In a message dated 1/10/2005 8:26:36 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I seem to recall banned any new person claiming to have
revelation. I don't remember it only limiting independent
manifestations."Yes, I believe so.
"
What the passage in question literally says
Are dependent Manifestations also ruled out during the 1000 years? I
seem to recall banned any new person claiming to have revelation. I
don't remember it only limiting independent manifestations.
Excellent question! We tened to bat that one around ourselves. I stand firmly in the I
I would look at the site in the Perfect Man thread and start there.
Then I would do searches under Perfect Man Universal Man or Insan
al-Kamil.
Peace
GIlberto
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:09:54 -0800 (PST), JS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
G: I think one possible unified
way to look at this
"We did not leave anything out of this Book, then all will be gathered before their Lord [for judgement]. (Qur'an 6:38)"
G: I don't think it gives positive support, they aren't even mentioned or implied. And in order to harmonize it you have to qualify "anything" to a certain degree... ...that's
Dear John,
Your previous post was edited in an odd way. Certain comments were
left out and I think it was a little unclear what arguments/comments
were being responded to. I'll try to clarify.
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 06:59:03 -0800 (PST), John Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We did not leave
Hi, Gilberto,
At 10:30 AM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
And I would suggest that Bahais don't seem to be very worried about all those
other figures they are implicitly saying no to.
In one sense, none of that matters. What God expects of His servants is to
recognize His Messenger in the age He
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:02:22 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Gilberto,
At 10:30 AM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
And I would suggest that Bahais don't seem to be very worried about all
those other figures they are implicitly saying no to.
In one sense, none of that matters.
G: Even today, there are many different groups claiming to be ledby the mahdi or his successors, or the second coming of christ, or thelatest installation of God's religion. From the Moonies, to the BranchDavidians, to the Matreya followers, to the Ahmadiya, or theAnsarullah, or the Nation of
Hi, Gilberto,
At 11:49 AM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
But even Iblis and the Dajjal have a particular spiritual function, no?,
For those who believe in the devil and/or the anti-Christ, they have a
function. A position, even an imaginary one, can perform a role (expected
behavior) without having an
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:51:59 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Gilberto,
At 11:49 AM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
But even Iblis and the Dajjal have a particular spiritual function, no?,
Mark:
For those who believe in the devil and/or the anti-Christ, they have a
function. A
In a message dated 1/10/2005 12:19:44 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So there are all these claims. Aren't they mutually exclusive? In whatsense can you accept all the above, while on top of that saying thatthe Bab (another title, in reality) really is the Mahdi? Do you
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:15:39 -0800 (PST), JS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
G: Even today, there are many different groups claiming to be led
by the mahdi or his successors, or the second coming of christ, or the
latest installation of God's religion. From the Moonies, to the Branch
Davidians,
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:54:37 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/10/2005 2:49:47 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you can easily dismiss the claims of all those groups (and others
not mentioned) on the grounds that the 1000 year clock
In a message dated 1/10/2005 3:20:40 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What do you mean by that? Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had a large body ofwritings. He claimed to be the Mahdi and the second coming. He claimedto fulfill prophecy. According to one Ahmadi I talked to there wereeven
Gilberto,
At 01:49 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
I didn't mean to invoke a discussion on whether Satan is literally real or
metaphorical or something else. I just meant that at least as I understand
it, the Dajjal is supposed to be a false claimant and that in fact there
would be many false
Hi, Gilberto,
Sorry, I forgot to respond to your last paragraph.
I wrote:
I accept all of their claims equally. However, I am not asserting a
divine involvement with all of them. (How would I know?) I am simply
affirming the particularity of their paradigms. As I said before, whether
I
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:37:59 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/10/2005 3:20:40 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gilberto:
Yes, but Muslims (especially Sufis) are wiling to permit the
continuance of other kinds of figures which the Bahais
Gilberto,
If I might jump in here. (I go back to work on Wednesday, and I won't be on the
Internet quite as much as I am now.)
At 05:55 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
So what do you think is the defining property of manifestation (not just a
description or summary of what you think, but the
G: I think one possible unifiedway to look at this situation is that a manifestation is a commonconcept between the Bahai faith and Islam (especially among Sufis).The disagreement is that according to the Bahai faith anotherManifestation won't come until the end of the 1000 years while for
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:57:45 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 05:55 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
So what do you think is the defining property of manifestation (not just
a description or summary of what you think, but the essential definition)?
I don't think
The appearance of dependent Manifestations prior to the next Independent
Manifestation are, in my view, ruled out by a different verse -- the closing
verse of the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, in which He states to turn
to the Center of the Cause (the Guardian) and the Universal House of
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:26:25 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Gilberto,
At 08:07 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
Are dependent Manifestations also ruled out during the 1000 years?
Yes. However, `Abdu'l-Baha wrote:
The station which he who hath truly recognized this Revelation
In a message dated 1/10/2005 9:51:23 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So I guess some of this whole question could depend on how the termsmatch up and how the "translations" are done. If the kashf or ilhamgiven to saints is "revelation" then the Bahai faith would object
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 02:54:07 -, Brent Poirier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are dependent Manifestations also ruled out during the 1000 years?
Yes, but not by that verse from Baha'u'llah. The verse from Baha'u'llah
states that no independent Manifestation, with a Revelation direct from God,
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:43:29 -0800, Patti Goebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that perhaps many of those equal to Lesser Prophets may well be
acknowledged in the institution of the learned, the Continental Counsellors,
appointed by the House of Justice. Although that's not to say that
Gilberto,
At 09:58 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
Like lesser prophets? How much lesser are we talking about? Are you saying
that the Continental Consellors are like Confucious or Isaiah or Solomon?
My own view is that is best not to equate, or even relate, any kind of
appointment within, or by, the
Gilberto,
At 09:51 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
So I guess some of this whole question could depend on how the terms match up
and how the translations are done. If the kashf or ilham given to saints is
revelation then the Bahai faith would object to them before the 1000
years.
It depends on how
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 22:45:30 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 09:58 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
Like lesser prophets? How much lesser are we talking about? Are you saying
that the Continental Consellors are like Confucious or Isaiah or Solomon?
[...]
`Abdu'l-Baha
Ooops, hit the wrong button.
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:07:30 -0500, Gilberto Simpson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 22:45:30 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 09:58 PM 1/10/2005, you wrote:
Like lesser prophets? How much lesser are we talking about?
29 matches
Mail list logo
