Mark,
Just out of curiosity: why did you use the term unity of religions in the
post to which I responded?
Richard.
- Original Message -
From: Mark A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: Eclecticism
Richard,
At 11:26 AM 1/6/2004 -0800, you wrote:
Just out of curiosity: why did you use the term unity of religions in the post to
which I responded?
That was the context of the discussion on the Study Circle list, where I originally
posted the message. There is a Baha'i who was arguing that
A. Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: Eclecticism
Richard,
At 11:26 AM 1/6/2004 -0800, you wrote:
Just out of curiosity: why did you use the term unity of religions in
the post to which I responded
Richard,
At 03:15 PM 1/6/2004 -0800, you quoted:
Briefly, it is not so much a new religion as Religion renewed and unified, which is
directed today by Abdul-Baha.
(Abdu'l-Baha, Tablets of Abdu'l-Baha v1, p. viii)
It seems to me that `Abdu'l-Baha here used religion in much the same way as
As a sociologist he presumably had in mind the totality of the Baha'i experience,
so to speak: Baha'i community life and social norms, Baha'i intellectual life and
philosophy, Baha'i art, and so on - IOW, the human aspect of the religion as opposed
to the divine.
Religion consists of two
Richard,
At 10:23 AM 12/24/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Beyond that, Mark did not make it clear what he meant by unity of religions.
IMO, there is no such thing as the unity of religions.
Mark A. Foster * http://MarkFoster.net
http://CompuServe.m.foster.name
: Gordon Dicks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: Eclecticism
Richard responded:
it seems quite a stretch to seek to define and distinguish an aspect of
the Faith, separate
it from another aspect and then define
Richard responded:
it seems quite a stretch to seek to define and distinguish an aspect of
the Faith, separate
it from another aspect and then define the separated part as an
organisation and as eclectic,
when Shoghi Effendi made no such distinctions.
I agree, if we put things that way.
