Which Koran?: Variants, Manuscripts, and the Influence of Pre-Islamic Poetry: Books: Ibn Warraq

One of the things a number of Muslim progagationists attempt is to compare the Bible with its occasional differing textual variants with the allegation that there is nothing like that with the Qur'an. In fact, they are a bit like some defenders of the TR manuscripts and the KJV in Christianity. The fact is that ... well, read this from the blurb of a book out soon:

historical and linguistic evidence suggests that there was considerable confusion regarding what should be included in the Koran in the early years of Muslim history. Although the caliph Uthman canonised a specific text some fifteen years after the death of Muhammad, variant readings of certain passages have persisted to the present. This can be seen in discrepancies between the two main printed versions of the Koran available today (the Warsh transmission found in West and Northwest Africa and the Hafs transmission, stemming from Kufa, and widely available through the standard Egyptian edition of 1924). This, coupled with the fact that Muslim secondary literature (the Hadiths) discusses missing Koranic verses and even Muhammad's sometimes faulty memory, strongly indicate that the Koran cannot be considered an inert revelation.

I think I'm going to have to find a library copy or wait for the paper back, though. Still, useful for taking the wind out of the sails of certain kinds of Muslim propagadists.
Amazon.co.uk: Which Koran?: Variants, Manuscripts, and the Influence of Pre-Islamic Poetry: Books: Ibn Warraq:
Filed in: Islam, Qur'an, variants, manuscript, history