The use of 'outwittings' is first clearly established.
Then, beginning with the multitude of boasts of modern Islam for the 'Perfection and Protection' of the Qur'an, we cite the obvious consequences if this is wrong.
We note and trace admissions by both modern and classical Islamic scholars that Muhammad's scribes did not know how to write properly and that the early followers copied their errors; that 'Uthman's scribes made further errors making 'Uthman's texts not identical and that later followers copied these errors.
Scans of all this. Full page scans of the Warsh (Medinan) and Hafs (Kufan) textual discrepancies combine with the admission of scribal errors to show these are not mere 'transmissions'; full page original source scans such as Ad-Dani's Al-Muqni, etc..
In terms of readings, we note not only that Islam built its readings upon the textual errors but that its scholars admit that the clearest defining of what the original 7 readings, the '7 Forms', were, is to the tune of '35 sayings' - no clear knowledge at all. Neither text nor readings can be certified as a reconstruction of an 'original' from such 'evidence'.
The '7 Readings' are not only admittedly NOT the same as the '7 Forms' but originated later even though the '7 Forms' can be the only readings, and 'Uthman eliminated 6 of the 7 texts underlying them. What connection can there be between the two '7's? The 7 Readings were further chosen from an enormous number of readings - and of a multitude of persons it is asserted that "each had his own reading".
We note admissions that the scholars differ as the whether the Qur'anic texts say 'NO' when they should say 'YES' - and that this varies from text to text. We observe Mr Deedat 'switching' texts - and some 'no's for 'yes's.
Also the 'editing' involved in hiding all this in modern times.
The book further makes a comparison of a representative number of the Qur'ans in print and includes actual scans of the appropriate original texts as 'Proof'.
The texts compared include several Hafs texts - the Turkish printed text, Pakistani Taj, Indian, one hybrid of these last two, Iranian, 1924 Egyptian EDITION - and one Warsh text. Most of these are corrupted or corrected in various ways and hence the need for a new Edition in 1924. Further we note the 1985 Edition known as the 'Mushaf al-Madinah' and its variants and comment on the absence of the discrepancies noted in the 'original' Medinan text - "now you see them now you don't".
Also the Samarqand Manuscript is thoroughly examined and compared with the 1924 EDITION. They are NOT 'identical' - scans each covering several lines show in context almost 100 textual variations.
YET we further find that all the cries of 'Perfect and Preserved Qur'an' are meaningless anyway since it is also admitted that the Qur'an's text presents one with bafflement and few gems - and that further to this the Qur'an on its own is utterly useless.
The 'Qur'an vs Gospel/Bible' concentration of Islam is seen to be another 'outwitting' - meaningless when we understand not only that the Qur'an alone is not considered to transmit 'the revelation' [why then compare it to the Bible or Gospel records?], but that one might as well throw it away if much other material is not decisively identified, interpreted, and the 'intended meaning' of each aya known - to say nothing of the seeking to establish 'the rest of the revelation'. We note the result of Islam's search for 'life' for the Qur'an, and the desire of some to try again.
The claim of Islam that keeping the 'Words of God' separate from 'everything else' has been a blessing in 'preserving the Message' is found to be meaningless - an 'outwitting'.
Further the Qur'an obviously could not posssibly be a "Word of God" since, not only are its promises of protection and perfection proven false, but admittedly the materials required to transmit a "Word of God" are elsewhere. The Qur'an cannot function independantly of them and so neither can it be considered either 'an Eternal Truth', nor 'an Eternal Witness'. Any 'Eternal Truth' can exist independent of all else - the Qur'an cannot do this. A 'Witness' must present a "Word of God" - the Qur'an does not do this.
As for the Gospel records, though Islam has been railing upon these records for containing 'more than the Words of God', we see from Islam's dilemma that there is an the absolute need for all of this information - "Words of God", Hadith, Sirah - in order to transmit a Message, 'THE WORD OF GOD'.
The Gospel records being the personal records of the Companions and Tabi'un of Jesus could not be from more relaible sources - the Companions had the promise of the Jesus that the Holy Spirit would remind them of his teachings and reveal more, the Tabi'un learned from them - nor in a more complete form with all the information, not only in four comparable records, but set out originally in the complete written form of the Greek language.
We present the True Last Message.
Much Tabi'un and Tab Tabi'un evidence is examined.
One obvious conclusion is that there never was a need for 'a new Book' as Islam asserts - Islam is an 'outwitting' from the Arabs .
Finally we note the amazing Covenant-Love of the True God Who gives security to those who love His Way.
MUCH MORE.
The book contains some 700+ scans altogether and many diagrams - 560 pages.