| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
catherine monroe
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:20 pm Post subject: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
 |
|
I am a member of the Bahai Faith and I have been since july of
2007. About two months ago I came across the book--A Course in
Miracles-- and they say its a spiritual path not a religion. Its main
theme is the world that we live in a dream that we made up ourselves
with the help of our ego(devil) and that we never left heaven.
I'ld like to think that A Course in Miracles picks up were the
Bahai faith left off.
My question is would it be ok for me to belive in both the Bahai
faith & A Course in Miracles? Can the two be mixed? |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:16 pm Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
Dear Catherine,
I read portions of the Course on Miracles many years ago and didn't
find them all that compatible myself, but as the House worte me over a
decade ago: "the institutions do not busy themselves with what
individual believers think unless those thoughts become expressed in
actions which are inimical to the basic principles and vital interests
of the Faith."
warmest, Susan
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 10:20 AM, catherine monroe
<mysticmindset@webtv.net> wrote:
| Quote: | I am a member of the Bahai Faith and I have been since july of
2007. About two months ago I came across the book--A Course in
Miracles-- and they say its a spiritual path not a religion. Its main
theme is the world that we live in a dream that we made up ourselves
with the help of our ego(devil) and that we never left heaven.
I'ld like to think that A Course in Miracles picks up were the
Bahai faith left off.
My question is would it be ok for me to belive in both the Bahai
faith & A Course in Miracles? Can the two be mixed?
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:44 pm Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
My sister was involved with ACIM (A Course in Miracles) for many
years. As a sociologist of religion, I also personally have a library
of 23 books on ACIM (including the three-volume text itself).
ACIM, which was written (proponents claim "channelled") by Helen
Schucman, has become the basis for a very popular new-agey genre. Like
Susan, I do not find it to be particularly impressive.
The metaphysics behind ACIM is nondualist. It reads, to me, like a
Christian version of Hindu advaita (nondualist) philosophy. Similar to
Hindu advaita and Vedanta, ACIM teaches that the material world is an
illusion (like the Hindu concept of "maya"). Our problems, the author
argues, arise from believing that the material world is "real." (In
this respect, it is similar to Christian Science and the New Thought
movement, such as Unity and Religious Science.)
Schucman's viewpoint, while intriguing, does not correspond to my
*own* understandings of the Baha'i teachings on these subjects.
Material things, while relatively limited, should not, in my view, be
ignored. The "illusion" comes, not from materiality, but from allowing
an attachment to material objects to prevent one from conforming to
God's Will and from drawing close to Him.
In short, I think that ACIM philosophy differs significantly from the
perspectives presented by Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:35 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
On Jun 27, 9:01 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | So you think ACIM differs from Baha'i teachings. I don't believe anyone
said the two were similar, much less the same. Certainly not Catherine.
|
No, she said:
"I'ld like to think that A Course in Miracles picks up were the Bahai
faith left off."
That implies similarity or, at least, compatibility. As I wrote
before, I find ACIM to be intriguing (as a sociologist), and I will
occasionally listen to portions of formal presentations in thet ACIM
chat room on the Paltalk service. However, I think that many of the
basic assumptions of ACIM differ from those I read in the Baha'i
texts.
That is just my own viewpoint. Before I was a Baha'i, in the 1960s, I
was interested in many ideas which would later, in the 1970s, be
incorporated into certain constructions of the so-called new age
movement. I am also very familiar with ACIM - through reading the
literature, listening to talks, and discussing the subject with my
sister (who is very knowledgeable about it).
| Quote: | Aristostotle's Platonism is not the same, or even similar, to the Baha'i
Faith. But you and Susan read it into the Baha'i Faith, and teach that the
Founders of the Baha'i Faith are under Aristotle's tutelage, using his words
and not Their Own. That is much worse, in my opinion, than pursuing the
spiritual path offered in ACIM.
|
Kent, you keep on saying that, but I have never asserted that
Platonism or Aristotelianism are taught in the Baha'i texts.
| Quote: | The reason what you do is worse is because you offer your view as a studied
professional. But I submit you miss the point of the Baha'i Faith, the
Course in Miracles, and Platonism. Although you seem to know Neo-Platonism
quite well.
|
What point am I missing?
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:46 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
Hi Catherine, nice to meet you.
I was hoping someone else would answer with more than a "The Universal House
of Justice says..." kind of response. Not all Baha'is are like Susan, you
see.
Some of us believe you should continue your path to God even if you are
already a Baha'i (this is sarcasm).
It is part and parcel to the Baha'i Faith that we should all, all of
humanity, should investigate truth independently. If you see something in
the Course in Miracles that attracts you, please, for God's sake, for the
sake of your religion, investigate.
I am a Baha'i and the Founder of my religion said that the point of religion
was to establish unity and promote the better interests of humanity. In my
opinion the Course in Miracles is not nearly so likely to achieve that
purpose as the Baha'i teachings, but that doesn't mean it can't inspire us
to greater and finer acts of sacrifice for our fellow humanity. Because
that is how we grow spiritually.
--Kent
"catherine monroe" <mysticmindset@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:DoidnQ2T9rP_kPjVnZ2dnUVZ_oDinZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | I am a member of the Bahai Faith and I have been since july of
2007. About two months ago I came across the book--A Course in
Miracles-- and they say its a spiritual path not a religion. Its main
theme is the world that we live in a dream that we made up ourselves
with the help of our ego(devil) and that we never left heaven.
I'ld like to think that A Course in Miracles picks up were the
Bahai faith left off.
My question is would it be ok for me to belive in both the Bahai
faith & A Course in Miracles? Can the two be mixed?
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:31 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
| Quote: | I was hoping someone else would answer with more than a "The Universal House
of Justice says..." kind of response. Not all Baha'is are like Susan, you
see.
|
Kent,
Under normal standards of moderation posts containing personal attacks
such as this would be rejected.
| Quote: | Some of us believe you should continue your path to God even if you are
already a Baha'i (this is sarcasm).
|
Apparently you weren't paying attention to what that quotation from
the House of Justice actually said, which is basically that it is none
of our business what she chooses to pursue so long as she isn't trying
to change the Faith itself.
Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:01 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
Hi Mark,
So you think ACIM differs from Baha'i teachings. I don't believe anyone
said the two were similar, much less the same. Certainly not Catherine.
Aristostotle's Platonism is not the same, or even similar, to the Baha'i
Faith. But you and Susan read it into the Baha'i Faith, and teach that the
Founders of the Baha'i Faith are under Aristotle's tutelage, using his words
and not Their Own. That is much worse, in my opinion, than pursuing the
spiritual path offered in ACIM.
The reason what you do is worse is because you offer your view as a studied
professional. But I submit you miss the point of the Baha'i Faith, the
Course in Miracles, and Platonism. Although you seem to know Neo-Platonism
quite well.
--Kent
"Poststructuralist" <drfosternotfromgloucester@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:W8-dnVldYeI3EfjVnZ2dnUVZ_rDinZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | My sister was involved with ACIM (A Course in Miracles) for many
years. As a sociologist of religion, I also personally have a library
of 23 books on ACIM (including the three-volume text itself).
ACIM, which was written (proponents claim "channelled") by Helen
Schucman, has become the basis for a very popular new-agey genre. Like
Susan, I do not find it to be particularly impressive.
The metaphysics behind ACIM is nondualist. It reads, to me, like a
Christian version of Hindu advaita (nondualist) philosophy. Similar to
Hindu advaita and Vedanta, ACIM teaches that the material world is an
illusion (like the Hindu concept of "maya"). Our problems, the author
argues, arise from believing that the material world is "real." (In
this respect, it is similar to Christian Science and the New Thought
movement, such as Unity and Religious Science.)
Schucman's viewpoint, while intriguing, does not correspond to my
*own* understandings of the Baha'i teachings on these subjects.
Material things, while relatively limited, should not, in my view, be
ignored. The "illusion" comes, not from materiality, but from allowing
an attachment to material objects to prevent one from conforming to
God's Will and from drawing close to Him.
In short, I think that ACIM philosophy differs significantly from the
perspectives presented by Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha.
Mark Foster
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:04 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
My issue, Susan, is that someone comes to this forum and talks about their
personal spiritual path. Your response is "just don't try to change the
Baha'i Faith".
I think our fellow humanity needs more from Baha'is than that.
--Kent
"Susan Maneck" <smaneck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:j_SdnZ4g5bQ_BfjVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | I was hoping someone else would answer with more than a "The Universal
House
of Justice says..." kind of response. Not all Baha'is are like Susan,
you
see.
Kent,
Under normal standards of moderation posts containing personal attacks
such as this would be rejected.
Some of us believe you should continue your path to God even if you are
already a Baha'i (this is sarcasm).
Apparently you weren't paying attention to what that quotation from
the House of Justice actually said, which is basically that it is none
of our business what she chooses to pursue so long as she isn't trying
to change the Faith itself.
Susan
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
Hi Mark.
| Quote: | That implies similarity or, at least, compatibility.
|
Presumably you then think that the compatible is similar. Windows XP is
compatible with humanity, at least that portion of humanity with access to
computers. But is Windows similar to humanity? A portion of humanity?
So ACIM is *not* compatible with the Baha'i Faith? Why not? Your
statements clearly state that you see a relationship between the similar and
the compatible, and that ACIM is not similar to the Baha'i Faith. I think
you should redirect your statements to make it clear that you believe ACIM
is indeed compatible with the Baha'i Faith, at least as compatible as other
outdated and proven deficient philosophies, like say Neo-Platonism.
| Quote: | I think that many of the
basic assumptions of ACIM differ from those I read in the Baha'i
texts.
|
And many of your basic assumption *about the Baha'i Faith* differ from those
I read in the Baha'i texts. To wit those concerning "Divine Word" in the
very recent history of this very thread. I hope we get to that, but I think
I see some revision in your thinking. At least I hope so.
But the major point is that a Baha'i comes here with a personal, spiritual,
inspiration and you and Susan can only pronounce how bad it is. You an I
both know that ACIM is similar to many philosophical and religious movement
or doctrines of the past. And all of those paths have been peaceful,
tolerant of other peoples and thoughts, and has produced many admirable
individuals. How is that incompatible with the Baha'i Faith?
| Quote: | Kent, you keep on saying that, but I have never asserted that
Platonism or Aristotelianism are taught in the Baha'i texts.
|
You remind me of friends I had in High School. "I am not racist, but those
black people sure can dance, can't they?"
You and Susan have clearly said that the "Divine Word" is roughly equivalent
to the "Logos" despite the fact that every use of the phrase "Divine Word"
from the Baha'i Writings has been quoted here and none even approach the
usage of "Logos" in Neo-Platonic Christianity or Islam, which is where you
got it.
I suggest you check out "Creative Word" which is the usage in the Baha'i
Writings which most closely approximates the Logos, but in its usage clearly
shows differences from the Logos that you and Susan embrace and force-feed
into the Writings.
The point you are clearly missing is that your interpretation of the Baha'i
Writings is not correct, and neither is anyone else's. You need to embrace
that fact, and encourage others to independently investigate truth for
themselves.
You should most definitely not proclaim that other spiritual paths might not
be "similar" or "compatible" right out of the gate. Catherine is no doubt a
wonderful person on a spiritual path, and when she comes to Baha'is she
finds bickering from people who write with authority about their
misconceptions of my religion.
My religion is not your religion, Mark, that is true. But we are both
Baha'is. And there is room here for Catherine as well. I want to welcome
her, but I have to get past you before I can do that.
--Kent
"Poststructuralist" <drfosternotfromgloucester@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Bo6dnYGWrPy1gPvVnZ2dnUVZ_ojinZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | On Jun 27, 9:01 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
So you think ACIM differs from Baha'i teachings. I don't believe anyone
said the two were similar, much less the same. Certainly not Catherine.
No, she said:
"I'ld like to think that A Course in Miracles picks up were the Bahai
faith left off."
That implies similarity or, at least, compatibility. As I wrote
before, I find ACIM to be intriguing (as a sociologist), and I will
occasionally listen to portions of formal presentations in thet ACIM
chat room on the Paltalk service. However, I think that many of the
basic assumptions of ACIM differ from those I read in the Baha'i
texts.
That is just my own viewpoint. Before I was a Baha'i, in the 1960s, I
was interested in many ideas which would later, in the 1970s, be
incorporated into certain constructions of the so-called new age
movement. I am also very familiar with ACIM - through reading the
literature, listening to talks, and discussing the subject with my
sister (who is very knowledgeable about it).
Aristostotle's Platonism is not the same, or even similar, to the Baha'i
Faith. But you and Susan read it into the Baha'i Faith, and teach that
the
Founders of the Baha'i Faith are under Aristotle's tutelage, using his
words
and not Their Own. That is much worse, in my opinion, than pursuing the
spiritual path offered in ACIM.
Kent, you keep on saying that, but I have never asserted that
Platonism or Aristotelianism are taught in the Baha'i texts.
The reason what you do is worse is because you offer your view as a
studied
professional. But I submit you miss the point of the Baha'i Faith, the
Course in Miracles, and Platonism. Although you seem to know
Neo-Platonism
quite well.
What point am I missing?
Mark Foster
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
| Quote: | You and Susan have clearly said that the "Divine Word" is roughly equivalent
to the "Logos" despite the fact that every use of the phrase "Divine Word"
from the Baha'i Writings has been quoted here and none even approach the
usage of "Logos" in Neo-Platonic Christianity or Islam, which is where you
got it.
|
Some of those passages did and a few did not. But given the fact you
have abused you power as moderator to make personal insults against
me, I really do not wish to discuss this matter or any other with you
any longer. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:18 pm Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
On Jun 28, 6:40 am, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Presumably you then think that the compatible is similar. Windows XP is
compatible with humanity, at least that portion of humanity with access to
computers. But is Windows similar to humanity? A portion of humanity?
|
How is that related to the Baha'i Faith and ACIM?
| Quote: | So ACIM is *not* compatible with the Baha'i Faith?
|
I never commented on whether it was or was not compatible. I said that
I thought that "many of the basic assumptions" differ.
| Quote: | Why not? Your statements clearly state that you see a relationship between
the similar and the compatible, and that ACIM is not similar to the Baha'i Faith.
I think you should redirect your statements to make it clear that you believe
ACIM is indeed compatible with the Baha'i Faith, at least as compatible as other
outdated and proven deficient philosophies, like say Neo-Platonism.
|
Kent, you are arguing with a straw man. I can't respond to your
criticism of statements I neve made.
| Quote: | And many of your basic assumption *about the Baha'i Faith* differ from those
I read in the Baha'i texts. To wit those concerning "Divine Word" in the
very recent history of this very thread. I hope we get to that, but I think
I see some revision in your thinking. At least I hope so.
|
Neither of us is an authoritative interpreter, so we do not have the
the ability to make incontrovertible statements about the Baha'i
texts.
| Quote: | But the major point is that a Baha'i comes here with a personal, spiritual,
inspiration and you and Susan can only pronounce how bad it is. You an I
both know that ACIM is similar to many philosophical and religious movement
or doctrines of the past. And all of those paths have been peaceful,
tolerant of other peoples and thoughts, and has produced many admirable
individuals. How is that incompatible with the Baha'i Faith?
|
When did I say it was "bad"? I am an academic, a sociologist of
religion, and I believe in treating religious movements respectfully
and particularly. Disregarding differences, syncretism, making believe
that all religions are basically the same, etc. is the sort of
religious colonization, or triumphalism, which I unequivocally reject
as a scholar.
| Quote: | You remind me of friends I had in High School. "I am not racist, but those
black people sure can dance, can't they?"
|
That is a highly inappropriate example, Kent. Show me where I ever
said that I currently believe Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha taught
Neoplatonism.
| Quote: | You and Susan have clearly said that the "Divine Word" is roughly equivalent
to the "Logos" despite the fact that every use of the phrase "Divine Word"
from the Baha'i Writings has been quoted here and none even approach the
usage of "Logos" in Neo-Platonic Christianity or Islam, which is where you
got it.
|
Because Logos is generally translated as "Word."
| Quote: | The point you are clearly missing is that your interpretation of the Baha'i
Writings is not correct, and neither is anyone else's. You need to embrace
that fact, and encourage others to independently investigate truth for
themselves.
|
Can I investigate, too?
| Quote: | You should most definitely not proclaim that other spiritual paths might not
be "similar" or "compatible" right out of the gate. Catherine is no doubt a
wonderful person on a spiritual path, and when she comes to Baha'is she
finds bickering from people who write with authority about their
misconceptions of my religion.
|
Kent, no one has been bickering except for you.
| Quote: | My religion is not your religion, Mark, that is true. But we are both
Baha'is. And there is room here for Catherine as well. I want to welcome
her, but I have to get past you before I can do that.
|
That is another strange thing to say to another Baha'i.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:05 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
On Jun 28, 7:31 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | It is logic. If something compatible is similar by virtue of logic, then
something else compatible with something else should be similar, by the same
virtue.
|
That is not like logic, or critical thinking, as I present it to my
Social Problems students. The subjects to be compared need to have a
similar relationship in both instances. Take a look at some questions
from the Miller Analogies Test.
| Quote: | Then I misunderstood you when you said "That implies similarity or, at
least, compatibility."
|
I said that the OP (original poster) had implied a compatibility
between ACIM and the Baha'i Faith. However, I never said whether I
agreed with the OP. My only comment was that, IMO, the basic
assumptions differed.
| Quote: | You never said ""That implies similarity or, at least, compatibility."?
|
I never addressed the issue of compatibility. I simply referred to it
in the OP's message. I have no idea as to whether ACIM and the Baha'i
Faith are compatible. I would need to know which points were being
compared.
| Quote: | You: "Like Susan, I do not find it to be particularly impressive."
"It reads, to me, like a Christian version of Hindu advaita (nondualist)
philosophy."
|
Because it does not appeal to me. That doesn't mean I see it as "bad."
I also don't like most team sports. However, I don't regard them as
being "bad" either.
| Quote: | You did not say "bad" you said bad things about it. You dismissed it as not
impressive, which is not praise, and if you were to say that to me about my
dearly held beliefs I would be insulted.
|
I never said one "bad" thing about it. In fact, I did not judge it at
all.
| Quote: | Do you believe the Divine Word as used in the Baha'i Writings is roughly
equivalent to the NeoPlatonist concept of Logos? If so, can you please
find me an example of such (I quoted every single usage of the phrase
recently, so that should be easy).
|
Not entirely, because the Neoplatonic concept rests on assumptions I
do not make. I see Neoplatonic and Aristotelian terms of reference
used, but I see them as language games (as Lyotard used the term).
| Quote: | I have asked you repeatedly why you are speaking Greek.
|
Because I am speaking of the Person of the Prophet as Revelator (the
Logos).
| Quote: | Can you do so without denegrating others?
|
How have I denegrated you?
| Quote: | The reason I am here is because I find so many Baha'is are such authorities
on what others should believe. I know what I believe, and if you find a
problem with it I am here for you to help me find the error of my ways. But
when I see such cultish, cliquish, dismissive, anti-community work being
done here, well, I wonder if it is possible for the Baha'is to let me
believe in the Baha'i Faith.
|
I have never said anything against people having their own
understandings of the Baha'i primary sources. In fact, I support, even
advocate, it. My own view is toward a post-liberal approach to the
late Rabbi Alvin J. Reines concept of "polydoxy." The term post-
liberal theologies refers, in part, to theologies which attempt to
move beyond purely individual readings of sacred texts to those which
are grounded in a community of discourse (a moral community). From
that standpoint, I have acknowledged that, within the Baha'i Faith,
under the Universal House of Justice, we can see various discoursive
communities or, as I have called them, covenantally-grounded "Baha'i
faiths." While Reines' idea of polydoxy was individual, mine is
collective.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:38 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
| Quote: | My religion is not your religion, Mark, that is true. But we are both
Baha'is. And there is room here for Catherine as well. I want to welcome
her, but I have to get past you before I can do that.
|
You can't welcome Catherine except bu attacking us.
Right. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:43 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
On Jun 28, 9:05 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | How is that not Neo-Platonist?
|
H.P. Blavatsky's Theosophy is an example of Neoplatonism. According to
Blavatsky, God, truth, knowledge, etc. are fixed, eternal constants.
They do *not* change from age to age. God's will a million years ago
and God's will today are identical. What was revealed by each new
"avatar" is identical to what was revealed by the preceding ones.
There is no progressive Revelation. From a Theosophical (and
Neoplatonic) point of view, religious truth is *not* relative.
On the other hand, it is, to my understanding, the Baha'i concept of
the relativity of religious truth which, among other factors, makes
the Baha'i Faith *not* Neoplatonic. There are no fixed ideal forms.
Everything, including the Will of God and its Personification in the
divine Logos (the God-Man or Prophet), is susceptible to alteration.
Prophetic Covenants are particular, not universal.
| Quote: | Never, Mark, you have been very respectful. I was talking about Catherine.
|
Oh, okay.
| Quote: | Glad to hear it. But we can never achieve such a community, such unity, if
we denigrate and dismiss the beliefs of other Baha'i faiths, of others of no
named faith or of non-Baha'i faiths. I propose we simply prefer our own
beliefs, which is as it should be, and share those beliefs when we find
hearing ears.
|
That is why the Baha'i Faith acknowledges the relativity of religious
truth - and the relativity of human understanding.
Mark Foster |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:31 am Post subject: Re: A Course in Miracles & Bahai Faith |
|
|
Hi Mark,
| Quote: | How is that related to the Baha'i Faith and ACIM?
|
It is logic. If something compatible is similar by virtue of logic, then
something else compatible with something else should be similar, by the same
virtue.
| Quote: | I never commented on whether it was or was not compatible.
|
Then I misunderstood you when you said "That implies similarity or, at
least, compatibility."
| Quote: | I can't respond to your
criticism of statements I neve made.
|
You never said ""That implies similarity or, at least, compatibility."?
| Quote: | When did I say it was "bad"?
|
You: "Like Susan, I do not find it to be particularly impressive."
"It reads, to me, like a Christian version of Hindu advaita (nondualist)
philosophy."
You did not say "bad" you said bad things about it. You dismissed it as not
impressive, which is not praise, and if you were to say that to me about my
dearly held beliefs I would be insulted.
| Quote: | Show me where I ever
said that I currently believe Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha taught
Neoplatonism.
|
I didn;t say that you did say that you didn't... Golly, this is confusing.
I would much rather talk about what you do believe than what you said.
Do you believe the Divine Word as used in the Baha'i Writings is roughly
equivalent to the NeoPlatonist concept of Logos? If so, can you please
find me an example of such (I quoted every single usage of the phrase
recently, so that should be easy).
| Quote: | Because Logos is generally translated as "Word."
|
I have asked you repeatedly why you are speaking Greek.
| Quote: | Can I investigate, too?
|
Can you do so without denegrating others?
| Quote: | That is another strange thing to say to another Baha'i.
|
The reason I am here is because I find so many Baha'is are such authorities
on what others should believe. I know what I believe, and if you find a
problem with it I am here for you to help me find the error of my ways. But
when I see such cultish, cliquish, dismissive, anti-community work being
done here, well, I wonder if it is possible for the Baha'is to let me
believe in the Baha'i Faith.
--Kent
"Poststructuralist" <drfosternotfromgloucester@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4fqdncfhPMflU_vVnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | On Jun 28, 6:40 am, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
Presumably you then think that the compatible is similar. Windows XP is
compatible with humanity, at least that portion of humanity with access
to
computers. But is Windows similar to humanity? A portion of humanity?
How is that related to the Baha'i Faith and ACIM?
So ACIM is *not* compatible with the Baha'i Faith?
I never commented on whether it was or was not compatible. I said that
I thought that "many of the basic assumptions" differ.
Why not? Your statements clearly state that you see a relationship
between
the similar and the compatible, and that ACIM is not similar to the
Baha'i Faith.
I think you should redirect your statements to make it clear that you
believe
ACIM is indeed compatible with the Baha'i Faith, at least as compatible
as other
outdated and proven deficient philosophies, like say Neo-Platonism.
Kent, you are arguing with a straw man. I can't respond to your
criticism of statements I neve made.
And many of your basic assumption *about the Baha'i Faith* differ from
those
I read in the Baha'i texts. To wit those concerning "Divine Word" in the
very recent history of this very thread. I hope we get to that, but I
think
I see some revision in your thinking. At least I hope so.
Neither of us is an authoritative interpreter, so we do not have the
the ability to make incontrovertible statements about the Baha'i
texts.
But the major point is that a Baha'i comes here with a personal,
spiritual,
inspiration and you and Susan can only pronounce how bad it is. You an I
both know that ACIM is similar to many philosophical and religious
movement
or doctrines of the past. And all of those paths have been peaceful,
tolerant of other peoples and thoughts, and has produced many admirable
individuals. How is that incompatible with the Baha'i Faith?
When did I say it was "bad"? I am an academic, a sociologist of
religion, and I believe in treating religious movements respectfully
and particularly. Disregarding differences, syncretism, making believe
that all religions are basically the same, etc. is the sort of
religious colonization, or triumphalism, which I unequivocally reject
as a scholar.
You remind me of friends I had in High School. "I am not racist, but
those
black people sure can dance, can't they?"
That is a highly inappropriate example, Kent. Show me where I ever
said that I currently believe Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha taught
Neoplatonism.
You and Susan have clearly said that the "Divine Word" is roughly
equivalent
to the "Logos" despite the fact that every use of the phrase "Divine
Word"
from the Baha'i Writings has been quoted here and none even approach the
usage of "Logos" in Neo-Platonic Christianity or Islam, which is where
you
got it.
Because Logos is generally translated as "Word."
The point you are clearly missing is that your interpretation of the
Baha'i
Writings is not correct, and neither is anyone else's. You need to
embrace
that fact, and encourage others to independently investigate truth for
themselves.
Can I investigate, too?
You should most definitely not proclaim that other spiritual paths might
not
be "similar" or "compatible" right out of the gate. Catherine is no
doubt a
wonderful person on a spiritual path, and when she comes to Baha'is she
finds bickering from people who write with authority about their
misconceptions of my religion.
Kent, no one has been bickering except for you.
My religion is not your religion, Mark, that is true. But we are both
Baha'is. And there is room here for Catherine as well. I want to
welcome
her, but I have to get past you before I can do that.
That is another strange thing to say to another Baha'i.
Mark Foster
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
