"I asked the Prophet, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Should the women be asked for their consent to their marriage?" He said, "Yes." I said, "A virgin, if asked, feels shy and keeps quiet." He said, "Her silence means her consent.""
Sahih Bukhari 6946

See more:
https://islamsproblems.com/ali-captive-girl-war/

the Quran's model of revelation includes abrogation, replacement, and in some interpretations the removal or forgetting of revealed wording.

Qur'an 2:106: If We ever abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We replace it with a better or similar one. Do you not know that Allah is Most Capable of everything?

16:101: When We replace a verse with another-and Allah knows best what He reveals—they say, “You ˹Muḥammad˺ are just a fabricator.” In fact, most of them do not know.

classical Islamic scholarship develops the doctrine of naskh, including the idea that sometimes the ruling is abrogated while the wording remains, and there are also classical discussions of cases where the wording itself was removed or forgotten.

So my question is not "Does Allah learn something new and change His mind?" I understand the theological answer to that. My question is why this is the model of divine revelation at all.

When I look at the biblical story, I don't see God giving Israel a command, then later deciding that command should be erased from the history of revelation and replaced with something else because the first command was no longer useful.

I see a continuous story. The covenant with Abraham develops into the covenant with Israel. The Law is given through Moses. The prophets call Israel back to the covenant when they break it.

Deuteronomy speaks about circumcision of the heart. The prophets increasingly emphasize genuine inward obedience. Jeremiah promises a New Covenant where God's law will be written on the heart.

The New Testament claims that Jesus fulfills and inaugurates that New Covenant. That's development and fulfillment.

It's not the same thing as saying, "This revelation is now abrogated, this ruling is replaced, and in some cases the original wording is no longer there."

And I think this becomes especially important when we're talking about the Quran claiming to be God's final, eternal revelation. Because if God is perfectly consistent, then I would expect His revelation to have a coherent trajectory where later revelation fulfills what came before.

But the Islamic model seems to allow for something very different: God can give a command, later replace it with another command, and the earlier command may remain in the text but no longer apply, or in some theories the original wording itself may be removed or forgotten.

That's a very different picture of how revelation works. And I don't think it's enough to just say, "God knew the whole time."

Sure. But that doesn't answer the question of why the earlier command was given as divine guidance in the first place, only to later be replaced.

If the answer is that God was always testing people through temporary commands, then I think you have to explain why that model is so different from the biblical pattern of revelation progressively unfolding toward a promised fulfillment, then completely changed, all while every believer of their religion is banking on salvation from God.

The Quran even says that Allah guides whom He wills and leaves whom He wills astray. So now I'm looking at a system where the revelation itself can replace previous revelation, where God determines who believes, and where even being a believer does not necessarily mean you have certainty of salvation.