulated by Jesus himself nor found in the earliest layers of the Gospel tradition”. Küng’s admission supports the Muslim claim that later theological developments—particularly the elevation of Jesus to divine status—were not part of the original message but rather a result of centuries of doctrinal evolution.

Regarding textual preservation, Bart D. Ehrman, a leading American New Testament scholar, has extensively documented how biblical manuscripts were altered over time, both intentionally and unintentionally. In Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (2005), Ehrman writes: “The more I studied the manuscript tradition of the New Testament, the more I realized just how radically the text had been altered over the centuries.” While Ehrman does not approach this from an Islamic perspective, his findings lend indirect support to Muslim claims that the Injil—as originally revealed—was not preserved in its original form.

Additionally, some Muslim apologists point to passages in the current biblical canon that they argue contain veiled or symbolic references to Muhammad. For example, Deuteronomy 18:18 speaks of a prophet “like unto Moses,” which classical Muslim commentators have interpreted as referring to Muhammad. Although Christian exegetes typically identify this figure as Jesus, scholars such as David Benjamin Keldani—a former Catholic priest who converted to Islam—argued in The Gospel of Barnabas and the Truth About Islam (1904) that such passages were deliberately recontextualized in post-Nicene Christianity to fit a different theological agenda.

While these views remain controversial in Christian scholarship, they reflect a consistent thread within both Muslim thought and some strands of Western academic inquiry: that the formation of the biblical canon involved complex historical, political, and theological processes that may have shaped, or reshaped, the texts as we know them today.

The Gospel of Barnabas and Alternate Early Christian Narratives

The Gospel of Barnabas is a controversial text, largely rejected by mainstream Christian denominations, yet cited by many Muslim thinkers as evidence of early Christological beliefs more aligned with Islamic teachings. This gospel, which presents Jesus as a human prophet and explicitly predicts the coming of Muhammad by name, has been dismissed as a medieval forgery by most Christian scholars. However, some academics—such as Lonsdale Ragg and Laura Ragg, who translated the text into English in 1907—noted that certain elements of the Gospel of Barnabas reflect ideas found in earlier Jewish-Christian sects, such as the Ebionites, who denied the divinity of Christ and followed Jewish law.

While the authenticity of the Gospel remains debated, its theological content resonates with the Quranic view of Jesus, leading some to argue that it preserves a strand of early Christianity later marginalized by Pauline doctrine. As George Sale, an 18th-century Orientalist and translator of the Qur’an, remarked, “there is good reason to believe that the Gospel of Barnabas exhibits the belief of some ancient Christian sects whose tenets closely resemble those of Islam”.

Paul of Tarsus

A significant theme in both Muslim and some revisionist Christian scholarship is the role of Paul of Tarsus in transforming the message of Jesus from prophetic monotheism to a complex theology centered on Christ’s divinity and redemptive death. Muslim writers have likened Paul to a figure who introduced innovation into the pure message of Christ, much like the controversial figure of Abdullah ibn Sabaʾ is portrayed in some Islamic narratives Where he claimed the divinity of Ali, the cousin of the Prophet Muhammad.

Thomas Jefferson, the third U.S. president and a Deist thinker, once remarked in a private letter (1822), “Paul was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.” Similarly, Gerd Lüdemann, a German New Testament scholar, contends in Paul: The Founder of Christianity (2002), that “the transformation from the historical Jesus to the divine Christ is rooted in Paul’s theology, not in Jesus himself.”

Bart D. Ehrman, in How Jesus Became God (2014), writes: “It was not Jesus who declared himself divine, but later followers like Paul, who interpreted his mission through a Greco-Roman lens of divine men and dying saviors.” This lends strong support to the Muslim position that Paul’s influence played a foundational role in altering the original monotheistic message of Jesus.

The Evolution of Christology in the Canonical Gospels

A critical observation made by textual scholars is the progressive development of the portrayal of Jesus across the four canonical gospels. The Gospel of Mark, widely regarded by scholars as the earliest (circa 70 CE), presents Jesus as a human teacher and miracle worker. He expresses ignorance at times (Mark 13:32), is seen praying to God, and never claims divinity. As James D. G. Dunn notes in Jesus Remembered (2003), “Mark’s Jesus is thoroughly Jewish, a charismatic prophet with no clear claims to ontological divinity.”

By contrast, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (written between 80–90 CE) begin to develop more overt theological motifs: virgin birth narratives, fulfillment of prophecy, and exalted titles like “Son of God,” though still often metaphorical or functional rather than ontological. Finally, John’s Gospel, written last (circa 90–100 CE), presents a radically different theology: Jesus as the Logos, pre-existent and co-eternal with God, declaring “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30) and “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58).

This dramatic evolution is not lost on Western scholars. Raymond E. Brown, a leading Catholic biblical scholar, writes in The Birth of the Messiah (1993), “The high Christology of John is a theological interpretation, not a historical memory of Jesus' own claims.”

Elaine Pagels, in The Gnostic Gospels (1979), similarly observes, “The early church had diverse views of Jesus; it was only with time—and through power struggles—that a particular divine interpretation became dominant.”

Thus, the pattern of textual development—from Mark’s prophetic Jesus to John’s divine Logos—has been cited by both Muslim thinkers and historical critics as evidence that the original message of Jesus underwent systematic theological transformation, raising questions about the textual and doctrinal integrity of the New Testament canon.

Romanization of Christianity

A recurring observation among Muslim scholars, often couched in the witticism, "When Christianity entered Rome, Rome did not become Christian; Christianity became Roman," reflects the view that the original monotheistic message of Jesus was gradually reshaped by Roman cultural, religious, and political forces.

Historical records support this perception. The date of Christmas (December 25) was chosen to align with the Roman pagan festival of Sol Invictus, the "Unconquered Sun," celebrated near the winter solstice. Thomas Talley, in The Origins of the Liturgical Year (1986), traces the Christian adoption of this date to Roman influence, not scriptural mandate.

Additionally, many pagan rites and symbols—such as halos (originating in depictions of sun gods), incense, and elaborate priestly vestments—entered Christian practice during and after the Constantinian era. As Adolf von Harnack, a German theologian and historian, noted in The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries (1908): “What we call dogma was, in large part, a product of Hellenistic philosophy imposed upon the gospel.”

Moreover, the Council of Nicaea (325 CE), convened under Emperor Constantine, marked a watershed moment where theological disputes were not resolved purely by spiritual insight or prophetic tradition, but through imperial power and political expedience. Elaine Pagels, in Beyond Belief (2003), writes: “The canon and creed were not so much chosen for their theological merit as for their political utility in unifying the empire under one church.”

These developments, from calendrical shifts to theological syncretism, support the idea that early Christianity, especially post-Pauline and post-Constantinian, became increasingly enmeshed in Roman and Greek metaphysical frameworks, far removed from the Semitic monotheism of Jesus and the Hebrew prophets.

Summary

The preceding examination—spanning the Dead Sea Scrolls, the evolution of Christology in the gospels, the role of Paul, the Gospel of Barnabas, and critical studies of the Torah—paints a coherent picture:

Scriptural integrity was not preserved in a uniform or unbroken chain; instead, the texts show signs of editorial manipulation, theological reinterpretation, and political standardization.

Doctrinal evolution—particularly the elevation of Jesus from prophet to divine figure—occurred gradually and unevenly across time, as evidenced by the growing Christology from Mark to John.

Western scholars, from Bart Ehrman to Raymond Brown, Geza Vermes, and Elaine Pagels, have acknowledged many of these transformations, albeit from historical-critical rather than religious motives.

The integration of pagan Roman customs into Christian ritual and theology underscores the susceptibility of the faith to external influences once it was institutionalized within the Roman Empire.

From a Muslim perspective, this corpus of scholarly evidence affirms the Qur'anic assertion that earlier revelations were subject to human alteration—whether by distortion, suppression, or syncretism—and that Muhammad came to restore the original Abrahamic monotheism, unsullied by empire, creed, or clergy.

See also

• Biblical inerrancy
• Categories of New Testament manuscripts
• Criticism of the Quran
• Great and abominable church - Mormon equivalent doctrine
• Islamic holy books
• Internal consistency of the Bible
• Naskh
• Supersessionism
• Textual variants in the New Testament

External links

• Corruption in the Bible: The Muslim Stance
• Is The Bible Corrupted?
• What the Gospels Mean to Muslims