Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
PaulHammond (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1:
==Covenant Breaker==
As it is clearly stated in the Will and Testament, only the Guardian of the Faith has the authority to declare a believer a Covenant Breaker. This is the most serious charge imaginable to a believer, and is never issued lightly. As no Guardian of the Faith ever declared Dr. Jensen a Covenant Breaker before or after his death, it is erroneous to ever state that Dr. Jensen has this stigma in the after-life. Moreover it is irrelevant whether other believers or even institutions "consider" him to be one or not, as they are just opinions and not actually sanctions conforming to the Sacred Will and Testament which is the charter for all institutions governing the Faith. [[User:Jeffmichaud]]
:OTOH, it's pretty undisputable fact that the mainstream group of Baha'is (what most people mean when they just use the word "Baha'i") regard Leland Jensen as a covenant breaker - indeed, he was the most cult-like of all the Guardian claimants, seeing as how he alone, amongst all the putative Guardians, actually did have sex with several of the women in his cult. [[User:PaulHammond|PaulHammond]] 09:33, 16 November 2005
:Did any Guardian ever declare him one? NO! The entire world could "regard" him one and it don't mean diddly, guvna. The term is tossed about so cavalierly. Far from considering him a C.B., the Guardian Shoghi Effendi made him a Knight of Baha'u'llah. He spent his entire life promoting the Cause of Baha'u'llah, not the cause of Leland, turning believers towards God and the Cause. Tossing about unsubstantiated charges based on hearsay and rumor is called libel, good friend. To stoop to that instead of using fact seems beneath you. You name me one believer who can say they've turned half as many people on to Bahau'llah and the Faith as Dr. Jensen (some estimates are between 5 and 10 Thousand), and your next cup of Earl Grey is on me. [User:Jeffmichaud] (UTC)
::Well, that would be because Leland Jensen's covenant breaking took place after Shoghi's death, now wouldn't it? If you recall, Baha'u'llah did indeed say that Muhammad Ali ought to succeed Abdu'l Baha, and the Bab did indeed appoint Subh-i-Azal to lead after his death. Just because someone you like says nice things about a person doesn't stop things going pear-shaped afterwards. Jeff, you don't know me very well, so I'd appreciate if you didn't start calling me a "good friend" or speculating about what might or might not be beneath me. I take it that you aren't disputing the fact that Leland served a jail term for lewd behaviour? That one appears to be substantiated fact. I know there's a lot of people unofficially declared CBs by enthusiastic Baha'is, but that isn't the case with Jensen. The UHJ have officially declared him a Covenant Breaker, and that's a fact. [[User:PaulHammond|PaulHammond]] 22:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Paul, you do understand that only the Guardian of the Faith has the authority to make such a declaration, right? The UHJ wasn't given that authority either in the Master's Will, nor in any other Explicit Text. The sans-Guardian UHJ can't "officially declare" anyone a C.B. as far as the Explicit Texts are concerned. So here is where we'll have to agree to disagree. You go on following the sans-Guardians down the road of error, and I'll continue as always to follow the Covenant, the Master, and the Explicit Text. [[User:Jeffmichaud]]
::I understand that the UHJ has so declared him, and that the UHJ is the authority mandated to make such declarations. The mainstream Baha'is find the term "sans-Guardian UHJ" insulting. You do your level best to deny the fact that the UHJ declare Leland a Covenant Breaker. This is the heart of the issue of Covenant Breaking. You aren't going to solve that issue by editing articles on Wikipedia. [[User:PaulHammond|PaulHammond]] 00:11, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
:Patently not true. The Universal House of Justice indeed has that authority. It was instituted by Bahá'u'lláh, properly elected per the Guardian's instructions at the close of the Ten-Year Crusage, and explicitly identified as the authoritative body on matters not found in the holy books — including determining who is, or is not, a Covenant breaker. 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Himself, is absolutely clear regarding the authority of the House of Justice in the very ''Will and Testament'' these people are so fond of selectively quoting:
::And now, concerning the House of Justice which God hath ordained as the source of all good and freed from all error, ... By this House is meant the Universal House of Justice, ... It enacteth all ordinances and regulations that are not to be found in the explicit Holy Text.
:::('Abdu'l-Bahá, ''The Will and Testament'', p. 14)
:[[User:MARussellPESE|MARussellPESE]] 16:04, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
All conjecture and debatable. The Master's Words you quote are in my opinion not relevant in this case, for it all hinges on your fantasy that the sans-Guardian UHJ was established according to the Provisions of His Will, which I don't believe to be the case. Another flaw in this thinking is that it was "properly elected per the Guardian's instructions", for this is patently not true. The fIBC was to "efflouresce" through four stages: IBC, World Court, Supreme Tribunal (1st elected stage), and finally the UHJ. I'm not even getting into the whole Guardian, Twin Pillars thing. Your statements, though impressively crafted, are patently flawed. [[User:Jeffmichaud]]
== Covenant breaking again ==
Regardless of how you interpret scripture, the opening paragraph must mention that Leland Jensen is considered a covenant breaker by most Baha'is. Whether or not you agree with it is one thing, but he was labelled a covenant breaker. It's deceiving if it's not mentioned. Someone reading this page might come to the conclusion that Jensen led a group of Baha'is within the Baha'i administrative structure. [[User:Cunado19|<font color="#d14c04">'''Cuñado'''</font>]] [[image:Bahaitemplatestar.png|20px]] - [[User talk:Cunado19|<font size="-3">Talk</font>]] 18:53, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
:This statement "whose followers are labelled by the majority of Bahá'ís as [[covenant-breaker]]s" is unacceptable. The "majority of Baha'is" have no authority to label anyone anything. According to Wikipedia's Files there are only two individuals who officially carry the title "Covenant Breaker"; one is Mason Remey, and Dr. Jensen's NOT the other one. Provide an "autorative reference" or drop the subject. This statement is just hearsay otherwise. BTW, I've also been "labelled" one by the hijackers on Mt. Carmel. I've used my real name so there would be no confusion about who I am. Why are you communicating with me if you blindly follow the rulings of that FALLIBLE "House of Justice"? Careful you don't get reported on for collaborating with enemies. You could get in trouble for this you know. [[User:Jeffmichaud]]
::Once again, whether or not you agree with the label, or agree with the authority to give that label is rather irrelevant. Wikipedia's "files" had Leland Jensen on the list as a covenant breaker until '''you''' removed him.
::The only way the statement should be removed is if he was not actually labelled as a covenant breaker by the rest of the Baha'is, and that is not the case. [[User:Cunado19|<font color="#d14c04">'''Cuñado'''</font>]] [[image:Bahaitemplatestar.png|20px]] - [[User talk:Cunado19|<font size="-3">Talk</font>]]
That accusation is insulting and out of order. I could care less who's name is on that list. I was pointing out that Jensen's not on it. I've had nothing to do with editing that list of names, and you have no right to say I have. This statement that "whose followers are labelled by the majority of Bahá'ís as [[covenant-breaker]]s" is unacceptable. It doesn't conform with the definition, for the "majority of Baha'is" don't have any say in the matter. If it can be shown that he was labelled that by an Institution then say which and reference it, or drop it. [[User:Jeffmichaud]]
:The way the statement is written is in line with other Wikipedia articles. See [[Ahmadi]] and [[Mirza Ghulam Ahmad]] who "mainstream" muslims (Both Sunni, and Shia) see as heritical. The statement that mainstream Muslims see them as heretical and controversial are in both articles at the top. -- [[User:Jeff3000|Jeff3000]] 13:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
| |||