On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 07:20:09 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Gilberto: > > > "And at some point, you weren't just saying the Quran is silent about > > > the equality but that it is positively inconsistent with it."
> > Susan: > > > I think the details of the Qur'an are inconsistent with the social > > equality > > > of women as we presently understand it. > > Gilberto: > > When you say that it makes me think that on some level you don't > > really believe that the Quran is from God > [D.A.L.] I struggle with the Qu'ran also. Gilberto: I respect that and think its an honest answer. I think that what happens in the case of many people coming to Islam from Western backgrounds is that there is this struggle and wrestling with the Quran but eventually the Quran wins. : ) > I think that part of the problem > is that from what I understand, it is nearly impossible to faithfully render > Arabic directly into English. (This also says something about biblical > inerrantists). I was thinking of mentioning this earlier now is probably more appropriate. I don't think of myself as very post-modern, but Mark's earlier point about reading and meaning might be appropriate here. I mean, there is a question of whether ANY text, especially religious ones can be "rendered faithfully". If he is right, then one approach might be that the Quran isn't telling anybody to do anything (so in particular it isn't telling anyone to be sexist). But when you read the Quran, you meditate on the words, and you contemplate the consequences of your own actions and act accordingly. > On the other hand, knowing that the Qu'ran was revealed to a time and > culture radically different from our own seems to resolve the difficulty. > The principle of progressive revelation doesn't invalidate the Qu'ran, but > it does mean that we are expected to move forward. Every former revelation > was directed toward a particular time and culture, each with its unique set > of parameters. This is the first time the world has been presented with a > truly universal revelation. I see things very differently. Islam, Christianity, and in some ways even Judaism claim to have a revelation which is "truly universal". In Islam there are explicit texts saying that the Muhammad was sent to all mankind and that the Quran was as well. If you look at all the societies Islam had spread to from the time of Muhammad by 1843, in Africa, Spain, Eastern and Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Spain as well as the Middle East I'm not sure how convincing it is to say that Islam was just meant for a very narrow range of cultures. There is actually a really interesting comment attributed to the Bahai figures, unfortunately it is just a Pilgrim's Note: " It is blasphemy to believe that Islam was not meant to be a universal religion." And I thought there was a passage actually in the writings saying that previous religions (at least Islam) was intended to be universal but the blamed the behavior of the followers Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __________________________________________________ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
