Re: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Gilberto Simpson]

On 10/22/05, Hajir Moghaddam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Gilberto:
> > I think that in general matters of human life, the sanctitiy of human
> > life, are related to the essential fundamental principles.

> So are you saying that it is an essential fundamental principle to kill
> apostates?

No. In the previous e-mail I spelled out what I meant and you just
ignored it. I'm saying, roughly, essentially, that human life has a
constant value. And so we should be able to come up with moral
principles which tell us when it is just or unjust to take a life. And
those  principles should not just arbitrarily change in 1844. That's
what I'm saying.

Peace

Gilberto


 
 
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be 
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The 
information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts 
or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and 
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
 
 
__
 

You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Gilberto Simpson]

On 10/22/05, Hajir Moghaddam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Gilberto,

> I'm surprised you haven't brought up the concept of abrogation 'naskh' and
> progressive revelation within the Qur'an itself.  Why do you object to
> progressive revelation and abrogation by Baha'i Writings over the Qur'an,
> but hide the issues over abrogration and progressive revelation within the
> Qur'an itself?

I'm not hiding them. I don't think abrogation necessarily works the
same way you think it does. It doesn't make sense to me that there
would be a verse in the Quran which was legislative, recited,
preserved in the Quran, but then only meant to be valid for 20
something years and ignored for the next 1400. If you show me an
example of one verse which you think abrogates the other I would try
to show you a pair of verses where one explains the other, or where
one is the general rule and the other the exception, or where two
rulings were meant for two different situations, etc.

>
> It seems you are trying to hide away from all the evidences supporting
> Baha'u'llah as fulfillment of the Qur'anic Revelation.

I haven't seen any evidence. I've seen Bahai attempts at explaining
the Quran in a non-mainstream way, but that's all. The Bahai
interpretations aren't particularly compelling to me.

>  Honestly, in your
> heart, your qalb, don't you feel that Baha'u'llah is right,

No, I really don't.

>
> major issue in Qur'anic interpretation is that of abrogation - Naskh. Within
> the Qur'an itself are statements which offset others, but according to the
> doctrine of abrogation the later texts supersede the earlier whenever there
> are inconsistencies. The Muslim argument is that the abrogated verses were
> only meant for specific, temporary situations.

I would add, specific situations which could possible re-occur. For
example Muhammad Taha has the idea that in general the Meccan passages
(earlier passages, before the hejira)are still valid as ideals which
should be implemented as Muslim society becomes more ready.

I won't yet reply to the cut and paste, I'd prefer to stick to the
material we've discussed so far.

Peace

Gilberto


 
 
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be 
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The 
information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts 
or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and 
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
 
 
__
 

You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Hajir Moghaddam]

> I think that in general matters of human life, the sanctitiy of human> life, are related to the essential fundamental principles.
So are you saying that it is an essential fundamental principle to kill apostates?
 
		 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

 

 





 
 

The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.



 
 

__



 


You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Hajir Moghaddam]

Gilberto,
 
I'm surprised you haven't brought up the concept of abrogation 'naskh' and progressive revelation within the Qur'an itself.  Why do you object to progressive revelation and abrogation by Baha'i Writings over the Qur'an, but hide the issues over abrogration and progressive revelation within the Qur'an itself?  
 

It seems you are trying to hide away from all the evidences supporting Baha'u'llah as fulfillment of the Qur'anic Revelation.  Honestly, in your heart, your qalb, don't you feel that Baha'u'llah is right, and that you are really turning your back on God's Cause, and instead of helping it advance and grow, you are really working to stop the advancement of the Cause of God?
 
Hajir
 
--- 
 
major issue in Qur'anic interpretation is that of abrogation - Naskh. Within the Qur'an itself are statements which offset others, but according to the doctrine of abrogation the later texts supersede the earlier whenever there are inconsistencies. The Muslim argument is that the abrogated verses were only meant for specific, temporary situations. We have seen that the revelation of the Qur'an is grounded in the historical circumstances of the life and career of Muhammad, and so there is a progressive element in doctrine of Islam's holy book. Situations change and develop, and since the Qur'an reflects this, its teachings changed with the circumstance at hand. At the most obvious level we can see this in the fact that in the early years of Islam, Muhammad was a minority preacher in Mecca, concerning himself with almost solely theological and moral/social issues, but when he moved to Medina, he became the Governmental Executive, and so his rev!
 elations
 began to address legal, political and economic matters. The Qur'an explains the practice of abrogation by referring to the sovereignty of God. Yusuf Ali says: 
For: 2.106 
The word which I have translated by the word 'revelations' is Ayat... It is not only used for verses of the Quran, but in a general sense for God's revelations, as in ii. 39 and for other Signs of God in history or nature, or miracles, as in ii. 61. It has even been used for human signs and tokens of wonder, as, for example, monuments or landmarks built by the ancient people of AD (xxvi. 128). What is the meaning here? If we take it in a general sense, it means tht God's Message from age to age is always the same, but that its Form may differ according to the needs and exigencies of the time. That form was different as given to Moses and then to Jesus and then to Muhammad. Some commentators apply it also to the Ayat of the Quran. There is nothing derogatory in this if we believe in progressive revelation. In iii. 7 we are told distinctly about the Quran, that some of its verses are basic or fundamental, and others are allegorical, and it is mischievous!
  to treat
 the allegorical verses and follow them (literally). On the other hand, it is absurd to treat such a verse as ii. 115 as if it were abrogated by ii. 144 about the Qibla. We turn to the Qibla, but we do not believe that God is only in one place. He is everywhere.
As can be seen, some Muslims believe that this verse refers to Jewish and Christian Scriptures. However, it is not the only verse that impinges on this subject, and these others indicate that what is involved is abrogation of the Qur'an. 
For: 16.101 
... The doctrine of progressive revelation from age to age and time to time does not mean that Allah's fundamental Law changes. It is not fair to charge a Prophet of Allah with forgery because the Message as revealed to him is in a different form from that revealed before, when the core of the Truth is the same, for it comes from Allah.
In the Hadith, we find reference to abrogation which specifically relates this practice to the Qur'an. Another text concerns Surah 2:106; a Qur'anic reciter was supposed to have memorised every revelation from Muhammad, so what was under consideration in this text was whether he should have deleted those verses which had been cancelled. Finally, there are Hadith texts which settle the issue that abrogation relates to the Qur'an itself, rather than to the holy scriptures of the Jews and Christians (or anyone else for that matter). The Hadith illustrates our earlier point about the progressive character of Qur'anic revelation, and how an aspect of this related to the changed conditions of Muhammad after the Hegira. The classic example often used by Muslim exegetes to explain the mechanics of abrogation is found with respect to the widow's bequest. 
To understand what this involves, we can examine the fact that Islam makes a great point in portraying itself as a 'mercy' to Mankind, and part of this is that is does not burden believers with too much ritual obligation. For example, Surah 73 begins in vs. 2 - 4, by commanding Believers to spend a considerable portion of the night in prayer, but ayah 20 abrogates this. S. 43:89 orders that polytheists be let alone, however, S. 2:190-191

Re: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Gilberto Simpson]

Hajir,

I think the following is pretty repetitive on my part.. I think there
is a core idea behind most of the responses which I'm trying to get
across and came up in different ways.


On 10/22/05, Hajir Moghaddam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gilberto:
> But there are parts of the shariah which I would
> include in that fundamental essential aspect but which
> Bahais would not.

Hajir:
> What is a fundamental essential aspect of the Islamic law > that I as a Baha'i
> disagreed was essential?

I gave you an example...

Gilberto:
> > For example, I would say that properly understood, both the existence of 
> > slavery and its abolition flow out of those fundamental principles. But for 
> > Bahais this is not the case.

Hajir:
> I also think everything flows out of the fundamental
> principles.

I've discussed this issue before with other Bahais but maybe you are
different. Let me ask you. Do you think slavery is wrong? And if so
why?

Gilberto:
> > I would say that genocide is always wrong, but some Bahais (like some
> > Christians) have argued that some genocides (like those attributed to
> > God in the OT) are ok.

Hajir:
> How do you presume you know the exact circumstance for
> the commandment of God made thousands of years ago?

Gilberto:
I don't start with the assupmtion that the Bible is in its entirety
the word of God. It needs to be examined to see if it makes sense. And
you might call it presumtuous but I feel comfortable sticking to the
rule of thumb that genocide is generally wrong. (Maybe you could come
up with a bizzare hypothetical situation where genocide might prevent
a much greater harm from resulting but I don't think that applies in
the OT)

Gilberto:
> > On top of that, given how the Bahai faith says that religious laws
> > change, I think the periods we are talking about are really not as
> > distant as you seem to be making out.

Hajir:
> Since the essentials don't change, I don't see this as a problem.

The point was that from a Bahai perspective (at least as I understand
it) the rules change when the Manifestation says so. But in some cases
it seems a bit too much like "Simon Says" for my taste. As if at one
point slavery was 100% A-Ok, and then a moment later it was 100%
totally wrong. That is weird when I think about it.

Hajir:
>  God makes
> the decision when to change the non-essential religious laws that are borne
> out of those essential teachings.

Gilberto:
I would say that people have the capacity to reason morally based on
the essential moral principles. That's why there was an abolitionist
movement in the West which started before Bahaullah.

Hajir:
>  And it is God who decides which specific
> non-essential laws are appropriate, not you or me.

Gilberto:
I think God informed us of the essential principles in the first
place, and he gave us an intellect and the capacity to reason based on
those essential principles.

> Unless of course you claim to the mihdi of Islam and are > advancing your own
> claim, and now deem the shariah death penalty for
> apostates no longer valid
> or restricted to very rare situations.

Gilberto:
I think that is reasonable. The shariah isn't supposed to be applied
in a stupid simplistic way. The various punishments have certain
conditions.

 Gilberto:
> > So from that perspective, and your interpretation of the hadith,
> > killing apostates is A-OK until 1843.

Hajir:
> There was a justification for it until 1843, and the justification in my
> view was to prevent people from making false claims to revelation from God.

Gilberto:
That isn't a very convincing reason to me. People made all sorts of
false claims before 1843 and after 1843.

Hajir:
> This rule allowed the Bab to declare Himself without
> being lost in the crowd
> of too many false claimants.

I think there are ALOT of claimants of all kinds even today if you
really look. Check out.

http://unusualchurches.blogspot.com/



Gilberto:
> > I don't think fundamental moral principles should
> > change with
> > the calendar.

Hajir:
> Neither do I.  But I don't think the Islamic rule to kill > apostates is an 
> essential fundamental teaching of Islam
> or religion in general.

I think that in general matters of human life, the sanctitiy of human
life, are related to the essential fundamental principles. Human life
didn't suddenly become more valuable in 1844. So if it was justifiable
to kill another human being in situation X in 1843 it should be
justifiable to kill another human being in situation X in 1844. (and
vice versa) If it is not justifiable to kill another human being in
situation Y in 1844 then it is also not justifiable to kill another
human being in situation Y in 1843. (and vice versa).


Peace

Gilberto


 
 
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be 
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The 
information may be protected

Re: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Hajir Moghaddam]

Gilberto,
 
> But there are parts of the shariah which I would include in that fundamental
> essential aspect but which Bahais would not.
 
What is a fundamental essential aspect of the Islamic law that I as a Baha'i disagreed was essential?  All religions teach:
 
1. pure and kind heartedness
2. justice
3. man created by God
4. love of God
5. love of man6. selflessness and elimination of ego and selfishness
7. importance of works
8. search for God
9. obeying the law of God
10. importance of prayer
11. helping the poor
12. doing unto others like doing unto self
13. elimination of hypocrisy
14. teaching cause of God
15. etc. etc.
 
>> For example, I would say that properly understood, both the existence> of slavery and its abolition flow out of those fundamental principles.> But for Bahais this is not the case.<
 
I also think everything flows out of the fundamental principles. 
 
>> I would say that genocide is always wrong, but some Bahais (like some> Christians) have argued that some genocides (like those attributed to> God in the OT) are ok.<
 
How do you presume you know the exact circumstance for the commandment of God made thousands of years ago?
> On top of that, given how the Bahai faith says that religious laws> change, I think the periods we are talking about are really not as> distant as you seem to be making out. 
 
Since the essentials don't change, I don't see this as a problem.  God makes the decision when to change the non-essential religious laws that are borne out of those essential teachings.  And it is God who decides which specific non-essential laws are appropriate, not you or me.  
 
Unless of course you claim to the mihdi of Islam and are advancing your own claim, and now deem the shariah death penalty for apostates no longer valid or restricted to very rare situations.
> So from that perspective, and your interpretation of the hadith,> killing apostates is A-OK until 1843.There was a justification for it until 1843, and the justification in my view was to prevent people from making false claims to revelation from God.  This rule allowed the Bab to declare Himself without being lost in the crowd of too many false claimants.  But since I am not God, I cannot tell you whether this is the only reason.  What I *can* tell you for sure is that this law is not part of the Baha'i Law, and is therefore no longer valid for this day and age.  Even proto-Baha'is like agnostics, Christians, Jews, and some Muslims agree that it is outdated.
 
> I don't think fundamental moral principles should change with> the calendar. 
 
Neither do I.  But I don't think the Islamic rule to kill apostates is an essential fundamental teaching of Islam or religion in general.  It is one of those laws that had a specific purpose, but this specific scenario is now obviously lost to Islam.  And there isn't one entity, one leader, with the authority to make a conclusive decisive decision about this rule, such that it would apply to all Muslims.  There is no way that you, if you claim to be a kind of a mihdi, bring together the Shi'a and the Sunni to both agree to throw this rule on apostates out the window, or to make it so specific that it is no longer exercised.  Shi'as even today sentence Baha'is to death based on this Hadith.
 
Hajir
		 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

 

 





 
 

The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.



 
 

__



 


You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Gilberto Simpson]

On 10/22/05, Max Jasper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When God punishes man for his perversity, that is not called "genocide".
> "genocide" is done by man to man.
>

I agree. I wasn't refering to the cases of fire and brimstone raining
down on folks from heaven or heavenly plagues. I was talking about
those cases where according to the Bible, "God" commands the children
of Israel to wipe out entire populations, men, women, children,
infants, livestock. Everything that has breath. Just read the book of
Joshua for example.

Peace

Gilberto

> |I would say that genocide is always wrong, but some Bahais (like some
> |Christians) have argued that some genocides (like those
> |attributed to God in the OT) are ok.
> |
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto
> ("e-mail") is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is
> intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or
> entity named above. The information may be protected by federal and state
> privacy and disclosures acts or other legal rules. If the reader of this
> message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that retention,
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately
> notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and permanently delete this
> e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
>
>
> 
 
 
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be 
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The 
information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts 
or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and 
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
 
 
__
 

>
>
> You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unsubscribe: send a blank email to
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe:
> http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
> Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
> Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
> Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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
>
>


--
"There are no poets"

__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Max Jasper]

When God punishes man for his perversity, that is not called "genocide".
"genocide" is done by man to man.

|
|I would say that genocide is always wrong, but some Bahais (like some
|Christians) have argued that some genocides (like those
|attributed to God in the OT) are ok.
|






The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto
("e-mail") is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is
intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or
entity named above. The information may be protected by federal and state
privacy and disclosures acts or other legal rules. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that retention,
dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately
notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and permanently delete this
e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.


__


You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe:
http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Gilberto Simpson]

On 10/22/05, Hajir Moghaddam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Gilberto:
> Even if they last for over a millenia before changing, moral values
> shouldn't just be a "fad". I'm sure there are ways that specific
> circumstances change. But we should be able to apply *some* kind of moral
> reasoning based on more fundamental principles.

Hajir:
> Gilberto, I agree.  For this reason, the Baha'i writings stress that the
> 'essential' aspect of religion, what in your terminology are the
> 'fundamental principles', remain the same.

No. But there are parts of the shariah which I would include in that
fundamental essential aspect but which Bahais would not.

For example, I would say that properly understood, both the existence
of slavery and its abolition flow out of those fundamental principles.
But for Bahais this is not the case.

I would say that genocide is always wrong, but some Bahais (like some
Christians) have argued that some genocides (like those attributed to
God in the OT) are ok.

Gilberto:
> On top of that, given how the Bahai faith says that religious laws
> change, I think the periods we are talking about are really not as
> distant as you seem to be making out. According to the Bahai faith,
> isn't the shariah valid until the Bab announced that he was bringing a
> new revelation in 1844,
>
> So from that perspective, and your interpretation of the hadith,
> killing apostates is A-OK until 1843.


Hajir:
> It is a sign of openmindedness that you are starting to view the world as a
> Baha'i!  Are you starting to see the Truth of the Baha'i Revelation?
>
>


??? No I strongly disagree with the hypothetical situation I described
above. I don't think fundamental moral principles should change with
the calendar. If it is wrong to kill people for their religious
beliefs in 1844 then it is wrong to kill people for their religious
beliefs in 1843. I would say that the Bahais are reading the hadith in
the most unflattering light with the intention of trying to discredit
Islam. And my response is that if that's what they are trying to do
then it becomes their responsibility to defend killing apostates in
1843.

Personally, I think it makes more sense to try to resove the apparent
difficulty by appealing to a single set of basic moral principles
which can explain  why a certain behavior was justifiable in one
context even though such contexts might be rare today.

Peace

Gilberto


 
 
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be 
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The 
information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts 
or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and 
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
 
 
__
 

You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Fwd: Interesting thread

[Hajir Moghaddam]

> 
Even if they last for over a millenia before changing, moral values shouldn't just be a "fad". I'm sure there are ways that specific circumstances change. But we should be able to apply *some* kind of moral reasoning based on more fundamental principles.<
 
Gilberto, I agree.  For this reason, the Baha'i writings stress that the 'essential' aspect of religion, what in your terminology are the 'fundamental principles', remain the same.  What really remains the same is the Essence of God, and these principles are manifestations of His names.
 
>On top of that, given how the Bahai faith says that religious lawschange, I think the periods we are talking about are really not asdistant as you seem to be making out. According to the Bahai faith,isn't the shariah valid until the Bab announced that he was bringing anew revelation in 1844,
So from that perspective, and your interpretation of the hadith,killing apostates is A-OK until 1843. 
<
 
It is a sign of openmindedness that you are starting to view the world as a Baha'i!  Are you starting to see the Truth of the Baha'i Revelation?
 
>
So really, we are talking about you imposing your late20th century values on the mid-19th century which isn't as much of astretch.
<
 
The mid 19th century was not all that different in those areas and lands owned and run by Islam from the 7th century.  Even today, the middle east looks like the 7th century, doesn't it.  For Islam to be valid, it has to freeze time to the conditions of the 7th century.  This is why we have the Baha'i Revelation, so that civilization may continue to grow.
		 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

 

 





 
 

The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.



 
 

__



 


You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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: Israel according to Qur'an

[Mark A. Foster]

>>THE QUR'AN SAYS THAT ALLAH GAVE THE LAND OF ISRAEL TO THE JEWS AND WILL 
>>RESTORE THEM TO IT AT THE END OF DAYS
>>http://www.templemount.org/quranland.html
>> 

`Abdu'l-Baha made a similar prediction in _Some Answered Questions_. However, 
even if the this writer's understanding of this qur'anic verse is correct, the 
conclusion he draws is not justified:

"MUSLIMS MUST RECOGNIZE THE STATE OF ISRAEL AS A JEWISH STATE" 

I see no reference to a "Jewish state," or recognizing it, in the Qur'an.

Via moderna, Mark A. Foster . http://markfoster.net
... [a] word is ... a universal. - William of Ockham
Structurization Tech: http://tech.structurization.com 



 
 
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be 
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The 
information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts 
or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail 
in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and 
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
 
 
__
 

You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/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