Editing Openai/67f9c019-88f0-8007-a867-29e6f1beeb8b (section)

===== Summary =====
* Traditional translations (like Yusuf Ali’s) and their associated tafsirs interpret Q4:157 within a long‑standing theological and linguistic framework that underscores the divine protection and miraculous nature of the event.
* Qur’an‑bil‑Qur’an translations aim to demonstrate that the Quran, through its own internal references, is complete and self‑interpreting—thus preserving its inherent unity and divinely given detail.
* In contrast, Saint Murad’s translation employs a cross‑linguistic, ultra‑literal methodology that some critics argue reflects an underlying Christological influence. This method tends to reinterpret key words (such as the term for “appeared”) in ways that depart from both classical exegesis and the Quran’s internal coherence. As a result, many scholars do not regard his work as academically rigorous; instead, they view it as a revisionist or polemical approach that casts doubt on the Quran’s inimitability.

In essence, accepting Murad’s interpretation—as some argue—is tantamount to accepting that the Quran’s language may be subject to human‑constructed, external reinterpretation rather than being the self‑contained, divinely complete revelation as traditionally understood.