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:[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:[email protected] 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/[email protected] New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
