Why the "There are so many interpretations of the Bible" claim is confused

[Aractus]

Aractus

I never get sick from reminding people, that dates hold no true value.

Yes, parts of the bible and talmud are true, according to the Quran.
The forging touched many of it, that's the main reason why the Quran was descended anyways..

Revising the archaeological evidence, will never bring the dead back to testify. The body of Jesus was never found, and unlike Mohammed, even his tomb isn't known.

Until then,Aractus, the archaeological evidence is based on "copies" of the bible and the Torah, and until then that dates can never be trusted when it comes to the original versions.

That claim simply is not true. I've explained this to you repeatedly. You are not entitled to invent your own facts, and ignore solid evidence from modern academics.

I am not making the claim that the Bible is true. I'm simply explaining to you that your claim that the text of the bible is corrupted and not what was originally written down is FALSE.

As for your claim that we don't have the originals - so what? We don't have an original of a single Shakespearian play either. We don't have the original autograph of the Qur'an either.

We lost the body of Ned Kelly for over 100 years, it was only recently re-discovered - and he died less than 150 years ago.

We don't need a body of an ancient person to demonstrate that they existed. Even if you were to find his actual remains, you may not know you've found them - or it may be contested (as with the James Ossuary).