The Qur’?n, Textual Criticism, and the New Testament

By Nicholas Lammé

To understand the current state of Qur’?nic textual studies, especially in comparison to the Greek New Testament, it is essential to explore first how Islam traditionally views the emergence and preservation of the Qur’?n.

A Brief History of the Qur’?n

Islamic tradition teaches that the Prophet Muhammad received the Qur’?n through revelations from Allah, delivered by the Angel Gabriel over twenty years at the beginning of the seventh century CE. Muhammad, who, according to tradition, was illiterate, was first visited by Gabriel at the age of forty in a cave called Hira and was appointed by him as Allah’s messenger. Muslims believe Muhammad’s illiteracy is evidence of the Qur’?n’s divine origin, especially since, according to Islamic teaching, the Qur’?n contains no contradictions or errors despite being revealed to an “unlettered man,” as stated in Surah 7:157.

The first word Gabriel revealed to Muhammad was “Iqra,” which means “Read” or “Recite.” In the early days of Islam, the transmission of the Qur’?n was mainly oral. Muhammad memorized what was revealed and passed it on to his closest followers, like Abu-Bakr, who acted as scribes and wrote down his words. These words were recorded by Muhammad’s companions on various materials like leather, parchment, leaves, and tablets.

Every year during Ramadan, the Angel Gabriel would appear to Muhammad and listen to him recite the Qur’?n as it had been revealed so far. In the year of Muhammad’s death, Gabriel had him recite the entire Qur’?n twice to ensure that every word was preserved exactly as it had been revealed. During his lifetime, Muhammad was considered a “Living Qur’?n,” while his followers were seen as “Living Copies” who recorded and memorized the revelations.

After Muhammad’s death, there was an urgent need to gather the scattered portions of the Qur’?n into a single text, especially after many of the “reciters” of the Qur’?n died in the battle of al-Yam?ma. Abu-Bakr, the first Caliph, ordered one of Muhammad’s scribes, Zaid-bin-Thabit, to bring the Qur’?n’s revelations into one collection. Zaid, who had memorized the Qur’?n, found this task difficult but eventually gathered the different pieces from palm leaves, stones, and the memories of men who had learned it by heart. Abu-Bakr kept this collection until his death.

The story of the Qur’?n’s collection continues in different versions. One account says that as Islam spread to new regions like Syria and Iraq, people began reciting the Qur’?n in various ways, not as Muhammad had taught. This concerned Uthman-bin-Affan, the third Caliph, so he ordered Zaid-bin-Thabit and others to make copies of the Qur’?n in the “Quraishite accent,” Muhammad’s dialect. According to tradition, these copies followed the exact order of verses and chapters as Muhammad had arranged. Once the work was finished, Uthman ordered that all other versions be destroyed to prevent any corruption to the text.

Another version of this story tells how a companion of Muhammad, Hudhayfa ibn al-Yam?n, was shocked to find that people in Iraq and Syria were reading the Qur’?n differently. He feared these differences might divide Muslims as Jews and Christians had been divided over different interpretations of their scriptures. Hearing this, Uthman asked for the original Qur’?n collection, which was kept by one of Muhammad’s wives. Uthman then ordered copies to be made and sent across the Islamic world, with instructions to burn any other versions.

Both stories share the idea that followers of Islam were reciting different versions of the text, implying divergent interpretations, because mistakes had crept into their copies. Therefore, it was necessary to standardize the Qur’?n to prevent corruption and confusion. While these accounts differ slightly, they both highlight the effort to preserve the Qur’?n in its original form. Muslims believe that the Qur’?n they have today is the exact same text that Muhammad received from Gabriel and that Allah has perfectly preserved it verbatim.

The Manuscripts and Transmission History of the Qur’?n

We now turn from the tradition of the Qur’?n’s origins to the history of its text and the surviving manuscripts. The exact number of extant Qur’?n manuscripts is difficult to ascertain. This information is not readily available in any condensed format. The most comprehensive authoritative source appears to be the Corpus Coranicum project.¹ Corpus Coranicum is an online database of Qur’?n manuscripts from all over the world. As of this writing, the catalog contains over 800 fragments, representing more than 30,000 pages from 95 collections worldwide. The database includes information on the manuscripts, such as their material (mostly parchment), holding institution, shelf number, format, provenance, estimated date, and transcriptions of the Arabic text (and some English translations). These transcriptions are often annotated with a color-coded scheme highlighting text-critical and paleographical observations. Wherever possible, high-resolution images are provided or linked to.

Early witnesses to the Qur’?n are relatively few. The oldest known manuscript is the Birmingham Qur’?n, consisting of two parchment leaves containing Surahs 18 to 20. Radiocarbon dating places the manuscript between 568 and 645 CE, which overlaps with Muhammad’s lifetime (c. 570–632). If accurate, this dating suggests that portions of the Qur’?n were organized, edited, and copied during the Prophet’s life or shortly after his death. Another critical discovery is the Sana’a Palimpsest, discovered in 1972 between the ceiling and the roof of the Great Mosque of Sana’a, among some 12,000 fragments belonging to 926 distinct copies of the Qur’an. A palimpsest is a manuscript whose original text has been erased or washed off to reuse the parchment. Modern technology, such as ultraviolet photography, allows scholars to recover the original writing.

The Sana’a Palimpsest is particularly important because its lower text (that is, the original text that was scraped off) differs from the standard text, making it the only known surviving manuscript that predates Uthman’s seventh-century standardization of the Qur’?n (c. 644–656 CE). The upper text, a witness to the standard textual tradition, has been paleographically dated (that is, dated based on the scribe’s handwriting) to the latter part of the seventh century or the first part of the eighth. The undertext has also been dated to the seventh century on paleographical grounds, and radiocarbon dating has placed the manuscript to some time before 671 CE, and probably closer to the middle of the century, fixing it within decades of Muhammad’s death. Its text-critical value cannot be overstated since it is “direct documentary evidence” of a text type other than the standard Uthmanic text that dominates Qur’?n studies and makes reconstructing alternate textual traditions a daunting task. The comparison of the under and upper texts of the Sana’a palimpsest allows scholars to gain a better understanding of what the non-Uthmanic tradition might have looked like.

Qur’?nic Textual Criticism

Fred Donner, Islamic scholar and Peter B. Ritzma Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern History at the University of Chicago, has described Qur’?nic studies as being in a state of disarray. He notes that scholars still lack answers to fundamental questions about the Qur’?n’s origins, such as: “How did the Qur’?n originate? Where did it come from, and when did it first appear? How was it first written?” The Qur’?n itself offers few definitive clues about its original context, and the limited manuscript evidence from before the eighth century adds to the challenge.

Moreover, no critical edition of the Qur’?n based on a text-critical study of the manuscript tradition has yet to be produced. Donner suggests that creating a critical edition of the Qur’?n, based upon the earliest manuscript evidence, is “the most cherished dream of everyone who works with the Qur’?n.” However, significant obstacles remain.

While variant readings exist among Qur’?n manuscripts, most are not meaningful, like spelling differences (i.e., orthographic variants).  Meaningful variants—those that change the sense of the text or suggest a relationship between manuscripts—are extremely rare. Additionally, some manuscripts feature surahs in a different order than the traditional one, though these are still within their recognized context. Importantly, scholars have not identified any anachronistic language in the Qur’?n that would suggest that it had been written after Muhammad’s death. However, the scarcity of viable variants does not mean they never existed. Instead, their absence is likely due to Uthman’s successful efforts to eliminate competing textual traditions by destroying non-standard manuscripts.

In many respects, there is no genuine “Qur’?nic textual criticism,” at least in the same way we understand it in New Testament studies. This is partly because Muslims do not see a need for it; Islamic tradition teaches that today’s Qur’?n is identical to the one Muhammad received from Gabriel. Nevertheless, the Qur’?n used by Muslims today is based on medieval Islamic tradition rather than a collation of surviving manuscripts. After Muhammad’s time, seven reading traditions (qir?’?t) emerged, representing variations in the oral recitation of the Qur’?n handed down by Muhammad’s companions. These variant readings were standardized and included as part of the Uthmanic recension and thus are not seen as problematic. They reflect the complexity of the oral transmission of the Qur’?n but offer little insight into the text’s original form before 936 CE.

The version of the Qur’?n most widely used today was commissioned by King Fu’?d I of Egypt in 1924. This “Cairo Qur’?n,” as it is known, was created in response to variant readings found in Qur’?ns that had been imported to be used in Egyptian schools. The Egyptian government corrected the text and then produced its own edition, gathering up as many existing copies as possible and disposing of them in the Nile River—a move reminiscent of Uthman’s purge. Although other printed versions exist, none has achieved the global recognition of the Cairo Qur’?n.

In conclusion, the early oral transmission of the Qur’?n, the deliberate destruction of early variant manuscripts, the lack of a standardized Arabic grammar until the eighth century, and the absence of other literary works or Qur’?n-adjacent literature from the time of the Prophet all contribute to the difficulty of recovering the Qur’?n’s original text. Unless new evidence emerges, the earliest form of the text that modern textual criticism could reconstruct would be the canonical version produced by Uthman in the latter half of the seventh century—not much earlier.

The New Testament and the Qur’an

In concluding our survey of the Qur’?n’s textual tradition, we can draw some comparisons to the Greek New Testament by focusing on two areas: composition and transmission.

During Muhammad’s time, Arabic culture had writing systems suitable for commerce and administration but lacked a well-established literary tradition. Religious, cultural, and poetic works were mainly passed down orally, much like the traditional account of the Qur’?n’s transmission. Arabic grammar was not standardized until the eighth century, a development likely driven by the need to preserve the Qur’?n accurately. Written records of the Qur’?n helped support oral recitation, which remained the primary means of transmission.

Similarly, early Christian teachings about Jesus and his life were initially passed down orally before being committed to writing. The Gospel of Mark, which many scholars believe was based on the preaching of Peter, was likely written around 30 years after Jesus’ death and resurrection. Many scholars date Mark’s Gospel to the mid-60s CE. However, the earliest written testimony about Jesus comes from Paul’s letters, particularly 1 Corinthians, written around 54–55 CE—about a decade before Mark’s Gospel. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul shares early credal material regarding Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection, which he says he “received” (i.e., by oral transmission) and now passes on to the Corinthians. Based on autobiographical information in Paul’s letters (cf. Acts 9:22–31; 1 Cor. 11:23–33; Gal. 1:17), Paul likely received this tradition in Jerusalem sometime between 37–39 CE. This suggests that the tradition Paul received dates back to less than a decade after Jesus’ death.

The critical difference between the New Testament and the Qur’?n is that while Christian traditions were initially passed on orally, they were soon committed to writing by multiple eyewitnesses or those closely associated with them, and this early written record exists today. This early documentation anchors the New Testament narratives in history and allows for their examination alongside extra-biblical events, people, and places, providing a means to cross-check their accuracy. Such verification is difficult for the Qur’?n due to the loss or destruction of its earliest witnesses and the absence of early external records of the Qur’?n’s development.

Another significant difference lies in the transmission histories of the two texts. Christianity, unlike Islam, did not enjoy the protection of the civil authority for its first four centuries. During this time, Christian books—including copies of the New Testament—were destroyed during the “Great Persecution” under the emperor Diocletian in the early fourth century. This may partially explain the scarcity of early New Testament manuscripts from that time. Another reason for the paucity of manuscript evidence from the first four centuries is the fragile nature of the papyri upon which the first copies of the New Testament were written. Later developments, such as the use of parchment, allowed for the production of copies that were far more resilient, thousands of which have survived to the present day. Nevertheless, a significant amount of manuscript evidence from these early centuries remains, which helps us trace the history of the New Testament’s transmission during this period.

Unlike the systematic destruction of divergent manuscripts in the Qur’?n’s history under Caliph Uthman, early Christians did not organize to eliminate manuscripts with variant readings. For example, among Church Fathers like Jermone, Irenaeus, and Augustine, Origen (c. 185–254)  acknowledged textual variations in New Testament manuscripts and explored the causes of textual corruption. The presence of variants in the Greek New Testament manuscripts has long been a source of criticism from Islamic apologists and embarrassment for some Christians. However, viewed differently, these variants provide a wealth of data for scholars about the history of the text and turn out to be a net positive for the reliability and stability of the New Testament. These variants were not always seen as a liability for the New Testament by scholars and Christian leaders, and for good reason.

There are as many as 500,000 textual variants among Greek New Testament manuscripts, which might seem to suggest instability. However, the large number of extant manuscripts provides numerous data points, enabling scholars to identify meaningful variants and reconstruct the autographical text with high probability, tracing the history of its transmission over two millennia with greater confidence. One might even say that the textual variants are a providential feature of the tradition rather than a bug.

??In contrast, the homogeneity of the Qur’?n’s text, achieved by Uthman’s destruction of variant manuscripts, gives an appearance of stability but presents significant challenges for text-critical study. Keith Small notes that:

“Without textual criticism being done on early manuscripts of the Qur’?n, claims for the preservation of the Qur’?n are challenging to evaluate and in some respects are both unverifiable and unfalsifiable; that is, they can’t be proven to be either reliably or unreliably transmitted.”²

The destruction or loss of early Qur’?nic witnesses during Uthman’s standardization campaign leaves scholars with fewer resources to reconstruct the early textual history of the Qur’?n, making the task of textual criticism even more difficult.

In comparison, the rich and complex tapestry of the New Testament’s transmission allows scholars to examine multiple streams of textual evidence. This diversity ensures that Christians today can have confidence that the New Testament they read is what the early Church received. If, hypothetically, only the Byzantine textform (also known as the Majority Text) of the New Testament had survived, we would doubtless have a good and largely accurate text. Still, in lacking access to the fuller range of textual streams in the tradition, it would be impossible to detect potential errors that might have entered unnoticed. We could never be sure if the more homogeneous text of the Byzantine tradition went back to the autographs or not. Fortunately, because multiple textual streams have survived, we can have confidence in the accuracy of the New Testament text—a level of certainty that the Qur’?n’s transmission history does not provide. What is remarkable about the New Testament tradition is that despite the shockingly high number of extant variants, the story of Jesus and his gospel are preserved throughout the tradition’s different textual streams of every leaf of every manuscript, as is the apostolic witness to Jesus Christ and the meaning of his life, death, and resurrection.

These differences highlight why the New Testament’s text and history are more accessible to scholars than the Qur’?n’s and why the historical realities of the manuscript tradition, far from being an embarrassment to Christians, should be a source of encouragement. They allow us to conduct the historical research necessary to show its stability and reliability going back to the beginnings of Christianity. Unfortunately, the Qur’?n’s textual tradition, due to its intentional early homogenization, leaves far less room for such investigation.

Help PreserveNew Testament Manuscripts

Bibliography

Aland, Kurt and Barbara Aland. The Text of the New Testament. Trans. Erroll F. Rhodes, 2nd (Paperback) ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Bates, Clark R. “Manuscripts 101: A Brief History of Greek Handwriting.” Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM). Blog.

Bernard Lewis, ed. and trans. Islam: From the Prophet Muhammad to the Capture of Constantinople, II: Religion and Society. New York: Harper&Row, 1974.

Bock, Darrell L. Acts. Barker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

Donner, Fred M. “The Historian, the Believer, and the Qur’?n.” In New Perspectives on the Qur’?n: The Qur’?n in Its Historical Context 2. Ed. Gabriel Said Reynolds, Routledge Studies in the Qur’?n (New York: Routledge, 2011), 25.

Donner, Fred M. “The Qur’?n in Recent Scholarship.” In The Qur’?n in Its Historical Context. Ed. Gabriel Said Reynolds, Routledge Studies in the Qur’?n (New York: Routledge, 2008), 29.

Evans, Craig A. “Mark.” In Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible. Ed. James D. G. Dunn and John W. Rogerson. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.

Higgins, Andrew. “The Lost Archive.” The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 12, 2008.

Leggett, Katie and Greg Paulson. “How Many Greek New Testament Manuscripts are there REALLY? The Latest Numbers.” Institute for New Testament Textual Research (INTF). Blog.

Metzger, Bruce M. and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Muhammad Farooq-i-Azam Malik. English Translation of the Meaning of Al-Qur’an: The Guidance for Mankind. Houston: The Institute of Islamic Knowledge, 1997.

Peter Gurry, “Origen on Textual Criticism and Biblical Authority.” Evangelical Textual Criticism. Blog.

Reynolds, Gabriel Said. “Introduction: Qur’?nic studies and its controversies” In The Qur’?n in Its Historical Context. Ed. Gabriel Said Reynolds, Routledge Studies in the Qur’?n. New York: Routledge, 2008.

Riddle, Peter G. and Peter Cotterell. Islam in Context: Past, Present, and Future. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003.

Sadeghi, Behnam and Mohsen Goudarzi. “?an‘?’ 1 and the Origins of the Qur’?n.” Der Islam 87, no. 1–2, 2012.

Salgado, Denis. “Manuscripts 101: What is a Palimpsest?” Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM). Blog.

The Sana Quran: One of the Oldest Extant Quran Manuscripts. https://bible-quran.com/sana-quran/Small, Kieth E. Textual Criticism and Qur’?n Manuscripts. Lanhan, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011.

Footnotes

1. Another digitization project is the Yemeni Manuscripts Digitization Initiative which has digitized 236 manuscripts from three private libraries in the capital city of Sana’a. Not all of these are Qur’ans. Most manuscripts digitized include Qur’anic commentaries, poetry, legal works, grammars, among other related literature. ↩︎
2.  Kieth E. Small, Textual Criticism and Qur’?n Manuscripts (Lanhan, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011), 11. ↩︎