The Archeology of the Kingdom of God: Diving a Bit Deeper into a Baha'i Approach to Metaphysics

[Thomas]

Reverence without understanding is the very definition of a blind alley, @Thomas.

I was alluding to First Nation reverence based on symbiotic relationships – generally healthier than our own devastating relationship to and effects upon nature – environmentally we seem incapable of steering away from a blind alley, for all our scientists try to warn us to the inevitable consequence of our inaction.

 

[Thomas]

I'm saying that while the development of our intrinsic perspective is not on Paul's radar, it is on the Baha'i radar. Therefore, it constitutes something new within Baha'i teachings that is not in Christian teachings.

OK. I don't dispute what might be on the Baha'i radar ... as I understand it, the Baha'i worldview generally dismisses the Tradition's interpretation of Paul and repurposes his writings to its own ends, as with Christian Scripture in general.

But then the Baha'i are not alone in that, LOL, even within Christianity, there are differing and conflicting interpretations.

 

[Thomas]

I am not sure what you mean by spiritual incorporation. Please explain.

'Spiritual adoption' as spoken of in Christian Scripture and the Tradition – adoption, deification, and so on.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But then the Baha'i are not alone in that, LOL, even within Christianity, there are differing and conflicting interpretations.

Yeah, the images that come on our radars are most of the time are very different.

 

[Ahanu]

I was alluding to First Nation reverence based on symbiotic relationships – generally healthier than our own devastating relationship to and effects upon nature – environmentally we seem incapable of steering away from a blind alley, for all our scientists try to warn us to the inevitable consequence of our inaction.

And I was directly talking about reverence and understanding, putting them in their historical context. Reverence alone is insufficient. While the Chimu approached natural disasters like extreme flooding with child sacrifices, we have managed ways to minimize casualties from them.

First Nation reverence is often romanticized. Indigenous peoples of the Americas hunted megafauna, contributing to their extinction. Human-environment interactions have always been complex and never as simple as you present them.

"The extent of these extinctions across continents is shown in the chart. Between 52,000 and 9,000 BCE, more than 178 species of the world’s largest mammals were killed off. These were mammals heavier than 44 kilograms, ranging from mammals the size of sheep to mammoths."

Source: Did humans cause the Quaternary megafauna extinction?

"There is strong evidence to suggest that these were largely driven by humans – we look at this in more detail later.

Africa was the least hard-hit, losing only 21% of its megafauna. Humans evolved in Africa, and hominins had already interacted with mammals for a long time. The same is also likely to be true across Eurasia, where 35% of megafauna were lost. But Australia, North America, and South America were particularly hard-hit; very soon after humans arrived, most large mammals were gone. Australia lost 88%; North America lost 83%; and South America, 72%.

Far from being in balance with ecosystems, tiny populations of hunter-gatherers changed them forever. By 8,000 BCE – almost at the end of the QME – there were only around 5 million people in the world."

 

[Ahanu]

Yeah, the images that come on our radars are most of the time are very different.

Which makes sense. Our intrinsic perspective evolves over time.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Which makes sense. Our intrinsic perspective evolves over time.

Did it? We still believe in Gods, ghosts, prophets, sons, messengers, manifestations, mahdis.

 

[Ahanu]

My thoughts and beliefs are in step with science and evidence.

That's what you like to think. To pretend that personal experiences, cultural background, and philosophical outlook don't play any role is silly, especially when the same data can have many interpretations.

He should have described it in better words.

You mean Baha'u'llah should have described in words according to your place and time? That's the equivalent of asking Muhammad to split the moon in half.

What he said what similar to what Muhammad said about Jibreel. A heavenly maiden!

Baha'u'llah's description of the Holy Spirit is quite different. Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha both agree that "it is in no wise possible for the Holy Spirit to ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere." Christians and Muslims still believe in demonic possession in the 21st century.

Yeah, scammers are not difficult to identify, but people still believe in them. Particularly in Abrahamic religions - prophets, sons, messengers, manifestations, mahdis.

Scammers can appear in white lab coats as well.

 

[Aupmanyav]

"The extent of these extinctions across continents is shown in the chart. Between 52,000 and 9,000 BCE, more than 178 species of the world’s largest mammals were killed off. These were mammals heavier than 44 kilograms, ranging from mammals the size of sheep to mammoths."

India lost Cheetahs, perhaps wolves, and some migratory birds (because of destruction of wet-lands). Otherwise, they are prospering.
However, Delhi has lost its sparrows (at least in my area), which is so unfortunate. They say it is because of telecom towers.

 

[Thomas]

And I was directly talking about reverence and understanding, putting them in their historical context.

OK, I was thinking more in lines of the wisdom/insights of the First Nation peoples in the US and their advice to the white man, or their incomprehension at his actions.

Accentuate the positive, and all that jazz. If that's romance, that's OK, I can live with that.

 

[Thomas]

Baha'u'llah's description of the Holy Spirit is quite different. Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha both agree that "it is in no wise possible for the Holy Spirit to ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere." Christians and Muslims still believe in demonic possession in the 21st century.

The two are separate statements – the operations of the Holy Spirit and the view of demons – a belief or otherwise in either is a matter of personal conscience. Science has not proven nor disproven the existence of spiritual entities.

The question that remains for me is, is it impossible for God to make Himself known in and to the world – do I have that right?

On what authority then, do the words of Baha'u'llah rest? What is the source of their inspiration, and their infallibility?

And what distinguishes between a 'messenger', as the Baha'i sees it, and someone who makes a statement based purely on human rationality and logic?

In the Abrahamic traditions prior to the Baha'i, I think, the idea of a prophet was as a mouthpiece of the Divine?

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

The question that remains for me is, is it impossible for God to make Himself known in and to the world – do I have that right?

On what authority then, do the words of Baha'u'llah rest? What is the source of their inspiration, and their infallibility?

And what distinguishes between a 'messenger', as the Baha'i sees it, and someone who makes a statement based purely on human rationality and logic?

My thoughts would be that God can only be known through the Holy Spirit, which is the Essence of the Messengers.

This is not knowing the Essence of God that is the Most Great Spirit, this is knowledge of the Names and Attributes given of God via the Holy Spirit, which Baha'u'llah offered is even created of God. The Holy Spirit is the First and the Last, the Befinning and the End, the Alpha and Omega, it is the cause of creation, given of God, who is outside of creation, the uncontained, the unconstrained.

There is a large amount of information on this subject and it has many tangents of thought.

Regards Tony

 

[Thomas]

My thoughts would be that God can only be known through the Holy Spirit, which is the Essence of the Messengers.

But that contradicts "Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha both agree that "it is in no wise possible for the Holy Spirit to ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere."

This is not knowing the Essence of God that is the Most Great Spirit, this is knowledge of the Names and Attributes given of God via the Holy Spirit, which Baha'u'llah offered is even created of God.

Nevertheless, if the Holy Spirit cannot 'ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere' then we can have no direct knowledge of the Holy Spirit, can we?

The Holy Spirit is the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End, the Alpha and Omega, it is the cause of creation, given of God, who is outside of creation, the uncontained, the unconstrained.

Not disputed, the Holy Scriptures say that.

(But the Holy Scriptures also say the Holy Spirit of God, is Itself unconstrained and there is nothing to prevent it 'descending' or 'entering' or 'meeting' or 'indwelling' – this is a Baha'i dogma that is soundly refuted by the Jewish, Christian and Islamic sacred texts.)

If that were the case, the best a 'messenger' could honestly say, is 'in my opinion' or 'it seems to me that' ...

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

But that contradicts "Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha both agree that "it is in no wise possible for the Holy Spirit to ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere."


Nevertheless, if the Holy Spirit cannot 'ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere' then we can have no direct knowledge of the Holy Spirit, can we?


Not disputed, the Holy Scriptures say that.

(But the Holy Scriptures also say the Holy Spirit of God, is Itself unconstrained and there is nothing to prevent it 'descending' or 'entering' or 'meeting' or 'indwelling' – this is a Baha'i dogma that is soundly refuted by the Jewish, Christian and Islamic sacred texts.)

If that were the case, the best a 'messenger' could honestly say, is 'in my opinion' or 'it seems to me that' ...

I personally see there is no conflict and my current understanding is that we can not know the Essence of the Holy Spirit, we can only know it by the Names and Attributes, let alone the Essence of God, which Baha'u'llah offers even the Messengers do not know.

This is a snippet of the explanation given by Abdul'baha

"... The descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles means that that glorious and divine grace cast its light and splendour upon their realities. For otherwise ingress and egress, descent and inherence are characteristics of bodies and not of spirits—that is, ingress and inherence pertain only to sensible realities, not to intelligible subtleties; and intelligible realities, such as reason, love, knowledge, imagination, and thought, do not enter, exit, or inhere, but rather denote relationships.
For example, knowledge, which is a form acquired by the mind, is an intelligible thing, and to speak of entering into the mind or exiting from it is absurd. Rather, it is a relationship of acquisition, even as images are reflected in a mirror.
Thus, as it is evident and established that intelligible realities do not enter or inhere, it follows that it is in no wise possible for the Holy Spirit to ascend, descend, enter, exit, commingle, or inhere. At most it appears as the sun appears in a mirror.

I was also contemplating Thomas, that we really do not even fully understand the essence of our own selves, which is Human Spirit, but we can comprehend levels below us, such as the Animal and Vegitable spirit.

Regards Tony

 

[muhammad_isa]

For example, knowledge, which is a form acquired by the mind, is an intelligible thing, and to speak of entering into the mind or exiting from it is absurd..

I don't know about absurd, but I understand the drift of what he says.
It is a 2-way process .. the receiver needs to be in the right spiritual state
to "receive".

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

I don't know about absurd, but I understand the drift of what he says.
It is a 2-way process .. the receiver needs to be in the right spiritual state
to "receive".

It would be interesting and good to know the Arabic or Persian words that were used, it was translated using Absurd, but maybe the original meaning is not quite that, or it may be exactly the intent.

@Sen McGlinn might be able to help.

Regards Tony

 

[Aupmanyav]

That's what you like to think.

Scammers can appear in white lab coats as well.

Whatever, no religion has any evidence of God, soul or God sending any message. I do not buy what you are trying to sell.

 

[Ahanu]

OK. I don't dispute what might be on the Baha'i radar ... as I understand it, the Baha'i worldview generally dismisses the Tradition's interpretation of Paul and repurposes his writings to its own ends, as with Christian Scripture in general.

But then the Baha'i are not alone in that, LOL, even within Christianity, there are differing and conflicting interpretations.

Oh, like how Paul repurposes Jewish writings to his own ends, stating that Christ "was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures?" 2,000 years later Jews and Christians are still arguing about it. Just listen to Rabbi Tovia Singer for a clear example:

Or like how you repurpose Genesis 2.7 to your own ends, ignoring that "In Judaism, there was originally little to no concept of a soul," and "as seen in the Genesis, the divine breath simply animated bodies?"

The list is long. We could go on and on here, @Thomas.

 

[Ahanu]

OK. I don't dispute what might be on the Baha'i radar ... as I understand it, the Baha'i worldview generally dismisses the Tradition's interpretation of Paul and repurposes his writings to its own ends, as with Christian Scripture in general.

But then the Baha'i are not alone in that, LOL, even within Christianity, there are differing and conflicting interpretations.

The Baha'i position on tradition is straightforward:

"This criterion is not perfect either, because the traditions must be understood by the mind. As the mind itself is liable to error, how can it be said that it will attain to perfect truth and not err in comprehending and inferring the meaning of the traditions? For it is subject to error and cannot lead to certitude. This is the criterion of the leaders of religion. What they comprehend from the text of the Book, however, is that which their minds can understand and not necessarily the truth of the matter; for the mind is like a balance, and the meanings contained in the texts are like the objects to be weighed. If the balance is untrue, how can the weight be ascertained?"
-Abdu'l-Baha

 

[Ahanu]

(But the Holy Scriptures also say the Holy Spirit of God, is Itself unconstrained

If the Holy Spirit is truly unconstrained, it would, by definition, be capable of any action, including those unprohibited by Baha'i belief, so nothing prohibits it from acting only in accordance with Baha'i belief!

and there is nothing to prevent it 'descending' or 'entering' or 'meeting' or 'indwelling' – this is a Baha'i dogma that is soundly refuted by the Jewish, Christian and Islamic sacred texts.)

This is like arguing the following: both my Baha'i understanding and many modern Christians' views differ from a strict literalism of the ascension, but metaphorical views are soundly refuted by ancient Christian texts, including the NT.

"And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Æsculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, and Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus. For what shall I say of Ariadne, and those who, like her, have been declared to be set among the stars? And what of the emperors who die among yourselves, whom you deem worthy of deification, and in whose behalf you produce some one who swears he has seen the burning Cæsar rise to heaven from the funeral pyre?"
-Justin Martyr (c. AD 100 – c. AD 165)

This is clear proof that the language used to describe spiritual realities reflects the limitations of human understanding at that time.