Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:37:27 -0600, Susan Maneck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "I > think that it should be possible for us to come up with a reasonable > definition of "prophet" such that a good number of Christians will > allow for future prophets after Jesus but the typical Muslim will not > allow for future prophets after Muhammad." > Dear Gilberto, > Obviously if one wanted to come up with such a conclusion as was prepared to > ignore the fact that Paul and Muslims are talking about very different > things when the refer to prophets one could come to that conclusion. No. You aren't understanding what I'm saying. I'm conceding that when the English New Testament says "prophet" and when English translations of the Quran say "prophet" that different concepts are intended. What I'm saying is that it is possible to come up with a third (perhaps even one of the first two) concept of "prophet. And when we apply it to both belief systems, you get the above result. > While > there might well be 'prophets' within the church they could not add anything > to scripture. You are really being silly here. The New Testament church created the scripture after Jesus. > But when a Muslim talks about prophets they usually mean one > who brings a Book. There are about 25 prophets mentioned in the Quran and the only revelations mentioned are the Torah, Zabur, Injil, Quran, and the suhuf of Ibrahim and Musa. Traditionally there were about 124,000 prophets and I've heard the claim that there were a couple hundred revelations altogether. Most prophets didn't come with their own book. Christianity did not allow for that. The last passage of > the Book of Revelation, however misinterpreted, was understood by most > Christians to mean that nothing else could be added to scripture. I think "added to scripture" is a kind of red herring. Whether there is new revelation or not the Bible is a relatively fixed book. Neither Bahais or Muslims change the Bible to add more stuff to it. The New revelations are seperate. > > "Not everyone was a prophet. Prophet is still a meaningful category." > > Yes, it was a particular office within the church. But it has no bearing on > the station of prophethood in Islam which goes by that name. > I never said that Christians believe that figures satisfying the Islamic definitions of prophet would continue to appear. > Mark: > "> Regardless of whether one equates Paul's view of a prophet with > Muhammad's, to Paul, prophecy takes place in the context of the Gospel of > Christ. Paul's christocentrism was unaffected. > > Gilberto: > And what you are calling ethnocentrism I would probably call > exclusivism (not finality)" > > He said Christocentric, not ethnocentric. That's a very different thing. Yes, having 4 or 5 different conversations with people on the same subject and nearly 3 in the morning sometimes put strains on my powers of concentration. Luckily you are smart enough to know what I had in mind. Mark: Unlike the qur'anic concept of prophecy, under Paul's system, no further "book" and law was revealed. IMO, that is the main difference. Gilberto: > "That would be alot more convincing if Paul didn't write more of the > Bible than any other person, including Jesus." > Susan: > That is really irrelevant to the question of whether or not Christianity > makes the same claims to exclusivity and finality as does Islam. Gilberto: Mark claimed that the kind of "prophets" permitted in a Christian context had no book. According to Christianity, the New Testament was inspired scripture and it was written after Jesus. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Finality of the Bible
In a message dated 1/15/2005 1:15:33 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What exactly did he say about them? And how do you know they are the same? I don't have the book with me right now. Have you never read "That which Delivers from Error"? It is a classic. "And how do you know they are the same?" If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . . __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Finality of the Bible
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:07:34 -0600, Susan Maneck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "The largest Christian group, namely the Catholic Church clearly and > explicitly says that individuals can receive private revelation. Some > of these revelations have been written down. Some of these might even > be highly regarded by many in the Catholic Church. The Message of > Fatima would be a really good example." > > Dear Gilberto, > > But such private 'revelations' would never become part of scripture or even > canon law Where did I claim they would? > "But in Islam, people who receive revelation (private or not) > satisfy at least one definition of being a prophet. But Muhammad > (saaws) is the last prophet so that sort of thing doesn't happen > anymore in the Islamic perspective." > > Al-Ghazali held that Walis recieved the type of private revelations you are > talking about. What exactly did he say about them? And how do you know they are the same? Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
From the Baha'i Library
Dearest John Smith Nothing, absolutely nothing can replace the perusal of the Iqan Itself but I thought a brief review of Chris Buck's book may be helpful to you. Please forgive my presumption in sharing it with you Well may it be claimed that of all the books revealed by the Author of the Baha'i Revelation, this Book alone [the Kitab Iqan], by sweeping away the age-long barriers that have so insurmountably separated the great religions of the world, has laid down a broad and unassailable foundation for the complete and permanent reconciliation of their followers. (Shoghi Effendi: God Passes By, Page: 139)*** http://bahai-library.com/books/symbol.secret/ *** This claim [the claim of finality], consistently upheld by Islamic orthodoxy, not only militates against the notion of prophetic continuity but also hinders any attempt at the renovation of doctrine. No intellectual current in the course of Islamic history-not even the Sufis' claim to intuitive inspiration or the philosophers' rational exposition of the fundamentals of the Islamic faith-has ever escaped this predicament. 15 Bahá'u'lláh overrides the obstacle of the "Seal" from several directions. In so doing, he defines the designation as an attribute common to all messengers of God. The concept of the "Seal" as "Last" is kept intact, but "Last" indicates importance rather than temporality. Bahá'u'lláh sets up his argument by citing a tradition in which Muhammad is reported to have said, "I am Jesus."16 Enlarging on the Quranic theme of the oneness of the prophets, Bahá'u'lláh writes: Hath not Muhammad, Himself, declared: "I am all the Prophets."? Hath He not said as We have already mentioned: "I am Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus."? Why should Muhammad, that immortal Beauty, Who hath said: "I am the first Adam," be incapable of saying also: "I am the last Adam."? For even as He regarded Himself to be the "First of the Prophets"-that is Adam-in like manner, the "Seal of the Prophets" is also applicable unto that Divine Beauty. It is admittedly obvious that being the "First of the Prophets," He likewise is their "Seal."17 Viewed in this light, they [the Prophets] are all but Messengers of that ideal King, that unchangeable Essence. And were they all to proclaim: "I am the Seal of the Prophets," they verily utter but the truth, beyond the faintest shadow of a doubt. For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation. They are all the Manifestation of the "Beginning" and the "End," the "First" and the "Last," the "Seen" and the "Hidden"all of which pertain to Him Who is the innermost Spirit of Spirits and eternal Essence of Essences.18 Having linked Quranic concepts of prophetic unity with this Quranic distinction (Quran 33:40), a tenable leap in logic for Bahá'u'lláh was to suggest that if the prophets share the same essence, they should also share the same attributes, including that expressed by the title, "Seal of the Prophets." (Bahá'u'lláh does allow for distinctions in station and intensity of revelation, however.) By the force of this argument, Jesus is fully equal with the prophet Muhammad, since Jesus is considered "the Seal of the Prophets" as well. The same is likewise the case with the prophet Adam and the Patriarchs of yore: "Behold, O concourse of the earth," Bahá'u'lláh exclaims, "the splendours of the End, revealed in the Manifestations of the Beginning!" In fine, Bahá'u'lláh applies Quranic concepts of the oneness of the prophets to relativize the idea of the "Seal of the Prophets." The accepted notion of the "Seal" as meaning "last" is kept intact, but "last" indicates authority rather than succession. Through an associative equivalence grounded in the Qur'án's message of prophetic oneness, the "Seal of the Prophets" distinguishes all the Messengers of God. In The Book of Certitude, Bahá'u'lláh shows orthodox claims to Muhammad's ultimacy as trading on notions of triumphalism to the exclusion of the Quranic concept of prophetic unity. Bahá'u'lláh has used one Quranic doctrine as a constraint on another. Bahá'u'lláh opens up a whole new line of interpretation by drawing a simple Qur'anic equation: The Qaim of Islamic tradition is the "presence of God" in the Qur'án. Throughout The Book of Certitude, Bahá'u'lláh consistently identifies the figure of the Qá'im with the Qur'anic "presence of God," in which Gods "presence" (not essence) is incarnated in the person of an eschatological fulfiller whose charisma is the numinosity of God. The latter identification is not exclusive to the Qá'im for good reason, since it equally applies to the messenger foretold by the Báb. ... Just as Muhammad manifests the Will and Presence of the transcendent Deity, so also must the Qur'anic eschatological "God" be a mediated Deity. According to Bahá'u'lláh, the Qur'án refers to this deputy of God in various ways, ONE OF WHICH IS ITS CRYPTIC REFERENCES TO "THE PRESENCE OF
RE: Finality of the Bible
"The largest Christian group, namely the Catholic Church clearly and explicitly says that individuals can receive private revelation. Some of these revelations have been written down. Some of these might even be highly regarded by many in the Catholic Church. The Message of Fatima would be a really good example." Dear Gilberto, But such private 'revelations' would never become part of scripture or even canon law anymore than they would in Islam which would also allow for this kind of inspiration. "But in Islam, people who receive revelation (private or not) satisfy at least one definition of being a prophet. But Muhammad (saaws) is the last prophet so that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore in the Islamic perspective." Al-Ghazali held that Walis recieved the type of private revelations you are talking about. In fact he held those experiences were evidence of the validity of the revelations which Muhammad received. "So this would be a difference in what Muslims are saying and what Christians are saying." Not according to al-Ghazali, Ibn Arabi and myriad of other Muslim mystics and scholars. warmest, Susan __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
RE: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
"I think that it should be possible for us to come up with a reasonable definition of "prophet" such that a good number of Christians will allow for future prophets after Jesus but the typical Muslim will not allow for future prophets after Muhammad." Dear Gilberto, Obviously if one wanted to come up with such a conclusion as was prepared to ignore the fact that Paul and Muslims are talking about very different things when the refer to prophets one could come to that conclusion. While there might well be 'prophets' within the church they could not add anything to scripture. But when a Muslim talks about prophets they usually mean one who brings a Book. Christianity did not allow for that. The last passage of the Book of Revelation, however misinterpreted, was understood by most Christians to mean that nothing else could be added to scripture. Furthermore, the guidance of the church through the Holy Spirit was thought to make further revelations of this type unneccesary. Paul's statement in Galatians, which has already been quoted, was understood the same way. But don't take our word for this. Ask the next five Christians you meet whether they believe it is possible for God to send a prophet with a books to add to the scripture and see what they say. They are in a better position to tell us what they believe than you or I. "Not everyone was a prophet. Prophet is still a meaningful category." Yes, it was a particular office within the church. But it has no bearing on the station of prophethood in Islam which goes by that name. Mark: "> Regardless of whether one equates Paul's view of a prophet with Muhammad's, to Paul, prophecy takes place in the context of the Gospel of Christ. Paul's christocentrism was unaffected. Gilberto: And what you are calling ethnocentrism I would probably call exclusivism (not finality)" He said Christocentric, not ethnocentric. That's a very different thing. "That would be alot more convincing if Paul didn't write more of the Bible than any other person, including Jesus." That is really irrelevant to the question of whether or not Christianity makes the same claims to exclusivity and finality as does Islam. Ultimately no religion likes to be superceded. As the Qur'an says: "And to you there came Joseph in times gone by, with Clear Signs, but ye ceased not to doubt of the (Mission) for which he had come: At length, when he died, ye said: 'No messenger will Allah send after him.'" warmest, Susan __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Accountability (was:RE: Women in West/Islam)
G: But in some ways the larger issue is that if Susan hadn't made hercomment and I hadn't read similar things elsewhere and I had heardyour accusation towards Islam for the first time, then it would havebeen misleading. I'm "ok" with the idea that western liberals like theidea of a secular government and are going to have certain qualmsabout Islamic governments, but if you criticize Islam and give theimpression that you would like to see secular governments, when inreality you are just in favor of a different kind of theocracy, thatcertain gives the impression of being evasive (at best).J: Baha'is really aren't bad people, trust me. The person you are refering to had incorrect information or a difference of opinion about the Baha'i teachings. Read Susan's emails about the Baha'i view on theocracy, it is spelled out pretty clearly and in detail, including quotes for Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice. Let me summarize this key point from a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi for clarification, if you don't have time to read them yourself (btw, my paraphrasing and cutting and pasting may be incorrect, but this is how I understood it, so forgive me if the cut and paste totally messes up the meaning of it): 1) Christianity and Islam"The Catholic Church and the Caliphate" were not directly sanctioned by Muhammad or by Christ. Therefore they are "not divinely given" and are considered to be "man-made". However, since they are "partly derived from the teachings of Christ and Muhammad", they are "in a sense theocracies." 2) Baha'i Faith"The Baha'i theocracy, on the contrary, is both divinely ordained as a system and, of course, based on the teachings of the Prophet (Baha'u'llah) Himself." What does Shoghi Effendi mean by saying that the Baha'i theocracy is (1) divinely ordained and (2) based on the teachings of Baha'u'llah? He is refering to specific verses from Baha'u'llah's writings (among others). As you already know, neither Christianity nor Islam has writings from the Bible nor the Qur'an that directly point to who has divine authority to guide or govern the people. Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Finality of the Bible
G: I've been trying to be very specific in my claims and many people inhere seem to stubbornly refuse to see what I'm talking about. J: What you are saying seems to be missing the point and is irrelevant. G: It is possible to make well-defined distinctions between what Christianityteaches about future prophets, and what Islam teaches about futureprophets. J: Both religions believe their Book is the Last. Even the Pope's writings neither change the content of, nor add to, the Bible. G: Bahais might have an interest in conflating the two and not making that distinction but to me it is clearly there. J: There are clearly many distinction between Islam and Christianity, but they both reject additions to their Books, and reject new Books that override them.G: The largest Christian group, namely the Catholic Church clearly andexplicitly says that individuals can receive private revelation. J: How does private revelation impact the Eternal nature of the Bible to Christians? It does not. I haven't been to the bookstore recently. Is there a new version with new chapters added to the Bible? G: Some of these revelations have been written down. J: But the Bible is Always the Bible from Genesis to Revelations. G: Some of these might even be highly regarded by many in the Catholic Church. J: As are the writings of Ayatollah Khomeini or Imam Husayn or Imam Ali or Rumi or Hafez to Muslims. None of these change the Qur'an. And no religious writings of Christianity change the Bible. G: The Message of Fatima would be a really good example. J: It is not any different from the messages that Sufi saints or other Islamic religious leaders' writings. None of it changes the Bible and none of it changes the Qur'an. G: Other saints have similar experiences. J: None of it changes the Bible. G: In Islam, under at least one conception, a "prophet" is anyone who receives revelation. J: But you still have not shown that Christianity does not believe in the Finality of the Bible. Why bring up Islam?? G: Some examples I've mentioned earlier would be Mary (who received revelation from Gabriel in the Annunciation) or Moses' mother who was told to put her child in the water through revelation. J: Okay. But none of it adds to or changes the Bible. G: As far as I could tell, this is the sort of thing which Catholics call private revelation. J: Okay, and they don't change the Bible nor do they add to the Bible. G: Do you understand what I'm saying? J: No. G: So the Catholic Church clearly says that private revelation is ongoing. J: Fine, but when was the last time the Bible was changed? Last I heard they were still on the King James Version. G: But in Islam, people who receive revelation (private or not) satisfy at least one definition of being a prophet. J: Here is your flaw. I thought we were talking about Christianity. So far, you have not shown that the Bible changes over time, gets renewed, is overridden, or superceded by anything else. Why are we back to discussing Islam? Until you can show that the Bible changes or Text gets added to the Bible, you cannot bring Islam back into the discussion. We both already know that in the Islamic view, The Qur'an is ended and no future prophets are to come. Go back a step and show me how the Bible is being added onto. The Bible is indeed Final, and Christianity upholds the Finality of the Bible. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
RE: Falsifiability
"And one can start to suggest properties that beings with souls have which might be verified or disproven." And how would one establish a that these properties do indeed establish that the being who possesses them has a soul? Would this be a falsifiable criteria? "And Mark (correct me if I'm wrong) seemed to suggesting that the Bahai writings might contain factual errors but he would still "believe in them" and it was at that point that I wondered what it could mean to believe in writings when you don't actually believe that they are factually true." It might mean that the scriptures aren't about whether there were six or seven or a dog in the cave. ;-} warmest, Susan __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
RE: Accountability (was:RE: Women in West/Islam)
"but if you criticize Islam and give the impression that you would like to see secular governments, when in reality you are just in favor of a different kind of theocracy, that certain gives the impression of being evasive (at best)." Dear Gilberto, I wish you would stop casting aspersions on other's motives and assuming they are being insincere. Firouz is not being evasive, he is expressing a different opinion on this subject than most Baha'is have. warmest, Susan __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
RE: Accountability (was:RE: Women in West/Islam)
"But the Baha'i institutions exist, and operate based on the explicit, written statements of Baha'u'llah or His successors. Can Islam make the analogous claim?" Analogous, yes, but obviously not the same. But perhaps in the same since that Christian claims to finality are analogous to Muslim claims. ;-} __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Finality of the Bible
Gilberto, I have a suggestion. How about you and I go into a Christian forum of *your* choosing (why not Catholicism), and we will ask them whether they believe in the Finality of the Bible in the same sense that you believe in the Finality of the Qur'an. Will you do that with me? Here are two quotes from the New Testament, not the Old Testament. (Again, I am not asking you how you understand the Bible from an Islamic perspective. I am asking you how Christians view Christianity from their own perspective.) 1) How do you understand the last sentence of this verse "If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-9) 2) How do you understand "the same [word] shall judge him in the last day." "He that rejected Me, and receiveth not My sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:48) Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Finality of the Bible
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:16:36 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I assume that you still do not acknowledge the perspective > purporting the finality of the Bible and the finality of Jesus. I've been trying to be very specific in my claims and many people in here seem to stubbornly refuse to see what I'm talking about. It is possible to make well-defined distinctions between what Christianity teaches about future prophets, and what Islam teaches about future prophets. Bahais might have an interest in conflating the two and not making that distinction but to me it is clearly there. > I would say > that most Christian groups do firmly assert the finality of the Bible and > the finality of Jesus. The largest Christian group, namely the Catholic Church clearly and explicitly says that individuals can receive private revelation. Some of these revelations have been written down. Some of these might even be highly regarded by many in the Catholic Church. The Message of Fatima would be a really good example. Have you heard of them? Other saints have similar experiences. In Islam, under at least one conception, a "prophet" is anyone who receives revelation. Some examples I've mentioned earlier would be Mary (who received revelation from Gabriel in the Annunciation) or Moses' mother who was told to put her child in the water through revelation. As far as I could tell, this is the sort of thing which Catholics call private revelation. Do you understand what I'm saying? So the Catholic Church clearly says that private revelation is ongoing. But in Islam, people who receive revelation (private or not) satisfy at least one definition of being a prophet. But Muhammad (saaws) is the last prophet so that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore in the Islamic perspective. So this would be a difference in what Muslims are saying and what Christians are saying. The emphasis that Christians make is that the Bible > possesses powers that are not to be found in any other book to come. > > 1) Clearly, all portions of the Bible must be regarded as Sacred, and that > rejection of even one word of the Bible is tantamount to rejection of all of > it. > > "Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous > judgments endureth for ever." (Psalm 119:160) Saying that God's word endures is different from saying that no more words are coming. A really good proof of this fact is that even for Jews and Christians, Psalms isn't the last book in the Bible. > > 2) Another common belief is that the Bible is right about any and all the > subjects that are addressed in it. This means that it is the *only* Book > with this status, in the past and in the future. > "Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and > I hate every false way" (Psalms 119:128; 98-100). That doesn't follow. A good proof of this is the fact that Psalms is not the only book in the Bible. I don't think that what you are arguing follows from the other quotes either. Sorry. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:01:15 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > > "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be > encouraged " (I Corinthians 14:31) > Paul's view of prophecy was, apparently, something in which all Christian > could > engage. In other words, he seems to have believed that *any* > Christian could be > a prophet. > At 02:55 PM 1/14/2005, Gilberto wrote: > >>I agree. This is one of the things which for me strongly indicates that > >>Christianity is more open to future prophets coming than Islam.<< Mark: > Well, we don't seem to agree on this point. I still contend that there is no > such thing as "prophets." There is only what Paul had in mind in a particular > case, what Muhammad had in mind in a particular case, and what one or more > writers of the Tanakh had in mind in a particular case. Gilberto: I think the philosophical approach you are taking here, while curious and intriguing, is something which I don't find convincing here. I think that it should be possible for us to come up with a reasonable definition of "prophet" such that a good number of Christians will allow for future prophets after Jesus but the typical Muslim will not allow for future prophets after Muhammad. > Clearly, Paul was referring to something entirely different than Muhammad. Yes. But that is besides the point. We can look behind the words and we still get the result that Muslims and Christians are saying different things about the possibility of future kinds of communication from God. Mark: Paul's epistles focused on his view of the routinization of charisma. A "prophet," to Paul, was one who prophesied; and Paul believed, and desired, that all Christians should prophesy. Gilberto: Not exactly. Consider 1 Corinthians 12 [4] Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; [5] and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; [6] and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one. [7] To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. [8] To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, [9] to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, [10] to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. [11] All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills. Not everyone was a prophet. Prophet is still a meaningful category. Mark: > Regardless of whether one equates Paul's view of a prophet with Muhammad's, > to Paul, prophecy takes place in the context of the Gospel of Christ. Paul's > christocentrism was unaffected. Gilberto: And what you are calling ethnocentrism I would probably call exclusivism (not finality) Mark: Unlike the qur'anic concept of prophecy, under Paul's system, no further "book" and law was revealed. IMO, that is the main difference. Gilberto: That would be alot more convincing if Paul didn't write more of the Bible than any other person, including Jesus. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Falsifiability
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:16:37 -0800 (PST), Tim Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Gilberto, > >The idea is that in order for a theory or a statement to be > meaningful, it has to be falsifiable.If you can't really do that, > so the argument goes, what you are saying ultimately has > no meaning or content< > This criterion may useful in the field of science, which is > the process of observation, forming hypotheses, > then testing them by more observation. But in the realm > of spiritual reality, this principle is not always helpful. > > For example, the existence of God is not falsifiable because > there are no conditions under which God would not exist. > The same could be said for the human soul. Thus, to say > God exists, or human beings have souls, is not falsifiable, > yet both statements have meaning. > I'm not troubled by the idea that God's existence is not falsifiable. I'm not sure that I would agree that the existence of the soul is unfalsifiable. For example, we might say that humans have souls but rocks don't have souls. And one can start to suggest properties that beings with souls have which might be verified or disproven. But also, in the original case where I suggested the concept might come up we were talking about scriptures. And Mark (correct me if I'm wrong) seemed to suggesting that the Bahai writings might contain factual errors but he would still "believe in them" and it was at that point that I wondered what it could mean to believe in writings when you don't actually believe that they are factually true. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Accountability (was:RE: Women in West/Islam)
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:22:20 -0800 (PST), Tim Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Susan, > Firouz>Islamic governments and Islamic parties say that they are just > accountable to God not to people.< > Susan >Don't we say the same thing about own institutions? < > Yes, we do. But the Baha'i institutions exist, and operate > based on the explicit, written statements of Baha'u'llah > or His successors. Can Islam make the analogous claim? But in some ways the larger issue is that if Susan hadn't made her comment and I hadn't read similar things elsewhere and I had heard your accusation towards Islam for the first time, then it would have been misleading. I'm "ok" with the idea that western liberals like the idea of a secular government and are going to have certain qualms about Islamic governments, but if you criticize Islam and give the impression that you would like to see secular governments, when in reality you are just in favor of a different kind of theocracy, that certain gives the impression of being evasive (at best). Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Accountability (was:RE: Women in West/Islam)
Dear Susan, Firouz>Islamic governments and Islamic parties say that they are just accountable to God not to people.Don't we say the same thing about own institutions? < Yes, we do. But the Baha'i institutions exist, and operate based on the explicit, written statements of Baha'u'llah or His successors. Can Islam make the analogous claim? Tim Nolan Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Falsifiability
Hi Gilberto, >The idea is that in order for a theory or a statement to be meaningful, it has to be falsifiable.If you can't really do that, so the argument goes, what you are saying ultimately has no meaning or content< This criterion may useful in the field of science, which is the process of observation, forming hypotheses, then testing them by more observation. But in the realm of spiritual reality, this principle is not always helpful. For example, the existence of God is not falsifiable because there are no conditions under which God would not exist. The same could be said for the human soul. Thus, to say God exists, or human beings have souls, is not falsifiable, yet both statements have meaning. Tim Nolan Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
It's a bit bizzare to say there is NO connection. It's not like "nabi"is the Arabic word for "kumquat" or something. The Hebrew and Arabicwords for "prophet" is essentially the same and the OT/NT notions ofprophehood are going to be similar.In any case, For Christians, the authors of the New Testament (none ofwhom are named "Jesus") received revelation from God and werecomissioned (whether they knew it or not) to deliver that message tothe public for a large community. The same is true of the Quranicconcept of nabi.Some Muslims wouldn't even insist that there be a comission topreach, and this is part of the argument for why for some considerMary and the mother of Moses are as prophets (because they receivedrevelation from God, even though it only concerned "personal"information regarding their children. In Mary's cas! e, Gabriel spoke toher in the Annunciation while in the case of Moses' mother she wastold to put her son in the water). If we go by that notion, then mostChristians certainly accept the continuing presence of this kind ofprophet/nabi because the Catholic Church has well developed concept ofprivate revelation.PeaceGilberto"My people are hydroponic"__You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]Baha'i Studies is available through the following:Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.eduWeb - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-stNews - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-stPublic - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaistOld Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.netNew Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Finality of the Bible
Gilberto, I have a feeling that you are hesitating a bit about responding to my question about what you think about the verse I quoted from the Kitab-i-Iqan. So I assume that you still do not acknowledge the perspective purporting the finality of the Bible and the finality of Jesus. I would say that most Christian groups do firmly assert the finality of the Bible and the finality of Jesus. The emphasis that Christians make is that the Bible possesses powers that are not to be found in any other book to come. 1) Clearly, all portions of the Bible must be regarded as Sacred, and that rejection of even one word of the Bible is tantamount to rejection of all of it. "Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever." (Psalm 119:160) 2) Another common belief is that the Bible is right about any and all the subjects that are addressed in it. This means that it is the *only* Book with this status, in the past and in the future. "Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way" (Psalms 119:128; 98-100). Some Christians even think that the Bible is absolute instead of relative or objective based on this verse. 3) The following verses firmly establish the finality of the Bible. In addition, they imply that the Bible has the first and last word on everything. That the Bible is God's CHANGELESS word and has been revealed once and for all. In fact, the last verse even states that no other different Gospels are EVER to come. "For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven." (Psalm 119:89) "He that rejected Me, and receiveth not My sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:48) "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-9) __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
RE: Arson
According to Baha'u'llah, an arsonist can be either burned alive or sentenced to life in prison. Actually, it doesn't say whether the arsonist should be burned alive or dead. ;-} __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Arson
Sandra, Here is the quotation: "Should anyone intentionally destroy a house by fire, him also shall ye burn; should anyone deliberately take another's life, him also shall ye put to death." -- Baha'u'llah, Aqdas: Notes, p.203 With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Arson
Sandra, At 05:58 PM 1/14/2005, you wrote: >>Would you please provide your source for this statement - Book and page from >>Baha'i Sacred Scripture ?<< According to Baha'u'llah, an arsonist can be either burned alive or sentenced to life in prison. The law of Baha'u'llah prescribes the death penalty for murder and arson, with the alternative of life imprisonment (see note 87). In His Tablets Abdu'l-Baha explains the difference between revenge and punishment. He affirms that individuals do not have the right to take revenge, that revenge is despised in the eyes of God, and that the motive for punishment is not vengeance, but the imposition of a penalty for the committed offence. In Some Answered Questions, He confirms that it is the right of society to impose punishments on criminals for the purpose of protecting its members and defending its existence. With regard to this provision, Shoghi Effendi in a letter written on his behalf gives the following explanation: In the Aqdas Baha'u'llah has given death as the penalty for murder. However, He has permitted life imprisonment as an alternative. Both practices would be in accordance with His Laws. Some of us may not be able to grasp the wisdom of this when it disagrees with our own limited vision; but we must accept it, knowing His Wisdom, His Mercy and His Justice are perfect and for the salvation of the entire world. If a man were falsely condemned to die, can we not believe Almighty God would compensate him a thousandfold, in the next world, for this human injustice? You cannot give up a salutary law just because on rare occasions the innocent may be punished. The details of the Baha'i law of punishment for murder and arson, a law designed for a future state of society, were not specified by Baha'u'llah. The various details of the law, such as degrees of offence, whether extenuating circumstances are to be taken into account, and which of the two prescribed punishments is to be the norm are left to the Universal House of Justice to decide in light of prevailing conditions when the law is to be in operation. The manner in which the punishment is to be carried out is also left to the Universal House of Justice to decide. In relation to arson, this depends on what "house" is burned. There is obviously a tremendous difference in the degree of offence between the person who burns down an empty warehouse and one who sets fire to a school full of children. 87. Should ye condemn the arsonist and the murderer to life imprisonment, it would be permissible according to the provisions of the Book. # 62 Shoghi Effendi, in response to a question about this verse of the Aqdas, affirmed that while capital punishment is permitted, an alternative, "life imprisonment", has been provided "whereby the rigours of such a condemnation can be seriously mitigated". He states that "Baha'u'llah has given us a choice and has, therefore, left us free to use our own discretion within certain limitations imposed by His law". In the absence of specific guidance concerning the application of this aspect of Baha'i law, it remains for the Universal House of Justice to legislate on the matter in the future. Kitab-i-Aqdas: Notes, pp.203-205 With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 02:55 PM 1/14/2005, you wrote: >>I agree. This is one of the things which for me strongly indicates that >>Christianity is more open to future prophets coming than Islam.<< Well, we don't seem to agree on this point. I still contend that there is no such thing as "prophets." There is only what Paul had in mind in a particular case, what Muhammad had in mind in a particular case, and what one or more writers of the Tanakh had in mind in a particular case. Clearly, Paul was referring to something entirely different than Muhammad. Paul's epistles focused on his view of the routinization of charisma. A "prophet," to Paul, was one who prophesied; and Paul believed, and desired, that all Christians should prophesy. Paul was clearly not referring to Christians becoming Prophets in either the Islamic or Baha'i sense of the word. Prophesying, to Paul, was to be performed in the context of Christ's authority. Regardless of whether one equates Paul's view of a prophet with Muhammad's, to Paul, prophecy takes place in the context of the Gospel of Christ. Paul's christocentrism was unaffected. Unlike the qur'anic concept of prophecy, under Paul's system, no further "book" and law was revealed. IMO, that is the main difference. With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Arson
Gilberto, you stated: <> Also, since being burned alive is the punishment for arson in the Bahai faith, I'm not sure on what grounds you are objecting to the above. <> Would you please provide your source for this statement - Book and page from Baha'i Sacred Scripture ? Thank you! Sandra __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Luke 21:33 & the Qur'an
-- Original Message -- From: "Brent Poirier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Baha'i Studies" Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:17:32 - > > >>>Let's face it, we can discuss this stuff for centuries, but it all comes >>>down to this. To anyone who reads the Bible the way we Baha'is read our >>>Writings, then Islam is false. To anyone who reads the Quran the way we >>>Baha'is read our Writings, it is clear that Baha'u'llah is false. It can be >>>no other way. Believing in the literal inerrancy of religious writings >>>guarantees >this. It is a form of Idolatry.>> > >Ron, it's clear from your last word, where you have been reading. > >Just as critical thinking is an important part of examination of revealed >religious truth, so is evaluation of what others write about religion. Where >exactly are they leading you? To where they themselves are residing in >relation to the Cause. Is that where you want to be? That's the best they >can offer you. > >This is why Baha'u'llah repeatedly urges us to seek out those who have drunk >from the cup of the Holy Spirit, and to avoid those who create doubt. The >House has warned us about those former Baha'is who have a corrosive effect on >our faith. You seem determined to cast that advice aside. > >And as to how we should approach Baha'u'llah's word, the views of the Baha'is >are not the standard. The views of Baha'u'llah concerning His own Word are, >in my view, the standard, and "Bahá'u'lláh repeatedly affirms the absolute >integrity of His Writings as the Word of God." >(The Universal House of Justice, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 226) > >Best wishes, >Brent > > > >__ >You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Baha'i Studies is available through the following: >Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu >Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st >News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st >Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist >Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net >New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu > __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, I feel like we are all pretty much on the same page, and understand what eachother say and understand the respective perspectives. Am I wrong?Gilberto Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 13:05:01 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> Gilberto, > > Now that we all seem to be in agreement all of a sudden, how do you read the> following passage from the Kitab-i-Iqan that I quoted earlier?> > "Beside this passage, there is yet another verse in the Gospel wherein He> saith: "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but My words shall not pass away."> [Luke 21:33.]Gilberto:What do you mean by being in agreement all of a sudden? What was theapparent disagreement? What is the apparent agreement?PeaceGilberto"My people are hydroponic"__You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]Baha'i Studies is available through the following:Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.eduWeb - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-stNews - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-stPublic - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaistOld Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.netNew Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 13:05:01 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > > Now that we all seem to be in agreement all of a sudden, how do you read the > following passage from the Kitab-i-Iqan that I quoted earlier? > > "Beside this passage, there is yet another verse in the Gospel wherein He > saith: "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but My words shall not pass away." > [Luke 21:33.] Gilberto: What do you mean by being in agreement all of a sudden? What was the apparent disagreement? What is the apparent agreement? Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Religion and State
In a message dated 1/14/2005 3:47:37 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At the top of the document Jonah states "Note: the article "Church and State in the World Order of Baha'u'llah," by Sen McGlinn, also addresses these issues." Is this the document that the Universal House of Justice is refuting? Dear John, I think that article was written after Sen McGlinn received this letter but Sen had expressed these arguments earlier on the internet. When Sen subsequently wrote the World Centre asking for information regarding certain documents on this topic, the House of Justice apparently took advantage of that opportunity to correct his errors. However, Sen never refers to this letter in any of his later articles on the same topic which argue the same position as he had before; a position which the House also disallows in the April 7, 1999 letter where they write the following: "The effort, rather, has been to sow the seeds of doubt among believers about the Faith's teachings and institutions by appealing to unexamined prejudices that Bahá'ís may have unconsciously absorbed from non-Bahá'í society. In defiance of the clear interpretation of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and the Guardian, for example, Bahá'u'lláh's limiting of membership on the Universal House of Justice to men is misrepresented as merely a "temporary measure" subject to eventual revision if sufficient pressure is brought to bear. Similarly, Shoghi Effendi's explanation of Bahá'u'lláh's vision of the future Bahá'í World Commonwealth that will unite spiritual and civil authority is dismissed in favour of the assertion that the modern political concept of "separation of church and state" is somehow one that Bahá'u'lláh intended as a basic principle of the World Order He has founded." http://bahai-library.com/?file=compilation_issues_study_bahai.html The latest incarnation of Sen's argument is the article: "Theocratic Assumptions in Bahá'í Literature" which was published in the book *Reason and Revelation*. You can read my review of that article here: http://theocracy.susanmaneck.com/ Because Sen has made the same argument in so many forms, which got published in a couple of places, and because those same articles were distributed widely on the internet many of the friends have accepted this position unaware that the House has refuted it. warmest, Susan __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Religion and State
Susan, At the top of the document Jonah states "Note: the article "Church and State in the World Order of Baha'u'llah," by Sen McGlinn, also addresses these issues." Is this the document that the Universal House of Justice is refuting?[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My understanding is that the word siyasat in 19th century (and early 20th century) Persian and Arabic means leadership and not politics as it is commonly used. The 1943 translation of the eighth Ishraq in the Baha'i World Faith reads: "Administrative affair are all in charge of the House of Justice, and devotional acts must be observed according as they are revealed in the Book." This is a translation by Ali Kuli Khan in 1906. Dear Firouz, And as you know, it has been consistently translated as 'matters'of state' or 'affairs of state' ever since. The term siyasat does come from a root meaning leadership, however, the term came to increasingly refer to statecraft well before the 19th century. I presume you are familiar with the Siyasat Name, by Nizamu'l-Mulk. It is the mos! t famous Iranian book of statecraft and was written in the 11th century, I believe. In any case, particularly, it would not make much sense to translate amur siyasat as "administrative affairs' because the passage is talking about the use of reward and punishment. Without temporal power, the Houses of Justice aren't going to be able to administer much in the way of that. Shoghi Effendi, in a letter written on his behalf, has his secretary write the following: "Eventually, however, as you have rightly conceived it, the Movement will, as soon as it is fully developed and recognized, embrace both religious and political issues. In fact Bahá'u'lláh clearly states that affairs of state as well as religious questions are to be referred to the House of Justice into which the Assemblies of the Bahá'ís will eventually evolve." 30 November 1930. Cited in a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice and addressed to Sen McGlinn April 27, 1995. Abdu! 'l-Baha also makes it perfectly clear that the Houses of Justice have jurisdiction over enacting secular [qanun] and civil law [akham-i madaniyyih] as well. *Qanun * or secular law, is the word used in the passage from the Will and Testament: "The House of Justice enacteth the law and the government enforceth it." The reference to the House of Justice making civil law can be found in 'Abdu' l-Bahá's Tablet on the the Universal House of Justice and the principles of jurisprudence which can be found here: http://bahai-library.com/provisionals/bayt.adl.usul.qadai.au.html You wrote cited the following passage from the Lawh-i Dunya: "According to the fundamental laws which We have formerly revealed in the Kitab-i-Aqdas and other Tablets, all affairs are committed to the care of just kings and presidents and of the Trustees of the House of Justice. ... "" What Baha'u'llah is doing here is making the distinction between the legisla! tive and executive functions. The same distinction is made by Abdu'l-Baha in the Will and Testament when He says "This House of Justice enacteth the laws and the government enforceth them. The legislative body must reinforce the executive, the executive must aid and assist the legislative body so that through the close union and harmony of these two forces, the foundation of fairness and justice may become firm and strong ..." Likewise there is a talk given by Abdu'l-Baha, recorded in Star of the West wherein He reiterates this point: "Thee centre of the executive power is the government, and the legislative power lies in the hands of thoughtful and wise men. On the other hand, if these strong pillars and firm foundations are not complete and comprehensive, how can it be supposed that there will be safety and salvation for the nation? But as, in these latter days, such excellency is rare, the government and the whole body of the nation are in sore need of just and di! scerning directions. Thus it is of the utmost importance to establish an assembly of learned men, who, being proficient in the different sciences and capable of dealing with all the present and future requirements will settle the questions in accordance with forbearance and firmness. All the civic affairs and the legislation of material laws for the increasing needs of the enlightened humanity belong to the House of Justice. This the House of Justice, will be not only a body for the legislation of laws according to the spirit and requirement of the time, but a board of arbitration for the settlement of all disputes arising between peoples. When the Universal House of Justice is organized the members will do their utmost for the realization of greater cordiality and comity amongst the nations. The Laws of Bahá'u'lláh are the unchangeable, organic laws of the Universal House of Justice. They are the very foundation upon which the structure of additional legislation is built... Again, ! I repeat, the House of Justice, whether Nation
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, Now that we all seem to be in agreement all of a sudden, how do you read the following passage from the Kitab-i-Iqan that I quoted earlier? "Beside this passage, there is yet another verse in the Gospel wherein He saith: "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but My words shall not pass away." [Luke 21:33.] Thus it is that the adherents of Jesus maintained that the law of the Gospel shall never be annulled, and that whensoever the promised Beauty is made manifest and all the signs are revealed, He must needs re-affirm and establish the law proclaimed in the Gospel, so that there may remain in the world no faith but His faith. This is their fundamental belief. And their conviction is such that were a person to be made manifest with all the promised signs and to promulgate that which is contrary to the letter of the law of the Gospel, they must assuredly renounce him, refuse to submit to his law, declare him an infidel, and laugh him to scorn. This is proved by that which came to pass when the sun of the Muhammadan Revelation was revealed. Had they sought with a humble mind from the Manifestations of God in every Dispensation the true meaning of these words revealed in the sacred bookswords the misapprehension of which hath caused men to be deprived of the recognition of the Sadratul-Muntaha, the ultimate Purposethey surely would have been guided to the light of the Sun of Truth, and would have discovered the mysteries of divine knowledge and wisdom. "__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:38:10 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be > encouraged " (I Corinthians 14:31) > Paul's view of prophecy was, apparently, something in which all Christian > could > engage. In other words, he seems to have believed that *any* > Christian could be > a prophet. I agree. This is one of the things which for me strongly indicates that Christianity is more open to future prophets coming than Islam. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
G: I think you are setting the bar high. I never said that Christiansexpected a new world world prophet who would replace the Bible with anew revelation. All I've been saying is that Islam (as understood bythe overwhelming majority to an extremely high degree of consensu)teaches that prophethood ended with Muhammad (saaws). WhileChristianity does NOT teach that prophethood ended with Jesus (saaws).There are consistent reasonable plausible understandings of the word"prophet" which make both those statements true at the same time.Do you agree or disagree?J: I don't think I disagree. Can you say "There are consistent reasonable plausible understandings of the word "prophet" which make both those statements true at the same time." in a different way, because I'm not sure what you mean. Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Religion and State
My understanding is that the word siyasat in 19th century (and early 20th century) Persian and Arabic means leadership and not politics as it is commonly used. The 1943 translation of the eighth Ishraq in the Baha'i World Faith reads: "Administrative affair are all in charge of the House of Justice, and devotional acts must be observed according as they are revealed in the Book." This is a translation by Ali Kuli Khan in 1906. Dear Firouz, And as you know, it has been consistently translated as 'matters'of state' or 'affairs of state' ever since. The term siyasat does come from a root meaning leadership, however, the term came to increasingly refer to statecraft well before the 19th century. I presume you are familiar with the Siyasat Name, by Nizamu'l-Mulk. It is the most famous Iranian book of statecraft and was written in the 11th century, I believe. In any case, particularly, it would not make much sense to translate amur siyasat as "administrative affairs' because the passage is talking about the use of reward and punishment. Without temporal power, the Houses of Justice aren't going to be able to administer much in the way of that. Shoghi Effendi, in a letter written on his behalf, has his secretary write the following: "Eventually, however, as you have rightly conceived it, the Movement will, as soon as it is fully developed and recognized, embrace both religious and political issues. In fact Bahá'u'lláh clearly states that affairs of state as well as religious questions are to be referred to the House of Justice into which the Assemblies of the Bahá'ís will eventually evolve." 30 November 1930. Cited in a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice and addressed to Sen McGlinn April 27, 1995. Abdu'l-Baha also makes it perfectly clear that the Houses of Justice have jurisdiction over enacting secular [qanun] and civil law [akham-i madaniyyih] as well. *Qanun * or secular law, is the word used in the passage from the Will and Testament: "The House of Justice enacteth the law and the government enforceth it." The reference to the House of Justice making civil law can be found in 'Abdu' l-Bahá's Tablet on the the Universal House of Justice and the principles of jurisprudence which can be found here: http://bahai-library.com/provisionals/bayt.adl.usul.qadai.au.html You wrote cited the following passage from the Lawh-i Dunya: "According to the fundamental laws which We have formerly revealed in the Kitab-i-Aqdas and other Tablets, all affairs are committed to the care of just kings and presidents and of the Trustees of the House of Justice. ... "" What Baha'u'llah is doing here is making the distinction between the legislative and executive functions. The same distinction is made by Abdu'l-Baha in the Will and Testament when He says "This House of Justice enacteth the laws and the government enforceth them. The legislative body must reinforce the executive, the executive must aid and assist the legislative body so that through the close union and harmony of these two forces, the foundation of fairness and justice may become firm and strong ..." Likewise there is a talk given by Abdu'l-Baha, recorded in Star of the West wherein He reiterates this point: "Thee centre of the executive power is the government, and the legislative power lies in the hands of thoughtful and wise men. On the other hand, if these strong pillars and firm foundations are not complete and comprehensive, how can it be supposed that there will be safety and salvation for the nation? But as, in these latter days, such excellency is rare, the government and the whole body of the nation are in sore need of just and discerning directions. Thus it is of the utmost importance to establish an assembly of learned men, who, being proficient in the different sciences and capable of dealing with all the present and future requirements will settle the questions in accordance with forbearance and firmness. All the civic affairs and the legislation of material laws for the increasing needs of the enlightened humanity belong to the House of Justice. This the House of Justice, will be not only a body for the legislation of laws according to the spirit and requirement of the time, but a board of arbitration for the settlement of all disputes arising between peoples. When the Universal House of Justice is organized the members will do their utmost for the realization of greater cordiality and comity amongst the nations. The Laws of Bahá'u'lláh are the unchangeable, organic laws of the Universal House of Justice. They are the very foundation upon which the structure of additional legislation is built... Again, I repeat, the House of Justice, whether National or Universal, has only legislative power and not executive power... ( Star of the West, Vol. VII, No. 15, pp. 138-139) In traditional Islamic thought, legislation is not really a legitimate function of government. Law is seen as something divinely revealed and in
Re: Exclusive/Final
Gilberto, At 09:34 AM 1/14/2005, you wrote: >>Just to try to explain more why I think it is reasonable to draw a >>distinction between exclusiveness and final, and perhaps why I see it as a >>real difference (and why Bahais seem not to) I would say this.<< I didn't say there weren't differences. I said almost the opposite. However, different religious systems can be exclusive (or inclusive or universal) without sharing all, or even most, of the same doctrines. With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:58:44 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > G: Yes, I understand that this is what Bahais are trying to say. That > Christians have a concept of finality, but were wrong because Muhammad > came afterwards. So the point is to try to say that the Muslim concept > of finality is the same, and equally wrong, so it would make it more > plausible that Bahaullah could come. > > J: Good summary of my personal view. > > G: And the point I'm making is that even from a Christian perspective, > they aren't claiming finality for themselves in the same way that > Muslims are. That in concrete ways they are actually open to future > revelation and future prophets and future messages. > > J: I think that in your statement above you are incorporating Islam thought > into Christianity. Try to understand Christianity from a Christian > perspective, not an Islamic one. They will never universally accept a > prophet who will also add to their Bible. I think you are setting the bar high. I never said that Christians expected a new world world prophet who would replace the Bible with a new revelation. All I've been saying is that Islam (as understood by the overwhelming majority to an extremely high degree of consensu) teaches that prophethood ended with Muhammad (saaws). While Christianity does NOT teach that prophethood ended with Jesus (saaws). There are consistent reasonable plausible understandings of the word "prophet" which make both those statements true at the same time. Do you agree or disagree? Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
G: And the point I'm making is that even from a Christian perspective,they aren't claiming finality for themselves in the same way thatMuslims are. That in concrete ways they are actually open to futurerevelation and future prophets and future messages. J: Gilberto, reading this again, I have some question to ask you. How are these Christian revelations and prophets different from the saints and Imams allowed in Islam? Also, do you believe that Muhammad is a prophet equal to the 'prophet' mentioned in the Bible? If so, do you think that these prophets are inferior to Jesus as described in the Bible? If they ARE inferior to the Christian view to Jesus, why is that? Is it in your view due to corruption of portions of the Bible? If so, how do you know which portions of the Bible are in fact right and which are in fact wrong? Do you based this on whether or not they contradict the Qur'an? You have also stated that revelation continues because the Bible was written by the apostles and not Jesus anyway, so the phrase "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my Word will never pass away" is written by the apostles and not really by Jesus. And following this logic, isn't the whole Bible the product of apostles and not Jesus, so none of it can be scripture, can it. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 10:04 AM 1/14/2005, you wrote: >>It's a bit bizzare to say there is NO connection. It's not like "nabi" is the >>Arabic word for "kumquat" or something.<< Well, etymologically, "prophetes" does not translates as warner. However, I was not referring to the words but to the ways in which they were used in either the Qur'an or the NT. >>The Hebrew and Arabic words for "prophet" is essentially the same and the >>OT/NT notions of prophehood are going to be similar.<< You think that they are going to be similar because they use similar words? I suppose I don't follow. Yes, "nabii" is used in both the Tanakh and the Qur'an. However, does this fact constitute evidence that some or all of the tanakhian writers and the author of the Qur'an had the same, or similar, meanings in mind? Because "prophetes" is, roughly, the NT equivalent of the tanakhian "nabii," can we then say that Paul used "prophetes" with the same meaning as did the authors of the Tanakh and the Qur'an? >>In any case, For Christians, the authors of the New Testament (none of whom >>are named "Jesus") received revelation from God and were comissioned (whether >>they knew it or not) to deliver that message to the public for a large >>community. The same is true of the Quranic concept of nabi.<< Except that a qur'anic nabii was a person especially chosen by God. Here are some of the statements purportedly made by Paul on the subject of "prophets." "If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord." (I Corinthians 14:37) "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged " (I Corinthians 14:31) Paul's view of prophecy was, apparently, something in which all Christian could engage. In other words, he seems to have believed that *any* Christian could be a prophet. He wasn't authorizing the construction of a special class of prophets. >>If we go by that notion, then most Christians certainly accept the continuing >>presence of this kind of prophet/nabi because the Catholic Church has well >>developed concept of private revelation.<< As do many Sufis. With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Luke 21:33 & the Qur'an
Dear Brent, Your wrote: """Ron, it's clear from your last word, where you have been reading. Just as critical thinking is an important part of examination of revealed religious truth, so is evaluation of what others write about religion. Where exactly are they leading you? To where they themselves are residing in relation to the Cause. Is that where you want to be? That's the best they can offer you""" Sincerely, Brent, I would really like to know to whom or to what your referring to? I am not reading any other internet groups or lists, haven't for long time, and no books that aren't official Baha'i books. I have no idea who you think I am being influenced by. Susan has often expressed thoughts tha tI am being influenced by others and this bothers me because, for bettter of for worse, my thoughts are my own thought. \ \ As for idolatry; when I was a Crhistian, from about 1966-1994, considered that fundamentalist Christians idolized the Bible, and I often commented to them about this. So, you think I am influenced, but like it or not, some things are just true and different people will come up with them individually, it happens all the time. Please, though, tell me whop you think is influencing me so I can know. Seriously, it is very hard to know who one is supposed to avoid in this faith, since it is mostly by innuendo and no is named. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
G: Yes, I understand that this is what Bahais are trying to say. ThatChristians have a concept of finality, but were wrong because Muhammadcame afterwards. So the point is to try to say that the Muslim conceptof finality is the same, and equally wrong, so it would make it moreplausible that Bahaullah could come. J: Good summary of my personal view. G: And the point I'm making is that even from a Christian perspective,they aren't claiming finality for themselves in the same way thatMuslims are. That in concrete ways they are actually open to futurerevelation and future prophets and future messages. J: I think that in your statement above you are incorporating Islam thought into Christianity. Try to understand Christianity from a Christian perspective, not an Islamic one. They will never universally accept a prophet who will also add to their Bible. There is no need because the Bible is a recounting of the life of Jesus, the only Saviour for man and the only Son of God. I agree that from a Muslim perspective, prophethood continues when looking at Christianity in hind-sight. That is exactly what Baha'is do to Islam. Looking at the Qur'an now, the term Seal of the Prophets is reborn with a new meaning. G: Have you looked at the history of early Islam? The Christians and Jewsin Arabia were said to be expecting another prophet to come. J: Excellent. And in the time of Baha'u'llah, Muslims were expecting the coming of the Mahdi, that's why there were so many claimants at that time. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:11:56 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > J: I can't remember point of this theat anymore. But I thought it was to > show that just as Christians believe in the Finality of the Bible and the > Finality of Jesus, Muslims believe in the finality of Muhammad and the > Qur'an. Yes, I understand that this is what Bahais are trying to say. That Christians have a concept of finality, but were wrong because Muhammad came afterwards. So the point is to try to say that the Muslim concept of finality is the same, and equally wrong, so it would make it more plausible that Bahaullah could come. And the point I'm making is that even from a Christian perspective, they aren't claiming finality for themselves in the same way that Muslims are. That in concrete ways they are actually open to future revelation and future prophets and future messages. Have you looked at the history of early Islam? The Christians and Jews in Arabia were said to be expecting another prophet to come. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
Gilberto Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:48:03 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> > > G: Just to try to explain more why I think it is reasonable to draw a> distinction between exclusiveness and final, and perhaps why I see it> as a real difference (and why Bahais seem not to) I would say this.> J: For the record, I see exclusiveness and finality as different from one> another. I also believe that there are elements of exclusivity and finality> in both Islam and Christianity. Christians, in my view, believe in Finality> of the Bible.G: I would say that in Christianity the exclusiveness dominates the mix.I would also say there are also elements of exclusivity in the Bahaifaith (or at least the Bahai community) J: I can't remember point of this theat anymore. But I thought it was to show that just as Christians believe in the Finality of the Bible and the Finality of Jesus, Muslims believe in the finality of Muhammad and the Qur'an. Yes, there are elements of exclusivity in all three religions, and more in some than in the other. G: According to the Catholic Church (so the body representing mostChristians) there is a well developed concept of private revelation.So there are certain visionaries who have claimed to receive messagesfrom God, have passed along messages, and their sainthood has beencanonized by the Church. J: Private revelation is not what I am talking about. I am talking about revelation applicable to all of humanity. No one can add to the Bible, nor is there a way for someone to come equal to Jesus (until the end of time). So, in the same way that Islam permits the appearance of the Qur'an and the Prophet, Baha'i permits the appearance of Baha'u'llah and His writings.G: This is one significant way in which one could argue that for manyChristians prophethood isn't really final. Not all revelation isreally contained in the Bible.J: We are not talking about the same thing. If you were seeing it from my perspective, then you would expect the Bible to have more chapters than Revelations, and Jesus would have come a few times before the end of time. (from a Christian perspective I mean, because of course the continuation of the Bible is the Qur'an and the reappearance of the Prophet is Muhammad). Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:48:03 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > G: Just to try to explain more why I think it is reasonable to draw a > distinction between exclusiveness and final, and perhaps why I see it > as a real difference (and why Bahais seem not to) I would say this. > J: For the record, I see exclusiveness and finality as different from one > another. I also believe that there are elements of exclusivity and finality > in both Islam and Christianity. Christians, in my view, believe in Finality > of the Bible. I would say that in Christianity the exclusiveness dominates the mix. I would also say there are also elements of exclusivity in the Bahai faith (or at least the Bahai community) According to the Catholic Church (so the body representing most Christians) there is a well developed concept of private revelation. So there are certain visionaries who have claimed to receive messages from God, have passed along messages, and their sainthood has been canonized by the Church. http://www.catholic.com/library/Private_Revelation.asp This is one significant way in which one could argue that for many Christians prophethood isn't really final. Not all revelation is really contained in the Bible. "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:51:30 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I said before, aside from their common English translations, I see no > connection between the a NT "prophetes" and a qur'anic "nabii." It's a bit bizzare to say there is NO connection. It's not like "nabi" is the Arabic word for "kumquat" or something. The Hebrew and Arabic words for "prophet" is essentially the same and the OT/NT notions of prophehood are going to be similar. In any case, For Christians, the authors of the New Testament (none of whom are named "Jesus") received revelation from God and were comissioned (whether they knew it or not) to deliver that message to the public for a large community. The same is true of the Quranic concept of nabi. Some Muslims wouldn't even insist that there be a comission to preach, and this is part of the argument for why for some consider Mary and the mother of Moses are as prophets (because they received revelation from God, even though it only concerned "personal" information regarding their children. In Mary's case, Gabriel spoke to her in the Annunciation while in the case of Moses' mother she was told to put her son in the water). If we go by that notion, then most Christians certainly accept the continuing presence of this kind of prophet/nabi because the Catholic Church has well developed concept of private revelation. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Exclusive/Final
G: Just to try to explain more why I think it is reasonable to draw adistinction between exclusiveness and final, and perhaps why I see itas a real difference (and why Bahais seem not to) I would say this. J: For the record, I see exclusiveness and finality as different from one another. I also believe that there are elements of exclusivity and finality in both Islam and Christianity. Christians, in my view, believe in Finality of the Bible. When was the last time someone added a chapter to the Bible? If you argue that the Bible was written after Christ, so it invalidates their whole arguement, I would say that it is altogether irrelevant because to the Christian the Holy Spirit guided the writing of the Bible, just as the Holy Spirit guided the writing of the Qur'an. __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Exclusive/Final
Just to try to explain more why I think it is reasonable to draw a distinction between exclusiveness and final, and perhaps why I see it as a real difference (and why Bahais seem not to) I would say this. Without necessarily making any claims on whether these are faithful representatives of their religious communities, it is very easy for me to imagine a Bahai who in a very narrow, exclusive way says that *today* everyone REALLY needs to accept the Bahai faith and go through Bahaullah and he's the only way to God. Even though they believe that major prophets will continue to come for the next half-million years one after another. It is also very easy for me to imagine a Muslim who says, prophethood is definitely over and done with. Muhammad (saaws) was chronologically the last prophet and messenger and there are no more coming. But God, in his sovereign mercy and infinite compassion and understanding says that Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sabians, anyone who believes in God and the Last Day and does God deeds will surely meet with their reward. And people can find God without being formally Muslim. And those two attitudes are very different from one another. One doesn't imply the other. Just because a person believes that more prophets will come in the future doesn't make them immune from a certain narrowness of vision. Just because a person doesn't believe that prophets will come in the future, doesn't bind them into a certain narrowness of vision. And so when I read Christian claims of exclusiveness like "I am the way, the truth and the life..." or "There is no other name" those are clearly (to me anyway) about exclusiveness but they don't necessarily imply an end to prophecy. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Women in West/Islam
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:52:09 +0700, Firouz Anaraki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto: > > You were speaking positively about Turkish secularism (in spite of the > > fact that the Turkish military respresses Muslims). In alot of parts > > in the Muslim world, if the governments became more democratic, then > > that would mean more power for the Islamic parties but you've > > commented about this as if it were a bad thing. > > You started talking positively about Turkey first by saying that women have > equal rights in Turkey, Egypt, and a few other countries. [That women there got the right to vote there and in other Muslim countries before certain "Christian" countries, yes] > I just suggested > the reason for justice and equal rights in Turkey was not due to Islam but > to due military and its secular way of government. Gilberto: My point is that NONE of it is due to Islam. Its due to all kinds of cultural, economic, social conditions and religion is only a part of that mix in certain complex ways. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/suffrage.htm Women had a full right to vote and run for office in Pakistan before they did in Canada. They had a right to vote and run for office in Libya and Yemen before they did in Switzerland, They could vote and run for office in Turkey before they could in France. Women are oppressed in different ways all over the world. No one group has a monopoloy. In various religious communities people are trying to make things better. Again, no group has a monopoly. And Muslims are included in that as well. Including the positive aspects. Actually I once heard that the overwhelming majority of converts to Islam are actually women. > But my opinion is that > if real democracy exist in Muslim countries, Muslim people don't fall into > traps of Islamic parties. I think you are confusing "democracy" with "dictatorship under Firouz". In a democracy, the wishes, ideals, values and aspirations of the population wiill be reflected in the running of the government. If you start off with a population of mostly religious Muslims and they get "democracy" then of their own free will they will choose a type of government which reflects Islamic values. And I think there is more than one way that might look like. > The reason that in S.A.Saudis are joining > extremist is because there is no democracy in SA. Even on Islamic grounds there is alot to be disagreed with in terms of what goes on in Saudi Arabia. For one, its a monarchy. Gilberto: > > when people say "apply the > > Shariah" it should be done intelligently instead of stupidly. I think > > that in alot of places (like in Afghanistan after the civil war) > > people were so tired of crime and drugs and chaos that they really > > wanted order. And so they just wanted some strong leaders to keep the > > peace. And so people say they want "the shariah" and typically that > > means cutting off the hands of theives and stoning adulterers. But the > > shariah involves many different principles and rules in many areas of > > life and the system needs to be implemented intelligently. > Firouz: > As far as I know majority of people in Afghanistan are happier now than > under Taliban. Gilberto: And they were probably happier under the Taliban than they were during the civil war. The Taliban is an aberation in alot of ways. Even on Islamic grounds. > And I am not sure what you mean to implement Shariah laws > intelligently. A law is a law, G: Because laws have conditions and should be applied intelligently, and enforced intelligently and with wisdom. Firouz: > how in Shariah one's hand should not be cut > if he steals something, G: The shariah doesn't say to cut the hand of everyone who "steals something". For example its not applied if you are hungry and steal food. It's not applied unless the value of the item is above a certain amount. It's not applied if you "steal" from family. One requirement I've read is that you also need to have a full Islamic system in place in terms of providing for the needs of the poor as well (so collecting zakat, distributing wealth from the bayt ul-mal, preventing different forms of economic exploitation) before you even start talking about cutting off hands. Also, since being burned alive is the punishment for arson in the Bahai faith, I'm not sure on what grounds you are objecting to the above. > In a few of countries with Shariah law, 9 years > girls are being raped and then stoned to death for committing adultery. I know that in certain places young girls are raped and then punished for adultery. I would be shocked if you had actually found several countries where this was actually done for 9 year old girls. I also think that not distinguishing between rape and adultery is a stupid and offensive and inhumane way to apply those laws If you want to realy look at the issue here is a paper discussing the shariah and how Pakistan, for example, deals with this issue of rape and adultery. htt
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, You simply reposted my message. With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:51:30 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gilberto,
>
> At 02:44 AM 1/14/2005, you wrote:
> >>The fact that you have to add any kind of caveat ("most conservative")
> >>underlines the fact that there is a difference. For the overwhelming
> >>majority of Muslims, not believing in the finality of Muhammad's
> >>prophethood excludes one from Islam. The analagous claim is not true for
> >>Christianity.<<
> I almost always qualify my statements. However, I am not aware of any
> self-defined conservative evangelical or fundamentalist Christian group,
> denomination, or sect which does not believe in the finality of Christ. To
> most of these Christians, Paul's epistles are not regarded as apart from
> Christ's authority.
And
> Of course there are differences in particulars between many of the religions
> in the Christian network and many of those in the Islamic network. However,
> the concept of finality is commonly found in both (almost universally among
> self-defined fundamentalists and neo-evangelicals). NT references to
> prophets, pastors, etc. do not detract from the centricity of Christ in these
> conservative Christian denominations and sects.
>
> >>At this point, I really don't care. The fact that they even have continuing
> >>prophecy and prophets is a significant difference from Islam. That's all
> >>I've been saying.<<
>
> There are certainly many differences. However, I don't think that is one of
> them. The Isna Ashariyya Imams also made many prophecies.
>
> As I said before, aside from their common English translations, I see no
> connection between the a NT "prophetes" and a qur'anic "nabii."
>
> With regards, Mark A. Foster â 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net
> "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman
>
> __
> You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
> Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
> Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st
> News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
> Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist
> Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net
> New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
>
--
"My people are hydroponic"
__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st
News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto,
At 02:44 AM 1/14/2005, you wrote:
>>The fact that you have to add any kind of caveat ("most conservative")
>>underlines the fact that there is a difference. For the overwhelming majority
>>of Muslims, not believing in the finality of Muhammad's prophethood excludes
>>one from Islam. The analagous claim is not true for Christianity.<<
I almost always qualify my statements. However, I am not aware of any
self-defined conservative evangelical or fundamentalist Christian group,
denomination, or sect which does not believe in the finality of Christ. To most
of these Christians, Paul's epistles are not regarded as apart from Christ's
authority.
Of course there are differences in particulars between many of the religions in
the Christian network and many of those in the Islamic network. However, the
concept of finality is commonly found in both (almost universally among
self-defined fundamentalists and neo-evangelicals). NT references to prophets,
pastors, etc. do not detract from the centricity of Christ in these
conservative Christian denominations and sects.
>>At this point, I really don't care. The fact that they even have continuing
>>prophecy and prophets is a significant difference from Islam. That's all I've
>>been saying.<<
There are certainly many differences. However, I don't think that is one of
them. The Isna Ashariyya Imams also made many prophecies.
As I said before, aside from their common English translations, I see no
connection between the a NT "prophetes" and a qur'anic "nabii."
With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net
"Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman
__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st
News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Women in West/Islam
Gilberto: You were speaking positively about Turkish secularism (in spite of the fact that the Turkish military respresses Muslims). In alot of parts in the Muslim world, if the governments became more democratic, then that would mean more power for the Islamic parties but you've commented about this as if it were a bad thing. You started talking positively about Turkey first by saying that women have equal rights in Turkey, Egypt, and a few other countries. I just suggested the reason for justice and equal rights in Turkey was not due to Islam but to due military and its secular way of government. But my opinion is that if real democracy exist in Muslim countries, Muslim people don't fall into traps of Islamic parties. The reason that in S.A.Saudis are joining extremist is because there is no democracy in SA. The same is true in Turkey. But the overall situation in Turkey is much better because of its secular way of government and leaving aside Shariah laws. I think that would be natural except when people say "apply the Shariah" it should be done intelligently instead of stupidly. I think that in alot of places (like in Afghanistan after the civil war) people were so tired of crime and drugs and chaos that they really wanted order. And so they just wanted some strong leaders to keep the peace. And so people say they want "the shariah" and typically that means cutting off the hands of theives and stoning adulterers. But the shariah involves many different principles and rules in many areas of life and the system needs to be implemented intelligently. As far as I know majority of people in Afghanistan are happier now than under Taliban. And I am not sure what you mean to implement Shariah laws intelligently. A law is a law, how in Shariah one's hand should not be cut if he steals something, In a few of countries with Shariah law, 9 years girls are being raped and then stoned to death for committing adultery. Can the minimum age for marriage of girls be changed under Shariah from 9 years old to say 15 years old? How about if a father decides to wed his young 9 years old daughter to a rich man almost the same age as himself? I believe there are so many laws in Shariah which are not compatible with democracy. regards, Firouz __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Women in West/Islam
Firouz, do you think the Baha'i House of Justice, at any level you prefer, is part of the "church" or the "state". Where do you in fact do you locate it? Which sovereignty sphere? Dear Steve, My understanding of Baha'i Writings is that Universal House of Justice and other Baha'i administrative institutions are religious institutions for Baha'is. In future of course many things may change, the people and politics as well. Even then my understanding of a Word Government is not a government headed by Universal House of Justice. Of course I assume in a distant future majority of the population of the earth will be Baha'is, most politicians will be Baha'is, members of the World Parliment will be mostly Baha'is and many of Baha'i laws and principles will be implemented but this does not mean that Universal House of Justice will be involved in politics. It would probably be like USA, even though the president and majority of the cabinet and other officials are Christian but there is a clear separation of church and state. Just my guess. regards, Firouz __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 21:57:36 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gilberto,
>
> At 09:44 PM 1/13/2005, you wrote:
> >>What I would say is that "religious exclusivism" is one thing, and
> >>"finality" is another. And finality in Islam is alot clearer, more
> >>decisive, more emphasized than finality in Judaism or Christianity.<<
>
> You do not think that most conservative Christians believe that
The fact that you have to add any kind of caveat ("most conservative")
underlines the fact that there is a difference. For the overwhelming
majority of Muslims, not believing in the finality of Muhammad's
prophethood excludes one from Islam. The analagous claim is not true
for Christianity.
Mark:
Many pentecostals, whom I studied for my doctoral dissertation in the
early 80s, go to great pains to stress that their acceptance of
prophecy, tongues, interpretation of tongues, word of knowledge, and
word of wisdom cannot replace, over-rule, or contradict the New
Testament.
Gilberto:
At this point, I really don't care. The fact that they even have
continuing prophecy and prophets is a significant difference from
Islam. That's all I've been saying.
Peace
Gilberto
"My people are hydroponic"
__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st
News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Women in West/Islam
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:07:58 +0700, Firouz Anaraki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto: > > You seem to be suggesting that Muslim countries shouldn't have democracy. > On the opposite, I would love to see democracy everywhere with and without > Muslim World. You were speaking positively about Turkish secularism (in spite of the fact that the Turkish military respresses Muslims). In alot of parts in the Muslim world, if the governments became more democratic, then that would mean more power for the Islamic parties but you've commented about this as if it were a bad thing. > Dear Gilberto, you did not answer my question in the previous email. What I > asked is what kind of government a democratic Muslim country should have? > Should the constitution of the country be based upon Quran and Islamic > Shariah in this government that you would like to have? I think that would be natural except when people say "apply the Shariah" it should be done intelligently instead of stupidly. I think that in alot of places (like in Afghanistan after the civil war) people were so tired of crime and drugs and chaos that they really wanted order. And so they just wanted some strong leaders to keep the peace. And so people say they want "the shariah" and typically that means cutting off the hands of theives and stoning adulterers. But the shariah involves many different principles and rules in many areas of life and the system needs to be implemented intelligently. Peace Gilberto > "My people are hydroponic" __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Re: Women in West/Islam
Gilberto: You seem to be suggesting that Muslim countries shouldn't have democracy. On the opposite, I would love to see democracy everywhere with and without Muslim World. But it seems to me that Islamic Shariah is not very democratic. Maybe that's one reason that there is no real democracy in any of Muslim countries. Your whole framework of looking at this thing is too different. If you start off with the basic assumption that Islam is evil and ought to be eliminated, of course the rest of what you are saying would follow. I never said that Islam is evil, as I have told you several times I am the only Baha'i inmy family. Majority of my friends and all my relatives are Muslims. What I am saying is that the Islamic Shariah is not really compatible with democracy. All I'm saying is that it is a good thing for Muslim countries to have good governments which respect the will of the people. There is nothing in Islam opposed to that. And furthermore, if you have Muslim countries with good governements which respect the will of the people then what you would see are the best ideals of Islam being implemented in the society and things would improve. Dear Gilberto, you did not answer my question in the previous email. What I asked is what kind of government a democratic Muslim country should have? Should the constitution of the country be based upon Quran and Islamic Shariah in this government that you would like to have? regards, Firouz Peace Gilberto __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
RE: Women in West/Islam
Firouz, do you think the Baha'i House of Justice, at any level you prefer, is part of the "church" or the "state". Where do you in fact do you locate it? Which sovereignty sphere? Cheer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Firouz Anaraki Sent: Friday, 14 January 2005 8:44 p.m. To: Baha'i Studies Subject: Re: Women in West/Islam > Dear Firouz, > > I don't really see any clear distinction between religion and politics > in the Baha'i Teachings either accept that matters of legislation rest > with our elected Assemblies, not the Learned. Abdu'l-Baha insisted > that the clergy should be separate from the state, but Baha'u'llah > placed political affairs (amr siyast) in the hands of the House of > Justice. Dear Susan, The question is what exactly Baha'u'llah meant by "umur-i siyasiyyah". My understanding is that the word siyasat in 19th century (and early 20th century) Persian and Arabic means leadership and not politics as it is commonly used. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
