Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto,
At 11:12 AM 1/18/2005, you wrote:
>>I'm not sure what we are going back and forth on. So you are saying that the
>>Light is no longer in Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc. or even the Babis
>>but that it is just in the Bahai lamp?<<
What I am suggesting is that the various Islams, Christianities, Judaisms, etc.
are expressions of the Will of God ("the Light") for previous Dispensations.
The religion founded by Baha'u'llah is an expression of the Will of God for the
present Dispensation.
One may still benefit from these earlier "lamps" (religions), since God's Will
("the Light") shines through them. However, the God's Will for this
Dispensation is that people should accept the Baha'i Faith, the latest Lamp and
Light.
In other words, God's Will is progressive. It can change from one Dispensation
to the next. If one wishes to know what God wants of us today, one should
follow His most recent Prophet.
With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net
Lifeworlds are the structurizations of wills [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"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]
Hi, Gilberto, At 09:24 AM 1/18/2005, you wrote: >>Yes, I agree with you. What I would say is that in effect the Bahai faith (or >>at least many Bahais in my experience) are still just looking at the lamp >>(container), not the light (the essential spiritual truth).<< I am baffled as to how you could have arrived at that conclusion from what I wrote. However, anything else I can say on the subject would be repetitious. >>In what way do they matter?<< The names matter if they point to God's Will in that particular Dispensation. With regards, Mark A. Foster 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net Lifeworlds are the structurizations of wills [EMAIL PROTECTED] "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: FIRE [exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]]
G: Also, at least in the Quran, light and fire are certainlydistinguished (for examples, angels are made from light, jinn fromfire) so I'm not sure I would switch one for the other. Or assume oneimplies the other. JS: In some of Baha'u'llah's writings, Fire is identified with Love. "If he be kindled with the fire of His love, if he forgoeth all created things, the words he uttereth shall set on fire them that hear him." Gleaning CLVII "Be as brilliant as the light, and as splendid as the fire that blazed in the Burning Bush. The brightness of the fire of your love will no doubt fuse and unify the contending peoples and kindreds of the earth, whilst the fierceness of the flame of enmity and hatred cannot but result in strife and ruin. " Gleaning XLIII "Be thou as a flame of fire to My enemies and a river of life eternal to My loved ones, and be not of those who doubt." Tablet of Ahmad Persian 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
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:00:45 -0800, Richard H. Gravelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Gilberto: > >>Yes, I understand that. But that would only be an issue if the Bahai lamp > >>is the only one with light. If light shone through muiltiple lamps, you > >>can pick any lamp you want, even if for silly reasons like it was the lamp > >>you grew up with, or it was the lamp your in-laws wanted you to use, > >>because they all have light.<< Richard: > The first clear statement regarding the light and its function, in my > understanding, is in Genesis Gilberto: In terms of the Bible, I agree, but I would have tried to bring together a different set of passages: Genesis 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. So that was the light which was brought into existence by God speaking.a word. So then there are also connections with John 1 [1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] He was in the beginning with God; [3] all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. [...] [9] The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the world. which the Bible identifies with Jesus. And then what is really interesting is Proverbs 8 which talks alot about Wisdom personified. But just the bit I would want to share is where wisdom says: 22] The LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old. [23] Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth. [..] [30] then I was beside him, like a master workman; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, So throughout the Bible there are all these connections between Logos in John 1, the Light in Genesis, Wisdom mentioned in Proverbs 8, and then Jesus. (also, I would say that since the light is created, this is more like the Arian interpretation) Interestingly enough, In Islam there are similar ideas. Where Islamic sources say in some places that the first thing created was the Intellect, or in other places, the Pen, or in other places, the Light of Muhammad (saaws). So in both it seems as if God *creates* the Light, and this light is sometimes identified with some kind of human mental activity (wisdom or intellect) and is also identified with the prophets, or at least, with Jesus and Muhammad, by Christians and Muslims, respectively. But then would you say that an old lamp goes dark? Or do they continue to possess the same light? Also, at least in the Quran, light and fire are certainly distinguished (for examples, angels are made from light, jinn from fire) so I'm not sure I would switch one for the other. Or assume one implies the other. Peace Gilberto > 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of > Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way > of the tree of life. (King James Bible, Genesis) That light, from whatever > Cherubim or Messenger is always shinning. > > Viewing this as a Christian one would get the impression that the Cherubims > are keeping Adam and Eve (mankind) out of the Garden. Taking "cherubims" as > celestial beings or angels, and being aware that Muhammad was made to deny > that He claimed to be one of the angels, the verse: > > 50:20 And every soul shall come, - an angel with it urging it along, and an > angel to witness against it - (The Qur'an (Rodwell tr), Sura 50 - Kaf) > > yet may well refer to Messengers of God being promised and one previous to a > soul's time on earth. For the angel driving the soul would be the Messenger > for the day in which the soul lives; and the witness angel being the very > same Messenger Who is then resurrected with a new name; which would fit with > the word "cherubim" being in the plural in Genesis. > > The flaming sword would necessarily be the Word of God itself: > > Matt. 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to > send peace, but a sword. > > Rev 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went > a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his > strength. > > The conclusion then would be that the "Light" is the Word of God which is > always held aloft by His Messengers so that the souls may find their way to > Paradise. It therefore does not matter with which Prophet or Messenger or > Manifestation one begins because He will have prophesied the next to come. > It follows then that obedience to the Message in one's hand will result in > one accepting any succeeding Message. The subsequent Messenger is the > previous Messenger resurrected. God is One. He is God. > > "Seek and ye shall find" > > Richard. > > __ > 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 a
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
: Yes, I understand that. But that would only be an issue if the Bahai lamp is the only one with light. If light shone through muiltiple lamps, you can pick any lamp you want, even if for silly reasons like it was the lamp you grew up with, or it was the lamp your in-laws wanted you to use, because they all have light.<< The first clear statement regarding the light and its function, in my understanding, is in Genesis 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (King James Bible, Genesis) That light, from whatever Cherubim or Messenger is always shinning. Viewing this as a Christian one would get the impression that the Cherubims are keeping Adam and Eve (mankind) out of the Garden. Taking "cherubims" as celestial beings or angels, and being aware that Muhammad was made to deny that He claimed to be one of the angels, the verse: 50:20 And every soul shall come, - an angel with it urging it along, and an angel to witness against it - (The Qur'an (Rodwell tr), Sura 50 - Kaf) yet may well refer to Messengers of God being promised and one previous to a soul's time on earth. For the angel driving the soul would be the Messenger for the day in which the soul lives; and the witness angel being the very same Messenger Who is then resurrected with a new name; which would fit with the word "cherubim" being in the plural in Genesis. The flaming sword would necessarily be the Word of God itself: Matt. 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Rev 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. The conclusion then would be that the "Light" is the Word of God which is always held aloft by His Messengers so that the souls may find their way to Paradise. It therefore does not matter with which Prophet or Messenger or Manifestation one begins because He will have prophesied the next to come. It follows then that obedience to the Message in one's hand will result in one accepting any succeeding Message. The subsequent Messenger is the previous Messenger resurrected. God is One. He is God. "Seek and ye shall find" Richard. __ 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 Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:21:12 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 07:49 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: > >>That's not what I"m hearing from Bahais. What I tend to hear is that the > lamp doesn't matter but then they insist that people should use their > lamp.<< > I think that point is that when one accepts the Light, the Will of God, one > accepts it in whatever Lamp it chooses to manifest itself. If, on the other > hand, one is attached to the Lamp, then one may reject its Light, the Will > of God, when it shines through a different Lamp. > I'm not sure what we are going back and forth on. So you are saying that the Light is no longer in Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc. or even the Babis but that it is just in the Bahai lamp? -Gilberto > > JS> > > In other words, if one is really in LOVE with the LIGHT and NOT the LAMP, > then one recognizes that the LIGHT was passed on from Jesus to Muhammad to > the Bab to Baha'u'llah. > > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. > __ 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]
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:46:15 -0800, Patti Goebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Gilberto: > > I might have. Personally, I would have to make a serious study of > > Daniel and Revelation before I would feel really confident responding > > in a specific way. Offhand my impression is that Biblical prophecies > > are really murky, and given the range of different interpretations > > given to the various passages through the centuries, I don't think > > there is going to be anything conclusive come out of them. > Patti: > As I stated, this prophecy is clearly explained elsewhere in Baha'i terms in > Some Answered Questions & Thief in the Night. Gilberto: I know that. I've looked at Thief in the Night and even Bahais admit that there are mistakes in it. The approach taken didn't seem very intuitive to me. I'm really skeptical of how I've seen Biblical prophecies interpreted in general, whether from Daniel, the Book of REvelation or elsewhere. In order to really discuss these issues with you, I would want to reread Daniel, reread Revelation, read the relevant passages in Some Answered Questions and go through them and see how I think everything does or doesn't match up. That's alot of work. It may seem to some folks that I don't have anything better to do besides post in here, but it actually isn't the case. The prophecies are vague enough that through the centuries many different people have been named as the various actors in the visions. The woman with the crown, the anti-christ, the beast, etc. > This is not just a Baha'i > interpreted prophecy, but was the source of "The Great Disappointment" to a > great number of literal minded Christians who thought the world would end in > 1844. Yes, I realize that. I was reading about that in a different context, and had actually mentioned it to a Bahai I know and he's the one that lent me his copy of A thief in the night. The Millerite groups are the predecessors to the Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, and ultimately even the Branch Davidians. They have their own understandings of what happened instead during the Great Disappointment as well. I'll try to better understand how the prophecies are interpreted and we can talk about it some more later on if you like. 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 Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:46:59 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 08:30 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: > >>Yes, I understand that. But that would only be an issue if the Bahai lamp > >>is the only one with light. If light shone through muiltiple lamps, you can > >>pick any lamp you want, even if for silly reasons like it was the lamp you > >>grew up with, or it was the lamp your in-laws wanted you to use, because > >>they all have light.<< Mark: > That viewpoint would certainly agree with most approaches to the perennial > philosophy I have read. However, it would not, to my understanding, agree > with the Baha'i principle of progressive Revelation and the Covenant (the > Will of God). Gilberto: Yes, I agree with you. What I would say is that in effect the Bahai faith (or at least many Bahais in my experience) are still just looking at the lamp (container), not the light (the essential spiritual truth). Gilberto: > >>That reminds me of the parable of the grapes. They are all talking about > >>the same thing, but with different names. The moral is that the names don't > >>matter.<< Mark: > Again, that is one reason why I find such approaches to the philosophia > perennis to be so problematic. The names *do* matter if they are pointing to > God's Will. > Gilberto: In what way do they matter? Pecae 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]
> Gilberto: > I might have. Personally, I would have to make a serious study of > Daniel and Revelation before I would feel really confident responding > in a specific way. Offhand my impression is that Biblical prophecies > are really murky, and given the range of different interpretations > given to the various passages through the centuries, I don't think > there is going to be anything conclusive come out of them. Patti: As I stated, this prophecy is clearly explained elsewhere in Baha'i terms in Some Answered Questions & Thief in the Night. This is not just a Baha'i interpreted prophecy, but was the source of "The Great Disappointment" to a great number of literal minded Christians who thought the world would end in 1844. Here is a link to a brief description of the event http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/61/61h031.html, As I'm going to be putting in a lot of extra hours at work this week and trying to find time for the gym, etc., I won't take time to give more details now, maybe I can this weekend. __ 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 08:30 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: >>Yes, I understand that. But that would only be an issue if the Bahai lamp is >>the only one with light. If light shone through muiltiple lamps, you can pick >>any lamp you want, even if for silly reasons like it was the lamp you grew up >>with, or it was the lamp your in-laws wanted you to use, because they all >>have light.<< That viewpoint would certainly agree with most approaches to the perennial philosophy I have read. However, it would not, to my understanding, agree with the Baha'i principle of progressive Revelation and the Covenant (the Will of God). `Abdu'l-Baha said that people could benefit, today, from following the teachings of Christ. However, the Will of God, He believed, was for people to accept Baha'u'llah. If one rejects Baha'u'llah as the latest Prophet of God, because of an attachment to the verses revealed by a particular Lamp (a previous Prophet), then, by `Abdu'l-Baha's criterion, one is rejecting the Light (the Will of God) >>That reminds me of the parable of the grapes. They are all talking about the >>same thing, but with different names. The moral is that the names don't >>matter.<< Again, that is one reason why I find such approaches to the philosophia perennis to be so problematic. The names *do* matter if they are pointing to God's Will. 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 Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:15:07 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 07:49 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: > >>That's not what I"m hearing from Bahais. What I tend to hear is that the > >>lamp doesn't matter but then they insist that people should use their > >>lamp.<< > I think that point is that when one accepts the Light, the Will of God, one > accepts it in whatever Lamp it chooses to manifest itself. If, on the other > hand, one is attached to the Lamp, then one may reject its Light, the Will of > God, when it shines through a different Lamp. Gilberto: Yes, I understand that. But that would only be an issue if the Bahai lamp is the only one with light. If light shone through muiltiple lamps, you can pick any lamp you want, even if for silly reasons.. like it was the lamp you grew up with, or it was the lamp your in-laws wanted you to use, because they all have light. That reminds me of the parable of the grapes. They are all talking about the same thing, but with different names. The moral is that the names don't matter. 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]
Gilberto,At 07:49 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote:>>That's not what I"m hearing from Bahais. What I tend to hear is that the lamp doesn't matter but then they insist that people should use their lamp.< In other words, if one is really in LOVE with the LIGHT and NOT the LAMP, then one recognizes that the LIGHT was passed on from Jesus to Muhammad to the Bab to Baha'u'llah. 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
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 07:49 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: >>That's not what I"m hearing from Bahais. What I tend to hear is that the lamp >>doesn't matter but then they insist that people should use their lamp.<< I think that point is that when one accepts the Light, the Will of God, one accepts it in whatever Lamp it chooses to manifest itself. If, on the other hand, one is attached to the Lamp, then one may reject its Light, the Will of God, when it shines through a different Lamp. 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]
If you love the light, then the lamp doesn't matter (much). Then you should be happy with the light from your lamp, and other people can be fine with the light from theirlamp. But it's all good since it's all the same light.JS: That is a nice way to see it. No matter what lamp you use, the dark room (the heart, mind, and soul) will light up (love of God, true knowledge) regardless. 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]
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:09:10 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Abdu'l Baha likens it to the light in a lamp. When you love the lamp, you > love it whereever it appears, is it better to love the lamp THINKING it is > the light itself? Of course, not. > > Regards, > > Scott Did you mean to say "When you love the light, you love it wherever it appears"? If so, yes. I would agree. But I think that leads to different conclusions for me. If you love the light, then the lamp doesn't matter (much). Then you should be happy with the light from your lamp, and other people can be fine with the light from their lamp. But it's all good since it's all the same light. That's not what I"m hearing from Bahais. What I tend to hear is that the lamp doesn't matter but then they insist that people should use their lamp. 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]
Yes, and based on the first paragraph of the Iqan, Looking at it in "essence"/"jawhar", I would only see the light and not care about the lamp. Looking at it in an "earthy"/"araz" way, I would see the lamp and get fixated on the lamp, and forget that the purpose of the lamp is to give LIGHT. "The ESSENCE of these words is this: they that tread the path of faith, they that thirst for the wine of certitude, must cleanse themselves of all that is EARTHY... They should put their trust in God, and, holding fast unto Him, follow in His way." - Baha'u'llah. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Abdu'l Baha likens it to the light in a lamp. When you love the lamp, you love it whereever it appears, is it better to love the lamp THINKING it is the light itself? Of course, not. Regards, Scott__ 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 __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]
Abdu'l Baha likens it to the light in a lamp. When you love the lamp, you love it whereever it appears, is it better to love the lamp THINKING it is the light itself? Of course, not. Regards, Scott __ 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 did't say anything about denying any signs. Just that if theprophets are really one and the same, then one is as good as theother.JS> Hi Gilberto, to me, its pretty simple. They are one and the same, but each time He comes, He add a bit more to what He said earlier.__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 Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:59:55 -0800, Patti Goebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you > > believe all the prophets are one, and God's religion is one, then the > > Bahai faith is redundant and Islam (in the sense of following the > > Quran and the sunnah of Muhammad, saaws) is sufficient. Are you > > willing to go along with that conclusion? Patti: > No Gilberto, I for one am not willing to go along with that conclusion. As > several people have already pointed out, we believe that the "Last Hour" and > "Judgment Day" prophesied in the Qur'an have occurred, and that the "Signs" > of the last day have been fulfilled. To me, denying these signs would make > me a denier of the Day of Judgment. Gilberto: I did't say anything about denying any signs. Just that if the prophets are really one and the same, then one is as good as the other. > Incidentally, you went on and on about the 1000 years interpretation by > Baha'is leading to the lunar year 1260, but you never responded to my point > about the specific sign referred to by Christ that led to the same year, > 1844. Did you miss that message? Gilberto: I might have. Personally, I would have to make a serious study of Daniel and Revelation before I would feel really confident responding in a specific way. Offhand my impression is that Biblical prophecies are really murky, and given the range of different interpretations given to the various passages through the centuries, I don't think there is going to be anything conclusive come out of them. 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]
Gilberto, At 04:00 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: >>There might be more space for varied religious groups in general, in more >>pluralistic societies. But Christian prophets still had a large presence in >>Christianity from a very early point in time.<< That is true, but, until recently, they largely operated in the context of the authority of the Gospel (after the NT was completed). And, again, Paul's view of Prophets (and the views of Prophets maintained by most pentecostals) is vastly different from the qur'anic concept. 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 03:47 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote: >>But the fact that one of those lists was almost 4 times longer than the other >>one is not just some coincidence, and its not just that you might be more >>familiar with Western examples.<< In terms of the size of the list, I offered an explanation. 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 Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:25:42 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > > Also, I don't think that the fact that there may, proportionately, be more > people calling themselves "Christians" who claim to be prophets, messiahs, > and the like than those calling themselves "Muslims" (Hazrat Mirza Ghulam > Ahmad, Rashad Khalifa, and Elijah Muhammad has much to do with the qur'anic > statement on khatam. To many Christians, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the > Life" carries about just as much weight. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" doesn't imply finality. It implies exclusivity. Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, and others still read those phrases in more or less similar ways to other Christians. Mark: > IMO, the main factor is the fact that the Christianities are prevalent in > post-Enlightenment Western societies which value and tolerate religious > pluralism. The Islams are not. Prophets after Jesus were mentioned right there in the New Testament. And right in the second century you had people like Montanus who were claiming to be prophets and developed a large following. This isn't just a new phenomena in Christianity. There might be more space for varied religious groups in general, in more pluralistic societies. But Christian prophets still had a large presence in Christianity from a very early point in time. 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 Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:02:54 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > > At 08:36 AM 1/17/2005, you wrote: > >>And I've NEVER said in all of this that most Christians think the Bible has > >>been added to or replaced. But it is easier to find Christians who claim to > >>receive revelations claiming to supplement, enhance, etc. the Bible than it > >>is to find Muslims claiming to receive revelation adding, supplementing, > >>etc. the Quran.<< > There are, and have been, people like that (Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, > Emmanuel Swedenborg, William Sadler, Edgar Cayce, Helen Schucman, Sun Myung > Moon, etc.). However, these persons, like Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and > Rashad Khalifa, have been rejected by more "mainstream" (traditional) > elements within their respective religious networks. Gilberto: Yes, I agree. But the fact that one of those lists was almost 4 times longer than the other one is not just some coincidence, and its not just that you might be more familiar with Western examples. It has something to do with how those communities tend to think of the possibility of future prophets. The way they are rejected is different as well. 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]
Gilberto, Also, I don't think that the fact that there may, proportionately, be more people calling themselves "Christians" who claim to be prophets, messiahs, and the like than those calling themselves "Muslims" (Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Rashad Khalifa, and Elijah Muhammad has much to do with the qur'anic statement on khatam. To many Christians, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" carries about just as much weight. IMO, the main factor is the fact that the Christianities are prevalent in post-Enlightenment Western societies which value and tolerate religious pluralism. The Islams are not. 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 08:36 AM 1/17/2005, you wrote: >>And I've NEVER said in all of this that most Christians think the Bible has >>been added to or replaced. But it is easier to find Christians who claim to >>receive revelations claiming to supplement, enhance, etc. the Bible than it >>is to find Muslims claiming to receive revelation adding, supplementing, etc. >>the Quran.<< There are, and have been, people like that (Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Emmanuel Swedenborg, William Sadler, Edgar Cayce, Helen Schucman, Sun Myung Moon, etc.). However, these persons, like Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Rashad Khalifa, have been rejected by more "mainstream" (traditional) elements within their respective religious networks. 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]
Just to zoom in on one point.. Gilberto: > >>What I'm saying is that the bulk of the people on the Christian side are > >>much more open to the idea of future prophets. And people on the Muslim > >>side have a clearer sense that no prophets are coming.<< Mark: > On average, they use the word more frequently - though not with the same > meaning as most Muslims. However, this discussion began as a way to compare > claims of finality or exclusiveness; and I don't think that most Christians > (such as pentecostals) and Muslims (such as the Qadianis) who speak of > prophets regard them as replacing the authorities of the Bible or the Qur'an. And I've NEVER said in all of this that most Christians think the Bible has been added to or replaced. But it is easier to find Christians who claim to receive revelations claiming to supplement, enhance, etc. the Bible than it is to find Muslims claiming to receive revelation adding, supplementing, etc. the Quran. 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]
Gilberto, At 08:28 PM 1/16/2005, you wrote: >>On some level I sympathize. Mathematicians are trained to see statements as >>simply false on the strength of a single counter-example. But full >>mathematical rigor doesn't get you very far in the real world.<< The work I do isn't very utilitarian. ;-) >>At the same time, there are statements which do apply to some, most, or >>nearly all self-identified Christians. (Would you really give me a hard time >>if I said that most Christians believe that Jesus was a real person, believed >>to be the messiah and the son of God?)<< As an example, the three belief systems I mentioned before would all use those terms, but the meanings they would associate with them are far apart. 1. Official Roman Catholic dogmas would probably have the most traditional views on these subjects. 2. The Unification Church would say that Jesus was a real person (but more like the Jewish or Islamic concept of a "prophet"), a *failed* messiah (because of the failure to John the Baptist and others to accept Him), and the son of God in a metaphorical sense. 3. A Course in Miracles argues that Jesus was a real person, but that, in reality, we are all Jesus. The differences between persons are an illusion. (They are, like proponents of New Thought, extreme monists.) His messiahship was for the Piscean Age and was an example for us. (We should all be messiahs and sons of God.) >>Maybe I'm just having a memory lapse but I think that I've tried to add in >>qualifiers to my statements on this comparison of mine which we have been >>hitting back and forth like a dead horse. (i.e. "Most Christians", >>"Christians tend to..." "Muslims tend to.." "Muslims are more likely to...")<< Then, if you noticed it, I must be doing it more than you. ;-) >>But from another perspective, since most Christians are Catholic, then from >>another point of view they *are* the distribution (at least a large chunk of >>it). If I wanted to talk about what Christians believe world-wide, Catholic >>opinion would weigh very heavily in that picture. If the scope were limited >>to the United States, though, the situation might be different.<< Yes. >>What I'm saying is that if we are going to talk about world-wide >>Christianity, the fact that some Protestants might not think Catholics are >>Christian, that doesn't actually constitute an actual reason to exclude >>Catholics from world-wide Christianity (especially not as a part of a >>conversation between Bahais and a Muslim)<< I would not exclude anyone. I would *include* any group whose members claimed to be Christian. >>For example, some were careful to say that ilham and kashf couldn't provide >>new information which wasn't already contained in the prophetic sources (the >>Quran and sunnah) So they might provide interpretations of the Quran or >>insights into hadith, but probably wouldn't produce detailed specific new >>messages (like Fatima)<< As I said, I don't think that the word is important. Fatima may be a new message, but it is not generally regarded as subtracting from the authority of Christ, the Papacy, or the Bible. >>I could see how you would make that assumption. Maybe I've been unclear. I >>don't think Qadianis should be oppressed. [full stop] At the same time, I >>think "Islam" should mean something and not be some nebulous wishy washy >>category left to be defined by whoever chooses to use the name.<< Okay, but who gets to make that decision? Is it majority rules? >>So in the process of defining what it means to be "Muslim" I would actually >>want to be inclusive but certain things should be "dealbreakers". And given >>what my understanding of Islam is, finality of prophethood is one of them.<< That is the majority position. >>That said, I don't expect non-Muslims, especially not Bahais, to go along >>with that so the claim I'm making isn't just tautologically true. It's a >>valid as a generalization (as valid as such a generalization could be)<< On a normal distribution, I would imagine it would be the mean, median, and mode. However, measures of central tendency are, in themselves, incomplete. They need to be supplemented by other descriptive statistics, such as factor analysis, multiple regression, and path analysis. >>So if you want, throw in the Qadianis, the Ismailis, the Five Percent Nation >>of Gods and Earths, etc. But then on the Christian side you "throw in" >>Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, followers of Simon >>Kimbangu, Swedonborgians, Jim Jones, Reverend Moon, the Church of St. John >>Coltrane, the Snake handlers, the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches, >>Rastafarianism and all the rest.<< Yes, especially the Church of St. John Coltrane (St. John's African Orthodox Church). I've always liked jazz. ;-) >>What I'm saying is that the bulk of the people on the Christian side are much >>more open to the idea of future prophets. And people on the Muslim sid
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
If you > believe all the prophets are one, and God's religion is one, then the > Bahai faith is redundant and Islam (in the sense of following the > Quran and the sunnah of Muhammad, saaws) is sufficient. Are you > willing to go along with that conclusion? No Gilberto, I for one am not willing to go along with that conclusion. As several people have already pointed out, we believe that the "Last Hour" and "Judgment Day" prophesied in the Qur'an have occurred, and that the "Signs" of the last day have been fulfilled. To me, denying these signs would make me a denier of the Day of Judgment. Incidentally, you went on and on about the 1000 years interpretation by Baha'is leading to the lunar year 1260, but you never responded to my point about the specific sign referred to by Christ that led to the same year, 1844. Did you miss that message? I would just re-post the link, but it appears that escribe is down this weekend, so I am pasting it below. Patti > > "And there shall be a blast on the Trumpet, and all who are in the Heaven > > and all who are on the earth shall expire, save those whom God shall > > vouchsafe to live. Then shall there be another blast on it, and lo! arising > > they shall gaze around them: and the earth shall shine with the light of her > > Lord." (Qur'an 39:68-69) > > And what does it mean that "every soul shall be paid back fully what > it has done"? > > It seems weird. If judgment day is an event in ordinary human history > such that it was possible for most of the world to live through with > most people not even having an inkling that it was happening, is that > kind of odd? Are people "paid back" for their sins now, then at any > other time in history? > Gilberto, Hello again, I haven't written in a while because of a busy schedule and the fact that there are not enough hours in the day to just read all of the correspondence on this list recently (including links which I generally skip due to lack of time). First, my understanding is that every individual soul is judged at the time of death, while physically living individuals and societies are also judged at the appearance of a Manifestation. Also, as has already been stated, the appearance of Baha'u'llah accompanied major turning point in human history, inaugurating a new period in human history and ending the old 'age', which I understand as a special "Day of Judgment". "Resurrection" involves bringing the spiritually dead to spiritual life: "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many." (King James Bible, Matthew 27:52-53 ) Another sign used to indicate "Judgment Day" is the blast of a trumpet. Note that the trumpet blast also accompanied Moses: "And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the LORD descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice." Exodus 19:18-19 One specific instance where Christ speaks specifically of the sign of the end of the age (many interpret these signs as end of the world, but the Hebrew word used--"Aion"--can also mean the end of an age or period of time) is found in Matthew 24:3: "And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be ? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" He goes on to mention specifically: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)" (King James Bible, Matthew 24:15 ) The prophecy of the abomination of desolation leads specifically to 1844 (the year 1260 AH, 1000 years after the occultation of the 12th Imam). This time is recorded as the first major time in history that many Christian millenialists arose, based on this prophecy. The time calculations used here are specific, and also predicted the coming of Christ (details are found in "Some Answered Questions" and "Thief in the Night") using the same formula. Saint Augustine even cites this prophecy in "City of God" to justify the veracity of Christ. Also, Christ says the following, speaking of what I would understand as "Judgment Days"--the second & third watches which could signify multiple Manifestations: "And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through. Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not." Luke 12:38-40 Generally, the metaphor of the thief in the night means to me that the "Hour" wi
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
> 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. > Yes Gilberto, Paul goes on to point out that there is something greater than prophecy, which is "agape"--love: "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily PROPHETS (note that he ranks prophets second to apostles here), thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love (agape), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of PROPHECY, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love (agape), I am nothing." (1 Corinthians 12:28 - 13:2) Digressing a bit, I just ran across a different passage from the Bible, pointing out that not only have people had different understandings of the definition of "prophets", but also of "gods": "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. (King James Bible, John 10:34-37) Fundamentally, I think that the distinctions between various definitions of prophets are very tangential to the overriding truth of God. In "The Seven Valleys" Baha'u'llah points out that in progressing beyond the realm of limitation, i.e. one who may be approaching the realm of prophethood, by whatever definition one might use, "seeth in himself neither name nor fame nor rank". I think it is only us, with our limited minds, that tend to focus on such details: "After passing through the Valley of knowledge, which is the last plane of limitation, the wayfarer cometh to THE VALLEY OF UNITY and drinketh from the cup of the Absolute, and gazeth on the Manifestations of Oneness. In this station he pierceth the veils of plurality, fleeth from the worlds of the flesh, and ascendeth into the heaven of singleness. With the ear of God he heareth, with the eye of God he beholdeth the mysteries of divine creation. He steppeth into the sanctuary of the Friend, and shareth as an intimate the pavilion of the Loved One. He stretcheth out the hand of truth from the sleeve of the Absolute; he revealeth the secrets of power. He seeth in himself neither name nor fame nor rank, but findeth his own praise in praising God. (Baha'u'llah, The Seven Valleys, p. 17) And He goes on: "These statements are made in the sphere of that which is relative, because of the limitations of men. Otherwise, those personages who in a single step have passed over the world of the relative and the limited, and dwelt on the fair plane of the Absolute, and pitched their tent in the worlds of authority and command-have burned away these relativities with a single spark, and blotted out these words with a drop of dew. And they swim in the sea of the spirit, and soar in the holy air of light. Then what life have words, on such a plane, that "first" and "last" or other than these be seen or mentioned! In this realm, the first is the last itself, and the last is but the first." (Baha'u'llah, The Seven Valleys, p. 27) Now, back to the theme of love: The Gospel of Matthew states that: "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt LOVE the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment." 22:37-38 And, The Gospel of John points out that: "Greater LOVE has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends." 15:13 These two statements, in conjunction, illustrate to me the selflessness of love, through loving God and one's friends more than one's life (including even one's hope of eternal li
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:44:38 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Gilberto, > At 03:30 PM 1/16/2005, you wrote: > >>Yes. I don't mean just political oppression in a local context. I mean > >>where they fit in the large scheme of Christiainities in the world. > >>Virtually any kind of statement along the lines of "Muslims believe.." or > >>"Christians believe..." will be a generalization. But in life we make > >>certain generalizations just in order to speak, and point to trends.<< > As a sociologist of religion, I would never make those generalizations. I > don't > think that my voice or fingers would let the words out. ;-) Gilberto: On some level I sympathize. Mathematicians are trained to see statements as simply false on the strength of a single counter-example. But full mathematical rigor doesn't get you very far in the real world. Mark: How can one make most any generalization which would simultaneously hold true for Roman Catholicism, A Course in Miracles, and the Unification Church? Those who identify with each of these three belief systems define themselves as Christian. Gilberto: At the same time, there are statements which do apply to some, most, or nearly all self-identified Christians. (Would you really give me a hard time if I said that most Christians believe that Jesus was a real person, believed to be the messiah and the son of God?) Maybe I'm just having a memory lapse but I think that I've tried to add in qualifiers to my statements on this comparison of mine which we have been hitting back and forth like a dead horse. (i.e. "Most Christians", "Christians tend to..." "Muslims tend to.." "Muslims are more likely to...") > > >>In the context of discussing Christianities. Roman Catholicism is going to > >>represent a large near-typical mass of Christians because the majority of > >>Christians are Catholic.<< Mark: > However, if one was also attempting to study other Christianities, then Roman > Catholicism would skew the distribution. One would need to make a correction. Gilberto: But from another perspective, since most Christians are Catholic, then from another point of view they *are* the distribution (at least a large chunk of it). If I wanted to talk about what Christians believe world-wide, Catholic opinion would weigh very heavily in that picture. If the scope were limited to the United States, though, the situation might be different. Gilberto: > >>A small fundamentalist church which calls Catholics non-Christian, while > >>part of the picture, and deserving mention, are certainly not > >>representative of world Christianity.<< Mark: > I don't know where you live, but here in the American Bible belt, a great > many folks do not consider Roman Catholicism to be Christian. Gilberto: I don't think you understand me. I realize that opinion exists. At the church I grew up in, once or twice I remember the preacher said things which implied that Catholics weren't Christian. (Now that I think about it, since it was a Hispanic Protestant church alot of the members probably came from Catholic family backgrounds so it wouldn't be good to harp on the point all the time.) Gilberto: What I'm saying is that if we are going to talk about world-wide Christianity, the fact that some Protestants might not think Catholics are Christian, that doesn't actually constitute an actual reason to exclude Catholics from world-wide Christianity (especially not as a part of a conversation between Bahais and a Muslim) Gilberto: > >>So how are you defining "revelations" and on what basis would you say that > >>the Muslim Sufis you claimed to receive revelation but Pentecostals > >>wouldn't?<< Mark: > I was not defining it exactly, but it appears to me that there is a great > deal of similarity between what some Sufis claim to experience and the > populist revelations in Roman Catholicism which you had mentioned. In other > words, individual guidance, prophecy, revelation, visions, etc. (whatever > terms one wishes to use) are common in certain segments of two (largely) > authority-centered religious networks: Islam and Christianity. Gilberto: I think I need to find more specific discussions about this point from the Muslim side. I have a book which I've only skimmed called "Sharia and Sufism" (or something similar. About Sufism especially in India, especially related to Ahmad Sirhindi. I started to look up what it had to say about this topic and some descriptions of what is going on the Sufi side tend to be...very restricted. For example, some were careful to say that ilham and kashf couldn't provide new information which wasn't already contained in the prophetic sources (the Quran and sunnah) So they might provide interpretations of the Quran or insights into hadith, but probably wouldn't produce detailed specific new messages (like Fatima) [Jehovah's Witnesses and Arius ] Gilberto: > >>It seems that in the Bahai faith unity is more important than
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Hi, Gilberto, At 03:30 PM 1/16/2005, you wrote: >>Yes. I don't mean just political oppression in a local context. I mean where >>they fit in the large scheme of Christiainities in the world. Virtually any >>kind of statement along the lines of "Muslims believe.." or "Christians >>believe..." will be a generalization. But in life we make certain >>generalizations just in order to speak, and point to trends.<< As a sociologist of religion, I would never make those generalizations. I don't think that my voice or fingers would let the words out. ;-) How can one make most any generalization which would simultaneously hold true for Roman Catholicism, A Course in Miracles, and the Unification Church? Those who identify with each of these three belief systems define themselves as Christian. >>In the context of discussing Christianities. Roman Catholicism is going to >>represent a large near-typical mass of Christians because the majority of >>Christians are Catholic.<< However, if one was also attempting to study other Christianities, then Roman Catholicism would skew the distribution. One would need to make a correction. >>A small fundamentalist church which calls Catholics non-Christian, while part >>of the picture, and deserving mention, are certainly not representative of >>world Christianity.<< I don't know where you live, but here in the American Bible belt, a great many folks do not consider Roman Catholicism to be Christian. Are these fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals representative of global Christendom (whatever that might be)? No, but aside from the growth of fundamentalism and pentecostalism, especially in the U.S. and Australia, the religious character of the West can be pretty accurately described as post-Christian, secularist, and accommodationist. >>So how are you defining "revelations" and on what basis would you say that >>the Muslim Sufis you claimed to receive revelation but Pentecostals >>wouldn't?<< I was not defining it exactly, but it appears to me that there is a great deal of similarity between what some Sufis claim to experience and the populist revelations in Roman Catholicism which you had mentioned. In other words, individual guidance, prophecy, revelation, visions, etc. (whatever terms one wishes to use) are common in certain segments of two (largely) authority-centered religious networks: Islam and Christianity. >>Coming back.<< I was referring to the Qadians as Muslims who believe in continuing prophethood. >>Actually, that reminds me of an unrelated point which might be illuminating >>about other issues. Apparently the Bahai writings have some negative things >>to say about Arius.<< http://bahai-library.com/uhj/arius.html >>Which surprised me because from my perspective and the perspective of alot of >>Muslims who heard about him, he's seen as a step in the right direction >>(because he was an early Christian clergyman who did not believe Jesus was >>God) although in other respects he had an exalted view of Jesus). At some >>point, Arianism was even the official interpretation of Christianity for the >>Empire.<< Apparently the principal reason is that, regardless of the merits or lack of merits of various Arian positions, Shoghi Effendi placed unity over correctness. >>It seems that in the Bahai faith unity is more important than truth. I don't >>know. I guess that's my take on it.<< Yes, I anticipated what you wrote. Ideally, assuming people are sufficiently open-minded, critical, and unprejudiced, unity in diversity (consultation) should lead to the discovery of truth. >>Yes, not all, just sunnis, shias, and khawarij. I think philosophically your >>point is in some sense "too deep" for us to have a conversation because if >>you absolutely refuse to make any kind of generalization then it is hard to >>say anything at all.<< I am usually willing to generalize. However, I am hesitant to generalize in any way which disenfranchises a minority position (especially an oppressed minority like the Qadianis). >>I am actually comfortable with that idea and would insist on it if we were in >>a math class because categorical statements are only true if they are >>absolutely true. But in the rest of the world such a standard tends to put an >>end to conversation.<< As a sociologist of religion specializing in NRMs, I am very sympathetic to the problems of the Qadianis, even if they have not always been very respectful to my own religion. >>But there aren't just two levels. The concepts of revelation different in >>kind and extent. Alot of these Catholic examples are specific verbal messages >>which are said to come from God and are delivered to the world.<< Many of the Ismailis, including the Nizaris, also believe in continuing revelation after Muhammad. It is one of the reasons the Ismailis have been so controversial (and secretive). >>What do you think my argument is?<< You are arguing that Muslims, as
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto:I've tried hard to follow the theology and it just isn't plausible. Itoften seems like Bahai theology is a large exercise in having yourcake and eating too. Prophets are similar in some respects, anddifferent in other respects. I wouldn't call them "one". If youbelieve all the prophets are one, and God's religion is one, then theBahai faith is redundant and Islam (in the sense of following theQuran and the sunnah of Muhammad, saaws) is sufficient. Are youwilling to go along with that conclusion? JS: Gilberto, I'd say that what you are saying is reasonable, but I come to a different conclusion. First, these are my own views based on my limited knowledge, so take what I say, and have said, in that light. I agree with what you say, prophets are one on the one hand and are different on the other. To me, it means that both conditions are simultaneously true. **(A) What are prophets, really? Baha'u'llah says that the Prophets (Manifestations), "one and all" (Gleaning pg 47), have qualities that come from God, and are not from the Prophets' themselves: 1. "Exponents on earth of Him Who is the central Orb of the universe, its Essence and ultimate Purpose"2. "From Him (God) proceed their (Prophets') knowledge and power"3. "from Him (God) is derived their (Prophets') sovereignty"4. "beauty of their (Prophets') countenance is but a reflection of His (God's) image"5. "their (Prophets') revelation a sign of His (God's) deathless glory" They all have these qualities: 1. "They are the Treasuries of Divine knowledge"2. "[They are] the Repositories of celestial wisdom"3. "Through them is transmitted a grace that is infinite"4. "by them is revealed the Light that can never fade"5. "reflect the light of unfading glory" In other words, "By the revelation of these Gems of Divine virtue (Prophets) all the names and attributes of God, such as knowledge and power, sovereignty and dominion, mercy and wisdom, glory, bounty, and grace, are made manifest" **(B) Now, how are they the same? They are the same in that they all have these qualities mentioned above. "These attributes of God are not, and have never been, vouchsafed specially unto certain Prophets and withheld from others. Nay, all the Prophets of God, His well-favored, His holy and chosen Messengers are, without exception, the bearers of His names, and the embodiments of His attributes." **(C)So, how are they different? "They only differ in the intensity of their revelation, and the comparative potency of their light. Even as He hath revealed: "Some of the Apostles We have caused to excel the others." Don't misinterpret this to mean that the intensity difference of the prophets has to do with the fact that some Prophets were just endowed with more qualities. This is not so. Their difference has to do with what they EXPRESS. In other words, all the Prophets have the exact same qualities, but some choose to reveal more of it than the others. Why? It has to do with the condition and maturity of human beings. Like if I knew Calculus but taught first Grade, I would only teach addition and subtraction. If I taught 12th grade, I would teach calculus. So, someone could say that I as the first grade teacher did not know calculus because he only witnessed me teach simple number relationships all year. "the light of some of these attributes may or may not be outwardly revealed from these luminous Temples to the eyes of men. That a certain attribute of God hath not been outwardly manifested by these Essences of Detachment doth in no wise imply that they who are the Day Springs of God's attributes and the Treasuries of His holy names did not actually possess it." **(D)I am sure you are going to ask, what does Baha'u'llah say that Muhammad did not, so I'll wait until you ask it to write something about it... but basically, because the people of Muhammad's time were not ready to hear everything that He could have said, He did not. The 1st grade teacher can say that the lessons for the year are complete and ended, and that they have acquired all the skills needed (to move on to 2nd grade). The content in the Kitab-i-Iqan, for example, is an example of interpretations that Muhammad did not reveal. 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: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:31:40 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: JS > > In Islam, Muhammad Himself is a Prophet. Why? Because the > > word 'Khatam' is a reference that no other Muhammad will return until the > > End. > Gilberto: > No, that there will be no new prophets. Jesus already came before > and so he isn't a new prophet. And the Mahdi isn't a prophet. > JS: > But aren't all the prophet one? So Baha'u'llah in that sense, > Baha'u'llah isn't a new prophet either. Gilberto: I've tried hard to follow the theology and it just isn't plausible. It often seems like Bahai theology is a large exercise in having your cake and eating too. Prophets are similar in some respects, and different in other respects. I wouldn't call them "one". If you believe all the prophets are one, and God's religion is one, then the Bahai faith is redundant and Islam (in the sense of following the Quran and the sunnah of Muhammad, saaws) is sufficient. Are you willing to go along with that conclusion? -- "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 Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:01:15 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > > At 01:27 PM 1/16/2005, you wrote: > >>But self-defined fundamentalist Christians who actually believe that > >>Catholics aren't Christian are themselves a marginalized group.<< Mark: > I am afraid I don't understand your response to what I wrote. I thought we > were addressing approaches to prophetology, not marginalization. Gilberto: Correct Mark: > In any event, marginalization is relative. Roman Catholics have been > marginalized for some time in Russia. They are obviously not marginalized in > Italy or the Republic of Ireland. Gilberto: Yes. I don't mean just political oppression in a local context. I mean where they fit in the large scheme of Christiainities in the world. Virtually any kind of statement along the lines of "Muslims believe.." or "Christians believe..." will be a generalization. But in life we make certain generalizations just in order to speak, and point to trends. In the context of discussing Christianities. Roman Catholicism is going to represent a large near-typical mass of Christians because the majority of Christians are Catholic. A small fundamentalist church which calls Catholics non-Christian, while part of the picture, and deserving mention, are certainly not representative of world Christianity. Gilberto: > >>I gave you a specific example. Of at least one possible way to do it. > >>According to some Muslim scholars, a "nabi" is anyone who has received > >>revelation.<< > Based on that definition, no pentecostals I have ever known would equate > prophecy with receiving anything like wahy (thought there may be some). Rev. > Moon's and Swedenborg's views could perhaps be regarded as closer to wahy. I > have also personally known a couple of Muslim Sufis who claimed to receive > "revelations." Gilberto: So how are you defining "revelations" and on what basis would you say that the Muslim Sufis you claimed to receive revelation but Pentecostals wouldn't? > >>And so, for example Mary is seen by some as a prophet because of the > >>Annunciation. Gabriel appeared to her with a message, and gave her an > >>invitation to her own baby shower. Right? Moses' mother received revelation > >>to put her son in the water.<< Mark: > I don't know whether they were prophets. Gilberto: It doesn't matter. They aren't the issue. Its just an example to try to outline what the content of the concept of "nabi" might or might not include. Gilberto: > >>So in which case, Muslims are saying no more nabis are coming, while > >>Catholics and others are saying that such people continue to appear.<< Mark: > Some Muslims are saying that more prophets (at least one more) are coming. Gilberto: Coming back. Mark: I am unwilling to universalize (beyond the paradigms) the common Sunni view that Qadianis are not Muslims, just as I am unwilling to universalize the common fundamentalist view that Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians. Gilberto: Yes. That's understandable. I certainly wouldn't want to say that Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians. Gilberto: Actually, that reminds me of an unrelated point which might be illuminating about other issues. Apparently the Bahai writings have some negative things to say about Arius. Which surprised me because from my perspective and the perspective of alot of Muslims who heard about him, he's seen as a step in the right direction (because he was an early Christian clergyman who did not believe Jesus was God) although in other respects he had an exalted view of Jesus). At some point, Arianism was even the official interpretation of Christianity for the Empire. But what is weird to me is that Arius' views seem even closer to the Bahai perspective than the Muslim perspective (Arius still called Jesus the Son, said he was the first thing in creation) But Arius is criticized in the writings. http://bahai-library.com/?file=uhj_tablet_abdulbaha_arius.html It seems that in the Bahai faith unity is more important than truth. I don't know. I guess that's my take on it. Gilberto: > >>If you up the requirement and say a "nabi" is someone who receives > >>revelation of a message meant for a larger audience. Then Muslims are still > >>saying no more nabis are coming.<< > Mark: > Some Muslims, not all. > Gilberto: Yes, not all, just sunnis, shias, and khawarij. I think philosophically your point is in some sense "too deep" for us to have a conversation because if you absolutely refuse to make any kind of generalization then it is hard to say anything at all. I am actually comfortable with that idea and would insist on it if we were in a math class because categorical statements are only true if they are absolutely true. But in the rest of the world such a standard tends to put an end to conversation. Gilberto: > >>But in the Catholic case you still have something like the secrets of > >>Fatima which deals with world-wide events like the f
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 01:27 PM 1/16/2005, you wrote: >>But self-defined fundamentalist Christians who actually believe that >>Catholics aren't Christian are themselves a marginalized group.<< I am afraid I don't understand your response to what I wrote. I thought we were addressing approaches to prophetology, not marginalization. In any event, marginalization is relative. Roman Catholics have been marginalized for some time in Russia. They are obviously not marginalized in Italy or the Republic of Ireland. >>The majority of self-identified Christians overall are themselves Catholic.<< Yes, but I don't see how that is relevant to the subject. >>And Ecumenism has made at least a few inroads and there are alot of >>Protestants who, even though they might disagree with Catholics about this or >>that, are at least willing to call them "Christian".<< The fundamentalists I was referring to would have nothing to do with the ecumenical movement. >>I gave you a specific example. Of at least one possible way to do it. >>According to some Muslim scholars, a "nabi" is anyone who has received >>revelation.<< Based on that definition, no pentecostals I have ever known would equate prophecy with receiving anything like wahy (thought there may be some). Rev. Moon's and Swedenborg's views could perhaps be regarded as closer to wahy. I have also personally known a couple of Muslim Sufis who claimed to receive "revelations." >>And so, for example Mary is seen by some as a prophet because of the >>Annunciation. Gabriel appeared to her with a message, and gave her an >>invitation to her own baby shower. Right? Moses' mother received revelation >>to put her son in the water.<< I don't know whether they were prophets. >>So in which case, Muslims are saying no more nabis are coming, while >>Catholics and others are saying that such people continue to appear.<< Some Muslims are saying that more prophets (at least one more) are coming. I am unwilling to universalize (beyond the paradigms) the common Sunni view that Qadianis are not Muslims, just as I am unwilling to universalize the common fundamentalist view that Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians. >>If you up the requirement and say a "nabi" is someone who receives revelation >>of a message meant for a larger audience. Then Muslims are still saying no >>more nabis are coming.<< Some Muslims, not all. >>But in the Catholic case you still have something like the secrets of Fatima >>which deals with world-wide events like the fall of communism etc.<< Just because the word "revelation" may be used does not indicate that the meaning is the same. Some Roman Catholics may use the word "revelation" to describe Fatima, Lourdes, etc. However, as with most Muslims, they would not, for the most part, place personal experiences are on the same level as those of Christ Himself. >>It's common for Quakers in the sense that everyone has the inner light. It's >>common among pentecostals because there are many people who would have the >>experience of speaking in tongues and claiming to get messages from God that >>way. Sufis say certain phenomena are possible but I wouldn't call them >>common. It's like a miracle given to saints, not necessarily everyone who >>joins the order.<< So you are basing your argument on frequency? >>Not just stopping there but because it [use of the word prophet] indicates an >>underlying difference.<< I don't think that words indicate anything but the use of those words. >>Thanks for including the link. That description is from an anti-Sufi website >>which is trying to descredit Sufism as a whole and isn't a reliable source of >>information about Sufism. The author is accusing Sufis of claiming revelation >>as a way of refuting them.<< What about the following: "Every time he [Bayazid] had a Divine revelation, he fasten a zunar (a Sufi belt) and he had over seventy zunar. When the time of his passing was close, he went to the altar, put on one zunar, an old reversed rob, backward hat and said: Oh, Allah, this is how I see myself. I am not offering You my life's mortification, my constant prayers, my day and night fasting, You know that nothing will take me from You. I confess that I am shameful, I have nothing, You are the One who has given me all this fortune. I witness that there is no god but You. Your have accepted me. Purify me from my errors, forgive my faults, wash away my shortcomings." http://www.uwaiysi.org/features_archive/2001_oct.html >>http://www.alislam.co.za/file.asp?ID=56<< Obviously, there are different opinions on the subject. 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 b
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto:The followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (who claimed to be the Mahdi andthe Second Coming of Christ) identify themselves as Muslim. Themovement split into "Qadianis" who say he was a prophet and "Lahoris"who don't. There have been laws on the books in Pakistan declaringthem (at least the ones who say he was a prophet) to be non-Muslim. JS: Not sure about their beliefs or views. Gilberto:And did not say that they were. (But I also wouldn't necessarilyexclude it, for example the Unification Church teaches that Rev. Moonwas the Second Coming and his writings are given a special status) JS: Don't know much about the Moonies either. > In Islam, Muhammad Himself is a Prophet. Why? Because the> word 'Khatam' is a reference that no other Muhammad will return until the> End. Gilberto: No, that there will be no new prophets. Jesus already came before andso he isn't a new prophet. And the Mahdi isn't a prophet. JS: But aren't all the prophet one? So Baha'u'llah in that sense, Baha'u'llah isn't a new prophet either.G: It's not clear to me how you are using "Christs". It literally means"annointed" and kings were traditionally annointed. So in some sense,many people are Christs. Even Cyrus the persian king who ended theBabylonian captivity is called "christ" in the Bible. And in someChristian circles when a person is called to preach they talk abouthaving "received an annointing" in some sense. J: I just meant "Jesuses". > The Christian prophet does not equal the Qur'an prophet because in the> Christian sense, Jesus was not a Prophet.G: !?!? Jesus is called a prophet in the Bible though. He's just also alot more.JS: Yes, I understand that, but since they say that Jesus is the Son of God, they say he is more than a Prophet, more than Moses, for example. 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: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:21:34 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Gilberto, Hi Mark. Gilberto: > >>In terms of the above, there is a huge difference between how the issue is > >>played out in this case. In the case of Qadianis, there is a strong > >>consensus that they actually aren't Muslim, specifically for the reason > >>that they say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet.<< Mark: > There is also a huge consensus among self-defined fundamentalist Christians > that members of Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract > Society, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, etc. are not > Christians. Gilberto: But self-defined fundamentalist Christians who actually believe that Catholics aren't Christian are themselves a marginalized group. The majority of self-identified Christians overall are themselves Catholic. And Ecumenism has made at least a few inroads and there are alot of Protestants who, even though they might disagree with Catholics about this or that, are at least willing to call them "Christian". Gilberto: > >>The issue is important enough and central enough in Islam, that there is > >>another group of Lahori Ahmadis who distance themselves from the first > >>group and make a point of being careful not to say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a > >>prophet.<< Mark: > I know. However, having read many of the works of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, > I think that both interpretations can be justified. Gilberto: Yes, but you also think the Church of the Sacred Yellow Pages can be justified... lol.. Anyway, I'm not really commenting on which side of the split is most justified. I'm saying this is an emphasized enough issue in Islam that it split the movement. Gilberto: > >>Finality of prophethood, simply is not that clear, central, or as important > >>an idea in Christianity.<< Mark: > I don't understand why you think there is a basis for comparison. From my > perspective, you are saying, Finality of "the word prophet" is not as clear > in these two religious networks. You have never established that that the > qur'anic teaching on nabiyyin has any relationship to any particular > Christian view of prophets, Gilberto: I gave you a specific example. Of at least one possible way to do it. According to some Muslim scholars, a "nabi" is anyone who has received revelation. And so, for example Mary is seen by some as a prophet because of the Annunciation. Gabriel appeared to her with a message, and gave her an invitation to her own baby shower. Right? Moses' mother received revelation to put her son in the water. They didn't found religions. They didn't necessarily get a commission to pass a message to other people. But they received revelation. If these people are "nabis" then nabi would pretty clearly include those who have received private revelation (in the Catholic sense). So in which case, Muslims are saying no more nabis are coming, while Catholics and others are saying that such people continue to appear. If you up the requirement and say a "nabi" is someone who receives revelation of a message meant for a larger audience. Then Muslims are still saying no more nabis are coming. But in the Catholic case you still have something like the secrets of Fatima which deals with world-wide events like the fall of communism etc. > >>And the group which accepts different forms of prophethood is more > >>prevalent and varied in Christianity. The Mormons say Joseph Smith was a > >>prophet. Seventh Day Adventists have Ellen G. White. Quakers say everyone > >>has access to the inner light.<< > > All I will say is that, in English, the application of the word prophet to > modernity is more common in the Christianities than in the Islams. Gilberto: Fair enough for now. > >>Catholics and Orthodox Christians clearly talk about individuals in the > >>present day receive special revelations from God with a clear commission to > >>deliver the message to others. That's not just some isolated, localized > >>minority of Christians.<< > As I have said before, if you are defining a prophet as one who receives > some kind of revelation or communication from God, it is a common notion > > among many Sufis and Christian mystics, such as Quakers and > pentecostals. It's common for Quakers in the sense that everyone has the inner light. It's common among pentecostals because there are many people who would have the experience of speaking in tongues and claiming to get messages from God that way. Sufis say certain phenomena are possible but I wouldn't call them common. It's like a miracle given to saints, not necessarily everyone who joins the order. Mark: > You seem to want to focus on the word "prophet" itself. > Not just stopping there but because it indicates an underlying difference. > >>Sufis make a point of saying that whatever miracles or powers they might > >>attribute to saints, that it is different from being a prophet. The kashf > >>and
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:51:51 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In terms of the above, there is a huge difference between how the > issue is played out in this case. In the case of Qadianis, there is a > strong consensus that they actually aren't Muslim, specifically for > the reason that they say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet. > JS> Some questions I would ask are, do the Ahmadis who are believers in > Ahmad's prophethood, themselves, self-designated non-Muslims, or are > they non-Muslims because they are declared as such by the Muslim > nation or by Pakistan? Gilberto: The followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (who claimed to be the Mahdi and the Second Coming of Christ) identify themselves as Muslim. The movement split into "Qadianis" who say he was a prophet and "Lahoris" who don't. There have been laws on the books in Pakistan declaring them (at least the ones who say he was a prophet) to be non-Muslim. > Also, do they believe that Ahmad is a prophet like unto Muhammad, > or a prophet of lesser stature than Muhammad? The ones who claim he was prophet don't say he was greater than Muhammad. > If a prophet of lesser > stature, then I would say that 'prophet' is a loose word used in many > different ways. It may be that 'prophet' is another way to say saint. I think this whole issue is tricky. > G: Finality of prophethood, simply is not that clear, central, or as > important an idea in Christianity. And the group which accepts > different forms of prophethood is more prevalent and varied in > Christianity. > > JS>: I think one reason why I do not see what you are saying is that I am > taking Muhammad's declaration of 'katam' in the same light as Jesus's > declaration that he will return at the end of time as he went up to heaven > from the cave. Neither event will happen until the End Time. > All I'm doing is trying to describe what Christians believe and what Muslims believe. I'm not necessarily saying anything about what Jesus or Muhammad (peace be upon both) actually intended, especially not from a Bahai perspective. > Prophethood, as accepted by some Christian sects, does not mean that > these prophets, Joseph Smith. White, or others, are the Return of Christ. And did not say that they were. (But I also wouldn't necessarily exclude it, for example the Unification Church teaches that Rev. Moon was the Second Coming and his writings are given a special status) > All > these groups, even Mormons, preach that Jesus will return later. > Therefore, their view of 'Prophethood' does not equal the Islamic view of > Prophethood. I don't know what you mean. Even in Islam, Jesus will return later. What does that prove? > In Islam, Muhammad Himself is a Prophet. Why? Because the > word 'Khatam' is a reference that no other Muhammad will return until the > End. No, that there will be no new prophets. Jesus already came before and so he isn't a new prophet. And the Mahdi isn't a prophet. > In Christianity, though some recognize prophets, none of them > recognize these prophets as Christs. It's not clear to me how you are using "Christs". It literally means "annointed" and kings were traditionally annointed. So in some sense, many people are Christs. Even Cyrus the persian king who ended the Babylonian captivity is called "christ" in the Bible. And in some Christian circles when a person is called to preach they talk about having "received an annointing" in some sense. > > The Christian prophet does not equal the Qur'an prophet because in the > Christian sense, Jesus was not a Prophet. !?!? Jesus is called a prophet in the Bible though. He's just also alot more. "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]
Hi, Gilberto, I wrote: If you mean the quotation by somebody from one of the Orthodox churches - yes, I read the entire piece. Just as there are a minority of Christians who believe in future prophets, there are a minority of Muslims (Qadiani Ahmadis) who believe the same. You replied: >>So in what sense are you using the term prophet and applying it to both >>religions?<< I am not making any assumptions about the meanings they may associate with the word - just that they both believe in prophets. >>In terms of the above, there is a huge difference between how the issue is >>played out in this case. In the case of Qadianis, there is a strong consensus >>that they actually aren't Muslim, specifically for the reason that they say >>Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet.<< There is also a huge consensus among self-defined fundamentalist Christians that members of Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, etc. are not Christians. On the other hand, to members of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, all other branches of Christendom are false Christianities. >>The issue is important enough and central enough in Islam, that there is >>another group of Lahori Ahmadis who distance themselves from the first group >>and make a point of being careful not to say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a >>prophet.<< I know. However, having read many of the works of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, I think that both interpretations can be justified. >>Finality of prophethood, simply is not that clear, central, or as important >>an idea in Christianity.<< I don't understand why you think there is a basis for comparison. From my perspective, you are saying, Finality of "the word prophet" is not as clear in these two religious networks. You have never established that that the qur'anic teaching on nabiyyin has any relationship to any particular Christian view of prophets, such as with the Orthodox piece you posted. >>And the group which accepts different forms of prophethood is more prevalent >>and varied in Christianity. The Mormons say Joseph Smith was a prophet. >>Seventh Day Adventists have Ellen G. White. Quakers say everyone has access >>to the inner light.<< All I will say is that, in English, the application of the word prophet to modernity is more common in the Christianities than in the Islams. However, I don't see the significance of that statement. >>Catholics and Orthodox Christians clearly talk about individuals in the >>present day receive special revelations from God with a clear commission to >>deliver the message to others. That's not just some isolated, localized >>minority of Christians.<< As I have said before, if you are defining a prophet as one who receives some kind of revelation or communication from God, it is a common notion among many Sufis and Christian mystics, such as Quakers and pentecostals. You seem to want to focus on the word "prophet" itself. >>Sufis make a point of saying that whatever miracles or powers they might >>attribute to saints, that it is different from being a prophet. The kashf and >>ilham attributed to saints is sometimes described as unveiling or intuition.<< Muhammad clearly distinguished Himself from others (not nabii) by His receiving of wahy. However, would all Sufis understand what He said as a restriction? "What does it mean when a Muslim does not read or write? It means he does not learn, and if he does not, how, then, can he worship Allah in the manner that would qualify him to become His constant servant and His favourite? Al-Junaid's assertion actually means that the murid is to be kept ignorant and "pure" enough to occupy himself with dthikr or wird, so that he may join the ranks of those who receive "direct revelation from God," i.e. esoteric knowledge." http://www.qss.org/articles/sufism/sufi17.html It is unclear to me as to whether this writer is allowing for wahy by a murid or is using "revelation" in a broad sense to include irfaan. However, simply from the standpoint of making comparison with certain Christian groups, I don't see the practical difference between receiving divine revelation and receiving divine gnosis. In any event, from my own reading, I don't think that the view that individuals cannot receive wahy, as it is defined, is universal. 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://w
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
In terms of the above, there is a huge difference between how theissue is played out in this case. In the case of Qadianis, there is astrong consensus that they actually aren't Muslim, specifically forthe reason that they say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet. JS> Some questions I would ask are, do the Ahmadis who are believers in Ahmad's prophethood, themselves, self-designated non-Muslims, or are they non-Muslims because they are declared as such by the Muslim nation or by Pakistan? Also, do they believe that Ahmad is a prophet like unto Muhammad, or a prophet of lesser stature than Muhammad? If a prophet of lesser stature, then I would say that 'prophet' is a loose word used in many different ways. It may be that 'prophet' is another way to say saint. If they believe Ahmad is equal to Muhammad, where is Ahmad's Book, and is it as miraculous as the Qur'an? G: Finality of prophethood, simply is not that clear, central, or asimportant an idea in Christianity. And the group which acceptsdifferent forms of prophethood is more prevalent and varied inChristianity. JS>: I think one reason why I do not see what you are saying is that I am taking Muhammad's declaration of 'katam' in the same light as Jesus's declaration that he will return at the end of time as he went up to heaven from the cave. Neither event will happen until the End Time. Prophethood, as accepted by some Christian sects, does not mean that these prophets, Joseph Smith. White, or others, are the Return of Christ. All these groups, even Mormons, preach that Jesus will return later. Therefore, their view of 'Prophethood' does not equal the Islamic view of Prophethood. In Islam, Muhammad Himself is a Prophet. Why? Because the word 'Khatam' is a reference that no other Muhammad will return until the End. In Christianity, though some recognize prophets, none of them recognize these prophets as Christs. Christ (the Real Prophet) based on Christian thought, was the khatam until the End Time. The Christian prophet does not equal the Qur'an prophet because in the Christian sense, Jesus was not a Prophet. None of the Prophets accepted by some Christian sects are Christ or equal to Christ. The Qur'anic Prophet is equal to Muhammad and to Jesus. Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! What will yours do? __ 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 Sun, 16 Jan 2005 03:29:23 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Gilberto: > >>Have you looked at what I posted on Christian prophets (that was in the > >>subject).<< Mark: > If you mean the quotation by somebody from one of the Orthodox churches - > yes, I read the entire piece. Just as there are a minority of Christians who > believe in future prophets, there are a minority of Muslims (Qadiani Ahmadis) > who believe the same. Gilberto: So in what sense are you using the term prophet and applying it to both religions? In terms of the above, there is a huge difference between how the issue is played out in this case. In the case of Qadianis, there is a strong consensus that they actually aren't Muslim, specifically for the reason that they say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet. The issue is important enough and central enough in Islam, that there is another group of Lahori Ahmadis who distance themselves from the first group and make a point of being careful not to say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet. Finality of prophethood, simply is not that clear, central, or as important an idea in Christianity. And the group which accepts different forms of prophethood is more prevalent and varied in Christianity. The Mormons say Joseph Smith was a prophet. Seventh Day Adventists have Ellen G. White. Quakers say everyone has access to the inner light. Pentecostals have a strong ongoing belief in the activity of the Holy Spirit. Catholics and Orthodox Christians clearly talk about individuals in the present day receive special revelations from God with a clear commission to deliver the message to others. That's not just some isolated, localized minority of Christians. > Don't Sufis and Ismailis also believe in people after Muhammad coming with > revelation? I'm not superfamiliar with the Ismailis. Sufis make a point of saying that whatever miracles or powers they might attribute to saints, that it is different from being a prophet. The kashf and ilham attributed to saints is sometimes described as unveiling or intuition. Some might say it would be enhanced, or becomes possible after much dhikr, and spiritual practice, its something that you might develop or work at. I don't think the same could necessarily be said about prophetic revelation (wahy). 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]
Gilberto, At 10:04 PM 1/15/2005, you wrote: >>[28] And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, >>third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, >>administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. [29] Are all apostles? >>Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? [30] Do all possess >>gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? [31] But >>earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent >>way.<< As I see it, he is expanding on his idea that the Holy Spirit is manifested according to its own will. He also said that all Christians in the church at Corinth could prophesy: "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged " (I Corinthians 14:31) >>In the course of this discussion I've given several different examples. (On >>multiple occasions) Please just look them up.<< I have looked up all the biblical verses you referenced. >>Yes. They were talking about exclusivity and didn't really address the kind >>of finality I've been talking about. (Remember one doesn't imply the other).<< Most of them *did* address the issue of the finality of Christ. I do not know whether they address the kind of finality you have been talking about. >>Have you looked at what I posted on Christian prophets (that was in the >>subject).<< If you mean the quotation by somebody from one of the Orthodox churches - yes, I read the entire piece. Just as there are a minority of Christians who believe in future prophets, there are a minority of Muslims (Qadiani Ahmadis) who believe the same. >>Yes, I know that. You asked me if I saw him as a messenger. And I gave you my >>opinion. But what we were talking about what Christians believe about Paul. >>And I agree with you. Christians see Paul as a great deal more than what I >>described. And that would tend to support my point. Christianity is more open >>to the possibility of people after Jesus coming with revelation.<< Don't Sufis and Ismailis also believe in people after Muhammad coming with revelation? 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 Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:32:38 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Gilberto, Mark: > I prefer not to construct such broad (macro) definitions. In my > experience, they are rarely productive, and they tend to dilute the > various concepts pointed to by the words.<< Gilberto: > >>If that were the case, your objection should be that comparing the > >>religions doesn't make sense. Not that I'm wrong. And if the above is the > >>case, you can't say that both Islam and Christianity assesrt the finality > >>of prophethood.<< Mark: > My objection *is* that comparing religions, unless justified by the data, > does not make much sense. Gilberto: I understand and respect where you are coming from even if I might not agree. Mark: > To Paul, all Christians can be prophets and prophesy. > You replied: > >>(many Christians, but not necessarily all)<< > > However, he apparently believed that *all* Christians could be prophets. 1 Corinthians 12 [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. 12] For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. [13] For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body -- Jews or Greeks, slaves or free -- and all were made to drink of one Spirit. [14] For the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15] If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. [16] And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. [17] If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? [18] But as it is, God arranged the organs in the body, each one of them, as he chose. [19] If all were a single organ, where would the body be? [20] As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. [28] And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. [29] Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? [30] Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? [31] But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way. [..] Gilberto: > >>After all, the Bible doesn't clearly say that no further prophets are > >>coming. In fact, it definitely says that more prophets will be coming.<< Mark: > Where does Paul say that more "prophets will be coming"? In the course of this discussion I've given several different examples. (On multiple occasions) Please just look them up. > >>From a Muslim perspective, when Bob comes around, the above would be less > >>likely to happen because the religion clearly says that Muhammad was the > >>last prophet and messenger and no more are coming.<< Mark: > Have you looked at those URLs I posted about the finality and exclusivity of > Christ? Gilberto: Yes. They were talking about exclusivity and didn't really address the kind of finality I've been talking about. (Remember one doesn't imply the other). Have you looked at what I posted on Christian prophets (that was in the subject) . I also understand that there are variations of belief among communities calling themselves Muslim and Christian. So ultimately this is about general trends and whatever one says, one could probably find exceptions. Gilberto: > >>Incidentally, I've been noticing that in the course of these discussions, > >>when you and others have been editing, you've tended to break the flow of > >>the discussion.<< Mark: > One of the policies of this list, as Susan and I developed them, is that only > as much should be quoted to make the response understandable. I try to strike > a balance between too much and too little quoting. I don't know if I always > succeed. > Gilberto: Alot of the time I've noticed both you and Susan leave a comment of mine refering to some bit of text and the text itself is gone. For example, the exchange below was about Paul but no one could tell that just by looking at your letter.. Gilberto: > >>No, I don't think he was a messenger. But I think for Christians he was a > >>person who apparently never met Jesus in the flesh, bu
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Hi, Gilberto, I wrote: I prefer not to construct such broad (macro) definitions. In my experience, they are rarely productive, and they tend to dilute the various concepts pointed to by the words.<< You replied: >>If that were the case, your objection should be that comparing the religions >>doesn't make sense. Not that I'm wrong. And if the above is the case, you >>can't say that both Islam and Christianity assesrt the finality of >>prophethood.<< My objection *is* that comparing religions, unless justified by the data, does not make much sense. That was my point about constructing macro definitions and universalizing the word "prophet." I wrote: In any event, I think I made a pretty good case for the differences between the Pauline and the qur'anic views of "prophet." You replied: >>Again see above.<< Exactly. I do not assume that concepts are related unless demonstrated. I wrote: To Paul, all Christians can be prophets and prophesy. You replied: >>(many Christians, but not necessarily all)<< However, he apparently believed that *all* Christians could be prophets. >>After all, the Bible doesn't clearly say that no further prophets are coming. >>In fact, it definitely says that more prophets will be coming.<< Where does Paul say that more "prophets will be coming"? He said that all Christians can be prophets. That is not exactly the same thing. Or are you speaking of the some passage in the Tanakh? >>From a Muslim perspective, when Bob comes around, the above would be less >>likely to happen because the religion clearly says that Muhammad was the last >>prophet and messenger and no more are coming.<< Have you looked at those URLs I posted about the finality and exclusivity of Christ? >>ALL I've been saying is that this is a difference between Christianity and >>Islam.<< There are many differences, but I don't think that is one of them. >>Do you agree or disagree?<< The latter. >>[Mark said that under Paul's conception there was some kind of end of >>prophecy..<< No, I didn't say that. I said that most churches do not believe in modern-day prophets and that many of them argue that prophecy ended with the canonization of the New Testament. >>Incidentally, I've been noticing that in the course of these discussions, >>when you and others have been editing, you've tended to break the flow of the >>discussion.<< One of the policies of this list, as Susan and I developed them, is that only as much should be quoted to make the response understandable. I try to strike a balance between too much and too little quoting. I don't know if I always succeed. >>No, I don't think he was a messenger. But I think for Christians he was a >>person who apparently never met Jesus in the flesh, but appeared after him, >>and received inspiration from God, which he wrote down to pass on to future >>generations.<< Some Protestants see him as a great deal more. 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 Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:38:00 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 09:56 PM 1/14/2005, Gilberto wrote: > >>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.<< Mark: > I prefer not to construct such broad (macro) definitions. In my experience, > they are rarely productive, and they tend to dilute the various concepts > pointed to by the words. Gilberto: If that were the case, your objection should be that comparing the religions doesn't make sense. Not that I'm wrong. And if the above is the case, you can't say that both Islam and Christianity assesrt the finality of prophethood. Mark: In any event, I think I made a pretty good case for the differences between the Pauline and the qur'anic views of "prophet." Gilberto: Again see above. Mark: To Paul, all Christians can be prophets and prophesy. Gilberto: (many Christians, but not necessarily all) YES. YES. YES. So what does that mean. So suppose that in a Christian context, someone pops up and says "Hi, my name is Bob. God spoke with me. And he gave me a message to pass on to Y'all" A Christian will theoretically hear them out because they accept that prophets can still come. They might be skeptical. But they could probe further. They could hear what Bob has to say and see if he is a true prophet or a false prohet. After all, the Bible doesn't clearly say that no further prophets are coming. In fact, it definitely says that more prophets will be coming. >From a Muslim perspective, when Bob comes around, the above would be less likely to happen because the religion clearly says that Muhammad was the last prophet and messenger and no more are coming. ALL I've been saying is that this is a difference between Christianity and Islam. Do you agree or disagree? [Mark said that under Paul's conception there was some kind of end of prophecy.. Incidentally, I've been noticing that in the course of these discussions, when you and others have been editing, you've tended to break the flow of the discussion. And what is especially difficult is when I make a comment, that refers to a certain passage, but you remove the antecedents. So then if someone following along wants to make sense of the flow, the antedent needs to be put back in again. Like here...] Gilberto: > >>That would be alot more convincing if Paul didn't write more of the Bible > >>than any other person, including Jesus.<< Mark: > So are you saying that you regard Paul as a Prophet and Messenger? Gilberto: No, I don't think he was a messenger. But I think for Christians he was a person who apparently never met Jesus in the flesh, but appeared after him, and received inspiration from God, which he wrote down to pass on to future generations. 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]
Gilberto, At 01:43 AM 1/15/2005, you wrote: >>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.<< By bringing a new book, I was referring to replacing or circumventing the authority of Christ. 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 09:56 PM 1/14/2005, you wrote: >>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.<< I prefer not to construct such broad (macro) definitions. In my experience, they are rarely productive, and they tend to dilute the various concepts pointed to by the words. In any event, I think I made a pretty good case for the differences between the Pauline and the qur'anic views of "prophet." To Paul, all Christians can be prophets and prophesy. >>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.<< Sufis do not believe in "the possibility of future kinds of communication from God"? >>Not exactly. Consider 1 Corinthians 12<< Paul is emphasizing that it is the prerogative of the Holy Spirit how it is manifested and by whom. However, he also said: "For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged " (I Corinthians 14:31) >>Not everyone was a prophet. Prophet is still a meaningful category.<< My impression is that Paul regarded a "prophet" as a category of manifestation, not as a category of persons. >>And what you are calling ethnocentrism I would probably call exclusivism (not >>finality)<< I said christocentrism (not ethnocentrism). However, in terms of finality: http://www.raptureready.com/resource/hunt/dh15.html http://www.bibleviews.com/NTFinality.html http://www.faithalone.org/journal/bookreviews/pinnock.htm There are seemingly countless others which address similar topics. >>That would be alot more convincing if Paul didn't write more of the Bible >>than any other person, including Jesus.<< So are you saying that you regard Paul as a Prophet and Messenger? 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]
"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." Dear Gilberto, Are we looking at what Christianity and Islam actually teach at that point or how we want to recreate them? "> 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." Did I say anything about Jesus? "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." On the contrary, calling the Bible and the Qur'an separate revelations is a red herring. The Bible is the collection of *all* those scriptures which Christians regard as valid for the community of faith as a whole. Any text which is not contained in the Bible is not recognized as scripture by definition. "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." Actually I wasn't sure whether you misunderstood Mark or simply misspoke. "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." Yes, it is inspired scripture. It is not revelation in the same sense the Qur'an is. The New Testament bears witness to Jesus, much as the hadith does. It is not a separate revelation. Ultimately it is Jesus Himself, not the Bible that constitutes the Word of God for Christians. 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]
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:57:47 -0600, Susan Maneck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "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." > > Dear Gilberto, > > Are we looking at what Christianity and Islam actually teach at that point > or how we want to recreate them? At what they actually teach (recognizing that there will be variety) > > "> 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." > > Did I say anything about Jesus? > That's a part of what I've been saying all along. Muslims and their attitudes about revelation after Muhammad. Christians and their attitudes about revelation after Jesus. Gilberto: > "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." Susan: > On the contrary, calling the Bible and the Qur'an separate revelations is a > red herring. The Bible is the collection of *all* those scriptures which > Christians regard as valid for the community of faith as a whole. Any text > which is not contained in the Bible is not recognized as scripture by > definition. > Gilberto: That's not exactly true. In the Catholic case, the Pope can certainly come up with binding authoritative infallible statements outside the Bible. But on top of that one interesting issue is that the Bible itself has alot of tiny references to other texts which aren't contained between its pages. Check out http://www.bible.ca/b-canon-books-mentioned-bible.htm or other similar sites So the Bible mentions books which are presumably inspired here. "Now the acts of King David, from first to last, are written in the chronicles of Samuel the seer, in the chronicles of Nathan the prophet and in the chronicles of Gad the seer" 1 Chronicles 29:29 "Then Samuel told the people the ordinances of the kingdom, and wrote them in the book and placed it before the Lord." 1 Samuel 10:25 "Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the records of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?" 2 Chronicles 9:29 "Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the records of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?" 2 Chronicles 9:29 "Now the rest of the acts of Abijah, and his ways and his words are written in the treatise of the prophet Iddo." 2 Chronicles 13:22 So since the Bible is pointing to and refering the reader to these other places they were presumably validly from God. > "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." > > Actually I wasn't sure whether you misunderstood Mark or simply misspoke. > Yeah, mis-typed. __ 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 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: 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: 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: 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
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
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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
The PEN [was]: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist/m43523.html My dear Gilberto writes: **This whole discussion gives me the impression that people in here are just resisting what I'm saying for some kind of bizarre and perverse reason which isn't clear to me .Gilberto** http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist/m43523.html My dear Gilberto This is not the case. I have read all your letters. You have written more than 300 letters to this list and nearly 100 since [this servant] one has been closely addressed by your good self in the vocative case!. What is happening is that both you and the Bahá'ís on this list have a profound appreciation of the Station of Muhammad and all Gods Manifestations. And it is a necessary consequence of this exalted conception that finality in terms of temporality and limitation is discussed at length and not accepted ab initio. After all in our Message to the Religious Leaders millions of which have been distributed but not responded to as yet our Supreme Institution wrote: * What others believe or do not believe cannot be the authority in any individual conscience worthy of the name. What the above words do unequivocally urge is renunciation of all those CLAIMS TO EXCLUSIVITY OR FINALITY that, in winding their roots around the life of the spirit, have BEEN THE GREATEST SINGLE FACTOR IN SUFFOCATING IMPULSES to unity and in promoting hatred and violence*** THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE [added emphasis] http://bahai-library.com/published.uhj/religious.leaders.html So Bahá'ís agree with the following exalted conceptions of the Reality of the Manifestations of God. The World of the Supreme Pen. The World of the Reality of realities. The Logos. The Word. The only thing the Bahá'ís would submit that in their daily Obligatory Prayer the Bahá'ís say. The Maalik has come. *** God testifieth that there is none other God but Him. His are the kingdoms of Revelation and of creation. He, in truth, hath manifested Him Who is the Day-Spring of Revelation, Who conversed on Sinai, through Whom the Supreme Horizon hath been made to shine, and the Lote-Tree beyond which there is no passing hath spoken, and through Whom the call hath been proclaimed unto all who are in heaven and on earth: "Lo, the All-Possessing [qad ata al-MAALIK] is come (Baha'u'llah: Prayers and Meditations, Page: 315) Exalted Station of the Reality Confirmed. In so many many Islamic texts we read: Muhammad is the First to be created, the First to be mentioned, the First to be honoured. When God ordered the Pen to write, it asked, "What shall I write?" and Allah said, "Write LA ILAHA ILLALLAH." The Pen wrote "LA ILAHA ILLALLAH" for seventy-thousand of Gods years and then it stopped. One of Gods days is equal to one thousand of our years. Then God ordered it to write again, and the Pen asked, "What shall I write?" and God answered, "Write Muhammadun RASUL-ALLAH." And the Pen said, "O God, who is this Muhammad that You have put Your Name next to his name?" God said, "YOU MUST KNOW THAT IF IT WERE NOT FOR MUHAMMAD I WOULD NOT HAVE CREATED ANYTHING IN CREATION." So the Pen wrote Muhammadun RASUL-ALLAH for another seventy-thousand years.*** Nay, all else besides these Manifestations, live by the operation of their Will, and move and have their being through the outpourings of their grace. "But for Thee, I would have not created the heavens." (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 103) How, they wondered, could such a person be sent down from God, assert His ascendancy over all the peoples and kindreds of the earth, and claim Himself to be the goal of all creation, - even as He hath said: "But for Thee, I would not have created all that are in heaven and on earth," - and yet be subject to such trivial things? (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 73) But for Thee is the Law laaka clause mentioned before God Taught Man by the PEN [QALAM]. According to so many many Commentators that QALAM [PEN] is Muhammad or the Muhammadan Reality. That Pen writes and has written this Day a hundred Books The light that is shed from the heaven of bounty, and the benediction that shineth from the dawning-place of the will of God, the Lord of the Kingdom of Names, rest upon Him Who is the Supreme Mediator, the Most Exalted Pen, Him Whom God hath made the dawning-place of His most excellent names and the dayspring of His most exalted attributes. (Baha'u'llah) No resistance no perversity just affection Humblest before you khazeh __ 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/reli
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
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 Gospel is final? 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. >>No, because the Bible clearly has prophets as an ongoing aspect of the >>church.<< And how many churches recognize the legitimacy of "prophets as an ongoing aspect of the church"? Very, very few. Those that do, such as the Irvingites (the Catholic Apostolic Church and the New Apostolic Church), stress that these "prophets" have no authority over the Bible. And again, you have not demonstrated any similarity between how a "prophetes" is regarded by the few denominations and sects which accept them today (or even the statements by some NT writers) and the "ambiyaa," as understood by Muslims (or discussed in the Qur'an). 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 Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:55:19 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 05:48 PM 1/13/2005, you wrote: > >>But they are not saying identical things.<< > > I have not been saying that any two religious networks, or religions within > them, are "saying identical > things." In fact, I have insisted on the opposite point of view. However, it > does appear to me that most > of them advocate a kind of religious exclusivism and finality. You appear to > have taken issue with that > idea. 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. Gilberto: > >>There is a real sense in which for Muslims, the Quran came first and then > >>"created" the Muslim community. The beginning of revelation marks the > >>beginning of Muhammad's prophethood and the Quran guided the community from > >>the very beginning.<< Rich: > I don't think that books, even divine ones, create communities. All > communities are constructed by people. > Gilberto: I think you are being nit-picky. In Islam the revelation started coming to Muhammad and THEN there was a community which was the response to that revelation, to the text. In Christianity, the community very much comes into existence before the text, the Bible. Gilberto: There is a high degree of consensus that prophethood is over. And for many a person who doesn't believe that Muhammad was the last prophet isn't Muslim.<< > That is also true among most Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics. No, because the Bible clearly has prophets as an ongoing aspect of the church. 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]
Today in http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist/m43489.html I read this written by dear Mark** What can be said is that some of the NT writers apparently believed that prophets, as they understood the concept, would continue. (There is a debate among the various Christianities as to how long that would occur. Some believe that prophecy, like tongues, ended with the canonization of "the Bible.") These "Prophets" were expected to operate within a Christocentric context. In other words, just as Islam is Qur'anocentric, most of the Christianities are Christocentric.** I liked what Mark has written. The Holy Qur'an and the Bible are my favourite Books [apart from the Holy Writings of this Revelation]. I read them a lot. In relation to the Holy Qur'an, some Passages [more than a third] are everlasting in their implications. They infuse the soul with God's Presence, God's Personality, His Attributes. Who cannot be moved by such a verse to the end of his or her life: 2: 186 AND IF My servants ask thee about Me - behold, I am near; I respond to the call of him who calls, whenever he calls unto Me: let them, then, respond unto Me, and believe in Me, so that they might follow the right way. 002.186 YUSUFALI: When My servants ask thee concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them): I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calleth on Me: Let them also, with a will, Listen to My call, and believe in Me: That they may walk in the right way. The peoples of the World did CALL for the Promised One. In Islam they said: O God hasten His Coming. Imam Al-Mahdi [Ajjal God Ta'ala Farajahu Sharif - May God approach His Appearance] In Christianity they prayed: "Thy Kingdom Come." There are other verses nearly less than a third that talk about the Events of the Latter Day, the Great Yawm, Yawm al Az.eem. THE DAY OF THE TWO TRUMPET BLASTS. *** 039.068 YUSUFALI: The Trumpet will (just) be sounded, when all that are in the heavens and on earth will swoon, except such as it will please God (to exempt). THEN WILL A SECOND ONE BE SOUNDED, when, behold, they will be standing and looking on! PICKTHAL: And the trumpet is blown, and all who are in the heavens and all who are in the earth swoon away, save him whom God willeth. Then it is blown a second time, and behold them standing waiting! SHAKIR: And the trumpet shall be blown, so all those that are in the heavens and all those that are in the earth shall swoon, except such as God please; then it shall be blown again, then lo! they shall stand up awaiting. 039.069 YUSUFALI: And the Earth will shine with the Glory of its Lord: PICKTHAL: And the earth shineth with the light of her Lord, THEN WILL A SECOND ONE BE SOUNDED referring to Baha'u'llah as innumerable Bahai students have discovered themselves on reflection. The third part of the Holy Book of the Qur'an refers to temporal events at the time of the Prophet which have some signification some lesson for humanity. http://www.geocities.com/masad02/066.html The Message of the Quran Muhammad Asad AT-TAHRIM (PROHIBITION) THE SIXTY-SIXTH SURAH Total Verses: 12 MEDINA PERIOD IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE MOST GRACIOUS, THE DISPENSER OF GRACE: (1) O PROPHET! Why dost thou, out of a desire to please [one or another of] thy wives, impose [on thyself] a prohibition of something that God has made lawful to thee? 1 But God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace: (2) God has already enjoined upon you [O believers] the breaking and expiation of [such of] your oaths [as may run counter to what is right and just]: 2 for, God is your Lord Supreme, and He alone is all-knowing, truly wise. Now it is clear that this Holy Sura refers to specific events, specific situations, specific circumstances. Or the Sura 80 The Message of the Quran Muhammad Asad 'ABASA (HE FROWNED) THE EIGHTIETH SURAH Total Verses: 42 MECCA PERIOD Introduction REVEALED at a very early stage of the Prophet's mission, this surah has always been designated by the predicate with which its first sentence opens. The immediate cause of the revelation of the first ten verses was an incident witnessed by a number of the Prophet's contemporaries (see verses 1-2 and the corresponding note 1 below). IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE MOST GRACIOUS, THE DISPENSER OF GRACE: 80: 1 HE FROWNED and turned away 80: 2 because the blind man approached him!* http://www.geocities.com/masad02/080.html In His Will and Testament the Book of His Covenant Baha'u'llah reveals: The aim of this Wronged One in sustaining woes and tribulations, in revealing the Holy Verses and in demonstrating proofs hath been naught but to quench the flame of hate and enmity, that the horizon of the hearts of men may be illumined with the light of concord and attain real peace and tranquillity (Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, Page: 219) __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a bl
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 05:48 PM 1/13/2005, you wrote: >>But they are not saying identical things.<< I have not been saying that any two religious networks, or religions within them, are "saying identical things." In fact, I have insisted on the opposite point of view. However, it does appear to me that most of them advocate a kind of religious exclusivism and finality. You appear to have taken issue with that idea. >>I understand that if you ignore all the evidence that I'm mentioning and >>*choose* to not make certain distinctions Christianity and Islam are saying >>very similar things from a certain perspective.<< I don't think I have been ignoring your evidence. >>But they are not saying identical things.<< Again, yes, but I am not sure why you are saying so. Who here has argued that they are saying identical things? >>But for some reason the Bahais in here seem to have a hard time recognizing >>those differences.<< Which Baha'is and what differences? >>Forget the quotes for a second. It is glaringly obvious in the ordinary way >>people use language that the New Testament was written, identified and >>compiled as a unit *after* Jesus Christ's earthly ministry.<< Of course, but my point is that, to most evangelical Christians, what is contained in the New Testament nonetheless comes from Christ. They may be incorrect in that assessment, but it is *their* construction of reality. >>That is a real difference. You can choose to ignore it and say it doesn't >>matter. One can also chose to note it and recognize it.<< It is a difference, but I don't see how it relates to what we were discussing. You seem to repeatedly turn the discussion back to that one point. >>There is a real sense in which for Muslims, the Quran came first and then >>"created" the Muslim community. The beginning of revelation marks the >>beginning of Muhammad's prophethood and the Quran guided the community from >>the very beginning.<< I don't think that books, even divine ones, create communities. All communities are constructed by people. >>In contrast, the Church created the Bible.<< That is certainly the view held by some of the Christianities - particularly Eastern Orthodoxy. However, is it correct? Was there really a single unitive church, in the sense we understand it, before the so-called Bible was completed? I am not saying that the social construction of the New Testament resulted in one or more churches, but that the development of the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Church occurred *as* the New Testament was being canonized. One was not exactly the cause of the other. I agree, however, that the Qur'an was formulated under somewhat different circumstances. >>Even the fact that the issue is debateable is another difference. There is a >>high degree of consensus that prophethood is over. And for many a person who >>doesn't believe that Muhammad was the last prophet isn't Muslim.<< That is also true among most Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics. Prophets are now frequently regarded as a feature of the early church - before canonization. However, again, the fact that the terms "prophetes" and "nabii" (warner) are both often translated into English as "prophet" does not indicate they are necessarily pointing to a similar concept. In my view, they are not. >>You chose to read what I wrote in a certain way. I don't know your intentions >>but you just seemed to want to marginalize what I'm saying and limit it to >>one or two groups of Christians. I think what I"ve been saying applies to >>most Christians.<< I don't see how my arguing that most Protestants, except for Calvinists, do not believe that one could be saved without Jesus is marginalizing what you are saying. >>Yes, that was my intention.<< Except you appeared to say that Jesus was regarded by Christians as the source of salvation before His birth. >>So you quote "I am the way, the truth.." relates to how people are saved. It >>doesn't imply an end of revelation. On the other hand, Muslims generally >>wouldn't say that people are saved by Muhammad in the same sort of way that >>Christians say people are saved by Jesus.<< Yes. As I suggested, they are different kinds of particularism 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]
After this servant posted this afternoon there are already so many letters on the List. I shall focus with your indulgence on a few postings by Gilberto, Mark, and John. I liked very much Scotts and Mr Anarakis too. First I quote faithfully. Gilberto, my dear brother, writes; **I'm not sure what you [khazeh f] are saying here. It seems like "first" and "last" don't mean anything at all in the writings of Baháulláh. That doesn't make sense to me. Even if you wanted to take the hadith above, or even others where the prophet says that the first thing created was his light... But then still, in the physical sense Muhammad was still unique in saying that prophethood ended with him. The other prophets simply didn't make the same claim before. Gilberto** AND AGAIN FROM BROTHER GILBERTO **All I've been trying to say in this whole sub-topic is that in Islam there is a very clear, strongly emphasized principle which is believed to a high degree of consensus that Muhammad was the last prophet and that prophethood is over. This is something which both Sunni and Shia agree to. But the same isn't true in Christianity G] MARK FOSTER What can be said is that some of the NT writers apparently believed that prophets, as they understood the concept, would continue. (There is a debate among the various Christianities as to how long that would occur. Some believe that prophecy, like tongues, ended with the canonization of "the Bible.") These "Prophets" were expected to operate within a Christocentric context. In other words, just as Islam is Qur'anocentric, most of the Christianities are Christocentric. As I see it, the Sunni caliphate and Paul's view of prophethood were both attempts to institutionalize charismatic authority after the passings of Muhammad and Christ. In that respect, both concepts have more in common with each than either have with the Quránic concept of nabí. The tanakhian minor Prophets were the spiritual successors to Moses. According to the record, they "prophesied," both in the sense of foretelling and forth telling. Paul's concept of a "prophetes" is one who served a congregation of believers Also my brother, JOHN SMITH, writes:*** Bahá'ís assert Muhammad was Jesus, and Baha'u'llah is Muhammad and Baha'u'llah is Jesus. Bahá'ís assert Muhammad was Jesus, and Baha'u'llah is Muhammad and Baha'u'llah is Jesus.*** This servant [khazeh] would wholeheartedly agree with the very good points in all the above especially Marks erudite contributions. What I wish to contribute is am illumination re this unsurpassable difficulty re the theological/semantic/ meaning of last. Brother Gilberto is impressed that LAST means temporal lastness/ [although LAST literally in the Arabic aakhir does not occur in the Holy Quran about Muhammad]. Rather Seal KHAATAM occurs But at any rate His Holiness Bahaullah quotes Jafar S.aadiq the 6th Imam quoting His Ancestors and the Prophet Muhammad saying. ***"Muhammad is our first, Muhammad our last, Muhammad our all." (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 153)*** >From this particular sacred teaching, this spiritual teaching, this non-temporal perspective Muhammad is both Last and First. And moreover the Continuity of WAH. Y [Revelation is assured]. There are definitely strands within Islam that allow us to look at Muhammad with this universal perspective, this metaphysical perspective. There is the teaching in Islam [which a Bahai can understand a Bahai of whatever background and a Bahai can understand it in the light of the Iqan] There is a teaching in Islam that in a sense the PROPHET WAS THE FIRST PROPHET. As for the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) being the first of creation, among the Islamic scholars who have compiled works on his characteristics is the hadith master (hafiz) Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti with his two-volume hadith work al-Khasais al-kubra [The greater compendium of unique attributes], of which the first chapter is entitled "The Uniqueness of the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) in Being the First of the Prophets to Be Created, the Priority of His Prophethood, and the Taking of the Covenant with Him." THE FOCAL POINT OF THIS LIGHT OF LIGHTS, THE HEAD OF THE WHOLE MATTER OF ITS APPEARANCE, AND THE SITE OF ITS MANIFESTATIONIN A SENSE THE RÉSUMÉ OF ALL CREATED BEING AND OCCASION FOR ITS APPEARANCEIS THE AL-HAQIQA AL-MUHAMMADIYYA, OR MUHAMMADAN REALITY THE HOLY PROPHET (GOD BLESS HIM AND GIVE HIM PEACE) In His unfathomable Self, God perceived Himself by Himself in the perfection of His essence. He then desired to perceive His perfection through His names, though these are determined only by their effects. He consequently manifested Himself in the form of the comprehensive Spirit (al-ruh al-kulli), in which the general image of all things was decreed in accordance with God's knowledge of it. Through this manifestation the Divine Self became reflected in reverse as in a mirror. God then turned to this mirror with Hi
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
I think this discussion is getting very frustrating because people seem unwilling to understand what I"m saying and are simply refusing to see where I am coming from or see it as having any validity. I understand that if you ignore all the evidence that I'm mentioning and *choose* to not make certain distinctions Christianity and Islam are saying very similar things from a certain perspective. But they are not saying identical things. And one can also look at what Christians are saying and what Muslims are saying and see certain differences. But for some reason the Bahais in here seem to have a hard time recognizing those differences., On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:47:54 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > > At 12:57 PM 1/13/2005, you wrote: > >>No. The Christian New Testament was finished (and presumably started) well > >>after Jesus earthly ministry. Bible-believing Christians necessarily have > >>to accept that revelation comes after Jesus.<< > > Except that most evangelical and fundamentalist Christians do not believe it > is a revelation which came "after" Jesus. Gilberto: Forget the quotes for a second. It is glaringly obvious in the ordinary way people use language that the New Testament was written, identified and compiled as a unit *after* Jesus Christ's earthly ministry. On the other hand, the Quran was publically recited during Muhammad's ministry. That is a real difference. You can choose to ignore it and say it doesn't matter. One can also chose to note it and recognize it. Gilberto: > >>And there is no clear Biblical statement that Paul completed the canon. The > >>canon came out of a loose consensus among the church on a particular body > >>of texts. In the inital stages there was some variation. The Ethiopian > >>Orthodox Bible has a slightly different New Testament for instance. The > >>Bible came out of a very human mediated process. There is no sense that God > >>decisively closed the canon and said this is the end of revelation.<< > One can argue about the intentionalities underlying many scriptures. However, > most of the historical branches of Christianity *believe* that the canon > ended (and the canonical differences are not very significant). I also do not > see how the "Bible" coming out of a "very human mediated process" relates to > the subject. Gilberto: There is a real sense in which for Muslims, the Quran came first and then "created" the Muslim community. The beginning of revelation marks the beginning of Muhammad's prophethood and the Quran guided the community from the very beginning. In contrast, the Church created the Bible. The Church existed as a community, and the writers produced the Bible to reflect on their own experiences with Christ. Because of that the "end" of the Bible is in some sense softer. It's not as if Jesus was writing the New Testament and it was clear that the revelation ended with his earthly ministry. There were other gospels floating around, other epistles, other books of "acts" other apocalypses. The boundaries of the text weren't directly mandated by Jesus (or even the apostles necessarily). > > >>The Bible specifically sees prophethood as an ongoing part of the Church.<< > > There is no such "thing" as the Bible. What can be said is that some of the > NT writers apparently believed that prophets, as they understood the concept, > would continue. (There is a debate among the various Christianities as to how > long that would occur. Some believe that prophecy, like tongues, ended with > the canonization of "the Bible.") Even the fact that the issue is debateable is another difference. There is a high degree of consensus that prophethood is over. And for many a person who doesn't believe that Muhammad was the last prophet isn't Muslim. In Christianity the point isn't made as strongly and isn't as clear. [..] > >>No. Even the Catholic Church teaches that ultimately Jesus is the only way. > >>That's why for them Jesus went to "hell" to preach to those who had died > >>before he had come in the flesh.<< > That is not what you wrote before. You said that "Jesus has always been the > only way to salvation." It was in that context that I referred to Calvinism. Gilberto: You chose to read what I wrote in a certain way. I don't know your intentions but you just seemed to want to marginalize what I'm saying and limit it to one or two groups of Christians. I think what I"ve been saying applies to most Christians. > >>Isn't it also part of the Catholic view. EVERYONE, and they mean. EVERYONE > >>is saved through what Jesus did on the cross. Whether they know it or not.<< > I am afraid I don't follow you. Correct. Now, if you had said, "Everyone who *is* saved receives their salvation from Jesus," I would agree with you. Gilberto: Yes, that was my intention. So you quote "I am the way, the truth.." relates to how people are saved. It doesn't imply an end of revelation. On the ot
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 12:57 PM 1/13/2005, you wrote: >>No. The Christian New Testament was finished (and presumably started) well >>after Jesus earthly ministry. Bible-believing Christians necessarily have to >>accept that revelation comes after Jesus.<< Except that most evangelical and fundamentalist Christians do not believe it is a revelation which came "after" Jesus. They see it, including the Apocalypse, *as* the Word of God, which they do not really distinguish from Jesus Christ. >>And there is no clear Biblical statement that Paul completed the canon. The >>canon came out of a loose consensus among the church on a particular body of >>texts. In the inital stages there was some variation. The Ethiopian Orthodox >>Bible has a slightly different New Testament for instance. The Bible came out >>of a very human mediated process. There is no sense that God decisively >>closed the canon and said this is the end of revelation.<< One can argue about the intentionalities underlying many scriptures. However, most of the historical branches of Christianity *believe* that the canon ended (and the canonical differences are not very significant). I also do not see how the "Bible" coming out of a "very human mediated process" relates to the subject. >>The Bible specifically sees prophethood as an ongoing part of the Church.<< There is no such "thing" as the Bible. What can be said is that some of the NT writers apparently believed that prophets, as they understood the concept, would continue. (There is a debate among the various Christianities as to how long that would occur. Some believe that prophecy, like tongues, ended with the canonization of "the Bible.") These "Prophets" were expected to operate within a christocentric context. In other words, just as Islam is qur'anocentric, most of the Christianities are christocentric. >>The analagous claims can't be made about Islam.<< Do you think that Paul's view of a "prophetes" has any similarity, outside of sharing the same common English translation, to the qur'anic "nabii"? I see hardly any similarity at all. As I see it, the Sunni caliphate and Paul's view of prophethood were both attempts to institutionalize charismatic authority after the passings of Muhammad and Christ. In that respect, both concepts have more in common with each than either have with the qur'anic concept of nabii. >>No. Even the Catholic Church teaches that ultimately Jesus is the only way. >>That's why for them Jesus went to "hell" to preach to those who had died >>before he had come in the flesh.<< That is not what you wrote before. You said that "Jesus has always been the only way to salvation." It was in that context that I referred to Calvinism. Few Arminians would accept what you wrote. >>Isn't it also part of the Catholic view. EVERYONE, and they mean. EVERYONE is >>saved through what Jesus did on the cross. Whether they know it or not.<< I am afraid I don't follow you. Now, if you had said, "Everyone who *is* saved receives their salvation from Jesus," I would agree with you. However, most Roman Catholics do not believe in universal salvation, and this viewpoint is certainly not taught by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. >>But in what sense? Sometimes the connection is quite tenuous. Especially in >>the Old Testament days it may just have involved a minimal belief in the >>barest outlines of messianic prophecy.<< The tanakhian minor Prophets were the spiritual successors to Moses. According to the record, They "prophesied," both in the sense of foretelling and forthtelling. Paul's concept of a "prophetes" is one who served a congregation of believers. 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 Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:20:04 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe the main problem preventing us from completely agreeing with one > another is that we are using the same word to mean different things. I will > try to explain what I mean below. G: I think I see what you are getting but I'm not sure if you are seeing what I'm saying. Even if you look beyond words, I think it is possible to make a real distinction between what Christianity is saying and what Islam is saying about the possibility of prophesy and revelation after their respective founders. > Gilberto Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:51:36 -0800 (PST), JS wrote: [Summarizing differences in Christian and Islamic attitudes towards finality of revelation] > > G: But the same isn't true in Christianity (at least not as I've > > experienced it or studied it). Christianity as a whole CLEARLY allows > > for prophets coming after Jesus. I'm not sure why there is even any > > question. > > J: It seems like you are using Islamic slant on Christianity > > instead of > > Christian slant on Christianity. Christianity as a whole and in > > general, does not allows anyone on the same level as *the > > Christian view* of Jesus, > > to come after Jesus. > G: I am not at all taking the "Islamic slant". I'm exactly taking the > "Christian slant". I quoted several passages from the Bible which > CLEARLY mention prophets after Jesus. > J: Gilberto, my defenition of 'prophet' in relation to Christianity is "the > only Son of God, the Divine". Gilberto: Ok. to be honest that seems like a really unnatural definition of "prophet" which neither Christians, nor Muslims are really using. For example both Christians and Muslims would be willing to call Moses a prophet even though neither of them would call him "the only Son, the Divine". If you want to say that Christians think Jesus has unique attributes than I agree with you. But I don't see how (or why) you are really arguing this point in such a bizzare way. What is even more bizzare is that you are a Bahai and I'm a Muslim. So we both agree that there was at least one prophet to come after Jesus. So in what sense, and with what motivation would you be trying to insist that Christians should actually refuse to believe in prophets after Jesus?? It's like you want to interpret Christianity in an unreasonable way because you'd rather refute it than find some kind of harmony or continuity. > With this in mind, Christianity does not > believe that anyone else will come after Jesus, because He is the only Son > of God and Savior of mankind. Yes. Except for the writers who were inspired with the New Testament, the specific prophets mentioned in the New Testament by name, the future prophets who would be part of the ongoing prophetic office of the church, the two witnesses mentioned in the Revelation according to St. John, who would prophesy, along with those in the endtimes when God's spirit would be poured out on all flesh and the sons and daughters would prophesy and the young men will see visions and the old men will dream dreams. So yes, except for all those people, no one else is coming. > > J: My definition of 'prophet' in relation to Islam is "the Last Prophet, > since He brought a fully authentic Qur'an." In this respect, Islam does not > believe that anyone else will come after Muhammad with another Book of God, > because there is no need for another book if the Qur'an is already perfect. > Gilberto: I don't understand why you would define "prophet" as "Last prophet". Islam clearly recognizes prophets other than Muhammad. In particular the 123,999 or so prophets who came before Muhammad. > J > > Christianity does allow so called 'prophets' after Jesus, > > G: > Then we agree. That's all I'm saying. Islam clearly says that > prophethood ended with Muhammad. Christianity clearly teach that > prophets will come after Jesus. You can say other things to try to > blur that distinction or narrow it. But the difference is there. > J: I completely disagree with you on this. Words are only words. It is > the meaning of words that is important. A prophet from the Christian > perspective is inferior to Jesus the only Son of God, Saviour, and the Only > way to the Father. But rank is a seperate issue, its not part of the definition of prophet. Whether small or large, Christianity certainly allows for prophets to continue after Jesus. Whether small or large, Islam teaches that no more new prophets are coming after Muhammad. Not big ones. Not small ones. 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
Re: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
In a message dated 1/13/2005 12:58:35 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No. The Christian New Testament was finished (and presumably started)well after Jesus earthly ministry. Bible-believing Christiansnecessarily have to accept that revelation comes after Jesus. But they will not accept a "Messiah" coming after Jesus. Thence Muhammed might lay claim to prophet hood, but HE explicitly states that He and Jesus are both of the same rank. "Prophet" does not mean the same thing to most conservatively oriented Christians that it does to Muslims. Jesus was not a "Prophet" at all by Christian measure. He was the Son of God, the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE. Muhammed's claim to equality with Christ is most firmly rejected. Regards, Scott __ 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 believe the main problem preventing us from completely agreeing with one another is that we are using the same word to mean different things. I will try to explain what I mean below. Gilberto Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:51:36 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:>> G: But the same isn't true in Christianity (at least not as I've> experienced it or studied it). Christianity as a whole CLEARLY allows> for prophets coming after Jesus. I'm not sure why there is even any> question.> J: It seems like you are using Islamic slant on Christianity > instead of> Christian slant on Christianity. Christianity as a whole and in > general, does not allows anyone on the same level as *the > Christian view* of Jesus,> to come after Jesus. G: I am not at all taking the "Islamic slant". I'm exactly taking the"Christian slant". I quoted several passages from the Bible whichCLEARLY mention prophets after Jesus. J: Gilberto, my defenition of 'prophet' in relation to Christianity is "the only Son of God, the Divine". With this in mind, Christianity does not believe that anyone else will come after Jesus, because He is the only Son of God and Savior of mankind. Only through Jesus are we saved, and there is no need to be saved by anyone else. Biblical verses fully back this up. Remember, I am looking at this from the Christian perspective. I understand Muslims do not believe He is the only Son of God, the Divine. J: My definition of 'prophet' in relation to Islam is "the Last Prophet, since He brought a fully authentic Qur'an." In this respect, Islam does not believe that anyone else will come after Muhammad with another Book of God, because there is no need for another book if the Qur'an is already perfect. J> Christianity does allow so called 'prophets' after Jesus,G:Then we agree. That's all I'm saying. Islam clearly says thatprophethood ended with Muhammad. Christianity clearly teach thatprophets will come after Jesus. You can say other things to try toblur that distinction or narrow it. But the difference is there. J: I completely disagree with you on this. Words are only words. It is the meaning of words that is important. A prophet from the Christian perspective is inferior to Jesus the only Son of God, Saviour, and the Only way to the Father. On the other hand, a prophet from the Muslim perspective is equivalent to Muhammad. To Muslims, a 'prophet' is as high as they come. To a Christian, a 'prophet' is not that big of a deal. J: I think in my previous emails I am using 'prophet' interchangeably, so I appologize for the confusion.G:When Muslims object to groups like the Bahais, Ahmadiya, etc. theygenerally *do* just say "but prophets can't come after Muhammad".J: Again, I think you are not understanding what I am saying. If what I have written above does not explain it, please do ask again and I hope I can answer you better. I am beginning to see that my explanations are not that clear, so I am not faulting you for it ! :) 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: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:00:38 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, [I am the way the truth and the life...etc] > > At 03:07 AM 1/13/2005, you wrote: > >>But there the issue is exclusivity and the emphasis isn't on being > >>chronologically last. Maybe its a fine distinction and I'm sounding > >>nit-picky but I think it is a real one.<< > Mark: > I don't think the emphasis is especially relevant. Christian particularism or > exclusivism presumes that Jesus (and, in some Christianities, Paul) completed > the biblical canon. Gilberto: No. The Christian New Testament was finished (and presumably started) well after Jesus earthly ministry. Bible-believing Christians necessarily have to accept that revelation comes after Jesus. And there is no clear Biblical statement that Paul completed the canon. The canon came out of a loose consensus among the church on a particular body of texts. In the inital stages there was some variation. The Ethiopian Orthodox Bible has a slightly different New Testament for instance. The Bible came out of a very human mediated process. There is no sense that God decisively closed the canon and said this is the end of revelation. In the case of the Quran and Islam, there *is* that sense. In fact, the Bahai writings are more fixed, and closed and rigid than the Bible is for Christians. It's obvious that there are no more Bahai writings coming. Mark: > Functionally, I see very little difference between conservative evangelical > and fundamentalist christologies (especially premillennial dispensationalism) > and Islamic concepts about Muhammad being the final Prophet. Both centralize > authority around the teachings, statements, or revelations of a particular > Person. The Bible specifically sees prophethood as an ongoing part of the Church. The Bible specifically mentions prophets after Jesus The Bible speciflcally talks about a general phemona of prophesy continuing in the future. The analagous claims can't be made about Islam. > >>For example, there are some Christian fundamentalists who are not just > >>saying that Jesus is the last in a long series of prophets, they are > >>actually saying that Jesus has always been the only way to salvation.<< > That is very much a minority position among conservative Protestants. It is > mostly found among Calvinists. No. Even the Catholic Church teaches that ultimately Jesus is the only way. That's why for them Jesus went to "hell" to preach to those who had died before he had come in the flesh. > >>And that if people of other religions are saved, it will be because somehow > >>Jesus was able to save them even though they didn't necessarily know his > >>name.<< > That is soteriological inclusivism, which is a minority position among > conservative evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants. Isn't it also part of the Catholic view. EVERYONE, and they mean, EVERYONE is saved through what Jesus did on the cross. Whether they know it or not. > > >>So this is very different from the Muslim "seal of the prophets" concept. > >>Christians are saying that Christ is the only way to salvation but they > >>allow for there to be prophets before and after Jesus.<< > Yes, but those prophets, like the caliphs and imams, are > expected to be christocentric (or qur'anicentric). But in what sense? Sometimes the connection is quite tenuous. Especially in the Old Testament days it may just have involved a minimal belief in the barest outlines of messianic 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: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:51:36 -0800 (PST), JS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > G: But the same isn't true in Christianity (at least not as I've > experienced it or studied it). Christianity as a whole CLEARLY allows > for prophets coming after Jesus. I'm not sure why there is even any > question. > J: It seems like you are using Islamic slant on Christianity > instead of > Christian slant on Christianity. Christianity as a whole and in > general, does not allows anyone on the same level as *the > Christian view* of Jesus, > to come after Jesus. I am not at all taking the "Islamic slant". I'm exactly taking the "Christian slant". I quoted several passages from the Bible which CLEARLY mention prophets after Jesus. J > Christianity does allow so called 'prophets' after Jesus, G: Then we agree. That's all I'm saying. Islam clearly says that prophethood ended with Muhammad. Christianity clearly teach that prophets will come after Jesus. You can say other things to try to blur that distinction or narrow it. But the difference is there. G: When Christians object to Muhammad, they generally don't just say "but prophets can't come after Jesus" (Because the Bible won't let them say that). Even when Christians object to groups like the Mormons, a more typical objection is to accuse them of polytheism or to be weirded out by the polygamy. When Muslims object to groups like the Bahais, Ahmadiya, etc. they generally *do* just say "but prophets can't come after Muhammad". 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]
Gilberto, At 03:07 AM 1/13/2005, you wrote: >>But there the issue is exclusivity and the emphasis isn't on being >>chronologically last. Maybe its a fine distinction and I'm sounding nit-picky >>but I think it is a real one.<< I don't think the emphasis is especially relevant. Christian particularism or exclusivism presumes that Jesus (and, in some Christianities, Paul) completed the biblical canon. The most popular eschatology at the present, time, dispensationalism, explicitly emphasizes a timeline. However, full preterists (neo-Hymenaeanists), partial preterists, historicists, postmillennialists, and amillennialists also place Christ at the axis of their time lines. Functionally, I see very little difference between conservative evangelical and fundamentalist christologies (especially premillennial dispensationalism) and Islamic concepts about Muhammad being the final Prophet. Both centralize authority around the teachings, statements, or revelations of a particular Person. >>For example, there are some Christian fundamentalists who are not just >>saying that Jesus is the last in a long series of prophets, they are actually >>saying that Jesus has always been the only way to salvation.<< That is very much a minority position among conservative Protestants. It is mostly found among Calvinists. >>That even in Genesis in Eden when the Bible says that the seed of the woman >>will crush the head of the serpent that this was a prophecy about Jesus.<< Of course there are differences. However, I don't think that changes what I wrote. >>And that the people of the Old Testament were saved because they believed in >>the messianic prophecies about Jesus.<< There are **very** few Christians who believe that the Hebrews were saved by accepting the prophecies of the coming of Jesus. However, again, I don't see how the theological differences you are raising relate to the issue. >>And that if people of other religions are saved, it will be because somehow >>Jesus was able to save them even though they didn't necessarily know his >>name.<< That is soteriological inclusivism, which is a minority position among conservative evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants. >>So this is very different from the Muslim "seal of the prophets" concept. >>Christians are saying that Christ is the only way to salvation but they allow >>for there to be prophets before and after Jesus.<< Yes, but those prophets, like the caliphs and imams, are expected to be christocentric (or qur'anicentric). >>Muslims aren't saying Muhammad is the only way to salvation, but Muhammad >>*is* the last prophet.<< Some Muslims do say that. What about those who condemn Jews, Baha'is, Ahmadis, etc. to eternal hellfire? However, again, I don't see how that relates to the issue. 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]
G: But the same isn't true in Christianity (at least not as I'veexperienced it or studied it). Christianity as a whole CLEARLY allowsfor prophets coming after Jesus. I'm not sure why there is even anyquestion. J: It seems like you are using Islamic slant on Christianity instead of Christian slant on Christianity. Christianity as a whole and in general, does not allows anyone on the same level as *the Christian view* of Jesus, to come after Jesus. Similarly, Islam does not allow anyone to come with the same station as *the Islamic view* of Muhammad. Christianity does allow so called 'prophets' after Jesus, but they are not equal to Jesus, in the Christian view. Islam does allow continuation of God's intervention in human affairs through saints, etc., but these people are not equal to Muhammad, in the Islamic view. Note that although Baha'is accept the Qur'an, it doesn't mean Baha'is accept the Islamic slant as truth. Baha'is assert Muhammad was Jesus, and Baha'u'llah is Muhammad and Baha'u'llah is Jesus.__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 Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:59:04 -, Khazeh Fananapazir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Prof Mark Foster said to my kind brother Gilberto: > > You don't think that the statement, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the > Life. > > No one comes to the Father except through Me," is the principal argument > > used by the fundamentalist and conservative evangelical websites against > > Islam? Mark Foster > Then Gilberto replied: > **But there the issue is exclusivity and the emphasis isn't on being > chronologically last. > Maybe its a fine distinction and I'm sounding nit-picky but I think it is a > real one. > For example, there are some Christian fundamentalists who are not just > saying that Jesus is the last in a long series of prophets, they are > actually saying that Jesus has always been the only way to salvation. That > even in Genesis in Eden when the Bible says that the seed of the woman will > crush the head of the serpent that this was a prophecy about Jesus. And that > the people of the Old Testament were saved because they believed in the > messianic prophecies about Jesus. > And that if people of other religions are saved, it will be because somehow > Jesus was able to save them even though they didn't necessarily know his > name. > > So this is VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE MUSLIM "seal of the prophets" concept. > Christians are saying that Christ is the only way to salvation but they > allow for there to be prophets before and after Jesus. > > Muslims aren't saying Muhammad is the only way to salvation, but Muhammad > *is* the last prophet. > Peace Gilberto** > I am in a sense not here because I should be here this weekend! But there > are dear Gilberto arguments on both aspects of the argument. Dear Khazeh, I"m not sure why there is a need to argue and why you don't seem to think that what I'm saying is true or accept it.. Maybe it would be good if you could say more clearly where you are trying to push the discussion to and it would be easier to see where you are coming from. All I've been trying to say in this whole sub-topic is that in Islam there is a very clear, strongly emphasized principle which is believed to a high degree of consensus that Muhammad was the last prophet and that prophethood is over. This is something which both sunni and shia agree to. But the same isn't true in Christianity (at least not as I've experienced it or studied it). Christianity as a whole CLEARLY allows for prophets coming after Jesus. I'm not sure why there is even any question. In the Bible itself after the crucifixion, after the ascencion, in the early church, in acts 11: [27] Now in these days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. [28] And one of them named Ag'abus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world; and this took place in the days of Claudius. [29] And the disciples determined, every one according to his ability, to send relief to the brethren who lived in Judea; [30] and they did so, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul Or 1 Corinthians 4 [5] Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless some one interprets, so that the church may be edified. And there are other examples too. > 1] that Jesus Christ "is" also last chronologically and in terrestrial time > and on His Return He will bear the marks of the nails etc on His Blessed > Body [Corpus Christi]. And the Revelation of John says: Do not add anything. Yes, there is that warning at the end of the book of revelation. Revelation 22 [18] I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, [19] and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. Except the Bible was written seperately, not as one book, so the above is really refering to people who try to change that one book. I'm not even sure if it was the last book of the Bible written so if it did really apply to Christian revelation as a whole there are going to be alot of people in trouble. > > 2] Conversely as His holiness Baha'u'llah explains in the Sacred Iqan, in > tones of lucidity and inexpressible beauty,: > **Likewise, from this statement it is made evident that the term "last" is > applicable to the "first," and the term "first" applicable to the "last;" > inasmuch as both the "first" and the "last" have risen to proclaim one and > the same Faith. >(Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 161)** > It is admittedly obvious that being the "First of the Prophets," He likewise > is their "Seal." >(Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 162) > The mystery of this theme hath, in this Dispensation, been a sore test unto > all mankind. Behold, how many are those who, clinging unto these
RE: exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Prof Mark Foster said to my kind brother Gilberto: > You don't think that the statement, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. > No one comes to the Father except through Me," is the principal argument > used by the fundamentalist and conservative evangelical websites against > Islam? Mark Foster Then Gilberto replied: **But there the issue is exclusivity and the emphasis isn't on being chronologically last. Maybe its a fine distinction and I'm sounding nit-picky but I think it is a real one. For example, there are some Christian fundamentalists who are not just saying that Jesus is the last in a long series of prophets, they are actually saying that Jesus has always been the only way to salvation. That even in Genesis in Eden when the Bible says that the seed of the woman will crush the head of the serpent that this was a prophecy about Jesus. And that the people of the Old Testament were saved because they believed in the messianic prophecies about Jesus. And that if people of other religions are saved, it will be because somehow Jesus was able to save them even though they didn't necessarily know his name. So this is VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE MUSLIM "seal of the prophets" concept. Christians are saying that Christ is the only way to salvation but they allow for there to be prophets before and after Jesus. Muslims aren't saying Muhammad is the only way to salvation, but Muhammad *is* the last prophet. Peace Gilberto** I am in a sense not here because I should be here this weekend! But there are dear Gilberto arguments on both aspects of the argument. 1] that Jesus Christ "is" also last chronologically and in terrestrial time and on His Return He will bear the marks of the nails etc on His Blessed Body [Corpus Christi]. And the Revelation of John says: Do not add anything. And Matthew says I shall be with you to the end of time. Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. 2] Conversely as His holiness Baha'u'llah explains in the Sacred Iqan, in tones of lucidity and inexpressible beauty,: **Likewise, from this statement it is made evident that the term "last" is applicable to the "first," and the term "first" applicable to the "last;" inasmuch as both the "first" and the "last" have risen to proclaim one and the same Faith. (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 161)** It is admittedly obvious that being the "First of the Prophets," He likewise is their "Seal." (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 162) The mystery of this theme hath, in this Dispensation, been a sore test unto all mankind. Behold, how many are those who, clinging unto these words, have disbelieved Him Who is their true Revealer. What, We ask, could this people presume the terms "first" and "last" - when referring to God - glorified be His Name! - to mean? If they maintain that these terms bear reference to this material universe, how could it be possible, when the visible order of things is still manifestly existing? Nay, in this instance, by "first" is meant no other than the "last" and by "last" no other than the "first." (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Pages: 162-163) ***This is why Ibn 'Abbas narrates saying that the Prophet said: "I WAS PROPHET WHEN ADAM WAS BETWEEN SOUL AND BODY (I.E. WHEN ADAM'S CREATION WAS IN ITS PRELIMINARY STAGES)" (AT-TABARANI, AL-MU'JJAM AL-KABIR; AL KHASA'IS AL-KUBRA, VOL.1, p.4).*** Have to rush to work but I still beg/beseech/plead/with every one to re-read the Iqan. I have done so again recently and it is a heavenly delight. I have also re-read re-memorized sections of the Holy Qur'an... Humbly prayerfully affectionately most hurriedly khazeh __ 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 08:14:47 -, Khazeh Fananapazir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 12:06 PM 1/12/2005, you wrote: > >>I'm not blaming them. I'm describing them. All I'm saying is that the > concept of finality of revelation is not as essential, or emphasized, or as > clear in Christianity as it is in Islam. It's not the most common argument > Christians have against Islam.<< > You don't think that the statement, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. > No one comes to the Father except through Me," is the principal argument > used by the fundamentalist and conservative evangelical websites against > Islam? But there the issue is exclusivity and the emphasis isn't on being chronologically last. Maybe its a fine distinction and I'm sounding nit-picky but I think it is a real one. For example, there are some Christian fundamentalists who are not just saying that Jesus is the last in a long series of prophets, they are actually saying that Jesus has always been the only way to salvation. That even in Genesis in Eden when the Bible says that the seed of the woman will crush the head of the serpent that this was a prophecy about Jesus. And that the people of the Old Testament were saved because they believed in the messianic prophecies about Jesus. And that if people of other religions are saved, it will be because somehow Jesus was able to save them even though they didn't necessarily know his name. So this is very different from the Muslim "seal of the prophets" concept. Christians are saying that Christ is the only way to salvation but they allow for there to be prophets before and after Jesus. Muslims aren't saying Muhammad is the only way to salvation, but Muhammad *is* the last prophet. Peace Gilberto __ 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]
The various theological positions on the subject have been differently classified by theologians. One classification distinguishes four main opinions: 1) an ecclesiocentric universe and an exclusive Christology. 2) a Christocentric universe and an inclusive Christology; 3) a theocentric universe and a normative Christology: 4) a theocentric universe and a non-normative Christology. For the sake of simplicity other classifications reduce the spectrum of opinions to three main categories: ecclesiocentrism, Christo-centrism, and theocentrism; or, equivalently, exclusivism, inclusivism, and 'pluralism'. The first opinion [EXCLUSIVIST] holds that the explicit knowledge of Jesus Christ and membership of the Church are required for salvation; it maintains the axiom extra ecclesiam nulla salus in its rigid interpretation. The second [INCLUSIVIST] seeks to combine the twofold New Testament affirmations of the concrete and universal salvific will of God, on the one hand, and of the finality of Jesus Christ as universal Saviour, on the other; it affirms that the mystery of Jesus Christ and of his Spirit is present and operative outside the boundaries of the Church, both in the life of individual persons and in the religious traditions to which they belong and which they sincerely practice. The third opinion [PLURALIST] holds that God has manifested and revealed himself in various ways to different peoples in their respective situations; no finality of Jesus Christ in the order of salvation is to be upheld, for God saves people through their own tradition even as he saves Christians through Jesus Christ. Thus, for the exclusivist position Jesus Christ and the Church are the necessary way to salvation: for the inclusivist Jesus Christ the way of all; according to the pluralist model Jesus Christ is the way for Christians while the respective traditions constitute the way for the others. http://www.sedos.org/english/dupuis.htm Gilberto, At 12:06 PM 1/12/2005, you wrote: >>I'm not blaming them. I'm describing them. All I'm saying is that the concept of finality of revelation is not as essential, or emphasized, or as clear in Christianity as it is in Islam. It's not the most common argument Christians have against Islam.<< You don't think that the statement, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me," is the principal argument used by the fundamentalist and conservative evangelical websites against Islam? The exclusivity of Christ appears to be the most common objection raised by these folks against, not only Muslims, but Buddhists, Hindus, Bahá'ís, and just about every other religion I recall. With regards, Mark A. Foster Dearest Mark and Gilberto I am still over laden with midweek work and will join later God willing in this soul-enriching, educative, friendly conversation you are having. But just a brief word for the moment dear Mark. You are right that all Christian Communities use some passages of John to indicate finality and exclusivity and what they call NORMATIVITY. http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFUNICI.HTM it says that the following "truths" are NEVER SUPERSEDED. 1]***the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the inseparability - while recognizing the distinction - of the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, and the subsistence of the one Church of Christ in the Church.*** 2]It says further quoting the passage of John ***As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, IT IS NECESSARY ABOVE ALL TO REASSERT THE DEFINITIVE AND COMPLETE CHARACTER OF THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST. In fact, it must be firmly believed that, in the mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), THE FULL REVELATION OF DIVINE TRUTH IS GIVEN: "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him" (Mt 11:27)...*** ... Thus, the Encyclical Redemptoris missio calls the Church once again to the task of announcing the Gospel as the fullness of truth: "In this definitive Word of his revelation, GOD HAS MADE HIMSELF KNOWN IN THE FULLEST POSSIBLE WAY. HE HAS REVEALED TO MANKIND WHO HE IS. This definitive self-revelation of God is the fundamental reason why the Church is missionary by her very nature. She cannot do other than proclaim the Gospel, that is, the fullness of the truth which God has enabled us to know about himself".11 Only the revelation of Jesus Christ,
exclusivity and finality in the Faith which PRECEDED Islam [John 14:6]
Gilberto, At 12:06 PM 1/12/2005, you wrote: >>I'm not blaming them. I'm describing them. All I'm saying is that the concept of finality of revelation is not as essential, or emphasized, or as clear in Christianity as it is in Islam. It's not the most common argument Christians have against Islam.<< You don't think that the statement, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me," is the principal argument used by the fundamentalist and conservative evangelical websites against Islam? The exclusivity of Christ appears to be the most common objection raised by these folks against, not only Muslims, but Buddhists, Hindus, Baha'is, and just about every other religion I recall. With regards, Mark A. Foster Dearest Mark and Gilberto I am still over laden with midweek work and will join later God willing in this soul-enriching, educative, friendly conversation you are having. But just a brief word for the moment dear Mark. You are right that all Christian Communities use some passages of John to indicate finality and exclusivity and what they call NORMATIVITY. http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFUNICI.HTM it says that the following "truths" are NEVER SUPERSEDED. 1]***the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the inseparability - while recognizing the distinction - of the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, and the subsistence of the one Church of Christ in the Church.*** 2]It says further quoting the passage of John ***As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, IT IS NECESSARY ABOVE ALL TO REASSERT THE DEFINITIVE AND COMPLETE CHARACTER OF THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST. In fact, it must be firmly believed that, in the mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), THE FULL REVELATION OF DIVINE TRUTH IS GIVEN: "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him" (Mt 11:27)...*** ... Thus, the Encyclical Redemptoris missio calls the Church once again to the task of announcing the Gospel as the fullness of truth: "In this definitive Word of his revelation, GOD HAS MADE HIMSELF KNOWN IN THE FULLEST POSSIBLE WAY. HE HAS REVEALED TO MANKIND WHO HE IS. This definitive self-revelation of God is the fundamental reason why the Church is missionary by her very nature. She cannot do other than proclaim the Gospel, that is, the fullness of the truth which God has enabled us to know about himself".11 Only the revelation of Jesus Christ, therefore, "introduces into our history a universal and ultimate truth which stirs the human mind to ceaseless effort". [emphasis added] This statement by the Vatican is read in all the Churches. http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/v2non.htm "The Church ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life." The man who has walked beside the sea and has heard the voice of Jesus saying "No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6), can ever get the consent of his heart thus to trifle with religion. He has been smitten with the love of God and the wonder of the cross AND HE CAN NEVER AGAIN BE TOLERANT IN THINGS THAT TOUCH HIS SOUL AND THE SOULS OF HIS FELLOW MEN. He will live beside, be patient with, minister to, pray for and love any religionist of whatever colour or creed from a cardinal to a medicine man from the long grass, But NEVER WILL HE COMPROMISE THE TRUTH TO STAY ON GOOD TERMS WITH ANYONE. The Only Way to the Father In relation to finality the Universal House of Justice http://bahai-library.com/published.uhj/religious.leaders.html urges " renunciation of all those claims to exclusivity or finality that, IN WINDING THEIR ROOTS AROUND THE LIFE OF THE SPIRIT, have been the greatest single factor in suffocating impulses to unity and in promoting hatred and violence." Be happy affectionately khazeh __ 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
