Re: Clarification and Progressive Revelation and Peace

[Popeyesays]

In a message dated 12/21/2004 9:31:07 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For example, Bahais say that an important principle of the faith is gender equality. But when I discover all the different ways that the Bahai faith makes distinctions between men and women it makes me feel lied to. Scott   I find the question of women's services on the Universal House of justice confusing. But that decision was made first by a group containing a large percentage of women and the decision was unanimous. They also decided to exclude themselves from service on the House of Justice. They were the Hands of the Cause who administered the faith after the passing of the Guardian. So I see no conflict of  interest there. Do I understand WHY there is that distinction? No. But I am told that in the fullness of time the reason will become apparent. On the other hand we are told that peace is impossible until women take their full place in the governance of nations.   Gilberto: "The Bahai faith says that the law of holy war has been blotted from the book. But then in the Bahai writings I read about the Bahai concept of "righteous warfare"."   Scott A nation may defend itself from attack but no other war is acceptable. When one nation is invaded ALL nations should come to the aid of the nation attacked. In this frame of reference, I think the original Gulf War was justifiable - in that Kuwait was invaded and the nations of the world united behind protecting the invaded nation. The Second World War was a justifiable war - both Poland and China were invaded and other nations came to their defense.   Gilberto: "Bahais claim that they don't prosyletize. And when I've looked into an explanation I've been told that it means that they don't threaten non-Bahais with hellfire for not believing. But then that's exactly what is found in the writings of the Bab."   Scott: Baha`i's do not "proselytize" in the normal sense. We do not present information or material without a willing ear. That seems to be the key difference. As to the Writings of the Bab, the Writings of baha`u'llah abrogate several of those ordinances. Even in the day of the Bab hardly any Babis ever read the Bayan. They were far more familiar with the Qayyum'l Asma. So if you want to understand the Revelation of the Bab that is the place to concentrate.   Gilberto: "It would be one thing if I were talking to a Unitarian-Universalist who was criticizing Islam. If they wanted to criticize jihad, or the concept of the Fire, or Islamic attitudes towards gender, I would still probably disagree with them. And they would probably disagree with me. But I'm more certain that I could trust them to believe what they say they believe."   Scott I would submit that not understanding what someone believes does not mean that they are inconsistent in their beliefs. Consistency is the thing that attracted me most to the faith. Now, one believer's understanding may be different than another's.   Gilberto: "For example, the Bahai faith says very beautiful things about Allah, and the Quran, and Muhammad and the Imams. I agree. And that's very nice. The Bahai faith also says some very harsh things about Muslims. Both sides of that are necessary to get a full picture. If you just focus on the negatives, you aren't seeing the whole thing. If you just focus on the positives, you aren't seeing the whole thing."   Scott Baha`u'llah speaks respectfully of all the Messengers. He also points out that when a new Messenger appears the clergy of the previous faith become very hostile and are largely responsible for keeping the people from accepting the new Messenger. Abdu'l Baha speaks harshly of the Jews who led the fight against Jesus and contributed to His ultimate faith. To the extent that they misled the people they are responsible for their own actions. In the light of what they did do, those actions are not to be approved. Is that harsh? Truth is truth. If one accepts that Baha`u'llah and Abdu'l Baha are speaking truth then why do they speak harshly? To prevent others from committing the errors of the past. That is a good reason, not a harsh reason. In my opinion, of course.   Gilberto: "Gilberto: I agree its strong, but I don't think I would want to make apolologies for that. I might try to be tactful and not have the verse written in neon caligraphy during a Jewish-Muslim interfaith get-together, but I don't think it should be hidden. The Quran has some beautiful things to say about Jews and Christians. It also has some harsh things to say about Jews and Christians. It has some harsh things to say about Arabs and hypocritical "Muslims" too. And for me personally, what makes the "harshness" okay is that it is all has a context. Everything is balanced. And to be honest, I find the tone really refreshing sometimes."   Scott: Yet you condemn the figures of the Baha`i Revelation from speaking in the same tone for the same purpose? I find that inconsistent. I'm not picking a fight over it, but it appears to be inconsistent to me.   Gilberto: "I'm not sure about your politics, and maybe you don't understand the example, but it's kind of like the experience of reading Malcolm X. He sometimes says "harsh" things which need to be said. And even if they aren't polite or delicate that's perfectly okay because they are true and spoken out of sincere love."   Scott:   Exactly!   Gilberto" "I guess what I'm rambling about in different ways and am trying to suggest is that most of the time, or at least some of the time, the truth can ultimately be contraversial, divisive, offensive, inconvenient and harsh sometimes. And it can be conveyed wisely, and tactfully, sincerely, and in love. But if you value unity and peace and inoffensiveness too highly, then you can end up compromising that truth."   Scott: Again I agree exactly.   Gilberto: "Gilberto: But there are ALOT of religions out there. If you looked at all the religions of the world and decided to thoroughly completely investigate their claims then you would never finish. If you happened to go in reverse alphabetical order you could read for several lifetimes before getting to the Bahais."   Scott Too true, but there are very few religions revealed that survive for us to investigate. You would only have to work your way through a dozen or fifteen . Granted many more true religious revelations have occured in the history of man. But we do not know the Messenger's name or Scripture anymore.   Gilberto: "Actually, that is interesting. Your kind words made me think about something. The Bahais say that the whole world is a country  and mankind are its citizens. So how does that work out in terms of how Bahais see the world? And current events?"   Scott:   We see it as one world, but those citizens have not all matured at the same rate and level. Current events are today and always have been "growing pains" in the unfoldment of the Will of God. One thing we can be sure of - the Will of God will be fulfilled, because as the Bab said: "All are His servants, and all abide by His bidding."   Very High Regards,   Scott   __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu