In the last two articles, I responded to two points raised by an acquaintance who approached me in a spirit of dawah, the Islamic practice of inviting others to consider Islam. The first article addressed whether Paul had any real connection to Jesus since he never walked with him in person. The second addressed Paul’s violent past as Saul, before his conversion. Now I want to turn to his third complaint.
His argument was that Paul claims that Jesus spoke to him in a vision on the road to Damascus, not in a physical, in person meeting. Since this was only a vision, the argument goes, it carries less weight than an actual, physical encounter with Jesus, and he claimed that it raises doubt about whether Paul truly received authority to teach in Jesus’s name.
I want to respond to this honestly and directly.
It’s true that the accounts in Acts describe Paul encountering a bright light and hearing a voice while traveling to Damascus, rather than sharing a meal with Jesus or walking beside him on a road the way the twelve disciples did. But the word “vision” can be misleading if we assume it means something imagined. According to Acts 9, the men traveling with Paul also experienced this event. They saw the light and heard something, even if they didn’t fully understand the words. Paul was struck blind for three days afterward, a physical effect that lingered well past the initial moment. This was not a private daydream or an inward feeling. It had outward, physical, and lasting consequences that other people around him witnessed.
Paul also describes this event elsewhere in a way that treats it as a genuine appearance of the risen Christ, not a lesser kind of experience. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul lists the people Jesus appeared to after the resurrection, including Peter, the twelve disciples, more than five hundred believers at once, and then he adds, “last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.” Paul places his own encounter in the same category as the others, as a real appearance of the risen Jesus, not a separate or lesser category of religious experience.
It’s also worth remembering that the resurrection itself is central to the Christian message. If Jesus rose from the dead, then he was no longer limited to walking dusty roads with a small group of followers in Galilee. A postresurrection appearance to Paul, even if it came through blinding light and a voice rather than a shared meal, fits within the pattern of how the risen Jesus is described appearing to others in the Gospels as well, sometimes recognized immediately, sometimes not, sometimes appearing suddenly in a locked room.
So while the nature of Paul’s encounter was different from how the twelve disciples first met Jesus during his earthly ministry, it does not follow that this makes it less real or less authoritative. It was a genuine encounter with the risen Christ, with physical effects witnessed by others, and Paul treats it with the same weight as the other resurrection appearances recorded in the New Testament.
This is the third point my acquaintance raised. The next article will address his claim that the details of this event are described differently across different verses in Acts, which he offered as evidence of contradiction.
Before I get into this, let me state very clearly: I am a Christian and I do not promote hatred of Muslims. I also do not promote the teachings of the Qur’an. I am presenting this as something important to know when you witness to your Muslim friends who have been taught things that prevent them from listening to the Gospel.
IRS Images, 2025
A recurring theme in discussions between Muslims and Christians concerns the Muslim accusation of revelations in the Torah (TawrÄt) and the Gospel (InjÄ«l,) and Islamic claims about the integrity of those scriptures. The Qurâan repeatedly affirms the authority and reliability of the earlier books. Yet in later Islamic thought, it became increasingly common to claim that these scriptures had been textually corrupted.
1. The Qurâanic View of Previous Revelations: Every nation receives a revelation in its own language
The Qurâan teaches that God sent prophets to all peoples and that each group received its revelation in its own language. Arabs, according to this narrative, were simply the last to receive theirs.
Relevant passages include:
Qurâan 14:4 â âWe did not send any messenger except in the language of his people, so that he might make things clear for them.â
Qurâan 16:36 â âWe certainly sent a messenger to every nationâŠâ
On this basis, Jews and Christians already possessed their divinely revealed scriptures, the Torah and the Gospel, while Arabs received the Qurâan as their own scripture.
The Qurâanic expectation that Jews and Christians should judge by their own books
Several passages instruct Jews and Christians to follow the revelation already in their hands:
Qurâan 5:43 â âWhy do they come to you for judgment while they have the Torah, in which is Godâs judgment?â
Qurâan 5:47 â âLet the People of the Gospel judge by what God has revealed in it.â
Qurâan 5:68 â âYou have no ground to stand upon unless you uphold the Torah and the GospelâŠâ
These verses assume the authority and reliability of the Torah and Gospel available to these communities at the time.
Accusations of distortion refer to speech, not scripture
Christians had scriptures in Greek, Syriac, Latin, etc.
Most Arabs could not read these languages.
Thus, when disagreements arose, the charge was that Jews or Christians were misquoting or misinterpreting their scriptures, not altering the written text.
2. The Qurâanâs Argument to Jews and Christians
IRS Images, 2025
The Qurâan insists repeatedly that Jews and Christians must believe all of their scripture, not selectively, and that failure to do so leads to condemnation.
Examples include:
Qurâan 2:85 â âDo you believe in part of the Scripture and disbelieve in part? What then is the recompense for those among you who do so except disgrace in this life, and in the HereafterâŠ?â
Qurâan 2:89 â The Qurâan describes itself as confirming what the Jews already possessed.
Qurâan 2:91, 2:97, 2:101, 2:121 â These verses repeat the theme that the Qurâan confirms the earlier books and that the earlier books are to be believed in their entirety.
The Qurâanic reasoning is consistent:
Jews and Christians possess valid, divine scriptures.
The Qurâan agrees with these scriptures.
Therefore Jews and Christians should recognize the Qurâanâs prophet as legitimate because he affirms their books.
This argument depends on the assumption that the Torah and Gospel of the 7th century were intact, trustworthy revelations.
3. Why Later Muslim Thought Shifted: Expecting recognition that never came
The earliest Qurâanic passages present Jews and Christians as people who would recognize the prophet sent to the Arabs, since their books allegedly foretold him. According to this framework, they were expected to recognize him as the prophet mentioned in our scripture.
When Jewish and Christian communities in Medina did not recognize this prophetic claim, the Qurâan concludes that they were deliberately rejecting what they knew to be true, motivated by hostility rather than ignorance. This is important: The issue they claim was not presented as a problem with their scriptures, but with the people reading them.
Escalation of opposition
As Jewish and Christian groups increasingly rejected the new prophet, the Qur’anic perspective shifted:
In the Meccan period: Muslims, Jews, and Christians are grouped together as monotheists contrasted with pagans.
After encountering Jewish rejection in Medina: Qurâan 5:82 â Jews are described as the group most hostile to believers.
When Christians likewise mocked or rejected the new revelation: The Qurâanâs stance moves toward Muslims standing in opposition to all other groups unless they submit to Islamic governance (e.g., Qurâan 9:29).
The Later Doctrine of Textual Corruption
Because the Qurâanâs argument relies heavily on the authority of earlier scriptures, the persistent refusal of Jews and Christians to accept the “new prophet” became a theological problem. Over centuries, Islamic commentators increasingly adopted a different excuse: The Torah and Gospel must have been textually corrupted in the past. But surviving copies of both from Muhammad’s time do not support this.
to be clear, the Qur’an commands people to judge by the Torah and Gospel then present. There is no claim made during Muhammad’s time that the text had been corrupted. There are Qurâanic statements that earlier scriptures are âguidance and lightâ (e.g., Qurâan 5:44, 5:46). The Qurâanâs argument is that it âconfirms what is with them (Qurâan 2:89, 3:3â4, 10:94).
The Qurâan never states that the Torah or Gospel have been corrupted as texts; it only accuses individuals of distorting with their tongues.
MY CONCLUSION
The Qurâan affirms the authority and integrity of the Jewish and Christian scriptures available in the 7th century.
Modern Islamic theology commonly claims that those scriptures had already been altered.
These two claims cannot both be true.
If the scriptures were intact in the 7th century, the Qurâanic affirmation poses a challenge to later Islamic claims of textual corruption. If the scriptures were corrupted before the 7th century, then the Qurâanâs commands to âjudge byâ them, and its argument that they support the new prophet lose their force.
I stress that I am not saying all this so people can “win” a debate. I’m saying this because God loves all people. This includes Christians, Muslims and Jews. His offer of redemption is made to all people and I hope my Muslim friends will one day accept redemption. Saving faith is a gift from God, not from anything I do or that you do. But hopefully, knowing this will help some remove the blocks they have to hearing His word.
