Farhan Ahmed Zia’s Low Evidential Bar

Okay, this is part three in a series of responses to YouTuber Farhan Ahmed Zia, who generously throws around words like “ignorant” and “liar” when discussing me, yet curiously refuses a public conversation with yours truly, an inexperienced debater and utter jahil.

Honestly, I’m sure Farhan is a decent person at heart. He’s simply trying to defend his beliefs, which is understandable to a degree. However, I believe his faith is misguided, his personal attacks are unwarranted, and I sincerely hope he eventually discovers the truth. My door is still open to him to have a public conversation.

Anywho, this time, I’ll be responding to his claims about Muhammad and miracles. Here’s my original video:

And here’s his response:

Farhan’s claim is a real head-scratcher. He says, and I quote: “The Quran does not say Muhammad does no miracles. Even in the verses you cited, none of them say Muhammad does not do any miracles. These verses are just addressing the arrogant people who are never satisfied, not only in the time of Muhammad but for all of the prophets.” Oh, really? Let’s dive into this, shall we?

Contrary to my friend Farhan, the Quran is pretty clear on one thing: Muhammad didn’t perform supernatural, verifiable miracles. The Quran outright denies the idea of Muhammad performing physical feats like raising the dead or healing the sick. Let’s look at the text:

• “And they that know not say, ‘Why does God not speak to us? Why does a sign not come to us?’ So spoke those before them as these men say; their hearts are much alike. Yet We have made clear the signs unto a people who are sure.” (S. 2:118)
• “They say, ‘Why has a sign  not been sent down upon him from his Lord?’ Say: ‘The Unseen belongs only to God. Then watch and wait; I shall be with you watching and waiting.'” (S. 10:20)
• “The unbelievers say, ‘Why has a sign not been sent down upon him from his Lord?’ Thou art ONLY a warner, and a guide to every people.” (S. 13:7)
• “Naught prevented Us from sending the signs but that the ancients cried lies to them; and We brought Thamood the She-camel visible, but they did her wrong. And We do not send the signs, except to frighten.” (S. 17:59)

These verses make it clear: Muhammad’s role was to warn, not to perform miracles. The phrase “Thou art ONLY a warner” would be utterly pointless if warners could perform wonders.

Here’s another gem:

• “Then, it may be that you will give up part of what is revealed to you and your breast will become straightened by it because they say: Why has not a treasure been sent down upon him or an angel come with him? You are ONLY a warner; and Allah is custodian over all things.” (S. 11:12)

Translation: “Since you are only a warner, it’s not your job to perform miracles because you haven’t been given that ability, Muhammad. Your job is to simply exhort and admonish people.”

The Quran also says, “Not before this didst thou recite any Book, or inscribe it with thy right hand, for then those who follow falsehood would have doubted. Nay; rather it is signs, clear signs IN THE BREASTS of those who have been given knowledge; and none denies Our signs but the evildoers. They say, ‘Why have signs not been sent down upon him from his Lord?’ Say: ‘The signs are only with God, and I am only a plain warner.’ What, is it not SUFFICIENT for them that We have sent down upon thee the Book that is recited to them? Surely in that is a mercy, and a reminder to a people who believe.” (S. 29:48-51).

So, if Muhammad did perform miracles, it blows up the whole “the Quran is sufficient” argument. According to this verse, the Quran itself is the sign. Muhammad’s job was to deliver the message, not perform miracles. If the Quran is supposed to be enough, then why the need for miraculous spectacles?

Farhan, like most Muslims, pushes miracle stories outside the Quran for proof of Muhammad’s prophethood. These tales, conveniently absent from the Quran, pop up in hadiths long after Muhammad’s time. Hadiths that also report stories about Jews being turned into rats and a companion of Muhammad joining in a stoning of a she-monkey for having adultery with another monkey! I mean seriously…do you believe those stories, too, Farhan? And how are we supposed to take these later miracle stories about your prophet seriously when they contradict the very book you claim to follow and are full of nonsense?

Farhan strikes again with his next claim: “It is true for both Christians and Muslims because if we think about an atheist and you ask them what it would take to believe in God, they would say, ‘We need proof.’ If you ask them what proof, they would usually say something miraculous like seeing God. But we both know even if their demands are met, some of these atheists only believe in naturalism, almost following it like a religion. Even if they saw God, they could just make up natural explanations like, ‘Maybe I was hallucinating; it could have been an illusion; I can’t know for certain.’ That’s why Allah says specifically to the disbelievers in Surah 6:111: ‘Even if We did send unto them angels, and the dead did speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very eyes, they are not the ones to believe unless it is in Allah’s plan. But most of them ignore the truth.’ In Surah 6:111, the same thing can be found.”

Well, let’s set the record straight. According to the Gospels, Jesus was all about the miracles, and guess what? Plenty of people believed in him because of those very miracles. Sure, some folks are always going to be stubborn, clinging to their skepticism like it’s a life raft. Jesus chided those people and refused to do parlor tricks for them. (Matthew 12:39-40) But Jesus made it crystal clear that his miracles were signs he was a messenger from God, and he said even the stubborn ones will still have the sign of Jonah, aka his resurrection. And when John the Baptist had his doubts, Jesus didn’t just shrug and say, “Oh well, they won’t believe anyway.” No, he pointed to the evidence:

“When John the Baptist was in prison, he heard what Jesus was doing. He sent his followers. They asked, ‘Are You the One Who was to come, or should we look for another?’ Jesus said to them, ‘Go and tell John what you see and hear. The blind are made to see. Those who could not walk are walking. Those who have had bad skin diseases are healed. Those who could not hear are hearing. The dead are raised up to life and the Good News is preached to poor people. He is happy who is not ashamed of Me and does not turn away because of Me.’”

(Matthew 11:2-6)

Jesus didn’t just talk the talk; he walked the walk. He said, “The works I do in My Father’s name speak of Me…. If I am not doing the works of My Father, do not believe Me.” (John 10:25, 37)

In other words, a miracle is a pretty solid way to show someone is speaking for God. Moses was given the Torah. He did miracles. Jesus was given the Gospel. He did miracles. It’s like the ultimate divine signature.

As philosopher Tim McGrew puts it: “Any initial prejudice against miracles—any ground for assignment of a low initial probability to the claim that a miracle has occurred—cannot be any greater than the rational prejudice (great or small) against the conjunction of two claims: that there is a God who has destined his human creations for a future state of existence, and that he wants to tell them about it in such a way that they can know the message comes from him. If there is a God who wants to make such a revelation, and he wants to make it in such a way that we cannot mistake it for the mere word of man, then there is really no other way to seal it than by a miracle. A miracle would be the guarantee to us that this is a genuine word from God and not just someone’s fine-sounding philosophy or a well-crafted tale.” (Four Views on Christianity and Philosophy, Page 148, Kindle Edition.)

So, how do we know Muhammad isn’t just spinning a yarn? Miracles. He’s claiming he’s the guy who is the fulfillment of the Torah and Injeel, God’s final apostle and messenger. But, as the Quran clearly spells out, Muhammad didn’t perform any. Therefore, Islam has nothing going for it from an evidential standpoint.

Think about it. If Muhammad had been doing miracles left and right in the Hejaz, he could’ve easily said, “If you don’t believe me, believe the works that I do,” just like Jesus did in the Gospel of John or Matthew. But instead, we get what just sounds like a bunch of excuses. As I mentioned in the video, Muhammad’s own sons died prematurely. His soldiers got seriously sick. No miracles, no signs for them. Oh, there’s some vague thing about the moon splitting, but who saw it? Where are the witnesses? Muslims aren’t even in agreement about how to interpret this passage. (Surah 54:1-2)

Farhan claims, “The Quran does not say Muhammad does not do miracles or have signs. This is a misreading of the text, either from lack of knowledge or intentional deceit. It specifically says the disbelievers demanded specific signs to their liking. It then goes on to say the choice of specific signs is not up to them or the messenger. The signs that are brought are from God, in the same way, it was up to Allah for Moses to part the sea, and it was up to Allah for Jesus to cure the blind. Muhammad did come with many miracles. There was water gushing out from his fingers, where he filled a tub with enough water for 40 people to complete ablution. He also cured a companion’s eye that had fallen out of its socket in the battle. He healed a companion who was bleeding to death with his hand, and the companion could walk again with no pain. He healed Abdullah bin Taymiyah’s broken leg by wiping his hand over it. He healed the painful eyes of Ali during the expedition of Khaibar. He stopped Medina from drowning in rain when people were saying, ‘We are drowning, so please call upon your Lord to withhold it from us,’ and Muhammad asked God to make it rain around Medina, not upon them, and this came true. He split the moon.”

Riiiiight. So, in some circumstances, we have prima facie reasons to doubt miracle claims, especially when they appear centuries after the alleged events or originate from distant sources where verification is impossible. These reports often come from sources that wouldn’t pass serious scrutiny, either because checking them was impossible or because the local population had no motive to question them—after all, these stories aligned perfectly with their religious beliefs.

In the case of the messenger of Islam, miracle claims appear in later hadiths, compiled around two centuries after Muhammad’s death. Even if these hadiths were based on oral traditions from Muhammad’s time, they do not meet reasonable criteria for serious investigation. These reports are problematic because they align with preexisting beliefs and biases, and there was little to no social cost for spreading them. Additionally, these compiled sources included absurd fables, such as stories about Moses running around naked and beating a rock that supposedly stole his clothes, which only surfaced 2000 years later.

Compare this to the resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection was proclaimed in Jerusalem within six weeks of Jesus’ crucifixion, to a hostile audience eager to disprove the claim. Jesus’ followers faced immense trials and dangers to spread their message. These accounts were recorded within the first century by Jesus’ apostles and their companions (and I’m happy to defend the traditional authorship and reliability of the Gospels). Given Jesus’ claims about himself, these accounts merit closer investigation to determine if they stand up to scrutiny, which I argue they do. After all, it’s what my entire channel is about.

On the other hand, the stories about Muhammad’s miracles appear only two centuries later, after Islam had already conquered the region. Even if Farhan is right, and that they were based on earlier oral traditions, these stories were told in a safe environment to people who already revered their prophet. They are not circulating widely in a hostile context with witnesses who can verify them. And again, these tales contradict what Muhammad clearly states in the Quran—that he is merely a warner.

I’m guessing Farhan doesn’t believe that Saint Nicholas raised some children from the dead or that Saint Brigit turned water into beer based on similar standards. So why should we accept these stories in the later hadiths?

So, Farhan, perhaps it’s time to reassess the sources and claims. The Quran is clear: Muhammad did not perform miracles. The miracle stories found in later hadiths do not align with the Quranic message or meet even basic criteria for historical reliability.