This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Interlingua page doesn't yet exist but is linked to by ia:theologia. If I spoke Interlingua I'd write a stub for it. Andrewa 23:54, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)
is there a policy that a NPOV requires denying the revelation of Bahá'í scripture?-- Smkolins 19:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I just added a lot of material to the article regarding content and date of composition. The large block quotation from Shoghi Effendi may be on the long side, but it is a useful summary of the Iqan's content from the point of view of the translator. RHStockman 05:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
The qualifier 'superb' is POV and should be removed. MKV 01:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Introductory Paragraph
The fact that this highly qualified opinion is the opinion of a Baha'i ought to be noted in the text, or perhaps the remark ought to be omitted altogether for POV reasons. For instance, the phrase might better be worded as follows: One Baha'i source ... Kaweah ( talk) 17:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Please provide justification that the Iqan specifically includes subservience to Azal. While some anti-Baha'i commentators have stated that Baha'u'llah's reference to "the Mystic Source" in paragraph 278 is Azal, this is a real stretch and is, from a Baha'i perspective quite blasphemous, not merely because of Azal particularly, but because the Mystic Source is clearly God and not another human being. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.241.132 ( talk • contribs) 2007-12-14
This may be a bone of contention, but it cannot be resolved by asserting that a statement is blasphemous according to a particular POV. In any case, the text in question appears to have been stricken without comment. Kaweah ( talk) 17:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there some special reasons why the four questions that occasioned this book aren't listed in the text? J S Ayer ( talk) 23:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Here in the Wikipedia. J S Ayer ( talk) 22:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kitáb-i-Íqán. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:29, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Interlingua page doesn't yet exist but is linked to by ia:theologia. If I spoke Interlingua I'd write a stub for it. Andrewa 23:54, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)
is there a policy that a NPOV requires denying the revelation of Bahá'í scripture?-- Smkolins 19:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I just added a lot of material to the article regarding content and date of composition. The large block quotation from Shoghi Effendi may be on the long side, but it is a useful summary of the Iqan's content from the point of view of the translator. RHStockman 05:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
The qualifier 'superb' is POV and should be removed. MKV 01:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Introductory Paragraph
The fact that this highly qualified opinion is the opinion of a Baha'i ought to be noted in the text, or perhaps the remark ought to be omitted altogether for POV reasons. For instance, the phrase might better be worded as follows: One Baha'i source ... Kaweah ( talk) 17:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Please provide justification that the Iqan specifically includes subservience to Azal. While some anti-Baha'i commentators have stated that Baha'u'llah's reference to "the Mystic Source" in paragraph 278 is Azal, this is a real stretch and is, from a Baha'i perspective quite blasphemous, not merely because of Azal particularly, but because the Mystic Source is clearly God and not another human being. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.241.132 ( talk • contribs) 2007-12-14
This may be a bone of contention, but it cannot be resolved by asserting that a statement is blasphemous according to a particular POV. In any case, the text in question appears to have been stricken without comment. Kaweah ( talk) 17:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there some special reasons why the four questions that occasioned this book aren't listed in the text? J S Ayer ( talk) 23:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Here in the Wikipedia. J S Ayer ( talk) 22:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kitáb-i-Íqán. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:29, 10 December 2017 (UTC)