Re: Not Exhausted

[Rich Ater]

Gilberto: I'm not sure I've read enough of Bahaullah's writings to say that he gives a particularly deep understanding. Some Bahai interpretations of Quranic passages I don't find terribly satisfying or super-deep. I think there are Muslim scholars, especially Sufis and others who interpret the Quran in ways which I find more impressive. But the larger point I would want to make is that if you are saying that over time, people can have a deeper understanding of certain texts, then I actually wouldn't have much a problem with that notion of progress. If, as quoted from the Bahai writings, the word of God is endless in meaning, then that suggests that Muslims could stick to the Quran and continue to study it, and find more and more spiritual depth the more time they spent in its ocean. Gilberto,     I have no problem with this either. I don't feel the need to convince you to believe what I believe, just to accept the fact the I believe it. I think you may never agree with my stance and that's alright. I do not doubt for a minute your sincerity, or the sincerity of other Muslims out there. What I'm looking for is mutual respect and dialogue. I think this is achievable, but it will be more dificult if we take each diference of oppinion as a dig at the other person. I don't mean you personally, I have enjoyed our dialogue and wish it to continue. My concern was that some of what you've said made me think that you might have thought I was trying to convert you. I'm not, I just want us to understand each other and live together. That has not always been the case between our religions. As I said, I believe that when a new Prophet comes, the energy released in the world effects all people. That is why in the wake of Jesus (PBUH) Hillel arrose and in the wake of  Muhammad (PBUH) the likes of Francis of Assisi, Moses Maimonides, and Thomas Aquinas arrose.  I would go further and say in the wake of Baha'u'llah Muhammad Abduh and Fazlur Rahman arrose. Other religions will continue to produce brilliant scholars and holy people. Each religion will produce new insights into its scriptures and these will all be valid from some perspective. I must also add here that while Shoghi Effendi instructed Western Baha'is to study and vindicate Islam, we have not done that good a job and most Baha'is have no clue about fiqh, sharia, or what either entails. Rich: Once again this has to do with our understanding. I know the Muslim belief about the original Gospel and Torah. I think its specious. There is nothing in the Qur'an to back it up. In a passage discussing the People of the Book, is the admonition: [2.79] Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah, so that they may take for it a small price; therefore woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. This may be open to interpretation. I respect that you believe it means that the Gospel and Torah here today are forgeries. I disagree with this interpretation. On top of that there are several hadith (at least one specifically interprets the above verse) which are more explicit. More harm has been done to Islam by Hadith than by all the armies of Christendom. I know the ulm al isnad, but still its anybody guess as to what is and isn't valid in Hadith. You'll note that I said that I did not believe the Qur'an supports you're interpretation, my leaving out Hadith was intentional. I mean no disrespect, but it's hard to prove Hadith. And on top of that, even if the Quran and sunnah didn't verify the idea, I think the case for Biblical corruption is too strong to neglect. For example, if you read the Penteteuch (the "Torah") Moses' death is described at the end, in particular from the perspective of someone long after. So someone besides Moses obviously wrote that section. But then other passages of the Penteteuch are written in the same style. In fact, Biblical scholars almost universally accept the Documentary Hypothesis, which states that the Biblical Penteteuch had multiple authors (typically 4 are distinguished) and edited together centuries after Moses. So if that's true, the original revelation given to Moses (the actual Torah) is only a part of the Biblical Penteteuch. A similar argument could be made about the Gospels. If the Gospel is a revelation given to Jesus (similar to how the Quran was given to Muhammad) then the Gospel, if it exists in the NT at all is found in some portion of just the "red letters". But other elements are put into the mix as well. Besides, if you read about the history of the texts you would see that certain changes have taken place. I'm very aware of Biblical history, I've lectured on it in Baha'i classes. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by God. I do not believe that every word of it is the Word of God in the same sense that the Qur'an is, Baha'u'llah does not claim this. He states that the spirit of truth is imbued in it so that the followers of Christ and Moses could have used their scriptures to recognize the prophets after them. Thus the Torah was intact enough to recognize Christ and the Gospel to recognize Muhammad. Corruption would be the intentional placement of false verses to mislead, I do not believe this happened. Alaikum Sallam wa Rahmat'u'llah wa Barakahu, Rich __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu