Why Does the Definition of a Muslim Shift in Islamic Theology?

Introduction: The Changing Definition of a Muslim

Islamic theology frequently adjusts the definition of a Muslim when discussing previous prophets like Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. The goal of this shifting definition appears to be maintaining continuity between pre-Islamic prophetic traditions and Islam, while also asserting Islam’s supremacy as the final revelation.

This creates a contradiction:

When referring to past prophets, Islam broadens the definition of a Muslim to mean anyone who submits to God (thereby claiming that all biblical prophets were Muslims).
When defining Islam today, a narrower definition is applied—requiring belief in Muhammad and the Quran—which excludes those same prophets.

This inconsistency raises serious theological and historical questions about the legitimacy of Islam’s claim over earlier religious traditions.

1. The Broad Definition: A General Submission to God

Islam often claims that all prophets—from Adam to Jesus—were Muslims because they "submitted to God" (Islam literally means submission).

This broad definition is vague and removes specific Quranic requirements, making it easier to argue that biblical figures were essentially proto-Muslims.
However, this ignores the fact that these prophets operated under different revelations, covenants, and theological understandings of God that do not match the Quranic framework.

Why This Definition Is Problematic:

Jesus, Moses, and Abraham worshiped a different concept of God than Islam’s Allah.
Their scriptures and laws (Torah, Psalms, Gospel) do not align with the Quran.
They had no knowledge of Muhammad or the Quran, making it anachronistic to call them "Muslims" in the modern Islamic sense.

2. The Narrow Definition: The True "Muslim" According to Islam

In contrast, Islam today defines a true Muslim as someone who:

Believes in Allah as described in the Quran.
Accepts Muhammad as the final prophet.
Submits to the teachings of the Quran and follows its laws.

By This Definition, Biblical Prophets Cannot Be Muslims

They did not know Muhammad or acknowledge him as the final prophet.
They followed distinct revelations (the Torah, Gospel, and Psalms), which Islam later claimed were corrupted.
The God they worshiped differs significantly from the Quran’s portrayal of Allah (e.g., the biblical God is a Father, relational, and, in Christianity, Trinitarian).

Thus, under Islam’s own narrow definition, the prophets of the previous scriptures do not qualify as Muslims.

3. The Contradiction: Switching Definitions When Convenient

Islam uses the broad definition to claim continuity with biblical prophets, but it demands the narrow definition when asserting its exclusivity.

This results in a contradiction:

If being Muslim only means submission to God, then Jews, Christians, and even some Hindus could also be considered Muslims.
If being Muslim requires belief in Muhammad, then all past prophets were not Muslims.

This Strategic Definition Shift Serves Several Purposes:

To Establish Continuity – By claiming all prophets were Muslims, Islam portrays itself as the true successor of all past monotheistic traditions.
To Discredit Other Faiths – By arguing that previous scriptures were corrupted, Islam can invalidate Judaism and Christianity while still appropriating their key figures.
To Claim Authority Over Abrahamic Prophets – If Abraham, Moses, and Jesus were "Muslims," then their authority is absorbed into Islam, even while their original teachings are rejected.

4. The Problems with This Approach

This redefinition of "Muslim" creates major theological and historical problems:

A. Historical Inconsistencies

Abraham’s Covenant: Circumcision is upheld in Islam, but his sacrificial system and direct relationship with YHWH are not.
Moses’ Torah: The Torah contains a detailed legal system that is separate from Quranic Sharia.
Jesus’ Teachings: Jesus’ emphasis on grace, forgiveness, and salvation through his death contradicts the Quranic view of Jesus as merely a prophet.

B. Theological Contradictions

The biblical God is relational and referred to as a Father, while Islam denies that Allah has any such relational aspect.
Christianity’s Trinitarian God is fundamentally different from Islam’s strictly unitarian concept of God.
Islam denies the crucifixion, while all historical evidence affirms it.

C. Logical Fallacies

It is anachronistic to call someone a Muslim before Islam even existed in its current form.
It is circular reasoning to claim past prophets were Muslim simply because Islam redefined the term.
If Islam were truly a continuation of previous revelations, its teachings would align with earlier scriptures—but instead, they contradict them.

5. Logical Conclusion: The Redefinition of “Muslim” Is Inconsistent

This shifting definition of a Muslim leads to three unavoidable conclusions:

It is inconsistent and illogical – Islam cannot apply two different definitions of a Muslim and expect both to be accepted.
It undermines the distinct teachings of earlier prophets – The unique beliefs and roles of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus are erased in favor of an Islamic reinterpretation.
It attempts to retroactively claim religious figures who never followed Islam – A tactic that fails under theological and historical scrutiny.

Final Thought: What This Means for Interfaith Discussions

The redefinition of "Muslim" is not a historical reality but a theological tool. It is used to:

Establish a false continuity between past prophets and Islam.
Maintain Islamic exclusivity while still claiming biblical figures.
Avoid acknowledging fundamental contradictions between Islam and previous revelations.

However, when critically examined, it becomes clear that:

The prophets of the previous scriptures were not Muslims in the Quranic sense.
Islam evolved from an early Abrahamic movement into a distinct and exclusivist religion.
Attempting to redefine past figures as Muslims is historically inaccurate and logically flawed.

Thus, if Islam’s own definition of a Muslim excludes past prophets, the claim that they were Muslims collapses entirely.

Final Challenge to Islamic Apologetics

If Muslims truly believe their own definition, then they must accept that Abraham, Moses, and Jesus were not Muslims.

If they continue to claim they were, then they must explain:

Why these prophets never mentioned Muhammad or the Quran.
Why their understanding of God differs fundamentally from Islamic teachings.
How they can use two contradictory definitions of a Muslim without falling into historical revisionism.

Until these issues are addressed, the redefinition of a Muslim remains an unconvincing theological construct—not a historical fact.

Exposing Islam

Thursday, April 17, 2025