بِسْمِ ٱللَّٰهِ ٱلرَّحْمَٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
Preface:
My dear brother
@uppercut has provided us with an opportunity to address and expose the deceitful propaganda of
Christian Missionary & Apologist by the name of Jay Smith. He
challenged an assertion I made and requested a “serious fact and logic based discussion”.
The assertion I made, which was challenged, is as follows:
To this, the exact words of
@uppercut were:
As evidence for his claim,
@uppercut provided a YouTube video entitled “
Investigating Islam with Dr. Jay Smith (2 Corinthians 10:5)”
The video is over an hour long, and not all of it is relevant to the topic. After some back and forth @upper pointed me to
45 minutes onwards and later from
5 minutes to 11:38.
I summarized the argument
here and then @upper presented his preference presented the
YouTube generated transcript here, asking for @upper to check and verify that my summation of the argument is accurate. I then
added the summation of the additional material provided by @upper.
I was still waiting for
@uppercut to agree with the scope and his confirmation that he stands by the arguments of
Christian Missionary & Apologist by the name of Jay Smith. In order to emphasize the issue @upper categorically
stated his argument as follows:
All in all, a very polite and constructive exchange — one for which I am extremely grateful. Before I begin to dissect his evidence which he claims that “no Muslim”
Jay Smith throws Christianity under the bus:
Before addressing Jay Smith’s claims about the Qur’aan, it’s worth highlighting that he was compelled to admit several crucial points about the Bible itself:
- The Bible is not the word of God.
- Christianity does not possess the original manuscript of the Bible — or any reliable record of the original text.
- The Bible has been altered.
- The Bible contains inconsistencies.
- The Bible was written by people who were merely “inspired” by God.
Jay Smith’s
own words confirm these admissions. The exact quotes along with timestamps are as follows:
He quickly glosses over the topic to avoid further exposing the Bible’s flaws. But let me summarize what he conveniently skipped:
- He provides no evidence whatsoever for how these individuals were "inspired by God."
- There is zero historical proof that these individuals actually wrote the Bible, that they even existed, or any details regarding when, where, or how they supposedly authored it.
The Islamophobe Modus Operandi
Jay Smith delivers an hour-long presentation on Islam, yet makes no real effort to address the
authenticity of the Bible. He completely avoids applying the same standards or critical techniques to his own scriptures. In fact, he openly admits that the Bible is
not the word of God, then quickly sidesteps the conversation by vaguely claiming it was merely “inspired by God” — without offering a shred of evidence to support this claim.
This is a
common pattern among Islamophobes: they focus intensely on Islam, throwing out every possible argument, but never turn the spotlight on their
own beliefs. They rarely—if ever—subject their religion to the same level of scrutiny.
You also see this behavior from individuals like
@Farhan The Man , who claims to have left Islam after “11 years of Madrasah study,” yet refuses to disclose or defend the beliefs he now holds. If their worldview is so superior, why the hesitation to present it openly and let it be challenged?
I strongly encourage everyone to visit the YouTube channels of
Yasir Nadeem al Wajidi (Hindi/Urdu) or
Muhammed Ali (The Muslim Lantern) in English, as an example. These platforms expose the
deception of those who come forward to attack Islam but consistently avoid defending or even acknowledging their own belief systems.
Setting the Technical Scene
Islam possesses several
unique features that distinguish it from all other religions — features that are not only unmatched but also
easily verifiable in practice.
1) Al-Hifdh (Memorization of the Qur’an)
Also known as
Hifz in South Asia, this refers to the
oral preservation of the Qur’an. Ordinary Muslims — not just scholars — regularly recite the Qur’an in its
original Arabic, and
millions across the globe have memorized the entire Qur’an
cover-to-cover, complete with its exact
pronunciation and recitation rules (
tajweed).
This is a profound and
globally observable phenomenon. No other religion — whether Christianity, Hinduism, or otherwise — has anything comparable. In fact, many adherents of other religions cannot even read their scriptures in the original language. For example, most Hindus cannot read
Sanskrit, leaving them dependent on priests and religious figures to recite, interpret, or translate their sacred texts.
When someone enters Islam, one of their first priorities is to learn portions of the Qur’an in Arabic to perform the
five daily prayers. Many later go on to study Arabic in order to understand its meanings more deeply.
The
textual preservation of the Qur’an is so
widespread, methodical, and consistent that any attempt to forge or alter the Qur’an would be immediately recognized and rejected by the community. Such a forged text could
never gain traction because of the sheer number of people who have memorized and recite the authentic Qur’an daily.
2) Knowledge of Chains of Transmission (Isnaad)
Muslims do not simply quote the words of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him); they quote them with a
chain of narrators (
isnaad), and assess whether a narration is
authentic based on the
integrity,
accuracy, and
chronological connection between the narrators. In other words, every link in the chain must be
known, and the narrators must have
met in a verifiable context.
This level of rigor is
non-existent in other religions. In Christianity or Hinduism, religious claims are often based on anonymous or unverifiable sources — essentially, “someone said something, somewhere, somehow,” and the chain of transmission is either missing or irrelevant.
3) Historical Transmission and Islamic Historiography
While general historical events in Islam — such as the military expeditions of Muhammad bin Qasim (may Allah be pleased with him) — are
not subject to the same level of verification as prophetic sayings (
ahadith),
Islamic historians have, in some cases, employed the same
methodology of verifying chains of narration to record history.
As a result, the works of those historians who used the
isnaad system for documenting historical events are considered
more reliable and
highly regarded.
To be clear, it is
not my intention here to delve into the differences between historical events and prophetic transmissions. Rather, I mention this to highlight the
distinction and to show the
depth of Islamic preservation practices in comparison to other traditions.
The First Lie of Jay Smith: Claiming Imam al-Bukhari Was the First to Record the Words of the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him)
Jay Smith falsely claims that the
first words of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) were written down
240 years later by Imam al-Bukhari. His exact words in the video at are:
This claim is a
blatant lie.
The sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) were
recorded during his lifetime — both
orally and in written form — by his
companions. Some of the well-known early written compilations directly from the Companions include:
- The Manuscript of Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘As
- The Compilation of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib
- The Narrations Collected by Abu Huraira
These early collections were later incorporated into larger hadith compilations. In fact,
numerous authentic compilations of prophetic sayings
predate Imam al-Bukhari, including the following:
I am no expert on this topic but you can find these books in print today (easily) in many Arabic bookshops and translations of many are easily available by using “google”
I do not claim to be a scholar in this field, but these works are
well known,
widely published, and
easily available today — both in Arabic and in translation. Anyone can verify their existence with a simple search or a visit to a bookstore.
Jay Smith either doesn’t know this — or he is deliberately misleading his audience.
The Second Lie of Jay Smith: Claiming the Qur’an Was First Written Down by Caliph Uthman (May Allah Be Pleased with Him)
Jay Smith’s second major falsehood is his
claim that the Qur’an was first written down during the time of Caliph Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him). The relevant timestamp from his video is:
Before we expose the
deception in this statement, let’s lay down a few historical facts to
set the scene:
- The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) passed away in 632 CE.
- He was succeeded by the first Caliph, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), who passed away in 634 CE, roughly 2.5 years later.
- The second Caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), ruled until 644 CE.
- The third Caliph, Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him), ruled until approximately 653 CE.
Now, let’s examine the
absurdity of Jay Smith’s claim. According to his own words, Muslims somehow managed to preserve a complete and accurate Qur’an just
20 years after the Prophet’s death — and that millions today continue to recite it
from memory — yet he presents this as a
problem or inconsistency?
This is not a weakness — it’s a
miracle of preservation unmatched by any other religion. Neither Christianity nor Hinduism can demonstrate such
precision and consistency in preserving their scriptures. The Qur’an has been — and still is — maintained primarily through
oral transmission. Anyone who wishes to verify this can simply visit
any mosque on earth. During daily prayers, if the imam makes a mistake in recitation — even in
pronunciation — the worshippers behind him
immediately correct him, as an error can
invalidate the prayer.
So yes, you heard that correctly:
a mispronunciation can invalidate prayer, which is why
accuracy in Qur’anic recitation is universally enforced in mosques across the globe.
Now back to the claim: Jay Smith is factually wrong. The Qur’an was
not first written during the time of Uthman. It was
memorized in full during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and it was
compiled into written form shortly after his death under the
first Caliph, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him).
Here’s how it happened:
- Many companions had written portions of the Qur’an on various materials — parchments, bones, leather, etc.
- After the Battle of Yamamah, where many memorizers (Huffaz) were martyred, Caliph Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) ordered the collection of the Qur’an into a single manuscript.
- This was done through a rigorous process of verification with both oral and written sources.
- The compilation was completed within 2 to 2.5 years of the Prophet’s passing.
Later, during Caliph Uthman's time, as Islam spread to non-Arab regions and
differences in recitation styles began to emerge, he
standardized the existing manuscript and
disseminated exact copies to various parts of the Muslim world. He did
not author a new version, nor did he start from scratch.
So to be clear:
Caliph Uthman
copied the codex of Abu Bakr, which had already been compiled — he
did not “write the Qur’an” as Jay Smith falsely claims.
If anyone wants to study this topic in depth, there are
numerous reports and scholarly works detailing the compilation of the Qur’an under the first Caliph.
Finally, allow me to repeat this critical point:
Al-Hifdh — the memorization of the Qur’an — continues to this day. Millions around the world know it by heart. Test them by skipping a verse or changing a word — they will immediately detect the error and recite the correct verse. This is why we do not rely on manuscripts alone, and this is
why the Qur’an remains perfectly preserved — not just on paper, but in the hearts of Muslims everywhere.
There are numerous reports of the codex of
1st Caliph Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and instead of me reproducing hundreds of references,
here is a detailed paper on the topic for people to read.
The Third Set of False Claims by Jay Smith: Alleged Variations in Qur’anic Codices alongside the Standard Codex of Uthman (May Allah Be Pleased with Him)
Before addressing this claim, it's important to reaffirm a fundamental fact:
the Qur’an, as it exists today, contains 114 chapters (surahs) — this is a universally accepted and verified reality among Muslims worldwide.
Now, returning to a point I made earlier: the reason
Caliph Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) sent out a standardized written copy of the Qur’an was not because of any dispute over content, but to
preserve the correct pronunciation and enunciation of the Qur’an. As Islam rapidly spread, large numbers of non-Arabs were entering the faith, and with them came the potential for variations in
pronunciation due to linguistic differences. Uthman's action was a
precautionary and unifying measure, not a response to conflicting versions of the Qur’an.
Jay Smith, after correctly stating that
copies of Uthman's codex were distributed to five major cities, goes on to
mislead by suggesting that other codices appeared which
contradicted the Uthmanic codex. He specifically names four supposed codices:
- The codex of Ubayy ibn Ka'b — which he claims contained 116 chapters
- The codex of Ibn Mas‘ud — which allegedly had 110 chapters
- The codex of Ibn Musa — which he claims had 114 chapters
- The codex of Zayd ibn Thabit — also said to have 114 chapters
His words as per the timestamp are as follows:
This framing is misleading at best and deceptive at worst. It
fails to distinguish between
personal collections of notes and the
officially compiled, recited, and memorized Qur’anic text.
Let’s be clear: differences in these early compilations — if any — were either due to
personal notes, du‘a (supplications), commentary, or
chapters not yet written into personal collections at the time. These do not represent differences in the Qur’an itself, nor do they contradict the
preserved oral tradition that was always the primary method of transmission.
Furthermore, there is
no reliable evidence that the companions disputed the
content of the Qur’an — rather, they all submitted to the Uthmanic codex precisely because it
matched what they had memorized and what had been collectively verified by the Prophet’s companions.
Let’s now address the
false claims made by Jay Smith regarding four supposed “different Qur’anic codices,” which he alleges contradict the standard compilation of the Qur’an sent out by Caliph Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him):
- Jay claims that Ubayy ibn Ka‘b’s codex contained 116 chapters. This is intentionally misleading.
Ubayy’s personal compilation did not only contain Qur’anic verses, but also included supplications (duʿās) and personal notes or commentary. These additions were not part of the Qur’an and Ubayy himself acknowledged and accepted the standardized Uthmanic codex, which excluded non-Qur’anic material.
Bottom line: No contradiction — only supplementary content outside of the Qur’an.
Research can be read here
- The codex of Ibn Mas‘ud — which allegedly had 110 chapters. This claim is even weaker. There is no manuscript or physical codex of Ibn Mas‘ud in existence.
Orientalists derived this number (110 chapters) from a few historical narrations in which Ibn Mas‘ud is said to have not included Sūrah al-Falaq and Sūrah al-Nās. Scholars have addressed this issue in several ways:
The reports of him omitting these chapters are
weak and unauthentic.
Even if he did omit them, it was due to a belief they were
prophetic invocations, not because he doubted their divine origin.
Crucially,
he still recited their exact Arabic text, proving no verses were missing from his recitation.
His opinion, even if it were true, was a
minority view outweighed by the consensus of the entire Muslim community.
Bottom line: A historical opinion from one companion, preserved with transparency, does
not mean the Qur’an was incomplete or altered. The Islamic opinion is
detailed here.
- The codex of Ibn Musa — which he claims had 114 chapters: This one is particularly bizarre because there is no companion of the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) named “Ibn Musa” who had a codex. This is likely a fabrication or confusion, possibly originating from Orientalist Professor Arthur Jeffery (1892-1959) who often speculated on early Islamic history without credible evidence.
Bottom line: No codex. No companion. No issue.
- The codex of Zayd ibn Thabit — also said to have 114 chapters: Zayd ibn Thābit (may Allah be pleased with him) was the chief scribe of the Qur’an during the lifetime of the Prophet (ﷺ) and during the first official compilation under Caliph Abu Bakr.
Jay’s claim that Zayd had a “separate codex” is again a distortion of facts. Zayd’s compilation is the very basis of the Uthmanic codex, and he personally led the effort to make verified copies during Uthman’s time.
Bottom line: Zayd’s “codex” is the
same as the standardized Qur’an we have today.
Conclusion:
Jay Smith and others like him depend on
distortions, out-of-context references, and Orientalist fabrications to cast doubt on the Qur’an. When we examine their claims carefully, we find they
collapse under the weight of authentic historical scholarship and verified Islamic tradition. The preservation of the Qur’an — both orally and textually — remains unmatched by any other religious tradition.
Topics Still Left to Address:
- The variations in Qur’anic recitation (Qirā’āt) — their nature, origin, and significance.
- The alleged discrepancies found in early historical manuscripts — and how they are (mis)represented in missionary presentations.
Request for @uppercut
There are millions of Muslims around the world who have memorized the Qur’an entirely and rely on their memory rather than a printed copy. It is part of everyday life for ordinary Muslims to recite portions from memory without difficulty. To put this into perspective: around 25% to 30% of the global Muslim population resides in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh—regions where Arabic is not the native language, and yet millions from these areas have committed the entire Qur’an to memory.
For the benefit of those unfamiliar with the scope, the Qur’an consists of 114 chapters, 6,236 verses, and roughly 604 pages of Arabic text. Despite not understanding the language, countless individuals have memorized it word-for-word. One might brush this off with a sarcastic or dismissive comment, but objectively speaking, there is no other book—especially in a foreign language—that has been memorized in full by millions of people worldwide. For instance, India produces hundreds of thousands of university graduates annually, yet how many of them have memorized even a single textbook cover-to-cover, let alone one in a completely foreign language?
So before making a flippant remark, I’d urge you to reflect on the magnitude of what’s being claimed.
Secondly, I respectfully ask that you engage directly with the points I’ve raised instead of dropping another generic video that you feel may somehow address my argument.
Lastly, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to explore this topic—though it’s far from fully addressed yet.
Thank you.
For Muslims—and for anyone genuinely interested in the topic:
All of these issues have been thoroughly addressed, discussed, and debated countless times. They’ve been analyzed in-depth, summarized in YouTube videos, and clarified in public dialogues. Yet, as I’ve mentioned before, Islamophobes continue to bring them up, ignoring the fact that detailed answers have already been provided repeatedly.
A highly recommended book on the subject is "The History of the Quranic Text: From Revelation to Compilation – A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments" (2nd Edition). It provides an excellent, well-researched overview for anyone seeking clarity.
