What’s the Injil?

According to the Quran, what is the Gospel, or (in Arabic) the Injil? In this video, I’ll show that on Islam, this question has no answer. The Quran ties itself in a knot that it cannot escape.

The Quran says that Allah taught the Injil to Jesus (Quran 3:48, 5:46, 5:110, 57:27). Whatever this Injil is, let’s call it Injil-J. Maybe it was written down, maybe not. Whatever these verses are referring to, whatever Jesus received, that’s Injil-J.

The Quran also refers to the Injil as something that is with the People of the Book in Muhammad’s time, centuries later. Quran 5:46-47 says, “let the people of the Injil judge by what Allah has revealed in it.” The Quran expects people in Muhammad’s time to know about something called “The Injil”. Whatever this verse refers to, call it “Injil-M”.

Here’s the question: what is the relationship between Injil-J (in Jesus’s time) and Injil-M (in Muhammad’s time)? 

Breaking it down, there are three questions that we need to ask.

• Question 1: Is anything missing? Is there anything that was revealed to Jesus that is missing from Injil-M? 
• Question 2: Is anything preserved? Is there anything that was revealed to Jesus that was preserved in Injil-M?
• Question 3: Is anything added? Has anything that was not revealed to Jesus been added into Injil-M?

To show that the Quran leaves Muslims with no options, we need to cover all the possibilities. With three “yes or no” questions, there are eight possible combinations. 

Three options we can discard easily. 

1. “No, No, No”. 
2. “No, No, Yes”. 
3. “Yes, No, No”.

In these options, at least one of the books is missing completely. This contradicts the Quran, which refers to both the Injil given to Jesus, and the Injil in Muhammad’s time. These options are out.

Next option.

4. “No, Yes, No”. Nothing missing, some things preserved, nothing added. This implies perfect, complete preservation: Injil-J and Injil-M are identical.

Muslims must reject this option. There is no book in Muhammad’s time that anyone calls the Injil or the Gospel that Muslims can completely accept. The Gospels of the Christians, found in the New Testament, say that Jesus called himself the Son of God, and died on a cross. The other books called “Gospels” either say that Jesus died, or say that the creator of our world is evil. (In Muhammad’s time, the “Gospel” of Barnabas won’t exist for several centuries, so don’t bother trying that.) This option is out.

There are three options with two “Yes” and one “No” answers.

5. “Yes, Yes, No”. Some things missing, some things preserved, nothing added. This implies perfect but incomplete preservation of the Injil. The Injil in Muhammad’s time contains some of the Injil in Jesus’s time, but not all of it. Some of it was lost, but nothing has been added.

Muslims must reject this option. As in the previous option, there is no book in Muhammad’s time that any group of people call the Gospel/Injil, that Muslims can completely accept. Even if some of Jesus’s Injil is missing, the Gospels of the Christians, found in the New Testament, say that Jesus called himself the Son of God, and died on a cross. The other Gospels are no better. This option is out.

6. “Yes, No, Yes”. Some things missing, nothing preserved, some things added. This is complete corruption, complete fabrication. There is no overlap between Injil-J and Injil-M. We have nothing of what Jesus had, and everything in the Injil in Muhammad’s time has been added by someone else.

Muslims must reject this option. Quran 5:46-7 says, “let the people of the Injil judge by what Allah has revealed in it.” This refers to the Injil in Muhammad’s time. Allah would not tell the people of the Injil to judge by a completely fabricated book: Allah didn’t send any of it! So, there must be some things in the Injil that are preserved. This option is out.

7. “No, Yes, Yes”. Nothing missing, some things preserved, some things added. In this case, we have everything that was in the Injil given to Jesus, but the Injil in Muhammad’s time also has other things added to it.

Muslims must reject this option. Quran 61:6 says “And ˹remember˺ when Jesus, son of Mary, said, “O children of Israel! I am truly Allah’s messenger to you, confirming the Torah which came before me, and giving good news of a messenger after me whose name will be Aḥmad.”” But these exact words of Jesus are not in any book in Muhammad’s time or before. If Allah revealed to Jesus the name of a future prophet, and future believers are expected to “remember” it, that revelation is part of the Injil-J, given to Jesus. Those exact words have been lost, so at least something from Jesus’s Injil is missing. This option is out.

We have only one option left. 

8. “Yes, Yes, Yes”. Some things missing, some things preserved, some things added. There are things that were revealed to Jesus that have been lost, that are not in the Injil in Muhammad’s time. There are also some things that have been preserved from Jesus’s Injil. And there are some things that have been added. Can Muslims accept this option?

No. There are several severe problems. 

Problem 1: Quran 5:46-47 says, “So let the people of the Injil judge by what Allah has revealed in it.” This refers to Injil-M, the Injil in Muhammad’s time. But this can’t work.

Let’s imagine it. Suppose one of the people of the Injil tries to follow this command. They face a certain decision, or a confusing situation, and they need a judgement. As Allah has instructed, they open up Injil-M. They read a certain part, and it recommends a judgement.

Now, 

• If this part of the Injil-M was sent by Allah as part of Injil-J (i.e. the preserved part), then they should accept the judgement.

However,

• If this part of the Injil-M was not sent by Allah as part of Injil-J (i.e. the added part), then they need not accept the judgement.

But the people of the Injil don’t know which is which! So, we don’t know what to do. The Quran’s command makes no sense. We cannot judge by a corrupted book.

“So, you should judge by the Quran!”, you might say. In that case, the Quran was wrong to tell us to judge by the Injil. There goes the last option. But there’s more.

Problem 2: Suppose I write a book, using the following method. First, I copy-and-paste some parts of the Quran. Second, I add a bunch of stuff that I made up. My book is part Quran, and part invented by me, with no indication of what’s what. Relative to the true Quran, there are some things missing, some things preserved, and some things added.

Here’s the crucial question: would Allah refer to my mixed-up book as “The Quran”?

Of course not. My book is a blasphemy, an abomination, an affront to the purity of Allah’s revelation. It’s shirk: I’m associating my words with Allah’s words. My book must be distinguished from the Quran, so that no one confuses the two. My book must be condemned. Anyone who reads my book must be warned, told to throw it away, and commanded to read the real Quran.

Now think about the Injil. Muslims say that the Injil in Muhammad’s time is like my book: mixed-up, part revelation, part corruption. It’s partly Allah’s pure word to Jesus, and also a bunch of things that people made up, with no indication of what’s what. 

So, it’s a blasphemy, an abomination. It’s shirk: it associates human words with Allah’s words. It needs to be distinguished from the real Injil. Anyone who reads it needs to be warned. 

Is that what the Quran does? No! The Quran doesn’t even mention the difference. Allah uses the same word “Injil” for A) His own words sent in the pure, perfect revelation given to Jesus, and B) a blasphemous, corrupted mixture made by disbelievers. Allah doesn’t make a distinction. Allah doesn’t condemn the mixed-up Injil. Allah doesn’t warn people not to read it.

When Muslims make a distinction between the original Injil, and the Injil in Muhammad’s time, they are being smarter than Allah. The Quran doesn’t make this distinction. As a result, the Quran makes no sense.

But it gets worse.

Problem 3: Quran 10:94 says, “If you ˹O Prophet˺ are in doubt about ˹these stories˺ that We have revealed to you, then ask those who read the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so do not be one of those who doubt.”

This can’t work. Let’s imagine it.

Suppose Muhammad goes to those who read the Scripture before him. Muhammad finds that there is a difference between what has been revealed to him, and what the scripture says. Perhaps Muhammad says that Allah has no Son, but the Scriptures show Jesus saying repeatedly that he is the Son of God. Perhaps Muhammad says that Jesus did not die on a cross, but the Scriptures show Jesus dying on a cross. Now what?

• If “those who read the Scripture before you” are recounting truly preserved words of Allah, then Muhammad has to accept them. Muhammad just discovered that his revelations are lies; they didn’t come from God.
• If “those who read the Scripture before you” are recounting stories invented by some human and not sent by Allah, Muhammad can reject them. He doesn’t have to worry about it: he can still believe that he is a true prophet.

But nobody knows which is which! Nobody knows which parts of the scriptures have been preserved, and which haven’t. So, Muhammad doesn’t know what to do. He can’t follow this command. It makes no sense.

You might be thinking: “I know how to tell which is which! Compare it with the Quran.” But again, that’s the exact opposite of what the Quran says. It doesn’t tell people of the Scripture ”if you have doubts, ask Muhammad what the Quran says.” It says to Muhammad: if you have doubts about your revelation (the Quran), to talk to people of the Scripture. If you have to completely reverse what the Quran says for it to make sense, then you’re admitting that the Quran is nonsense. Muhammad cannot have his doubts answered by a corrupted book.

Objection:

The Torah and Injil have been corrupted, and the Quran itself proves it! Just look at Surah 2:79, 3:71, and 5:48—they show the Jews and Christians changed their scriptures!

Response:

Not so fast. These verses don’t say the actual text of the Torah or Injil was corrupted—only that some people misrepresented, concealed, or distorted its meaning.

• Surah 2:79 condemns those who write something with their own hands and claim it is from God—that’s forgery, not widespread textual corruption. If this verse meant the Torah and Injil were hopelessly corrupted, it would contradict Surah 2:85, which rebukes people for picking and choosing which parts of scripture to follow. That only makes sense if the text as a whole was still intact and authoritative. If the Torah and Injil were beyond repair, why would Allah criticize people for selectively obeying them?
• Surah 3:71 rebukes twisting the truth, not altering scripture itself.
• Surah 5:48 says the Quran confirms previous scripture, not replaces a corrupted one. And if 5:48 meant “check the Quran to see what’s corrupted in the previous scriptures,” then Allah would be commanding believers to engage in circular reasoning—“The Quran confirms the Bible, but only where the Quran agrees with it.” That’s not an argument; that’s a rigged game. If the previous scriptures were truly corrupted, the logical move would be to reject them entirely, not to tell people to judge by them (Surah 5:47) or stand on them (Surah 5:68). This interpretation self-destructs.

If Allah really wanted to say the Injil was corrupted, he could’ve just said, “Your books are false, blasphemous shirk—ditch them.” But instead, the Quran affirms them, commands believers to stand on them (Surah 5:68), judge by them (Surah 5:47), and declares they were sent down by God (Surah 3:3, 10:94).

Conclusion

In Islam, the question “What’s the Injil?” has no consistent answer. The Quran ties itself in a knot that it cannot escape. Reject it. Read the real Gospels for yourself, and discover the real Jesus.