ian,
:"the belief that the
world is an illusion (SAQ 278). Thus, no understanding of the Writings
that
we develop should be endorse these philosophies or maintain these
positions."
has nothing at alll to do with the factualkness of the statement that
our understadning of the world is illusory.
:"And having authoritative Interpretations doesn't help this one iota,
for the Interpretations also must be understood by human minds and put
into effect."
So Baha'u'llah was wasting His time and just teasing us when He appointed
Abdul'-Baha as the official interpreter to clear up problems?"
pure straw.
if He Is Baha'u'llah, it isn't His time---it's the Logos' time.
"offical" is dependent on a world view that is dissonant here.
He did name the Mysery of God as Centre of the Covenant, and set a
>>>relative<<
standard---when the Blessed Beauty and the Master appear to be disagreeing, the
>>>accessible<<< unnderstadning is found thru the Master.
understadning and accessibility are related but not equal..but in >>motion<<
ar treated as one.
:"When He tells us
all Manifeststations share the station of oneness in which they are
identical, the meaning is clear."
reallly? to my ears that's shirk, since only the Manifestations understand
Their own Station.
:"All we need to do is work out the
consequences in various situations.
ahhh motion..."work out"
:"This is easy to say - but why don't you prove it with a concrete example?
Prove that I have set up a straw man."
at first consistent glance, denying the reality of the UHJ approving the word
"necessity" in the cite that opens this discussion.
foloowed by "s the one used in standard philosophical
reference works,"
why would i care? does T&G name the standard philospophical refernce books?
if not, then at any moment they are relativistic nonsense engaged in a dog
fight for which will get to reproduce its meme.
T&G are the artchimedan point. so "somebody said" regardless of who the
somebody is is terrorism or duplicity in the creation of a straw man.
:"'The part is smaller than the whole'? is a set of sounds showing relationship
within a shared community.
'God
exists'?
or doesn;t. it has the same meaning as "multiply by one" --true but irrlevant
unless actionable.
'Every human being had a mother'?
Adam. see sAq
'Fire is hotter than ice'?
any paramedic will say the meaning is relative, a chemist, no, and somebody
intelligent will point out that the idea that there is any difference at all is
utterly relative to the ambient, since compared to the surface of the sun, a
bic lighter and an ice cibe are at indistinguishably close temperatures that
makes the statment empty sound.
we agree: words have meaning. hillel, if there were no words, there would be
no worlds. the point is that hillel understands the necessity of worlds being
plural without any one of the worlds being "right" or "wrong" except
contexctuallly.
sAq.."scorpion"
siutationally, someone can be suffocated by a devotional gathering, whilew
someone else can be potentiated by teaching children to share. both may or may
acting out of the desire to align with the UHJ's current Plan set, without this
being a manifestatio9on of any essense at all. ruhi 1...the abiloity to lie to
self.
:"27
years of teaching high school classes on a philosophical basis have taught
me that especially young people enjoy it once they get into it "
people generallly like playing with tools...it goes with the opposed thumb
thing.
if enjoyment is the standard,
then "if it makes u happy, why the hell are u so sad"....sheryl crowe.
:"does it mean we are always
wrong, i.e. there is no true knowledge? That would be contradicted by the
Writings. Moreover, relativism does not allow the attribution of error, only
difference of viewpoint. "
straw man. yes we are always not the Manifestation, so iondeed we are always
wrong. what's wrong with that??? that's the emotional element that keeps
sliding on and off the table here, to my ears. that truth, we are always not
the Manifestation, has nothing to do with whether or not the Manifestation is
the Manifestation.
attribution of error? not being the Centre, how could i do it without error?
we are right back to mas'um or whatever.
the Master can talk about error. the UHJ can talk about error.
we can internalise what they said and reduce the rate of error in motion.
:"However, that does not mean we cannot test people's views on the
basis of logic, their consequences, their ability to harmonise with a wide
variety of Scripture and explicit guidance from the Universal House of
Justice. "
and here u&i are back together, exceot that consequnces will be imho the only
available metric.
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail")
is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be
confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The
information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts
or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail
in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.
__________________________________________________
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:[email protected]
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st
News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
