Is progressive revelation believable?

[oldbadger]

When a Manifestation appears in the world spiritual and creative energies are released into the world, even though the world in general doesn't know it's because of the advent of the new Manifestation.

You can see today that the age that we live in is different from the age that was say, 3000, 2000, 1000 years ago, so it will be in the future from the age we live in.

We are an ever advancing civilization. The world will progressive materially and spirituality. It won't be like it is today.

Baha'u'llah says:
'This is the Day in which God’s most excellent favors have been poured out upon men, the Day in which His most mighty grace hath been infused into all created things. It is incumbent upon all the peoples of the world to reconcile their differences, and, with perfect unity and peace, abide beneath the shadow of the Tree of His care and loving-kindness. It behoveth them to cleave to whatsoever will, in this Day, be conducive to the exaltation of their stations, and to the promotion of their best interests. Happy are those whom the all-glorious Pen was moved to remember, 7 and blessed are those men whose names, by virtue of Our inscrutable decree, We have preferred to conceal.
Beseech ye the one true God to grant that all men may be graciously assisted to fulfil that which is acceptable in Our sight. Soon will the present-day order be rolled up, and a new one spread out in its stead. Verily, thy Lord speaketh the truth, and is the Knower of things unseen'.

But humans have not advanced in my opinion . In technology, maybe.

You didn't answer my question, though. Tell me, how many crimes will attract the death penalty in your spiritual Baha'i world?

More........ Why will there be an armed police force in your Baha'i world?

Will the Bab's laws be released in your Baha'i world?

 

[oldbadger]

Well I did mention the criterias. It all comes down to the Manifestation.

What do they actually teach? Do they practice what they teach? What prophecies do they fulfill from the scriptures of old?

But your manifestation did not practice what he preached, I'm afraid.

He married more times than he ruled.
He didn't cut his hair as he ruled.
He was massively wealthy by Persian standards.
His family was split apart so much.

 

[od19g6]

I think with a little bit of true independent investigation you would quickly find these are all very old ideas put forth by others or already being attempted. There are no new social teachings in Baha'i theology. There are regressive ideas such as no women allowed in the highest positions of power, lack of allowing gays to become members, women praying in a certain way when on their periods, wearing ones hair in a certain way, dressing in certain ways, etc. Education available to all, global peace, equal rights, fair distribution of wealth are all humanist and other religion's goals. Baha'i is probably the most divisive of all religions as it is the most openly insulting of all other belief systems. I think if you were to read some history and current events other than Baha'i texts you yourself would be able to see this for yourself.

Btw, when you copy and paste the same answers to different posters, it makes the religion look like a cult. The same exact reponses repeated over and over looks like brainwashing to anyone outside of those cults.

So just curious, can you list some people that had the same idea as Baha'u'llah?

Some of the things you said are inaccurate, lgbt people can be members of the baha'i faith, the baha'i faith doesn't have a dress code.

Why would you imply that a copied and past answer [even though it's my own answer] is necessarily a bad thing? I'm replying with an answer according to the question.

 

[Vinayaka]

But your manifestation did not practice what he preached, I'm afraid.

He married times than he ruled.
He didn't cut his hair as he ruled.
He was massively wealthy by Persian standards.
His family was split apart so much.

I think one of the most damaging hypocrisies was from the Grandson, who proclaimed that all Baha'is should have a will, but he himself was somehow above having a will, thus throwing the entire faith into a chaotic scramble to stay with a semblance of organisation.

 

[oldbadger]

I think one of the most damaging hypocrisies was from the Grandson, who proclaimed that all Baha'is should have a will, but he himself was somehow above having a will, thus throwing the entire faith into a chaotic scramble to stay with a semblance of organisation.

Yes.
I think that Shogi Effendi was a great grandson. There must have been an extreme family rift and a whole generation got cut out. ....?

It's just a question of seeing through the word salad of spirits and heavenly nightingales to see the ghouls and scarecrows, I think.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Don't forget Mahavira! I'll always make a pitch for the Jains.

I see many moral and spiritual values, as well as mystical teachings, in Baha'i Writings which cohere with Christian ethics - much to praise and commend - but on this question of "law", I feel we are very far apart indeed.

Well, Christians fail at the very first duty - so we must be accounted among those who have gone astray and are abject and foolish, because we hold no stock in divine "precepts laid down by God for the maintenance of order in the world", as I've been explaining.

I never forget Mahavira, though I dont mention him all the time because people will not know about him and the Jain view. I consider him to be Che Guevara of religion. An absolute radical. Never did anything half-heartedly.

If possesing anything was wrong, then he would not even wear clothes. If Ahimsa was correct, then he will keep a broom with him and take a next step only when he is sure that he is not putting his feet on any small insect or creature, wore a piece of cloth over his mouth that he may not swallow any insect. If one was not to be slave of taste, then he had a long list of vegetables to avoid, no onion, no garlic, no chilies.

That is very natural. You too belong to a One God Abrahamic religion. See what I have underlined.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes.
I think that Shogi Effendi was a great grandson. There must have been an extreme family rift and a whole generation got cut out. ....?

It's just a question of seeing through the word salad of spirits and heavenly nightingales to see the ghouls and scarecrows, I think.

In a way I feel sorry for any Baha'i who comes to this forum fresh. They aren't privy to the fact that we've been through the very same discussions and points that they bring up with several other Baha'is for the last 7 or 8 years. So there is nothing at all new to us. It's just same old tired argument after same old tired argument, always stated as if it were just simple fact, not even prefaced by 'I believe' or 'Baha'i's believe', and not realising that this type of proselytising just drives people away. All this despite the evidence of new questioners realising right away all the fallacies, and having more sense than some of us old die-hards, by just leaving.

It's sad, because Baha'u'llah reiterated some good ideas. Sure they weren't original or particularly inspiring, but neither are they all that 'evil' as some would accuse us of thinking. Shucks darn.

They probably were quite original and radical in their time, given the context.

 

[Vouthon]

Hindus don't even believe in evil as a concept, unlike the Abrahamic faiths

To be fair, Catholics (and I think most Orthodox and probably a decent number of Protestants too, such as maybe Anglicans and Lutherans), don't believe evil actually exists either. Its just the privation of good in our theology.

St. Augustine of Hippo wrote:

"...And in the universe, even that which is called evil, when it is regulated and put in its own place, only enhances our admiration of the good; for we enjoy and value the good more when we compare it with the evil. For the Almighty God, who, as even the heathen acknowledge, has supreme power over all things, being Himself supremely good, would never permit the existence of anything evil among His works, if He were not so omnipotent and good that He can bring good even out of evil. For what is that which we call evil but the absence of good? In the bodies of animals, disease and wounds mean nothing but the absence of health; for when a cure is effected, that does not mean that the evils which were present;namely, the diseases and wounds;go away from the body and dwell elsewhere: they altogether cease to exist; for the wound or disease is not a substance, but a defect in the fleshly substance;the flesh itself being a substance, and therefore something good, of which those evils; that is, privations of the good which we call health;are accidents. Just in the same way, what are called vices in the soul are nothing but privations of natural good. And when they are cured, they are not transferred elsewhere: when they cease to exist in the healthy soul, they cannot exist anywhere else..."

- St. Augustine of Hippo (354-30 C.E), Enchiridion 10-12

​

St. Augustine on the Problem of Evil Enchiridion, 10-12 | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University

In his struggles with the problem of evil, Augustine argues first that the fact that there are things of varying goodness makes for a greater goodness of things as a whole than if there weren’t such variety. And he further argues that evil is not something fully real but only something dependent on that which is more real, as disease (which is an evil) can exist only in a body (which is a good). Thus God, as the source of all that is, is not in contest with a positive being or an ultimate reality which is evil and would be His counterpart.

​

Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism are the two ancient religious systems that put forward this concept of a cosmic duality of good and evil, as two genuinely existing forces that compete for hegemony in the universe, but that belief is considered heterodox in Catholicism.

 

[od19g6]

But humans have not advanced in my opinion . In technology, maybe.

You didn't answer my question, though. Tell me, how many crimes will attract the death penalty in your spiritual Baha'i world?

More........ Why will there be an armed police force in your Baha'i world?

Some of the laws in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas is for a future civilization, they're not for right now.

Surely you would think that the world will always need police because people have free will to do some sort of crime.

Will the Bab's laws be released in your Baha'i world?

Well the Bab was the Prophet forerunner of Baha'u'llah is the similar way john the baptist was a forerunner of Jesus Christ.

 

[Vinayaka]

To be fair, Catholics (and I think most Orthodox and probably a decent number of Protestants too, such as maybe Anglicans and Lutherans), don't believe evil actually exists either. Its just the privation of good in our theology.

St. Augustine of Hippo wrote:

"...And in the universe, even that which is called evil, when it is regulated and put in its own place, only enhances our admiration of the good; for we enjoy and value the good more when we compare it with the evil. For the Almighty God, who, as even the heathen acknowledge, has supreme power over all things, being Himself supremely good, would never permit the existence of anything evil among His works, if He were not so omnipotent and good that He can bring good even out of evil. For what is that which we call evil but the absence of good? In the bodies of animals, disease and wounds mean nothing but the absence of health; for when a cure is effected, that does not mean that the evils which were present;namely, the diseases and wounds;go away from the body and dwell elsewhere: they altogether cease to exist; for the wound or disease is not a substance, but a defect in the fleshly substance;the flesh itself being a substance, and therefore something good, of which those evils; that is, privations of the good which we call health;are accidents. Just in the same way, what are called vices in the soul are nothing but privations of natural good. And when they are cured, they are not transferred elsewhere: when they cease to exist in the healthy soul, they cannot exist anywhere else..."

- St. Augustine of Hippo (354-30 C.E), Enchiridion 10-12

​

St. Augustine on the Problem of Evil Enchiridion, 10-12 | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University

In his struggles with the problem of evil, Augustine argues first that the fact that there are things of varying goodness makes for a greater goodness of things as a whole than if there weren’t such variety. And he further argues that evil is not something fully real but only something dependent on that which is more real, as disease (which is an evil) can exist only in a body (which is a good). Thus God, as the source of all that is, is not in contest with a positive being or an ultimate reality which is evil and would be His counterpart. ​

I believe you. It's just that I'm not at all familiar with your theology other than in an extremely basic way. I do know there is great variety in Christian theology. 'Evil' is used in various scriptures in Hinduism as well. Generally the rough meaning is just that that would lead you away from God, not closer. But we agree on there nor being any true intrinsic pure evil.

 

[Vouthon]

I believe you. It's just that I'm not at all familiar with your theology other than in an extremely basic way. I do know there is great variety in Christian theology. 'Evil' is used in various scriptures in Hinduism as well. Generally the rough meaning is just that that would lead you away from God, not closer. But we agree on there nor being any true intrinsic pure evil.

Is that where the concept of maya comes into a Hindu philosophical context (well, certainly in Advaita anyway, not sure about Dvaita)?

St. Angela of Foligno (1248 - 1309), in the medieval period, took this doctrine of the non-existence of evil to a rather interesting conclusion:

"In a vision I beheld the fullness of God in which I beheld and comprehended the whole creation, that is, what is on this side and what is beyond the sea, the abyss, the sea itself, and everything else. And in everything that I saw, I could perceive nothing except the presence of the power of God, and in a manner totally indescribable. And my soul in an excess of wonder cried out: "This world is pregnant with God!" ...

God presents himself in the inmost depths of my soul. I understand not only that he is present, but also how he is present in every creature and in everything that has being, in a devil and a good angel, in heaven and hell, in good deeds and in adultery or homicide, in all things, finally, which exist or have some degree of being, whether beautiful or ugly.

She further said: I also understand that he is no less present in a devil than a good angel. Therefore, while I am in this truth, I take no less delight in seeing or understanding his presence in a devil or in an act of adultery than I do in a good angel or in a good deed. This mode of divine presence in my soul has become almost habitual"

(Paulist Press, 1993, pp. 212-213)
​

Sometimes this gets lost in the popular mindset with the whole "devil" thing.

In orthodox Christian theology, the "devil" is not a force of evil that can counteract God (as in Zoroastrian cosmology) - indeed, God (as St. Angela notes) is as much omnipresent in hell and in demons as he is in us.

Satan is, understood, simply to be a being with a greater privation of good than the rest of us.

But metaphysically, evil is not anymore real than 'darkness' is - darkness is just lack of light, a privation of sunlight.

Edit: wikipedia (surprisingly) actually has a decent short article on it:

Absence of good - Wikipedia

The absence of good (Latin: privatio boni) is a theological doctrine that evil, unlike good, is insubstantial, so that thinking of it as an entity is misleading. Instead, evil is rather the absence or lack ("privation") of good.[1][2][3] It is typically attributed to St. Augustine of Hippo, who wrote:

See also: "For evil has no positive nature; but the loss of good has received the name “evil.”" (In: The City of God, XI, chapter 9)​

 

[paarsurrey]

I think with a little bit of true independent investigation you would quickly find these are all very old ideas put forth by others or already being attempted. There are no new social teachings in Baha'i theology. There are regressive ideas such as no women allowed in the highest positions of power, lack of allowing gays to become members, women praying in a certain way when on their periods, wearing ones hair in a certain way, dressing in certain ways, etc. Education available to all, global peace, equal rights, fair distribution of wealth are all humanist and other religion's goals. Baha'i is probably the most divisive of all religions as it is the most openly insulting of all other belief systems. I think if you were to read some history and current events other than Baha'i texts you yourself would be able to see this for yourself.

Btw, when you copy and paste the same answers to different posters, it makes the religion look like a cult. The same exact reponses repeated over and over looks like brainwashing to anyone outside of those cults.

"Btw, when you copy and paste the same answers to different posters, it makes the religion look like a cult. The same exact reponses repeated over and over looks like brainwashing to anyone outside of those cults."

Is it that they do, please?

Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

Is that where the concept of maya comes into a Hindu philosophical context (well, certainly in Advaita anyway, not sure about Dvaita)?

St. Angela of Foligno (1248 - 1309), in the medieval period, took this doctrine of the non-existence of evil to a rather interesting conclusion:

"In a vision I beheld the fullness of God in which I beheld and comprehended the whole creation, that is, what is on this side and what is beyond the sea, the abyss, the sea itself, and everything else. And in everything that I saw, I could perceive nothing except the presence of the power of God, and in a manner totally indescribable. And my soul in an excess of wonder cried out: "This world is pregnant with God!" ...

God presents himself in the inmost depths of my soul. I understand not only that he is present, but also how he is present in every creature and in everything that has being, in a devil and a good angel, in heaven and hell, in good deeds and in adultery or homicide, in all things, finally, which exist or have some degree of being, whether beautiful or ugly.

She further said: I also understand that he is no less present in a devil than a good angel. Therefore, while I am in this truth, I take no less delight in seeing or understanding his presence in a devil or in an act of adultery than I do in a good angel or in a good deed. This mode of divine presence in my soul has become almost habitual"

(Paulist Press, 1993, pp. 212-213)
​

Sometimes this gets lost in the popular mindset with the whole "devil" thing.

In orthodox Christian theology, the "devil" is not a force of evil that can counteract God (as in Zoroastrian cosmology) - indeed, God (as St. Angela notes) is as much omnipresent in hell and in demons as he is in us.

Satan is, understood, simply to be a being with a greater privation of good than the rest of us.

But metaphysically, evil is not anymore real than 'darkness' is - darkness is just lack of light, a privation of sunlight.

What St. Angela wrote about is called Sat-Chit-Ananda in some Hindu schools. In modern words, energy flowing through all form. It was this form that I personally first encountered. Surprised the heck out of me at the time.

The Hindu belief (certainly in monistic versions) There is nowhere that God is not. It's just that He/She is more noticeable in some places (the Lotus of the Heart, sanctified Hindu temples) than in others. The electricity is running at a stronger current.

 

[wandering peacefully]

It really seems like a group of sock puppets to me. Now, it's a psychological study on the nature of brainwashing, fundamentalism, and cults. One wonders how individuals could possibly convert to it. In one case we know it was friendship evangelism, and that's a decent and understandable explanation. Being born into it is also rather understandable.

I must have a fairly decent grasp now as it's not difficult to predict the responses to non-Baha'is and who will upvote whom. I guess we're all just haters.

I don't really consider the Bahai a cult. Fundamentalists yes, but the ones on this forums don't seem cultish. I don't know about one is Iran. They are most likely different than the western ones.

But if they really spent all the time actually doing everything their prophet told them to do, they most likely wouldn't have time to be 'sharing' on the Internet. So they aren't hard core.

I don't find any harm in what they do. It is just interesting. And yes, I guess some people find that disagreement equals hate. But most dharmic type people don't find hate helpful.

 

[Vouthon]

What St. Angela wrote about is called Sat-Chit-Ananda in some Hindu schools. In modern words, energy flowing through all form. It was this form that I personally first encountered. Surprised the heck out of me at the time.

The Hindu belief (certainly in monistic versions) There is nowhere that God is not. It's just that He/She is more noticeable in some places (the Lotus of the Heart, sanctified Hindu temples) than in others. The electricity is running at a stronger current.

Yup, as the old Catholic Baltimore catechism taught millions of bored American kids at Jesuit school in the 19th century (1891 Version):


~Baltimore Catechism #3 : Lesson 2~

Q. 166. Where is God?

A. God is everywhere.

Q. 167. How is God everywhere?

A. God is everywhere whole and entire as He is in any one place. This is true and we must believe it, though we cannot understand it.

Q. 168. If God is everywhere, why do we not see Him?

A. We do not see God, because He is a pure spirit and cannot be seen with bodily eyes.
​

I hope they took it in (I doubt it though, judging by myself at that age. Mind on other things! )

 

[Vinayaka]

"Btw, when you copy and paste the same answers to different posters, it makes the religion look like a cult. The same exact reponses repeated over and over looks like brainwashing to anyone outside of those cults."

Is it that they do, please?

Regards

That's one thing I appreciate about you, Paar. You speak for yourself, and rarely quote the Ammadiyya prophet. (Sorry, I forget his name just now.) The Ammadiyyas number at least 3 times, probably much much more than the Baha'i faith, both face persecution from Islam, and yet one seems cultish, while the other seems okay. Perhaps it's because you're the only representative of your faith on these forums, I don't know.

 

[Vouthon]

That is very natural. You too belong to a One God Abrahamic religion. See what I have underlined.

That was a direct quotation from Baha'i scripture.

I was quoting it to evidence that, according to the first duty of the believer outlined in the Aqdas, nearly every Christian is effectively - by implication - described as among what Baha'u'llah labels the "abject and foolish" for not believing in the concept of divine positive law.

Christian and Baha'i views in that respect seem to be irreconcilable, as one of us holds adherence to divine positive law as an idea to be liberated from and the other as among the most fundamental doctrines of their Faith, indeed the starting point, other similarities we have owing to shared Abrahamism notwithstanding.

But on Mahavira, we are agreed. He is utterly unique in religious philosophy, Eastern or Western. He isn't well-known to the layman here in the West, though, to the same extent as Gautama Buddha - and I think that should be remedied, if possible.

 

[wandering peacefully]

"Btw, when you copy and paste the same answers to different posters, it makes the religion look like a cult. The same exact reponses repeated over and over looks like brainwashing to anyone outside of those cults."

Is it that they do, please?

Regards

I didn't say "they" although 'they' do a lot more copy paste of 'scripture' than anyone I've ever seen.

I was speaking to the op in this case. I was reading a couple pages and kept seeing the same robotic type answer. Something I can't remember . But it was just a couple pages back from here...

 

[Vinayaka]

I didn't say "they" although 'they' do a lot more copy paste of 'scripture' than anyone I've ever seen.

I was speaking to the op in this case. I was reading a couple pages and kept seeing the same robotic type answer. Something I can't remember . But it was just a couple pages back from here...

Some of the other Baha'i adherents have been able to change their behaviour away from that style of non-dialogue, after being encouraged to do so by others. Hopefully that'll happen here as well.

 

[Vouthon]

the baha'i faith doesn't have a dress code.

Agreed, in this respect the Baha'i laws are more libertarian than those operative in Islam i.e. leaving more scope for discretion in clothing and individual agency in choosing dress etc.:

"Many rules about dress had their origins in the laws and traditional practices of the world's religions. For example, the Shí'ih clergy adopted for themselves a distinctive headdress and robes and, at one time, forbade the people to adopt European attire. Muslim practice, in its desire to emulate the custom of the Prophet, also introduced a number of restrictions with regard to the trim of the moustache and the length of the beard.

"Bahá'u'lláh removed such limitations on one's apparel and beard. He leaves such matters to the "discretion" of the individual..."

(Notes to the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, no. 175)
​

With that being said, there are a few small restrictions i.e.

"Shave not your heads; God hath adorned them with hair, and in this there are signs from the Lord of creation to those who reflect upon the requirements of nature. He, verily, is the God of strength and wisdom. Notwithstanding, it is not seemly to let the hair pass beyond the limit of the ears. Thus hath it been decreed by Him Who is the Lord of all worlds." (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i Aqdas)​

"Shoghi Effendi has made clear that, unlike the prohibition on shaving the head, this law forbidding the growing of the hair beyond the lobe of the ear pertains only to men." (The Kitab-i Aqdas, notes)
​

Not clothing, as such, but it does deal with appearance / fashion / hair growth, just as Shariah law does in Islam as well.