after a wilfull week off,
i would offer another pass at the perceptual issues in some of the Master's
comments.
: etheral MATTER as being an intellectual reality but
later statements imply that the vibrations of this matter exist:
yes. to exactly the same degree...which to say, as an
I don't consider this to be a false categorization of the views of
many believers, and I never said it was true of most believers. It
is clearly the view of some on this list, and some of these believers
are extremely outspoken and intolerant of any other viewpoint, thus
magnifying their
Also, if you would capitalize and punctuate your posts a little bit
closer to common norms it would help me understand them better.
I think we would all say Amen to that.
warmest, Susan
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto (e-mail)
is sent by the
ron,
i did not attribute the quotes to u. that would involve me saying u said or
something like it.
i attributed them to the set of persons offering views without what passes my
standards of qualification.
i caused their reiteration as an example of strawman argument.
i caused their
Yes, Shoghi Effendi uses the words unerring pen in multiple
contexts
when referring with to Abdul-Baha.
Dear Marleen,
When I did a search on Ocean ever instance I found was in reference
to Abdu'l-Baha's prophecies or vision of the future.
warmest, Susan
The information contained
Yes, you are right about generalities. Excessive emphasis on liberty
from the Enlightenment was seen negatively by some Arabs as contributing
to bloodshed and the French Revolution. Let me finish writing this with
footnotes so you can review my sources and interpretation. Thank you
for your
Excessive emphasis on
liberty
from the Enlightenment was seen negatively by some Arabs as
contributing
to bloodshed and the French Revolution.
Dear Marleen,
In Baha'u'llah's case He seems to have been more disturbed by the
Revolutions of 1848. The French Revolution was looked upon
Yes, the idea was toyed with but as the century went on I think there
was increasing ambivalence by some of the liberals and outright
hostility by conservatives to the adoption of secular, foreign ideals
and government. Give me more time to finish this so I can post some
specifics. Marleen
Yes, the idea was toyed with but as the century went on I think
there
was increasing ambivalence by some of the liberals and outright
hostility by conservatives to the adoption of secular, foreign
ideals
and government.
Dear Marleen,
Abdu'l-Baha had His own problems with the
ursus,
actuallly that's a fie example of failing to show the Cite.
i been hearing this the whole Iqan alll the Writings of Baha'u'llah
yadydyydaa for wa longer than i ever wanted to. from people upholding
absolute nonsense, people trying to be reasonable, and people trying to run.
the
Jeanine H. wrote:
I could certainly be off track here, as I do not claim to be a
historian or philosopher. But, if we disagree with 'Abdu'l-Baha about
a philosophical movement, aren't we just pitting our opinions against
His?
Yes, you raise a good point. I did not mean to simply disagree
I sent this yesterday, but I did not see it arrive on the list; somehow it got lost. So, I'm sending it again.Dear Susan,I'm not entirely sure they [Baha'u'llah's words about Abdu'l Baha] shed much light on whether Abdu'l-Baha was right about this, that and the other thing. Not
I sent this message yesterday, but it apparently got lost in cyberspace, so I'm sending it again.Hi Marleen,I apologize for the delay in responding.but how do we know Abdul-Baha possessed superhuman knowledge when he couldn't discern factual errors? First, there is this quote:
Marleen and Susan,For some reason my emails are not getting posted to the Baha'i Studies list. I've sent this twice and it hasn't been posted. So, I'll respond directly. I'm not entirely sure they [Baha'u'llah's words about Abdu'l Baha] shed much light on whether Abdu'l-Baha was
Marleen and Susan,For some reason my emails are not getting posted to the Baha'i Studies list. I've sent this twice and it hasn't been posted. So, I'll respond directly.Hi Marleen,I apologize for the delay in responding.but how do we know Abdul-Baha possessed superhuman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many of His contemporaries had a great deal of admiration for
the
Enlightenment.
Arabs that did were clearly in the minority and seen as
extremists.
\
Dear Marleen,
Your complaining about Abdu'l-Baha speaking in generalities about the
Enlightenment
In my view, calling Abdu'l Baha wrong is like a newborn infant
calling Aristotle wrong.
The infant is not qualified to say Aristotle is wrong. By the
same principle, I am not qualified to say Abdu'l Baha was wrong.
And yes, I know Aristotle was wrong about some things, particulary
Another reason why Abdul-Baha and many Arabs may have rejected
Enlightenment values was the perception that the concepts of
liberty and
civil rights went too far and were inconsistent with Islam and
submission to God.
Dear Marleen,
You're talking about Arabs in generalities. Which
I am more than a little puzzled about explaining Abdul-Baha's
errors, especially related to science, to nonBahais
Why not just offer them your own understanding?
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto (e-mail)
is sent by the Johnson County Community
Dear Susan,Can you explain the "moral" quality of conferred infallibility please? Thanks, Hasan[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi: Have you read
my essay on this topic? http://infallibility.susanmaneck.com/My understanding is that infallibility is a moral quality and that the one who
Dr. Maneck,
You wrote:
What I find belligerent is your false categorization of the views of
most believer
Dear Susan,
I said, in my original response to this thread:
A very common Baha'i attitude is that if one of the Central Figures
wrote something that comes into conflict with scientific
Dear Ron,
You wrote:
1. Many Baha'is believe that some of the Writings expose flaws in the
theory of evolution, and that to believe that people evolved from
common ancestors to other primates is wrong.
and 2. Some Baha'is believe that modern physics is wrong to have
rejected the concept of an
Can you explain the moral quality of conferred infallibility
please?
Dear Hasan,
The word translated as infallibility is ismat which literally means
immaculacy. It is used primary to denote someone incapable of sin,
which is a moral failing. I think possessing ismat means that one's
Dean Betts wrote:
I think Tim Nolan has given a very cogent interpretation of the Master's
words on these two subjects.
I agree with you, Dean. Tim grasps that these passages are symbolic of
spiritual realities, not physical realities.
Ron Stephens
The information contained in this e-mail
dear susan,
what we have, as noted, are notesd taken by
Notes by Joseph H. Hannen
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 411)
it's my dim recall that the Master didn't work off prepared speeches,
but did improv based on...well, being the Master.
marleen notes, quite
As I see it, any attempt to understand a Figure as noble, as pure, as majestic as Abdu'l Baha should rest on the foundation of what the sacred text says about Him. If a person takes these words to heart, it will help clear up misunderstandings, in my opinion.PRAISE be to Him Who hath
I could certainly be off track here, as I do not claim to be a historian
or philosopher. But, if we disagree with 'Abdu'l-Baha about a
philosophical movement, aren't we just pitting our opinions against His?
This is not the same as comparing a statement of the Master about some
aspect of
Ursus Maximus wrote:
From a spiritual and theological perspective, which to me is actually the
more important perspective, I believe in a conception called God and I
believe Baha'u'llah is His Prophet and Messenger. And, I believe that God
will never allow a community, Baha'i or otherwise, to
Dear Marleen,
If I'm not mistaken, the beloved Guardian Shoghi Effendi refers to the
unerring pen of `Abdu'l-Baha somewhere in his writings but I can't
recall the context in which he makes that comment about Him.
What is your paper about; and where and when will you publish it?
Warm and
Why can't I find castrophizing in any dictionary?
Don't know, but you can find a good description of it here:
http://www.getunstuckandgetgoing.com/articles/catastrophe.php
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto (e-mail)
is sent by the Johnson County
Well, "catastrophizing" is what Chicken Little does when it sprinkles rain.Regards, Scott[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why can't I find "castrophizing" in any dictionary? Don't know, but you can find a good description of it here: http://www.getunstuckandgetgoing.com/articles/catastrophe.phpThe
Abdul-Baha bashes Enlightenment philosophers like the rest of his
contemporaries.
Dear Marleen,
Many of His contemporaries had a great deal of admiration for the
Enlightenment. Abdu'l-Baha could have chosen to adopt their view.
The Enlightenment and those associated with it,
when
If a person takes these words to heart, it will help clear up
misunderstandings, in my opinion.
Dear Tim,
I'm not entirely sure they shed much light on whether Abdu'l-Baha was
right about this, that and the other thing. Not unless you can find
specific ways in which they apply. Simply
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many of His contemporaries had a great deal of admiration for the
Enlightenment.
Arabs that did were clearly in the minority and seen as extremists.
See Albert Hourani's Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798-1939
(Oxford, 1962) and Ibrahim Abu-Lughod's
Another reason why Abdul-Baha and many Arabs may have rejected
Enlightenment values was the perception that the concepts of liberty
and civil rights went too far and were inconsistent with Islam and
submission to God.
M Chase wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Many
I am resending this email, it seems did not arrive.This is from the Universal House of Justice: http://bahai-library.com/uhj/infallibility.guardian.htmlThe Guardian was meticulous about the authenticity of historical fact. One of the friends in Yazd wrote to him stating that the
I am resending this email because it seems did not arrive.
http://bahai-library.com/uhj/infallibility.guardian.html
This is from the Universal House of Justice:
The Guardian was meticulous about the authenticity of historical fact. One of
the friends in Yazd wrote to him stating that the
http://bahai-library.com/uhj/infallibility.guardian.htmlThis is from the Universal House of Justice:The Guardian was meticulous about the authenticity of historical fact. One of the friends in Yazd wrote to him stating that the account given by 'Abdu'l-Baha in one of His Tablets
As 'Abdu'l-Baha was already advocating what could be seen as apostacy
(embracing a successor religion to Islam) and forms of immorality
(equal rights for women), I would wonder why we should assume that He
would have any fear of
speaking His true opinion in these matters, as well.
M Chase
Hi Marleen,I apologize for the delay in responding.but how do we know Abdul-Baha possessed superhuman knowledge when he couldn't discern factual errors? First, there is this quote: "...in the person of 'Abdu'l-Bah the incompatible characteristics of a human nature and superhuman
http://bahai-library.com/uhj/infallibility.guardian.htmlThis is from the Universal House of Justice:The Guardian was meticulous about the authenticity of historical fact. One of the friends in Yazd wrote to him stating that the account given by 'Abdu'l-Baha in one of His Tablets
Dear Firestorm,
You asked me to
show me the cite.
Firestorm, I can prove many contradictory things by citing a few
words or a few paragraphs from our Writings; just as Christian
believers in Biblical literalism can prove many contradictory things
by citing a few words or a few paragraphs from
again, when non-specific quotes, re-nuanced to fit a view are offerd to dialog,
the result can be fairly empty.
i can find voltaire speaking to a point that might be summarised, any god
that works for my goals is good enuff.
i don;t have access, nor probably does any one else, to what tfhe
The joke has it that when Voltaire was on his death bed, the priest
asked him: Do you renounce the Devil now? to which Voltaire replied:
Now is not the time to make new enemies.
Warm regards,
Iskandar
Quoting M Chase [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yes, there are a number of instances in which I think
i don;t have access, nor probably does any one else, to what tfhe
Master actuallly said in the one time the Master is recorded
(pup) as calling voltaire an atheist.
Dear Gabe,
Here it is:
Today France glorifies Napoleon Bonaparte, saying, He was a French
military genius, whereas, in
Yes, I erred. The quote I had in mind was from PUP:
Furthermore, every nation is proud of its great men and heroes even
though those great ones may have been atheists or agnostics. Today
France glorifies Napoleon Bonaparte, saying, He was a French military
genius, whereas, in reality, he was
M Chase wrote:
Nevertheless, even in Secret of Divine Civilization, Abdul-Baha
misunderstands the historical context of the Enlightenment reaction
against the power of Roman Catholic ecclesiastics.
Marleen
Would you like to flesh out your statement, so I could follow it?
thanks,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Guardian asserted that Abdu'l-Baha had supernatural knowledge. He
didn't say He was omniscient, however.
Dear Susan,
Could you please elaborate on some of the ideas you presented? How do
we understand supernatural knowledge as distinct from omniscience? How
to? Can't we just let religion be religion and science be
science as the One Common Faith document suggests?
If infallibility isn't about
propositional
inerrancy, how is it defined?
Have you read my essay on this topic?
http://infallibility.susanmaneck.com/
My understanding
Abdul-Baha
misunderstands the historical context of the Enlightenment
reaction
against the power of Roman Catholic ecclesiastics.
What do you think he misunderstands and why?
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto (e-mail)
is sent by the Johnson County
I did not intend to start a fight, although I will admit that this
topicusually does end as a fight, unfortunately.
Dear Ron,
My point is that if you approach the topic as belligerantly as your
last post, that is bound to be the case.
The reason I bring it up is this: I believe that our
Why can't I find castrophizing in any dictionary?
Is the
light your castrophizing about the future of the Baha'i community?
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
Tim, what about when Abdul-Baha's statements to do agree with facts?
marleen
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
The issue of infallibility has multiple interpretations, since nor has the Will or the Guardian or the House defined its limits.I don't think the House is infallible in "all" its decisions, especially in judicial cases, and why must everything be infallible, lest it be of no worth at all?
Sorry. I meant what about when Abdul-Baha's statements DO NOT agree
with facts?
M Chase wrote:
Tim, what about when Abdul-Baha's statements to do agree with facts?
marleen
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto (e-mail) is sent
by the Johnson County
Tim Nolan wrote:
I assume you meant to type don't agree with facts.
Yes, thank you.
As I see it, Abdu'l Baha was in a category different from the rest of
us, and different from the House of Justice. He combined humanness
with superhuman knowledge and perfection.
Forgive me if I seem
Ron wrote:
"But many, if not most, Baha'i's, understanding ofstatements by the Central Figures is that They (and the UniversalHouse of Justice) are infallible, so as to mean that they can't make amistake, literally."
To which Albert responded:
"Have you got any sources from within the
albert,
u state: firestorm wrote:
:A very common Baha'
as indicated by the quotation marks, firestorm does not say that. someone else
did.
the end quote is found at the end of the quoted section, which albert
interrupted.
someone to whom it would appear u had replied, and thus be familiar
"But many, if not most, Baha'i's, understanding of statements by the Central Figures is that They (and the Universal House of Justice) are infallible, so as to mean that they can't make a mistake, literally."To those who think this way I offer these thoughts.Being infallible is not
firestorm wrote:
:A very common Baha'i attitude is that if one of the Central Figures
wrote something that comes into conflict with scientific knowledge,
then science is wrong because our Central Figures are infallible.
Firestorm, do you have any proof or are you just venting? I gather you
: Re: Baha'i double standards re: science and religion - ?
firestorm wrote:
:A very common Baha'i attitude is that if one of the Central Figures
wrote something that comes into conflict with scientific knowledge,
then science is wrong because our Central Figures are infallible.
Firestorm, do
firestorm wrote:
:A very common Baha'i attitude is that if one of the Central
Figures wrote something that comes into conflict with scientific
knowledge, then science is wrong because our Central Figures are
infallible.
Firestorm, do you have any proof or are you just venting? I
the source of all good and freed from all
error, wrote this in their message to religious leaders:
"...
religion and science are the two indispensable knowledge systems through
which the potentialities of consciousness develop. Far from being in
conflict with one another, these fundamental modes
The behaviors of His servants are absolutelyapart of His, and I dont think that after the poisoning (or other sad situations) the light of His glory were reduced. For example, after the murder of three azalis in Akka, Bah'u'llh was interrogated, and He responds with great majesty, this is in
Dear Hasan,
In truth, the Sun of Reality cannot be clipsed, nevertheless, its light
apparently does not penetrate the veils that men interpose between
themselves and its brilliance. I believe that Abdu'l-Baha explains this
phenomenon by using the analogy of a cloudy day. At any rate, I had in
Are you talking merely of His calligraphy or something more? It is clear that the effect of the poisoning was His trembling hand and shrinkage of physical power; but His station as the Mouthpiece of God remained intact. "Richard H. Gravelly" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribi: Is Baha'u'llah
:it is possible that man came into existence after the animal.
(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 192)
I believe He is telling mankind that it must continue to investigate the
matter.
:the useful thing is to meditate on what Abdu'l Baha really meant,
yeah. excellent point.
imho a
Subject: Re: Re: Science and
Religion
Are you
talking merely of His calligraphy or something more? It is clear that the
effect of the poisoning was His trembling hand and shrinkage of physical
power; but His station as the Mouthpiece of God remained intact.
"Rich
Firestorm
Huh?
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 the whole rest of the world is
wrong.
I've not known the House to make pronouncements in regards to
scientific fact, have you? In fact, I would be surprised if they did
so given the fact the One Common Faith document insists:
Religion is religion, as science is science. The one discerns
:Abdu'l Baha explicitly says in Some Answered Questinos that ether is an
intellectual reality, not a phenomenal reality
yes. and u can find einstein saying precisely the same thing about the
atom.
inre the ether, it is currently hypothesised that clouds of probability some
more real than
Hello Ron,many, if not most, Baha'i's, understanding of statements by the Central Figures is that They (and the Universal House of Justice) are infallible, so as to mean that they can't make a mistake, literally.Here is how I see this. The Bab, Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l Baha to a lesser
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 4:44
PM
Subject: : Re: Science and Religion
Hello Ron,
many, if not most, Baha'i's, understanding of statements by the
Central Figures is that They (and the Universal House of Justice) are
infallible, so as to mean that they can't make
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You're missing both the point of this article
and misundersanding the very nature of mdoern science which is *always* dynamic, not because it is in its
infancy, but because this is instrinsic to its method.
Generally, true, but with issues considered
David Friedman wrote:
Why is it that we Baha'is say other religionists beliefs are wrong
because they conflict with science, yet if proof for some view of ours
isn't forthcoming we're allowed to say that we expect science in
future to support our beliefs?
Inconsistency, hypocrisy,
Scott Saylors wrote:
Abd'ul Baha said evolution is incomplete and that we will never find a
missing link - so far we haven't.
Not as far as most evolutionary biologists and anthropologists are
concerned, as the article cited by Susan suggests. I wonder if Bahais
will be able to drag
David Friedman wrote:
Why is it that we Baha'is say other religionists beliefs are wrong
because they conflict with science, yet if proof for some view of ours
isn't forthcoming we're allowed to say that we expect science in
future to support our beliefs?
Sadly, David, as some of the
- Original Message -
From: Ursus Maximus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Baha'i Studies bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: Baha'i double standards re: science and religion - ?
David Friedman wrote:
Why is it that we Baha'is say other religionists beliefs
People are attracted to us because of our professed noble ideals. When
eventually confronted with the fact that we do not do as we say, our
reaction is too often to avoid reality with ever more obtuse and
elaborate justifications for our unscientific and irrational beliefs;
anything other than
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It (still) is a sign of a dynamic field of inquiry.
In other words it's still in the gelatin stage.
Dear Albert,
You're missing both the point of this article and misundersanding the
very nature of mdoern science which is *always* dynamic, not because
it is
Some of you might find this article on the 'missing link' interesting:
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/missinglinks.htm
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
In a message dated 3/27/06 2:43:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some of you might find this article on the 'missing link' interesting:
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/missinglinks.htm
Great article-- thanks!
--Sekhmet
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments
The late historian Vine Deloria, Jr. who passed away recently published
two very interesting books that offer Native American perspectives on
these topics:
_Evolution, Creationism, and Other Modern Myths: A Critical Inquiry_
(Fulcrum, 2002) and _Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some of you might find this article on the 'missing link' interesting:
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/missinglinks.htm
It (still) is a sign of a dynamic field of inquiry.
In other words it's still in the gelatin stage. Thus to speak of a
standard is a might
It (still) is a sign of a dynamic field of inquiry.
In other words it's still in the gelatin stage.
Dear Albert,
You're missing both the point of this article and misundersanding the
very nature of mdoern science which is *always* dynamic, not because
it is in its infancy, but because
:science to support our beliefs cain't ocean that one either.
perhaps rather than discuss the incredible difference it will make if man's
body is more closerly related to the bonobo than the chimp--personal theory of
mine based on response to aggression,
we could find a specific case to test
I agree, Sekhmet. Science has its methods of exploration, and religion has its own. It is only when one insists upon the "truth" of its own viewpoint that a clash results. And that clash is the basis for the warnings by Baha`u'llah and Abd'ul Baha.Regards, Scott[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a
In a message dated 3/25/06 3:40:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During Abdu'l-Baha's time many scientists believed that there was a
direct link between modern higher primates and homo Sapiens. In other
words we evolved directly from chimpanzees or some other existing
great ape. Since the
Hi Susan,religious convictions must be tested using scientific methods. The question then arises what do we do when some of the details of our religious convictions don't seem to pass the test? If the science is sound, then we have to change our convictions, I would say.If the
"If the conviction is about what the universe is made of, or how it works,
then the scientific method is the standard. If this appears to contradict
a religious belief, then one must change one's beliefs.
On the other hand, if the conviction is about what is moral, what is good or bad,
I am forwarding this information as requested:
Dear Friends:
This year the Association for Bahai Studies Science and Religion Special
Interest Group (ABS Sci/Reg SIG), in collaboration with the MIT Bahai Club,
will sponsor two programs at the upcoming ABS Science and Religion SIG Meeting
91 matches
Mail list logo
