The point is you rely on others' renderings in lieu of your own because you don't know any Arabic at all.
Therefore you must constantly be defending someone else's work....of which, you cannot support.
I was born into a Muslin and Christian family Bowman. I know enough Arabic to keep up with you. Your understanding however is weak and you have to constantly rely on lexicons and dictionaries. You're the only one on this forum contesting any rendering of the Quran and for some strange reason believe your renderings are golden even though you've failed to even reach native Arabic speaking people here with your version. No one, but you, is fooled by the weak translation you've been copying and pasting here. If you have a problem with the Quran I use when I use it then point it out but to date you haven't.
None of your renderings show their work.
You've shown a translated verse here or there based on a lexicon and a dictionary from where ever you've been copying and pasting but you've never shown the translator. If it's you then credentials of your abilities to be taken serious should be forthcoming assuming you can produce any of them.
We have already been over this numerous times, brother....and yet you still cling tenaciously to something that you can never defend.
Why defend it if it is backed by serious scholarship and you've failed to refute it?...
That's like me contesting the outcome of an election where I'm the winner!!!!
What would you like them to be?
So you're relying on your own renderings? Got it.... When I ask for credentials I'm asking for your degrees or anything that one would need to ascertain your ability to make the claims you make in the field. Surely you just don't want people here to just 'take your word for it'...? If you don't have any then it's no problem if you admit to such....but there is a problem if you feel as though you are qualified to make the claims you have, based on an ability to define words.
Is this the point in our conversation where you list Arberry's credentials, and then promptly make excuses why he never showed any of his reasoning and why you are unable to defend his renderings?
But see if you knew anything about scholarship you'd know that when they produced their works you rarely got a chance to see their footnotes, rough drafts or any other reasoning. Where is the King James exegetical process and reasoning or that of any of the countless bibles in circulation? See, there is no need to try and get into the mind of Arberry because, as I've said before, his rendering being one of the best ones rendered from the classical Arabic meets the rules of Arabic grammar. I personally haven't found any fault in it. What's your beef with it?
This is a pretty poor excuse for not discussing the Arabic.
You can do better.............stall.....
Your copy/paste rendering was nothing new. What was there to discuss? It's clearly your own rendering....so as I consult the many Qurans I have I concluded they all say basically the same thing as Arberry.
You have no point....and no, your googled assertions are meaningless and without merit.
What "googled" assertions? This is a historical fact concerning the bible. The oldest fragment is only 120 to 150 after the fact. The NT is a copy, of a copy, of a copy.....the first bible is 300 to 350 years after Yeshua, Some of the stories and laws in the bible are written in earlier civilizations that predate the bible and the Jews. Look, I'm not trying to get you to admit it. There's no need because the history, if you knew it or were aware of its existence, is more than enough and those facts can't be changed.
If you think that you have googled something of merit then start a dedicated thread to it...as if it has not already been debated numerous times already...
Had you not open the door with your spotlight on the Quran there would be no need for me to speak the truth about your bible...but you did. You can't have it both ways and that's not how it works here at RF. We want to know if the Quran tells its followers or readers to refer to the bible....we didn't ask you for pseudo-translation or some sort of history lesson....
The authors of the Koran repeatedly state that they copied the Holy Bible.
It really does not get much simplier than this brother.
And biblical stories, without a doubt, are found in the writings/carvings of civilizations that predate the bible and the Jews. What's your point? What does any of that, so you say, have to do with if the Quran instructs it's followers/readers to look to the bible?