Islam belief, Noah, the Great Flood and Science. Coherent or contradictory?

[TransmutingSoul]

But what I do get irritated by is wild claims that Bahai makes about the last 150 years. Bahai needs to get honest about these, imo.

We have offered nothing but honesty and from our heart.

We appreciate you can choose to see it anyway you wish to.

Regards Tony

 

[oldbadger]

Next you're going to tell me all those supposed skeletons of giants are real and one of them had a rock stuck in his forehead.

Now now!
A giant is anybody who looks imposingly large to any other.
And a person brained by a stone is just that....may not even be surface bleeding.

And slings are very very deadly, a friend of mine was serving in the military in Palestine in the late 40's, and he never forgot how accurately the locals could throw and sling stones.

 

[oldbadger]

We have offered nothing but honesty and from our heart.

We appreciate you can choose to see it anyway you wish to.

Regards Tony

Hello Tony.....
I hope that your pilgrimage was interesting, wonderful and memorable.

But, yes, whilst believing in your honesty and heart I cannot help but think that some Bahais seem to be imprinted with all manner of strange ideas about reality.

Anyway, I had an exciting journey as well, this week. My wife and I went to the shops in ........ Canterbury!!..... on Monday this week! That's a whole 8 miles away, and our first visit in months.......... and we even went to a McDonalds!!

 

[shunyadragon]

Hello Tony.....
I hope that your pilgrimage was interesting, wonderful and memorable.

But, yes, whilst believing in your honesty and heart I cannot help but think that some Bahais seem to be imprinted with all manner of strange ideas about reality.

Anyway, I had an exciting journey as well, this week. My wife and I went to the shops in ........ Canterbury!!..... on Monday this week! That's a whole 8 miles away, and our first visit in months.......... and we even went to a McDonalds!!

I would like to see what 'strange ideas' that you consider strange that Baha'is believe in an appropriate thread.

Personally I consider belief in a literal world food and Noah's Ark, and a literal Genesis Creation as strange beyond belief.

 

[oldbadger]

I would like to see what 'strange ideas' that you consider strange that Baha'is believe in an appropriate thread.

So you haven't been following the gigantic threads about Bahai, by Bahais over the last year or two. OK, fair enough.... maybe you'll join any in the future, but in the meantime you might like to visit some of those from the recent past?

Personally I consider belief in a literal world food

...Just a second! I rather thought that you've been denying any value to the enormous floods in the Mid-East that are known about, any of which may have seemed to victims to be worldwide.

and Noah's Ark,

You're beginning to look like the kind of person who might write in to complain about nannies that are telling their charges stories about the stork bringing them. Lies!...all lies! Anybody with a degree in ornithology with physics could tell those poor folks that storks can't lift 8lb brats in nappy towels!
I quite like that story as well....... let's not get so serious about what other folks wish to tell their kids, eh?

And a literal Genesis Creation as strange beyond belief.

Most Christians and Muslims probably interpret early Genesis is symbolic, or metaphorical, or allegorical..... take your pick.
But it looks as if most or all of our water got here from above......
And we may soon be hearing about life beyond our planet, then delivered life via incoming bodies.

If we survive long enough we may be in for some very shaky shocks in the way of new knowledge, and Genesis won't look quite so daft by then..... just be seen as clever metaphor intended for an audience that would never be able to grasp the whole detailed truth. Elijah's journey upwards may yet be considered a bit more seriously?

 

[shunyadragon]

So you haven't been following the gigantic threads about Bahai, by Bahais over the last year or two. OK, fair enough.... maybe you'll join any in the future, but in the meantime you might like to visit some of those from the recent past?

Phfffft!

...Just a second! I rather thought that you've been denying any value to the enormous floods in the Mid-East that are known about, any of which may have seemed to victims to be worldwide.

There are no such enormous floods exist that would have anything to do with a Biblical flood.beyond local and rare regional floods referenced.

Actually, I have already presented the most likely flood of the Tigris Euphrates valley in ~2900 BCE that would have appeared to a world flood, and recorded by the Sumarians, No problem.

Most Christians and Muslims probably interpret early Genesis is symbolic, or metaphorical, or allegorical..... take your pick.
But it looks as if most or all of our water got here from above......
And we may soon be hearing about life beyond our planet, then delivered life via incoming bodies.

~40 to 50+ of Christians in the USA believe in a literal Genesis.

If we survive long enough we may be in for some very shaky shocks in the way of new knowledge, and Genesis won't look quite so daft by then..... just be seen as clever metaphor intended for an audience that would never be able to grasp the whole detailed truth. Elijah's journey upwards may yet be considered a bit more seriously?

Very extreme and unlikely arguing from ignorance. Nothing meaningful in your response. These are strange ideas.

Still waiting . . . 'What strange ideas do Baha'is believe?'

 

[CG Didymus]

I don't know what unity of religion means for you, but for Baha'is it means they originate from the same spiritual source. Religions can be like trees. They grow, bear fruit, whither and eventually die. It doesn't mean they will all merge into one.

Why can't the major religions have a different source? Then there are the smaller religions, what was their source? But then there were the religions of some of the great empires. They had their gods and they had their laws. From the one true God or from some religious person's ideas of who the gods were and what they wanted? Somewhere down the line, some religions had to be just the inventions of the people and culture couldn't they?

Then of course for me, would be to say the same thing about some of the major religions too. That spiritual/religious people within a culture came up with who their God is and what that God wants them to do. To tie it in with this thread, whoever invented the Creation story and the Flood story, for me, it seems very likely it was God talking to them, but them making up their God. And the flood story was an important story in their make believe history to get them to believe and follow the rules of their religion. The only people that survive are the "true believers".

Since even the major religions are not all that "logical" and based on "reason", then why blame God for inventing them? Like this flood story and so many other Biblical stories, the Baha'is are going to have to explain away most of them with some symbolic interpretation to get people away from taking them literal. Like all the plagues that struck the Egyptians. Then, supposedly, they let the Hebrews go, and then go chase them down in their chariots. Then the sea parts for the Hebrews but comes crashing down on the Egyptians. Then there is Jonah being swallowed by a big fish.

Why can't this be a people's myth and legends. Why does it have to be God "inspiring" some scribe or prophet to write this stuff... knowing full well it never happened? But did God make it clear it was only symbolic? No, not until the Baha'is came along. The poor Bible-believers think they are doing the right thing by clinging to a literal interpretation. They think they are the only ones standing up for the "Truth" of God's Word. And what happens? They turn away from what God is telling them through His new Prophet. And, I don't blame them. I blame the writers of the Bible and whoever inspired them, hopefully not the real God, 'cause whoever did inspire them, put out a lot of misinformation... unless you make it all symbolic. Then it all makes sense.

What was it? The sea is humanity? And the Ark is the Word of God? Oh, whatever that symbolic interpretation was. I forget.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And we may soon be hearing about life beyond our planet,........

We already know this is so.

It is very clear in Baha'u'llahs Message.

Regards Tony

 

[shunyadragon]

Why can't the major religions have a different source? Then there are the smaller religions, what was their source? But then there were the religions of some of the great empires. They had their gods and they had their laws. From the one true God or from some religious person's ideas of who the gods were and what they wanted? Somewhere down the line, some religions had to be just the inventions of the people and culture couldn't they?

This is all possibly true,but I do not believe it,

Then of course for me, would be to say the same thing about some of the major religions too. That spiritual/religious people within a culture came up with who their God is and what that God wants them to do. To tie it in with this thread, whoever invented the Creation story and the Flood story, for me, it seems very likely it was God talking to them, but them making up their God. And the flood story was an important story in their make believe history to get them to believe and follow the rules of their religion. The only people that survive are the "true believers".

Your view is possible.

Since even the major religions are not all that "logical" and based on "reason", then why blame God for inventing them? Like this flood story and so many other Biblical stories, the Baha'is are going to have to explain away most of them with some symbolic interpretation to get people away from taking them literal. Like all the plagues that struck the Egyptians. Then, supposedly, they let the Hebrews go, and then go chase them down in their chariots. Then the sea parts for the Hebrews but comes crashing down on the Egyptians. Then there is Jonah being swallowed by a big fish.

True, religions are not necessarily logical. For that matter most humans are rather selfish in their logic to justify their beliefs. The Baha'is need not explain what other people believe. Like all the different believers of religions it is up to them to explain their beliefs.

You description of the Exodus version is believed by those that consider it a true account. I do not consider it a true account. Yes, supposedly these stories are true based on what the people believe who wrote.

Why can't this be a people's myth and legends.

It is possible this is true.

Why does it have to be God "inspiring" some scribe or prophet to write this stuff... knowing full well it never happened?

It does not have to be so, I believe that inspiration from God is in the form of spiritual teachings, Spiritual Laws,and communion with God, and not some scribe writing down what he 'believes' to be factual and true concerning history and the nature of our physical existence.

But did God make it clear it was only symbolic? No, not until the Baha'is came along. The poor Bible-believers think they are doing the right thing by clinging to a literal interpretation. They think they are the only ones standing up for the "Truth" of God's Word. And what happens? They turn away from what God is telling them through His new Prophet. And, I don't blame them. I blame the writers of the Bible and whoever inspired them, hopefully not the real God, 'cause whoever did inspire them, put out a lot of misinformation... unless you make it all symbolic. Then it all makes sense.

Your presented a negative hypothetical argument to justify what you believe, and not what Baha'i believe. Bah'is do not make it all symbols. Baha'is believe that the eternal value in God's communication with humanity in progressive revelation is the spiritual teachings laws and communion between humans and God through progressive Revelation in God's Creation, and not whether the historical and physical facts are true or not. The value today of the stories are as religious teachings in scripture is not whether they are true or not. This is a common view among Jews.

What was it? The sea is humanity? And the Ark is the Word of God? Oh, whatever that symbolic interpretation was. I forget.

Do your homework instead of spending all your time constructing a hypothetical negative arguments to justify your agenda.

 

[oldbadger]

Phfffft!

There are no such enormous floods exist that would have anything to do with a Biblical flood.beyond local and rare regional floods referenced.

Actually, I have already presented the most likely flood of the Tigris Euphrates valley in ~2900 BCE that would have appeared to a world flood, and recorded by the Sumarians, No problem.


~40 to 50+ of Christians in the USA believe in a literal Genesis.

So........ what?

Very extreme and unlikely arguing from ignorance. Nothing meaningful in your response. These are strange ideas.

So..... what? These possibilities are looking less extreme by the decade, methinks. And I wasn't arguing, and am not ignorant.

But another Bahai has already written on this thread that Bahauallah has already written about this kind of thing..... was he 'arguing from ignorance'? Or are you?

Still waiting . . . 'What strange ideas do Baha'is believe?'

This is what we find............. folks like you write down one message, and then convert it into another.
You never asked me to post strange ideas that I have read from Bahais on this thread......,

Here is what you wrote :-
I would like to see what 'strange ideas' that you consider strange that Baha'is believe in an appropriate thread.

 

[shunyadragon]

So..... what? These possibilities are looking less extreme by the decade, methinks. And I wasn't arguing, and am not ignorant.

But another Bahai has already written on this thread that Bahauallah has already written about this kind of thing..... was he 'arguing from ignorance'? Or are you?

Please cite 'already said this kind of thing,.' and not vague statements of no meaning.

Education in logic; The fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance' is not an accusation that you are ignorant. The bold above is essentially claiming that the very very unlikely of what may be possible in the future is an 'arguing from ignorance' fallacy and not relevant to the now. My answer is 'so what?'

This is what we find............. folks like you write down one message, and then convert it into another.
You never asked me to post strange ideas that I have read from Bahais on this thread......,

I asked you to cite these 'strange ideas,' if you refuse to start another thread post them here!

Need to cite and not vague generalizations of 'What we find?' Nothing in the way of 'strange ideas' posted in this thread, just simply what Bah'is believe.

Here is what you wrote :-
I would like to see what 'strange ideas' that you consider strange that Baha'is believe in an appropriate thread.

I did ask you to reference 'these strange things,' and all I get is a vague dodge and meaningless third party 'they say' claims without citation. Start the thread or back up your claim here.

Still waiting . . .

 

[oldbadger]

Please cite 'already said this kind of thing,.' and not vague statements of no meaning.

Education in logic; The fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance' is not an accusation that you are ignorant. The bold above is essentially claiming that the very very unlikely of what may be possible in the future is an 'arguing from ignorance' fallacy and not relevant to the now. My answer is 'so what?'

Nah nah! You don't get to judge what is likely or unlikely in the future....... well, you can have your opinions, but beyond that you are no judge imo.

I asked you to cite these 'strange ideas,' if you refuse to start another thread post them here!

Yeah.... you asked, but I'm going to wait until I read your Bahai ideas, otherwise I will be posting up sources written by other Bahais.

Now I've suggested that you go and read the massive threads of recent months which were visited by several well known Bahais on here and you replied with 'pfft' or something similar. That's clearly some kind of refusal......
...so.... on yer bike, Shunyadragon!

. Start the thread or back up your claim here.
Still waiting . . .

You want a 'STRANGE IDEAS OF BAHAI' thread?
Start it!
Do it or go irritate someone else......... it was your suggestion, so do it or give it up.

 

[shunyadragon]

Nah nah! You don't get to judge what is likely or unlikely in the future....... well, you can have your opinions, but beyond that you are no judge imo.

Phfffftttt! Plop! Plop!

 

[CG Didymus]

This is all possibly true,but I do not believe it,

That was in reply to my... "Somewhere down the line, some religions had to be just the inventions of the people and culture couldn't they?"

So in some far off island a few hundred years ago, the religious leaders would throw people, probably virgin women, into a volcano. Was this from God or did some spiritual leader invent that practice thinking he was doing what the gods desired? Same thing with the people that took people, again, probably young virgin women, to the took of a pyramid and cut their hearts out. Did God direct them to do that or did a spiritual leader of those people invent that? And some people get a reading from a electronic device and tell people what's wrong with them and how to fix the problems. Did God tell the founder of that religious group to do that, or did he invent that himself?

You are the one talking about, "Genesis and the rest of the Pentateuch is compiled, edited and redacted well after 1000 BCE, and not written by Moses. Evidence is clear most of the Bible is not first hand accounts." Is it compiled, edited, and redacted by God or by men? If the "manifestation" Moses didn't write it, who did God or men? If most of the Bible is from second and thirdhand accounts... then are those accounts from God or from men? All I'm saying is there is a very good chance in my mind that it was men. If it's from God fine. If God inspired people to write symbolic riddles disguised as history in the Bible then fine. I just not convinced of that, like Baha'is seem to be.

Oh, and I did do my homework, but my symbolic dog ate it.

 

[CG Didymus]

Nah nah! You don't get to judge what is likely or unlikely in the future....... well, you can have your opinions, but beyond that you are no judge imo.


Yeah.... you asked, but I'm going to wait until I read your Bahai ideas, otherwise I will be posting up sources written by other Bahais.

Now I've suggested that you go and read the massive threads of recent months which were visited by several well known Bahais on here and you replied with 'pfft' or something similar. That's clearly some kind of refusal......
...so.... on yer bike, Shunyadragon!



You want a 'STRANGE IDEAS OF BAHAI' thread?
Start it!
Do it or go irritate someone else......... it was your suggestion, so do it or give it up.

Blessed are the peacemakers, and the meek shall inherit the Earth, and be humble and kind to all people and all that stuff. Where and who are those people? I know it's not you and me, but I thought it might be the Baha'is. Was I wrong... or just ignorant?

 

[oldbadger]

Blessed are the peacemakers, and the meek shall inherit the Earth, and be humble and kind to all people and all that stuff. Where and who are those people? I know it's not you and me, but I thought it might be the Baha'is. Was I wrong... or just ignorant?

Not you or me?
We are the sweet little p*ssycats of RF, you and me.
Cuddly, even.

But 'yes', I do find many Bahai claims to be very strange; I must have written the description 'double-think' a hundred times in my posts to Bahais.

But I don't think that 'Fred-said...' posts are allowed on RF, so irritable members who want clashy conversations just need to go-look for themselves, or I can wait until they themselves write something 'very strange'.

 

[shunyadragon]

That was in reply to my... "Somewhere down the line, some religions had to be just the inventions of the people and culture couldn't they?"

So in some far off island a few hundred years ago, the religious leaders would throw people, probably virgin women, into a volcano. Was this from God or did some spiritual leader invent that practice thinking he was doing what the gods desired? Same thing with the people that took people, again, probably young virgin women, to the took of a pyramid and cut their hearts out. Did God direct them to do that or did a spiritual leader of those people invent that? And some people get a reading from a electronic device and tell people what's wrong with them and how to fix the problems. Did God tell the founder of that religious group to do that, or did he invent that himself?

You are the one talking about, "Genesis and the rest of the Pentateuch is compiled, edited and redacted well after 1000 BCE, and not written by Moses. Evidence is clear most of the Bible is not first hand accounts." Is it compiled, edited, and redacted by God or by men? If the "manifestation" Moses didn't write it, who did God or men? If most of the Bible is from second and third hand accounts... then are those accounts from God or from men? All I'm saying is there is a very good chance in my mind that it was men. If it's from God fine. If God inspired people to write symbolic riddles disguised as history in the Bible then fine. I just not convinced of that, like Baha'is seem to be.

It is very apparent you have not read my posts, and continue to construct a contorted negative argument against the Baha'i Faith based on your agenda. Your hostility and over the top sarcasm is noted and creates a lot of static.

First, like all scripture the positive spiritual laws and teaching are inspired by God for the age they were revealed. They are written by humans with a very human fallible cultural paradigm. The spiritual teachings evolve as humanity spiritually

Second, yes much of the Bible is third hand accounts from the human perspective. This the reason that the historical and physically factual writing is not necessarily reliable is that it is written from the human perspective.

Third, you obviously revealed attributes of ancient human cultures that are not spiritual attributes and laws revealed by God such as human sacrifice. The purpose of.Progressive Revelation is to cleanse these human practices and beliefs from the cultures and restore the Divine Spiritual Principles and Laws.This process is evolving spiritual nature of humanity.

Forth, God did not inspire humans to write symbolic riddles disguised as history. This is solely human responsibility as in all cultures where humans write their own story. A good reference for this is the works of Joseph Campbell. There are clearly different interpretations of these stories in terms of moral lessons and allegory. These different interpretations are not considered Revelation.The spiritual teachings and laws are Revelation

Fifth, the roll of allegory and moral and ethical lessons in these in stories has been acknowledged through out history whether these stories are literally accurate or not. The same is true of the folk stories and other writings in all ancient cultures. In comparison many Jews and some Christians in recent history have a similar view of the stories in the Bible as the Baha'i Faith.

Oh, and I did do my homework, but my symbolic dog ate it.

Bitter venomous sarcasm contributes nothing to the dialogue.

 

[Vinayaka]

Not you or me?
We are the sweet little p*ssycats of RF, you and me.
Cuddly, even.

But 'yes', I do find many Bahai claims to be very strange; I must have written the description 'double-think' a hundred times in my posts to Bahais.

I had it as Baha'ispeak there for awhile. Now I'm just more viewing it as talking the talk but not walking the walk. Things like saying you want to get along, and then in the next sentence criticizing, or the oft heard refrain, 'We're forbidden to proselytize.' and then going on to proselytize. Reminds me of 'I've told you a million times not to exaggerate." It's entertainment mostly, watching double standard actions, in action. Good people I'm sure.

 

[oldbadger]

I had it as Baha'ispeak there for awhile. Now I'm just more viewing it as talking the talk but not walking the walk. Things like saying you want to get along, and then in the next sentence criticizing, or the oft heard refrain, 'We're forbidden to proselytize.' and then going on to proselytize. Reminds me of 'I've told you a million times not to exaggerate." It's entertainment mostly, watching double standard actions, in action. Good people I'm sure.

Yes, I get good fibes out of them as people, but the answers as Baha'i goes are very strange.

In future, when Bahais claim that a passage is out of context, I would like to see how the passage was intended.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, I get good fibes out of them as people, but the answers as Baha'i goes are very strange.

In future, when Bahais claim that a passage is out of context, I would like to see how the passage was intended.

Indeed. I think 'out of context' is a catch all phrase used as an excuse for failing to admit that it could have been a contradiction, or that the manifestation or his descendants just plain got it wrong. It goes back to the infallibility syndrome. That's a real stickler.