The Gospels are unreliable because they present stories of Jesus in slightly different manners, which means they cannot be trusted.

Muslim apologists often argue that the variations in the Gospel accounts of Jesus' life indicate unreliability and suggest that these texts should be discarded. However, this perspective misunderstands the nature of historical writing. Historians frequently summarize and modify accounts to highlight what is most relevant for their audience, which is precisely what the Gospel writers have done. They have accurately captured the essence of Jesus' teachings and actions, even if the wording differs. Furthermore, if the Muslim claim about the necessity of comprehensive detail were true, it would also apply to the Quran, which presents parallel accounts with differing details and wording. For instance, the story of Moses and the burning bush is recounted in multiple places in the Quran, yet the variations in these accounts do not lead Muslims to reject their scripture. Instead, they accept these differences as part of the divine revelation. Thus, the argument that the Gospels are unreliable due to their differences ultimately undermines the credibility of the Quran as well. If one were to apply the same standards of scrutiny to both texts, it would lead to the conclusion that both the Gospels and the Quran contain valuable truths despite their narrative variations.