Muhammad Mujtahed Shabestari and Abdolkarim Soroush have taken an unexpected hermeneutic turn in how they deal with the concept of revelation (wahy). This turn, which began germinating nine years ago in Soroush’s book “Bast-e Tajrobe-ye Nabavi (the Expansion of the Prophetic Experience)”, questions the unqualified and categorical orthodoxy of the Qur’an as “kalam Allah” and makes an effort to problematize the finality of revelation (wahy). In August of 2007, Shabestari also began publishing a series of six articles on the topic. Both Shabestari and Soroush, although using different methodologies and arguments, have suggested that the Qur’an however inspired and conceived by God, is itself already “at some level” an interpretation by the prophet and not the divine word. In effect, Shabestari and Soroush, in an attempt to reconcile modernity and tradition anthropomorphize the message and in doing so, try to make the Qur’an less authoritative. I argue that neither Shabestari nor Soroush present us with workable models and therefore fail at what they set out to do. What they have accomplished is a dialogue that dared to question the orthodoxy, a dialogue that resulted in an academic conference on the topic in Qom, an event that by its very existence, and despite the theocracy’s monolithic nature, acknowledges the peaceful co-existence and tolerant interaction of multiple Islams within Iran. This coexistence is nothing new, but the boundaries have never been pushed this far and response has never been this enlightened. This radical kind of Islam, questions the givenness of the Qur’an, making the text less foundational in epistemological terms. While the Qur’an as the mediated word of God (through the prophet) has already clarified what is supposed to be “significant” in Islam, in choosing to consider the word of God as Muhammad’s interpretation of wahy, Soroush and Shabestari are preparing the means by which to construct a new system of religious significance for themselves. In Soroush and Shabestari’s redefinitions of the Qur’an, it now becomes less problematic for the already humanly-produced text to undergo another signification process which is more in tune with current historical and cultural needs. The doors of ijtihad become open to otherwise unimagined degrees. Most importantly, in current day Iran, “creative ijtihad” seems to operate in a far less restricted arena and does so with the tacit agreement of the orthodoxy.