Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters

[Smaneck]

In a message dated 12/29/2004 11:03:09 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I take Their statements literally unless thye violate natural law. The existence of a human who inspired the stories about Abraham does not require violation of physical laws of the universe, it is , in other words, credible, even when understood literally. Dear Ron,   The existence of a man who inspired such stories would certainly not violate the physical laws of the universe but wouldn't it take supernatural knowledge to know if someone actually lived nearly four thousand years ago when we have no records from that time telling us of them? And it sounds like anything supernatural is considered by you to be  a violation of the physical laws of the universe. Otherwise there would be no reason to object to the notion of omniscience. But by the way, what physical law of the universal does omniscience and infallibility actually violate?   "As usual, there is the question of waht does "omniscient at will" mean?"   Yes, and that is the real question you ought to be raising.     "I apply to the this statement of the Guardian's secretary the standard raised by Baha'u'llah when assessing the Books of previous Manifestations: is it credible literally, or does it require spiritual interpretation to make it credible?"   I wasn't aware that was the standard He used. There are times when He discounts an interpretation because it is logically absurd, but that I don't think He suggests that statements of scripture as a whole be understood literally or not on the basis of the criteria you state. Perhaps you have a specific passage in mind?   In any case, the standard I tend to use in interpreting such statements is whether or not it fits the context. Otherwise I tend to leave 'spiritualized' interpretations which go far beyond the context, to the Manifestation Himself or to authorized interpreters.    " is the Guardian's secretary now a higher authority than the text of teh Quran to which Baha'u'llah applied this standard in teh IqaN? You begin to see how our literal understanding of Infallibility begins to  cause absurdities, (as secretary with more Authority than than Muhammad and Baha'u'llah combined)."   The Guardian's secretary has no authority whatsoever. It is the Guardian which has authority and tells his secretaries what to write. And yes, ultimately it is the authoritative interpretations of the Guardian which determine Baha'u'llah's intention. "What are these miracles "associated: with Baha'u'llah? How are they associated?"   You will find lots of them mentioned by those around Him.    "Did Baha'u'llah record them Himself?"   Nope. He didn't consider them worthy of mention. But He never denied He performed them.   "But the miracles I believe in are spiritual, not violations of natural physical law. God is a law maker, not a law breaker."   I tend to think that natural law is nothing more than the way God customarily does things. "I agree, Their Divine Nature is completely real, but spiritual, not physical. Their physical natures were human. You do  in spiritual realities, do you not?"   Yep. I just don't regard them as symbolic.   warmest, Susan   __________________________________________________ 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