Divine revelation

[robrecht]

Thanks, Sen.

[shunyadragon]

Is there a spiritual law that is not in the Bible? Does the Bible have a specific law that Christians have to obey that is not in Baha'i? (My guess is that there is no such law in the Bible, but I'm not sure).

The spiritual laws I can think of are: (1) The Harmony of Science and Religion. (2) Legal and Social Equality of Women. (3) The prohibition of all forms of slavery and involuntary indentured servitude.

I may add more after some thought. Some Spiritual Laws are matter an evolution of the Spiritual teaching or Law and not the fact that there is no such previous Law.

[robrecht]

The spiritual laws I can think of are: (1) The Harmony of Science and Religion. (2) Legal and Social Equality of Women. (4) The prohibition of all forms of slavery and involuntary indentured servitude.

I may add more after some thought. Some Spiritual Laws are matter an evolution of the Spiritual teaching or Law and not the fact that there is no such previous Law.

With respect to 2), have you figured out yet whether or not women may or should be elected to the Universal House of Justice?

What happened to 3)?

[shunyadragon]

With respect to 2), have you figured out yet whether or not women may or should be elected to the Universal House of Justice?

What happened to 3)?

Sorry missed three. We have discussed the question of UHJ. I do not try to (figure out????, more awkward terminology) Baha'i scripture. Notice I said, legal and social equality, and not whether at present they may be elected to the UHJ, which may change in the future as some Baha'is propose. This spiritual law is indeed absent from Judaism, Christianity and Islam, as well as the other spiritual laws mentioned.

It is awkward to personally demand that the spiritual laws and teaching conform to the way you want them to be.

[robrecht]

Sorry missed three. We have discussed the question of UHJ. I do not try to (figure out????, more awkward terminology) Baha'i scripture. Notice I said, legal and social equality, and not whether at present they may be elected to the UHJ, which may change in the future as some Baha'is propose. This spiritual law is indeed absent from Judaism, Christianity and Islam, as well as the other spiritual laws mentioned.

It is awkward to personally demand that the spiritual laws and teaching conform to the way you want them to be.

So you have now determined once again that women may not be elected to the Universal House of Justice? I ask because you have flip flopped on this issue a couple of times recently.

[shunyadragon]

So you have now determined once again that women may not be elected to the Universal House of Justice? I ask because you have flip flopped on this issue a couple of times recently.

You used a bait and switch. You cited different sources. One some Baha'is believe it so. A source I was not aware of. I referred you to Haifa and where the translation now takes place. Then you cited the Universal House of Justice specifically and I answered at the time that the UNJ of Haifa, Israel reflected the current view, and I acknowledged it may change. I believe at the time I answered all your questions. Dialogue DONE. No further discussion needed unless you can provide further relevant information or questions I have not addressed.

[robrecht]

You used a bait and switch. You cited different sources. One some Baha'is believe it so. A source I was not aware of. I referred you to Haifa and where the translation now takes place. Then you cited the Universal House of Justice specifically and I answered at the time that the UNJ of Haifa, Israel reflected the current view, and I acknowledged it may change. I believe at the time I answered all your questions. Dialogue DONE. No further discussion needed unless you can provide further relevant information or questions I have not addressed.

'Bait and switch' implies that I intentionally misled you, which, of course, I would never do and did not do. So that's another false ad hominem on your part. Allow me to refresh your memory as to the real nature of this exchange from my perspective.

OingoBoingo first brought up the fact here that women are not eligible for election (nine members every five years) to the Universal House of Justice, the governing body of the Baha'i faith. You gave what I considered a very encouraging initial response, namely, 'that ALL religious scripture must be interpreted in the light of the evolving knowledge science including Baha'i scripture' (70 cf 130), but then you said here that 'women not being allowed to be elected to the Universal House of Justice is not an issue of science but is rather a spiritual law' and, more specifically, "a spiritual law in the scripture of the Baha'i Faith" (100).

You considered OingoBoingo's attempts to engage in discussion of this and related matters to be "no intellible response nor meaningful dialogue" and so you said that you would not discuss this further with him (81), and that he had a history of being hostile to the Baha'i faith (87 147). By the way, OingoBoingo denied your ad hominem charge against him (91). NormATive and I thought he had brought up some interesting points, but you claimed that OingoBoingo had not posted 'the current position of the official Baha'i Doctrine' (93). And yet, by your own words, and your affirmation of the spiritual law in the sacred Baha'i scriptures, OingoBoingo appeared to have quoted the Baha'i doctrine accurately, at least with respect to the restriction of women from leadership positions within the Universal House of Justice.

I did my own quick research of this question and posted the position of the Universal House of Justice (104). Your position at that time was that the spiritual law that women may not be elected to the International House of Justice is not likely to change but could change, but only with another act of divine revelation and not through the evolution of scientific knowledge nor the decisions of the International House of Justice (130, 132). This seems to be related to your, as yet unexplained