The following verses of the Qur’an are challenged by some ignorant people:
الم – غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ – فِي أَدْنَى الْأَرْضِ وَهُم مِّن بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سَيَغْلِبُونَ- فِي بِضْعِ سِنِينَ لِلَّهِ الْأَمْرُ مِن قَبْلُ وَمِن بَعْدُ وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ – بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنصُرُ مَن يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ- وَعْدَ اللَّهِ لَا يُخْلِفُ اللَّهُ وَعْدَهُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
Alif, Lam, Meem. The Romans have been defeated. In the nearest/lowest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome. Within three to nine years. To Allah belongs the command before and after. And that day the believers will rejoice. In the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the Exalted in Might, the Merciful. [It is] the promise of Allah. Allah does not fail in His promise, but most of the people do not know. [Surah Ar-Rum 1-6]
The Arabic word (بِضْعِ) Bid’ sometimes translated as few refers to a time period of three to nine years.
The verses state a historical event; a battle between the Romans and Persians in a nearby land which is also the lowest land i.e. near the Dead Sea. The battle that the Qur’an mentions about the Roman defeat took place in 614 CE. The idolators of Makkah supported the Persians while the Muslims supported the people of the Book. After the verses were revealed, the companion of the Prophet (ﷺ), Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) mentioned this to the idolators, and they said, “Set a time limit for that, and if we prevail, we will get such and such; and if you prevail, you will get such and such.” So he set a limit of five years, and they (the Romans) did not prevail. Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and he said:
أَلَا جَعَلْتَهَا إِلَى دُونَ أُرَاهُ قَالَ: الْعَشْرِ
Why do you not make it less than ten?
Sa`id bin Jubayr said: “Bid` means less than ten.”[1]
The criticisms against these verses are two:
- Why did the Prophet (ﷺ) mention to increase the time period from five to 10 years after Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) lost the bet instead of before?
- The Qur’an still got it wrong as the Romans defeated the Persians in 627 CE which is 13 years after 614 CE.
Both of these arguments are flawed as we shall see below:
1. Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) did not discuss about the bet with the Prophet (ﷺ) until after five years which is when the Prophet (ﷺ) instructed him to make it less than 10 years. Moreover, Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) was an Arab along with the people whom he made a bet with and if he simply changed the number of years from five to 10 without any basis, they would have mocked him but instead they knew the meaning of Bid` (بِضْعِ) and hence they did not have any basis to make fun of Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه).
2. When the Qur’an says The Romans have been defeated, it does not speak of the overall war but rather a battle out of the many battles. The Persians had taken the offensive and appeared unbeatable. The British historian Gibbon says, even seven to eight years after this prediction of the Quran, the conditions were such that no one could even imagine that the Byzantine Empire would ever gain an upper hand over Iran. Not to speak of gaining domination, no one could hope that the Empire, under the circumstances, would even survive. This is when the Qur’an stated that after their defeat, they will overcome within three to nine years. This is again not stating that the Persians would be completely eliminated but states that the Romans would stage a comeback and defeat the Persians within 10 years. The decisive battle which unquestionably brought the Romans back in the dominant position took place in 627 CE but this is not what the Qur’an speaks of; the Qur’an speaks of the Romans overcoming and defeating the Persians in a battle before 624 CE which appeared impossible to everyone including the Romans as they had sought out unconditional peace treaties with the Persians which the latter rejected.
In 622 CE as the Prophet (ﷺ) migrated to Madinah, the Emperor Heraclius set off for Trabzon. Heraclius started his counter attack in 623 CE from Armenia. Next year, in 624 CE, he entered Azerbaijan and destroyed Clorumia, the birthplace of Zoroaster, and ravaged the principal fire temple of Persia.
As Khosru had desecrated Jerusalem, Heraclius now destroyed Clorumia, the birthplace of Zoroaster and put out its sacred light. Heraclius defeated Khosru’s army in Armenia, while his brother Theodorus defeated a second army to the west. In the meantime, the Persians and their Avar allies laid siege to Constantinople in 626 CE, which failed. The last battle between the Byzantines and Persians was the battle of Nineveh, in 627 CE, which ended in a Persian defeat.[2] Parvez fled to Ctesiphon, where he was later killed by one of his sons, Kavadh II, who later made peace with Heraclius by returning all the lands that Persia had taken from Byzantium along with the cross.[3]
We learn that there is no error in the Qur’an and this prophecy attests to the truthfulness of the Qur’an.
Indeed, Allah knows the best.
References and Footnotes:
[2] This is the problem faced by many critics; they fail to understand the Qur’anic statements and compare the dates when the decisive battle took place; however, the victory started to come Rome’s way much before 627 CE and within the 10 years indicated by the Prophet (ﷺ).
Qur'anic misconceptions addressed 
Pingback: Islamic identity of Rûm (Rome) and Romans | Qur'anic misconceptions addressed
The victory was the Battle of Badr. 9 years later.
Here is the exact translation of your previous message (word-for-word as much as possible in natural English): In Surah Ar-Rum verses 2-5, it is said that Rome will be victorious. Okay. But here another prophecy is made that this will happen on the day when the Muslims will be rejoicing. And most tafsirs and one sahih hadith mention that this event happened on the day of the Battle of Badr, and on that very day the Muslims were rejoicing, and the hadith states that the Muslims received the news on that day. Now there are some problems here. Rome was completely victorious in 627 or 628 CE. But the Battle of Badr took place on March 13, 624 CE. So this is the first problem. Even if we assume that this verse of the Quran is indicating 624 CE, it would still be wrong. Because historically, in 624 CE, there was no victory or battle at all between Persia and Rome. I have learned this from various secular historical sources. Here in the verse, there is an Arabic grammatical word which is “bid‘”. The claim that “bid‘” does not strictly mean a specific number is not correct — linguistically, it strictly means (3-9/10). Some scholars call it flexible because they give priority to the purpose of the verse and the final event, but this conflicts with the strict meaning of the language. Mainstream scholars therefore take it as Badr for this reason. So its time limit is 3-9 years. There is even one hadith where Abu Bakr (ra) was betting and it was about almost 9 years. Therefore, it never covers the 628 CE timeline. Because this verse was revealed in 614-15. Even if I take the maximum number, it still comes to 624. Because the Battle of Badr happened in 624 CE, and all the mufassirs say that on that very day victory occurred over Rome and Persia. But historically this is completely contradictory. Because firstly, Rome was victorious in 628 CE. Even if we assume that it refers to some expedition at the beginning of 624 CE, it would still be wrong. Because that expedition in 624 happened on March 25. Another expedition happened around August or July. But the Battle of Badr took place on March 13, 624. Now perhaps you might say that the Quran did not mention the timeline. But this is agreed upon by Arabic grammar and all the mufassirs that the Arabic word for “a few years” in this verse strictly limits it to within 3-9 years. I am giving you all the references and evidences below. Islam web: Within a few years — To Allah belongs the command before and after. And that day the believers will rejoice (4) In the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the Exalted in Might, the Merciful. (5)) (Within a few years) The word “few” means within three to seven years, or, as some say, within three to nine years, or, as others say, a period of less than ten years. Abdullah ibn Umar, Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, al-Hasan, and ‘Isa ibn Umar recited “ghulibat” with fatha on ghayn and lam, and “sayaghlibun” with damma on ya’ and fatha on lam. They said that this verse was revealed when the Prophet (peace be upon him) informed them of the Romans’ victory over the Persians. The meaning of the verse is: Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated by the Persians in your nearest land, and after their defeat, they will be victorious. Within a few years the Muslims will defeat them. After this period ended, the Muslims began their jihad against the Romans. The first interpretation is more correct, and it is the view of most commentators. (To Allah belongs the command before and after) means: before and after the Roman Empire’s victory over Persia. Whichever side wins, it is by Allah’s command, decree, and predestination. (And that day the believers will rejoice in Allah’s victory over the Persians) . As-Suddi said: The Prophet (peace be upon him) and the believers rejoiced on the day of Badr at their victory over the polytheists and at the People of the Book’s victory over the polytheists. (He gives victory to whom He wills and He is the Exalted in Might) victorious for the believers, (the Merciful). Even if we take the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, it conflicts with both Arabic grammar and the hadith. The tafsir says Rome was victorious in 624 CE. But history says 628. The main point is that the hadith says on the day of Badr Rome was victorious (it does not mean the final victory). But historically this timeline does not match. What do neutral historians say? (With evidence) World-renowned Byzantine specialists and historians, after analyzing Roman records, describe the events of 624 CE (the year of the Battle of Badr) as follows: Historian Walter Kaegi: In his famous book “Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium” (pages 122-126), he mentions that on March 25, 624 CE, Emperor Heraclius left Constantinople. At that time he had only just begun the journey for war. James Howard-Johnston: According to his research, the Romans conquered the main Persian city of Ganzak (Ganzak) and its fire-temple there in the autumn of 624 CE (September or October)
Correct me if I’m wrong; there are three issues:
1) what the Qur’an actually predicts,
2) what “bid‘ sinin” linguistically allows, and
3) which historical event qualifies as the fulfilment.
The verse speaks about reversal of fortune, not the final decisive victory. Q.30:2-4 states that the Romans have been defeated but will be victorious “in a few years.” Nothing in the wording requires the final destruction of Persia or the climactic victory of Nineveh (627). Note that the final destruction of Persia still didn’t happen in 627. Classical commentators such as al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir discuss the prophecy as the return of Roman ascendancy after catastrophic defeat. Historically, this shift begins when Heraclius launched counter-campaigns and regained strategic initiative (622-624), not only when the war ends years later.
Modern historians also acknowledge that by 624 the Byzantines had already begun successful offensives into Persian territory and reversed momentum. If the Qur’an refers to the turning of the tide, then early Roman successes fit the wording without difficulty.
The expression “bid‘ sinin” is not an exact mathematical boundary. Arabic lexicons define biḍ‘ as a small number typically between three and nine, but classical Arabic usage is approximate rather than mathematically rigid. Early Arabic poetry and prose show that such expressions describe a limited span, not a precise deadline down to a specific year. However, I know this will not convince you so I will skip this part.
Reports linking Muslim rejoicing to Badr do not necessarily mean that a Roman battlefield victory occurred on that exact day. News in the past travelled slowly, and celebrations could coincide with the arrival of reports that Romans had begun winning again. Many scholars understood the verse to describe two simultaneous divine signs: the believers’ victory at Badr and the Romans’ resurgence during that period, not a precise synchronised date.
Basically, your objection assumes that only the decisive victory of 627 qualifies. However, several milestones exist:
• 622–623: Heraclius reorganises and launches counter-offensives (the tides had turned).
• 623–624: Byzantine incursions into Persian territory and recovery of initiative.
• 627: Battle of Nineveh, the decisive climax.
If the prophecy concerns the Romans recovering and becoming victorious after defeat, then the earlier phase already fulfils the wording within the expected timeframe.
The argument that the Qur’anic prediction fails rests on equating “victory” exclusively with the final war-ending triumph and reading “bid‘” as a rigid numerical boundary (which we will ignore). Both assumptions are debated linguistically and historically. When the verse is read according to classical Arabic usage and the broader arc of the Byzantine-Persian war, the early Roman resurgence provides a plausible and coherent fulfilment within the period described.