Allah’s Name Not The Same In Qur’an!?

Is the Qur’an is perfectly preserved as the follower of Islam claims? Is every letter perfectly preserved? I’m here to exhibit this cannot be the case according to the Qur’an itself.[1]

The personal name of the god of Islam is Allah (highlighted in both the Arabic and English text), the name Allah is composed of an Alif (ا) the 1st letter of the two-syllable word, a Double Lam (ﻝﻝ), He (ه), and a small diacritical mark above the double lam called a ‘shadda together we get الله.

[1:1] Surat l-fātiḥah (The Opening)

This name Allah is specifically used only for the god of Islam, Islamicity expresses this in the following quote.

The word God in English is not a name of the one God like Allah or YHVH. It is the generic term used for any and every deity, … When Muslims use the word Allah they mean the one God they worship and adore; … This Allah is the same Allah that the holy Qur’an refers to. Neither Jews nor Christians connect to God in this very universal way.

Is Allah God’s Name or God’s CV?

Make no mistake Allah الله is a name, according to Islamic sites such as states is this way confirming Allah is a name, not a title.

According to Muslim scholars and theologians, the name Allah is better defined as “the proper name of the One who is necessarily existent in himself and who deserves all praises.” This dense definition encapsulates several of the most important attributes of the Creator and nuances the term to mean so much more than just ‘god.’ Furthermore, it appears that the name has its root in Semitic languages, with variations on the divine name for god being il, el, or eloah.

What Does ‘Allah’ Mean in Arabic?

We’ve established Allah is a name now to simplify this concept, let’s use the name, Muhammad. Removing a letter from this name would alter it. Here’s a simple illustration.

Does Muhammad = Uhammad?

Would Muslims agree Uhammad still means Muhammad? No! They would not if they were honest, can you see the problem? In the following verse 1:2 Allah’s name is missing a letter, notice the missing alif (ا).[2]

[1:2] Surat l-fātiḥah (The Opening)

Yet they still render it, Allah, as if there hasn’t been a change, this is the level of deception we face with Islam. This is not the only verse where their god’s name is missing a letter, go to an online Qur’an and type in Arabic ( لِلَّهِ) and see how many verses in which the Arabic text has a missing alif.[3]


Let’s not forget that this problem in the Qur’an is not the same as taking a word(s) from one language and translating them, neither is this a case of bad transliteration. We’re still in the original text (Arabic) and the name Allah is missing a letter altering the name of thier god.

Muslims need to answer why letters are dropping out of the name of their god? If their Qur’an is preserved as claimed then why are they translating changed names in the Arabic text the same?


[1] However, it should be clear from the discussion above that while the Tanakh and the New Testament (hence the entire Bible) have a dubious history, the same cannot be said about the Quran.  The preservation of the latter is a fact of history, and was a fulfillment of Allah’s promise: The Quran and Bible Blog (2014, February 9). The History of the Bible and the Quran [Blog post]. Retrieved from

[2] Al-Azami asserts that this convention is one of shorthand abbreviation, believing there to have been an accompanying oral tradition to clarify the correct pronunciation and grammar. He states that the alifs were originally present, then dropped for abbreviation, and then reinstated in the reforms of Ubaydullāh b. Ziyād in the time of al-Ḥajjāj, circa the eighth/late first century. Noja-Noseda also suggests omitting alifs may represent an example of abbreviation to save space on an expensive piece of parchment. Intentional abbreviation of an understood pronunciation is a valid hypothesis for the omission, but there are some issues that need to be explored. First, there is no written evidence of a more fully written prior text that was then abbreviated. Instead, the earliest available manuscripts have the alifs missing. It seems a simpler explanation that omitting the alif was a normal convention within a flexible orthography that was later standardized, than that there was a fixed longer text that was abbreviated for economic or practical reasons. Small, Keith E.. Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts, Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2011. pg42

[3] 2:22; 98; 112; 142; 156; 165; 173; 193; 196; 238; 284; 3:20; 154; 172; 199; 4:125; 131; 135; 139; 144; 146; 170; 172; 5:8; 120; 6:1; 12; 45; 57; 100; 136; 162; 7:43; 128; 8:1; 24; 39; 41; 9:91; 114; 10:10; 20; 55; 65; 66; 12:31; 40; 51; 67; 13:16; 31; 33; 14:21; 30; 39; 48; 16:48; 57; 62; 74; 75; 120; 17:111; 18:1; 44; 19:35; 22:31; 56; 23:28; 85; 87; 89; 24:64; 27:15; 25; 44; 59; 93; 28:75; 29:63; 30:4; 31:12; 25; 26; 33:31; 34:1; 46; 35:1; 34; 37:182; 39:3; 8; 29; 44; 74; 75; 40:12; 16; 65; 41:37; 42:49; 53:62; 57:1; 59:1; 61:1; 62:1; 6; 64:1; 65:2; 71:13; 72:18; 82:19

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s