| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
compx2
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:57 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
 |
|
Hi Doug, I have always loved that quote. However, when most Baha'is
read it they see one thing whereas everyone else sees something
different.
Who is the "Dayspring" of God's Revelation and the "Fountain" of His
laws Who represents the "Godhead" in the worlds of religion and
creation? Well, Baha'is say that must be Baha'u'llah, of course. But
if you ask anyone else you will get different answers. According to
the teachings of the Baha'i Faith everyone, not just Baha'is, are
commanded to independently investigate this issue, and every other.
As members of a religion that values that investigation it is up to us
to accept the answers others find.
Surely we won't argue that you should investigate independently, but
only if you are going to find OUR answer.
As an aside, let me mention that the principle of Independent
Investigation is a universal principle like the Elimination of
Prejudice, Universal Auxiliary Language, and Compulsory Education.
These principles are not just binding on Baha'is, but the whole world
must accept them, as we see in their progression over the decades, but
as Baha'is we need to accept them as a good thing, even when they
happen without mentioning God or Baha'u'llah.
So if someone says that Jesus is the Dayspring there is no reason for
any of us to say that person has not, like Baha'is, "attained unto all
good." That person, like us, has independently investigated and found
the answer according to our teachings. Not sure how a Muslim would
answer the question, but perhaps only Muhammad could be such a
Fountain, Dayspring and Godhead. The point to my thinking is whether
or not the Muslim would investigate, would accept the premise that
this is how to attain "unto all good", but if so that Muslim is on the
very same path as every Baha'i.
The issue in my mind is after accepting that path (to find the
Godhead), acquiring the inspiration from that Fountain, Dayspring and
Godhead, do we recognize that He commands us to be generous, thankful,
worthy, friendly, to be noble and as a jewel on the diadem of wisdom?
That if we do not follow these commands, but we pray every day, are we
doing our parts of His covenants with us? Do we expect to receive His
confirmations if we strive to follow the letter of the law but not the
Spirit?
Let me repeat what I said that seems to be so controversial.
"Inspiration is part of the answer, the rest is deeds and works.
Wherever we get the inspiration, God, society, poetry, philosophy,
life... It is all God." And "whether or not a person accepts the
Baha'i Faith, or any faith, religion, creed or philosophy, it is that
person's deeds and intentions over a lifetime that will attract the
confirmations God has promised, both here and hereafter."
If it takes me a while to get back to you we can blame this moderation
software which doesn't appear to work very well.
--Kent
On Sep 16, 4:47 pm, Douglas McAdam <douglasmca...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
| Quote: | Dear friend-
This quote has always come to mind when I read about how anyone can
accept principles but they also need more.
"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition
of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His
laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause
and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained
unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, though
he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth every one who
reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent glory,
to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the world.
These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable without the
other." (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 16)
regards,
doug
On Sep 16, 2008, at 9:06 AM, mikera...@yahoo.com wrote:
Again, I couldn't disagree more.
Your position is tantamount to stating that since alot of kids will
figure out basic math on their own being driven by financial needs, we
shouldn't care whether or not they are taught it in school. Then you
sit back and wonder why our economy is going south?
Not all Baha'is are perfect, but on a percentage basis, a few do
arise from any given population to become good Baha'is and the rest
tend to follow. Given this understanding, it should be appreciated
that while many people or churches will come to accept Baha'i
principles on their own, without ever having heard of the Baha'i
faith, it still represents a shortage in the need for society at
large. These inspired individuals or groups are not serving humanity's
needs in a sufficiently organized manner.
Important to God's great Purpose are not the words we speak or >the
groups to which we have enrolled.
Who could argue that God's purpose will transpire regardless, that's
not the point. It's about how much we will suffer and lose along the
way. And to that end, we should worry.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Romane
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:28 pm Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Good morning Doug
Both yes and no (Romane grins). Unfortunately, there is only a small
space that can be utilised here, while the topic itself could have a
hefty volume written. So can only minimally give here any form of answer.
Baha'u'llah unequivocally states that we are to draw no distinction
between any of the Manifestations :
"Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any
distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to
discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed
their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if ye
be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured,
moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these
Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoever
they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a
reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possible
difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their
acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His
signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers." (Gleanings from the
Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 59)
The Bab, however, demonstrates conclusively the progressive nature of
God's Revelation, starting on page 105, through to page 108 of
"Selections from the Writings of the Bab", to which I strongly refer
you. He speaks of the fruits of the previous Dispensations being
gathered. I will quote just one small part of it :
"It is clear and evident that the object of all preceding Dispensations
hath been to pave the way for the advent of Muhammad, the Apostle of
God. These, including the Muhammadan Dispensation, have had, in their
turn, as their objective the Revelation proclaimed by the Qá'im. The
purpose underlying this Revelation, as well as those that preceded it,
has, in like manner, been to announce the advent of the Faith of Him
Whom God will make manifest. And this Faith -- the Faith of Him Whom God
will make manifest -- in its turn, together with all the Revelations
gone before it, have as their object the Manifestation destined to
succeed it. And the latter, no less than all the Revelations preceding
it, prepare the way for the Revelation which is yet to follow."
(Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 105)
But as regards recognition of the Revelation brought by the Blessed
Beauty, we have Baha'u'llah saying :
"Know thou that he is truly learned who hath acknowledged My Revelation,
and drunk from the Ocean of My knowledge, and soared in the atmosphere
of My love, and cast away all else besides Me, and taken firm hold on
that which hath been sent down from the Kingdom of My wondrous
utterance." (Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 82)
Or that well-known statement from the "Tablet of Ahmad" - "..., he who
turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers of
the past..."
But the argument would be incomplete if some of the consequences were
not mentioned. An intimation, very brief, is given, I believe, on page
80 of the Kitab-i-Iqan, where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus been
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance.".
My warmest greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
| Quote: | Dear Romane-
I'm wondering how this is to be applied. For example if a person is
earnestly seeks the Truth and finds the object of his longing in
accepting Jesus or Muhammad say and then strives to be steadfast in
obedience has he been obedient to this command?
My belief is that the Bab, Baha'u'llah, or the Master, when using the
terms such as "Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation", or
"Godhead", or the "Desire of the World" and others means Baha'u'llah,
the Glory of God. Afterall the Baha'i Writings inform us that the
Prophets or Manifestations are One but appear to us in a different huma
n
body from time to time and bring us new laws to live by in order to
advance civilization.
My understanding is that if a person is a believer in God and accept Hi
s
Manifestation and then steadfastly strives to obey His command then
that soul will more readily recognize the Return when the Manifestation
reappears to bring us new knowledge.
However I seem to recall something, I think by the Hand of the Cause,
saying that many Babis did not come forward because of their attachment
to the love of the Bab.
regards,
doug
On Sep 16, 2008, at 9:29 PM, Romane wrote:
Good morning
A statement re-iterated in many places in the Sacred Words of the Bab
and of Baha'u'llah. As an example :
"The supreme cause for creating the world and all that is therein is
for man to know God. In this Day whosoever is guided by the fragrance
of the raiment of His mercy to gain admittance into the pristine
Abode, which is the station of recognizing the Source of divine
commandments and the Dayspring of His Revelation, hath everlastingly
attained unto all good. Having reached this lofty station a twofold
obligation resteth upon every soul. One is to be steadfast in the
Cause with such steadfastness that were all the peoples of the world
to attempt to prevent him from turning to the Source of Revelation,
they would be powerless to do so. The other is observance of the
divine ordinances which have streamed forth from the wellspring of His
heavenly-propelled Pen. For man's knowledge of God cannot develop
fully and adequately save by observing whatsoever hath been ordained
by Him and is set forth in His heavenly Book." (Tablets of
Baha'u'llah, p. 268)
With warm greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear friend-
This quote has always come to mind when I read about how anyone can
accept principles but they also need more.
"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition
of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His
laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause
and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained
unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, though
he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth every one who
reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent
glory, to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the
world. These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable
without the other." (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 16)
regards,
doug
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
compx2
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:33 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Hi Romane,
The heart of this discussion is in your end quote:
| Quote: | "...where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus been
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance
|
We all know the wonders of His utterance, but let's talk about grace.
These Christians have deprived themselves of something other than the
Baha'i Writings, right? They are deprived of what Baha'u'llah calls,
in this quote: "the outpourings of God's holy grace." Can you give an
example of that grace?
I wonder if you know my answer to the question. I don't believe grace
is a metaphysical intangible, but rather a character trait. The
largest measure of God's grace is manifest in the grace of His
followers.
1. Seemingly effortless beauty or charm of movement, form, or
proportion.
2. A characteristic or quality pleasing for its charm or refinement.
3. A sense of fitness or propriety.
4. a. A disposition to be generous or helpful; goodwill. b. Mercy;
clemency.
Perhaps at this point you can guess how I believe one acquired grace:
a lifetime of deeds inspired by God, however we have discovered or
named Him.
--Kent
On Sep 18, 7:28 am, Romane <rom...@miscellanie.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Good morning Doug
Both yes and no (Romane grins). Unfortunately, there is only a small
space that can be utilised here, while the topic itself could have a
hefty volume written. So can only minimally give here any form of answer.
Baha'u'llah unequivocally states that we are to draw no distinction
between any of the Manifestations :
"Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any
distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to
discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed
their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if ye
be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured,
moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these
Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoever
they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a
reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possible
difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their
acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His
signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers." (Gleanings from the
Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 59)
The Bab, however, demonstrates conclusively the progressive nature of
God's Revelation, starting on page 105, through to page 108 of
"Selections from the Writings of the Bab", to which I strongly refer
you. He speaks of the fruits of the previous Dispensations being
gathered. I will quote just one small part of it :
"It is clear and evident that the object of all preceding Dispensations
hath been to pave the way for the advent of Muhammad, the Apostle of
God. These, including the Muhammadan Dispensation, have had, in their
turn, as their objective the Revelation proclaimed by the Qá'im. The
purpose underlying this Revelation, as well as those that preceded it,
has, in like manner, been to announce the advent of the Faith of Him
Whom God will make manifest. And this Faith -- the Faith of Him Whom God
will make manifest -- in its turn, together with all the Revelations
gone before it, have as their object the Manifestation destined to
succeed it. And the latter, no less than all the Revelations preceding
it, prepare the way for the Revelation which is yet to follow."
(Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 105)
But as regards recognition of the Revelation brought by the Blessed
Beauty, we have Baha'u'llah saying :
"Know thou that he is truly learned who hath acknowledged My Revelation,
and drunk from the Ocean of My knowledge, and soared in the atmosphere
of My love, and cast away all else besides Me, and taken firm hold on
that which hath been sent down from the Kingdom of My wondrous
utterance." (Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 82)
Or that well-known statement from the "Tablet of Ahmad" - "..., he who
turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers of
the past..."
But the argument would be incomplete if some of the consequences were
not mentioned. An intimation, very brief, is given, I believe, on page
80 of the Kitab-i-Iqan, where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus been
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance.".
My warmest greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear Romane-
I'm wondering how this is to be applied. For example if a person is
earnestly seeks the Truth and finds the object of his longing in
accepting Jesus or Muhammad say and then strives to be steadfast in
obedience has he been obedient to this command?
My belief is that the Bab, Baha'u'llah, or the Master, when using the
terms such as "Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation", or
"Godhead", or the "Desire of the World" and others means Baha'u'llah,
the Glory of God. Afterall the Baha'i Writings inform us that the
Prophets or Manifestations are One but appear to us in a different huma
n
body from time to time and bring us new laws to live by in order to
advance civilization.
My understanding is that if a person is a believer in God and accept Hi
s
Manifestation and then steadfastly strives to obey His command then
that soul will more readily recognize the Return when the Manifestation
reappears to bring us new knowledge.
However I seem to recall something, I think by the Hand of the Cause,
saying that many Babis did not come forward because of their attachment
to the love of the Bab.
regards,
doug
On Sep 16, 2008, at 9:29 PM, Romane wrote:
Good morning
A statement re-iterated in many places in the Sacred Words of the Bab
and of Baha'u'llah. As an example :
"The supreme cause for creating the world and all that is therein is
for man to know God. In this Day whosoever is guided by the fragrance
of the raiment of His mercy to gain admittance into the pristine
Abode, which is the station of recognizing the Source of divine
commandments and the Dayspring of His Revelation, hath everlastingly
attained unto all good. Having reached this lofty station a twofold
obligation resteth upon every soul. One is to be steadfast in the
Cause with such steadfastness that were all the peoples of the world
to attempt to prevent him from turning to the Source of Revelation,
they would be powerless to do so. The other is observance of the
divine ordinances which have streamed forth from the wellspring of His
heavenly-propelled Pen. For man's knowledge of God cannot develop
fully and adequately save by observing whatsoever hath been ordained
by Him and is set forth in His heavenly Book." (Tablets of
Baha'u'llah, p. 268)
With warm greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear friend-
This quote has always come to mind when I read about how anyone can
accept principles but they also need more.
"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition
of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His
laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause
and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained
unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, though
he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth every one who
reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent
glory, to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the
world. These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable
without the other." (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 16)
regards,
doug- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Romane
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:28 pm Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Good morning Kent
Suffice it to say that I generally disagree with pretty much every
opinion you have expressed in this forum, but it is as simple as I
cannot be bothered entering into a discussion I consider a waste of
time. So no, am not going to cater to the needs I perceive in you - you
are free to your own opinion, me to mine.
With greetings
Romane
compx2 wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Romane,
The heart of this discussion is in your end quote:
"...where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus bee
n
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings
of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance
We all know the wonders of His utterance, but let's talk about grace.
These Christians have deprived themselves of something other than the
Baha'i Writings, right? They are deprived of what Baha'u'llah calls,
in this quote: "the outpourings of God's holy grace." Can you give an
example of that grace?
I wonder if you know my answer to the question. I don't believe grace
is a metaphysical intangible, but rather a character trait. The
largest measure of God's grace is manifest in the grace of His
followers.
1. Seemingly effortless beauty or charm of movement, form, or
proportion.
2. A characteristic or quality pleasing for its charm or refinement.
3. A sense of fitness or propriety.
4. a. A disposition to be generous or helpful; goodwill. b. Mercy;
clemency.
Perhaps at this point you can guess how I believe one acquired grace:
a lifetime of deeds inspired by God, however we have discovered or
named Him.
--Kent
On Sep 18, 7:28 am, Romane <rom...@miscellanie.com> wrote:
Good morning Doug
Both yes and no (Romane grins). Unfortunately, there is only a small
space that can be utilised here, while the topic itself could have a
hefty volume written. So can only minimally give here any form of answ
er.
Baha'u'llah unequivocally states that we are to draw no distinction
between any of the Manifestations :
"Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make a
ny
distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to
discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed
their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if
ye
be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured,
moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these
Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoev
er
they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a
reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possibl
e
difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their
acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His
signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers." (Gleanings from the
Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 59)
The Bab, however, demonstrates conclusively the progressive nature of
God's Revelation, starting on page 105, through to page 108 of
"Selections from the Writings of the Bab", to which I strongly refer
you. He speaks of the fruits of the previous Dispensations being
gathered. I will quote just one small part of it :
"It is clear and evident that the object of all preceding Dispensation
s
hath been to pave the way for the advent of Muhammad, the Apostle of
God. These, including the Muhammadan Dispensation, have had, in their
turn, as their objective the Revelation proclaimed by the Qá'im. The
purpose underlying this Revelation, as well as those that preceded it,
has, in like manner, been to announce the advent of the Faith of Him
Whom God will make manifest. And this Faith -- the Faith of Him Whom G
od
will make manifest -- in its turn, together with all the Revelations
gone before it, have as their object the Manifestation destined to
succeed it. And the latter, no less than all the Revelations preceding
it, prepare the way for the Revelation which is yet to follow."
(Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 105)
But as regards recognition of the Revelation brought by the Blessed
Beauty, we have Baha'u'llah saying :
"Know thou that he is truly learned who hath acknowledged My Revelatio
n,
and drunk from the Ocean of My knowledge, and soared in the atmosphere
of My love, and cast away all else besides Me, and taken firm hold on
that which hath been sent down from the Kingdom of My wondrous
utterance." (Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 82)
Or that well-known statement from the "Tablet of Ahmad" - "..., he who
turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers
of
the past..."
But the argument would be incomplete if some of the consequences were
not mentioned. An intimation, very brief, is given, I believe, on page
80 of the Kitab-i-Iqan, where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus bee
n
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings
of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance.".
My warmest greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear Romane-
I'm wondering how this is to be applied. For example if a person is
earnestly seeks the Truth and finds the object of his longing in
accepting Jesus or Muhammad say and then strives to be steadfast in
obedience has he been obedient to this command?
My belief is that the Bab, Baha'u'llah, or the Master, when using the
terms such as "Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation", or
"Godhead", or the "Desire of the World" and others means Baha'u'llah,
the Glory of God. Afterall the Baha'i Writings inform us that the
Prophets or Manifestations are One but appear to us in a different hu
ma
n
body from time to time and bring us new laws to live by in order to
advance civilization.
My understanding is that if a person is a believer in God and accept
Hi
s
Manifestation and then steadfastly strives to obey His command then
that soul will more readily recognize the Return when the Manifestati
on
reappears to bring us new knowledge.
However I seem to recall something, I think by the Hand of the Cause,
saying that many Babis did not come forward because of their attachme
nt
to the love of the Bab.
regards,
doug
On Sep 16, 2008, at 9:29 PM, Romane wrote:
Good morning
A statement re-iterated in many places in the Sacred Words of the Ba
b
and of Baha'u'llah. As an example :
"The supreme cause for creating the world and all that is therein is
for man to know God. In this Day whosoever is guided by the fragranc
e
of the raiment of His mercy to gain admittance into the pristine
Abode, which is the station of recognizing the Source of divine
commandments and the Dayspring of His Revelation, hath everlastingly
attained unto all good. Having reached this lofty station a twofold
obligation resteth upon every soul. One is to be steadfast in the
Cause with such steadfastness that were all the peoples of the world
to attempt to prevent him from turning to the Source of Revelation,
they would be powerless to do so. The other is observance of the
divine ordinances which have streamed forth from the wellspring of H
is
heavenly-propelled Pen. For man's knowledge of God cannot develop
fully and adequately save by observing whatsoever hath been ordained
by Him and is set forth in His heavenly Book." (Tablets of
Baha'u'llah, p. 268)
With warm greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear friend-
This quote has always come to mind when I read about how anyone can
accept principles but they also need more.
"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recogniti
on
of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of H
is
laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause
and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained
unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, thou
gh
he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth every one who
reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent
glory, to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the
world. These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable
without the other." (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 16)
regards,
doug- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
compx2
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 1:07 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Good evening, Romane.
The needs you perceive in me? Teaching the Baha'i Faith to those who
misunderstand it the most.
"Adorn the body of Thy kingdom with the raiment of My name, and arise,
then,
to teach My Cause. Better is this for thee than that which thou
possessest.
God will, thereby, exalt thy name among all the kings. Potent is He
over
all things. Walk thou amongst men in the name of God, and by the power
of
His might, that thou mayest show forth His signs amidst the peoples of
the
earth." (Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 53)
--Kent
On Sep 19, 7:28 am, Romane <rom...@miscellanie.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Good morning Kent
Suffice it to say that I generally disagree with pretty much every
opinion you have expressed in this forum, but it is as simple as I
cannot be bothered entering into a discussion I consider a waste of
time. So no, am not going to cater to the needs I perceive in you - you
are free to your own opinion, me to mine.
With greetings
Romane
compx2 wrote:
Hi Romane,
The heart of this discussion is in your end quote:
"...where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus bee
n
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings
of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance
We all know the wonders of His utterance, but let's talk about grace.
These Christians have deprived themselves of something other than the
Baha'i Writings, right? They are deprived of what Baha'u'llah calls,
in this quote: "the outpourings of God's holy grace." Can you give a
n
example of that grace?
I wonder if you know my answer to the question. I don't believe grac
e
is a metaphysical intangible, but rather a character trait. The
largest measure of God's grace is manifest in the grace of His
followers.
1. Seemingly effortless beauty or charm of movement, form, or
proportion.
2. A characteristic or quality pleasing for its charm or refinement.
3. A sense of fitness or propriety.
4. a. A disposition to be generous or helpful; goodwill. b. Mercy;
clemency.
Perhaps at this point you can guess how I believe one acquired grace:
a lifetime of deeds inspired by God, however we have discovered or
named Him.
--Kent
On Sep 18, 7:28 am, Romane <rom...@miscellanie.com> wrote:
Good morning Doug
Both yes and no (Romane grins). Unfortunately, there is only a small
space that can be utilised here, while the topic itself could have a
hefty volume written. So can only minimally give here any form of answ
er.
Baha'u'llah unequivocally states that we are to draw no distinction
between any of the Manifestations :
"Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make a
ny
distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to
discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed
their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if
ye
be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured,
moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these
Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoev
er
they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a
reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possibl
e
difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their
acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His
signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers." (Gleanings from the
Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 59)
The Bab, however, demonstrates conclusively the progressive nature of
God's Revelation, starting on page 105, through to page 108 of
"Selections from the Writings of the Bab", to which I strongly refer
you. He speaks of the fruits of the previous Dispensations being
gathered. I will quote just one small part of it :
"It is clear and evident that the object of all preceding Dispensation
s
hath been to pave the way for the advent of Muhammad, the Apostle of
God. These, including the Muhammadan Dispensation, have had, in their
turn, as their objective the Revelation proclaimed by the Qá'im. The
purpose underlying this Revelation, as well as those that preceded it,
has, in like manner, been to announce the advent of the Faith of Him
Whom God will make manifest. And this Faith -- the Faith of Him Whom G
od
will make manifest -- in its turn, together with all the Revelations
gone before it, have as their object the Manifestation destined to
succeed it. And the latter, no less than all the Revelations preceding
it, prepare the way for the Revelation which is yet to follow."
(Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 105)
But as regards recognition of the Revelation brought by the Blessed
Beauty, we have Baha'u'llah saying :
"Know thou that he is truly learned who hath acknowledged My Revelatio
n,
and drunk from the Ocean of My knowledge, and soared in the atmosphere
of My love, and cast away all else besides Me, and taken firm hold on
that which hath been sent down from the Kingdom of My wondrous
utterance." (Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 82)
Or that well-known statement from the "Tablet of Ahmad" - "..., he who
turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers
of
the past..."
But the argument would be incomplete if some of the consequences were
not mentioned. An intimation, very brief, is given, I believe, on page
80 of the Kitab-i-Iqan, where Baha'u'llah speaks of "the adherents of
Jesus" who have "refused to acknowledge, even until now, the truth of
those Manifestations of Holiness that have since the days of Jesus bee
n
made manifest", and have "thus deprived themselves of the outpourings
of
God's holy grace, and of the wonders of His divine utterance.".
My warmest greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear Romane-
I'm wondering how this is to be applied. For example if a person i
s
earnestly seeks the Truth and finds the object of his longing in
accepting Jesus or Muhammad say and then strives to be steadfast in
obedience has he been obedient to this command?
My belief is that the Bab, Baha'u'llah, or the Master, when using the
terms such as "Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation", or
"Godhead", or the "Desire of the World" and others means Baha'u'llah,
the Glory of God. Afterall the Baha'i Writings inform us that the
Prophets or Manifestations are One but appear to us in a different hu
ma
n
body from time to time and bring us new laws to live by in order to
advance civilization.
My understanding is that if a person is a believer in God and accept
Hi
s
Manifestation and then steadfastly strives to obey His command then
that soul will more readily recognize the Return when the Manifestati
on
reappears to bring us new knowledge.
However I seem to recall something, I think by the Hand of the Cause,
saying that many Babis did not come forward because of their attachme
nt
to the love of the Bab.
regards,
doug
On Sep 16, 2008, at 9:29 PM, Romane wrote:
Good morning
A statement re-iterated in many places in the Sacred Words of the Ba
b
and of Baha'u'llah. As an example :
"The supreme cause for creating the world and all that is therein is
for man to know God. In this Day whosoever is guided by the fragranc
e
of the raiment of His mercy to gain admittance into the pristine
Abode, which is the station of recognizing the Source of divine
commandments and the Dayspring of His Revelation, hath everlastingly
attained unto all good. Having reached this lofty station a twofold
obligation resteth upon every soul. One is to be steadfast in the
Cause with such steadfastness that were all the peoples of the world
to attempt to prevent him from turning to the Source of Revelation,
they would be powerless to do so. The other is observance of the
divine ordinances which have streamed forth from the wellspring of H
is
heavenly-propelled Pen. For man's knowledge of God cannot develop
fully and adequately save by observing whatsoever hath been ordained
by Him and is set forth in His heavenly Book." (Tablets of
Baha'u'llah, p. 268)
With warm greetings
Romane
Douglas McAdam wrote:
Dear friend-
This quote has always come to mind when I read about how anyone can
accept principles but they also need more.
"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recogniti
on
of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of H
is
laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause
and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained
unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, thou
gh
he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth every one who
reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent
glory, to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the
world. These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable
without the other." (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 16)
regards,
doug- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Number Eleven - GPEMC!
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 11:12 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
If God is all-encompassing then surely all sides are God's are they not?
History has shown that the usage of "God's Side" has always been to "take
God's name in vain" for the purpose of legitimising otherwise onconscionable
deeds - usually involving robbery, murder, war, and genocide.
If God is all-powerful, surely God has no need of a side, yet being
all-knowing God understands the need of human beings to form sides in their
contests for supremacy. Is the subject of this "side" not likewise party to
a contest?
Yet I put it to you that the very existence of sides as such is ungodly, for
any God of religion (from religare meaning, "to bind together") is by
definition, intent on unity and not the divisiveness of which, partisan
behaviour such as taking sides is so diagnostic.
Thus we may also argue that no side is God's because God is
all-encompassing...
____________________________________________________________
Timothy Casey GPEMC - Eleven is the number@timothycasey.info to email.
Philosophical Essays: http://timothycasey.info
Speed Reading: http://speed-reading-comprehension.com
Software: http://fieldcraft.biz; Scientific IQ Test, Web Menus, Security.
Science & Geology: http://geologist-1011.com; http://geologist-1011.net
Technical & Web Design: http://web-design-1011.com
--
GPEMC! Anti-SPAM email conditions apply. See www.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
The General Public Electronic Mail Contract is free for public use.
If enough of us participate, we can launch a class action to end SPAM
Put GPEMC in your signature to join the fight. Invoice a SPAMmer today! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Sock-Puppet'ullah
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:21 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
"When colorlessness became the captive of color,
A Moses went to war with Jesus."
-- Masnavi |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
compx2
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:36 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Hi Timothy.
If "all sides are God's" that is pantheism, is it not?
It seems to me that God is on the side of justice, truth, mercy, all
the virtues, all the good. Which is the difference, the very reason
we have progressive revelation.
Every time God manifests He gives us teachings, tells us we need to be
just, loving, to sacrifice for others. And He tells us that when we
do we have rewards. And every time we hear those teachings we subvert
them to "our prophet is better than your prophet".
I think Baha'is who read this are doing just that. I think if a
Baha'i thinks praying every day and obeying the institutions is what
brings us rewards from God the Baha'i is misguided. What God wants
from us is simpler, but because what He wants is so demanding we
subvert it to merely prayer and obedience.
Unless and until we, as a group, the Baha'is, "get it" we do not own
the Cause of God and we are subverting the Baha'i Faith. He wants
everyone, not just Baha'is, to arise and take the standard of justice
and generousity, and virtue and nobility. And if we, as Baha'is, see
others doing the same thing, those people are on our side, on God's
side. No need to convert them, they already "get it".
Teach the Faith of God as a reasonable, verifiable truth. If you
acquire virtues for the Greater Good, and teach such to others your
rewards and confirmations in this world and the next will be
unspeakably glorious. Personally the teachings of Baha'u'llah are
what brought me this realization, and you are welcomed to those
teachings. They belong to humanity.
But wherever you get the idea that you need to improve yourself and
others through working for virtue and love and making everything we
touch a little bit more like heaven, well the place that you got that
idea is a fine place so far as I can see.
That is God's side.
--Kent
On Sep 20, 2:12 am, "Number Eleven - GPEMC!"
<eleven_is_the_num...@timothycasey.info> wrote:
| Quote: | If God is all-encompassing then surely all sides are God's are they not?
History has shown that the usage of "God's Side" has always been to "take
God's name in vain" for the purpose of legitimising otherwise onconsciona
ble
deeds - usually involving robbery, murder, war, and genocide.
If God is all-powerful, surely God has no need of a side, yet being
all-knowing God understands the need of human beings to form sides in the
ir
contests for supremacy. Is the subject of this "side" not likewise party
to
a contest?
Yet I put it to you that the very existence of sides as such is ungodly,
for
any God of religion (from religare meaning, "to bind together") is by
definition, intent on unity and not the divisiveness of which, partisan
behaviour such as taking sides is so diagnostic.
Thus we may also argue that no side is God's because God is
all-encompassing...
____________________________________________________________
Timothy Casey GPEMC - Eleven is the num...@timothycasey.info to email.
Philosophical Essays:http://timothycasey.info
Speed Reading:http://speed-reading-comprehension.com
Software:http://fieldcraft.biz;Scientific IQ Test, Web Menus, Security.
Science & Geology:http://geologist-1011.com;http://geologist-1011.net
Technical & Web Design:http://web-design-1011.com
--
GPEMC! Anti-SPAM email conditions apply. Seewww.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
The General Public Electronic Mail Contract is free for public use.
If enough of us participate, we can launch a class action to end SPAM
Put GPEMC in your signature to join the fight. Invoice a SPAMmer today! |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:05 pm Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
| Quote: | Maybe my position is, in your terms, that those who figure out basic math on their own and take care of business are >gods compared to those with advanced degrees who go bankrupt or are otherwise a burden on others. If that is what you >are talking about, I think those who arise to math skills with or without what you consider proper help are exactly the >same.
|
If I can surmise what you are stating here, is in effect that our
educational system is a waste of time and money? In essence, I think
this is your advocation.
and again, If that is the case, I couldn't disagree more.
As far as the Gods are concerned, you first need a golden calf which
right now, might not be a bad investment because I think your gods may
be failing you.
| Quote: | Has it been your experience that Baha'is are well organized?
|
It depends. In this country, there is a definative lack of sufficient
Baha'is to even consider legitimate organization. In countries like
India, where there are schools, or in Iran, pre-revolution, where
there where already Baha'i hospitals in the 60's, the answer is yes,
they were amazingly well organized. Recenty in Iran, Baha'is organized
a universty right under the nose of the government, until it was shut
down. It's a matter of where you live, whose oppressing you, and your
cutlure that determines the level of organization. It really all
depends on where and whom you are talking about.
Remember the Baha'i community is a world community and it would be a
mistake to take your local experience as the norm.
This leads me to your other issue. You are right in stating that if
Baha'is don't act others will take up the slack, but wrong in the
assumption about whom. If Baha'is in the US don't expand and meet the
needs then the crown of wealth given to the US will move to another
country with a more organized Baha'i community, ie. India. The US will
systematically lose its' prominence and will fall to the sidelines.
What has happened in India since the evolution of a larger Baha'i
community there?
Imagine if we continue on our path and ask yourself these questions.
Do we need international environmental regulations to ensure our own
productive crops? Do we need a multinational police force to take the
heat and cost of terrorism off our shoulders? Do we need a global
currency to stabilize our now global markets? What would globalizing
the dollar do to our economy? Are these things necessary, how much
longer do you want to shoulder both the tax cost and the environmental
cost?
The best question of all is what is going to happen to both our
economy and food supply if these things are not in play. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:06 pm Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
| Quote: | Thus we may also argue that no side is God's because God is
all-encompassing...
|
I look at it like this. Someone comes to your village and forewarns
you that your irrigation techniques will eventually turn your land to
waste and advises you on how to change. Instead of listening to him,
you crucify him, and then proceed to convince the village of his
stupidity and how the old ways are best.
God's side is that ultimately whatever you decide you must either
change or face starvation.
The changes that will take place are inevitable, either way they will
happen. The question is whether or not our village is going to starve
in the process. When it happens, we can't very well blame God for
abandoning his creation because after all, he warned you. The person
to blame in my humble opinion are the people who arrogantly presume
that the old ways are best and villagers who choose to relinquish
their decisions to the village elder. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
compx2
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:25 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Hi Mike, It seems we are not communicating well.
You: "Your position is tantamount to stating that since alot of kids
will figure out basic math on their own being driven by financial
needs...
Me: "those who figure out basic math on their own and take care of
business are gods compared to those with advanced degrees who go
bankrupt or are otherwise a burden on others.
You: "...we shouldn't care whether or not they are taught it in
school. Then you sit back and wonder why our economy is going south?"
Me: "I think those who arise to math skills with or without what you
consider proper help are exactly the same"
You: " ...our educational system is a waste of time and money? In
essence, I think this is your advocation."
Either you missed my point completely, you are insulting me directly,
or both. My issue is whoever does God's work (basic math)is doing
God's work, no matter what religion they belong to or what name they
call God, whether they have heard of the Baha'i Faith or not. And
believing in Baha'u'llah does nothing for anyone unless and until that
belief motivates us to do God's work. And when we do, we are exactly
as good as other who do God's work in whatever name they were
motivated.
--Kent
On Sep 22, 9:05 am, mikera...@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: | Maybe my position is, in your terms, that those who figure out basic mat
h on their own and take care of business are >gods compared to those with a |
dvanced degrees who go bankrupt or are otherwise a burden on others. If
that is what you >are talking about, I think those who arise to math skills
with or without what you consider proper help are exactly the >same.
| Quote: |
If I can surmise what you are stating here, is in effect that our
educational system is a waste of time and money? In essence, I think
this is your advocation.
and again, If that is the case, I couldn't disagree more.
As far as the Gods are concerned, you first need a golden calf which
right now, might not be a bad investment because I think your gods may
be failing you.
Has it been your experience that Baha'is are well organized?
It depends. In this country, there is a definative lack of sufficient
Baha'is to even consider legitimate organization. In countries like
India, where there are schools, or in Iran, pre-revolution, where
there where already Baha'i hospitals in the 60's, the answer is yes,
they were amazingly well organized. Recenty in Iran, Baha'is organized
a universty right under the nose of the government, until it was shut
down. It's a matter of where you live, whose oppressing you, and your
cutlure that determines the level of organization. It really all
depends on where and whom you are talking about.
Remember the Baha'i community is a world community and it would be a
mistake to take your local experience as the norm.
This leads me to your other issue. You are right in stating that if
Baha'is don't act others will take up the slack, but wrong in the
assumption about whom. If Baha'is in the US don't expand and meet the
needs then the crown of wealth given to the US will move to another
country with a more organized Baha'i community, ie. India. The US will
systematically lose its' prominence and will fall to the sidelines.
What has happened in India since the evolution of a larger Baha'i
community there?
Imagine if we continue on our path and ask yourself these questions.
Do we need international environmental regulations to ensure our own
productive crops? Do we need a multinational police force to take the
heat and cost of terrorism off our shoulders? Do we need a global
currency to stabilize our now global markets? What would globalizing
the dollar do to our economy? Are these things necessary, how much
longer do you want to shoulder both the tax cost and the environmental
cost?
The best question of all is what is going to happen to both our
economy and food supply if these things are not in play. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Number Eleven - GPEMC!
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 9:03 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
<mikeran37@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:rNednYnwHuXTpUXVnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: |
Thus we may also argue that no side is God's because God is
all-encompassing...
I look at it like this. Someone comes to your village and forewarns
you that your irrigation techniques will eventually turn your land to
waste and advises you on how to change. Instead of listening to him,
you crucify him, and then proceed to convince the village of his
stupidity and how the old ways are best.
|
Yes but if God was taking sides, we wouldn't have that choice in the first
place given the omnipotence of God - and it is this kind of theo-partisan
thinking that forms the basis of a number of Atheist arguments, which I
think, do no justice to the role of the idea of "God" in spiritual
contemplation.
We may talk of a side that is more sympathetic to human need in terms of the
side of love, but terms such as "God's side" can be used by anyone, and
generally characterise political agendas with questionable motives. This is
because terms like, "God" have a different meaning for every individual, and
thus can be used to legitimise an agenda without further examination.
Regardless of the motives, "God's side" is always a partisan banner that is
explicitly divisive. In your example, the people using "God's side" would be
the village conservatives.
I look at it like this. Someone comes to your village and forewarns you that
your irrigation techniques will eventually turn your land to waste and
advises you on how to change. When you ask this person to substantiate
his claim, he says "trust me", or "because God said so"; and if you
don't take his word for it, declares you an enemy of God - if not
explicitly, then implicitly in the wording of address such as to make a show
of great
distrust in you, when it is you asking the questions and he who claims to
have all the answers.
Ironically, it is a matter of simple logic that
only people with something to hide are afraid of questions.
Later, you find out that the proposed changes do not account for the fact
that your irrigation technique floods the land because you are growing rice
and not wheat; and rice, unlike wheat, needs to be flooded - yet the
messenger of change does not even supply the advice that you need to change
your crops from rice to wheat in order for his suggestion to work! Nor does
he supply the dietary changes necessary to avoid health problems inherent in
the transition from rice to wheat (eg. how to avoid developing coeliac's
disease).
Implicit in the "Divine Physician" title as applied to the bringers of
divine law, is the obligation to do no harm - and as such, divine law that
does not in its legislation, examine all the uses of aught it proscribes,
with the view to prescribing alternatives where the proscription in absence
of which will cause harm; fails the test implicit in the title of "Divine
Physician". For example, there is not a single proscription of alcohol in
any culture or religion that specifically prescribes replacements for
digestives such as amaros or alternative anti-oxidant sources such as red
wine. This by itself makes the proscription unethical in the first place
because not only is the proscription negligent and causes measurable harm,
but the proscription also creates a restriction which is not paid for by its
replacement with a less harmful liberty that wasn't previously available.
This is especially true in specific types of alcohol consumption (eg. highly
moderate & especially with regard to use in cooking) that does nothing to
restrict the consumer's ability to think - especially where as much has been
found to be beneficial to both body and mind (eg. antioxidants improve
circulation which in turn improves intellect in addition to physical
fitness).
"God's side" is an obfuscation that replaces specificity with
authoritarianism. This does not befit the strictly individual nature of the
independent search for truth.
____________________________________________________________
Timothy Casey GPEMC - Eleven is the number@timothycasey.info to email.
Philosophical Essays: http://timothycasey.info
Speed Reading: http://speed-reading-comprehension.com
Software: http://fieldcraft.biz; Scientific IQ Test, Web Menus, Security.
Science & Geology: http://geologist-1011.com; http://geologist-1011.net
Technical & Web Design: http://web-design-1011.com
--
GPEMC! Anti-SPAM email conditions apply. See www.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
The General Public Electronic Mail Contract is free for public use.
If enough of us participate, we can launch a class action to end SPAM
Put GPEMC in your signature to join the fight. Invoice a SPAMmer today! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Number Eleven - GPEMC!
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 9:47 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
"compx2" <compx2@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:H82dnf0Le5w0MEvVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
Hi Timothy.
"If "all sides are God's" that is pantheism, is it not?"
"It seems to me that God is on the side of justice, truth, mercy, all
the virtues, all the good. Which is the difference, the very reason
we have progressive revelation."
[SNIP]
I think that depends on how you define pantheism. I have to say that I find
`Abdu'l-Baha's arguments regarding pantheism unconvincing - perhaps because
I do not see the difference between a Creator and Creation that are one and
a Creation and Creator that are separate. For me both are at once distinct
and inseparable, and so in some contexts pantheism offers a more useful
description whereas in others it does not. This is indicative to me of a
misunderstanding on the part of both the for and against camps, of the
context in which pantheism and its alternatives are set.
I think that a truly omnipotent God has no need of a side, and attribution
of a side to God is at once a denial of God's omnipotence and the
attribution of a partner to God in the form of that "God's side". This
supposed "partnership" with God is what I think I really find most
objectionable about the whole "God's side" turn of phrase - and it's usage
in history bears this out.
To be on the side of justice, truth, mercy & all the virtues; all the
"good" - This in my view is to be on the side of Humanity, which needs these
things. However, God who does not need anything, cannot therefore have a
side any more than She has a partner. Neglecting the potential disproof of
the existence of arbitrary omnipotence as an attribute of anything including
"God"; it can be said that it is far more honest to call the side of those
virtues that benefit humanity, the "side of humanity" instead of the "side
of God" which detracts from the real issue by speaking to God's apparent
"need" of a defender to take Her side. One descriptor leads directly into
the idea of what is good for humanity, whereas the other degenerates into
metaphysical pseudo-philosophy about what is "good for God". What "is good
for God" can and has been used to justify anything and everything, from
human sacrifice to ethnic cleansing.
What I am talking about is the fine line between spirituality and idolatry.
In one we have God who as Creator is concerned with the welfare of Creation;
specifically humanity. In the other we have God made into a solipsistic idol
that exists only to rely upon the servitude of the "Creation" attributed to
it. The choice of language can tell a great deal about attached agendas -
and I can't buy a "God" who needs people to take Her side. "Humanity's side"
on the other hand is much more to the point, and its transparency makes it
the more honest alternative, if by "God's side" one refers to what will
ultimately benefit humanity.
This is just my opinion though, and everyone having a different body of
experience to draw on, likewise has their own unique set of beliefs...
____________________________________________________________
Timothy Casey GPEMC - Eleven is the number@timothycasey.info to email.
Philosophical Essays: http://timothycasey.info
Speed Reading: http://speed-reading-comprehension.com
Software: http://fieldcraft.biz; Scientific IQ Test, Web Menus, Security.
Science & Geology: http://geologist-1011.com; http://geologist-1011.net
Technical & Web Design: http://web-design-1011.com
--
GPEMC! Anti-SPAM email conditions apply. See www.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
The General Public Electronic Mail Contract is free for public use.
If enough of us participate, we can launch a class action to end SPAM
Put GPEMC in your signature to join the fight. Invoice a SPAMmer today! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Sock-Puppet'ullah
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:39 am Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
Tim,
All discussions of Spirit and Divinity, God and Godhead, without
recourse to some form of emanationism are tout court nonsense and more
of the same. Abbas Effendi's discussion of "pantheism" is totally
unconvincing and philosophically flawed. It is also unconvincing in
the original Persian because obviously the man had not really digested
the doctrine of the Unity of Being (wahdat al-wujud) in all its
various implications, especially as it was dealt and modified by
Shi'ites such as Mulla Sadra and finally expanded as into something
else by Shaykh Ahmad al-Ahsai. However, note that the doctrine of the
Unity of Being does not entail that everything is monochromatically
divine. Grades and hierarchies inform the construct of all levels of
the Kosmos. The Neoplatonism, the Hermetic tradition and Kabbalah are
places to look into such questions with a bit more rigor.
In any case, without getting into a long winded theological
discussion, I invite you to look into the writings of Rene Guenon,
especially his *The Multiple States of Being*:
http://www.fonsvitae.com/rene-guenon-multiple.html
I think for your type of probing metaphysical inquiry, Guenon's pure
metaphysical writings can serve as a valuable springboard to
reconsideration of the more symbolic and philosophically rigorous
aspects of the great question amongst the Traditions themselves. How
Guenon unpacks the issue I think you will find quite interesting. His
*Symbolism of the Cross*, *Metaphysical Principles of Infinitesimal
Calculas*, *The Reign of Quantity and the Sign of the Times* would
also interest you considerably. Look at *Multiple States of Being* and
you will never need the garbled and befuddled pseudo-arguments of
Abbas Effendi ever again.
W |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Number Eleven - GPEMC!
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:17 pm Post subject: Re: God's Side? |
|
|
"Sock-Puppet'ullah" <wahidazal66@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6pednbRgs9tORkjVnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | "When colorlessness became the captive of color,
A Moses went to war with Jesus."
-- Masnavi
|
Are we not all prejudiced by the colour of our experience?
Albeit with such ironic consequences...
____________________________________________________________
Timothy Casey GPEMC - Eleven is the number@timothycasey.info to email.
Philosophical Essays: http://timothycasey.info
Speed Reading: http://speed-reading-comprehension.com
Software: http://fieldcraft.biz; Scientific IQ Test, Web Menus, Security.
Science & Geology: http://geologist-1011.com; http://geologist-1011.net
Technical & Web Design: http://web-design-1011.com
--
GPEMC! Anti-SPAM email conditions apply. See www.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
The General Public Electronic Mail Contract is free for public use.
If enough of us participate, we can launch a class action to end SPAM
Put GPEMC in your signature to join the fight. Invoice a SPAMmer today! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
