Divine revelation

[robrecht]

One possible source of this is prior Revelations failed to prohibit the burning of books, and tragic events such as the tragic burning of the library of Alexandria occurred.

In previous religions such things as slavery were allowed, and sometimes defined and regulated by scripture. In the Baha'i Law, all forms of slavery and indentured servitude are forbidden.

Also previous Revelations evolved an egocentric exclusiveness in their religion, even though this may have not been necessarily explicitly defined in the Revelation, and I believe this sense of exclusive is a cultural paradigm of ancient religions. The concept that Revelation is universal with all humanity throughout all human history is considered a contradiction by most religions.

Many of the spiritual laws of the Baha'i Faith are laws that were lacking or previously incomplete in previous Revelations.

This Tenth Glad Tiding seems more specific than that for it says: "We have removed from the Holy Scriptures and Tablets the law prescribing the destruction of books." What law was this? Is there some specific law in the Qur'an or in other Holy Scriptures and Tablets that prescribed the destruction of books? This also sounds a little similar to the early purging of prior copies of the Qur'an ordered by Caliph Uthman, but I do not know any such practice was ever prescribed in holy scriptures and tablets?

[robrecht]

The problem is the concept of infallibility and inerrancy of scripture does not mean things do not change in the Baha'i Faith like in some ancient religions. ...

In what sense to Baha'i consider their holy scriptures to be infallible?

[OingoBoingo]

In previous revelations Holy War is either endorsed or allowed in interpretation. In the Baha'i Faith Holy War is forbidden.

Well...not really. There are a number of places that Baha'i leaders talked in militaristic terms, and hinted at a future Holy War of sorts:

Source: 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Star of the West, Vol. 7, p. 157

The Bahá'í Grand Army consist of the invisible angels of the Supreme Concourse. Our swords are the words of love and life. Our armaments are the invisible armaments of Heaven. We are fighting against the forces of darkness. O my soldiers, my beloved soldiers! Foward! Foward! Have no fear of defeat; do not have failing hearts. Our supreme commander is Bahá'u'lláh. From the heights of glory he is directing the dramatic engagement. He commands us! Rush forward! Show the strength of your arms. Ye shall scatter the forces of ignorance.

Your war confers life; their war brings death. Your war is the cause of the illumination of all mankind; their war means the breaking and darkness of hearts. Your war means victory; their war is defeat upon defeat. Your war is the means of construction; their war is the origin of destruction. There are no dangers for you. Push forward! Fire! Fire! Attack the enemy! Your efforts shall be crowned with the diadem of eternal peace and brotherhood. His Holiness the Christ was fighting even upon the cross and His triumphs have continued through ages and cycles.

© Copyright Original Source

Source: http://bahai-library.com/uhj_institution_counsellors#16a

The need to protect the Faith from the attacks of its enemies may not be generally appreciated by the friends, particularly in places where attacks have been infrequent. However, it is certain that such opposition will increase, become concerted, and eventually universal. The writings clearly foreshadow not only an intensification of the machinations of internal enemies, but a rise in the hostility and opposition of its external enemies, whether religious or secular, as the Cause pursues its onward march towards ultimate victory. Therefore, in the light of the warnings of the Guardian, the Auxiliary Boards for Protection should keep "constantly" a "watchful eye" on those "who are known to be enemies, or to have been put out of the Faith", discreetly investigate their activities, alert intelligently the friends to the opposition inevitably to come, explain how each crisis in God's Faith has always proved to be a blessing in disguise, and prepare them for the "dire contest which is destined to range the Army of Light against the forces of darkness".

© Copyright Original Source

The use of militaristic terms is unsettling, but I grant that 'Abdu'l-Bahá was probably talking about a spiritual and intellectual Holy War, and not necessarily a physical one. Whether or not Baha'is in the future will interpret these writings (and other writings like them) in a more literal way, I suppose time will tell. We have plenty of examples of other religions of peace that turned violent when later generations re-interpreted the meaning of their Holy writings.

[robrecht]

I asked Frank a question earlier about dissent within the Baha'i religion but did not receive a response so I just did a quck Google search. I stumbled upon a case of a supposedly 'excommunicated' Baha'i named Sen McGlinn, who wrote a book entitled Church and State: A Postmodern Political Theology. If what I read is correct, the International House of Justice wrote a letter about him to all National Spiritual Assemblies, which included the following:

... In one recent instance, for example, an individual has declared himself a “Bahá’í theologian, writing from and for a religious community,” whose aim is “to criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas of the Bahá’í community, to enable Bahá’ís to understand their relatively new Faith and to see what it can offer the world”. Assertions of this kind go far beyond expressions of personal opinion, which any Bahá’í is free to voice. As illustrated, here is a claim that lies well outside the framework of Bahá’í belief and practice. Bahá’u’lláh has liberated human minds by prohibiting within His Faith any caste with ecclesiastical prerogatives that seeks to foist a self-assumed authority upon the thought and behaviour of the mass of believers. Indeed, He has prescribed a system that combines democratic practices with the application of knowledge through consultative processes. ...

I find this very interesting. In an earlier thread, I attempted to engage Shuny about his claim:

"Degree and role of free thought is an important issue in humanism as differenciated from theism. Theism in one way or another discourages free thought."

This claim seems to be true for Baha'i who presume to be theologians writing for other Baha'i.

[OingoBoingo]

I asked Frank a question earlier about dissent within the Baha'i religion but did not receive a response so I just did a quck Google search. I stumbled upon a case of a supposedly 'excommunicated' Baha'i named Sen McGlinn, who wrote a book entitled Church and State: A Postmodern Political Theology. If what I read is correct, the International House of Justice wrote a letter about him to all National Spiritual Assemblies, which included the following:

... In one recent instance, for example, an individual has declared himself a “Bahá’í theologian, writing from and for a religious community,” whose aim is “to criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas of the Bahá’í community, to enable Bahá’ís to understand their relatively new Faith and to see what it can offer the world”. Assertions of this kind go far beyond expressions of personal opinion, which any Bahá’í is free to voice. As illustrated, here is a claim that lies well outside the framework of Bahá’í belief and practice. Bahá’u’lláh has liberated human minds by prohibiting within His Faith any caste with ecclesiastical prerogatives that seeks to foist a self-assumed authority upon the thought and behaviour of the mass of believers. Indeed, He has prescribed a system that combines democratic practices with the application of knowledge through consultative processes. ...

I find this very interesting. In an earlier thread, I attempted to engage Shuny about his claim:

"Degree and role of free thought is an important issue in humanism as differenciated from theism. Theism in one way or another discourages free thought."

This claim seems to be true for Baha'i who presume to be theologians writing for other Baha'i.

Yeah, as I understand it, what happened was that in the 90s there were some early online forums of Baha'is on Yahoo and on Usenet groups. One in particular, Talisman, attracted a number of academics and intellectuals who were Baha'is. The Universal House of Justice found the nature of some of their discussions uncomfortable, and ruled that a number of the members were dissidents. They then excommunicated a number of those members, and other academics. You can find out a lot about this from blogs of excommunicated members, but the Baha'i Library Online actually hosts a paper about the issue here: http://bahai-library.com/dawai_bahai_subud_dissent.

Here is a snippet from the article:

Source: Bahá'í and Subud Dissent: Developments in the 2000s by Bei Dawai

Bahá'í dissent in the 2000's can be read as a continuation of the "internet wars" of the late 1990's. At this time, the Bahá'í administration either pressured to resign, or actively disenrolled, a number of Bahá'í intellectuals associated with the online Talisman discussion list, for disagreeing with the received line on certain controversial issues. These included the faith's opposition to homosexuality (and the strained scriptural interpretation upon which the policy is based); the exclusion of women from the Universal House of Justice (the same observation applies here); the shunning of "covenant-breakers"; the requirement that any proposed publications on the faith be submitted to regional censorship boards ("Bahá'í review"); and an electoral system which favors incumbents. All of these touch on more fundamental issues of infallibility and institutional authority—against which the dissidents invoke the equally core Bahá'í values of the independent investigation of truth, the elimination of all kinds of prejudice, the equality of men and women, and interreligious harmony. At the risk of oversimplifying a complex web of alliances and animosities, the rift between reforming liberals (many of them academics) and pro-administration conservatives widened, amidst mutual accusations of betrayal. In 1999 the Universal House of Justice complained of a "campaign of internal opposition to the Teachings,"[x] and warned Bahá'ís not to hold their faith to the materialistic standards of secular scholarship.

Following are some major developments of the 21st century:

Indiana University (Bloomington) anthropologist and sometime Bahá'í dissident Linda Walbridge died in 2002. She and her husband, Middle Eastern Studies professor John Walbridge (also of IUB), had both resigned during the Talisman affair, and largely abandoned the field of Bahá'í Studies for other research.

University of Michigan history professor Juan Cole—the most prolific Bahá'í academic during the 1990's, who likewise resigned from the faith during the Talisman affair—turned his attention to other, arguably more important Middle Eastern topics after 9-11. Of his 29 papers in the field of Bahá'í Studies,[xi] only two were published during the early 2000's;[xii] these took on a frank and even scathing tone, now that he was no longer constrained to submit his work to Bahá'í review. Besides Talisman, Cole and John Walbridge were also the organizers of H-Bahai, a now-inactive academic discussion list and online journal, the last of whose Occasional Papers in Shaykhi, Babi, and Bahá'í Studies appeared in 2003.

2005 saw the publication of two significant academic works which proved unexpectedly controversial within the faith (though not, apparently, outside it): William Garlington's The Bahá'í Faith in America (Praeger), which pro-administration critics felt devoted excessive attention to Bahá'í dissent (as opposed to, say, the fifty-year history of the construction of the House of Worship in Wilmette, Illinois); and Sen McGlinn's Church and State: A Postmodern Political Theology (self-published), which discusses the nature of the future global political order, i.e. whether it is to be a theocracy. McGlinn's incidental description of himself as a "Bahá'í theologian" attracted official rebuke, on the grounds that the faith has no clergy. He has since been disenrolled by the administration, for reasons which were never made public, but which seem likely to involve his published views. (Garlington had resigned during the 1980's.) Also in 2005, the U.S. National Spiritual Assembly ordered a partial boycott of Kalimat Press (founded in Los Angeles, 1978 by Anthony Lee and Payram Afsharian), an independent publisher of Bahá'í books known for its academic works, such as the Studies in the Babi and Bahá'í Religions series (eighteen volumes). At issue was Kalimat's promotion of scholarly books by Cole, Garlington, McGlinn, and Abbas Amanat.[xiii]

© Copyright Original Source

I don't know if Sen McGlinn is strictly a Baha'i theologian, but he wrote his MA dissertation on Church and State in Islam and the Baha’i Faith, and last anyone has heard, was working on a study of the institutions of the Baha’i community, which was intended to become a PhD thesis.

[shunyadragon]

In what sense to Baha'i consider their holy scriptures to be infallible?

The spiritual law and teachings in the scriptures are infallible and inerrant.

[robrecht]

The spiritual law and teachings in the scriptures are infallible and inerrant.

I already know what you consider infallible and inerrant. What I asked is, in what sense are they infallible. For example, you've arleady said that they can be changed by subsequent revelation. So perhaps there is some sense of temporary infallibility and temporary inerrancy? Sort of like the best approximation that one can arrive at for now but theoretically or potentially able to improved upon. Is that correct? Or do you have a better explanation of how your holy scriptures are infallible and inerrant?

[shunyadragon]

Well...not really. There are a number of places that Baha'i leaders talked in militaristic terms, and hinted at a future Holy War of sorts:

Source: 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Star of the West, Vol. 7, p. 157

The Bahá'í Grand Army consist of the invisible angels of the Supreme Concourse. Our swords are the words of love and life. Our armaments are the invisible armaments of Heaven. We are fighting against the forces of darkness. O my soldiers, my beloved soldiers! Foward! Foward! Have no fear of defeat; do not have failing hearts. Our supreme commander is Bahá'u'lláh. From the heights of glory he is directing the dramatic engagement. He commands us! Rush forward! Show the strength of your arms. Ye shall scatter the forces of ignorance.

Your war confers life; their war brings death. Your war is the cause of the illumination of all mankind; their war means the breaking and darkness of hearts. Your war means victory; their war is defeat upon defeat. Your war is the means of construction; their war is the origin of destruction. There are no dangers for you. Push forward! Fire! Fire! Attack the enemy! Your efforts shall be crowned with the diadem of eternal peace and brotherhood. His Holiness the Christ was fighting even upon the cross and His triumphs have continued through ages and cycles.

© Copyright Original Source

Source: http://bahai-library.com/uhj_institution_counsellors#16a

The need to protect the Faith from the attacks of its enemies may not be generally appreciated by the friends, particularly in places where attacks have been infrequent. However, it is certain that such opposition will increase, become concerted, and eventually universal. The writings clearly foreshadow not only an intensification of the machinations of internal enemies, but a rise in the hostility and opposition of its external enemies, whether religious or secular, as the Cause pursues its onward march towards ultimate victory. Therefore, in the light of the warnings of the Guardian, the Auxiliary Boards for Protection should keep "constantly" a "watchful eye" on those "who are known to be enemies, or to have been put out of the Faith", discreetly investigate their activities, alert intelligently the friends to the opposition inevitably to come, explain how each crisis in God's Faith has always proved to be a blessing in disguise, and prepare them for the "dire contest which is destined to range the Army of Light against the forces of darkness".

© Copyright Original Source

The use of militaristic terms is unsettling, but I grant that 'Abdu'l-Bahá was probably talking about a spiritual and intellectual Holy War, and not necessarily a physical one. Whether or not Baha'is in the future will interpret these writings (and other writings like them) in a more literal way, I suppose time will tell. We have plenty of examples of other religions of peace that turned violent when later generations re-interpreted the meaning of their Holy writings.

The following should be sufficient specifying the prohibition of actual Holy War, and not symbolic passages on spiritual conflict, which in and of themselves do not advocate holy war.

'O ye children of men! The fundamental purpose animating the Faith of God and His Religion is to safeguard the interests and promote the unity of the human race, and to foster the spirit of love and fellowship amongst men. Suffer it not to become a source of dissension and discord, of hate and enmity. This is the straight Path, the fixed and immovable foundation. Whatsoever is raised on this foundation, the changes and chances of the world can never impair its strength, nor will the revolution of countless centuries undermine its structure. Our hope is that the world's religious leaders and the rulers thereof will unitedly arise for the reformation of this age and the rehabilitation of its fortunes. Let them, after meditating on its needs, take counsel together and, through anxious and full deliberation, administer to a diseased and sorely-afflicted world the remedy it requireth.'

Baha'u'llah

Source: Baha'u'llah and the New Era, Pages 169-171: gr2

When Baha'u'llah appeared, He declared that the promulgation of the truth by such means must on no account be allowed, even for purposes of self-defense. He abrogated the rule of the sword and annulled the ordinance of "Holy War." "If ye be slain," said He, "it is better for you than to slay. It is through the firmness and assurance of the faithful that the Cause of the Lord must be diffused. As the faithful, fearless and undaunted, arise with absolute detachment to exalt the Word of God, and, with eyes averted from the things of this world, engaged in service for the Lord's sake and by His power, thereby will they cause the Word of Truth to triumph. These blessed souls bear witness by their lifeblood to the truth of the Cause and attest it by the sincerity of their faith, their devotion and their constancy. The Lord can avail to diffuse His Cause and to defeat the forward. We desire no defender but Him, and with our lives in our hands face the foe and welcome martyrdom."

© Copyright Original Source

[shunyadragon]

I asked Frank a question earlier about dissent within the Baha'i religion but did not receive a response so I just did a quck Google search. I stumbled upon a case of a supposedly 'excommunicated' Baha'i named Sen McGlinn, who wrote a book entitled Church and State: A Postmodern Political Theology. If what I read is correct, the International House of Justice wrote a letter about him to all National Spiritual Assemblies, which included the following:

... In one recent instance, for example, an individual has declared himself a “Bahá’í theologian, writing from and for a religious community,” whose aim is “to criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas of the Bahá’í community, to enable Bahá’ís to understand their relatively new Faith and to see what it can offer the world”. Assertions of this kind go far beyond expressions of personal opinion, which any Bahá’í is free to voice. As illustrated, here is a claim that lies well outside the framework of Bahá’í belief and practice. Bahá’u’lláh has liberated human minds by prohibiting within His Faith any caste with ecclesiastical prerogatives that seeks to foist a self-assumed authority upon the thought and behaviour of the mass of believers. Indeed, He has prescribed a system that combines democratic practices with the application of knowledge through consultative processes. ...

I find this very interesting. In an earlier thread, I attempted to engage Shuny about his claim:

"Degree and role of free thought is an important issue in humanism as differenciated from theism. Theism in one way or another discourages free thought."

This claim seems to be true for Baha'i who presume to be theologians writing for other Baha'i.

If you notice, I said 'in one way or another,' including the Baha'i Faith, humanism, in fact as stated in the 'Principles of Belief' for the Unitarian Universalists,' does have greater freedom of thought then theism in that nothing theist is sacred in terms of the nature of God and Revelation. There are no sacred core beliefs in the Theistic sense. The above is an example of the problem of one 'claiming to be an authority' over the authority of the elected Universal House of Justice as the interpreter of Baha'i scripture.

To become a Baha'i, is to embrace the core theistic belief of the Baha'i Faith and the authority of the scriptures and the Universal House of Justice. Personal opinions beyond this is wide open, and not an issue unless one claims an unwarranted claim of authority as an individual.

[robrecht]

If you notice, I said 'in one way or another,' including the Baha'i Faith, humanism, in fact as stated in the 'Principles of Belief' for the Unitarian Universalists,' does have greater freedom of thought then theism in that nothing theist is sacred in terms of the nature of God and Revelation. There are no sacred core beliefs in the Theistic sense. The above is an example of the problem of one 'claiming to be an authority' over the authority of the elected Universal House of Justice as the interpreter of Baha'i scripture.

To become a Baha'i, is to embrace the core theistic belief of the Baha'i Faith and the authority of the scriptures and the Universal House of Justice. Personal opinions beyond this is wide open, and not an issue unless one claims an unwarranted claim of authority as an individual.

Did he really claim any kind of authority comparable or competitive with the infallible International House of Justice? It sounded more like he just claimed to be a Baha'i believer with some theological training and wrote a book that for other Baha'i believers to read. Did he insist that his authority were such that his readers must agree with him in order to remain Baha'i in good standing? What exactly was his unwarranted claim to authority? Do you happen to know what was so destructive or dangerous about his views? Were his views as subversive of Baha'i faith as, for example, the dissenting or controversial theological views of Thomas Aquinas, Henri de Lubac, Hans Küng, Edward Schillebeeckx, or Karl Rahner's in their Roman Catholic contexts, where all were allowed to remain not only Catholic but active priests in good standing? It may be that we just have very different experiences of what it means to be a theist. For me, it is incredibly liberating of my mind and spirit and I feel no constraint or obstacles to free thought whatsoever. All of my beliefs, theistic and otherwise, are all freely assented to and allow me to explore dimensions of love and belief that I would never have known otherwise. I always say and teach exactly what I believe. While some Catholics in authority may sometimes not want to, or feel they cannot, hire me to represent Catholic teaching, that too is their freedom to exercise their responsibility as they see fit, and I would not have it any other way.

[shunyadragon]

Did he really claim any kind of authority comparable or competitive with the infallible International House of Justice? .

It is my understanding that he did.

[robrecht]

It is my understanding that he did.

Do you have a reference to support this?

Are you able to respond to any of my other questions, please?

Did he insist that his authority were such that his readers must agree with him in order to remain Baha'i in good standing? What exactly was his unwarranted claim to authority? Do you happen to know what was so destructive or dangerous about his views? Were his views as subversive of Baha'i faith as, for example, the dissenting or controversial theological views of Thomas Aquinas, Henri de Lubac, Hans Küng, Edward Schillebeeckx, or Karl Rahner's in their Roman Catholic contexts (all of whom were allowed to remain not only Catholic but also active priests in good standing)?

[shunyadragon]

I already know what you consider infallible and inerrant. What I asked is, in what sense are they infallible. For example, you've arleady said that they can be changed by subsequent revelation. So perhaps there is some sense of temporary infallibility and temporary inerrancy? Sort of like the best approximation that one can arrive at for now but theoretically or potentially able to improved upon. Is that correct? Or do you have a better explanation of how your holy scriptures are infallible and inerrant?

Yes, there is a concept of 'temporal infallibility and inerrancy,' because our spiritual nature evolves and becomes more mature. It is my understanding that the basic foundation principles such as the 'Oneness of God,' and the 'Universal nature of Revelation' are universal truths and will never change. spiritual laws as in the Katab-I-agdas will be subject to change. The process of change will parallel a natural evolving human nature, and the evolving spiritual civilization that will likely extend to the planets and possibly beyond.

Some of this is of course conjecture, but the reality is that the Baha'i view reflects the natural, and spiritual evolution of humanity and the nature of our physical existence that we experience closer then any other of the ancient religions.

If a 'Source' some call God(s) exists, it is most likely the God of the Baha'i Faith.

[shunyadragon]

This Tenth Glad Tiding seems more specific than that for it says: "We have removed from the Holy Scriptures and Tablets the law prescribing the destruction of books." What law was this? Is there some specific law in the Qur'an or in other Holy Scriptures and Tablets that prescribed the destruction of books? This also sounds a little similar to the early purging of prior copies of the Qur'an ordered by Caliph Uthman, but I do not know any such practice was ever prescribed in holy scriptures and tablets?

Uncertain, I will check.

[robrecht]

Yes, there is a concept of 'temporal infallibility and inerrancy,' because our spiritual nature evolves and becomes more mature. It is my understanding that the basic foundation principles such as the 'Oneness of God,' and the 'Universal nature of Revelation' are universal truths and will never change. spiritual laws as in the Katab-I-agdas will be subject to change. The process of change will parallel a natural evolving human nature, and the evolving spiritual civilization that will likely extend to the planets and possibly beyond.

Some of this is of course conjecture, but the reality is that the Baha'i view reflects the natural, and spiritual evolution of humanity and the nature of our physical existence that we experience closer then any other of the ancient religions.

If a 'Source' some call God(s) exists, it is most likely the God of the Baha'i Faith.

1. If one of the basic foundational principles is the 'Oneness of God', why do you speak here (and elsewhere) of 'God(s)'?
   
2. Do you perhaps mean something more aking to the neo-Platonic simplicity of God, ie, undefinability but not numerical 'oneness'?
   
3. What is your basis for saying that the Baha'i view more closely reflects the natural and spiritual evolution of humanity than other religions?
   
4. How exactly do you differentiate between the God of the Baha'i faith and the God of other religious people?
   
5. When you claim that it is most likely the God of the Baha'i faith that exists (ie, not the God of other peoples?), is that not an unnecessarily divisive claim that militates against the Baha'i promotion of unity of humankind and the 'Universal nature of Revelation?