Originally posted by shunyadragon
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Divine revelation
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostDoes he do that on purpose? Or is he just "not all there"?
Comment
-
Originally posted by OingoBoingo View PostI don't know. There are a lot of signs that point in that direction. In a recent thread with robrecht about Star Trek and his own personal sci-fi writings he was completely incapable of seeing that a post he wrote was obviously contradictory. It took like a couple pages of robrecht repeating his own words back to him again and again (with quotation marks and everything) before it finally clicked in his head, and he realized that he forgot a word or something that totally changed his original meaning. I mean, that's a small example of larger issues, but it gets the idea across. Something ain't right about that boy.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
being physically evolved from the animal kingdomOriginally posted by OingoBoingo View PostExplain then how the current Baha'i beliefs about homosexuality, that homosexuality is aberrant, and requires treatment, is interpreted in the light of the evolving knowledge of science. This should be good. While you're at it, explain to us all why females are not eligible for election to the Universal House of Justice if the Baha'i faith is a bastion of social and legal equality of women. These issues really sound like the workings of a religion that has, as you say, clung "to ancient paradigms with little or no relevance to today' knowledge of the world we live in today."
(1) Whether women are allowed to be elected to the Universal House of Justice is not an issue of Science. It is a spiritual law. Even the social and legal equality endorsed by the Baha'i faith is not an issue resolved by science. Science has not determined males and females are socially equal.
(2) The Baha'i view of homosexuality is changing based on science, but the spiritual law will remain that homosexual marriage and homosexual acts will most likely remain unchanged. The spiritual Laws of behavior are not always dependent on whether the behavior is a natural behavior according to science, nor whether it is treatable according to science. It is most likely that many forms of deviant sexual behavior such as forms of pedophilia and rapists may not be found to be treatable conditions. Treatability by science is not a criteria for whether something is moral and ethical or not. The Baha'i Faith does not oppose secular laws giving equal rights to marriage, and supports equal treatment of homosexuals and transgender people under secular law. .Just because certain behaviors are found to be natural behaviors according to science does justify considering them spiritually moral and ethical. This line of reasoning that natural behavior according to science should be considered moral and ethical can lead to justify a great deal of immoral behavior.
(3) The Baha'i Faith view of physical evolution is to accept the scientific knowledge of evolution, regardless of scripture. Spiritually the Baha'i Faith considers humanity a unique spiritual kingdom separate from the animal kingdom, but accepts humanity as evolved from the animal kingdom. The Baha'i teachings describe the evolution of humanity the intent of God regardless of the forms humanity evolved through to become human. This belief in the intent of God in evolution was to counter the growing conclusion by many that humanity was the result of random processes.
(4) Many spiritual laws of the Baha'i Faith are unique not found in other religions of the past and fast becoming the standard of the modern world such as the mandatory education of all children, male and female.Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-25-2014, 02:57 PM.
Comment
-
A couple of corrections still needed:
"Just because certain behaviors are found to be natural behaviors according to science does [not] justify considering them spiritually moral and ethical. ...
(3) The Baha'i Faith view of physical evolution is to accept the scientific knowledge of evolution, regardless of scripture. Spiritually the Baha'i Faith considers humanity a unique spiritual kingdom separate from the animal kingdom, but accepts humanity as [what?]."Last edited by robrecht; 06-25-2014, 03:02 PM.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostWhat makes you think you understood Darth Executor's claim any better than your initial misunderstanding of Jedidiah, who was speaking of accepting Scripture as divine revelation?
speaking in tongues in some churches is considered a 'personal direct communication' with God as Divine Revelation.'
The LDS has their own version.
There are numerous more examples I can cite. The problem remains with so many getting different versions of direct communication 'Divine Revelation' is true. I think it is a worthwhile issue that needs further clarification.Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-25-2014, 03:17 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe statements I quoted did not indicate this. I simply understood them as cited. If they wish to further explain their view then they are welcome. By the way many Christians do believe in personal communication and Divine 'personal' Revelation from God, ie talking to God personally, therefore the misunderstanding is possible.
speaking in tongues in some churches is considered a 'personal direct communication' with God as Divine Revelation.'
The LDS has their own version.
I think it is a worthwhile issue that needs further clarification.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostOne or more posters considered Christians talking to God as 'Divine Revelation.' At least one stated that if a Christian did not believe they talked with God, then they were not a Christian.Originally posted by Jedidiah View PostI seem to have missed this claim. Who made it and where?
Fact is I routinely talk to God. This is normally called prayer. It is not divine revelation. It is not any sort of revelation since God is already aware of everything I talk to Him about.Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostYou have a hostile combative view of the Baha'i Faith, and you have ignored my posts in the past explaining these issues. It is a problem continuing any dialogue with you, but the following points may help, but I doubt it.
(1) Whether women are allowed to be elected to the Universal House of Justice is not an issue of Science. It is a spiritual law. Even the social and legal equality endorsed by the Baha'i faith is not an issue resolved by science. Science has not determined males and females are socially equal.
(2) The Baha'i view of homosexuality is changing based on science, but the spiritual law will remain that homosexual marriage and homo sexual acts will remain unchanged. The spiritual Laws of behavior are not dependent on whether the behavior is a natural behavior according to science. The Baha'i Faith does not oppose secular laws giving equal rights to marriage, and supports equal treatment of homosexuals and transgender people under secular law. .Just because certain behaviors are found to be natural behaviors according to science does justify considering them spiritually moral and ethical. This line of reasoning that natural behavior according to science should be considered moral and ethical can lead to justify a great deal of immoral behavior.
(3) The Baha'i Faith view of evolution is to accept the scientific knowledge of evolution, regardless of scripture. Spiritually the Baha'i Faith considers humanity a unique spiritual kingdom separate from the animal kingdom, but accepts humanity as. The Baha'i teachings describe the evolution of humanity the intent of God regardless of the forms humanity evolved through to become human. This belief in the intent of God in evolution was to counter the growing conclusion that humanity was the result of random processes.
(4) Many spiritual laws of the Baha'i Faith are unique not found in other religions of the past and fast becoming the standard of the modern world such as the mandatory education of all children, male and female.
(1) Men and women aren't equal according to science? That's your best excuse for why, on one hand, you can state that the Baha'i faith is a bastion of "social and legal equality [for] women", while acknowledging that women are not permitted to be leaders in your faith? Do the social sciences not count as science in the Baha'i faith when it comes to equality? Are you saying that the Baha'i faith could hypothetically create a restriction on black members in leadership like the Mormons did, and that would be A-OK because black equality is not established by science?
(2) Basically what you're saying is that the Baha'i view is something like "hate the sin, but not the sinner", right? Boy that sounds familiar. The Baha'i faith's position that homosexuality is "an aberration" and an "affliction" that should be "subject to treatment" is "relevant to today's knowledge of the world we live in?" Really?
(3) If the Baha'i view is to accept scientific knowledge regardless of what scripture says, then I don't see how that's any different from any Jewish or Christian non-literalist who holds the same view in their religion. Instead of bitching and complaining every chance you can get that other religions are not as good as yours for being old fashioned and out of date, you should keep in mind all of those religionists who have no issue accepting the current scientific consensus regardless of a literalist reading of their scriptures.
And no, the Baha'i view is notthink that one species evolves into another species. For example, that the animal evolved until it became a human being. But the prophets teach that this theory is erroneousLast edited by OingoBoingo; 06-25-2014, 03:49 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by OingoBoingo View PostYou've never explained the issue of female inequality and treatment of homosexuality in the Baha'i faith. At least, not in any thread I've ever been a member of.
Most of the above is unintelligible, but basically what we can take away from the parts that are, is that, as long as you label something a "spiritual law" any religious belief is just dandy.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNo intellible response nor meaningful dialogue. This is my last effort.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostObviously there's some history of animosity between the two of you, but I thought his response was intelligible and meaningful. If you'd rather explain it to me via PM, I would be open to hearing your understanding and critique of his points.
It was meaningless, and he failed to respond.
Actually no, not necessary. Yes, there is a history of his hostility toward the Baha'i Faith. He has failed to comprehend the concept of evolving knowledge in the Baha'i Faith and the relationship with science. If you have any meaningful comments please reveal them.
If you choose to respond, be specific and do not use the OingoBoingo shotgun.Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-25-2014, 10:00 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostActually no, not necessary. Yes, there is a history of his hostility toward the Baha'i Faith. He has failed to comprehend the concept of evolving knowledge in the Baha'i Faith and the relationship with science. If you have any meaningful comments please reveal them.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNo intellible response nor meaningful dialogue. This is my last effort.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostIt was meaningless, and he failed to respond.
Actually no, not necessary. Yes, there is a history of his hostility toward the Baha'i Faith. He has failed to comprehend the concept of evolving knowledge in the Baha'i Faith and the relationship with science. If you have any meaningful comments please reveal them.
NORMWhen the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-22-2024, 06:28 PM
|
17 responses
104 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
04-23-2024, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
70 responses
399 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-26-2024, 05:47 AM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
169 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
276 responses
1,245 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 05:49 AM | ||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-04-2024, 05:06 AM
|
210 responses
1,023 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 05:15 AM |
Comment