liberal VS. literal Bahai

[Bandit]

liberal VS. literal Bahai

Dear my Bahai friends,
I would like to present & examine with you, my liberal view of being Bahai or converting to Bahai. This is only a liberal view. Please do not take any offense.

The first redemption in me becoming a Bahai would be that I cannot accept some of the prophets as manifestations. Would it be ok to dismiss some of these prophets as being true prophets & in my liberal view they are just regular men? For example I like the racial unity & respect for the environment & other things that came from Bab & Baha' ullah taught, but i dont think this is a literal manifestation of God . i dont think Buddha is a real manifestation of God He just taught simple but good things about conscience & peace. Mohammed did a nice job also, but i dont think he is a true messenger... just a regular man like Buddha.

Is this ok for me to be a liberal Bahai member? Or would this cause any conflicts in the core of Bahai religion & teaching?

I like the Bahai Temples for worship. They are beautiful sanctuaries.
I find the writings of some of these said prophets to be good but I disagree with about 70% of the teachings & the writings of the men who wrote. I like some the teaching of Bahu’ ullah, that God is beyond our limits but disagree that he is unknowable.

I like Jesus in the Bahai religion. I feel he is more than a prophet & should be placed higher & at the top & not just equal with Moses.
I also believe that the name of Jesus is the highest name. i hope that is not too much trouble in Bahai faith. Is this permitted in the Bahai religion or would it hinder the main theme & teaching of the religion?

The doctrine of Progressive Revelation is wonderful but would need to be limited more to Jesus in Revelation as Messiah & the King of Glory. while these other men are also good, my liberal view would be to reconsider that these others do not offer the same eternal life that Jesus has made available.
I know this is a liberal view, but would this flow well in Bahai?

Please remember this is only a liberal view of Bahai & I know it is different. I am being very serious & humble in my questions & application. this is not meant to disrespect, debate or change the Bahai faith nor to hinder the beliefs who follow Bahai teaching.

I do have other questions, concerns & I appreciate the replies.

 

[Bandit]

bump

 

[IMSassafras]

Bandit,

Dear, dear friend.....

I would like to begin my answer to your questions in one word, the type of one word that Shoghi Effendi is known for in the Guardianship of the Writings:

No.



In your explanation of "liberal Baha'i", I have to express me first reaction to your questions as being humorful and at times hysterical. But to be completely serious and humble I would say you seem to be, overall, attracted to the teachings of Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith. Maybe you are 30% Baha'i.

In order to have a better understanding of the Baha'i Faith, try looking at it this way:

Try replacing the word "convert" with "declare". Baha'is declare their belief in the Central Figures who are the Bab, Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha. And Baha'is except Progressive Revelations. (All of the Manifestations -- the Ones we know about and the Ones that have been forgotten by mankind throughtout history.) This declaration is sybolized through the filling out of what is called a "Declaration Card." Once a person signs this card, they are considered a Baha'i in the Adminatrative Order of the Baha'i Faith.

If, like yourself, a person is attracted to the Baha'i Faith through way of the teachings, this is referred to as being "close to the Faith". You are attracted to some of the Writings and Teachings, but you are just not sure about all the other stuff.


I hope this begins to answer your questions.

Sass

 

[IMSassafras]

OOPS!! Posted twice. Once is enough.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings, Bandit!

It's a mistake to try to characterize Baha'is with such labels as "liberal" and "conservative" because we're all one: simply Baha'i, and the Faith admits no divisions!

This doesn't mean we can't all have our own opinions and understandings: we can, and do!

But the basic teachings of the Baha'i Faith, INCLUDING those things in our scxriptures (the Writings of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha) are very much givens not subject to further debate. It is siimply not possible to believe these things only part way and still call oneself a Baha'i. If for example, Baha'u'llah states that a given individual such as Muhammad was a Divine Messenger, for a Baha'i that ends the matter, and no further debate is possible, though of course we can discuss Him and endeavor to gain a greater understanding.

So, no (to quote Shoghi Effendi ), there is no such thing as a "liberal" Baha'i! There are only Baha'is. And given that our most central teachings revolve around the unity of God, humanity, AND religion, this only makes sense.

I hope this helps clarify things.

If you have further questions, please feel free to ask them: they're most welcome!

Best,

Bruce

 

[Bandit]

thank you, Bruce

thank you, IMSassafras

i appreciate both of your thoughtful replies. i will get back to this early next week & look forward to the thoughts of the other Bahai members as well.

peace to you & have a nice weekend.

 

[Bandit]

Bandit,

Dear, dear friend.....

I would like to begin my answer to your questions in one word, the type of one word that Shoghi Effendi is known for in the Guardianship of the Writings:

No.



In your explanation of "liberal Baha'i", I have to express me first reaction to your questions as being humorful and at times hysterical. But to be completely serious and humble I would say you seem to be, overall, attracted to the teachings of Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith. Maybe you are 30% Baha'i.

In order to have a better understanding of the Baha'i Faith, try looking at it this way:

Try replacing the word "convert" with "declare". Baha'is declare their belief in the Central Figures who are the Bab, Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha. And Baha'is except Progressive Revelations. (All of the Manifestations -- the Ones we know about and the Ones that have been forgotten by mankind throughtout history.) This declaration is sybolized through the filling out of what is called a "Declaration Card." Once a person signs this card, they are considered a Baha'i in the Adminatrative Order of the Baha'i Faith.

If, like yourself, a person is attracted to the Baha'i Faith through way of the teachings, this is referred to as being "close to the Faith". You are attracted to some of the Writings and Teachings, but you are just not sure about all the other stuff.


I hope this begins to answer your questions.

Sass

yes you have answered my questions, IMSassafras. & i feel you did so truthfully & honestly. i was trying to be a little bit humorous on this one & i am glad you caught that.

attracted to, being close, not sure about it all, & 30% Baha'i was right on the money for me.
i appreciate the response.

 

[Bandit]

Greetings, Bandit!

It's a mistake to try to characterize Baha'is with such labels as "liberal" and "conservative" because we're all one: simply Baha'i, and the Faith admits no divisions!

This doesn't mean we can't all have our own opinions and understandings: we can, and do!

But the basic teachings of the Baha'i Faith, INCLUDING those things in our scxriptures (the Writings of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha) are very much givens not subject to further debate. It is siimply not possible to believe these things only part way and still call oneself a Baha'i. If for example, Baha'u'llah states that a given individual such as Muhammad was a Divine Messenger, for a Baha'i that ends the matter, and no further debate is possible, though of course we can discuss Him and endeavor to gain a greater understanding.

So, no (to quote Shoghi Effendi ), there is no such thing as a "liberal" Baha'i! There are only Baha'is. And given that our most central teachings revolve around the unity of God, humanity, AND religion, this only makes sense.

I hope this helps clarify things.

If you have further questions, please feel free to ask them: they're most welcome!

Best,

Bruce

Hi Bruce,
this was real good too. i also appreciate the honest answers. i also appreciate that the central is the central, though you can have a different opinion about what is central, that which has been established, does not change.
& so we shall remain with (the Writings of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha) not being open to further debate...no taking away from it & no adding to it.

no further questions & thank you

 

[BruceDLimber]

Hi again!

o we shall remain with (the Writings of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha) not being open to further debate...no taking away from it & no adding to it.

Uh, that's not exectly right.

While it's very true that the Baha'i scriptures are fixed until the next Divine Messenger appears (after at least another roughly 840 years at minimum), the specific function of our world-level elected administrative body, the Universal House of Justice, is to establish any needed new laws not already in our scriptures!

And while it can't alter the laws and teachings in our scriptures, iit also has the right to revoke its own laws and policies later on if circumstances change.

So I would suggest the Baha'i system combines the best of fixed and flexible guidance! . . .

Regards,

Bruce

 

[Bandit]

Hi again!



Uh, that's not exectly right.

While it's very true that the Baha'i scriptures are fixed until the next Divine Messenger appears (after at least another roughly 840 years at minimum), the specific function of our world-level elected administrative body, the Universal House of Justice, is to establish any needed new laws not already in our scriptures!

And while it can't alter the laws and teachings in our scriptures, iit also has the right to revoke its own laws and policies later on if circumstances change.

So I would suggest the Baha'i system combines the best of fixed and flexible guidance! . . .

Regards,

Bruce

wait. are you saying when the next manifestation appears, he can make changes & out who is & who is not a manifestation from the past? for example the new manifestation can decide who is & who is not as in removing one of the current claimed manifestations?
(this was my liberal Baha'i POV from the start)

are you also saying...
at the time of the new manifestation appears, the scriptures writings used from Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha can then be altered, changed or removed? &/or kept to the side to make way for new laws/writings, outdating the old ones?

also what does the 840 years in time have to do with this?

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

[A]re you saying when the next manifestation appears, he can make changes & out who is & who is not a manifestation from the past? for example the new manifestation can decide who is & who is not as in removing one of the current claimed manifestations?

The list will never grow shorter, though it could be expanded to include some we're currentlly unaware of.

No later Messenger would deny or "cancel" the status of an earlier one, no.

[A]re you also saying at the time of the new manifestation appears, the scriptures writings used from Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha can then be altered, changed or removed? &/or kept to the side to make way for new laws/writings, outdating the old ones?

Yes, precisely! Every new Divine Messenger can reveal new social teachings and laws (or more accurately, God can reveal new ones through Him or Her).

This is one of the two reasons new Messengers come, the other being the general renewal of religion.

I say "social" because spiritual laws and teachings are essentially eternal and unchanging (though they occasionally get expanded somewhat, as in Christ's expansion of the definition of killing).

[A]lso what does the 840 years in time have to do with this?

In the Baha'i scriptures, Baha'u'llah states plainly (and literally) that the next Messenger won't come for at least 1,000 years. Given the time that has passed, the minimum is now down to about 840. (No maximumm is given.)

Regards,

Bruce

 

[IMSassafras]

yes you have answered my questions, IMSassafras. & i feel you did so truthfully & honestly. i was trying to be a little bit humorous on this one & i am glad you caught that.

attracted to, being close, not sure about it all, & 30% Baha'i was right on the money for me.
i appreciate the response.

Bandit,

I am glad that you were being a little bit humorous in your questions.

To address your concern:
Being "attracted to" the Writings of Baha'u'llah or the Teachings of the Baha'i Faith is a good thing. It is a compliment. In other words, I am saying, you agree with something protaining to the Baha'i Faith.

"'Being close' to the Faith" is another compliment. Is it like saying a person recognizes and excepts some of the Teachings of the Baha'i Faith. And may even effect the way they live their life.

In simpler terms, you are about 30% "attracted" and 30% "close" to the Faith.

I have to say, I am unsure of your "liberal" view of being Baha'i. It is a little disappointing.

Please clarify what you meant in your description of (1.) Progressive Revelations and (2.) the more Lofty Station you would give to Christ if you were to title yourself a "Liberal Baha'i". I would say you are a devoted Christian with knowledge of the Baha'i Faith, but I could not accept your "Liberal Baha'i" term under this circumstance. (Note: The terms "Liberal" or "Literal" Baha'i are not used in the Baha'i Faith. I, thus, refer you to Bruce's explanation on this subject.) No one can be a Baha'i and place another Manifestation higher than Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah is the Prophet Founder of the Baha'i Faith. For example, a Christian would not place Mose or Abraham higher than Christ, if they did, then they would be Jewish. Get it?

You stated:
“For example I like the racial unity & respect for the environment & other things that came from Bab & Baha'u’llah taught, but i dont think this is a literal manifestation of God.”

I don't know if you were just tired when you wrote this or just didn't form your sentence properly, but "the Bab" and "Baha'u'llah" are two different Manifestations. Also, how utterly rude, Bandit, that you would say, "…i dont think this is a literal manifestation of God ." A Baha'i would have to except their own Manifestation; otherwise, what is the purpose of being Baha'i? And I am definitely not sure how anyone can call themselves a "Liberal Baha'i" and not except the Station of Baha'u'llah or the Bab. Please explain yourself.

Thank you for your conversation. I may have been able to recognize your humor, but I hope to be able to understand you humor, too.

warmly,
Sassafras

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings again!

The first redemption in me becoming a Bahai would be that I cannot accept some of the prophets as manifestations. Would it be ok to dismiss some of these prophets as being true prophets....

I like Jesus in the Bahai religion. I feel he is more than a prophet & should be placed higher & at the top & not just equal with Moses.

The Baha'i scriptures (specifically, The Book of Certitude <aka Kitab-i-Iqan>) make it expressly clear that ALL the Divine Messengers are spiritually equal and thus hold the same station!

At the same time, they point out that in their earthly station, each has unique attributes, and that in this plane, some are indeed greater than others; Christ is explicitly mentioned as being an example of this greater status.

But overall, in the Baha'i view one should avoid elevating any Messenger over any other, so in this respect there is indeed nothing higher than a Divine Messenger's station save God Himself!

Further, we Baha'is would NEVER use the word "just" (meaning "mere") in referring to the station of Moses or any other Messenger because They are ALL at a far greater station than ourselves! To do otherwise would be like an ant presuming to understand all about a human.

So you needn't worry about Jesus (or any other Messenger)!: each is already on as high a plane as it's possible for Them to be!

Best,

Bruce

 

[Bandit]

Bandit,

I am glad that you were being a little bit humorous in your questions.

To address your concern:
Being "attracted to" the Writings of Baha'u'llah or the Teachings of the Baha'i Faith is a good thing. It is a compliment. In other words, I am saying, you agree with something protaining to the Baha'i Faith.



I don't know if you were just tired when you wrote this or just didn't form your sentence properly, but "the Bab" and "Baha'u'llah" are two different Manifestations. Also, how utterly rude, Bandit, that you would say, "…i dont think this is a literal manifestation of God ." A Baha'i would have to except their own Manifestation; otherwise, what is the purpose of being Baha'i? And I am definitely not sure how anyone can call themselves a "Liberal Baha'i" and not except the Station of Baha'u'llah or the Bab. Please explain yourself.

Thank you for your conversation. I may have been able to recognize your humor, but I hope to be able to understand you humor, too.

warmly,
Sassafras

i see. so my liberal view on the Bab and Baha'u'llah as not literal manifestations would be considered rude to the Bahai faith. i have to agree, the purpose of being or claiming to be Bahai, from this liberal POV would be rude.
(we are actually in agreement here )

do you feel for others to keep pushing the issue of the manifestations would become a burden & hinderance for some of those in the Bahai faith?

 

[Bandit]

Greetings!



The list will never grow shorter, though it could be expanded to include some we're currentlly unaware of.

No later Messenger would deny or "cancel" the status of an earlier one, no.

Ok Bruce. i guess i got the writings mixed up with the Manifestations. thank you for explaining. the list of manifestations are expanded but do not grow shorter or cancel each other out with a new manifestation.
do i have that correct?

Yes, precisely! Every new Divine Messenger can reveal new social teachings and laws (or more accurately, God can reveal new ones through Him or Her).

This is one of the two reasons new Messengers come, the other being the general renewal of religion.

I say "social" because spiritual laws and teachings are essentially eternal and unchanging (though they occasionally get expanded somewhat, as in Christ's expansion of the definition of killing).

In the Baha'i scriptures, Baha'u'llah states plainly (and literally) that the next Messenger won't come for at least 1,000 years. Given the time that has passed, the minimum is now down to about 840. (No maximumm is given.)

Regards,

Bruce

i understand what you are saying about the laws being expanded & being eternal.

this kind of shows what happens when someone from a liberal POV choose to discard some of the Baha'i scriptures, they would not really be following them as established or authentic.
do you agree?
for example: if one were to keep declaring that the 1,000 year given time period from Baha'u'llah, is not a literal 1,000 years & that my liberal interpretation means anywhere within 1,000 years a new Manifestation will come, do you feel this would damper & hinder to an extent, the people of the Bahai Faith?
or would it not cause a problem?

i tend to think it would cause a problem.

 

[IMSassafras]

do you feel for others to keep pushing the issue of the manifestations would become a burden & hinderance for some of those in the Bahai faith?

Do you mean the acceptance of the Manifestations or the denial of some of the Manifestations? Liberal or literal? Who's "pushing"? I think your question might be too vague for me. Please clarify.

My first impression is people can either accept the Baha'i Faith or not. But changing the Baha'i Faith to fit a certain POV is out of the question.

warmly,
Sassafras

 

[Bandit]

Do you mean the acceptance of the Manifestations or the denial of some of the Manifestations? Liberal or literal? Who's "pushing"? I think your question might be too vague for me. Please clarify.


warmly,
Sassafras

in the case of someone pushing the issue of the manifestations not being real divine manifestations, making them less than manifestations & only ordinary men (liberal view)... would this become a burden & hinderance for those in the Bahai faith, who sincerly believe they are manifestations from God?
would that kind of liberal view being made an issue constantly cause problems with the people in the Bahai faith?

My first impression is people can either accept the Baha'i Faith or not. But changing the Baha'i Faith to fit a certain POV is out of the question.

i think this answers it, but i am kind of looking for a yes or no or to what degree kind of answer. i take this pretty much as a no, it is not possible.
thank you again, IMSassafras

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings.

[to a third party:] [D]o you feel for others to keep pushing the issue of the manifestations would become a burden & hinderance for some of those in the Bahai faith?.

First off, please explain what you're saying here. I don't understand you.

Ok Bruce. i guess i got the writings mixed up with the Manifestations. thank you for explaining. the list of manifestations are expanded but do not grow shorter or cancel each other out with a new manifestation.
do i have that correct?.

Yes. (The list could expand, but doesn't have to. And in any case, the most recent Revelation is always the most important one for that Age.)

this kind of shows what happens when someone from a liberal POV choose to discard some of the Baha'i scriptures, they would not really be following them as established or authentic.
do you agree?.

Once again, terms like "liberal" and "conservative" are NOT Baha'i usage and are therefore extremely misleading! There simply is no such thing in reference to the Baha'i Faith, so calling oneself one serves no purpose and is potentially disruptive/disunifying.

NO adherent in ANY religious dispensation is in any position to "choose" among that religion's scriptures cafeteria-style! Religions are pretty much take-it-or-leave-it packages.

Furthermore, you're overlooking that fact that such labels are also misleading because the Baha'i viewpoint varies according to the topic! For example, in old-world terminology, Baha'is are extremely "liberal" about things like interracial marriage and world government, but are extremely "conservative" about things like chastity and use of drugs or alcohol. So again, using such a description often does more harm than good (as well as quite possibly confusing yourself!).

f one were to keep declaring that the 1,000 year given time period from Baha'u'llah, is not a literal 1,000 years & that my liberal interpretation means anywhere within 1,000 years a new Manifestation will come, do you feel this would damper & hinder to an extent, the people of the Bahai Faith? or would it not cause a problem?

i tend to think it would cause a problem.

No, it would not, because our scriptures couldn't be more definite on this topic! I quote:

37 "Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor. We pray God that He may graciously assist him to retract and repudiate such claim. Should he repent, God will, no doubt, forgive him. If, however, he persisteth in his error, God will, assuredly, send down one who will deal mercilessly with him. Terrible, indeed, is God in punishing! Whosoever interpreteth this verse otherwise than its obvious meaning is deprived of the Spirit of God and of His mercy which encompasseth all created things. Fear God, and follow not your idle fancies. Nay, rather, follow the bidding of your Lord, the Almighty, the All-Wise."
--The Book of Laws (Kitab-i-Aqdas), Paragraph 62

So if you even THINK of altering this, you simply have nowhere to go with the idea!

Simple as that.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[IMSassafras]

in the case of someone pushing the issue of the manifestations not being real divine manifestations, making them less than manifestations & only ordinary men (liberal view)... would this become a burden & hinderance for those in the Bahai faith, who sincerly believe they are manifestations from God?
would that kind of liberal view being made an issue constantly cause problems with the people in the Bahai faith?

People making a general, overall statement about any Manifestation of God not being a real Divine Manifestation would be irrating, but not a problem. It means, to me, that there is the potential of disagreement and the possibility of more differences in opinion about other topics. That is all.

On the other hand, your orginal topic is about "liberal vs literal Baha'i". If someone disagrees with the Divinity of a Manifestation that the Baha'i Faith teaches IS a Manifesation of God AND that person claims some sort of "liberal Baha'i view", then any Baha'i member has a right to state that this combination of belief is NOT of the Baha'i Faith. (Which it IS NOT.) So why state it in the first place, I ask of you, Bandit? This view is not of the Baha'i Faith, at all. It is, on the other hand, a view of the individual, which is acceptable, because we, mankind, have free will and are able to freely make our own decisions and have our own opinions.


I would like to reiterate what Bruce and I have already said about "liberal" and "literal" Baha'i. These terms are not Baha'i, at all, and will never be Baha'i terms, and no one will find them in any of the Baha'i Writings today or in the future. I, personally, would not describe the Baha'i Faith using these terms. I am only using these terms because of the topic of this thread.

I hope this clarifies the conversation more.

Warmly,
Sass

 

[Bandit]

Hello, IMSassafras & BruceDLimber

i want to say thank you for being so patient with me. in all honesty, your last two postings have answered - completely answered my questions.
i feel if i were to clarify anything at this point, there would not be much in the Baha'i Religion left except for confusion, which is typical of a liberal view. i dont think my liberal interpretation of Baha'i scripture would be a good thing.

You have both been great to talk to about this & the truth is, we are in agreement all the way around.
This has been real good for me & you did a real nice job keeping unity & the core of your faith alive.
It is friday, so instead of dragging this out another week, i will stop here.
i will be back to visit & delighted to chat again (only about something different next time).
Have a wonderful weekend!