Objections Muslims Might Raise — and Why They Fail

A Critical Response to Defenses of Modern Islam Against the “Dead on Arrival” Thesis

In response to the claim that Muhammad’s original Islam no longer exists, many Muslims raise familiar objections meant to defend the continuity, legitimacy, and authenticity of post-Qur’anic Islam. This companion post examines these top objections and demonstrates, through logic, source criticism, and internal contradictions, why each one fails.

---

Objection 1: “The Hadith Are a Necessary Supplement to the Qur’an”

🔁 The Claim:

The Qur’an is general; Hadith fills in the gaps. You can’t understand how to pray, fast, or perform zakāh without the Prophet’s example — preserved in Hadith.

🔍 The Flaw:

This contradicts the Qur’an’s own claim to be:

• Fully detailed (6:114)

• Explaining all things (16:89)

• Nothing omitted (6:38)

• Clear guidance (12:111)

• Self-sufficient (5:3 – “This day I have perfected your religion for you”)

If Hadith was essential, the Qur’an would say so — but it never does. In fact, Muhammad is repeatedly told:

“I follow only what is revealed to me.” (6:50)

“What is this Hadith after Allah and His verses do they believe in?” (45:6)

✅ Conclusion:

Claiming Hadith is “necessary” undermines the Qur’an’s self-description and makes Allah’s “complete book” incomplete — a logical contradiction.

---

Objection 2: “The Prophet Explained the Qur’an — That Explanation Is the Sunnah”

🔁 The Claim:

Muhammad explained the Qur’an through his life, actions, and sayings. The Sunnah preserves this explanation.

🔍 The Flaw:

There is no verse in the Qur’an that says Muhammad’s personal behavior is binding law.

The Qur’an commands following the revelation — not Muhammad’s every action:

“Say: I do not follow anything except what is revealed to me.” (7:203)

Moreover, many Hadith that claim to record Sunnah contradict the Qur’an — e.g., stoning adulterers (Hadith) vs. lashing (Qur’an 24:2).

Even Muhammad himself is warned:

“If he had made up any sayings in Our name, We would have seized him by the right hand…” (69:44–46)

✅ Conclusion:

The Qur’an says follow the message, not imitate the man. Conflating the two is not Qur’anically supported.

---

Objection 3: “Hadith Were Collected Rigorously and Are Reliable”

🔁 The Claim:

The Hadith underwent strict scrutiny — isnāds (chains of transmission), ‘ilm al-rijāl (biographical vetting), and mass memorization. Bukhari and Muslim are authentic.

🔍 The Flaw:

Even if the methodology was rigorous, the raw material is hearsay — oral reports passed through decades of political upheaval and civil war.

Hard evidence:

• The first Hadith collectors (Bukhari, Muslim) lived over 200 years after Muhammad.

• Thousands of Hadith were forged for political, sectarian, or theological gain (as admitted in Islamic sources).

• Contradictions abound even within “Sahih” collections — including prayer formats, inheritance rules, and eschatology.

📚 Islamic scholar Ignaz Goldziher: “Hadith is a product of the second and third centuries of Islam, not a record of the first.”

✅ Conclusion:

Reliability claims fall apart under historical scrutiny. Late-stage hearsay, no matter how filtered, is not revelation.

---

Objection 4: “Consensus of Scholars (Ijmā‘) Validates Post-Qur’anic Islam”

🔁 The Claim:

The global consensus of the ulama proves that modern Islam is the rightful continuation of Muhammad’s religion.

🔍 The Flaw:

There is no verse in the Qur’an that gives scholars authority to legislate or reinterpret divine revelation.

“Do not follow what you do not know.” (17:36)
“They have taken their rabbis and monks as lords beside Allah…” (9:31)

Appealing to ijmā‘ is a classic appeal to authority fallacy. If consensus could override the original message, then truth would be determined by majority opinion — which the Qur’an explicitly warns against:

“If you obey most of those upon the earth, they will mislead you from the way of Allah.” (6:116)

✅ Conclusion:

Truth isn’t determined by consensus — especially when the consensus contradicts the Qur’an.

---

Objection 5: “You’re Rejecting the Prophet If You Reject the Hadith”

🔁 The Claim:

Disregarding Hadith is tantamount to rejecting Muhammad, which is kufr (disbelief).

🔍 The Flaw:

No — we reject posthumous attributions that contradict the Qur’an.

The Qur’an never equates following Muhammad with obeying unauthenticated Hadith. Rather:

“O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger…” (4:59)

The Messenger’s only authority was to deliver the message (Qur’an):

“Your duty is only to deliver the message.” (42:48)
“We have not sent you except as a bringer of good tidings and a warner.” (25:56)

Hadith = man-made attributions. The Messenger ≠ the books of narrations written centuries later.

✅ Conclusion:

Rejecting Hadith is not rejecting Muhammad — it’s refusing to attribute falsehoods to him.

---

Objection 6: “But Islam Must Evolve — That’s Why Jurisprudence Exists”

🔁 The Claim:

As societies change, Islam must adapt. That’s why we need madhhabs, fatwas, and scholarly interpretation.

🔍 The Flaw:

This contradicts the Qur’an’s claim to be timeless, unchanging, and sufficient:

“The word of your Lord has been completed in truth and justice — none can change His words.” (6:115)

If the Qur’an is timeless, and if God “completed the religion” (5:3), then post-Qur’anic evolution is either:

• Unnecessary (if the Qur’an is enough), or

• Corruptive (if it overrides or contradicts it)

And when “evolution” leads to internal contradictions — such as stoning, apostasy laws, or inherited madhhab doctrines — then it’s no longer evolution, but mutation.

✅ Conclusion:

“Evolution” of Islam through jurisprudence directly undermines the claim that the Qur’an is final, complete, and unchanged.

---

Objection 7: “Millions of People Can’t Be Wrong — Islam Has Been Preserved”

🔁 The Claim:

With 1.9 billion Muslims and centuries of continuity, how can the religion be false or corrupted?

🔍 The Flaw:

This is a classic argumentum ad populum — appealing to popularity, not truth.

The Qur’an itself rejects this logic:

“Most people do not believe — even though you strive.” (12:103)
“The majority of mankind are corrupt.” (5:49)

And consider: Hindus, Catholics, Buddhists, and others also claim historical continuity and billions of followers. Does that make all belief systems equally true?

Truth is not democratic. It’s tested by evidence and logic — not numbers.

✅ Conclusion:

Popularity ≠ authenticity. If anything, the Qur’an warns that mass belief can often mean mass error.

---

🧠 Final Summary: Why the Objections Fail

Objection	Why It Fails
Hadith supplements the Qur’an	Qur’an claims completeness — no need for supplements
Sunnah = Prophet’s explanation	Prophet told to follow only revelation, not invent law
Hadith is reliable	Late, contradictory, and based on hearsay
Scholars’ consensus	Qur’an never delegates authority to scholars
Rejecting Hadith = rejecting Prophet	Qur’an distinguishes Prophet from posthumous attributions
Islam must evolve	Qur’an is final and unchangeable — “evolution” is deviation
Billions follow it	Truth is not determined by popularity

---

📌 Closing Thought

If your religion requires secondary books, centuries of rulings, and contradictions to explain a “clear, complete” revelation — you don’t have divine truth. You have a posthumous bureaucracy pretending to be revelation.