The Baha'i Studies Listserv
Ursus Maximus wrote:
This is the first time I've encountered the term "plenary inerrancy'.
I would appreciate it if you would expand on this term and its
application to our Faith. It is important to me.
Hi, Ron:
In Protestantism, there are two major views of inerrancy: verbal plenary
inerrancy and nonverbal plenary inerrancy. The first one refers to the
view that the biblical autographs (the original manuscripts of the
Bible) were word-for-word inerrant. The second is the view that the
ideas or concepts, but not necessarily the precise words, are inerrant.
All fundamentalists (by definition) and most conservative evangelicals
subscribe to verbal plenary inerrancy. More moderate and liberal
evangelicals may support a nonverbal plenary inerrancy.
My problem is that it is apparent to me that what I call "literal
infallibility" or in other words verbal inerrancy or whatever is not
valid. In other words, any literal reading of scripture, including of
our Central Figures, can not be guaranteed to be literally inerrant
and any attempt to insist that it does leads to big problems as we try
to cover up and explain the discrepancies. For me this is a big issue,
to say the least.
Many Baha'is use the English-language word "infallibility" (a
translation of the Arabic 'ismat or related words) to refer to something
like verbal plenary inerrancy (especially concerning the Writings of the
Three Central Figures). However, this Baha'i perspective appears to me
to have been developed from at least two sources: the Protestant
influence on the Baha'i community and the reverence shown by many of the
early Iranian immigrants to the West. Personally, I do not find any
support for it in the Baha'i texts themselves.
My problem is, it seems to me that most Baha'is including famous ones
who speak at Conferences and etc. probably do not find my
understanding acceptable. This obviously worries me.
In most organizations, the more conservative members are usually those
who achieve prominence. Many people, as the Secretariat of the House of
Justice has said, confuse rigidity with devotion.
Maybe this concept of 'plenary inerrancy not applying' can help me.
But is a belief that our Central Figures including the Universal House
of Justice don't have plenary inerrancy, is that acceptable to the
Administration, do you think?
I don't know. Personally, I don't concern myself with what is or is not
acceptable. I just attempt to understand the Baha'i texts to the best of
my ability.
Yet most Baha'is seem to vehemently believe in such literal verbal
inerrancy, if you will.
My impression is that most people don't really think about it. However,
if asked, many will, upon reflection, support something like verbal
plenary inerrancy.
Can you help me with some thoughts on this? It is a big issue I think
because if we get "entry by troops" then surely it will require that
we not discourage people from entering the Faith unless they can
accept literal verbal inerrancy. I do not believe mass numbers of
people in a scientific age can or will accept literal verbal inerrancy.
I think that the main point is to accept the authority of the Central
Figures and of the Administration. The infallibility issue is really a
bit like metaphysical speculation.
I have been advised on this list to just stay quiet and not worry
about it. But I take this Faith seriously and I can't get this out of
my mind. I believe most folks on this list believe in what I would
call literal verbal inerrancy of the Writings and the Central Figures
so for them its not an issue. But for me it is and I don't want to
become inactive or be an outcast or leave the Faith because of this.
Someone advised you to stay quiet?
--
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * 25 domains: www.markfoster.net SED: www.neurelitism.com
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The basic fault lines
today are not between people with different beliefs but between people who hold
these beliefs with an element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs
with a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist
__________________________________________________
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]
Or 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 (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
