Provocative Core Question (Primary Version)

Provocative Core Question (Primary Version)

Where is the Sahih Hadith in which Muhammad explicitly declares that Paul the Apostle was a false Nabi (prophet) and a false Rasul (messenger)?

If Islam claims doctrinal continuity with the Gospel and insists that Paul corrupted the message of Jesus, then this accusation must be grounded in authentic, early Islamic sources—not later polemics.

So I ask Muslims plainly:

Produce one Sahih Hadith—Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, or Ibn Majah—where Muhammad names Paul and condemns him as a false prophet or messenger.

If such a Hadith exists and meets the standards of Sahih authentication, I will publicly embrace Islam.

If it does not exist, then the claim that Paul falsified Christianity is a later theological invention, not a prophetic declaration.

---

More Aggressive / Confrontational Version

Muslims frequently claim that Paul corrupted the teachings of Jesus, yet Muhammad himself is completely silent about Paul.

So here is my challenge:

Show me a single Sahih Hadith where Muhammad identifies Paul by name and declares him a false prophet, a false messenger, or a corruptor of Jesus’ Gospel.

No blogs.
No YouTube imams.
No modern scholars.
No weak (da‘if) narrations.

Only Sahih Hadith.

If Muhammad never condemned Paul, then who gave Muslims the authority to do so—Allah or later theologians?

---

Academic / Scholarly Version

Islam claims to affirm the Gospel (Injil) while rejecting Pauline Christianity. However, such a rejection demands primary-source evidence from Muhammad himself.

Therefore, the question is simple and methodological:

1. Where in the Sahih Hadith corpus does Muhammad:

   • Name Paul the Apostle?

   • Accuse him of falsifying the message of Jesus?

   • Declare him a false Nabi or Rasul?

2. If no such Hadith exists:

   • On what epistemological basis does Islam reject Paul?

   • How can Islam claim to “confirm” the Gospel (Qur’an 5:46–48) while rejecting its chief first-century interpreter?

Silence in Sahih Hadith is not evidence—it is a theological vacuum.

---

Logical Trap Version (Short & Sharp)

If Paul corrupted Christianity, Muhammad—Allah’s final messenger—should have said so.

So:

Where is the Sahih Hadith where Muhammad condemns Paul?

If none exists, then:

• Either Paul was not a corrupter

• Or Muhammad failed to warn the world

Which one is Islam willing to admit?

---

Debate-Ready One-Liners

• “No Sahih Hadith against Paul = no Islamic authority to reject Paul.”

• “If Paul was the greatest corrupter of Jesus, why did Muhammad never mention him?”

• “Islam rejects Paul without prophetic evidence—only post-Qur’anic opinion.”

• “Silence from Muhammad is louder than modern Muslim accusations.”

---

Closing Provocation (Optional)

Until Muslims produce a Sahih Hadith where Muhammad condemns Paul, the rejection of Pauline Christianity remains un-Islamic, un-prophetic, and historically unsupported.