• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Baha'i faith is not blind faith.

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
The principles of the Teachings of Baha’u’llah should be carefully studied, one by one, until they are realized and understood by mind and heart — so will you become strong followers of the light, truly spiritual, heavenly soldiers of God, acquiring and spreading the true civilization…. – Abdu’l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 22.

Independent Investigation of Truth

The teaching say, a baha'i should investigate deeply until understood by heart and mind, that means there is no blind faith nor a "read the scripture and blindly believe what you read"
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Unfortunately, though, most religious institutions do teach that blind, unquestioned, adherence to their religious doctrines and dogmas are "faith". And any objection to that characterization of faith is labeled apostasy.
This is not the kind I'm familiar with. Especially in Christianity, as I'm reminded of the passage in the New Testament to always be ready to give an answer for the hope that is within you etc.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I don't think any religion really teaches blind faith. At least, I know Judaism and Christianity don't. I don't think Islam does, either.

Unfortunately, this is a very naive approach to why people believe in these ancient religions. These religions do not encourage their believers to seriously question the foundation of their beliefs. In many Islamic countries, your life may be at risk for doing so. The cultural anchor of the sense of community and sense of identity is overwhelming any such 'independent 'search for truth.

Example: Fundamentalist Christians (close to the majority in the USA, must accept Genesis as literal and science as false, based on 'faith.'
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
Unfortunatly many people seem to think all religions are blindly followed without asking questions, and in discussion, i seen this been the case when some people look at Baha'i faith too
Im not sure that is exactly what "people" refer to when talking blind faith or at least only a bit of it.

Try to look at it like this.

Imagine you go to the shop and buy a lottery ticket with the chance of winning 5 million dollars. Obviously you hope you will win because it would be great with some extra money, but you also know that the chance of winning is extremely low.

However you have so much faith in the numbers you have picked that you are certain that you will win, so you decide to go out and borrow a lot money to buy all the stuff you like. It doesn't really matter, because in about 3 days you will have the 5 million dollars anyway and then you can just repay them.

Blind faith is to be certain of something being true without any reason for doing so. So in this case, you having faith in the numbers you picked without any good reason for why you think they are correct. However, being as certain as you are, you behave as if you were already a millionaire.

What atheists are simply saying is, sure we also hope we win the lottery, but we want to wait and see if we actually won before acting as if we did, because we don't think there is any particular good reasons to assume that we chose the correct numbers, given the extremely low chance there is of winning.

In the case of Bahais, or any religion for that matter, the limitation comes with the source material, whether that is Baha'u'llah, the bible or the Quran. Since none of them can tell you if the "numbers" being drawn are the one's you chose on your lottery ticket, so to speak. But you can again, choose to have faith in these telling you the truth, opposite of the atheists, that basically just say: "Well, we can't really verify whether these source materials are telling the truth or not, but based on what we know, have experienced etc. there doesn't seem to be a good reason to assume that they are true.". Again we are not claiming they aren't true, simply that we see no good reason for it, and therefore no reason to have faith in them being so either.

Hope that clear it up a bit?
 
Last edited:

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
Unfortunatly many people seem to think all religions are blindly followed without asking questions, and in discussion, i seen this been the case when some people look at Baha'i faith too

Though 'blind faith' occasionally happens, I don't think its the case for the vast majority of religious people.

Unfortunately, though, most religious institutions do teach that blind, unquestioned, adherence to their religious doctrines and dogmas are "faith". And any objection to that characterization of faith is labeled apostasy.

I see it sometimes. I see those institutions as not quite religious, as they don't seem to concern themselves with the actual teachings but more the cultural trappings. They're almost more cult like...
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Unfortunately, this is a very naive approach to why people believe in these ancient religions. These religions do not encourage their believers to seriously question the foundation of their beliefs. In many Islamic countries, your life may be at risk for doing so. The cultural anchor of the sense of community and sense of identity is overwhelming any such 'independent 'search for truth.

Example: Fundamentalist Christians (close to the majority in the USA, must accept Genesis as literal and science as false, based on 'faith.'
This is a US approach. This is not a naive approach in Europe. You do not seem very familiar at all with these religions and only seem to know them in their US form, which is not the only or dominant form of Christianity (the main religion in the US). Stop trying to tell me this is a naive approach. As a European, I know the kind of religion you describe is not what I see here. You will not find literal Genesis believers in many pews here at all. I don't know any.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
Im not sure that is exactly what "people" refer to when talking blind faith or at least only a bit of it.

Try to look at it like this.

Imagine you go to the shop and buy a lottery ticket with the chance of winning 5 million dollars. Obviously you hope you will win because it would be great with some extra money, but you also know that the chance of winning is extremely low.

However you have so much faith in the numbers you have picked that you are certain that you will win, so you decide to go out and borrow a lot money to buy all the stuff you like. It doesn't really matter, because in about 3 days you will have the 5 million dollars anyway and then you can just repay them.

Blind faith is to be certain of something being true without any reason for doing so. So in this case, you having faith in the numbers you picked without any good reason for why you think they are correct. However, being as certain as you are, you behave as if you were already a millionaire.

What atheists are simply saying is, sure we also hope we win the lottery, but we want to wait and see if we actually won before acting as if we did, because we don't think there is any particular good reasons to assume that we chose the correct numbers, given the extremely low chance there is of winning.

In the case of Bahais, or any religion for that matter, the limitation comes with the source material, whether that is Baha'u'llah, the bible or the Quran. But none of them can tell you if the "numbers" being drawn are the one's you chose on your lottery ticket, so to speak. But you can again, choose to have faith in these telling you the truth, opposite of the atheists, that basically just say: "Well, we can't really verify whether these source materials are telling the truth or not, but based on what we know, have experienced etc. there doesn't seem to be a good reason to assume that they are true.". Again we are not claiming they aren't true, simply that we see no good reason for it, and therefore no reason to have faith in them being so either.

Hope that clear it up a bit?
Your scenario is one way to look at it yes, and correct from that P.O.V but if an other person see it from a different P.O.V they might say, but Nimos you are wrong, because you seeing it from a wrong P.O.V. you must see it from where I am.

A Baha'i must always investigate even in to science to be able slowly but surely so that their understanding getting closer and closer to the teaching. If a person say as an example. But Baha'u'llah say you must believe this, so you must only believe that, then they have not investigated the other P.O.V that is within the teaching.
 
Last edited:

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
This is a US approach. This is not a naive approach in Europe. You do not seem very familiar at all with these religions and only seem to know them in their US form, which is not the only or dominant form of Christianity (the main religion in the US). Stop trying to tell me this is a naive approach. As a European, I know the kind of religion you describe is not what I see here. You will not find literal Genesis believers in many pews here at all. I don't know any.

Honestly, those who don't read the Bible literally are here in the US, too... there's a lot who question it, or think it is metaphorical, but they tend to get drown out by the very loud fundamentalists, so non theistic people often assume they don't exist(or there's not many of them).
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Honestly, those who don't read the Bible literally are here in the US, too... there's a lot who question it, or think it is metaphorical, but they tend to get drown out by the very loud fundamentalists, so non theistic people often assume they don't exist(or there's not many of them).
US fundamentalism is seen as bizarre here.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
Your scenario is one way to look at it yes, and correct from that P.O.V but if an other person see it from a different P.O.V they might say, but Nimos you are wrong, because you seeing it from a wrong P.O.V. you must see it from where I am.

A Baha'i must always investigate even in to science to be able slowly but surely that their understanding getting closer and closer to the teaching. If a person say as an example. But Baha'u'llah say you must believe this, so you must only believe that, then they have not investigated the other P.O.V that is within the teaching.
I get what you are saying and I agree with you. You should investigate it from an objective point of view only. That is the only one that matters, as every other angle is likely to get corrupted.

And basically one should address it the same way as one would do anything else, which is to ask, what is the best or most likely explanation?

The issue that religion runs into, is that it offend only have one angle. So in regards to the Bahai faith, you have Baha'u'llah which made the source material. Its basically impossible to investigate it from any other angle and since he is not around anymore, its not exactly easy to ask him. :)

So my point in the first reply, is that religion run into this wall, because the "authors" or main characters of the source material is not around anymore. So how would we verify that Baha'u'llah were telling the truth? How do we verify whether Jesus could walk on water? etc.

And lets imagine we wanted to verify whether Jesus did so or not, then we have no where to go. And the problem arise the moment we say "Well, according to the bible..."... because that is the one making the claim. It would be weird if it should claim he didn't. And its the same with the Bahais writings. Baha'u'llah wrote it, so it would be strange if, you suddenly read it and on page 34 it stated "I made it all up" or something. :) That is why we need other sources, experiments, observations etc. that can be used to verify the claims. And the problem is that we don't, so we get stuck in the source material, at least for now it seems.
 
Last edited:

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
I get what you are saying and I agree with you. You should investigate it from an objective point of view only. That is the only one that matters, as every other angle is likely to get corrupted.

And basically one should address it the same way as one would do anything else, which is to ask, what is the best or most likely explanation?

The issue that religion runs into, is that it offend only have one angle. So in regards to the Bahai faith, you have Baha'u'llah which made the source material. Its basically impossible to investigate it from any other angle and since he is not around anymore, its not exactly easy to ask him. :)

So my point in the first reply, is that religion run into this wall, because the "authors" or main characters of the source material is not around anymore. So how would we verify that Baha'u'llah were telling the truth? How do we verify whether Jesus could walk on water? etc.

And lets imagine we wanted to verify whether Jesus did so or not, then we have no were to go. And the problem arise the moment we say "Well, according to the bible..."... because that is the one making the claim. It would be weird if that would claim he didn't. And its the same with the Bahais writings. Baha'u'llah wrote it, so it would be strange if, you suddenly read it and on page 34 it stated "I made it all up" or something. :) That is why we need other sources, experiments, observations etc. that can be used to verify the claims. And the problem is that we don't, so we get stuck in the source material, at least for now it seems.

I sometimes wonder if non theists think that theists think that all answers can be found in their holy books...

Certainly, there's a few very loud ones who do. But for most of us... well, if we want to learn about butterflies, we'll pick up a book about butterflies, not the Qur'an(or any other religious text).

Scriptures are good for inspiration and guidance. The idea of 'claims' that I see mentioned so much in here don't apply to many of us theists. Most of us don't go around claiming this or that that's mentioned in a scripture literally happened. Furthermore, for the most part, it isn't important whether or not it happened.

I read in a Gita commentary once that "if you could prove Rama didn't exist, it wouldn't matter to most Hindus. The spirit of Rama will always live on by the guidance provided in the Ramayana". I suspect this applies to the majority of people in the majority of religions, just using their own holy figures in place of Rama...
 
Last edited:

Nimos

Well-Known Member
I sometimes wonder if non theists think that theists think that all answers can be found in their holy books...

Certainly, there's a few very loud ones who do. But for most of us... well, if we want to learn about butterflies, we'll pick up a book about butterflies, not the Qur'an(or any other religious text).

Scriptures are good for inspiration and guidance. The idea of 'claims' that I see mentioned so much in here don't apply to many of us theists. Most of us don't go around claiming this or that that's mentioned in a scripture literally happened. Furthermore, for the most part, it isn't important whether or not it happened.

I read in a Gita commentary once that "if you could prove Rama didn't exist, it wouldn't matter to most Hindus. The spirit of Rama will always live on by the guidance provided in the Mahabharata". I suspect this applies to the majority of people in the majority of religions, just using their own holy figures in place of Rama...
But in that case we are talking different things.

You don't need faith or even to be religious in order to get something out of scriptures or the teachings in them, if that is what one is after. But in that case, you might as well pick up any book which teaches meaningful things, like books with Socrates or other philosophers and find meaning in them.

From what I have read of Baha'u'llah a lot of it seems reasonable and with good intentions, so have no issue with that. But I think its irrelevant when we are talking whether or not, he is what he claims and whether he got this from God or not, and ultimately whether one should have faith in that being true.

But if someone said that they found meaning in the saying "Turn the other cheek....etc.", I wouldn't start an argument that they shouldn't have faith in that, it wouldn't make a lot of sense.
 

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
But in that case we are talking different things.

You don't need faith or even to be religious in order to get something out of scriptures or the teachings in them, if that is what one is after. But in that case, you might as well pick up any book which teaches meaningful things, like books with Socrates or other philosophers and find meaning in them.

From what I have read of Baha'u'llah a lot of it seems reasonable and with good intentions, so have no issue with that. But I think its irrelevant when we are talking whether or not, he is what he claims and whether he got this from God or not, and ultimately whether one should have faith in that being true.

But if someone said that they found meaning in the saying "Turn the other cheek....etc.", I wouldn't start an argument that they shouldn't have faith in that, it wouldn't make a lot of sense.

A lot of times, I don't understand why it matters so much(to either theist or non theist) on whether Baha'u'llah was sent from a God or not. His teachings seem to make a big difference for a fair amount of people, and overall, the Baha'is are pretty peaceful with his teachings.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
This is a US approach. This is not a naive approach in Europe. You do not seem very familiar at all with these religions and only seem to know them in their US form, which is not the only or dominant form of Christianity (the main religion in the US). Stop trying to tell me this is a naive approach. As a European, I know the kind of religion you describe is not what I see here. You will not find literal Genesis believers in many pews here at all. I don't know any.

Not a US approach at all The Christian churches of Europe and elsewhere, and Islam DO NOT often encourage the free investigation of the truth of religious beliefs of other religions. I was previously raised in the Roman Church (RCC) and traveled the world in my life. The Roman Church in the USA is actually more liberal than the Roman Church in Europe or Latin America and does not encourage the investigation of alternate beliefs in terms of an open consideration that other beliefs may be true.

The problem with the Fundamentalist Christians is a problem worldwide and not just a USA problem.

I am a Baha'i, and in much or most of the Islamic world to investigate and/or consider being a Baha'i can be punishable by death or imprisonment. Even in the more moderate, a few, considering the open investigation of the truth of other religions is very much discouraged or even condemned within the sects of Islam when tolerated by the government.

Note: Considering the fallible nature of human nature, any belief may be 'blind faith' on the individual level. The Baha'i Faith and more humanist groups like UU do not consider their beliefs exclusive 'Truth' in terms of the relationship with those who believe differently as do Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

The bottom line is the religions and beliefs that make less 'exclusive belief claims,' and acknowledge the diversity of very human beliefs are open to the the 'Independent search for truth.'
 
Last edited:

Nimos

Well-Known Member
A lot of times, I don't understand why it matters so much(to either theist or non theist) on whether Baha'u'llah was sent from a God or not. His teachings seem to make a big difference for a fair amount of people, and overall, the Baha'is are pretty peaceful with his teachings.
Well :)

If you learned that God existed, wouldn't that sort of change things a bit? That would mean that around half to 2/3 the worlds population would be living in sin and not as God instructed. Our whole existence as humans and place in the universe would be radical different than now.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Not a US approach at all The Christian churches of Europe and elsewhere, and Islam DO NOT often encourage the free investigation of the truth of religious beliefs of other religions. I was previously raised in the Roman Church (RCC) and traveled the world in my life. The Roman Church in the USA is actually more liberal than the Roman Church in Europe or Latin America and does not encourage the investigation of alternate beliefs in terms of an open consideration that other beliefs may be true.

The problem with the Fundamentalist Christians is a problem worldwide and not just a USA problem.

I am a Baha'i, and in much or most of the Islamic world to investigate and/or consider being a Baha'i can be punishable by death or imprisonment. Even in the more moderate, a few, considering the open investigation of the truth of other religions is very much discouraged or even condemned within the sects of Islam when tolerated by the government.

Note: Considering the fallible nature of human nature, any belief may be 'blind faith' on the individual level. The Baha'i Faith and more humanist groups like UU do not consider their beliefs exclusive 'Truth' in terms of the relationship with those who believe differently as do Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
This is just an ignorant approach imo. You don't seem to have studied these religions in any meaningful depth. Do you know about the Jewish study halls the males attend? Do you know about Vatican II? Have you heard the debates of the Mediaeval universities? It's not a monolith. Whatever form of non-Bahai religion you have seen is not a good representation.
 
Top