Originally posted by robrecht
View Post
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
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
-
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.
-
and other western countriesOriginally posted by NormATive View PostHmm. 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...?
Or Judaism without the individual reformers like Hillel and yes; even Jesus of Nazareth?
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
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 PostThe 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.
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:
And here:
Last edited by OingoBoingo; 06-26-2014, 10:40 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostI 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe 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.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 PostI 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:
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:
And here:
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 PostThese 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
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
Hmm.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostActually 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.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostSt. Augustine St. Thomas Aquinas were more into philosophical justification of Christian Faith not reform.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostSt Paul (Saul), no reform here, he established the Hellenist Roman foundation of Christianity.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostJohn 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.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostJesus 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.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostIf you are interested I would like to discuss Hillel in another thread.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostAttempts at reform in Islam, like Christianity, results in more divisions and violence.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostSubject 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.
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
NORMWhen 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 PostGood 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.
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. ...
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 PostI think that Martin Luther and John Calvin had a profound effect on the Christian faith in the Protestant reforms and the development of Capitalism.
NORMAtheism 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 PostThis 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?"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 PostFirst, 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.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostAs far as change, I do not believe this could change by other means, based on my review of the writings.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 PostI find no problem that based on the citations the statements on the nature of our physical existence in Baha'i scripture would be infallible.
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.
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.Last edited by OingoBoingo; 06-27-2014, 09:41 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostSo, 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?
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?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
by whag
Today, 03:32 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
|
21 responses
130 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-21-2024, 12:15 PM | ||
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
|
80 responses
426 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Today, 12:33 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
|
45 responses
303 views
1 like
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 07:19 AM |
Comment