INVESTIGATING ISLAM

Logic vs. Revelation

Unmasking the Qur’an’s Logical Fallacies

“If the Qur’an is perfect, why does it fail basic logic?”

This is the question no one’s supposed to ask. For centuries, Muslims have been told the Qur’an is flawless—free of contradiction, divine in origin, and unmatched in clarity. But once you open its pages with a critical mind instead of a fearful one, the illusion starts to crack.

This post isn’t about personal attacks, cultural critiques, or theological disagreements. It’s about logic. Specifically, the logical fallacies embedded within the Qur’anic text—flaws in reasoning that would get laughed out of a high school debate club, let alone survive as the foundation of a religion claiming divine authorship.

Surah 4:82 dares readers to find contradictions in the Qur’an as a test of its truth:

“Had it been from other than Allah, they would have found many contradictions therein.”

We’re taking that challenge—because if the book invites logical scrutiny, it should withstand it. Spoiler: it doesn’t.

What Is a Logical Fallacy (and Why It Matters in Religion)?

A logical fallacy is a mistake in reasoning—an argument that might sound persuasive but falls apart under scrutiny. Religion, if it claims to be rational and based on truth, must be held to the same standards as any other claim. If a divine text uses the same broken logic as cult leaders or conspiracy theorists, it raises the obvious question: Is it really divine?

Let’s walk through seven glaring logical fallacies found in the Qur’an itself.

1. Appeal to Authority: “Allah Said It, So It’s True”

This fallacy argues that something must be true simply because an authority figure says so. The Qur’an leans heavily on this.

“This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah.” (Qur’an 2:2)
“Shall I seek other than Allah as a judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?” (Qur’an 6:114)

The claim is that the Qur’an is true because it came from Allah—but how do we know it came from Allah? The Qur’an. Circular logic disguised as divine certainty. The authority is never questioned; it’s simply declared. That’s not reasoning. That’s dogma.

2. Circular Reasoning: The Qur’an Proves the Qur’an

Circular reasoning (begging the question) is when an argument’s conclusion is included in its premise.

Surah 4:82 is the ultimate example:

“Had it been from other than Allah, they would have found many contradictions in it.”

Translation: It’s from Allah because it has no contradictions. It has no contradictions because it’s from Allah.

But if contradictions are found (and they are), the argument collapses. This isn’t proof. It’s a logical booby trap.

3. False Dilemma: Believe or Burn

A false dilemma occurs when only two options are presented when more exist. The Qur’an is filled with these binary threats:

“Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam.” (Qur’an 3:19)
“Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam—it will never be accepted from him, and he will be among the losers in the Hereafter.” (Qur’an 3:85)

Believe in Islam or face eternal punishment. There’s no room for doubt, exploration, or respectful disagreement. This is intellectual blackmail, not divine wisdom.

4. Strawman Arguments: Misrepresenting Opponents

The Qur’an frequently mischaracterizes the beliefs of others in order to easily refute them. This is classic strawman fallacy.

“They have certainly disbelieved who say, ‘Allah is one of three.’” (Qur’an 5:73)

This is meant to target Christians, but it’s a distortion of the doctrine of the Trinity, which doesn’t claim “three gods” or “Allah is one of three.” Instead of engaging with actual theological positions, the Qur’an attacks a cartoon version.

It does the same with polytheists, often portraying them as childish, irrational, or absurdly simplistic—another rhetorical shortcut.

5. Ad Hominem: Attacking the Person, Not the Argument

Instead of addressing objections with reason, the Qur’an often dismisses critics by attacking their character or motives:

“Indeed, those who disbelieve—it is the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them—they will not believe. Allah has set a seal upon their hearts…” (Qur’an 2:6–7)

“Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are those who have disbelieved…” (Qur’an 8:55)

This is a textbook ad hominem. It labels non-believers as corrupted, ignorant, or evil by default, removing the need for rational dialogue. If you question, you're defective.

6. Inconsistency: Double Standards in Revelation

Consistency is key to any valid argument. The Qur’an claims earlier scriptures (Torah, Gospel) were revealed by Allah:

“We sent down the Torah… We gave him the Gospel…” (Qur’an 5:44, 5:46)

But then it contradicts them, while also accusing Jews and Christians of corrupting texts after divine delivery:

“Do you hope that they will believe you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah then distort it after they had understood it?” (Qur’an 2:75)

So which is it? Were these scriptures divine and reliable, or hopelessly corrupted? You can’t both affirm and deny the same texts without violating the law of non-contradiction. This inconsistency is logically fatal.

7. Shifting the Burden of Proof: “Prove It’s Not Divine”

Another subtle fallacy: instead of proving its own divine origin, the Qur’an demands that skeptics prove it false.

“If you are in doubt about what We have sent down… then produce a chapter like it.” (Qur’an 2:23)

This is a bait-and-switch. The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, not the critic. Demanding that disbelievers produce a literary imitation is not evidence of truth—it’s a diversion tactic.

Conclusion: If Truth Fears Logic, It Isn’t Truth

The Qur’an claims to be a book for “people who reflect.” But when you actually reflect—when you apply basic logic—it crumbles.

It appeals to its own authority.
It argues in circles.
It traps you in binary choices.
It misrepresents opponents.
It attacks doubters instead of answering them.
It contradicts itself while condemning contradiction.

This isn’t divine reasoning. It’s cult logic in scripture’s clothing.

And here’s the part you’re not supposed to say out loud:
If the Qur’an can’t survive a logic test, it doesn’t deserve blind obedience.

Call to Action

Stop outsourcing your brain. Read the Qur’an for yourself—not with fear, but with logic turned all the way on.

Ask yourself:
“If a book claims to be perfect, but collapses under reason… what exactly am I following?”