The issue of understanding the Qur’an and the challenges arising from modern epistemological foundations is one of the most significant debates in contemporary Islamic thought. Taha Hussein, by employing Cartesian doubt, literary reduction, and methodological Westoxification, institutionalized the discourse of humanizing the Qur’an, which leads to relativism and the reduction of revelation. The central question is whether these epistemological foundations are valid and efficient for understanding the Qur’an, or whether they are incompatible with its revealed nature and give rise to fundamental deficiencies. The present study, using an analytical-critical method and relying on Islamic theology (ontological miracle and supremacy of the Qur’an) and drawing on hermeneutics (faith-based preunderstanding), after explaining each foundation and enumerating the doubts arising from it, offers a systematic response. The findings show that Cartesian doubt, by suspending revelation, drags the Qur’an into the realm of the history of religions and produces relativism; literary reduction renders the multilayered identity of the Qur’an one-dimensional; and methodological Westoxification, by imposing secular presuppositions, falls into an epistemological vicious circle. Rejecting the efficiency of these foundations, the article relies on the integrative approach of “the historical nature of revelation” and “the transhistorical nature of truths”—which has been proposed by many researchers—as an alternative; an approach that, while acknowledging the historical context and the superhuman origin, through a theological rereading of the miracle and the model of “critical engagement with the West,” moves beyond traditional rigidity and historical relativism and offers a scholarly-committed reading.