What a bewildering statement. Have you actually read the Quran?

Yes, I was forced to read Quran as a child in school in Iran.

Literally no reader says this, because they know how much explanation is needed for the verses to make sense today. There are entire industries providing tafsir.

Please do read it yourself before questioning others with your kneejerk reactions.

I'm guessing you think this because as you've stated elsewhere you were taught in Iran, where they often opt for 'tafsir batiniyya' (esoteric interpretation) as opposed to just taking the texts at their dhahir (apparent) meaning. You might find the works of someone like Ibn Hazm refreshing, since he talks about this sort of thing alot.

The practice of people divorcing texts from their linguistic meaning isn't something unique to the Qur'an, by that logic anything can mean anything and it's very useful for certain people, but since you're obviously able to understand what I'm saying there has to be some underlying structure.

So you think we should take the part of Quran which says beat your wives if they disobey you at face value?

You shouldn't take a 'part' at face value you should take the whole at face value (that is to say, including any other texts that outwardly state what kind of striking people are permitted to engage in), but yes there is a kind of striking of the wife that Allah permitted and anyone who denies this is illiterate or coping.

This is a dishonest Sunni talking point. There is no apparent interpretation of every verse.

Simple example: aleph lam meem.

And verses you can't take literally: 18:85-86.

So apparent just means a regurgitation of the Sunni interpretation.

>There is no apparent interpretation of every verse.

There not being an apparent interpretation of 'alif lam meem' doesn't necessitate an esoteric interpretation, which is what I'm arguing.

>And verses you can't take literally: 18:85-86.

Linguistically it's very clear what the Arabic means here.

>So apparent just means a regurgitation of the Sunni interpretation.

No, it means the most obvious meaning of a statement according to the Arabic.

According to my apparent interpretation: First verse is meaningless. Latter verses are plain wrong.

If you want to make random claims I can't really stop you, idk what you want me to tell you

And this response gets a dishonest "nuh uh it's not" without any justification as expected.