On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:09:25 -0600, Susan Maneck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you are correcting my grammar?
No, I'm pointing out that he is in no position to correct his book.
This is a comment from William Pike on soc.relgion,bahai which may or
may not be verified elsewhere. It is the
Hi, Gilberto,
At 06:12 PM 12/18/2004, you wrote:
I've heard (although I don't remember the exact source this second) that
Sears has specifically not chosen to correct the errors in Thief in the
Night so that one could still honestly say that the book was written in its
entirety by a
Okay, cool. In the absence of further information, I will no longer
assume my initial statement about Sears to be true. Your explanation
seems more plausible.
Peace
Gilberto
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 03:55:04 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Gilberto,
At 06:12 PM 12/18/2004,
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:16:19 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thief In The Night contains the opinions and
understanding of the author, which reflects the Bahá'í position of the
time,
as far as I know. It still makes for fascinating reading, and remains a
great tool to spark interest in the Faith.
Khazeh wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:16:19 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thief In The Night contains the opinions and
understanding of the author, which reflects the Bahá'í position of the
time,
as far as I know. It still makes for fascinating reading, and remains a
great tool to spark
and books written to strengthen faith and certitude
in a second derivative sense, one should look at the positive, at the
bounties of explication, and of truth.
In this Faith, the Faith of Baha'u'llah we have been thus commanded:
**Warn, O Salman, the beloved of the one true God, not to view
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:28:41 -0600, Barbara Clements
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any writer who says the review process
is the reason s/he doesn't write is only looking for an excuse not to face
the prospect of rejection from many levels. It is a cop-out, not a
legitimate reason.
Probably
1. As far as Thief in the Night, my recollection is that Mr. Sears told us that
he wrote that book when he was a Catholic. I know from his wife Marguerite
that he left behind a good number of unpublished works including plays that
were fully scripted. So he was a prolific writer, and
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 01:41:21 -0900, Sandra Chamberlain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some time ago you wrote: And I thought there was a passage
actually in the writings saying that previous religions (at
least Islam) was intended to be universal but the blamed the
behavior of the followers.
At 3:58 PM -0500 12/19/04, Gilberto Simpson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 01:41:21 -0900, Sandra Chamberlain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some time ago you wrote: And I thought there was a passage
actually in the writings saying that previous religions (at
least Islam) was intended to be universal
I think you're thinking of as statement of the Bab, but I don't remember
enough to search for it.
In the Bayan the Bab says that every religion of the past was fit to become
universal. The only reason why they failed to attain that mark was the
incompetence of their followers. He then
YES That's the quote I was thinking of. It's weird though. I
had a really hard time trying to find it on the true seeker website.
So how universal is universal? Would it apply to all times? All
places? If we still have the Quran then couldn't Islam continue to be
universal?
Peace
Gilberto,
At 06:22 PM 12/19/2004, you wrote:
So how universal is universal? Would it apply to all times? All places?
If we still have the Quran then couldn't Islam continue to be universal?
My understanding is that each divine Revelation was globally applicable to to
human requirements for a
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:31:21 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gilberto,
At 06:22 PM 12/19/2004, you wrote:
So how universal is universal? Would it apply to all times? All places?
If we still have the Quran then couldn't Islam continue to be universal?
Mark:
My understanding
Gilberto,
At 06:35 PM 12/19/2004, you wrote:
So when if the Bab said each religion of the past was fit to be universal,
you are taking universal in terms of space, but not in terms of being valid
for all times?
IMO, it depends on how you define valid for all times. IMO, a Revelation is
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:53:14 -0600, Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. A Revelation doesn't lose its validity or its influence because of
the appearance of a new Messenger.
IMO, some Baha'is have taken `Abdu'l-Baha's seasonal metaphor a bit too
far. In the spiritual winter of a
Gilberto,
At 07:54 PM 12/19/2004, you wrote:
So what is the difference you are making between a religion being dead and
the divine intentionality for a particular religion being at an end?
I would never be so presumptuous to say that a divinely revealed religion, or
branch of that religion,
Gilberto:
I think you have to be careful about how you go about doing it. Bahais
call their belief *progressive* revelation which strongly suggests
that the dispensations of the Bab and then of Bahaullah are somehow
deeper, more complete, more suitable, new and improved, or otherwise
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:04:14 -0800, Rich Ater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[If I remember correctly, this was a response to the issue of whether
the concept of progressive revelation, implied criticizing God for the
previous revelations]
Gilberto:
I think you have to be careful about how you go
I'm not sure I've read enough of Bahaullah's writings to say that he
gives a particularly deep understanding. Some Bahai interpretations of
Quranic passages I don't find terribly satisfying or super-deep. I
think there are Muslim scholars, especially Sufis and others who
interpret the Quran in
Gilberto,
At 07:54 PM 12/19/2004, you wrote:
So what is the difference you are making between a religion being dead
and the divine intentionality for a particular religion being at an end?
I would never be so presumptuous to say that a divinely revealed religion,
or branch of that religion,
21 matches
Mail list logo
