This is an interesting article about Christian scientists trying to tackle the multiverse theory. Here is my favorite paragraph:
Robin Collins, a professor of philosophy at Pennsylvania’s Messiah College who also presented at the Wheaton conference, focuses much of his work on the theological opportunities multiverse theories present for the uniqueness of our universe. He imagines far-flung civilizations in the multiverse all in need of salvation and a multiplicity of Christs who would change forms to meet each universe’s redemptive needs. “If you had Klingons somewhere — of course a very fallen race, as we know from Star Trek,” Collins adds, “God takes up their nature, and there’s a Klingon version of the Son.” Collins has also argued that multiverse models are consistent with god’s creative capacities. “If you start thinking about god as infinitely creative,” he says, “it would be totally unexpected for god to just create us.”
If they are willing to go there then a new question arises. If Christ can take different forms in different places at different times to save all the heathen aliens, then why can't he do the same thing on earth?
Progressive revelation anybody?
-
Saturday, April 04, 2009
Sunday, March 01, 2009
A Baha'i's Interpretation of "Original Sin"
The concept of original sin has been the lynchpin of Christian theology for centuries. Many Christians interpret the book of Genesis, when Adam ate of the apple from the tree of good and evil, as the downfall of man. It gives their faith in the historical Jesus as the only means by which people can be redeemed of the sin of Adam and be born again of Christ. While giving Christians assurances of their faith, it has turned other people off. Many find it inconsolable that a baby is born sinful and guilty and will be consigned to hell if it dies before being baptized, inconsolable that everybody before the time of Jesus was consigned to hell, inconsolable that everybody who is raised in an isolated area without hearing about Jesus is consigned to hell. For many, including myself, these are reprehensible and unscientific interpretations.
Baha’i’s take the opposite view of human nature. We believe that humans are inherently noble, “A mine rich in gems of inestimable value”. We can choose to polish these gems and express our true nature, or we can ignore our true selves and fall into great degradation. Yet Baha’i’s also claim to believe in the Bible; for us there is a deeper meaning to the biblical idea of original sin.
Paul the apostle speaks quite extensively on the topic of original sin, especially in the book of Romans. The story of Adam and Eve was well known from the Book of Genesis. Paul took it to mean that the sin of Adam was imputed to all men, regardless of their relative morality. The Jewish law was a form of death, an albatross that could not be extricated by human will alone.
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned-for until the Law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. ..For if by the transgression of the one, death reined through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will rein in the life through the One, Jesus Christ." Romans 5:12-17
According to Paul’s story, we were recreated in the likeness of Christ through the mercy which required the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. This was the meaning of Jesus when he said claimed to fulfill the Law in its entirety.
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18
Through his sacrifice we were saved, not through our own merits, but through the grace of God. We were freed from the law which kept us under the weight of sin, and death.
"Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." Romans 7: 4-6
On the surface, these teachings suggest a very linear progression from the fall of Adam, to the naïve attempt by Abraham and Moses to redeem humanity through the Law, to the final redemption via the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross. There are some obvious logical problems with this interpretation, not the least contained within the Bible itself. Consider the following story told by Jesus.
“Now it came about that the poor man died and he was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried. And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue; for I am in agony in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during you life you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus bad things; but now he is being comforted here, and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, in order that those who wish to come over from here to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.’ And he said, ‘Then I beg you, Father, that you send him to my father’s house-for I have five brothers-that he may warn them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ But he said, ‘No, Father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’ But he said to him, ‘if they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’” Luke 16:22-31
It is clear from this passage that before the time of Jesus, there was already a distinction between Hades (Hell), the place where the rich man was consigned, and a heavenly place where Lazarus was consigned.
So how do we make sense of the contradictory ideas that salvation is reliant on a specific event in history, and this account of salvation well before the time of Jesus? Most Christians placed a heavy emphasis on the historical Jesus, even though Jesus stated that The Christ has been around for eternity.
“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad”. The Jews therefore said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am”. John 8:56-58
This passage clearly establishes Christ as an eternal spiritual presence. One that was around long before Jesus’s body was ever born into the world. His life, which was evident in the original Word, was also the light of men from the very beginning.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it." John 1: 1-5
If we are to understand the description of God as spirit and love…
"God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." John 4:24
"The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love." 1 John 4:1
...then it makes sense to view the Christ in much the same manner.
So then there must be a way to understand the historical nature and redeeming act of Jesus in the context of the eternal nature of Christ and spirit? Consider the explanation given by Baha’u’llah on the nature of the prophets and manifestations of God.
"…It is clear and evident to thee that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God, Who have appeared clothed in divers attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold Them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of Being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendor! Wherefore, should one of these Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying: “I am the return of all the Prophets,” He, verily, speaketh the truth. In like manner, in every subsequent Revelation, the return of the former Revelation is a fact, the truth of which is firmly established….
The other station is the station of distinction, and pertaineth to the world of creation, and to the limitations thereof. In this respect, each Manifestation of God hath a distinct individuality, a definitely prescribed mission, a predestined revelation, and specially designated limitations. Each one of them is known by a different name, is characterized by a special attribute, fulfils a definite mission, and is entrusted with a particular Revelation. Even as He saith: “Some of the Apostles We have caused to excel the others. To some God hath spoken, some He hath raised and exalted. And to Jesus, Son of Mary, We gave manifest signs, and We strengthened Him with the Holy Spirit.”
It is because of this difference in their station and mission that the words and utterances flowing from these Well Springs of Divine knowledge appear to diverge and differ. Otherwise, in the eyes of them that are initiated into the mysteries of Divine wisdom, all their utterances are, in reality, but the expressions of one Truth. As most of the people have failed to appreciate those stations to which We have referred, they, therefore, feel perplexed and dismayed at the varying utterances pronounced by Manifestations that are essentially one and the same..." Gleanings XXII
Baha’i’s believe in the idea of progressive revelation which asserts that there is only one religion which has been refreshed and expanded upon throughout history. While the core spiritual message has always been the same, its conceptual framework and the social laws have differed according to the needs of people at their stage of evolution. Jesus himself spoke of progressive revelation using the parable of the wineskins.
"No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment; otherwise he will both tear the new, and the piece from the will not match the old.
And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the new wine will burst the skins, and it will be spilled out, and the skins will be ruined.
But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins." - Luke 5:36-3
For progressive revelation to be credible from a biblical point of view, then there must be a deeper meaning to the concept of original sin than has commonly been interpreted. Investigating this deeper meaning, we must first consider the meaning of Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection from the dead as laid out at the end of each Gospel. Paul gives us a useful place to start.
"Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him." Romans 6: 4-9
What does it mean to die with Christ in order to live with him? Paul is constructive in this train of thought. He clearly distinguishes between the heavenly body and the earthly body.
"But someone will say, how are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come? You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies; and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body just as He wished, and to each of the seeds a body of its own...There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another." 1 Corinthians 15:35-40
The earthly body must be “united with Him in the likeness of His death”, so that the spiritual body can be raised “in the likeness of His resurrection”.
So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body, if there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.” 1 Corinthians 15:42-44
Clearly the physical body of Jesus was not raised as the Gospels seem to suggest and as many Christians believe, but instead his spiritual body manifested in the early Christian community.
"So we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one of another." Romans 12:5
So who was Adam in this story? According to Paul, Adam represents the human’s physical nature, the part that must be sown. Christ represents the spiritual nature, the part the must be resurrected.
"The first Man, Adam, became a living soul. The last Adam(Christ) became a life-giving spirit. However the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven, heavenly. As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. And just as we have born the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." 1Corinthians 15:35-50
It is easy to ask at this point, if original sin has a spiritual meaning instead of a literal one, why wasn’t the Bible more clear about that? Jesus was clear that his message at the time could only be delivered according to the capacity of the people to comprehend it. That is why he spoke in parables, in a figurative language.
"Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable. So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: "I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world." (Psa 78:2) Mat 13:34-35
He also promised to speak much more clearly the next time around.
"These things I have spoken to you in a figurative language; an hour is coming when I will speak no more to you in figurative language, but will tell you plainly of the father." John 16:25
Paul also alluded to this, claiming that spiritual things cannot be understood using a natural (or literal) mindset.
"For to us God revealed them through the spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of a man, which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of god; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." 1 Corinthians 2:10-14
Today we are capable of thinking much more complex and abstract thoughts than the people thousands of years ago. Science has progressed to a point that the old ways of viewing the universe no longer apply. If Jesus had to speak in parables for people to understand, imagine how much more figurative the language must have been in Old Testament times for people to understand. This is why there are so many impossible stories in the Old Testament. It was useful for people at that time to take the creation story, or the story of Noah’s Ark literally, because the spiritual teaching could not be understood any other way. In this day, we are ready to be told “plainly of the father”.
Abdu’l Baha, the son of Baha’u’llah and the appointed interpreter of his writings, gives a very useful explanation of the meaning of Adam and Eve.
It is worth reading in its entirety
Baha’i’s take the opposite view of human nature. We believe that humans are inherently noble, “A mine rich in gems of inestimable value”. We can choose to polish these gems and express our true nature, or we can ignore our true selves and fall into great degradation. Yet Baha’i’s also claim to believe in the Bible; for us there is a deeper meaning to the biblical idea of original sin.
Paul the apostle speaks quite extensively on the topic of original sin, especially in the book of Romans. The story of Adam and Eve was well known from the Book of Genesis. Paul took it to mean that the sin of Adam was imputed to all men, regardless of their relative morality. The Jewish law was a form of death, an albatross that could not be extricated by human will alone.
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned-for until the Law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. ..For if by the transgression of the one, death reined through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will rein in the life through the One, Jesus Christ." Romans 5:12-17
According to Paul’s story, we were recreated in the likeness of Christ through the mercy which required the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. This was the meaning of Jesus when he said claimed to fulfill the Law in its entirety.
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18
Through his sacrifice we were saved, not through our own merits, but through the grace of God. We were freed from the law which kept us under the weight of sin, and death.
"Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." Romans 7: 4-6
On the surface, these teachings suggest a very linear progression from the fall of Adam, to the naïve attempt by Abraham and Moses to redeem humanity through the Law, to the final redemption via the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross. There are some obvious logical problems with this interpretation, not the least contained within the Bible itself. Consider the following story told by Jesus.
“Now it came about that the poor man died and he was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried. And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue; for I am in agony in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during you life you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus bad things; but now he is being comforted here, and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, in order that those who wish to come over from here to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.’ And he said, ‘Then I beg you, Father, that you send him to my father’s house-for I have five brothers-that he may warn them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ But he said, ‘No, Father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’ But he said to him, ‘if they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’” Luke 16:22-31
It is clear from this passage that before the time of Jesus, there was already a distinction between Hades (Hell), the place where the rich man was consigned, and a heavenly place where Lazarus was consigned.
So how do we make sense of the contradictory ideas that salvation is reliant on a specific event in history, and this account of salvation well before the time of Jesus? Most Christians placed a heavy emphasis on the historical Jesus, even though Jesus stated that The Christ has been around for eternity.
“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad”. The Jews therefore said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am”. John 8:56-58
This passage clearly establishes Christ as an eternal spiritual presence. One that was around long before Jesus’s body was ever born into the world. His life, which was evident in the original Word, was also the light of men from the very beginning.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it." John 1: 1-5
If we are to understand the description of God as spirit and love…
"God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." John 4:24
"The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love." 1 John 4:1
...then it makes sense to view the Christ in much the same manner.
So then there must be a way to understand the historical nature and redeeming act of Jesus in the context of the eternal nature of Christ and spirit? Consider the explanation given by Baha’u’llah on the nature of the prophets and manifestations of God.
"…It is clear and evident to thee that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God, Who have appeared clothed in divers attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold Them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of Being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendor! Wherefore, should one of these Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying: “I am the return of all the Prophets,” He, verily, speaketh the truth. In like manner, in every subsequent Revelation, the return of the former Revelation is a fact, the truth of which is firmly established….
The other station is the station of distinction, and pertaineth to the world of creation, and to the limitations thereof. In this respect, each Manifestation of God hath a distinct individuality, a definitely prescribed mission, a predestined revelation, and specially designated limitations. Each one of them is known by a different name, is characterized by a special attribute, fulfils a definite mission, and is entrusted with a particular Revelation. Even as He saith: “Some of the Apostles We have caused to excel the others. To some God hath spoken, some He hath raised and exalted. And to Jesus, Son of Mary, We gave manifest signs, and We strengthened Him with the Holy Spirit.”
It is because of this difference in their station and mission that the words and utterances flowing from these Well Springs of Divine knowledge appear to diverge and differ. Otherwise, in the eyes of them that are initiated into the mysteries of Divine wisdom, all their utterances are, in reality, but the expressions of one Truth. As most of the people have failed to appreciate those stations to which We have referred, they, therefore, feel perplexed and dismayed at the varying utterances pronounced by Manifestations that are essentially one and the same..." Gleanings XXII
Baha’i’s believe in the idea of progressive revelation which asserts that there is only one religion which has been refreshed and expanded upon throughout history. While the core spiritual message has always been the same, its conceptual framework and the social laws have differed according to the needs of people at their stage of evolution. Jesus himself spoke of progressive revelation using the parable of the wineskins.
"No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment; otherwise he will both tear the new, and the piece from the will not match the old.
And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the new wine will burst the skins, and it will be spilled out, and the skins will be ruined.
But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins." - Luke 5:36-3
For progressive revelation to be credible from a biblical point of view, then there must be a deeper meaning to the concept of original sin than has commonly been interpreted. Investigating this deeper meaning, we must first consider the meaning of Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection from the dead as laid out at the end of each Gospel. Paul gives us a useful place to start.
"Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him." Romans 6: 4-9
What does it mean to die with Christ in order to live with him? Paul is constructive in this train of thought. He clearly distinguishes between the heavenly body and the earthly body.
"But someone will say, how are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come? You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies; and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body just as He wished, and to each of the seeds a body of its own...There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another." 1 Corinthians 15:35-40
The earthly body must be “united with Him in the likeness of His death”, so that the spiritual body can be raised “in the likeness of His resurrection”.
So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body, if there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.” 1 Corinthians 15:42-44
Clearly the physical body of Jesus was not raised as the Gospels seem to suggest and as many Christians believe, but instead his spiritual body manifested in the early Christian community.
"So we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one of another." Romans 12:5
So who was Adam in this story? According to Paul, Adam represents the human’s physical nature, the part that must be sown. Christ represents the spiritual nature, the part the must be resurrected.
"The first Man, Adam, became a living soul. The last Adam(Christ) became a life-giving spirit. However the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven, heavenly. As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. And just as we have born the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." 1Corinthians 15:35-50
It is easy to ask at this point, if original sin has a spiritual meaning instead of a literal one, why wasn’t the Bible more clear about that? Jesus was clear that his message at the time could only be delivered according to the capacity of the people to comprehend it. That is why he spoke in parables, in a figurative language.
"Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable. So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: "I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world." (Psa 78:2) Mat 13:34-35
He also promised to speak much more clearly the next time around.
"These things I have spoken to you in a figurative language; an hour is coming when I will speak no more to you in figurative language, but will tell you plainly of the father." John 16:25
Paul also alluded to this, claiming that spiritual things cannot be understood using a natural (or literal) mindset.
"For to us God revealed them through the spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of a man, which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of god; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." 1 Corinthians 2:10-14
Today we are capable of thinking much more complex and abstract thoughts than the people thousands of years ago. Science has progressed to a point that the old ways of viewing the universe no longer apply. If Jesus had to speak in parables for people to understand, imagine how much more figurative the language must have been in Old Testament times for people to understand. This is why there are so many impossible stories in the Old Testament. It was useful for people at that time to take the creation story, or the story of Noah’s Ark literally, because the spiritual teaching could not be understood any other way. In this day, we are ready to be told “plainly of the father”.
Abdu’l Baha, the son of Baha’u’llah and the appointed interpreter of his writings, gives a very useful explanation of the meaning of Adam and Eve.
It is worth reading in its entirety
Monday, February 16, 2009
Atheist Discussion Commentary - Part 1
Poking around on utube, I found this fascinating discussion between 4 of the most outspoken atheists out there today: Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris. I have watched two parts out of the twelve so far and have decided to start a six part series of my own, linking to two clips at a time and throwing out stream of consciousness thoughts on what I watch.
Here are the first two clips.
Discussion - Part 1
Discussion - Part 2
So far most of what they say I agree with, except of course the atheism part. I have been a little disappointed by the fact that they haven't differentiated between rational faith and irrational faith. (for example accepting scientific empiricism vs. believing in a 6000 year old earth) I was happy in the beginning of the second clip when Harris allowed for the reality and language of supernatural experiences, if not supernatural reality itself. I was also appreciative of Hitchens (who I think in general to be an incredible charismatic and profoundly intelligent writer) disagree with Dennett that religious people claim not to doubt their faith, giving a few examples. Then Dawkins makes an unfair assertion in my view that people of faith pray over and over to brainwash themselves out of doubt. We pray because it invokes the experience of self sacrifice and oneness with our reality. We pray because we want to detach ourselves from our own ego and open up to love and compassion in our lives. I don't pray because I want to be cured of doubt. It would scare me if I had absolutely no doubt.
Of course I doubt; there is no way to prove that I am praying to anything other than the floor and ceiling. But I feel that it is even harder to prove that something (the universe) came from nothing. Human consciousness has evolved the capacity for self reflection, scientific inquiry, and the conscious development of all virtues. It seems to me unlikely that this consciousness born out of some form in some galaxy was an accident. It seems to me likely that the universe itself is moving towards a greater perfection, one that will spawn in our day and age the unity of humankind. It is interesting to think of how the cells in a human body unite to form a human consciousness. What new meta consciousness will be created when humankind unites?
Here are the first two clips.
Discussion - Part 1
Discussion - Part 2
So far most of what they say I agree with, except of course the atheism part. I have been a little disappointed by the fact that they haven't differentiated between rational faith and irrational faith. (for example accepting scientific empiricism vs. believing in a 6000 year old earth) I was happy in the beginning of the second clip when Harris allowed for the reality and language of supernatural experiences, if not supernatural reality itself. I was also appreciative of Hitchens (who I think in general to be an incredible charismatic and profoundly intelligent writer) disagree with Dennett that religious people claim not to doubt their faith, giving a few examples. Then Dawkins makes an unfair assertion in my view that people of faith pray over and over to brainwash themselves out of doubt. We pray because it invokes the experience of self sacrifice and oneness with our reality. We pray because we want to detach ourselves from our own ego and open up to love and compassion in our lives. I don't pray because I want to be cured of doubt. It would scare me if I had absolutely no doubt.
Of course I doubt; there is no way to prove that I am praying to anything other than the floor and ceiling. But I feel that it is even harder to prove that something (the universe) came from nothing. Human consciousness has evolved the capacity for self reflection, scientific inquiry, and the conscious development of all virtues. It seems to me unlikely that this consciousness born out of some form in some galaxy was an accident. It seems to me likely that the universe itself is moving towards a greater perfection, one that will spawn in our day and age the unity of humankind. It is interesting to think of how the cells in a human body unite to form a human consciousness. What new meta consciousness will be created when humankind unites?
Friday, February 13, 2009
The Baha'i Faith and Bible Code
Bryan's Post, Bible Code, is a very interesting exploration on hidden meanings within the Bible. It makes a lot of connections that I had not considered and has humbled me (again) to the countless layers within these holy texts.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
The Baha'i Faith and Community Development
Check out this excellent essay on the nature of Baha'i community development.
Friday, January 30, 2009
The Baha'i Faith and Politics
We are told in school and by the media that our democratic politics are triumphant, a model to be emulated by the rest of the world. It does have many qualities, but why does the whole process seem so banal? Check out Bryan's new post Politics and Change. Here is a sampler:
"That Baha'is entirely reject these bastions of Western democracy -- the campaign, the candidate, etc. -- is the subject of some confusion from the general public. How could a system work without the soul-grinding competition of adversaries? Our current politics are based on opposition and the only alternative seems to be dictatorship. Within that question lies the key: the Baha'i system is fundamentally different, based on cooperation. The forces current in the world are disintegrating, while the Baha'i system is integrating."
"That Baha'is entirely reject these bastions of Western democracy -- the campaign, the candidate, etc. -- is the subject of some confusion from the general public. How could a system work without the soul-grinding competition of adversaries? Our current politics are based on opposition and the only alternative seems to be dictatorship. Within that question lies the key: the Baha'i system is fundamentally different, based on cooperation. The forces current in the world are disintegrating, while the Baha'i system is integrating."
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
First Televised Interview
The first televised interview that Barack Obama has had as president is with Al-Arabiya, an Arab news organization out of Dubai. It is cathartic to finally hear an engaging and fair minded approach to the Middle East coming from the leadership of the United States. It is an important step, it seems, in reconciling the "dissension and strife, contention, estrangement and apathy, among the loved ones of God."
A few different parts stuck out for me, this one in particular where he acknowledges the part of his Muslim Anscestory:
"I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries ... the largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith – and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers – regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams."
A few different parts stuck out for me, this one in particular where he acknowledges the part of his Muslim Anscestory:
"I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries ... the largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I've come to understand is that regardless of your faith – and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers – regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams."
Friday, January 16, 2009
A Baha'i and an Athiest Discuss Evolution
Over the last few days I have been involved in a discussion of the Baha'i view of evolution and spirituality with an self proclaimed athiest. It was prompted by a comment he made on Bryans post Genesis, Evolution, and Aliens. He has been kind of confrontational and I wavered on weather to engage him. I am glad I have because it has caused me to question my own beliefs in a productive way. Here is the dialogue so far. If you have something to contribute to this discussion, you should follow the link and make a comment. I will continue to repost this with any new comments made, so join in on the discussion!
Jason said...
This is a great post Bryan! I hadn't read that last quote by Abdu'l Baha in "Divine Philosophy", although it makes a lot of sense and is an exciting thought. If only we could get some fundamentalist Christians and dogmatic Darwinian's locked in a room together and have them read and discuss this until they recognized Baha'u'llah
September 1, 2008 9:41 AM
Atheist said...
WOW, guys!!! we are in the 21st century and you still dont accept the evolution and darwin???? WOWW
January 12, 2009 1:50 PM
Jason said...
Actually, the Baha'is believe in the harmony of science and religion. This includes the theories of Darwin and of evolution. We believe that evolution (the process of random mutation and natural selection) is the process by which humans eventually came into being. Where we might differ is that we believe humans, or possibly beings similar to humans, in that they have the capacity for self reflection, free will, and the development of divine attributes were destined to come about from the very beginning. Everything we see today was there potentially in the very first seeds of life and creation.
January 12, 2009 3:16 PM
Atheist said...
Hey Jason, It seems that you are not a bahai, because u dont know about this faith. Bahais dont believe in evolution and ESPECIALLY NATURAL SELECTION. Go to this website and judge:
http://www.bahai-library.org/articles/evolution.html
January 13, 2009 9:24 PM
Jason said...
Atheist,
Thank you for posting this link. You might find it interesting that this article appeared in a Baha'i journal. As Baha'is we are willing to calibrate our interpretation of spiritual teachings to new advancements in scientific discovery. I think the concept that Abdu'l Baha lays out, that we have always been potentially human, from the first single cell organism all the way up homosapien, does not contradict Darwin's notions of evolution. Instead I would argue it is a conceptual difference based upon the same reading of science.
January 13, 2009 9:57 PM
Atheist said...
How about this part that Abdulbaha says "it in the sense of progress or development within a single species, not in the meaning of the followers of Darwin, who believed that one species, by the force of natural selection alone,"
and how about this part:According to this view, the "modern" species is defined for an existing population of interbreeding organisms, by a common gene pool. For many modern biologists evolution is not the unfolding of a set of time invariant laws of nature or a God-given natural order, but evolution is believed to consist of new self-creations.(6) According to this view biological characteristics, which are not even potentially pre-existing, are assumed to be created de novo on the path of evolution. From the view point of an essentialist this position implies the evolution of species essences. Such concepts of self-creational evolution clearly contradict 'Abdu'l-Bahá's thesis that humanity mirrors the timeless names and attributes of God.
You know what you religious people are doing. you taking the scientific evidence and make them FIT with you religious ideas. In other word, you are rationalizing, you know you are wrong but dont want to admit it.
January 14, 2009 1:16 PM
Jason said...
I would agree with your statement that we are rationalizing, but I would add that we are doing it in both directions...also taking religious ideas and making them fit with scientific evidence. It is true that we attempt to harmonize science with a spiritual view of reality, a spiritual view that is based upon a faith in the existence of some kind of higher intelligence. Of course it is impossible to prove the existence of God, just like it is impossible to disprove the existence of God. To argue either side is an exercise in faith. Probably the most rational view to take given the information we have is to be agnostic.
Given that Baha'is do take a leap of faith that there is a higher intelligence which we cannot even begin to understand, we also view the universe in terms of spiritual purpose. The purpose for humans we believe is to grow spiritually and surrender ourselves to the suseptibilities of the higher intelligence. We also believe that we have developed (through physical evolution but spiritual determinism) intelligence for a reason, and to deny that faculty of reason is folly.
Baha'is believe that as humans evolve scientifically and philosophically, their conception of meaning must also adapt. For example, while Baha'is say they believe in the Bible (in addition to many other Holy books), we certainly wouldn't subscribe to the literal idea that the earth was created in seven days, or that Moses saw a literal burning bush, or that Christ physically resurrected. Christ said himself that he spoke to his followers using parables, and would speak much more plainly the next time around. This was the truth for them which gave them meaning in their lives, but a relative truth in a hierarchy of truth.
Continuing with this train of thought, Baha'is fully expect that our understanding of the universe will constantly change. Abdu'l Baha spoke as a spiritual philosopher working to understand the current scientific view of reality. We do not believe that Abdu'l Baha carried the creative word; he was not a manifestation of God (in the sense that we view the two prophet-founders of the Baha'i Faith, Baha'u'llah and the Ba'b to be). Instead we see him as a perfect example of human virtues at our stage of evolution. Somebody who interpreted the teachings of his father and gave guidlines regarding the protection, propagation, and organization of the Faith, but also somebody whose knowledge of scientific matters was limited to the evidence that everybody faced at that time.
Baha'is don't believe in the deriving of science from religion, but in the harmony. Humans are distinctly endowed with the faculties of reason which makes the scientific method the best means of advancing scientific understanding of reality. Science does a poor job however of advancing moral, ethical, and spiritual virtues. (the atom bomb is an obvious example, or the rampant materialism in our society today, the latter of which religion is often vulnerable to).
Now to the current discussion of evolution, I have to admit that much of it is over my head and I thank you for challenging me in this way, you have given me something to chew on. I would refer you to a review given of the book these two authors (whom you linked to) put out. What is interesting is that this review praises but also critizes parts of the book which present justification for Abdu'l Baha's explanations.
Here is the link:
http://profs-polisci.mcgill.ca/abizadeh/Bahai-Evolution.pdf
January 14, 2009 9:54 PM
Atheist said...
The other problem of Abdulbaha is that he thought evolution is a progress (that each specie is superior that the previous specie), but this is wrong. As he said the spirituality of men has progressed. but evolution is not progressing.
everything is at the same level. Humans, worms, chimps, elephants, dolphins. we are not superior to worms and worms are not superior to humans, we can not live where worms live, and worms can not live where we live. so nobody is superior.
also, people think that we used to be apes, but no, we evolved from apes as apes did evolve. (we are called "late apes")
Abdulbaha was thinking of evolution as a hierarchy, but again he was wrong, nothing goes up the hierarchy, but they evolve in the same level.
Also, bahais tried to make science and religion go hand in hand, but couldn't. one example is the theory of evolution that we discussed and the other one is homosexuality. Shoghi efandi really did not do a good job discussing that point.
January 15, 2009 9:18 PM
Atheist said...
lets look at the original quote from Abdulbaha about evolution:
"[F]rom the beginning of man's existence he is a distinct species."
Ok, we have fossils that indicate that man has evolved from apes. so he is not a distinct specie.
Also he said FROM THE BEGINNING, what does that mean? the beginning of the universe? the beginning of life?
lets continue:
"In the same way, the embryo of man in the womb of the mother was at first in a strange form; then this body passes from shape to shape, from state to state, from form to form, until it appears in utmost beauty and perfection."
We know that we have not evolved to be beautiful and perfect, we evolved to survive, not for beauty.
"But even when in the womb of the mother and in this strange form, entirely different from his present form and figure, he is the embryo of the superior species, and not of the animal; his species and essence undergo no change."
As i said in my previous point we are not superior. secondly, he is comparing evolution to fetus in the womb. it is like comparing a bridge and the cement that the bridge is made of. the fetus in the womb is the result of the evolution (the bridge) but it is not the evolution (the cement)
"Now, admitting that the traces of organs which have disappeared actually exist, this is not a proof of the impermanence and the non-originality of the species. At the most it proves that the form, and fashion, and the organs of man have progressed."
Again, he is making the mistake that evolution is a hierarchy and we progress to get to the top. no, not at all, evolution does not have a plan for future, it is not goal directed and it is not a progress. (this is one of the misconceptions that Darwin was concerned about, Darwin knew people would think that way)
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#a2
"Man was always a distinct species, a man, not an animal."
Yes, we are an animal and we should be proud of that. we are Late-apes. we evolved from animals, like other animals, so we are an animal.
"So, if the embryo of man in the womb of the mother passes from one form to another, so that the second form in no way resembles the first, is this a proof that the species has changed? that it was at first an animal, and that its organs progressed and developed until it became a man? No indeed! How puerile and unfounded is this idea and this thought! For the proof of the originality of the human species, and of the permanency of the nature of man, is clear and evident.
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 300)"
this sentence makes me laugh:"How PUERILE and unfounded is this idea and this thought!"
2 reasons:
1. he is making fun of Darwin
2. he said this Idea and Thought, not a theory, so he was not recognizing that in future Darwin's theory will be the best proven theories. (im wondering why God didn't tell him or help him?!)
January 15, 2009 9:39 PM
Jason said...
On your last point...As I said before, Baha'is respect the scientific process as an independent branch of human development. Abdu'l Baha was using the science available at the time to make some comments about the spiritual nature of humans. His intention was not to give us a science lesson, or to establish scientific truths...that wouldn't be his funtion, his funtion was the ethical, moral, social, and spiritual guidance of the Baha'i community at that time. I think we can both obtain from Abdu'l Baha's writings that he believed in the physical process of evolution. I grant that the idea of man always as a distinct species would not make sense if said in its current context. It would imply that there isn't common ancestory...science tells us that there is so I agree with it. I am not quite sure what Abdu'l Baha meant by that, it is possible that by 'species', he meant something spiritual or allegorical, not scientific...Nevertheless, even given the current theory of evolution, I would disagree that it invalidates the possible existence of God. Of course evolution was not deterministic, humans were not destined to have the exact physical features that they do today. Instead I would argue that it was stochastic, meaning it could have gone in many different ways with a very high probability that some species would develop that had the same spiritual capacities of humans.
This leads me to your other point about the heirarchy of kingdoms. Of course in one sense we are all on the same level, we all branched out and and we have all carved out a particular niche. On the other hand, what other species has the capacity for self reflection, for the capacity of objectivity, for unimaginable horror and unimaginable beauty? Humans have the capacity to express almost any attribute. Can you say that of any other species? Every species has certain spiritual capacities, but do they have them all?
This capacity is the reason Baha'is believe that true human purpose is to grow spiritually and thereby reflect the incredible majesty of the universe. We are uniquely capable of doing this (at least on this planet, you should peruse what Baha'u'llah says about potential life on other planets).
Science can explain human evolution but it cannot explain why. If humans feel lack of purpose in their lives, they become depressed and even suicidal. What makes you think that a universe this expansive and majestic could operate without a higher purpose? What makes you an athiest as opposed to an agnostic? I understand why you are frustrated with religion. We believe not only that there is a God, but that it has made itself known unto humans. That's a big claim. It is equally as big of a claim to say that there is no God at all.
We are both taking leaps of faith in our discussion, so lets keep it going.
Da Bank said...
Alláh'u'Abhá, Atheist, I thought I'd add to the discussion here. I certainly applaud your knowledge and your desire to promote understanding of the wonderful discoveries science has made possible, especially in relation to the distortions that past religious hierarchies have tried to perpetuate (for example the persecution of scientists such as Copernicus and Galileo by the Christian clergy 400 years ago).Regarding your criticisms of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's discussion of evolution, I think it would be helpful for you to read his writings, on many topics, more extensively, so you can be more familiar with the style and vocabulary he uses. Many of the objections you've raised seem to me to be a result of differences between what 'Abdu'l'Bahá meant by a word, writing 100 years ago, and the meaning we give to that word today. For example, you rightly point out that, from a material or scientific viewpoint, organisms (including humans) are not inherently superior or inferior to each other - a worm and a human being are equal in that they are both biological organisms, each having evolved to best adapt to the conditions of the environment in which it lives, as are all organisms. Biologically, worms and humans are both classified as 'animals', where the modern meaning of this term is an organism that is multicellular, and whose cells have mitochondria and lack cell walls. This applies equally to worms and humans. However, at the time 'Abdu'l-Bahá was writing, the term 'animal' was part of an older view of classification, where animals are those organisms that are capable of movement, but do not possess self-awareness or intelligence - they were part of a more limited division of the natural world into mineral (the inorganic), vegetable (organisms not capable of movement), animal (capable of movement), and man (possessing self-awareness and intelligence). In this classification, each division is part of a hierarchy from 'most inferior' (mineral) to 'most superior' (man). This is the meaning of the term 'animal' as used by 'Abdu'l-Bahá when speaking to his audiences 100 years ago, while now, of course, we have a different understanding of the natural world, and a different definition of the term 'animal'. So, to sum up, it would help your argument to reflect upon how those terms and assertions which 'Abdu'l-Bahá makes that you object to were intended for audiences of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and how we understand those terms and assertions today. I look forward to more discussion with you.
January 18, 2009 9:32 AM
rsiegel said...
I appreciate the following thoughtfully-written essay on this topic: http://www.onecountry.org/e193/e19302as_Perspective_Evolution.html
6:15 PM
Jason said...
This is a great post Bryan! I hadn't read that last quote by Abdu'l Baha in "Divine Philosophy", although it makes a lot of sense and is an exciting thought. If only we could get some fundamentalist Christians and dogmatic Darwinian's locked in a room together and have them read and discuss this until they recognized Baha'u'llah
September 1, 2008 9:41 AM
Atheist said...
WOW, guys!!! we are in the 21st century and you still dont accept the evolution and darwin???? WOWW
January 12, 2009 1:50 PM
Jason said...
Actually, the Baha'is believe in the harmony of science and religion. This includes the theories of Darwin and of evolution. We believe that evolution (the process of random mutation and natural selection) is the process by which humans eventually came into being. Where we might differ is that we believe humans, or possibly beings similar to humans, in that they have the capacity for self reflection, free will, and the development of divine attributes were destined to come about from the very beginning. Everything we see today was there potentially in the very first seeds of life and creation.
January 12, 2009 3:16 PM
Atheist said...
Hey Jason, It seems that you are not a bahai, because u dont know about this faith. Bahais dont believe in evolution and ESPECIALLY NATURAL SELECTION. Go to this website and judge:
http://www.bahai-library.org/articles/evolution.html
January 13, 2009 9:24 PM
Jason said...
Atheist,
Thank you for posting this link. You might find it interesting that this article appeared in a Baha'i journal. As Baha'is we are willing to calibrate our interpretation of spiritual teachings to new advancements in scientific discovery. I think the concept that Abdu'l Baha lays out, that we have always been potentially human, from the first single cell organism all the way up homosapien, does not contradict Darwin's notions of evolution. Instead I would argue it is a conceptual difference based upon the same reading of science.
January 13, 2009 9:57 PM
Atheist said...
How about this part that Abdulbaha says "it in the sense of progress or development within a single species, not in the meaning of the followers of Darwin, who believed that one species, by the force of natural selection alone,"
and how about this part:According to this view, the "modern" species is defined for an existing population of interbreeding organisms, by a common gene pool. For many modern biologists evolution is not the unfolding of a set of time invariant laws of nature or a God-given natural order, but evolution is believed to consist of new self-creations.(6) According to this view biological characteristics, which are not even potentially pre-existing, are assumed to be created de novo on the path of evolution. From the view point of an essentialist this position implies the evolution of species essences. Such concepts of self-creational evolution clearly contradict 'Abdu'l-Bahá's thesis that humanity mirrors the timeless names and attributes of God.
You know what you religious people are doing. you taking the scientific evidence and make them FIT with you religious ideas. In other word, you are rationalizing, you know you are wrong but dont want to admit it.
January 14, 2009 1:16 PM
Jason said...
I would agree with your statement that we are rationalizing, but I would add that we are doing it in both directions...also taking religious ideas and making them fit with scientific evidence. It is true that we attempt to harmonize science with a spiritual view of reality, a spiritual view that is based upon a faith in the existence of some kind of higher intelligence. Of course it is impossible to prove the existence of God, just like it is impossible to disprove the existence of God. To argue either side is an exercise in faith. Probably the most rational view to take given the information we have is to be agnostic.
Given that Baha'is do take a leap of faith that there is a higher intelligence which we cannot even begin to understand, we also view the universe in terms of spiritual purpose. The purpose for humans we believe is to grow spiritually and surrender ourselves to the suseptibilities of the higher intelligence. We also believe that we have developed (through physical evolution but spiritual determinism) intelligence for a reason, and to deny that faculty of reason is folly.
Baha'is believe that as humans evolve scientifically and philosophically, their conception of meaning must also adapt. For example, while Baha'is say they believe in the Bible (in addition to many other Holy books), we certainly wouldn't subscribe to the literal idea that the earth was created in seven days, or that Moses saw a literal burning bush, or that Christ physically resurrected. Christ said himself that he spoke to his followers using parables, and would speak much more plainly the next time around. This was the truth for them which gave them meaning in their lives, but a relative truth in a hierarchy of truth.
Continuing with this train of thought, Baha'is fully expect that our understanding of the universe will constantly change. Abdu'l Baha spoke as a spiritual philosopher working to understand the current scientific view of reality. We do not believe that Abdu'l Baha carried the creative word; he was not a manifestation of God (in the sense that we view the two prophet-founders of the Baha'i Faith, Baha'u'llah and the Ba'b to be). Instead we see him as a perfect example of human virtues at our stage of evolution. Somebody who interpreted the teachings of his father and gave guidlines regarding the protection, propagation, and organization of the Faith, but also somebody whose knowledge of scientific matters was limited to the evidence that everybody faced at that time.
Baha'is don't believe in the deriving of science from religion, but in the harmony. Humans are distinctly endowed with the faculties of reason which makes the scientific method the best means of advancing scientific understanding of reality. Science does a poor job however of advancing moral, ethical, and spiritual virtues. (the atom bomb is an obvious example, or the rampant materialism in our society today, the latter of which religion is often vulnerable to).
Now to the current discussion of evolution, I have to admit that much of it is over my head and I thank you for challenging me in this way, you have given me something to chew on. I would refer you to a review given of the book these two authors (whom you linked to) put out. What is interesting is that this review praises but also critizes parts of the book which present justification for Abdu'l Baha's explanations.
Here is the link:
http://profs-polisci.mcgill.ca/abizadeh/Bahai-Evolution.pdf
January 14, 2009 9:54 PM
Atheist said...
The other problem of Abdulbaha is that he thought evolution is a progress (that each specie is superior that the previous specie), but this is wrong. As he said the spirituality of men has progressed. but evolution is not progressing.
everything is at the same level. Humans, worms, chimps, elephants, dolphins. we are not superior to worms and worms are not superior to humans, we can not live where worms live, and worms can not live where we live. so nobody is superior.
also, people think that we used to be apes, but no, we evolved from apes as apes did evolve. (we are called "late apes")
Abdulbaha was thinking of evolution as a hierarchy, but again he was wrong, nothing goes up the hierarchy, but they evolve in the same level.
Also, bahais tried to make science and religion go hand in hand, but couldn't. one example is the theory of evolution that we discussed and the other one is homosexuality. Shoghi efandi really did not do a good job discussing that point.
January 15, 2009 9:18 PM
Atheist said...
lets look at the original quote from Abdulbaha about evolution:
"[F]rom the beginning of man's existence he is a distinct species."
Ok, we have fossils that indicate that man has evolved from apes. so he is not a distinct specie.
Also he said FROM THE BEGINNING, what does that mean? the beginning of the universe? the beginning of life?
lets continue:
"In the same way, the embryo of man in the womb of the mother was at first in a strange form; then this body passes from shape to shape, from state to state, from form to form, until it appears in utmost beauty and perfection."
We know that we have not evolved to be beautiful and perfect, we evolved to survive, not for beauty.
"But even when in the womb of the mother and in this strange form, entirely different from his present form and figure, he is the embryo of the superior species, and not of the animal; his species and essence undergo no change."
As i said in my previous point we are not superior. secondly, he is comparing evolution to fetus in the womb. it is like comparing a bridge and the cement that the bridge is made of. the fetus in the womb is the result of the evolution (the bridge) but it is not the evolution (the cement)
"Now, admitting that the traces of organs which have disappeared actually exist, this is not a proof of the impermanence and the non-originality of the species. At the most it proves that the form, and fashion, and the organs of man have progressed."
Again, he is making the mistake that evolution is a hierarchy and we progress to get to the top. no, not at all, evolution does not have a plan for future, it is not goal directed and it is not a progress. (this is one of the misconceptions that Darwin was concerned about, Darwin knew people would think that way)
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#a2
"Man was always a distinct species, a man, not an animal."
Yes, we are an animal and we should be proud of that. we are Late-apes. we evolved from animals, like other animals, so we are an animal.
"So, if the embryo of man in the womb of the mother passes from one form to another, so that the second form in no way resembles the first, is this a proof that the species has changed? that it was at first an animal, and that its organs progressed and developed until it became a man? No indeed! How puerile and unfounded is this idea and this thought! For the proof of the originality of the human species, and of the permanency of the nature of man, is clear and evident.
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 300)"
this sentence makes me laugh:"How PUERILE and unfounded is this idea and this thought!"
2 reasons:
1. he is making fun of Darwin
2. he said this Idea and Thought, not a theory, so he was not recognizing that in future Darwin's theory will be the best proven theories. (im wondering why God didn't tell him or help him?!)
January 15, 2009 9:39 PM
Jason said...
On your last point...As I said before, Baha'is respect the scientific process as an independent branch of human development. Abdu'l Baha was using the science available at the time to make some comments about the spiritual nature of humans. His intention was not to give us a science lesson, or to establish scientific truths...that wouldn't be his funtion, his funtion was the ethical, moral, social, and spiritual guidance of the Baha'i community at that time. I think we can both obtain from Abdu'l Baha's writings that he believed in the physical process of evolution. I grant that the idea of man always as a distinct species would not make sense if said in its current context. It would imply that there isn't common ancestory...science tells us that there is so I agree with it. I am not quite sure what Abdu'l Baha meant by that, it is possible that by 'species', he meant something spiritual or allegorical, not scientific...Nevertheless, even given the current theory of evolution, I would disagree that it invalidates the possible existence of God. Of course evolution was not deterministic, humans were not destined to have the exact physical features that they do today. Instead I would argue that it was stochastic, meaning it could have gone in many different ways with a very high probability that some species would develop that had the same spiritual capacities of humans.
This leads me to your other point about the heirarchy of kingdoms. Of course in one sense we are all on the same level, we all branched out and and we have all carved out a particular niche. On the other hand, what other species has the capacity for self reflection, for the capacity of objectivity, for unimaginable horror and unimaginable beauty? Humans have the capacity to express almost any attribute. Can you say that of any other species? Every species has certain spiritual capacities, but do they have them all?
This capacity is the reason Baha'is believe that true human purpose is to grow spiritually and thereby reflect the incredible majesty of the universe. We are uniquely capable of doing this (at least on this planet, you should peruse what Baha'u'llah says about potential life on other planets).
Science can explain human evolution but it cannot explain why. If humans feel lack of purpose in their lives, they become depressed and even suicidal. What makes you think that a universe this expansive and majestic could operate without a higher purpose? What makes you an athiest as opposed to an agnostic? I understand why you are frustrated with religion. We believe not only that there is a God, but that it has made itself known unto humans. That's a big claim. It is equally as big of a claim to say that there is no God at all.
We are both taking leaps of faith in our discussion, so lets keep it going.
Da Bank said...
Alláh'u'Abhá, Atheist, I thought I'd add to the discussion here. I certainly applaud your knowledge and your desire to promote understanding of the wonderful discoveries science has made possible, especially in relation to the distortions that past religious hierarchies have tried to perpetuate (for example the persecution of scientists such as Copernicus and Galileo by the Christian clergy 400 years ago).Regarding your criticisms of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's discussion of evolution, I think it would be helpful for you to read his writings, on many topics, more extensively, so you can be more familiar with the style and vocabulary he uses. Many of the objections you've raised seem to me to be a result of differences between what 'Abdu'l'Bahá meant by a word, writing 100 years ago, and the meaning we give to that word today. For example, you rightly point out that, from a material or scientific viewpoint, organisms (including humans) are not inherently superior or inferior to each other - a worm and a human being are equal in that they are both biological organisms, each having evolved to best adapt to the conditions of the environment in which it lives, as are all organisms. Biologically, worms and humans are both classified as 'animals', where the modern meaning of this term is an organism that is multicellular, and whose cells have mitochondria and lack cell walls. This applies equally to worms and humans. However, at the time 'Abdu'l-Bahá was writing, the term 'animal' was part of an older view of classification, where animals are those organisms that are capable of movement, but do not possess self-awareness or intelligence - they were part of a more limited division of the natural world into mineral (the inorganic), vegetable (organisms not capable of movement), animal (capable of movement), and man (possessing self-awareness and intelligence). In this classification, each division is part of a hierarchy from 'most inferior' (mineral) to 'most superior' (man). This is the meaning of the term 'animal' as used by 'Abdu'l-Bahá when speaking to his audiences 100 years ago, while now, of course, we have a different understanding of the natural world, and a different definition of the term 'animal'. So, to sum up, it would help your argument to reflect upon how those terms and assertions which 'Abdu'l-Bahá makes that you object to were intended for audiences of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and how we understand those terms and assertions today. I look forward to more discussion with you.
January 18, 2009 9:32 AM
rsiegel said...
I appreciate the following thoughtfully-written essay on this topic: http://www.onecountry.org/e193/e19302as_Perspective_Evolution.html
6:15 PM
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Being and Empowerment: Introduction
(This is the rough beginning of what I hope will be the introduction of a long essay spoken about in the essay blog. Most of the research will be documented there but I will be posting chapters and paragraphs here. I would love some feedback on the content and suggestions for other literary sources to be used.)
I have been thinking about the social model of personal and community development envisioned in the Baha'i community. It is becoming more and more apparent that the unity we envision will only come about when each of us take ownership of our potential and responsibility to the process. There will be no passive observers in the transformation.
For many it is challenging to be around large crowds of people. There is an inverse relationship between the number of people at a gathering and the quality of interaction that ensues. At a certain point one can feel completely isolated. In the Baha'i community, there has been a significant shift in the past few years to hold activities in peoples homes instead of a centralized location. These activities are no longer events in which a few perform and the rest spectate. Instead, everything is viewed as a process of building capacity within ourselves and the community. Being a Baha'i means actively working to overcome the divisions which plague our society, not standing in the larger and larger rooms together until the whole world is enclosed.
All too often we have been content with a superficial unity reflected in a type of large group mingling. In the dominance of the crowd the real potential and vulnerabilities of people are neglected, and hence we become passive observers to an evanescent impulse. Thus, as Paulo Freire would conceptualize it, we are like banks in which those who speak eloquently and can dominate a discussion deposit their wisdom as the rest of us save it up. This is how most religion today operates, with the members coming a few times a month to "do the church thing", without reflecting on how it relates to their lives and institutions.
We must realize that we have been given the spiritual tools and the dignity to realize the change within our hearts and to build these new divine institutions with our own hands. A Baha'i study circle stands as a model of engaging people of very different bearings in a singular study of spiritual human potential, while at the same time providing the flexibility of dialogue and independent thought. In each study course, a new practice is introduced which builds capacity for service to the community. By completing the last study course people are trained to bring along others through this process.
Spiritual empowerment requires an understanding of being itself and the process of a self-reflection and spiritualization. As this concept is investigated we can begin to define its relevance in a collective process to create real change in the world. The question of being has been a preoccupation of philosophers and religionists for quite some time. Martin Heidegger devoted his whole philosophical career to exploring this question, while Paulo Freire identified the "humanization" of being as a prerequisite to social transformation. This essay attempts to explore the historical thinking on being and community empowerment and place in a spiritual context using the Baha'i institute process as a model.
I have been thinking about the social model of personal and community development envisioned in the Baha'i community. It is becoming more and more apparent that the unity we envision will only come about when each of us take ownership of our potential and responsibility to the process. There will be no passive observers in the transformation.
For many it is challenging to be around large crowds of people. There is an inverse relationship between the number of people at a gathering and the quality of interaction that ensues. At a certain point one can feel completely isolated. In the Baha'i community, there has been a significant shift in the past few years to hold activities in peoples homes instead of a centralized location. These activities are no longer events in which a few perform and the rest spectate. Instead, everything is viewed as a process of building capacity within ourselves and the community. Being a Baha'i means actively working to overcome the divisions which plague our society, not standing in the larger and larger rooms together until the whole world is enclosed.
All too often we have been content with a superficial unity reflected in a type of large group mingling. In the dominance of the crowd the real potential and vulnerabilities of people are neglected, and hence we become passive observers to an evanescent impulse. Thus, as Paulo Freire would conceptualize it, we are like banks in which those who speak eloquently and can dominate a discussion deposit their wisdom as the rest of us save it up. This is how most religion today operates, with the members coming a few times a month to "do the church thing", without reflecting on how it relates to their lives and institutions.
We must realize that we have been given the spiritual tools and the dignity to realize the change within our hearts and to build these new divine institutions with our own hands. A Baha'i study circle stands as a model of engaging people of very different bearings in a singular study of spiritual human potential, while at the same time providing the flexibility of dialogue and independent thought. In each study course, a new practice is introduced which builds capacity for service to the community. By completing the last study course people are trained to bring along others through this process.
Spiritual empowerment requires an understanding of being itself and the process of a self-reflection and spiritualization. As this concept is investigated we can begin to define its relevance in a collective process to create real change in the world. The question of being has been a preoccupation of philosophers and religionists for quite some time. Martin Heidegger devoted his whole philosophical career to exploring this question, while Paulo Freire identified the "humanization" of being as a prerequisite to social transformation. This essay attempts to explore the historical thinking on being and community empowerment and place in a spiritual context using the Baha'i institute process as a model.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
The Brilliance or Arrogance of Cormac McCarthy
I love the writing of Cormac McCarthy, his use of language is absolutely unmatched. I know he is good enough to deserve creative licence, and this isn't even technically a run-on sentence. But seriously, is the story better served by not having a period for 10 lines or so. The sentence after it makes it even funnier, it's like he's making a joke. He does this sort of stuff all the time, he also writes sentence fragments constantly. I would understand if it was poetry or it made the storytelling better, but it isn't and it doesn't. Maybe I just don't understand this aspect of his profound writing, will some McCarthy devotee please illumine me?
"It came boring out of the east like some ribald satellite of the coming sun howling and bellowing in the distance and the long light of the headlamp running through the tangled mesquite brakes and creating out of the night the endless fenceline down the dead straight right of way and sucking it back again wire and post mile on mile into the darkness after where the boilersmoke disbanded slowly along the faint new horizon and the sound came lagging and he stood still holding his hat in his hands in the passing groundshudder watching it till it was gone. Then he turned and went back to the house."
"It came boring out of the east like some ribald satellite of the coming sun howling and bellowing in the distance and the long light of the headlamp running through the tangled mesquite brakes and creating out of the night the endless fenceline down the dead straight right of way and sucking it back again wire and post mile on mile into the darkness after where the boilersmoke disbanded slowly along the faint new horizon and the sound came lagging and he stood still holding his hat in his hands in the passing groundshudder watching it till it was gone. Then he turned and went back to the house."
Friday, December 26, 2008
Stuff that's happening
I've been thinking about what to write on this blog. There have been a couple of false starts, words have just fallen flat. I am really excited about an ongoing essay project. The scope of it will probably have to be toned down at some point, or else it will never get written. It was going to be collaborative, but that is looking less likely. I feel an intense need to engage in collaborative, creative writing projects with other people. I have tried to initiate things but nothing seems to get off the ground, which is a little bit frustrating. Maybe it is a sign that I need to put more energy in other aspects of my life right now.
Speaking of which, Sjo and I visited some of her family this evening. I had a really nice time, they are all very wonderful people. Here are some photos...
Jimmy and I. Jimmy is one of the most interesting people I have met. He is so good hearted and full of energy. I have to say it took me a while to get used to his personality, but now I love being around him, he makes me happy.
One of the cutest pictures I personally have taken of Sjo
The cousins. Nancy is in the middle, she is awesome. Very inquisitive, open minded, and mindful of things.
Speaking of which, Sjo and I visited some of her family this evening. I had a really nice time, they are all very wonderful people. Here are some photos...
Jimmy and I. Jimmy is one of the most interesting people I have met. He is so good hearted and full of energy. I have to say it took me a while to get used to his personality, but now I love being around him, he makes me happy.
One of the cutest pictures I personally have taken of Sjo
The cousins. Nancy is in the middle, she is awesome. Very inquisitive, open minded, and mindful of things.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Friday, December 05, 2008
A Bikeride
Sjona and I took a bike ride along the Rio Grande today. The last time we rode I had themes of landscape and nostolgia heavy on my mind. Today not so much, just happy to be with the one I love.
Just kidding, here we are below...
Just kidding, here we are below...
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Cycle 6, part 4
As we spoke on the phone he sounded nervous but very friendly. His name was Jim and he was enthusiastic about getting his three year old daughter into a children class. As I met them in the apartment lobby, his daughter had a huge smile on her face. She acted shy when I greeted her but approached me soon after with a hug.
As I presented the Faith, his daughter stammered for attention, one second doing something cute and getting a laugh, the next second hitting her dad for averting his eyes. While it was tough for both of us to maintain concentration, he was incredibly patient with her....
"So what is it that has drawn you to the Baha'i Faith?"
"You know we all come from a different place, and mainly that it seems that the Baha'i's to want to include everybody, of different colors, tall, short, skinny and not..."
"...Do you believe Baha'u'llah is the manifestation of God for today, would you like to be part of the Baha'i community?"
"Yeah, I do believe this, I think the Baha'i Faith is just what I have been looking for."
"Well that's great, welcome, we would love for you to join us.
"Yeah, you know I have been wanting to get involved with a religious community, and I have really been wanting to get Emily involved with some sort of children's activities..."
It is always kind of shocking to me that people can accept a religious faith based on such a simple, yet potent concept of unity. In a couple of situations now I have wanted to question them deeper, make sure they know what they are getting into. I don't know if I am projecting my own lingering sense of doubt onto them. In this case Jim was sure, he just KNEW. now that I think about it, I always knew intuitively that this was the truth. I went through an intense period of questioning, one in which I could barely function, but I always KNEW.
A few days later I called him to see how the first devotional gathering went. Apparently his daughter didn't want to leave, I could tell that this made him very happy.
It is obvious that he is devoted to her upbringing. It is not easy, she is very hyperactive and he is a single father.
As I sat across from him at the first Baha'i Feast, I couldn't concentrate on the prayers, I knew that she was getting fidgety and he was getting anxious. I anxiously hoped that he wouldn't feel embarrassed. Other kids were walking and climbing around, so I hoped that set his mind at ease. Finally the children's table opened up and she ran over along with about 10 other kids. As she worked on her butterfly, her dad watched with approving eyes. She kept running back to show her dad the art, relate to him her excitement, and then get back to the table where the fun was.
As I presented the Faith, his daughter stammered for attention, one second doing something cute and getting a laugh, the next second hitting her dad for averting his eyes. While it was tough for both of us to maintain concentration, he was incredibly patient with her....
"So what is it that has drawn you to the Baha'i Faith?"
"You know we all come from a different place, and mainly that it seems that the Baha'i's to want to include everybody, of different colors, tall, short, skinny and not..."
"...Do you believe Baha'u'llah is the manifestation of God for today, would you like to be part of the Baha'i community?"
"Yeah, I do believe this, I think the Baha'i Faith is just what I have been looking for."
"Well that's great, welcome, we would love for you to join us.
"Yeah, you know I have been wanting to get involved with a religious community, and I have really been wanting to get Emily involved with some sort of children's activities..."
It is always kind of shocking to me that people can accept a religious faith based on such a simple, yet potent concept of unity. In a couple of situations now I have wanted to question them deeper, make sure they know what they are getting into. I don't know if I am projecting my own lingering sense of doubt onto them. In this case Jim was sure, he just KNEW. now that I think about it, I always knew intuitively that this was the truth. I went through an intense period of questioning, one in which I could barely function, but I always KNEW.
A few days later I called him to see how the first devotional gathering went. Apparently his daughter didn't want to leave, I could tell that this made him very happy.
It is obvious that he is devoted to her upbringing. It is not easy, she is very hyperactive and he is a single father.
As I sat across from him at the first Baha'i Feast, I couldn't concentrate on the prayers, I knew that she was getting fidgety and he was getting anxious. I anxiously hoped that he wouldn't feel embarrassed. Other kids were walking and climbing around, so I hoped that set his mind at ease. Finally the children's table opened up and she ran over along with about 10 other kids. As she worked on her butterfly, her dad watched with approving eyes. She kept running back to show her dad the art, relate to him her excitement, and then get back to the table where the fun was.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Window in Time
The old windows drip. Surrounding me on three sides, I lay still in the moonlight a reflection of my waking self.
The bedroom was slapped onto the side of the house to raise it's market value. There is not much privacy, for them either.
The rain is relentless tonight. Once barking proud dogs, they now lay cowed in the street-lit shed. I wake many times in and out of various lives of questionable form and meaning.
For a moment I am the same as I was staring through that window. In what could be a memory, or could have been a dream, shadows of women are storing herbs and grains in large jars which slowly dissolve into the cupboard. They only emerge during sunset when the dusk intrudes on both sources of light.
I am the same as I was basking in the ray of light coming through the large sliding glass door. I am sharing the warm spot with Sambi, our black Labrador Retriever. Her name had been Sambo until my mom was told that it had a negative racial connotation. I was once envious of her four-legged life. I needed to understand her secret, take in the subtle exhilarants waiting beyond the backyard fence near the abandoned buildings and warehouse alleyways. Maybe dig a hole in the backyard and relish the cool earth on a hot day.
Vines hang down from the ceiling. Little plants are being raised in tofu containers and the water is draining through the punched holes. The electric light is a surrogate father until they peek through the window and delve into the universal soil of their kin.
The bedroom was slapped onto the side of the house to raise it's market value. There is not much privacy, for them either.
The rain is relentless tonight. Once barking proud dogs, they now lay cowed in the street-lit shed. I wake many times in and out of various lives of questionable form and meaning.
For a moment I am the same as I was staring through that window. In what could be a memory, or could have been a dream, shadows of women are storing herbs and grains in large jars which slowly dissolve into the cupboard. They only emerge during sunset when the dusk intrudes on both sources of light.
I am the same as I was basking in the ray of light coming through the large sliding glass door. I am sharing the warm spot with Sambi, our black Labrador Retriever. Her name had been Sambo until my mom was told that it had a negative racial connotation. I was once envious of her four-legged life. I needed to understand her secret, take in the subtle exhilarants waiting beyond the backyard fence near the abandoned buildings and warehouse alleyways. Maybe dig a hole in the backyard and relish the cool earth on a hot day.
Vines hang down from the ceiling. Little plants are being raised in tofu containers and the water is draining through the punched holes. The electric light is a surrogate father until they peek through the window and delve into the universal soil of their kin.
Friday, October 17, 2008
An Inspiring Way to Raise a Child
For a couple of years now I have been admiring how Aria and James are raising Sasha, and appreciating that they are documenting the whole thing. I know Aria is getting into education, I think she already has an outstanding resume.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Why He Blogs
"For centuries, writers have experimented with forms that evoke the imperfection of thought, the inconstancy of human affairs, and the chastening passage of time. But as blogging evolves as a literary form, it is generating a new and quintessentially postmodern idiom that’s enabling writers to express themselves in ways that have never been seen or understood before. Its truths are provisional, and its ethos collective and messy. Yet the interaction it enables between writer and reader is unprecedented, visceral, and sometimes brutal. And make no mistake: it heralds a golden era for journalism."
Check out this great article by Andrew Sullivan on blogging
Check out this great article by Andrew Sullivan on blogging
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Cycle 6, Part 3
Looking up at the clock, it was 5:20pm and we still had a work meeting to attend to. Mary and I were sitting in the secure room waiting anxiously to get out so that we could meet Camilla at 6pm. I had called her the night before.
"Hello, is Camilla there?"
"And who is this?"
"O, uh, my name is Jason, I am from the Baha'i community here in Albuquerque, I was made aware that you were interested in learning more about the Baha'i Faith."
"Yes, yes, I would like to join your church"
Wow, okay, lets make sure she knows what she's getting into
"Oh, okay, well would you like to meet up sometime so that we could talk about it?"
"So how long have you been in this church?"
"For about 10 years, yeah my mom was a Baha'i and after some investigation I found it to be the truth for myself. How did you get interested in the faith?"
"I met some Baha'is who have an art shop on the plaza, I was very impressed by how helpful they were to each other. I used to be a Mormon, but now I would like to join your church."
"Okay, can we meet up and discuss this further?"
The directions she gave me to her house were incredibly descriptive, and she spoke in a slow and deliberate manner, a style very different than my own. I am not always very good at recalling details on the spot, which makes me a horrible verbal storyteller. I really, really wanted to say, 'just give me an address, I will look it up online." But I waited...
We rushed over and were greeted into her house. My initial read of her seemed to be correct. Her energy was very grounded, she was a little shy but beauty and understanding reflected from her eyes. There was opera music in the background, which complemented the many paintings that hung in her house. Silence filled in the gap as we sat down and she sat there looking back at us, waiting for us to make a pitch.
"So if you are interested we brought this presentation, maybe we can go through it and see what you think."
"Okay, whatever you like."
As I presented, I couldn't help but notice that she she was respectfully waiting for this social formality to pass over.
"Do you believe that Baha'u'llah is a manifestation of God?"
"Everybody is a manifestation of God"
"Yeah, that's true, um, though Baha'u'llah is making a big claim here, He is saying that he is the promised one of all ages, foretold in the books of the past. Do believe that he is telling the truth?"
She paused for the briefest moment before saying:
"yeah, I believe that."
Time when on, she spoke of meeting a friend for lunch. While in conversation she had told her friend about meeting with the Baha'is in the evening, to which her friend responded:
"I'm a Baha'i, I just declared two weeks ago!
Throughout the presentation her phone had been ringing off the hook. Partway through the presentation she decided to answer it. Another friend also wanted to know about the Faith. She showed up at 6:50pm.
"So what is the Baha'i Faith?"
"Well the main theme of the Baha'i Faith...you know what, do you mind if I use this presentation, it kind of helps me keep my thoughts in order."
"Okay, but in five minutes is the vice presidential debate."
I presented for five minutes while Mary started Ruhi book 1 with Camille. We made plans to visit again the following week.
Thinking partly in jest, this is an example of how politics distracts us from what is really important. I was awed by what had just taken place, but I also wanted to watch the debate.
"Hello, is Camilla there?"
"And who is this?"
"O, uh, my name is Jason, I am from the Baha'i community here in Albuquerque, I was made aware that you were interested in learning more about the Baha'i Faith."
"Yes, yes, I would like to join your church"
Wow, okay, lets make sure she knows what she's getting into
"Oh, okay, well would you like to meet up sometime so that we could talk about it?"
"So how long have you been in this church?"
"For about 10 years, yeah my mom was a Baha'i and after some investigation I found it to be the truth for myself. How did you get interested in the faith?"
"I met some Baha'is who have an art shop on the plaza, I was very impressed by how helpful they were to each other. I used to be a Mormon, but now I would like to join your church."
"Okay, can we meet up and discuss this further?"
The directions she gave me to her house were incredibly descriptive, and she spoke in a slow and deliberate manner, a style very different than my own. I am not always very good at recalling details on the spot, which makes me a horrible verbal storyteller. I really, really wanted to say, 'just give me an address, I will look it up online." But I waited...
We rushed over and were greeted into her house. My initial read of her seemed to be correct. Her energy was very grounded, she was a little shy but beauty and understanding reflected from her eyes. There was opera music in the background, which complemented the many paintings that hung in her house. Silence filled in the gap as we sat down and she sat there looking back at us, waiting for us to make a pitch.
"So if you are interested we brought this presentation, maybe we can go through it and see what you think."
"Okay, whatever you like."
As I presented, I couldn't help but notice that she she was respectfully waiting for this social formality to pass over.
"Do you believe that Baha'u'llah is a manifestation of God?"
"Everybody is a manifestation of God"
"Yeah, that's true, um, though Baha'u'llah is making a big claim here, He is saying that he is the promised one of all ages, foretold in the books of the past. Do believe that he is telling the truth?"
She paused for the briefest moment before saying:
"yeah, I believe that."
Time when on, she spoke of meeting a friend for lunch. While in conversation she had told her friend about meeting with the Baha'is in the evening, to which her friend responded:
"I'm a Baha'i, I just declared two weeks ago!
Throughout the presentation her phone had been ringing off the hook. Partway through the presentation she decided to answer it. Another friend also wanted to know about the Faith. She showed up at 6:50pm.
"So what is the Baha'i Faith?"
"Well the main theme of the Baha'i Faith...you know what, do you mind if I use this presentation, it kind of helps me keep my thoughts in order."
"Okay, but in five minutes is the vice presidential debate."
I presented for five minutes while Mary started Ruhi book 1 with Camille. We made plans to visit again the following week.
Thinking partly in jest, this is an example of how politics distracts us from what is really important. I was awed by what had just taken place, but I also wanted to watch the debate.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Cycle 6, Part 2
The doorway had one of those "no smoking, oxygen in use" signs. About a minute passed and we were on our way out when a very old lady with a flower dress opened the door and told us to come in. Her name was Virginia and she was sitting on the couch gazing indifferently. She was hard of hearing but sharp as a nail. I did my best to accommodate her train of thought and ask her permission to continue with each part of the presentation. I felt like a respectful grandson. Looking on the wall, she had several pictures of kids. "Are those your grandchildren?" I asked. "Great-grandchildren", she proudly replied. While she was white her great grandchildren were of all different racial backgrounds. I couldn't help but be awed that somebody of her generation could be proud of such diversity in her family.
"Do you see the light of God in these words?" "Of course". "So what do you think, do you think that Baha'u'llah is the manifestation of God for this day?" "Well, yeah I do."
"Do your family members visit you often?" "No, they don't really come by".
I feel that one of the devastating consequences of modern transportation is that families are scattered. I find it hard to believe that somebody with dozens of grandchildren and great-grandchildren has to spend many of her final hours alone.
This has also helped me realize the value of this type of teaching. In the past we would hold big events and hope that people would be attracted to us. People would come, but only those who were actively discontent with their current spiritual resources and had the means to do something about it. Somebody like Virginia, with her immobility and everyday struggles would have never knocked down our doors. We knocked on her door and her heart was ready. She will probably never see the Baha'i center, but she will be every part of the community, with people to visit and care about her.
Teaching does not precede community development; they are inextricable. Now we have the tools to manifest the principles that we always believed were latent, even outside the walls of our Baha'i center.
"Do you see the light of God in these words?" "Of course". "So what do you think, do you think that Baha'u'llah is the manifestation of God for this day?" "Well, yeah I do."
"Do your family members visit you often?" "No, they don't really come by".
I feel that one of the devastating consequences of modern transportation is that families are scattered. I find it hard to believe that somebody with dozens of grandchildren and great-grandchildren has to spend many of her final hours alone.
This has also helped me realize the value of this type of teaching. In the past we would hold big events and hope that people would be attracted to us. People would come, but only those who were actively discontent with their current spiritual resources and had the means to do something about it. Somebody like Virginia, with her immobility and everyday struggles would have never knocked down our doors. We knocked on her door and her heart was ready. She will probably never see the Baha'i center, but she will be every part of the community, with people to visit and care about her.
Teaching does not precede community development; they are inextricable. Now we have the tools to manifest the principles that we always believed were latent, even outside the walls of our Baha'i center.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Cycle 6, Part 1
I missed the last expansion phase so when I first arrived in the Baha'i Center holding five hours of sleep and a large coffee-extra shot in hand, it still had not occured to me that in a few hours I would be standing in a doorway on my third sentence still not calm enough to take a breath. She listened carefully and then politely answered "no" to my question, "Do you see the light of God in these words". After about an hour of "I'm busy", or "I'm not home even though the music is on" (Which is a strategy I must admit I have use many times to avoid proselytizers), a young lady answered the door. "These quotes are beautiful", she said after about the 3rd page of Anna's Presentation. A few minutes later she acknowledged what her soul had surely recognized from the start, that Baha'u'llah is the manifestation God for this age. A conversation started about her family, how her and her husband were looking for a church, and how much she missed her three kids who had been taken away. At this point she couldn't keep the composure that is afforded to those who can take their loved ones for granted. Francis, one of my teaching partners, immediately found her gaze and with hands locked recited a healing prayer:
"They Name is my healing, O my God, and remembrance of Thee is my remedy. Nearness to Thee is my hope, and love for Thee is my companion. They mercy to me is my healing and my succor in both this world and the world to come, Thou, verily, art the All-Bountiful, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise." -Baha'u'llah
In tears she took a prayer book, which we would find out two days later from her husband had been used fervantly in prayer. He was getting ready to be re-deployed. With courteous manners and hard eyes, he was not yet ready to recieve God in his heart again. He did see her however, and her eyes were open.
"They Name is my healing, O my God, and remembrance of Thee is my remedy. Nearness to Thee is my hope, and love for Thee is my companion. They mercy to me is my healing and my succor in both this world and the world to come, Thou, verily, art the All-Bountiful, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise." -Baha'u'llah
In tears she took a prayer book, which we would find out two days later from her husband had been used fervantly in prayer. He was getting ready to be re-deployed. With courteous manners and hard eyes, he was not yet ready to recieve God in his heart again. He did see her however, and her eyes were open.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)