"Most, or at least many thinking Christians have rejected a literate translation of the Bible."

"A literal translation" please.

And it's pretty evidently "most" rather than "many", on a global level, if not perhaps in certain countries and certain religious groups, taking "rejected a literal translation" as meaning that the writings are to be understood and interpreted as a whole.

And essentially the same way of treating the Quran has been the predominent tradition among Islamic scholars for most of Islamic history, as indicated in that article.

Unfortunately an intolerant and fanatical literalist movement has sprung up in the last few decades, with powerful backers, and this has has set out to sweep all that away and to achieve a purified and reformed Islam. And this has a genuine appeal for many confused people, as such movements often do, since there is always much that does need reforming.

Something rather similar happened in Christian Europe a few centuries ago. In the light of what happened then, involving a century and more of genocidal internecine war, I can understand why moderate Moslems might be nervous about confronting their "Reformers" too directly, and setting off something analogous.