This was possibly the first topic that made me wonder whether the Qur'an was actually from a human source rather than a divine one.
Today I see more and more Muslims saying it doesn't mean hit - so I was wondering what Muslims here think?
I dont think we've gotten any Muslims here willing to say that daraba means beat. I can't recall anyone getting hounded and crucified for saying "its only meant to be with a miswak", so it may not have happened (might have to go thru the fun exkimdonesia thread).
We get all that weird ones, so they come up with their own personal interpretations of the verse. Most deniers seem to jump on the progressive bandwagon- either the quran is progressive or we have to intepret it as such today becasue we dont live in the 7th century
.
People (at least in the west) are progressive, but are so regardless of religion. Most people would agree today that wife-beating and slavery are bad, but as Muslims have such a strong attachment to the quran, they try to make shit taste better by adding lightly or say it means something else.
I think, if 4 34 was not in the quran, Muslims who presently try to justify it would find the notion of wife beating abhorrent. They would wonder how you could say such a discriminatory thing when its not there, and that the quran is ecumenical, just, etc.
They would probably take pride in the fact that there was no wife-beating in it, another reason to believe in the quran instead of the bible or torah. But simply because it is there, they have to reconcile it with what they believe or want to believe.