Historical consciousness in the Modern Age has often led to the relativisation of the power of the past and the quest to liberate humanity from tradition. In biblical studies, this has also often led to results that are profoundly divergent from the results of dogmatic and traditional exegesis such that dogmatic theologians criticise the methods and results of biblical exegesis. In Islam, the orthodoxy has sought to shield Qur’anic exegesis from historical critic. But this has not saved Qur’anic exegesis from the inevitable confrontation with the realities presented by modernity. The result is that, although traditional Qur’anic exegesis still holds sway in Islam, many Muslim scholars are already looking for alternative approaches.
In this book, the author tries to establish the nature and the points of conflict between traditional and modern approaches to exegesis in Christianity and Islam with a view to drawing necessary lessons for both religious traditions. To achieve this, he examines the extensive criticisms of the methods of biblical and qur'anic exegesis as presented by Joseph Ratzinger (Christianity) and Fazlur Rahman's (Islam). From these criticisms, he draws conclusions that could be helpful to both biblical and Qur'anic exegesis.
In this book, the author tries to establish the nature and the points of conflict between traditional and modern approaches to exegesis in Christianity and Islam with a view to drawing necessary lessons for both religious traditions. To achieve this, he examines the extensive criticisms of the methods of biblical and qur'anic exegesis as presented by Joseph Ratzinger (Christianity) and Fazlur Rahman's (Islam). From these criticisms, he draws conclusions that could be helpful to both biblical and Qur'anic exegesis.