If God was to send us a message.

james said:
i never said anything about dirt, and how is prostrating before your lord a humiliation.its better tahn sat down listening to someone reading the gospel, then eating some porridge tasting stuff that is meant to be god...
Click to expand...

And pride goeth before the fall...don't take what I say to task. I only expressed my thoughts. And, I don't recall the response being to you. In fact it was a response to Taijasi...

your disdain for those that wish to share the Good News is quite evident, but that gives you no license to step in on another coversation as if it were directed towards you, James. :mad:

v/r

Q
 
Art basically what your trying to say is.. A religious movement broke away from Islam in Persian in the 1800s. Basic teaching of this religion are

Racial equality

One God

All major world religions are given to us from the same God

Religions and societies go hand in hand and is the only reason for different views among different religions, whereas the core of every major world religion are very much the same in view.

Religion still progress's and changes with time!

As globalisation is increasing especially in this day and age, with interracial marriage and inter faith marriage, the more acceptance and need there is for a religion such as the Baha'i faith?

Let's have a look. Judaism broke away from Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Islam broke away from Judaism.
 
Thanks postmaster!

Quahom1 said:
I'd say "you're welcome Artha"...but I didn't start the thread. Postmaster did. :D
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right! Quahom. What was I thinking?
Also thanks for the definitions of "Noahides". Baha'is acknowledge Noah also.

O.K. Postmaster, please accept my apology and thanks for the original post starting this thread!!!

You asked about whether Baha'is accept "evolution"..that maybe a good topic for the Baha'i Board...but the short answer is yes...

Baha'is accept evolution but within species..in other words we believe humans have changed in appearence over the aeons and adapted but they have always potentially been humans and not descended say from simians or apes..there may have been humans who appeared like apes and earlier some may have appeared like other species but in potential they were always human.

- Art
 
Re: Thanks postmaster!

arthra said:
You're absolutely right! Quahom. What was I thinking?
Also thanks for the definitions of "Noahides". Baha'is acknowledge Noah also.

O.K. Postmaster, please accept my apology and thanks for the original post starting this thread!!!

You asked about whether Baha'is accept "evolution"..that maybe a good topic for the Baha'i Board...but the short answer is yes...

Baha'is accept evolution but within species..in other words we believe humans have changed in appearence over the aeons and adapted but they have always potentially been humans and not descended say from simians or apes..there may have been humans who appeared like apes and earlier some may have appeared like other species but in potential they were always human.

- Art
Click to expand...

Art, I know we've talked about this before, but just to clarify. The Baha'i teachings are consistent with the theory of descent from a common ancestor, such as humans and other primates both coming from the same ancestral species.

You don't have to believe this, but Baha'is should have no reason not to agree with the current models for understanding evolution.

peace,
Laurie
 
Baha'i view of evolution:

lunamoth said:
Art, I know we've talked about this before, but just to clarify. The Baha'i teachings are consistent with the theory of descent from a common ancestor, such as humans and other primates both coming from the same ancestral species.

You don't have to believe this, but Baha'is should have no reason not to agree with the current models for understanding evolution.

peace,
Laurie
Click to expand...

Here's an essay on the subject if anyone is interested:

http://bahai-library.com/?file=kitzing_bahai_view_evolution

- Art
 
Hi Laurie..

When you say "authoritative interpretation" Laurie that narrows it down a bit.

von Kitzing's articles appear in Baha'i Studies Review. Also you can click on Kevin Brown near the top of the page referenced and a commentary on the article as well.

At this point it may be that this is the same Eberhard von Kitzing as

http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/message-new?1997+02+21+003+raw

There's another interesting article by von Kitzing at

http://bahai-library.com/?file=kitzing_origin_complex_order

Another article also deals with the subject:

http://bahai-library.com/?file=nadimi_evolution_within_kingdoms

Have phun!

-Art
 
arthra said:
Hi Laurie..

When you say "authoritative interpretation" Laurie that narrows it down a bit.
Click to expand...
Hi Art, There is more than one way to read Abdu'l Baha's comments on evolution. One way might be to reject the concept of descent from a common ancestor, as you and the author of that essay appear to do. Another would be to read it figuratively, or with the understanding that Abdu'l Baha was speaking with the best knowledge available to him at the time, with the understanding that science and religion must always be in harmony.

It seems against the principle of the harmony of science and religion, and perhaps falling toward superstition, to say that science must be wrong in concluding that humans and apes descended from a common ancestor.

By authoritative, I mean has the UHJ said one way or another that the only way to understand Abdu'l Baha's comments is literally? Say I, as a Baha'i, were to publish a research article strongly supporting the idea that humans and apes shared a common ancestor--would that get me in trouble?

Laurie
 
Hi again Art,

I was writing the last part of the above rather quickly and it was not my intention to be challenging. But, I am under the impression that interpretations such as the essay you linked to are not considered authoritative by the UHJ, i.e., they are not the only possible interpretations of Abdu'l Baha's words that a Baha'i can have on the subject.

Laurie
 
Postmaster said:
Hello fellow monotheists!

If God was to send us a message by say a prophet! What would you like to hear? Or what do you think he will have to say? Feel free to express your views, I'm curious!
Click to expand...

The prime message is the same always; believe in ONENESS of God and to follow the prophet to reach to God and to uproot the evil on earth. This is outlined in Quran in many a places, I quote here a few verses from Chapter 11 Hud.
[11:26] And We sent Noah to his people, and he said, 'Truly, I am a plain Warner to you,
[11:27] That you worship none but Allah. Indeed, I fear for you the punishment of a grievous day.'
[11:28] The chiefs of his people, who disbelieved, replied, 'We see thee nothing but a mortal like ourselves, and we see that none have followed thee but those who, to all outward appearance, are the meanest of us. And we do not see in you any superiority over us; nay, we believe you to be liars.'
[11:29] He said, 'O my people, tell me if I stand on a clear proof from my Lord and He has bestowed upon me from Himself a great mercy which has remained obscure to you, how will it fare with you? Shall we force it upon you, while you are averse thereto?
[11:30] 'And O my people, I do not ask of you any wealth in return for it. My reward is only with Allah. And I am not going to drive away those who believe. They shall certainly meet their Lord. But I see that you are an ignorant people; unquote
Thanks
 
So what you’re trying to say is, even when we were fish we had a spiritual intent to progress towards being a human? So those who constantly follow God have some kind of X factor which always made us human (at least in spirit)? We had mating ethics which had some virtue in choice then?
 
Note of evolution...

Postmaster said:
So what you’re trying to say is, even when we were fish we had a spiritual intent to progress towards being a human? So those who constantly follow God have some kind of X factor which always made us human (at least in spirit)? We had mating ethics which had some virtue in choice then?
Click to expand...

Well it's an interesting concept to contemplate. Man is always potentially man even tyhough he has appeared in different forms:

"The forms assumed by the human embryo in its successive changes do not prove that it is animal in its essential character... Realizing this we may acknowledge the fact that at one time man was an inmate of the sea, at another period an invertebrate, then a vertebrate and finally a human being standing erect. Though we admit these changes, we cannot say man is an animal... Proof of this lies in the fact that in the embryo man still resembles a worm. This embryo still progresses from one state to another, assuming different forms until that which was potential in it - namely, the human image - appears."

'Abdu'l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1982) 358-9.

I don't want to detract the purpose of your thread here...

- Art
 
lunamoth said:
Hi again Art,

I was writing the last part of the above rather quickly and it was not my intention to be challenging. But, I am under the impression that interpretations such as the essay you linked to are not considered authoritative by the UHJ, i.e., they are not the only possible interpretations of Abdu'l Baha's words that a Baha'i can have on the subject.

Laurie
Click to expand...

What follows is the closest thinng I could find off hand to our position regarding "authoritative interpretations and science. I think it is the closest we can get to the issue:

With regard to the harmony of science and religion, the Writings of the Central Figures and the commentaries of the Guardian make abundantly clear that the task of humanity, including the Baha'i community that serves as the "leaven" within it, is to create a global civilization which embodies both the spiritual and material dimensions of existence.

The nature and scope of such a civilization are still beyond anything the present generation can conceive. The prosecution of this vast enterprise will depend on a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry.

This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality.

It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development.

The challenge facing Baha'i thinkers is to provide responsible leadership in this endeavour, since it is they who have both the priceless insights of the Revelation and the advantages conferred by scientific investigation.

(19 May 1995, written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer)

So I accept the following:

living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality.

It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development.
 
arthra said:
So I accept the following:

living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality.

It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development.
Click to expand...

Hi Art, Thank you. This is an excellent quote and one I can wholeheartedly agree with. I think that where we keep miscommunicating is that the way you replied at first, and the essay you linked to, suggest that a Baha'i is constrained in their understanding of evolutionary theory, where this is not the case (as your quote above suggests).

For example, one could think that Abdu'l Baha was alluding to the metaphysical idea that Adam (and all humanity with him) only came into existence at that moment when God was revealed to him. Or, one could think of potential humanity embedded in the first form of life and throughout whatever branch of the evolutionary tree gave rise to man, so that man's image in God was itself revealed through evolution. I think it's a very rich metaphor.

The difference, as I see it, is that the current evolutionary model as a tree, with all species sharing a common trunk, is acceptable as a theory to Baha'is. I'm not saying that this is the end of investigation, and I'm not saying one must reject the idea that each species was created independently and underwent linear evolution (although I do not share that view--seems quite a bit less probable than the tree model).

I felt that the essay you linked to was indeed limiting science to a particular idea.

Thank you,
Laurie
 
Re: Note of evolution...

arthra said:
Well it's an interesting concept to contemplate. Man is always potentially man even tyhough he has appeared in different forms:
"The forms assumed by the human embryo in its successive changes do not prove that it is animal in its essential character... Realizing this we may acknowledge the fact that at one time man was an inmate of the sea, at another period an invertebrate, then a vertebrate and finally a human being standing erect. Though we admit these changes, we cannot say man is an animal... Proof of this lies in the fact that in the embryo man still resembles a worm. This embryo still progresses from one state to another, assuming different forms until that which was potential in it - namely, the human image - appears."
Click to expand...

This is exactly the Ahmadi view a faith in Islam, and conforms to the Holy Quran. The Bible (OT) has stated it differently because those who translated Bible, of course they were human beings and had their limitations,they held the primitive view, otherwise that could also be genuinely and truthfully interpreted accordingly if we leave the errors, contradictions, ambiguities of the translators; of which we are entitled to as Bible is also a common treasure of the human beings and not necessarily of a particular race.
We Ahmadis believe from Quran that Adam was not the first human being rather he was the first of the human sapiens who received
Word of God directly (i.e. Revelation form God) and as such was the first Prophet/Messenger of God sent to his people who already existed like him.
We also do not believe in the blind Watchmaker or the Deaf and Dumb factors of Natural Selection and Survival of the fittest, of course this was not by accident but by the design of the Creator God whose powerful hand was always at work and used these operatives as per the scheme of things of God and shaped or evolved man and other animals as he had planned, and all this happened here on earth not in the heavens as misunderstood by many.
Thanks
 
Re: Note of evolution...

inhumility said:
This is exactly the Ahmadi view a faith in Islam, and conforms to the Holy Quran. The Bible (OT) has stated it differently because those who translated Bible, of course they were human beings and had their limitations,they held the primitive view, otherwise that could also be genuinely and truthfully interpreted accordingly if we leave the errors, contradictions, ambiguities of the translators; of which we are entitled to as Bible is also a common treasure of the human beings and not necessarily of a particular race.
We Ahmadis believe from Quran that Adam was not the first human being rather he was the first of the human sapiens who received
Word of God directly (i.e. Revelation form God) and as such was the first Prophet/Messenger of God sent to his people who already existed like him.
We also do not believe in the blind Watchmaker or the Deaf and Dumb factors of Natural Selection and Survival of the fittest, of course this was not by accident but by the design of the Creator God whose powerful hand was always at work and used these operatives as per the scheme of things of God and shaped or evolved man and other animals as he had planned, and all this happened here on earth not in the heavens as misunderstood by many.
Thanks
Click to expand...

think I'll stick with my flawed holy book, rather than one which is claimed as superior. Same goes for faith. :rolleyes:
 
Re: Note of evolution...

Did the car evolve from a boat, or a bicycle? Did the aircraft evolve from the car, or a bird? Did the helicopter evolve from an aircraft, or an electric egg beater? How different is a breathing body from a breathing vehicle? I get to drive one until it wears out.

Questions to ask God (swt)? What, did you want a full list of my prayers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top