Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Divine revelation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    Again, it would only be relevant to our discussion if you were a member of a dissenting group.
    I do not think that was the intent of OingoBoingo who brought up that problem. His intent was to present a chaotic disorganized picture of the Baha'i Faith where it was open to interpretation to mean anything someone wanted.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • and other western countries
      Originally posted by NormATive View Post
      Hmm. Interesting in light of our discussion on evolution of religion.

      What would Christianity today be like were it not for individual reformers like St. Paul, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, Pope John Paul II, and etc...?
      Actually I do not consider the above significant reformers in Christianity. For example Martin Luther believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible, literal Genesis and rejected modern cosmology, and endorsed a violent persecution and ethnic cleansing of Jews. St. Augustine St. Thomas Aquinas were more into philosophical justification of Christian Faith not reform. St Paul (Saul), no reform here, he established the Hellenist Roman foundation of Christianity. John Paul II like our present pope advocated limited reforms under the already firmly established Doctrine, Dogma, and Disaplines of the Roman Church. Neither pope has openly advocated any radical reform of the foundation of the church.

      Or Judaism without the individual reformers like Hillel and yes; even Jesus of Nazareth?
      Jesus of Nazareth would be considered a reformer outside the traditional Churches like Unitarian Universalists, but not within the churches. They consider him the Messiah and the Revealer of a new revelation from God that fulfilled Judaism.

      If you are interested I would like to discuss Hillel in another thread.

      Islam today, mostly among radicals, is heavily influenced by the teachings of one man: Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab. Usama bin Laden was influenced greatly by Wahhabist teaching.

      I wonder...

      NORM
      Attempts at reform in Islam, like Christianity, results in more divisions and violence.



      Subject of an upcoming thread: I seriously believe that the radicalization of Islam is directly a product of Western countries, to colonize, subdivide the Islamic world dividing ethic and religious division like a pie for there own plans to manipulate, colonize and control the Middle East, and their resources. There is also a distinct pattern to suppress and destroy moderate Islamic political parties and groups who supported democracy over the past 100 years or more. The USA and other western countries supported corrupt military and royal families that also suppressed moderate Islam.
      Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-26-2014, 10:08 AM.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        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. Statements on the physical sciences in scripture is not considered infallible nor inerrant. Decisions of the Universal House of Justice are also subject to change as knowledge evolves. The spiritual laws of the Katab-i-aqdas is not likely subject to change and the heart of scriptural inerrancy in the Baha'i Faith, until a later future Revelation. There are no statements concerning the physical nature of our existence in the Katab-i-aqdas.

        The question was previously asked about independent 'personal Divine Revelation' by believers in the Baha'i Faith that would change scripture or give an specific interpretation. The answer is not likely accepted.
        I don't know of any official statement that the Baha'i scriptures are considered infallible and inerrant except when making statements on the physical sciences. 'Abdu'l-Bahá did write:

        Source: The Promulgation of Universal Peace

        religion must conform to reason and be in accord with the conclusions of science. For religion, reason and science are realities; therefore, these three, being realities, must conform and be reconciled. A question or principle which is religious in its nature must be sanctioned by science. Science must declare it to be valid, and reason must confirm it in order that it may inspire confidence. If religious teaching, however, be at variance with science and reason, it is unquestionably superstition. The Lord of mankind has bestowed upon us the faculty of reason whereby we may discern the realities of things. How then can man rightfully accept any proposition which is not in conformity with the processes of reason and the principles of science? Assuredly such a course cannot inspire man with confidence and real belief.

        © Copyright Original Source



        But that's a far cry from stating that Baha'i scripture is fallible in matters of science.

        For more on the Baha'i Faith and Science you can check the following wikipedia link, but it does have a bit of an apologetic bent.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%...th_and_science

        The authoritative view, as espoused by the Universal House of Justice on matters of scriptural inerrancy and science can be read here:

        Source: http://bahai-library.com/uhj_infallibility_abdulbaha

        In considering the whole field of divinely conferred "infallibility" one must be careful to avoid the literal understanding and petty-mindedness that has so often characterised discussions of this matter in the Christian world. The Manifestation of God (and, to a lesser degree, 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi,) has to convey tremendous concepts covering the whole field of human life and activity to people whose present knowledge and degree of understanding are far below His. He must use the limited medium of human language against the limited and often erroneous background of His audience's traditional knowledge and current understanding to raise them to a wholly new level of awareness and behaviour. It is a human tendency, against which the Manifestation warns us, to measure His statements against the inaccurate standard of the acquired knowledge of mankind. We tend to take them and place them within one or other of the existing categories of human philosophy or science while, in reality, they transcend these and will, if properly understood, open new and vast horizons to our understanding.

        © Copyright Original Source



        And here:

        Source: http://bahai-library.com/compilation_science_technology.html#14

        With regard to the harmony of science and religion, the Writings of the Central Figures and the commentaries of the Guardian make abundantly clear that the task of humanity, including the Bahá'í community that serves as the "leaven" within it, is to create a global civilization which embodies both the spiritual and material dimensions of existence. The nature and scope of such a civilization are still beyond anything the present generation can conceive. The prosecution of this vast enterprise will depend on a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry. This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality. It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development. The challenge facing Bahá'í thinkers is to provide responsible leadership in this endeavour, since it is they who have both the priceless insights of the Revelation and the advantages conferred by scientific investigation.

        © Copyright Original Source

        Last edited by OingoBoingo; 06-26-2014, 10:40 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          I do not think that was the intent of OingoBoingo who brought up that problem. His intent was to present a chaotic disorganized picture of the Baha'i Faith where it was open to interpretation to mean anything someone wanted.
          No, that wasn't really my intent, but now that you mention it...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            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. Statements on the physical sciences in scripture is not considered infallible nor inerrant. Decisions of the Universal House of Justice are also subject to change as knowledge evolves. The spiritual laws of the Katab-i-aqdas is not likely subject to change and the heart of scriptural inerrancy in the Baha'i Faith, until a later future Revelation. There are no statements concerning the physical nature of our existence in the Katab-i-aqdas.

            The question was previously asked about independent 'personal Divine Revelation' by believers in the Baha'i Faith that would change scripture or give an specific interpretation. The answer is not likely accepted.
            So, do I understand this correctly? 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. Is that correct?
            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

            Comment


            • Originally posted by OingoBoingo View Post
              I don't know of any official statement that the Baha'i scriptures are considered infallible and inerrant except when making statements on the physical sciences. 'Abdu'l-Bahá did write:

              Source: The Promulgation of Universal Peace

              religion must conform to reason and be in accord with the conclusions of science. For religion, reason and science are realities; therefore, these three, being realities, must conform and be reconciled. A question or principle which is religious in its nature must be sanctioned by science. Science must declare it to be valid, and reason must confirm it in order that it may inspire confidence. If religious teaching, however, be at variance with science and reason, it is unquestionably superstition. The Lord of mankind has bestowed upon us the faculty of reason whereby we may discern the realities of things. How then can man rightfully accept any proposition which is not in conformity with the processes of reason and the principles of science? Assuredly such a course cannot inspire man with confidence and real belief.

              © Copyright Original Source



              But that's a far cry from stating that Baha'i scripture is fallible in matters of science.

              For more on the Baha'i Faith and Science you can check the following wikipedia link, but it does have a bit of an apologetic bent.
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%...th_and_science

              The authoritative view, as espoused by the Universal House of Justice on matters of scriptural inerrancy and science can be read here:

              Source: http://bahai-library.com/uhj_infallibility_abdulbaha

              In considering the whole field of divinely conferred "infallibility" one must be careful to avoid the literal understanding and petty-mindedness that has so often characterised discussions of this matter in the Christian world. The Manifestation of God (and, to a lesser degree, 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi,) has to convey tremendous concepts covering the whole field of human life and activity to people whose present knowledge and degree of understanding are far below His. He must use the limited medium of human language against the limited and often erroneous background of His audience's traditional knowledge and current understanding to raise them to a wholly new level of awareness and behaviour. It is a human tendency, against which the Manifestation warns us, to measure His statements against the inaccurate standard of the acquired knowledge of mankind. We tend to take them and place them within one or other of the existing categories of human philosophy or science while, in reality, they transcend these and will, if properly understood, open new and vast horizons to our understanding.

              © Copyright Original Source



              And here:

              Source: http://bahai-library.com/compilation_science_technology.html#14

              With regard to the harmony of science and religion, the Writings of the Central Figures and the commentaries of the Guardian make abundantly clear that the task of humanity, including the Bahá'í community that serves as the "leaven" within it, is to create a global civilization which embodies both the spiritual and material dimensions of existence. The nature and scope of such a civilization are still beyond anything the present generation can conceive. The prosecution of this vast enterprise will depend on a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry. This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality. It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development. The challenge facing Bahá'í thinkers is to provide responsible leadership in this endeavour, since it is they who have both the priceless insights of the Revelation and the advantages conferred by scientific investigation.

              © Copyright Original Source

              These are sufficient to describe the relationship between the Baha'i Faith scripture and science, which you call official. The main premise of the Baha'i Faith is that both spiritual and physical changes and evolves over time in terms of Progressive Revelation, and the progressive evolving nature of the knowledge of the physical world through sciences, and the other disciplines
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Good to see that post #85 wasn't your last effort after all.

                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                These are sufficient to describe the relationship between the Baha'i Faith scripture and science, which you call official. The main premise of the Baha'i Faith is that both spiritual and physical changes and evolves over time in terms of Progressive Revelation, and the progressive evolving nature of the knowledge of the physical world through sciences, and the other disciplines
                None of the citations I provided support your view that "physical sciences in scripture is not considered infallible nor inerrant". So, you were wrong on that point.

                What these citations make clear is that the earlier scriptures do not always need to be interpreted literally (how convenient!). The rationale for this is that Bahá'u'lláh, Abdu'l-Bahá, and Shoghi Effendi's divinely inspired writings were so spiritual and lofty that human language often failed them. The citations also tell us that Bahá'u'lláh's divinely inspired writings are far greater than the "inaccurate standard of the acquired knowledge of mankind", and that his statements transcend human philosophy and science. Which basically amounts to something like, "All your 'human' text books on philosophy and science ain't got nothin on the sage wisdom of Bahá'u'lláh. If you take the time to understand what the man's trying to say, you might learn a thing or two".

                The citations also tell us that when the Baha'i Faith refers to the interaction between religion and science, the type of science they're referring to is not necessarily limited to any "particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development." That's basically a far out way of saying they're not letting the system pin them down to accepting only one way of doing science. For a bit more backdrop on what that might mean, check out the following citation from this paper by the Association for Bahá’í Studies

                Source: Religion and Evolution Reconciled: ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s Comments on Evolution by Courosh Mehanian and Stephen R. Friberg

                Central to any discussion about the relationship between science and religion is the question about the extent to which each enjoys authority. The Bahá’í perspective is that “religion which is not in accordance with established science is superstition.” While this seems to suggest that religion must accept current scientific knowledge as authoritative, this is not necessarily always the case. The present scientific point of view is not always correct, nor is the truth limited to only what science can explain.

                Ultimately, according to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, the worth of a given science is determined by whether or not it leads to love of God: “Every kind of knowledge, every science, is as a tree: if the fruit of it be the love of God, then is it a blessed tree, but if not, that tree is but dried-up wood, and shall only feed the fire” (Selections 181). In a similar vein, He describes science without religion as blocking progress by leading man to “fall into the despairing slough of materialism” (Paris Talks 143). Thus, we can characterize the Bahá’í Writings as saying that religion must be in conformity with reason and science, and that science should not be misused to turn people’s hearts away from God.

                © Copyright Original Source



                Hmm.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Actually I do not consider the above significant reformers in Christianity. For example Martin Luther believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible, literal Genesis and rejected modern cosmology, and endorsed a violent persecution and ethnic cleansing of Jews.
                  I think that Martin Luther and John Calvin had a profound effect on the Christian faith in the Protestant reforms and the development of Capitalism.

                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  St. Augustine St. Thomas Aquinas were more into philosophical justification of Christian Faith not reform.
                  Isn't St. Augustine responsible for the concept of original sin? I think City of God is dripping with guilt and dualism, which has profoundly influenced modern Christianity. Aquinas allowed for critical criticism of the Bible and the unraveling of the Church's dependence on mystery.

                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  St Paul (Saul), no reform here, he established the Hellenist Roman foundation of Christianity.
                  ...and the dissolution of the Jewish followers of Jesus of Nazareth.

                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  John Paul II like our present pope advocated limited reforms under the already firmly established Doctrine, Dogma, and Disaplines of the Roman Church. Neither pope has openly advocated any radical reform of the foundation of the church.
                  No, but again, their reforms allowed individual reformers within the Church the freedom to begin movements (liberation theology in South America comes to mind).



                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Jesus of Nazareth would be considered a reformer outside the traditional Churches like Unitarian Universalists, but not within the churches. They consider him the Messiah and the Revealer of a new revelation from God that fulfilled Judaism.
                  I was mentioning Jesus as having influence on the Jewish faith. There is quite a bit of Talmudic literature that deals with the issue of all the failed messiahs throughout history. I think that Jesus was the beginning of the end of the messianic era in Judaism.

                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  If you are interested I would like to discuss Hillel in another thread.
                  I would enjoy that.


                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Attempts at reform in Islam, like Christianity, results in more divisions and violence.
                  I really think the reforms of all of these Abrahamic religions is undergoing a quiet revolution from within. Within the hearts and minds of individual believers.



                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Subject of an upcoming thread: I seriously believe that the radicalization of Islam is directly a product of Western countries, to colonize, subdivide the Islamic world dividing ethic and religious division like a pie for there own plans to manipulate, colonize and control the Middle East, and their resources. There is also a distinct pattern to suppress and destroy moderate Islamic political parties and groups who supported democracy over the past 100 years or more. The USA and other western countries supported corrupt military and royal families that also suppressed moderate Islam.
                  A really good book I read many years ago that sheds quite a bit of light on the subject is Robert Lacey's The Kingdom: http://www.amazon.com/The-Kingdom-Ar.../dp/0786106433

                  It covers Saudi Arabian history (and the development of the Wahhabist Islamic movement) up until the Iranian hostage crises in 79-80. His second book, Inside the Kingdom, picks up where the first one left off and covers the current situation in the Middle East and Saudi Arabia in particular: http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Kingdom.../dp/0143118277

                  NORM
                  When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by OingoBoingo View Post
                    Good to see that post #85 wasn't your last effort after all.

                    None of the citations I provided support your view that "physical sciences in scripture is not considered infallible nor inerrant". So, you were wrong on that point.
                    I find no problem that based on the citations the statements on the nature of our physical existence in Baha'i scripture would be infallible. The bottom line remains that science remains independent of religion as far as the search for scientific knowledge of our physical existence, and ALL scripture including Baha'i scripture must be understood in the light of the knowledge of science.

                    The source you cited did correctly state that all knowledge and truth is not revealed in the scientific knowledge of our physical world, and that the Baha'i Faith does not limited the methodology of the search for knowledge to the methods of science.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      ... ALL scripture including Baha'i scripture must be understood in the light of the knowledge of science. ...
                      This is the perspective that I have come to know as yours, but I'm still wondering if that is the 'orthodox' Baha'i understanding. You said earlier that "The spiritual laws of the Katab-i-aqdas is not likely subject to change and the heart of scriptural inerrancy in the Baha'i Faith, until a later future Revelation." Are the spiritual laws reformable by scientific investigation or do they require another revelation?

                      See my previous question (Post #125), in response to your post (119) and some of the other information I read on the International House of Justice website:
                      "So, do I understand this correctly? 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. Is that correct?"
                      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                        I think that Martin Luther and John Calvin had a profound effect on the Christian faith in the Protestant reforms and the development of Capitalism.

                        NORM
                        Really, that is a good thing, but I have never read that - do you have references?
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                          This is the perspective that I have come to know as yours, but I'm still wondering if that is the 'orthodox' Baha'i understanding. You said earlier that "The spiritual laws of the Katab-i-aqdas is not likely subject to change and the heart of scriptural inerrancy in the Baha'i Faith, until a later future Revelation." Are the spiritual laws reformable by scientific investigation or do they require another revelation?
                          First, the Katab-i-aqdas does not deal with or address knowledge of our physical existence that would reformed or changed by scientific investigation. Commentary on the nature of our physical existence by Baha'u'llah, Abdul'baha, and Shoghi Effendi is subject to be understood and interpretated by the evolving knowledge of science.

                          See my previous question (Post #125), in response to your post (119) and some of the other information I read on the International House of Justice website:
                          "So, do I understand this correctly? 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. Is that correct?"
                          As far as change, I do not believe this could change by other means, based on my review of the writings.
                          Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-27-2014, 10:12 AM.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            First, the Katab-i-aqdas does not deal with or address knowledge of our physical existence that would reformed or changed by scientific investigation. Commentary on the nature of our physical existence by Baha'u'llah, Abdul'baha, and Shoghi Effendi is subject to be understood and interpretated by the evolving knowledge of science.
                            So, the progressive revelation that is contained within the Bahai' holy scriptures only concerns spiritual laws and not scientific knowledge, and these can only evolve with a subsequent revelation. Thus, it seems that the commentary on the nature of our physical existence by Baha'u'lla are only contained in other writings. The website spoke about other revelatory texts of Baha'u'lla that are not included in the Baha'i holy scriptures--are these also considered inspired and inerrant or infallible? Are all of these writings only concerning spiritual laws and therefore also not reformable by science? Or do some of these other revelatory writings deal with or address knowledge of our physical existence?

                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            As far as change, I do not believe this could change by other means, based on my review of the writings.
                            Is it commonly believed by Baha'i that a new revelation will indeed occur and might contradict a prior revelation or is this just your speculation?
                            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                              I find no problem that based on the citations the statements on the nature of our physical existence in Baha'i scripture would be infallible.
                              Well, you should find your view problematic, because you'd be disputing statements made by the Universal House of Justice on the subject. The official stance of the Baha'i Faith is that the Baha'i scriptures are infallible. Period. But that certain statements can be interpreted more or less literally whenever things get sticky. So for instance, when `Abdu'l-Bahá made statements about "ethereal matter", he really was referring to the late 19th century theory of luminiferous aether. We know that he was talking about the 19th century concept of luminiferous aether, because he defines his usage, "Even ethereal matter, the forces of which are said in physics to be heat, light, electricity and magnetism, is an intellectual reality, and is not sensible. In the same way, nature, also, in its essence is an intellectual reality and is not sensible; the human spirit is an intellectual, not sensible reality. " When that theory was later rejected, the Baha'i leadership did NOT say that his statements on the subject were erroneous, rather, they came up the apologetic that `Abdu'l-Bahá's statements on ether should be interpreted in a general way to mean something like "an element", "a substance", or "a medium" and that `Abdu'l-Bahá purposely used language familiar to this then current audience so as to not confuse them with language that had not yet been invented.

                              Hypothetically, if at some later date something like the late 19th century concept of luminiferous aether is found to really exist afterall, and scientists rename that substance "aether", there's no doubt that Baha'i believers will claim that `Abdu'l-Bahá's statements were prophetically fulfilled and accurate all along, much in the same way they claim that Bahá'u'lláh's statement "Split the atom's heart, and Lo! within it thou wilt find a sun." was actually prophetic foreknowledge about nuclear fission. Its the exact same kind of accommodational thinking you see with Mormons, certain Christian creationists, or any other religion that holds doctrines on divine inspiration and infallibility. When the literal meaning of the text or statement is found to be wrong, "well they didn't really mean it literally afterall." Sometimes that excuse is clearly legitimate, but when you're providing the actual definition for what you mean in the same statement, eh, its horse hockey, and everyone knows it.

                              The bottom line remains that science remains independent of religion as far as the search for scientific knowledge of our physical existence, and ALL scripture including Baha'i scripture must be understood in the light of the knowledge of science.
                              Science and religion are not independent from one another in the Baha'i Faith. Quoting again from the Journal of Baha'i Studies:

                              Source: Religion and Evolution Reconciled:‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s Comments on Evolution by Courosh Mehanian and Stephen R. Friberg

                              The harmony of science and religion is a central tenet of the Bahá’í teachings. ‘Abdu’l‑Bahá explained the Bahá’í view thus: “Religion and science are the two wings upon which man’s intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress” (Paris Talks 143). Rejecting the view that science and religion are in conflict, Shoghi Effendi describes them as “the two most potent forces in human life” (World Order 204). Religion, he says, “must go hand-in-hand with science” [2] The task facing humanity, the Universal House of Justice has written, “is to create a global civilization which embodies both the spiritual and material dimensions of existence.” This can only be accomplished by “a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry”. [3]

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              And while it is true that a central principle of the Bahá’í teaching is that religion must conform to science, its also a principle in the Baha'i teaching that, "the present scientific point of view is not always correct", and that "science should not be misused to turn people’s hearts away from God." This gives Baha'i adherents a whole heck of a lot of wiggle room. Basically, all the Baha'i leadership has to say if they disagree with the current scientific consensus on a topic is something like "wait and see, you'll find out that we were right all along". That's why the Baha'i Faith can get away with statements about homosexuality being an aberrant affliction that requires treatment despite modern psychologists saying otherwise.

                              The source you cited did correctly state that all knowledge and truth is not revealed in the scientific knowledge of our physical world, and that the Baha'i Faith does not limited the methodology of the search for knowledge to the methods of science.
                              Yep. So basically the Baha'i Faith can get away with any view and say "well, scientists don't currently know the actual truth that has been revealed by our inspired and infallible writings. Maybe someday they'll learn." Or they could hypothetically say, "well, yes, the standard scientific method, and methodological naturalism in general, is one way of doing science, but we as Baha'i believers don't limit "science" to those methodologies. We also think non-falsifiable methodologies are legit and have merit as well." I'm not saying any Baha'i believers actually say these things, but, hypothetically, they have the wiggle room to do so.
                              Last edited by OingoBoingo; 06-27-2014, 09:41 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                                So, the progressive revelation that is contained within the Bahai' holy scriptures only concerns spiritual laws and not scientific knowledge, and these can only evolve with a subsequent revelation. Thus, it seems that the commentary on the nature of our physical existence by Baha'u'lla are only contained in other writings. The website spoke about other revelatory texts of Baha'u'lla that are not included in the Baha'i holy scriptures--are these also considered inspired and inerrant or infallible? Are all of these writings only concerning spiritual laws and therefore also not reformable by science? Or do some of these other revelatory writings deal with or address knowledge of our physical existence?
                                The spiritual laws are not reformable by science. The knowledge of science is progressive and evolving as a part and reflection of the spiritual evolution, but independent of the direct 'Revelation' of the Manifestation of God' or the Messiah. In the writings it describes the release of knowledge to humanity at the time of the Revelation, and much of this knowledge comes in the form of science. will provide references next post.

                                Yes, there are numerous tablets of Baha'u'llah revealing the spiritual truths of the New Age. My favorite are relatively short Tablets: The mystical Seven Valleys and Four Valleys, and the Hidden Words.

                                Is it commonly believed by Baha'i that a new revelation will indeed occur and might contradict a prior revelation or is this just your speculation?
                                No not speculation. I will give a reference to this in a future post. Progressive Revelation essentially involves change and evolution of spiritual laws and teachings in the past and the future. The Baha'i Faith Represents the end of the Adamic cycle, and the beginning of new cycle of Manifestations of God for 100,000 years or more.
                                Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-27-2014, 09:49 AM.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                159 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                130 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X