Baha'i faith, slavery and progressive revelation...

[seer]

Our friend (or personal demon, depending on how you see it). has often attacked Jew and Christian scripture for not out right condemning slavery. Yet Shuny believes that Moses and Christ were Manifestations of God literally divine Educators. Yet some how they never actually condemned slavery. God really did not condemn slavery until Bahá’u’lláh in the middle of the 1800s, it took that long for us to 'progress' to that point to understand. However Moses for instance had laws against murder, rape, theft, adultery, fraud, homosexuality, false witness, prostitution, etc, etc... So why wait so long with the slavery thing? We could understand back in the day that murder and rape were wrong, but not slavery?

[Ronson]

If he is Baha'i faith, how come he looks like he's Amish?

[Diogenes]

Much like Christianity does with Judaism, the easiest argument would be that of progressive revelation. Moses taught what God decided for that time in history, Jesus taught what God decided for that time in history, and then Bahá’u’lláh taught what God decided for that time in history. It's similar to why Christians don't abstain from eating shellfish and wearing mixed fabrics.

[seer]

Much like Christianity does with Judaism, the easiest argument would be that of progressive revelation. Moses taught what God decided for that time in history, Jesus taught what God decided for that time in history, and then Bahá’u’lláh taught what God decided for that time in history. It's similar to why Christians don't abstain from eating shellfish and wearing mixed fabrics.

I got no problem with that, but don't attack Christianity or Judaism for what God failed to instruct them to do, and according to the Baha'i faith God failed to instruct that.

.

[shunyadragon]

Our friend (or personal demon, depending on how you see it). has often attacked Jew and Christian scripture for not out right condemning slavery. Yet Shuny believes that Moses and Christ were Manifestations of God literally divine Educators. Yet some how they never actually condemned slavery. God really did not condemn slavery until Bahá’u’lláh in the middle of the 1800s, it took that long for us to 'progress' to that point to understand. However Moses for instance had laws against murder, rape, theft, adultery, fraud, homosexuality, false witness, prostitution, etc, etc... So why wait so long with the slavery thing? We could understand back in the day that murder and rape were wrong, but not slavery?

You distorting my view and posts on the subject. I consider the Revelations of Judaism and Christianity ancient tribal Religions relevant to the culture and times they were revealed. Yes, they did not forbid slavery at the time, and because the Revelation was for that time and we have spiritually evolved past these Revelations. The problem with ancient religion is the ambiguous interpretation of ancient scriptures such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam, on many issues form slavery to science they are not relevant to the contemporary world and do not represent a universal spiritual message for humanity. The ambiguous nature and the lack of provenance and original books creates conflict and many divisions over the millennia.

This more a difference of belief and the reasons I believe in the Baha'i Faith and not an attack on any religion. The ancient worldview of these religions is the reason I do not believe they are universal nor relevant to the contemporary world

[shunyadragon]

Yes, the failure to have scripture providing guidance for issues like slavery and science is a severe problem addressing the contemporary world.

[Diogenes]

Yes, the failure to have scripture providing guidance for issues like slavery and science is a severe problem addressing the contemporary world.

What was the faith of Gregory Mendel, John Philoponus, Robert Grosseteste, or George Lemaître?

[shunyadragon]

What was the faith of Gregory Mendel, John Philoponus, Robert Grosseteste, or George Lemaître?

Christian and an admirable list, but your dodging the issues concerning Christianity and science, by appealing to a few individual scientists, Up until the mid nineteen the overwhelmingly dominated belief is a literal interpretation of the Bible in particular Genesis and the Pentateuch. Today 40%+.of Christians believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and reject the science of evolution as well as often the scientific history of out universe.

John Philoponus, ancient philosopher and not a scientist. Nothing related to the contemporary literal Biblical controversy.

[Diogenes]

Christian and an admirable list, but your dodging the issues concerning Christianity and science, by appealing to a few individual scientists, Up until the mid nineteen the overwhelmingly dominated belief is a literal interpretation of the Bible in particular Genesis and the Pentateuch. Today 40%+.of Christians believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and reject the science of evolution as well as often the scientific history of out universe.

John Philoponus, ancient philosopher and not a scientist. Nothing related to the contemporary literal Biblical controversy.

Science is natural philosophy, so Philoponus still counts. Seeing as most Christians are Roman Catholic and Roman Catholicism does not reject evolution (outside of polygenism in regard to humans) your "40%+" is likely limited to American Protestants.

[seer]

You distorting my view and posts on the subject. I consider the Revelations of Judaism and Christianity ancient tribal Religions relevant to the culture and times they were revealed. Yes, they did not forbid slavery at the time, and because the Revelation was for that time and we have spiritually evolved past these Revelations. The problem with ancient religion is the ambiguous interpretation of ancient scriptures such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam, on many issues form slavery to science they are not relevant to the contemporary world and do not represent a universal spiritual message for humanity. The ambiguous nature and the lack of provenance and original books creates conflict and many divisions over the millennia.

The point is that God did not see fit to condemn slavery in those times. Yet He did condemn things like murder, rape, theft, adultery, fraud, homosexuality, false witness, prostitution, etc... How come God could condemn those actions but not slavery? And the fact is Shuny you have attacked the Bible a number of times for not condemning slavery - but in reality you are attacking God since He saw fit to not condemn slavery. And that is hypocritical.

[seer]

Yes, the failure to have scripture providing guidance for issues like slavery and science is a severe problem addressing the contemporary world.

But that was God's choice...

[rogue06]

Christian and an admirable list, but your dodging the issues concerning Christianity and science, by appealing to a few individual scientists, Up until the mid nineteen the overwhelmingly dominated belief is a literal interpretation of the Bible in particular Genesis and the Pentateuch. Today 40%+.of Christians believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and reject the science of evolution as well as often the scientific history of out universe.

And your point is?

It wasn't until the end of the 17th century that we first even started to realize that the earth might be older than we initially thought.

Don't equate what a poll of Americans finds with all of Christianity.

For many of those who still embrace a woodenly literal interpretation of Genesis 1, it is pretty "soft" in that while they might say that the earth is only a few thousand of years old they can immediately turn around and talk about dinosaurs that existed millions of years ago. The Kent Hovinds are few and far between these days.

[shunyadragon]

And your point is?

It wasn't until the end of the 17th century that we first even started to realize that the earth might be older than we initially thought.

So what?!?!?! The issue is not the science before the 17th century.

Don't equate what a poll of Americans finds with all of Christianity.

I did not not do that!!! This is a problem world wide, and an issue that an ancient tribal scripture held sacred and relevant today does not give guidance for science.

For many of those who still embrace a woodenly literal interpretation of Genesis 1, it is pretty "soft" in that while they might say that the earth is only a few thousand of years old they can immediately turn around and talk about dinosaurs that existed millions of years ago. The Kent Hovinds are few and far between these days.

The facts of the Bible text and the widespread rejection of the science of evolution and not 'dew and far between.' The writers of the NT clearly and specifically believed in a literal Genesis and Pentateuch.

[rogue06]

So what?!?!?! The issue is not the science before the 17th century.

My bad. I meant 18th century.

And you're the one who posted

Up until the mid nineteen the overwhelmingly dominated belief is a literal interpretation of the Bible in particular Genesis and the Pentateuch.

If it isn't the issue then don't complain about it.

I did not not do that!!! This is a problem world wide, and an issue that an ancient tribal scripture held sacred and relevant today does not give guidance for science.

Yes you did.

You cited a Gallup poll taken of Americans and then claimed it's what Christians believe.

News flash. Only a tiny percentage of the world's Christians live in the U.S.

The facts of the Bible text and the widespread rejection of the science of evolution and not 'dew and far between.' The writers of the NT clearly and specifically believed in a literal Genesis and Pentateuch.

Maybe they did. Or maybe they simply wrote using what people believed. It wasn't a science lesson. It was a polemic noting that God is the master of everything in comparison to the false gods of neighboring people.

[shunyadragon]

My bad. I meant 18th century.

And you're the one who posted

Up until the mid nineteen the overwhelmingly dominated belief is a literal interpretation of the Bible in particular Genesis and the Pentateuch.

If it isn't the issue then don't complain about it.

IT is an issue, because of the lack of guidance on science of ancient tribal scripture was established as literal gospel up until today by a large percentage of Christians.

Yes you did.

NO! I did not cite me properly.

You cited a Gallup poll taken of Americans and then claimed it's what Christians believe.

Yes I did and this reflects most of the missionaries world wide.

News flash. Only a tiny percentage of the world's Christians live in the U.S.

News Flash!!!! This problem is dominant in the third world countries world wide, because of very active fundamentalist missionaries. It is not a dominant view in Europe, but evangelists are active in Europe, and some churches even in Eastern Europe believe in a literal Bible..

Maybe they did. Or maybe they simply wrote using what people believed. It wasn't a science lesson. It was a polemic noting that God is the master of everything in comparison to the false gods of neighboring people.

Yes they simply wrote what they believed, but this is accepted as gospel and Divine guidance in the history of Christianity that the writers of the NT believed that the Pentateuch is a literal historical text.

Many members here on Tweb believe in some form of a literal Bible in contradiction of science.