Stones in glass houses. Bible has been changed but the hadiths ( the ones that are accepted as true) remain perfect in spite of being written 300 years after the prophet? I mean they point out the multiplicity of translations, versions, books ect in the bible but ingore that scholars had to throw out hundreds of obviously false hadiths.
What I find funny is the whole "there are many bible's" which is clearly a load of crap.
There is only one tanakh, sure, there are different translations with different exegetical work but that is no different to the Muslim world - with one difference, you very rarely get people who claim you must know ancient hebrew or otherwise you're not 'reading the real Tanakh'.
As for multiple versions of the Christian bible; there are only three if you're going to get anal; there is the Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox with the separation based on order in which the new testaments part appear and debate over whether a particular part of the old testament is included. In other words, it isn't even close to the clusterfuck that some Muslims make it out to be. Compare that to the 6 hadith collections of dubious reliability, a Qur'an of different exegetical explanations and God help you if you try to find an 'authentic' biography of Muhammad!