Hi, Gilberto, At 12:28 PM 1/8/2005, you wrote: >>Do you find them less convincing than Bahai attempts to reconcile the Bible >>and Quran?
No, that is what I was saying. I think that the various texts incorporated the Bible can be studied; and the Qur'an can be studied. If there are similarities between the various biblical texts or between certain biblical texts and the Qur'an, they can be pointed out, but I would not consider this type of "reconciliation" to be a scholarly activity. As I wrote on another list two days ago. "I take a pragmatic approach to this subject. IMO, the only value of Baha'i eisegeses is apologetic and propagative (not academic)." By "eisegesis," I was, in this case, referring to the interpretation of previous scriptures using statements, or "principles," contained in the Baha'i primary sources. However, I would have the same view about creating artificial "syncretisms" through doctrinal reconciliation. >>(I have in mind especially the teachings about the sonship, divinity and >>crucifixion of Jesus). I mean, the difference between Jesus being God or not >>God seems to me orders of magnitude more huge than the difference between Ali >>being the first imam, or him being possibly the greatest awliya, the qutb of >>his age, a perfect man.<< I would simply explain my understandings of the Baha'i views on those subjects. I see no reason why a Baha'i should not try to interpret other scriptures based on an application of certain Baha'i views. However, the only value I can see in this exercise would be apologetic and propagative (pedagogical), not academic. Academically, each text incorporated into a scripture (including the Baha'i Sacred Texts) should be examined on its own. >>I think I understand what you are saying but I'm not sure how in practice >>would work out. Again going back to the nature of Jesus, personally I think >>that there is a radical difference between what the Quran says about Jesus >>and what the Bible says about Jesus.<< As a Baha'i, I accept the authority of Baha'u'llah on this matter. From that standpoint, I would say that the qur'anic reference to Christ not dying on the cross applies to His Soul and Spirit, not to His body. In other respects, I would want to look at the statements in the Qur'an and in the various texts of the Bible and would point out any similarities and differences I observe, but I would not be interested in reconciling them . >>But then in the actual Bahai writings statements are made which seem to say >>these differences can be reconciled. That feels like an imposition to me >>because I don't think it is reflected in the texts. Do you have a different >>way of thinking about that issue?<< Yes, I think that the differences, from an apologetic standpoint, are explained in the Baha'i texts. That doesn't tell me that the actual differences between statements in the Qur'an and the "Bible" can independently be reconciled using any kind of scholarly perspective. With regards, Mark A. Foster • 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __________________________________________________ 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
