Introduction:

We first have to clarify that the Qur’an is nothing but a Revelation confirming those books that were revealed before it:
“And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allāh and obey me.” (Qur’an 3:50)
Muhammad didn’t come to “Preach a different law than the Torah”, not even the Jews in general at the time the Qur’an was revealed claimed this! Many Jews (if not even the majority) at the time of Revelation actually considered him to be truthful and others even deemed him to be a Prophet of God, just not necessarily for the jews, but more so for the gentiles. The words of Maimonides (i.e. that the general opinion was that he was a "mad man") is nothing but a big fat lie. Perhaps he based this on the general opinion of the people around him and his contemporaries among the scholars.

A conversion, however, was deemed by some to be heresy, but not apostasy, and I would assume that it was because they said that Muhammad was for the gentiles only (which many Jews to this day also say). Some considered him to be a false Prophet and hence claimed that it would be heretical to follow his religion.

The truth of the matter is that he ﷺ came and confirmed The Torah, but as any Prophet of God, he also came to correct things that have been distorted by corrupt people throughout history, he came to make things easier (i.e. permit some of the prohibitions), as it is clearly shown in a Biblical verse where he is Prophecized:
"Hearken unto me, my people, and to my nation, unto me hear, for a Torah from me shall emerge, and my judgment shall be a light to the peoples,* I will calm." (Isaiah 51:4)*
The word used here is "אַרְגִּֽיעַ", a lot of translators have translated this in a very weird way that makes no sense, such as for example “I will bring it about quickly”, why would this be said? What significance does speed have in regards to Revelation? and “I will establish my justice for a light of the peoples”, "for a light of the..." what does this even mean in plain English? The most reasonable meaning is derived when we look at the meaning of the word in the hebrew dictionaries:
Argiyea - Calming down, verb, root: regah, construction: the active, inflection: first person future*
Moderates the intensity of an emotion or feeling; let it subside; the quiet “The father soothed the crying child." "The pill calmed my headache."
Source: Milog Online Hebrew dictionary
In other words “I will make things easier/calmer for the people”, “I will calm the rulings/law”. Which is why some translators wrote “I will make it a light”, a light could be interpreted as making things easier, but it still doesn’t really mean that. Regardless, this verse speaks of a new Torah that it will be a light / be moderated for the people. And indeed, when the Qur'an and the Torah are compared, the laws of the Qur'an are easier to follow and implement. The Qur’an is it’s perfect successor.

Prophets and Messengers of God permit or forbid (by the command of God), or affirm or contradict, certain things that exist within the physical Scriptures of God that we have, such as The Torah, for obvious reasons. The number one reason is, Books are prone to distortions by evil rulers, scholars and preachers and other noteworthy people (in status) and nowhere did God promise to preserve the Torah at all times. Yes, the Torah is to be followed no matter what, but distortions are most likely to happen and did indeed happen. Humans are known to distort Scriptures due to their disbelief, this is just how humans are. Another reason is that times change, certain things that aren’t doctrinal or credal, such as rulings pertaining food etc, call for a change at different times, and these things are no major things that affect the foundations of the religion (like the Christians who changed the entire Godhead, or that satan is a fallen angel as they wrongfully claim, and similar theological matters).

My conclusions above are not Islamic such, these statements are all based on classical Jewish works:

There’s a concept within Judaism that discusses the possibility of changes to the Torah if a prophet were to come and preach laws that contradict the Torah. This concept is often associated with the idea of a future prophet being able to provide additional laws (that contradict or confirm the Torah) or further insights that align with the existing Torah. One of the classical Rabbinic sources that touches upon this concept is from the Talmud, specifically from Tractate Sanhedrin:

Talmud - Tractate Sanhedrin 89 a-b, if a Prophet contradicts the Torah - The rulings:

Many laymen Jews do not know that this is discussed in detail by their scholars, and what is being written completely gives room for a Prophet such as Muhammad ﷺ . We are presented with the following two general points, and these points is what most Jews today believe in:


  1. A scenario where if a prophet instructs people to violate a law established by Moses, that prophet is considered false.
  2. if a prophet confirms the existing Torah and brings additional teachings or explanations that are consistent with it, then the Talmud suggests that the people are obligated to heed that prophet's new message. This is seen as a possibility for a prophet to provide new insights while adhering to the foundation of the Torah.


They also list 3 things that would call for an capital execution of someone claiming to be a prophet:


  1. The one who did not hear from God, he is to be executed here on earth by men.
  2. The one who prophesies that which was not stated to him, he is to be executed here on earth by men. The difference between the first and second is (and I assume) that he did not hear from God directly, and the second is that he did not hear from a messenger of God (i.e. angel).
  3. The one who prophesies in the name of an idol (any idol), he is to be executed here on earth by men.


The manner of execution for all three is a matter of differences in opinions among the Jewish scholars, some say stoning, others say strangulation and etc.

Muhammad was free from all three things, unless you’re just hellbent on denying his prophet-hood for no good reason. They also state 3 other “Heavenly” punishments that real Prophets could get, which I will not enumerate here because they are quite unnecessary (one of the reasons they say is if one receives a revelation but refuses to teach it, his death is in the hands of heaven, i.e. God, and not earth). They also argue that a Prophet can nullify a specific mitzva temporary, and I quote:
“If a true prophet espouses temporary nullification of a specific mitzva, one must heed his words.”
And no time limit is given as to how long this nullification is, so we are to understand that this nullification could be until the day of the arrival of the Messiah or even longer, which again gives room for Islam.

A new Torah is Prophesied, and it is The Qur'an

The general opinion among Rabbis is that a new Torah will come, they base this opinion mainly on the verse that says:
"Hearken unto me, my people, and to my nation, unto me hear, for a Torah from me shall emerge, and my judgment shall be a light to the peoples, I will calm." (Isaiah 51:4)*
Some Rabbis say that this means “A new Torah, same exact laws, but just newer interpretation giving more detail”, but this is not what we read from the clear and obvious words and meaning of the sentence here, and it kind of makes no sense that a new Torah will emerge giving the exact same laws but just some more insights. The verse just mentions a new Torah and that His, The Most Merciful, Judgments would be calmed. The Qur'an confirms the Torah and is the one and only book that literally can be seen as a “twin” of the Torah. This is why the Jews gave the utmost respect to Muhammad and literally treated him like a Prophet, asked him concerning their disputes and debates. Allah says in the Qur’an:
“Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does not judge* by what Allah has revealed — then it is those who are the disbelievers.”
They knew and recognized Prophet Muhammad, mostly because they were expecting a Prophet, but he is also mentioned in the Scriptures, and his arrival aligns perfectly with the prophecies therein. Their problem was Jesus (peace be upon him), they couldn’t accept that God came down in flesh, which the Qur’an also adamantly rejects, in the harshest of tones and ways. Some however, didn’t convert due to fear of being killed by their contemporaries.


The Tractrate Sanhedrin actually details exactly when the new Torah (with new laws) would come and when it would be permissible to follow it, which perfectly aligns with the period of Muhammad’s ﷺ arrival:
“According to this opinion, the Messianic era will comprise two distinct periods. In the first period after Mashiach arrives, the whole of Torah law will be in force and the mitzvos will be fully observed. However, from the time of the Resurrection (which is to take place forty years after the advent of Mashiach), the mitzvos will no longer be in force.”
So after the resurrection of the Messiah, the Torah is not in force anymore. The issue is that they have understood that Jesus was not the Messiah, and that we are still waiting for him. But history tells another story. We have literally seen only one notable and legitimate figure claim to be the Messiah – i.e. Jesus – and we have witnessed only one other Prophet after him of significance and noteworthiness that fit perfectly into the Prophecies that are mentioned about him in the OT. So the following question is to be posed to the Jewish follower of the Torah:

Qur'an rejects the Jesus you reject, but affirms one that aligns with your creed and doctrine

Q: What if The Qur’an is right about Jesus, the person that according to modern history was crucified by the Jews of his era? What if the Qur’an is right in its saying that Jesus never claimed divinity or to be the son of God and that they unjustly tried to kill him, but that God saved him? Indeed, this is even seen from the various verses of the NT, one clear example is:

“...tell us whether you be the Christ, the Son of God?”
"That is what you say!" Jesus answered. "But I tell all of you, 'Soon you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right side of God All-Powerful and coming on the clouds of heaven.'"
(Matthew 26:64)
Jesus here was literally asked whether he claims to be the son of God, and he denies it and says “That is what you say”, i.e. “you say that about me”. Many christian scholars misguidedly interpret this by saying that there are other verses where Jesus says similar phrases and it is a statement of affirmation, but they completely ignore the fact that Jesus right after this phrase affirms what HE has been saying and gives them a title that DIRECTLY contradicts the title "Son of God":

”...But I tell all of you, 'Soon you will see the Son of Man...“

Now that you, O truth-seeking jew, know that Jesus denied the accusations of blasphemy, the claims of divinity, according to both the NT and the Qur’an, why do you still persist in denying that he was the Messiah? You have no right to do so! You ought to fear God and accept all of his Prophets and Messengers, including Muhammad (peace be upon them both).

Some jews argue for their denial by saying that some certain word used in relation to the mother of the Messiah actually meant “young girl” and not “virgin”, but this is a very weak argument; just because a word didn’t mean “virgin” doesn’t mean that God couldn’t have intended the Messiah to be born of a virgin woman. This is ridiculous! Do we actually need everything to be prophesied? No we don’t! This reason is weak and carries no basis at all.

Here’s some other reasons and their respective rebuttals:


  1. Judaism affirms that Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies by ushering in an era of universal peace (Isaiah 2:4)

- Rebuttal: This is not concerning the Messiah, this is concerning Muhammad.

2. Third Temple was not built (Ezekiel 37:26–28)
- Rebuttal: This is concerning Muhammad, and the third temple was indeed built. There is not a single Prophet noteworthy/notable before or after Muhammad ﷺ that fulfill these verses in a more accurate way. This is indeed about none other than Muhammad.

3. Gathering all Jews back to the Land of Israel did not happen (Isaiah 43:5–6)
- Rebuttal:

Verse 14 says:
“...For your sake I send to Babylon;
I will bring down all her defenses,
and the Chaldeans shall cry out in lamentation.”
Is this not talking about an event in the times of Babylon? Why are we trying to make it seem as if this is about the Messiah? This makes no sense, and renders the reason/argument weak.

4. Jews believe the Messiah will be a direct (blood) descendant of King David through Solomon on his father's side and will be born naturally to a husband and wife (Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 11:1, Ezekiel 34:23–24).
Rebuttal: The verse in Genesis says:
“The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and to him shall the gathering of the people be.”
The scepter is Jesus while the Shiloh is Muhammad. Muhammad was a descendant of Ishmael, while Jesus was of that of Judah through David. The Torah was followed until Muhammad. This is as clear as it can be, there is no denying this. This again, is a very weak argument and even further strengthens their truthfulness because they fulfilled the Prophecy.

The verse in Isaiah says that "The Spirit of the LORD will rest on...", what does this mean? How did they come to the conclusion that a virgin birth is denied here?

The verse in Ezekiel also doesn't deny anything. People are called as "daughters of...." and "sister of..." while not being literal daughters and siblings to that notable and noble person. This is an idiom of the Bible.

5. "The point is this: that the whole Christology of the Church - the whole complex of doctrines about the Son of God who died on the Cross to save humanity from sin and death - is incompatible with Judaism, and indeed in discontinuity with the Hebraism that preceded it."
- Rebuttal: The Qur’an agrees with this, the jews lied on Jesus (ﷺ) and made him to be something he never claimed he was. Paul later introduced various beliefs, laws, doctrines, which even further deviated into another god (the cursed trinity that no other Prophet taught or believed in, as it contradicts the very first commandment). So denying Jesus the Messianic title with this argument is again a very weak argument. The jews of that era lied, and it’s as simple as that! They didn’t believe in him and wanted him crucified at all costs, because being hanged on a tree means that you are cursed:

“Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.” (Gal. 3:13)
And by hanging him on a tree, they would disprove his Messianic title and Prophet-hood, well, so they thought. But Allah saved him:

“And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of Allāh." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.” (The Qur’an 4:157)
This as well, is a very weak argument. Jesus was not killed by crucifixion, and neither did he ever blaspheme against God!

6. "Aside from its belief in Jesus as the Messiah, Christianity has altered many of the most fundamental concepts of Judaism." (Kaplan, Aryeh)
- Rebuttal: Paul and the Roman empire have altered many of the most fundamental concepts of the religion of Abraham, we agree.

As you can see, their arguments are all weak. Jesus was and is the Messiah and Muhammad is the seal of the Prophets. This is the obvious truth!

As for the many verses where it is implied that the Torah is to be followed until the day of judgement – no questions asked – are all also very ambiguous and hence weak in basis for a rejection of Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ):
“Of old have I known from Thy testimonies that Thou hast founded them for ever” (T'hillim 119:152)

That God has founded His Testimonioes does not directly mean that all of the Scriptures God reveals are to be followed forever. This makes no sense because there are abrogations, changes etc that God Himself does through all the various Prophets and Scriptures. This (and many similar verses) are again very weak arguments. And even if, let us not forget what the jewish classical scholars wrote:

“According to this opinion, the Messianic era will comprise two distinct periods. In the first period after Mashiach arrives, the whole of Torah law will be in force and the mitzvos will be fully observed. However, from the time of the Resurrection (which is to take place forty years after the advent of Mashiach), the mitzvos will no longer be in force.”

There is an era and a time, when the Torah will not be in force, and we have proven to you here in this work that this era and time is none other than the time and era we are in right now!
And Jazakum Allahu Khairan, share this however you want, no copyright at all, would appreciate a mention though :).

/By Exion