Qu'ran, Bible -- Its all the same, anyway.

You know what really grinds my gears? When people who are not theological scholars try to interpret 'scriptures' where thought and opinion is fact and tangible to them and for all intended purposes, whatever is being debated. Graham makes a lot of good points in is introduction about just this. There is almost a sarcastic tone as soon as you begin to read, "Probably no major concept or phenomenon in the history of religion appears more self-evident or unproblematic than scripture," (1). It can be argued that this statement alone encompasses the teachings in the class, in that the scriptures are not linear or 'one-dimensional'; there is not one way to interpret the texts. Even across the board we have learned that the Vedas are different from the Qu'ran which is different from Buddhism where "what begins with perceived similarities and continuities proceeds rapidly to recognition of contrasts and disparities among differing traditions," (2). In all Graham tries to insinuate a sort of hermeneutic form of approaching not just one text or book but inter-traditions as well -- "scripture, not unlike religion, or ritual, or any other significant element of human life and society, proves finally ambiguous and elusive of simple definition or easy delineation," (3).