Then please explain how the story of Isaac in the tanakh is historically incorrect but that the Quranic version is correct. Please supply the objective historical data or acclaimed studies that support your notions.<quoted text>
The mistakes people allege in Quran are no mistakes. They are different from OT or NT books, but on these occasions, the mere authenticity of older scriptures come into question.
The "defects" in Quran are only from our assumptions, while those in OT and NT books are real and hard to explain.
And we see apologies like "Copying error" or Variant Readings and Errata etc. added in footnotes, to common readers they do not mean much, but to a scholar they carry lots of meanings.
Like I said, its the glass house/stones thing again.
I never said MY version was correct - what I am saying is that you can not claim your version is correct either - making your superiority argument fruitless.