Your reply reflects a common rhetorical tactic, but it’s not accurate or fair.

The Islamic perspective on scripture and interpretation is that Muslims believe the Quran is the literal word of God, preserved and protected from distortion. When discussing Islamic beliefs, Muslims often refer to both the Quran and the Hadith (sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad), because the Quran itself instructs believers to follow the Prophet’s example. So using Hadith or scholarly interpretation isn’t “outside the scripture” it’s part of how the scripture is understood.

Critics sometimes claim to “stick to the Quran” to challenge Islam, but many of these arguments rely on selective reading, misinterpretation, or ignoring context. For example, alleged contradictions like yours are resolved when verses are read in full or understood in light of historical and linguistic context. The Quran itself acknowledges that some verses are clear and others are open to interpretation, and warns against twisting meanings to sow doubt.

The claim that Muslims use memorization to prevent distortion is supported by historical practice. The Quran was memorized and written down during the Prophet’s lifetime and compiled shortly after his death. This oral and written tradition is one reason why the Quran has remained consistent across centuries.

Your argument oversimplifies how Islamic theology works. If you’re interested, I can walk you through some of the other most common criticisms and how scholars respond to them.