Gilberto,
At 12:49 PM 1/30/2005, you wrote:
>>Mark?
>>"I think the above is a good example of perennialist triumphalism. The
>>perenialist decides what the original religion was or wasn't, despite what
>>that religion may say about itself.<<
No, Susan wrote that. However, I would agree with it
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:56:36 -0800, Patti Goebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gilberto:
> > > I don't believe that the Nicean creed is necessarily authentic
> > > Christianity. The real Christians were probably all eaten by lions or
> > > never left the catecombs. There are some Jewish Christian (lik
> > I don't believe that the Nicean creed is necessarily authentic
> > Christianity. The real Christians were probably all eaten by lions or
> > never left the catecombs. There are some Jewish Christian (like
> > Ebionites) groups with docetic tendancies which from a Muslim
> > perspective seem a l
Dear Rich,
I'm sorry if my comment offend you -- it was not at all directed to you or for
that matter to anyone else. I was merely commenting on the signal to noise
ratio of the discussion. However, that was my own fault as I'd forgotten that
this list is more (informed) conversation than detail
Listen, judging from the huge number of postings on this list, some of you
folks seem to have a lot of time on your hand. I don't. So this is my last
word on the subject.
Ahang,
I'm sorry for your bad feelings towards Islam. Nonetheless it gives
you no cause to be dismisive and insulting
Ahang,
In Iran, yes. Iran was a very small part of the Islamic world. I'm
not saying that there was ever a time in which the Jizya was paid
nowhere in the Islamic world, only that In certain times and places, it
was suspended.
Rich
Ahang Rabbani wrote:
Dear Rich,
The payment of jizya
"Besides, jizya was meant for the Jews and Christians. Qur'an says nothing
about the Zoroastrians, where this tax was imposed with great vehemence to
the
destruction of that community."
Uh Ahang, if the Zoroastrians hadn't been deemed eligible to pay the jiziya,
they might have been killed straig
I don't know why the Qur'an sanctioned jizya. Why did the Bible endorse
slavery, why did it call homosexuality an abomination, why did it sanction
stoning if you plot different vegetables side by side, why did it allow one to
sells his daughter, why did it prohibit touching pigs on Sabbath? None
(a) that people normally leave off the reservation that it is insidious in our time and it was not insidious during the time of Muhammad,
or (b) it is insidious because the true Law of the Qur'an was supposed to be symbolic and never implemented, that jizya is actually a misinterpretation, by
Gilberto Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:53:13 -0800 (PST), Ahang Rabbani<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> Dear Rich,> The payment of jizya continued until the time of Baha'u'llah. I don't have> time now to get into the story of how this insidious tax At various times depending
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:53:13 -0800 (PST), Ahang Rabbani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Rich,
> The payment of jizya continued until the time of Baha'u'llah. I don't have
> time now to get into the story of how this insidious tax
At various times depending on circumstances jizya was sometimes
Dear Rich,
The payment of jizya continued until the time of Baha'u'llah. I don't have
time now to get into the story of how this insidious tax was lifted by
Nasiri'd-Din Shah through the guidance of Baha'u'llah and the leg-work of
Manikji Sahib, but you might find some pieces of the info in Balyu
In Gilberto's defense, I believe that Umar actually deferred the paying
of the jizya in many instances.
Rich
Gilberto Simpson wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:34:27 -0800 (PST), Ahang Rabbani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You ought to be kidding! "Jizya" was a tax imposed on minorit
In a message dated 1/23/2005 12:18:42 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who is "they"?
the closest grammatic reference - being from your statement: "Baha`i's".
" Bahais tell Muslims what "Seal of the> Prophets" means, what the Apocalypse means, who the Mahdi is, how the> second
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:58:17 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/23/2005 11:22:28 AM Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> That's EXACTLY, and I mean EXACTLY, what the Bahais do to Muslims.
> Despite what Muslims may say, Bahais tell Muslims what
In a message dated 1/23/2005 11:22:28 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's EXACTLY, and I mean EXACTLY, what the Bahais do to Muslims.Despite what Muslims may say, Bahais tell Muslims what "Seal of theProphets" means, what the Apocalypse means, who the Mahdi is, how theseco
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:16:48 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 12/28/2004 8:03:13 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I don't believe that the Nicean creed is necessarily authentic
> Christianity. The real Christians were probably all eaten
In a message dated 12/28/2004 8:03:13 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't
believe that the Nicean creed is necessarily authenticChristianity. The
real Christians were probably all eaten by lions ornever left the
catecombs. There are some Jewish Christian (lik
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 18:02:48 -0600, Susan Maneck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gilberto:
> "The whole passage already looked sinister as is. I didn't remove any
> mitigating context."
Susan:
> Yes, you did. You left out the parts that make that passage make sense.
Gilberto:
Go back and look at the
I thought the laws were in the Aqdas?
Dear Gilberto,
Not all of them.
> Jihads are also justified to defend Muslims living in the Daru'l-Harb as
I'm
> sure you know, and bring their country into the Daru'l-Islam.
"Then that's ultimately a matter of saving lives."
It can be done according to I
- Hide quoted text -
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:51:39 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Defending" could be nothing more than apologetics.
Gilberto:
> I could actually say the same about jihad then. There is a hadith
> which states: ""The best jihad is speaking the truth to an unj
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:28:09 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:17:16 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Why isn't "Bahaullah and the New Era" "the writings"?
> Dear Gilberto,
> By "Writings" I mean our scriptures; what w
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 02:10:36 -0600, Susan Maneck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> "So does that mean it is infallibly true and authoritative?"
>
> It means it isn't.
>
> __
So why did mark attribute it to the UHJ?
-GIlberto
> You are subscri
"So does that mean it is infallibly true and authoritative?"
It means it isn't.
__
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
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 22:50:03 -0600, Susan Maneck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So where did the document come from?
>
> Dear Gilberto,
>
> It comes from the World Centre. It is just that the House didn't write it
> directly.
>
So does that mean it is infallibly true and authoritative?
Peace
So where did the document come from?
Dear Gilberto,
It comes from the World Centre. It is just that the House didn't write it
directly.
warmest, Susan
__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
To unsubscribe, se
Susan,
At 06:55 PM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
>>A controversial question. Raising a black flag in Khurasan was bound to
>>provoke violence. That's how the rebellion against the Umayyad Dynasty was
>>launched, after all.<<
I guess it would depend on whether one interprets it as a provocation or as
t
Beginning with the policing of agreements worked out between hostile
states, the principle of collective action in defence of peace
gradually took on the form of military interventions such as that of
the Gulf War, in which compliance with Security Council resolutions
was imposed by force on aggres
In a message dated 12/26/2004 1:02:54 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>And is that really how
the rule is stated? So you can get an abortion if your doctor says its okay?
Or do they have to be medically necessary?<<
I"t is left up to the individual to m
Hi, Susan,
At 06:49 PM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
>>They weren't exactly saying that the Gulf War was justified, but that it
>>represented the kind of collective security which the world needed to move
>>towards.<<
In an earlier message, the House of Justice did refer to the Gulf War as just.
Rega
Gilberto,
At 06:45 PM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
>>So does the UHJ believe the first Gulf War was justified? Are there other
>>official Bahai statements related to Gulf War I, and Gulf War II? What do
>>they say?<<
The House of Justice made an earlier statement in which it called the Gulf War
"just
In a message dated 1/21/2005 4:26:17 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did the
Bab wage Jihad against all the non-believers or just against
Muslims?
The Bab never waged jihad. His followers fought in His absence when He was
imprisoned.
warmest, Susan
_
In a message dated 1/21/2005 5:00:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, all of the battles, including the one at Shaykh Tabarsi, were
defensive actions against attacks by Muslims.
Dear Mark,
A controversial question. Raising a black flag in Khurasan
In a message dated 1/21/2005 5:09:46 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, for clarification, can you tell us, if the Baha'is were trapped at
Shaykh Tabarsi today, and Muslims attacked them, would the Baha'is be allowed
to fight back, according to the Law of
Baha
In a message dated 1/21/2005 5:18:35 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By the religion which immediately preceded the Baha'i Faith, I think
that Susan had in mind the Babi Faith, not Islam.My
mistake.
Actually, I was thinking of both.
___
Dear James,
A number of your quotations are taken from Divine Philosophy which more or
less falls into the category of pilgrim's notes. But I think your understanding
is both right and wrong. The very purpose of the Baha'i Faith is to bring about
the unity of humanity and by it, an end to
In a message dated 1/21/2005 6:46:21 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So does
the UHJ believe the first Gulf War was justified? Are thereother official
Bahai statements related to Gulf War I, and Gulf
WarII?
Dear Gilberto,
That's the only one and it wasn't the H
In a message dated 1/21/2005 5:55:31 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
would certainlyadmit that it has the potential to be abused
(virtually all rules do)but jizya actually is ordained in the Quran, so if
you really think itis necessarily a form of harrassment and
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 18:12:59 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Beginning with the policing of agreements worked out between hostile states,
> the principle of collective action in defence of peace gradually took on the
> form of military interventions such as that of the Gulf W
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:31:34 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:25:40 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Secondly, the people being
> protected would also definitely include the non-Muslims who were
> members of the community. (
James,
At 05:41 PM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
>>Can someone please point out where any type of warfare is condoned?<<
"If, for example, a high-minded sovereign marshals his troops to block the
onset of the insurgent and the aggressor, or again, if he takes the field and
distinguishes himself in a st
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:34:27 -0800 (PST), Ahang Rabbani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You ought to be kidding! "Jizya" was a tax imposed on minority religions
> as a way to harass and contain them, and to ensure they were kept
> economically dirt poor!
> I have lived in many parts of the wor
Dear Friends,
Can someone please point out where any type of warfare is condoned?
It occurs to this mind that many statements have been made opposing war,
such as
In the new age Baha'o'llah has prohibited war.
(Abdu'l-Baha, Divine Philosophy, p. 45)
Every war is against the good pleasu
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:17:23 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gilberto,
>
> At 09:24 AM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
> >>That's really not funny.<<
>
> By the religion which immediately preceded the Baha'i Faith, I think that
> Susan had in mind the Babi Faith, not Islam.
My mistake.
>>Now, for clarification, can you tell us, if the Baha'is were trapped at
>>Shaykh Tabarsi today, and Muslims attacked them, would the Baha'is be allowed
>>to fight back, according to the Law of Baha'u'llah?
>>I'll answer it myself... No.<<
I agree.
Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.
"Mark A. Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Did the Bab wage Jihad against all the non-believers or just against Muslims?<
>>Did the Bab wage Jihad against all the non-believers or just against
>>Muslims?<<
Well, all of the battles, including the one at Shaykh Tabarsi, were defensive
actions against attacks by Muslims.
Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Sacred cows make the tastie
Did the Bab wage Jihad against all the non-believers or just against Muslims?"Mark A. Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gilberto,At 09:24 AM 1/21/2005, you wrote:>>That's really not funny.<
Gilberto,
At 09:24 AM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
>>That's really not funny.<<
By the religion which immediately preceded the Baha'i Faith, I think that Susan
had in mind the Babi Faith, not Islam.
Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Sacred cows make the tastiest hamb
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:25:40 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Secondly, the people beingprotected would also definitely include
the non-Muslims who weremembers of the community. (That's what the jizya
is for to beginwith).
Really? And which of these traditi
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:20:48 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If
you are just arguing about the "names" that seems an odddistinction to
make.
I am not at all arguing about names and I have a difficult time figuring
out why you find this so hard to grasp. Is
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:17:16 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why isn't "Bahaullah and the New Era" "the writings"?
Dear Gilberto,
By "Writings" I mean our scriptures; what we consider the Word of God.
Baha'u'llah and the New Era is just a piece
In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:40:41 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What practice is a part of proper "holy war" (not its distortions)which would be absolutely ruled out by the Bahai concepts ofcollective security, "righteous" warfare, and hikmat.In particular, why would the
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:33:49 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So are you saying that Christ already taught non-resistance. But thenunder Muhammad's dispensation the community progressed past it? Thenthe Bahai dispensation went backwards to what Christ taught?
"> Hither
> Secondly, the people being
> protected would also definitely include the non-Muslims who were
> members of the community. (That's what the jizya is for to begin
> with). So perhaps I should have been clearer but the state would have
> the obligation to protect the lives of all its citizens regard
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:25:52 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:21:10 PM Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> If you are just arguing about the "names" that seems an odd
> distinction to make. Actions are either right or wrong, regardl
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:29:32 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you understand what I'm asking?
Yes.
Regards,
Scott
__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com
To unsubscribe, sen
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:11:11 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 12:00:39 PM Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> You are allowed to apply capital punishment according to your
> religion. You are allowed to engage in "collective security"
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:21:10 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you are just arguing about the "names" that seems an odddistinction to make. Actions are either right or wrong, regardless ofwhose "name" they've been done in.PeaceGilberto
Here's the first couple paragra
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:50:16 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:58:08 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> "So I honestly think it is difficult to clearly distinguish between
> "defending the religion" and "defending the country
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:51:39 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Defending" could be nothing more than apologetics.
Gilberto:
> I could actually say the same about jihad then. There is a hadith
> which states: ""The best jihad is speaking the truth to an unjust
> ruler."
> Dea
In a message dated 1/21/2005 2:17:16 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gilberto:Why isn't "Bahaullah and the New Era" "the writings"? That section also quotes a passage from Abdul-Baha which elaborates onthe concept in interesting ways as well.
No, it is not. It is by a Baha`i
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:42:57 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:40:20 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Where did the word 'righteous' come from?
> In "Bahaullah and the New Era" there is an entire chapter called
> "Righ
In a message dated 1/21/2005 12:15:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1903,
not 1906.
Oops, sorry. I always associate with the Constitutional Revolution.
__
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail
In a message dated 1/21/2005 12:00:16 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"You are allowed to apply capital punishment according to
yourreligion. You are allowed to engage in "collective security" in
yourreligion. You are allowed to engage in "righteous warfare" in
In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:58:08 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pretty much every discussion of physical jihad I've seen from
atraditional/orthodox persepctive talks about it in the context
ofdefending Muslim lands and lives
Dear Gilberto,
When
In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:40:20 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Where did the word 'righteous' come from? In "Bahaullah
and the New Era" there is an entire chapter called"Righteous
Warfare"
Okay. The term 'righteous warfare' occurs nowhere in the Writ
1903, not 1906.
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 12/25/2004 1:20:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>
> I think I would define "H.ikmat" a trifle differently in a Bahá'í
> reference.
> Perhaps Susan or Khazeh could offer a better definition?
In a message dated 1/21/2005 12:00:39 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You are allowed to apply capital punishment according to yourreligion. You are allowed to engage in "collective security" in yourreligion. You are allowed to engage in "righteous warfare" in yourreligion.
I
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:43:07 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:29:15 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > "Defending" could be nothing more than apologetics.
> I could actually say the same about jihad then. There is a had
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:19:31 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:44:56 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> "So whatever it means to "blot out holy war" it doesn't absolutely
> exclude the possibility that Bahais would take up arm
In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:29:15 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
"Defending" could be nothing more than apologetics. I could actually
say the same about jihad then. There is a hadithwhich states: ""The best
jihad is speaking the truth to an
unjustruler."
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:16:25 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:40:43 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> "What practice is a part of proper "holy war" (not its distortions)
> which would be absolutely ruled out by the Bahai con
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:43:05 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:40:33 A.M. Central Standard Time,
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:10:16 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 12/25/2004 1:20:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EM
In a message dated 1/21/2005 11:20:38 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dear Gilberto,
They cannot do so in defense of their religion. They might be able to do so in defense of their country under these circumstances, but I can't say for sure.
Waging war in defense of
In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:44:56 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"So whatever it means to "blot out holy war" it doesn't
absolutelyexclude the possibility that Bahais would take up arms to
defendthemselves and fight non-Bahais."
Dear Gilberto,
They
In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:40:43 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You still haven't convincinglyexplained or shown why there would be
any morally significantdifference between the "holy wars" carried out
under the leadership ofthe prophet Muhammad or Imam Huss
In a message dated 1/21/2005 9:40:33 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the distinction you are making between "protecting" and
"defending"?
Dear Gilberto,
"Defending" could be nothing more than apologetics. I'm talking about
what could be life and
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:13:25 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 12/25/2004 9:40:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[hypothetical situation of a small group of Bahai countries being
attacked by a coaliion of fundamentalist countries on
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:18:34 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 12/25/2004 11:13:05 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> But when Bahais make a big deal out say that "holy war" has been
> abrogated it gives the impression that somehow they ar
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:10:16 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 12/25/2004 1:20:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> I think I would define "H.ikmat" a trifle differently in a Bahá'í reference.
> Perhaps Susan or Khazeh could offer a be
Hi, Susan,
At 01:24 AM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
>>I don't recall the Guardian referring to a woman's physician in this context
>>though I'm aware the House of Justice has. Do you have a reference?<<
I looked around for it, but I could not find it. That statement was, I believe,
in a letter written
In a message dated 12/25/2004 6:02:53 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Although Shoghi Effendi said that abortions should not be permitted
unless authorized by the woman's physician
Dear Mark,
I don't recall the Guardian referring to a woman's physician
In a message dated 12/25/2004 11:46:40 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
it's
true that the early, formative years of the Babí andBahá'í Faith were
characterized by a good deal of violence and bloodshed
Babi, not Baha'i.
_
In a message dated 12/25/2004 11:13:05 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But when Bahais make a big deal out say that "holy war" has
beenabrogated it gives the impression that somehow they are more
peaceful,or closer to pacifism, etc. than other religions in princi
In a message dated 12/25/2004 9:40:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Butthey see the Bahai faith as a threat to their worldview,
theirculture, their religion. And as a response, several countries led
byreligious militant fundamentalists join together an attack t
In a message dated 12/25/2004 1:20:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I
think I would define "H.ikmat" a trifle differently in a Bahá'í
reference.Perhaps Susan or Khazeh could offer a better
definition?
Not promote or defend but sometimes to protect. For instan
G
Gilberto:
In some neighborhoods, teenagers will kill one another because someone
is wearing a red bandana instead of a blue bandana (and vice versa in
certain other neighborhoods). This doesn't prove that bandana color is
a fundamental essential issue.
I spent ten years as a parame
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:14:56 -0800, Rich Ater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gilberto:
> Shia and Sunni disagree about certain issues but I'm not
> persuaded that the issues are fundemnantal or essential.
> Well, you may
> be in a minority here. Sunni are killing Shi'a in India and they are
> per
Gilberto:
Shia and Sunni disagree about certain issues but I'm not persuaded
that the issues are fundemnantal or essential.
Well, you may be in a minority here. Sunni are killing Shi'a in
India and they are persecuted in Saudi Arabia. Iraq is a whole other
kettle of worms. We shouldn't
Gilberto,
At 02:31 PM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
>>I'm not sure if I'm always careful to say it this way but I would say
>>"typical Muslims". Historically some past scholars (If I remember correctly
>>Ibn Taymiyya might even be in this camp) took the position that "corruption"
>>was a matter of wrong
On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 11:25:30 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, John,
> At 10:26 AM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
> >>Then what is meant by saying that the Bible is corrupted, and the teaching
> >>of the Sonship, Divinity of Christ, Crucifixtion of Christ, etc. are all
> >>made-up by
Hi, Gilberto,
At 12:28 PM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
>>Do you find them less convincing than Bahai attempts to reconcile the Bible
>>and Quran?
No, that is what I was saying. I think that the various texts incorporated the
Bible can be studied; and the Qur'an can be studied. If there are similaritie
Hi, John,
At 10:35 AM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
>>Remember, we are not talking about this or that school in Islam. Aren't we
>>talking about Gilberto's version / view of Islam, as he presents it ?? !!<<
I was referring to various Islamic positions, including among certain Islamic
(not "universal"
G: That's correct. I wouldn't make definite claims about Sidhartha orKrishna or others, but I wouldn't rule out that they were founded byprophets. I mean, in one hadith it says that in human history therewere as many as 124,000 prophets, so in fact most of them we probablydon't know. ALOT of the g
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), John Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark, At any rate, thanks for the correct. In fact, I don't disagree with
> what you are saying. My statement did make some unjustified leaps and
> assumptions. Let me restate what I really mean.
> Remember, we
On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:14:21 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John,
> At 09:45 AM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
> >>Isn't it more universal to do the one (Baha'i) than the other (Islam) ?
> >>Islam does not accept all religions as they are as valid expressions from
> >>God. The Baha'
On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:19:54 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, Gilberto,
> At 02:43 AM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
> >>If Bahais can try to present the doctrines of Christianity, Islam,
> >>Buddhism, Zorastrianism, etc. in a way which reconciles the apparent
> >>differences betwee
Hi, John,
At 10:26 AM 1/8/2005, you wrote:
>>Then what is meant by saying that the Bible is corrupted, and the teaching of
>>the Sonship, Divinity of Christ, Crucifixtion of Christ, etc. are all made-up
>>by man? Isn't this not accepting Christianity as it presents itself?<<
Obviously, Muslims
Mark, At any rate, thanks for the correct. In fact, I don't disagree with what you are saying. My statement did make some unjustified leaps and assumptions. Let me restate what I really mean.
Remember, we are not talking about this or that school in Islam. Aren't we talking about Gilberto's
1 - 100 of 171 matches
Mail list logo