Baha'i Faith: Science and Religion agree??? Part One
seegar
protected in its own mine from becoming solidified, it would, within
the space of seventy years, attain to the state of gold. There are
some, however, who maintain that copper itself is gold, which by
becoming solidified is in a diseased condition, and hath not therefore
reached its own state".
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, by Bahá'u'lláh, p.
157
Is there a explanation of the assertion by Baha'u'llah that copper
turns to gold? Are there any scientists here? How about melting
copper in a blast furnace and keeping it in a liquid state for 70
years in order to get the desired result? How does this agree with
the Baha'i principle that science and religion are to agree?
We all know that there are Christians who feel threatened by Science.
In the Bible it talks of creation being 6,000 years old. Science,
however has proven that the universe is much older. The calculation of
the speed of light proves that the age of the universe is in the
billions of years in age.
The Baha'i faith is supposed to support science and religion agreeing.
I will not suspend my rational thought so that my "faith based
religious thinking" can feel secure.
If I lived in Galieo's time I would support him instead of the
"infallable papacy" who mercilessly persecuted him for defending the
truth.
Are we supposed to oppose scientists who can prove this is impossible
(i.e. copper remains as copper and doesn't suddenly turn to gold after
70 years)? Please forgive me but I am having trouble with this
assertion. Any informed, logical or scientific response is welcome. I
am not interested in comments that we should take this statement with
blind faith and that to investigate would be heresy.
Seems to me Baha'u'llah made a clear statement with regard to mineral
transformation here in the physical world and then subsequently in His
following text (see below) used that as a basis for showing that
likewise in the spiritual world the tranforming power of the "Divine
Elixir" can alchemicaly tranform our souls.
Is there room for Baha's who think Baha'u'llah got it wrong with
respect to scientific facts or must we hold to the belief that
whatever
Baha'u'llah said was totally accurate and to hold to an opinion
otherwise
would be heresy, an offense worthy of losing one's voting rights or
expulsion from the Faith?
Does the principal of the Most Great Infalability apply to matters of
science when Baha'u'llah made a assertion regarding scientific opinion
which subsequently is proven by science to not hold true?
How does a believer in Baha'u'llah integrate the Baha'i principle that
Science and Religion are to agree when confronted with a statement by
the Manifistation of God for this age being found wrong by Science.
If one were to assert that certain statements were only to be
considered
an allegory, I think one would have to suspend one's God given faculty
of rational thought and would subject one to hold beliefs that made no
sense.
Are we supposed to leave our minds at the door of belief before
opening the door?
The following is the text from The Kitáb-i-Íqán, by Bahá'u'lláh, p.
157
64 For instance, consider the substance of copper. Were it to be
protected in its own mine from becoming solidified, it would, within
the space of seventy years, attain to the state of gold. There are
some, however, who maintain that copper itself is gold, which by
becoming solidified is in a diseased condition, and hath not therefore
reached its own state.
65 Be that as it may, the real elixir will, in one instant, cause the
substance of copper to attain the state of gold, and will traverse the
seventy-year stages in a single moment. Could this gold be called
copper? Could it be claimed that it hath not attained the state of
gold, whilst the touch-stone is at hand to assay it and distinguish it
from copper?
66 Likewise, these souls, through the potency of the Divine Elixir,
traverse, in the twinkling of an eye, the world of dust and advance
into the realm of holiness; and with one step cover the earth of
limitations and reach the domain of the Placeless. It behooveth thee
to exert thine utmost to attain unto this Elixir which, in one
fleeting breath, causeth the west of ignorance to reach the east of
knowledge, illuminates the darkness of night with the resplendence of
the morn, guideth the wanderer in the wilderness of doubt to the
well-spring of the Divine Presence and Fount of certitude, and
conferreth upon mortal souls the honour of acceptance into the Ridván
of immortality. Now, could this gold be thought to be copper, these
people could likewise be thought to be the same as before they were
endowed with faith.
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, by Bahá'u'lláh, p. 157
Peace and Love,
Chris
seegar
measurement set forth in the statement by Abdu'l-Baha that with regard
to true science or true religion "both are founded upon the premises
and conclusions of reason, and both must bear its test."(full quote
below)?
"Any religious belief which is not conformable with scientific proof
and
investigation is superstition, for true science is reason and reality,
and
religion is essentially reality and pure reason; therefore, the two
must
correspond. Religious teaching which is at variance with science and
reason
is human invention and imagination unworthy of acceptance, for the
antithesis and opposite of knowledge is superstition born of the
ignorance
of man. If we say religion is opposed to science, we lack knowledge of
either true science or true religion, for both are founded upon the
premises
and conclusions of reason, and both must bear its test."
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Promulgation of Universal Peace, Page: 107)
Peace and Love,
Chris
John Haukness
Abdul Baha and then find where the error is? But of course, that examination
may point out that the error lies with the suggestion that Bahaullah or
Abdul Baha errored. Gold and diamonds can be formed by labs, it's just too
expensive to do it commericially as it costs more to make than the market
value. But, I personally like cubic zirconium to diamonds. Where as the
public prefers natural diamonds and there is no comparison between the price
of a high quality natural diamond and cubic zirconium. You also could take
the old Micalangelo sp or Lenonardo De Vince painting and digitally make a
reproduction that would more replicate the natural color that existed at the
time they painted the work. However, that reproduction even though truer to
the originial would be worth very little. This is because the natural fading
that occurs is a part of the original art work and thus is part of what is
valued.
Thus, my enjoyment of cubic zirconium is that it is extremely brilliant and
reflects light and color better, to my tastes than a natural diamond. Now
the point is, how can you rule out that when Bahaullah mentions man made
minerals, that He is not accurately making a profecy such as cubic
zirconium? As far as planets, now physics have quarks, and now physics has
matter more elementary than quarks, and protons, and nuetrons have become
"large" elements to deal with. All matter is porous, it just depends on the
degree of maginifcation and magnification is an infinite process. You can
divide to infinity. Thus all planets do have their own identity, they all
have their own matter. Mostly we look at minerals as dead material. But in
quantum physics scientists use a whole range of explanations as to what
consitutes a dead verses living property. In quantum physics and chaos
mathematics you have circular discussions of the elements process. We are
not talking about only deductionist thinking or arguements on a line. We are
talking about reasoning on a spider's web and the spider is building the web
as the research and discussion is going on. You try to predict what the
spider is doing next, but the spider always treats you to new surprises in
construction, along with the predictability. au revoir j
dmcadam
Hi friends-
I have been done this road many times and although many erudite scholars
present some wonderful propositions to explain away what they see as
problems in certain quotes from the Writings that do not agree with
"their" sciences, such as the Central Figures using allegories and such,
not one as yet hold up to me when I apply my own reasoning powers and in
conjunction with what my heart "just knows" from study of the Writings
and using a balance between faith, intuition and the intellectual powers.
But once again I will try to articulate what I have learned from viewing
many quotes integrated in a certain manner. In fact, and just as an
example of what I mean by integration, one can select certain quotes from
the Kitab-i-Iqan (Book of Certitude) or any other book or Tablet that has
a theme and come up with many meanings, all of which may or may not be
accurate interpretations. They also can view all of the quotes in the
entire Book or Tablet and come up with a different meaning or say one
animating principle around and by which all of the specific and detailed
quotes are organized in unity. So forgive me I I do not supply all of
the quotes leading me to make the following comments but I will offer a
few that I have readily at hand.
When I was studying Philosophy and delving into such things as
existentialism I learned a great deal, both by the spiritual and material
philosophers. Unlike most of my peers who seemed to take sides I was
able to integrate both the material and spiritual and come up with a new
meaning or understanding. So to me this is one of our big problems in
the issue of the harmony of science and religion, that of taking sides or
favoring one over the other instead of viewing them as fundamentally in
harmony. If the Writings say they are two wings of the bird, or in
harmony and we know this world is but a reflection of the next REAL world
then it seems to me that logically in the next world this harmony is
evident but it only shows itself as such here on this plane by virtue of
our exercising all levels of awareness, i.e. our physical senses, which
are subject to error, and our rational powers which are dependent on the
physical senses and also therefore subject to error, and our higher than
human powers, the eyes of our heart, i.e. faith and intuition, which
likewise are subject to error in that faith can allow us to believe in an
untruth as readily as a truth. Also Intuition (inner teaching) and
inspiration can be a product of our ego-prompted imaginations as well as
maybe true guidance from the next world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"It is through the power of the soul that the mind comprehendeth,
imagineth and exerteth its influence, whilst the soul is a power that is
free.
The mind is circumscribed, the soul limitless.
...whereas the soul is ever endowed with full strength." Baha'i World
Faith p. 337-8
"Now concerning mental faculties, they are in truth of the inherent
properties of the soul, even as the radiation of light is the essential
property of the sun. BWF p.337
"The power and comprehension of the human spirit perceive and act in
two different modes. One way through instruments and organs....The other
is without instruments and organs." BWF p.326
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lastly, it is upon this final quote that I draw many of my own
conclusions about the harmony of science and religion.
"The understanding of His words and the comprehension of the
utterances of the Birds of Heaven are in no wise dependent upon human
learning. They depend solely upon purity of heart, chastity of soul, and
freedom of spirit. This is evidenced by those who, today, though without
a single letter of the accepted standards of learning, are occupying the
loftiest seats of knowledge; and the garden of their hearts is adorned,
through the showers of divine grace, with the roses of wisdom and the
tulips of understanding." (Baha'u'llah, "Kitab-i-Iqan," p. 211)
>From my perspective then, until have our spiritual nature and level of
consciousness and attendant powers developed we stand little chance of
determining what is and what is not an accurate interpretation or
understanding of Scriptures that must be investigated and validated by
reason. In other words I do not see how we can use our reasoning powers
to their maximum efficiency if we have not reached the spiritual
conditions noted in the above quote. And to reach these conditions we
must acquire virtues.
My former mentor Marian Crist Lippitt developed an education philosophy
and core curriculum she name The Science of Reality, as a result of her
35 year indexing project that accumulated over 300,000 quotes cross
referenced by the Conditions, Classifications and Sub-classifications of
Existence named in the Writings as well as the Phases of Reality she
discovered in the process. She also discovered an Application Technique
more or less implied by many quotes or teachings of the Master. It would
take much to long a time to explain all this in an email but suffice it
to say she felt she had discovered and excellent meeting place for both
scientists and religionists.
>From my own 20 years of in depth study of all her works I find myself
having no problems in the issue of the harmony of science and religion.
There are quotes in the Writings that to me "appear" to not agree with
discoveries in science. At the same time I know that science if
continually self-correcting and what was once believed in certitude by
science and philosophers to be true has now been replaced or supplanted
by new evidence. We used to have a saying in our philosophy class that
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.". In other words there
may be still hidden facts and information that will come to light in the
future that will overturn our present assertions or end frustrations we
now have of not being able to reconcile certain things. At one time the
educated of the day believed and logically proved by their physical
perceptions the earth was flat and the sun circled it.
We certainly do not want to fall victim today of this same condition of
over-relying on our logical powers when we are not yet spiritually mature
and thus heaping upon mankind further ignorance of spiritual realities.
To me there is no question of disharmony. True science and true religion
are in harmony. However we must be careful and not mistake our religion
as the inerrant representation of the Baha'i Revelation. Religion is
what we understand and apply of Revelation and as such is organic and
constantly developing as individuals develop. Likewise true science if
organic and constantly developing and therefore we must not become too
dogmatic in that sense either.
warmly,
doug
dmcadam
Hi John-
It has been my own observation that we today are the products of
mechanistic thinking, of conditioning from largely materialistic type and
thus very egocentric. First we must attain to certain spiritual
development in order to bring our mental powers proper focus on the
mysteries of life. What we produce now with our incomplete development
might be likened to what a child imagines or deduces from observing
phenomena. Consider how a change will believe a parent to be magical
when the parent pushes the elevator button and the doors open etc. Or
what about a cave man suddenly transported into the 21st century to
witness flying machines etc. As a cave man his imagination was not
capable of conjuring up such instruments etc. We are a long way from
perfection of our minds and the use of them being controlled by the
virtuous soul.
warmly,
doug
Sizwe Cawe
On 21 January 2001 03:04 Chris wrote:
<<"For instance, consider the substance of copper. Were it to be
protected in its own mine from becoming solidified, it would, within
the space of seventy years, attain to the state of gold. There are
some, however, who maintain that copper itself is gold, which by
becoming solidified is in a diseased condition, and hath not therefore
reached its own state".
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, by Bahá'u'lláh, p.
157
Is there a explanation of the assertion by Baha'u'llah that copper
turns to gold? Are there any scientists here? How about melting
copper in a blast furnace and keeping it in a liquid state for 70
years in order to get the desired result? How does this agree with
the Baha'i principle that science and religion are to agree?
The Baha'i faith is supposed to support science and religion agreeing.
I will not suspend my rational thought so that my "faith based
religious thinking" can feel secure.>>
Dear Chris
I have often been baffled by these statements. I do not know, for instance
what Baha'u'llah meant by 'copper's own mine'. What conditions obtain in
this mine? I am not aware of anyone who has artificially kept copper in a
liquid form for 70 years to see if it changed into gold. I suppose, even if
one were to do such, the question of 'its own mine' would have to be
resolved somehow. Consequently I would not, at this stage, draw the
conclusion that Baha'u'llah's statement does not accord with science.
I am rather wary of taking today's science as an absolute standard: there
are too many instances where 'scientific fact' has turned out to be anything
but. For example, it was 'scientific fact' for many centuries that elements
could not be transmuted into other substances. Today it is common knowledge
that such transmutations are possible and occur naturally all the time.
Human beings have also learnt how to do this hence the rather odd textbook
definition of an element. Remember the old Newtonian universe that,
according to modern reckoning, would not have lasted even for a nanosecond?
The list is very long.
I would not advocate the suspension of rational thought and I think neither
does the Baha'i Faith. I think our understanding of the physical world out
there is still too crude to assert with any degree of certainty that these
rather strange sounding statements by Baha'u'llah are indeed mistaken.
Best regards
dmcadam
Timothy Casey
If religious writ disagrees with Science, either the interpretation is
wrong, or science is in for a surprise, or the religious writ is not so
religious! The statements of religious adherents can be tested with science,
but the statements of the Manifestations of God so often deal exclusively
with issues of conscience that the interpretation offering a "scientific
assertion" is out of context. The Manifestations do not come to wet nurse us
through our scientific discoveries. There are usually more important issues
for them like keeping us from each-other's throats. Having said this, there
is an interesting parallel in Geology with what Baha'u'llah says as follows:
"That copper can be turned into gold is in itself sufficient proof that gold
can, in like manner, be transmuted into copper, if they be of them that can
apprehend this truth. Every mineral can be made to acquire the density,
form, and substance of each and every other mineral."
(Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, Page: 198)
"For instance, consider the substance of copper. Were it to be protected in
its own mine from becoming solidified, it would, within the space of seventy
years, attain to the state of gold."
(Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Iqan, Page: 157)
Those with some knowledge of Economic Geology may have a better
opportunity to grasp the physical reality of the example Baha'u'llah is
using here (to demonstrate the more important spiritual point).
How tempting to jump to the simplistic conclusion that this is a nuclear
transformation when the term implying its non-solid state could be referring
to any one of four separate states:
Liquid
Gas
Plasma
Solution or mobility
The last being the only one applicable in a "mine" or "potential mine". At
the time and to my current knowledge there were and are no mines in
non-solid material. As for the time period - This is a range between zero
and seventy years (_within_ the space of seventy years).
Under the right circumstances (equilibrium constant), gold and copper do
replace one another in solution at varying rates (equilibrium) - I suspect
within and without the specified seventy year period, making the
liquid bear greater amounts of either the gold or the copper. Gold is quite
mobile existing in varying amounts in solution in both seawater and
groundwater. Likewise there are no completely pure deposits as all deposits
contain at least trace amounts of other elements, by whose proportion the
actively mined source can be identified. Most deposits are precipitated from
solution as a result of a change in eh/ph, temperature, pressure or any
combination of these three changes.
Now that this parallel has been observed, I would like to suggest that an
interpretation with this parallel as its meaning is probably missing the
point - especially when we consider that Baha'u'llah did not come to share
with us the secrets of economic geology, He came instead to bring love and
unity.
Enjoy!
--
Timothy Casey
South Australia
wor...@iprimus.com.au
Formerly
ca...@smart.net.au
(1997-2000 AD)
"seegar" <cal...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:94dao2$b37$1...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU...
> "For instance, consider the substance of copper. Were it to be
> protected in its own mine from becoming solidified, it would, within
> the space of seventy years, attain to the state of gold. There are
> some, however, who maintain that copper itself is gold, which by
> becoming solidified is in a diseased condition, and hath not therefore
> reached its own state".
>
> The Kitáb-i-Íqán, by Bahá'u'lláh, p.
> 157
>
>
> Is there a explanation of the assertion by Baha'u'llah that copper
> turns to gold? Are there any scientists here? How about melting
> copper in a blast furnace and keeping it in a liquid state for 70
> years in order to get the desired result? How does this agree with
> the Baha'i principle that science and religion are to agree?
>
> We all know that there are Christians who feel threatened by Science.
> In the Bible it talks of creation being 6,000 years old. Science,
> however has proven that the universe is much older. The calculation of
> the speed of light proves that the age of the universe is in the
> billions of years in age.
>
> The Baha'i faith is supposed to support science and religion agreeing.
> I will not suspend my rational thought so that my "faith based
> religious thinking" can feel secure.
>
> If I lived in Galieo's time I would support him instead of the
> "infallable papacy" who mercilessly persecuted him for defending the
> truth.
>
> Are we supposed to oppose scientists who can prove this is impossible
> (i.e. copper remains as copper and doesn't suddenly turn to gold after
> 70 years)? Please forgive me but I am having trouble with this
> assertion. Any informed, logical or scientific response is welcome. I
> am not interested in comments that we should take this statement with
> blind faith and that to investigate would be heresy.
[snip]
bljenkins
> Is there a explanation of the assertion by Baha'u'llah that copper
> turns to gold? Are there any scientists here? How about melting
> copper in a blast furnace and keeping it in a liquid state for 70
> years in order to get the desired result? How does this agree with
> the Baha'i principle that science and religion are to agree?
See Gary Matthews "The Challenge of Baha'u'llah" page 83 for one individuals
answer to your questions. Hope this helps as I'm only on this news list by
mistake, but thought I'd reply as I had an answer.
Margaret Bristol
A seeker I am dialoguing with elsewhere online has asked me the following
question:
"Who are the other messengers of god that your faith
recognizes? "
This person I am dialoguing with is very sharp, very direct, and very open.
Most of her questions are actually more difficult than this one, or at
least this one seemed to be fairly easy and straightforward until I
realized I didn't know the answer (much to my chagrin. I mean, I should
really know this before I reach my one-year Baha'i anniversary next month,
right?)
Seems like I've heard that some are definitely defined as such -- like
Zoroaster, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Bab, Baha'u'llah -- and some there
seems to be some questions about. I'm not sure about ones like Krishna,
and the Buddha. What about Abraham and Noah? And what about some
lesser-known religions, such as those of the Native American tribes -- how
has God nutured their spiritual development? ('Cause she'll definitely
get around to asking that -- she leaves no stone unturned in her personal
investigation process.)
Any help you can give me on this will be much appreciated.
Margaret b.
kus...@webtv.net
Manifastations?
As far as I know, there is no where in the Writings, at least in
English, that there is a list of all the Manifestations of the Adamic
Cycle.
The follwing Quotes may be of some help:
"With regard to your concern that certain remote geographical regions
have historically been derpived of Divine Revelation,the following
extracts indicate that there are many other Prophets that have appeared
in the world,but Whose names are not mentiioned in the Scriptures with
which we are familiar,for example:
'And to every people have We sent an apostle...'(Qur'an,XVI,38)
''God hath raised up Prophets and revealed Books as numerous as the
creatures of the world, and will continue to do so to everlasting.'
(Selections From the Writings of the Bab,p.125)
'Know thou that the absence of any reference to them[Prophets before
Adam] is no proof that they did not actually exist.That no records
concerning them are now available,should be attributed to their extreme
remoteness,as well as to the vast changes which the earth hath undergone
since their time.' (Gleanings,p.172)
'While Asia has been clearly blessed as the birthplace of many
Manifesttions of God,we have found nothing in the Writings to suggest
exatly where in the world these Messengers of God in the remote past,
may have arisen.In a letter written on behalf of the Guardian,we have
the promise that"...there always have been Manifestations of God,but we
donot have any record of Their names.'
-Messages From The Universal House of Justce,1963-1978,
pp.663-664.(Message 425)
As you can see, then, there can be no complete answer to the question
you pose.
'Abdu'l-Baha also refers to the Call of God having been raised in
America, but names no names.Thus we cannot officially state that a given
Native Messenger is or is not a Manifestation of God.
But, among the Manifestations of God named as such in the Baha'i
Writings,are the following:
The First Adam( First ever Maniffestation of God on earth, time far, far
back, Adam here meaning Man)
Adam, Manifestation of God in Southern Iraq Six Thousand and some years
ago, beginning the Adamic Cycle.
Noah
Krishna
Hud
Salih
Abraham
possibly Joseph( the Guardian states that in the Qur'an, Joseph appears
as a Manifestation of God)
The Prophet of the Sabaean Religion Whose Name is unknown but Whom, the
Guardian says, we regard as a Manifestation of God.
Moses
Zoroaster
The Buddha
Jesus the Christ
Muhammad
The Bab
Baha'u'llah.
These are all regarded by the Baha'i Faith, as Manifestations of God.
Other Prophets are mentioned in the Qur'an and sometimes in the Baha'i
Writings without reference as to whether They are Manifestations of God
or Lesser Prophets.
These include Luqman,Shu'aib, and Idris among possibly others.Shu'aib
is sometimes identified as Jethro, Moses' Father -in-Law, , but if so,
He would not be a Manifestation of God.There may have been another
Shu'aib.
Idris is identified with Enoch in Genesis, and with Thoth, God of
Wisdom, Hermes,( the First Hermes) and Mercury, other names in other
traditions.
Baha'u'llah refers to Idris as the Father of Philosophy, and the Qur'an
names Him as a Prophet.
The Sabaans name themselves, Baha'u'llah says, after Sabi, Son of Idris,
but Sabi is not specifically named as a Prophet.
So you see, while Adam, Noah, Hud, Salih, Krihna, Abraham, Moses ,
Buddha, Zoroaster,Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah are named as
Manifestations of Gd, and several others possibly could have been, and
others there were Who are not named, and a lot of Them before Adam, we
can't specifically say Who They all were or even in some cases, were
not.
What we can say is that the nine Religions still extant at the time of
Baha'u'llah, are Sabaean, Prophet Unknown,Hindu,one of Whose
Manifestations is Krishna (Hindus list others not mentioned in our
Writings, including Manu<meaning man as does Adam>, Rama,and so
on),Jewish(Moses)
,Zoroastrianism(Zoroaster or Zarathustra),
The Buddhist Faith, Gautama Siddhartha( to forestall objections from
Buddhists,some of whom are either atheist or agnostic, I will here state
that the Baha'i Writings say the the Buddha is a Manifestation of God,
that we believe He taught the Oneness of God and the immortality of the
soul),Christian Religion, Jesus the Christ,Islam, Muhammad, The Babi
and Baha'i Religions, The Ba and Baha'u'llah, the Bab regarded as the
Forerunner of Baha'u'llah and therefore Co-Ruler of the Baha'i
Dispensation.
Manifestations of God , Whose Names are known but Whose Religions no
longer exist, are:Noah, Hud, Salih, Abraham,for sure, and possiby
Joseph, Luqman, and Idris, if Manifestations.
Muhammad was a follower fo the Religion of Abraham, which was subsumed
into Islam,as earlier some of the followers of other Manifestations were
subsumed in to the Faith revealed by Moses.
Some Native peoples claim supernatural Messengers as their founders, on
which, by name at least, the Wrtings are silent,although many Baha'is
have no problem accepting that these may have been Manifestations of
God, or at least some kind of Prophet.
Whether they were or not for certain, the Next Manifestation alone can
answer.
I hope this helps your search for truth in this matter.
Basically, some are for sure, some are maybe because the Writings do not
clearly state,and some may be but are not mentioned, and a bunch existed
Whose Names are forgotten, and in some case, their traces may faintly
remain, often in the form of Prophecies concerning this Day, and
Baha'u'llah and the Bab.
In addition, there have been spiritually minded teachers in tune with
the spiritual ciurrents flowig at the time, such as Joseph Smith and
Emmanuel Swedenborg,Mary Baker Eddy and others, who were not Prophets as
we consider Prophets, but rather seers, as well as other visionaries,
poets, and so on, who are sometimes regarded by followers as actual
Prophets.Some even considered Kahlil Gibran to be one such because he
wrote a book called the Prophet.
Since Kahlil Gibran actually knew 'Abdu'l-Baha, and was with Him in
Bosto, for instance, we cannot rule out Baha'i inspiration for some of
his books.
Mrs. Annie Besant, one of the founders of Theosophy, was present in
Paris during 'Abdu'l-Baha's Talks, and Charles Fillmore, Founder of the
Unity Church or movement, was in Boston when 'Abdu'l-Baha spoke on the
power of the Word of God, Unity's keynote.
Many Indian Gurus and such are regarded as Messengers of God by their
followers as well, to list them all would be difficult.
Baha'u'llah gives the signs of a manifestation of God in the
Kitab-i-Iqan.He also states in many places that the latest three are
Muhammad, the Bab and Himself, and the next will not come for at least
eight hundred and fifty years.
Regards,
john
Bruce D Limber
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 05:53:28 GMT Margaret Bristol <pian...@eoni.com>
writes:
>A seeker I am dialoguing with elsewhere online has asked ...
>
>"Who are the other messengers of god that your faith
> recognizes? "
There is no "short list" because as you know, many names
are lost to history. For example, we recognize the Sabaean
Faith but do not know Who founded it.
The list does include (not necessarily in order) Adam, Noah,
Hud, Salih, Krishna, Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha,
Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah. Some of
the religions They founded no longer exist.
There are other names (such as Queotzacatl) that remain
speculative becase we simply don't have enough evidence
to know (and probably never will).
And there are others we definitely _don't_ put on the list,
such as Confucius.
Regards, :-)
Bruce
`~=x[silvermask]x=~`
<pian...@eoni.com> wrote as follows:
> Greetings, friends,
>
> A seeker I am dialoguing with elsewhere online has asked me the following
> question:
>
> "Who are the other messengers of god that your faith
> recognizes? "
>
> This person I am dialoguing with is very sharp, very direct, and very open.
> Most of her questions are actually more difficult than this one,
<SNIP>
God sends His Messages through the chosen ones. Some, like the mosquito
that stung me a few months ago, are meant for that one particular finite
moment and to one single particular finite being. I swat that mosquito and
a whole new era of my finite life began.
There are also other Messengers who He sends to the massess for infinite
time. But alas! Before we find out Who the Infinite Messenger truly is,
about 2000-3000 years may have passed.
/ \
/ \
/ \
_______________________
````` from'''''
`~=x[silvermask]x=~'
~~
\ /
~~
Suzanne Gerstner
Bruce wrote:
> And there are others we definitely _don't_ put on the list,
> such as Confucius.
Hi Bruce,
I agree that Confucius wasn't a Manifestation of God. Shoghi Effendi said
"Confucius was not a prophet. He was the founder of a moral system and a
great reformer." However 'Abdu'l-Baha said that his station was very high.
He did mention him in the same breath with a list of Manifestations of God.
He did call Him, along with Buddha, a "King" in a former age and say he
founded a great civilization. Since 'Abdu'l-Baha was our role model and He
saw fit to speak like this about him, I don't know how definite it is that
we should always separate Confucius out from the rest when we are speaking
to people from China, for instance, who put Confucius in extremely high
esteem and pattern their lives on his teachings. 'Abdu'l-Baha must have had
a reason to say things like this:
"Blessed souls whether Moses, Jesus, Zoroaster, Krishna, Buddha,
Confucius, or Muhammad were the cause of the illumination of the world of
humanity. How can we deny such irrefutable proof? How can we be blind to
such light? How can we dispute the validity of His Holiness Christ? This
is injustice. This is a denial of reality. Man must be just. We must set
aside bias and prejudice. We must abandon the imitations of ancestors and
forefathers. We ourselves must investigate reality and be fair in
judgment."
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Japan Will Turn Ablaze*, Page: 45)
"Thou hast written regarding Buddha and Confucius. Buddha was an
illustrious personage. Confucius became the cause of civilization,
advancement and prosperity for the people of China. Now it is not the time
when we discuss concerning the stations and positions of those who are
passed away. We must concentrate our attention upon the present. What hath
transpired in a former time is past. Now is the time when we restrict our
discussion to the Most Great Luminary of Peace and Salvation in this Age, to
talk of the Blessed Perfection [Baha'u'llah] and to voice His exhortations,
behests and teachings. Buddha and Confucius were kings in bygone ages who
have disappeared. Their sovereignty in this world is ended and their cycle
is completed. Now the Throne of the Kingdom of ABHA is established and the
Blessed Perfection is sitting upon the Throne of Grandeur. We must raise
this Call, promulgate the Word of God and live in accord with the teachings
and advices of the Beauty of ABHA."
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Buddha, Krisna, Zoroaster, Page: 15)
I don't know what Confucius' station was, but he seems to have had a very
great one if he was the cause of the advance and prosperity of China. It
would seem great honor and respect is due to him, considering the high
praise of him by 'Abdu'l-Baha.
Kind regards,
Suzanne
John Haukness
>
>I agree that Confucius wasn't a Manifestation of God. Shoghi Effendi said
>"Confucius was not a prophet. He was the founder of a moral system and a
>great reformer." However 'Abdu'l-Baha said that his station was very
high.
>
Dear Friends: I find this topic for myself is far more simple. The Quran
tells us there are many Prophets, and Bahaullah mentions this. Abdul Baha
explains also that the Baha'i mention of 9 primary Prophets is nothing to
get excited over. There are more, it's just that we can be historical. The
whole thing is, we individual Baha'is are acting erroneously if we attempt
to name Prophets. Only the Prophets themselves, or Bahaullah's Covenent,
which is Abdul Baha, The Guardian and the Universal House of Justice can
name the Prophets. We can have our individual historical research as to
maybe she/he was a prophet if we feel we need to guess. But that's all it
is, is our rather feeble guesswork. I wouldn't go there, but I see others
doing it quite frequently. If we individually have the scholarly insight to
be able to tell the world who the unnamed Prophets are, I guess that makes
us a pretty good scholar. But in reality it puts us on the slippery slope.
Far more tricky is the minor prophets, the saints, the great minds, sages
and wisemen with the major Prophets. If we truely admire a saint, great
mind, sage or wise altruistic or courageous human figure, our fondness can
create the impulse to make this person be a major Prophet because maybe our
love for this person is greater than our love for Muhammad or The Bab. That
though is not Moses or Buddha's problem though, that is our propblem. au
revoir j