On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:17:16 -0800, Rich Ater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto Simpson wrote:
> Gilberto: > I wouldn't use the term > "forgeries". All I mean when *I* say > corruption is that the first five books > of the Bible are not identical to the Torah given to Moses. The 4 Biblical > gospels are not identical to the Gospel given to Jesus. I even know of > Bibles put out by Christians were the explanatory notes explain that the > texts are "corrupted". I wouldn't necessarily ascribe sinister motives to > the people who put the texts together. [...]I > think that what I'm saying is pretty mild. Rich: What you're saying is mild. I > was jumping to conclusions based on conversations that I've had with other > Muslims. You mentioned in other posts that you believe the essense of the > Injil is in the four Gospels, I believe that we are in aggreement there. > Gilberto: I don't think there is a fundamental difference in what we are > saying. Some of the Bible may be the word of God. Some isn't. If even > one letter is off, if some numbers are missing, then "corruption" > has occured. If the wrong books were canonized, then "corruption" > has occured. Everything else is just a matter of degree. Rich: In this sense, yes, > corruption has occurred. Although I don't know that there ever was a literal > book of Jesus' We know about the Q source meerly as an inference. Gilberto: I wouldn't insist that it has to be a physical paper and ink book. For example, even the Quran is in some sense primarily an oral revelation (the word itself means "the recitation") although we believe it has been faithfully transcribed. Jesus came as a prophet with a message. And some portion of the words which passed his lips probably would have been "from God" in such away that they would collectively qualify as the Gospel. In any case, the Gospel of Thomas is a sayings Gospel and is actually pretty close. I'm not sure if there are other known Sayings Gospels. Rich: > In other postings you discussed the genocidal tales in the Old Testament. > I've used those with Christians and Jews to illustrate that the Qur'an not > only isn't warlike, but considerably milder than the Bible. Yes, I agree. > I don't have > trouble with believing that these events may have occurred, considering the > times. Gilberto: I don't know what "considering the times" means. I'm not sure how the passing of time could by itself change the moral status of genocide. If you admit that there are extreme circumstances where genocide is actually justified, then if those extreme circumstances ever repeated themselves in the future, then genocide would again be justified. 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: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
