The Baha'i Source some call God(s) and why I believe in God.

[robrecht]

Then you have no problem with the receiving of indirect knowledge via the Holy Spirit beyond the knowledge of the written Revelation itself.

Yes there is a difference. There is no personification of the Holy Spirit here.

No, no problem. Some of these same passages, eg, that of Joel, are quoted in the New Testament in the very same sense. Each text should be understood in the sense intended by the original authors, insofar as this can be ascertained. For the Catholic church, the inspired sense of the 'Old Testament' is the original Hebrew meaning, again, insofar as this can be ascertained. One should not read later Christian doctrines into earlier Hebrew or Aramaic texts, but it always helps to understand the origins of later doctrine in earlier texts and interpretations.

[shunyadragon]

No, no problem.

Based on this what is the problem with the Baha'i principles being received by those who have no prior knowledge of the Baha'i Faith?

[robrecht]

Based on this what is the problem with the Baha'i principles being received by those who have no prior knowledge of the Baha'i Faith?

Same as I said above. There's no reason to propose or accept mysterious divine causality for societal developments that are easily explained with reference to direct and more obvious human and sociological causes.

[shunyadragon]

Same as I said above. There's no reason to propose or accept mysterious divine causality for societal developments that are easily explained with reference to direct and more obvious human and sociological causes.

The highlighted above is closer to a humanist, atheist agnostic approach to religious claims. Without a selective bias, this calim can easily be applied to all religious beliefs including yours.

Your selective acceptance as to whether the Holy Spirit can impart wisdom and knowledge reflects your religious bias against the Baha'i Faith. You have presented no reasonable reason why this could not be the case based on the evidence and social change in the world could not be due to Revelation in the history of humanity. The Baha'i scriptures did describe a radical transformation of the world that would be taking place in the 19th century. I have demonstrated that this is in harmony with the Jewish view of the Holy Spirit, and scripture cited.

Again there are principles that were revealed in the Baha'i Revelation such as the 'Mandatory universal education of all children' that occur in no other prior Revelation nor humanist movement prior to the Baha'i Revelation.

Source: http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/c/BWF/bwf-17.html

The greatest bestowal of God in the world of humanity is religion; for assuredly the divine teachings of religion are above all other sources of instruction and development to man. Religion confers upon man eternal life and guides his footsteps in the world of morality. It opens the doors of unending happiness and bestows everlasting honor upon the human kingdom. It has been the basis of all civilization and progress in the history of mankind.

We will therefore investigate religion, seeking from an unprejudiced standpoint to discover whether it is the source of illumination, the cause of development and the animating impulse of all human advancement. We will investigate independently, free from the restrictions of dogmatic beliefs, blind imitations of ancestral forms, and the influence of mere human opinion; for as we enter this question we will find some who declare that religion is a cause of uplift and betterment in the world, while others assert just as positively that it is a detriment and a source of degradation to mankind. We must give these questions thorough and impartial consideration so that no doubt or uncertainty may linger in our minds regarding them.

© Copyright Original Source

[tabibito]

anecdotal evidence
English
Noun

anecdotal evidence
anecdotal evidence (uncountable)

A limited selection of examples which support or refute an argument, but which are not supported by scientific or statistical analysis.

Anecdotal evidence is considered dubious support of a generalized claim; it is, however, within the scope of scientific method for claims regarding particular instances.

[shunyadragon]

anecdotal evidence
English
Noun

anecdotal evidence
anecdotal evidence (uncountable)

A limited selection of examples which support or refute an argument, but which are not supported by scientific or statistical analysis.

Anecdotal evidence is considered dubious support of a generalized claim; it is, however, within the scope of scientific method for claims regarding particular instances.

OK, but what is your point?

[shunyadragon]

From Baha'u'llah - The World Order of Baha'u'llah, Pages 22-25: gr6

In another passage of the same Book, Baha'u'llah, referring to the transformation effected by every Revelation in the ways, thoughts and manners of the people, reveals these words: "Is not the object of every Revelation to effect a transformation in the whole character of mankind, a transformation that shall manifest itself, both outwardly and inwardly, that shall affect both its inner life and external conditions? For if the character of mankind be not changed, the futility of God's universal Manifestations would be apparent." . . .

[shunyadragon]

[robrecht]

The highlighted above is closer to a humanist, atheist agnostic approach to religious claims. Without a selective bias, this calim can easily be applied to all religious beliefs including yours.

Your selective acceptance as to whether the Holy Spirit can impart wisdom and knowledge reflects your religious bias against the Baha'i Faith. You have presented no reasonable reason why this could not be the case based on the evidence and social change in the world could not be due to Revelation in the history of humanity. The Baha'i scriptures did describe a radical transformation of the world that would be taking place in the 19th century. I have demonstrated that this is in harmony with the Jewish view of the Holy Spirit, and scripture cited.

Again there are principles that were revealed in the Baha'i Revelation such as the 'Mandatory universal education of all children' that occur in no other prior Revelation nor humanist movement prior to the Baha'i Revelation.

Source: http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/c/BWF/bwf-17.html

The greatest bestowal of God in the world of humanity is religion; for assuredly the divine teachings of religion are above all other sources of instruction and development to man. Religion confers upon man eternal life and guides his footsteps in the world of morality. It opens the doors of unending happiness and bestows everlasting honor upon the human kingdom. It has been the basis of all civilization and progress in the history of mankind.

We will therefore investigate religion, seeking from an unprejudiced standpoint to discover whether it is the source of illumination, the cause of development and the animating impulse of all human advancement. We will investigate independently, free from the restrictions of dogmatic beliefs, blind imitations of ancestral forms, and the influence of mere human opinion; for as we enter this question we will find some who declare that religion is a cause of uplift and betterment in the world, while others assert just as positively that it is a detriment and a source of degradation to mankind. We must give these questions thorough and impartial consideration so that no doubt or uncertainty may linger in our minds regarding them.

© Copyright Original Source

You are wrongly assuming that I make exclusive or biased claims about divine guidance or inspiration only within Christianity, and that I am biased against Baha'i. I believe divine guidance is available to all and that it works through normal human channels. I've long considered myself a Christian humanist, at least since reading Erasmus in college. He reminded me of the reading of Voltaire I did in high school, whose biting wit also reminded me of Vonnegut--I also have an appreciation of atheism and agnosticism as a profound approach to reality. Whenever anyone makes choices for goodness, to the extent that our apprehension of goodness is true and honest, I believe we are ultimately moving toward a reflection of the ultimate goodness of God. I believe that is true of all people, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Bahai, other, athiest, or agnostic. I see no reason why those who choose goodness for their own reasons should be believed to do so on account of a Baha'i revelation that they have never heard of. That to me seems like a kind of 'magical thinking' that is unnecessary. That is not bias against the Baha'i philosophy or theology, just common sense, as far as I'm concerned. Humanism, atheism, or agnosticism vs religion is a false dichotomy just as a choice between whether or not 'religion is the greatest bestowal of God in the world of humanity' or a source of degradation. In the text you quoted above, this alternative is not presented as a false dichotomy, 'though it might be tending in that direction, and certainly some do. There is certainly no reason for you to apply any such dichotomy to my way of thinking. In the past, when I have preferred rational explanations, you have claimed that my reasoning is atheistic or that I sound like an atheist, but I see nothing wrong with that. I admire John Scottus Eriugena and other Christian rationalists, but especially Eriugena for his synthesis of a rationalist view of revelation with a fundamentally apophatic theological method and system, thus avoiding the pitfalls of an anti-intellectual mysticism. As a Christian rationalist, he certainly also believed that revelation occurs, but does not necessarily reveal anything beyond what may be known through fallible human reasoning and intuition.

[robrecht]

A couple of quick questions:

1. Did Baha'u'llah consider monarchies as the best form of government?
2. What did mean by the extension and consolidation of movement of the left?
3. The retribution decreed by God the Judge against those who turned a deaf ear to the Baha'u'llah sounds similar to his view that the Jews were cursed for their lack of acceptance of further revelation in Christ and Muhammad--do you see that?

[shunyadragon]

You are wrongly assuming that I make exclusive or biased claims about divine guidance or inspiration only within Christianity, and that I am biased against Baha'i. I believe divine guidance is available to all and that it works through normal human channels. I've long considered myself a Christian humanist, at least since reading Erasmus in college. He reminded me of the reading of Voltaire I did in high school, whose biting wit also reminded me of Vonnegut--I also have an appreciation of atheism and agnosticism as a profound approach to reality. Whenever anyone makes choices for goodness, to the extent that our apprehension of goodness is true and honest, I believe we are ultimately moving toward a reflection of the ultimate goodness of God. I believe that is true of all people, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Bahai, other, athiest, or agnostic. I see no reason why those who choose goodness for their own reasons should be believed to do so on account of a Baha'i revelation that they have never heard of. That to me seems like a kind of 'magical thinking' that is unnecessary. That is not bias against the Baha'i philosophy or theology, just common sense, as far as I'm concerned. Humanism, atheism, or agnosticism vs religion is a false dichotomy just as a choice between whether or not 'religion is the greatest bestowal of God in the world of humanity' or a source of degradation. In the text you quoted above, this alternative is not presented as a false dichotomy, 'though it might be tending in that direction, and certainly some do. There is certainly no reason for you to apply any such dichotomy to my way of thinking. In the past, when I have preferred rational explanations, you have claimed that my reasoning is atheistic or that I sound like an atheist, but I see nothing wrong with that. I admire John Scottus Eriugena and other Christian rationalists, but especially Eriugena for his synthesis of a rationalist view of revelation with a fundamentally apophatic theological method and system, thus avoiding the pitfalls of an anti-intellectual mysticism. As a Christian rationalist, he certainly also believed that revelation occurs, but does not necessarily reveal anything beyond what may be known through fallible human reasoning and intuition.

Again . . .

There's no reason to propose or accept mysterious divine causality for societal developments that are easily explained with reference to direct and more obvious human and sociological causes.

both the highlighted and the above taken as written can potentially be used as a humanist, atheist, and agnostic to reject all Divine influence.

You are neglecting the fact that many of the claims and writings of the Baha'i Revelation are congruent to the radical transformation of the world and the principles of the Baha'i Faith that have become the standards for the new age lacking in ALL previous Revelations. The same is true of the transforming of the world in previous Revelations.

Of course, it is "possible" all claims of ALL religions of Revelation and transformation of the world can 'not have necessarily revealed anything beyond what may be known through fallible human reasoning and intuition.' This indeed opens the door to humanist, atheist and agnostic rejection of all religions, if applied to all in an unbiased manner.

Note: I am using 'humanist and humanism' here as, any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values, and dignity predominate.

[robrecht]

Again . . .

both the highlighted and the above taken as written can potentially be used as a humanist, atheist, and agnostic to reject all Divine influence.

You are neglecting the fact that many of the claims and writings of the Baha'i Revelation are congruent to the radical transformation of the world and the principles of the Baha'i Faith that have become the standards for the new age lacking in ALL previous Revelations. The same is true of the transforming of the world in previous Revelations.

Of course, it is "possible" all claims of ALL religions of Revelation and transformation of the world can 'not have necessarily revealed anything beyond what may be known through fallible human reasoning and intuition.' This indeed opens the door to humanist, atheist and agnostic rejection of all religions, if applied to all in an unbiased manner.

Note: I am using 'humanist and humanism' here as, any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values, and dignity predominate.

If you try to force my thoughts into a false dichotomy, they may indeed be used as a humanist, atheist and agnostic rejection of all religions, but I do not accept such a false dichotomy.

[shunyadragon]

If you try to force my thoughts into a false dichotomy, they may indeed be used as a humanist, atheist and agnostic rejection of all religions, but I do not accept such a false dichotomy.

I do not think it is valid either, but you open the door for such a false dichotomy with you reasoning.

Previously I cited this kernel of knowledge revealed in the Baha'i writings, and it is very very unlikely that this could be "revealed may be known through fallible human reasoning and intuition."

From the Seven Valleys and Four Valleys by Baha'u'llah:

Split the atom's heart, and lo!
Within it thou will find a sun.

At the time science did not acknowledge that the atom existed. When it was determined to exist, it was considered indivisible. It was not until the twentieth century that the atom was known to have a heart (the nucleus) and the heart was divisible by nuclear fission, and the energy released as in E=mc2.

[robrecht]

I do not think it is valid either, but you open the door for such a false dichotomy with you reasoning.

So? That is no reason to interpret my reasoning as endorsing or encouraging or providing an opening to such a false dichotomy.

Previously I cited this kernel of knowledge revealed in the Baha'i writings, and it is very very unlikely that this could be "revealed may be known through fallible human reasoning and intuition."

From the Seven Valleys and Four Valleys by Baha'u'llah:

Split the atom's heart, and lo!
Within it thou will find a sun.

At the time science did not acknowledge that the atom existed. When it was determined to exist, it was considered indivisible. It was not until the twentieth century that the atom was known to have a heart (the nucleus) and the heart was divisible by nuclear fission, and the energy released as in E=mc2.

This represents another previous discussion of ours that you eventually neglected without a proper response to my questions. One of the unanswered points was my attempt to reconcile your use of this poetic text as a kind of proof of Bahai'i revelation with your opposite claim that Baha'i revelation only pertains to spiritual laws and morality and not matters of science. Which is it?

Secondly, the poetic text is indeed striking, but as discussed by other Baha'is which I pointed you toward, the Baha'u'llah seems to be relying upon earlier poetic texts rather than directly receiving and giving a direct revelation of his own. At the time you tried to argue that it could still have been a specifically Baha'i revelation because many Baha'i texts were destroyed. Special pleading. Perhaps it was also contained in some lost texts of Leucippus or other ancient atomists or their opponents or anyone else.

And, of course, this knowledge was indeed knowable by human reason as demonstrated by Albert Einstein and those who applied his theoretical knowledge in the Manhattan Project.

Finally, if I must state it once again, I do not reject revelation and divine guidance as being otherwise unavailable to poets and scientists of other cultures and religions. If Baha'u'lah and/or his predecessors intuitively perceived this with the aid of divine guidance, great, wonderful, stupendous, but that is no justification for Baha'i to claim indirect and mysterious credit for larger societal changes that happened without without any knowledge of such revelation.

[shunyadragon]

So? That is no reason to interpret my reasoning as endorsing or encouraging or providing an opening to such a false dichotomy.

Yes it is your wording most definitely opens the door to such a false dichotomy. It would be best to just disagree than to use this line of reasoning.

This represents another previous discussion of ours that you eventually neglected without a proper response to my questions. One of the unanswered points was my attempt to reconcile your use of this poetic text as a kind of proof of Bahai'i revelation with your opposite claim that Baha'i revelation only pertains to spiritual laws and morality and not matters of science. Which is it?

Secondly, the poetic text is indeed striking, but as discussed by other Baha'is which I pointed you toward, the Baha'u'llah seems to be relying upon earlier poetic texts rather than directly receiving and giving a direct revelation of his own. At the time you tried to argue that it could still have been a specifically Baha'i revelation because many Baha'i texts were destroyed. Special pleading.

For all further discussion I will make it clear there is no PROOF of the validity of the claims of religions nor the certainty of the Divine source, or inspiration of scripture.

Most religious scripture relies and refers to texts, includes texts, literature, and poetry from other sources which than becomes sacred scripture and Revelation when cited. This is true of the OT, NT, and the Quran.

Perhaps it was also contained in some lost texts of Leucippus or other ancient atomists or their opponents or anyone else.

Perhaps?!?! The only ancient record was the proposal of the existence of atoms, nothing more

And, of course, this knowledge was indeed knowable by human reason as demonstrated by Albert Einstein and those who applied his theoretical knowledge in the Manhattan Project.

60 to 100 years later. That is the point.

Finally, if I must state it once again, I do not reject revelation and divine guidance as being otherwise unavailable to poets and scientists of other cultures and religions. If Baha'u'lah and/or his predecessors intuitively perceived this with the aid of divine guidance, great, wonderful, stupendous, but that is no justification for Baha'i to claim indirect and mysterious credit for larger societal changes that happened without without any knowledge of such revelation.

Then at this point we will have to agree to disagree. The facts are that many of the principles revealed in the Baha'i Faith in their pure form became the standard of the world as in the United Nations Charter, the Humanist Manifestos, and other modern standards of science and education.