• 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.

ppp

Well-Known Member
Well I could for the sake of consciousness define the substance by what it does not do, only that the substance is real, and operates unlike anything known of in the material world.
I'm afraid that is the same thing. You are defining something by an assumption of your conclusion and by negatives.

Thought to action seems instantaneous for one thing.
Looks like an average of about 400 milliseconds. Far from instantaneous.
Conscious intention and human action: Review of the rise and fall of the readiness potential and Libet’s clock
The brain takes time to process intent and the impulse from then travel time to the appropriate muscles.
The speed of a nerve impulse varies with the type of nerve impulse the nervous system is sending. Some signals such as those for muscle position, travel at speeds up to 119m/s. Nerve impulses such as pain signals travel slower at 0.61m/s. Touch signals travel at speeds of 76.2m/s.
IIRC, our thoughts are generated at the chemical level via the change in action potential of sodium and potassium ions across the synaptic gap. Or millions of synaptic gaps. And those chemical interactions are standard interactions. How does something non-material interact with those ions, and what exactly does it change about the physical substrate of the brain?

Stop me if I'm out of line here.
Out of line? No. You have been nothing but pleasant and interesting.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
It's like if one asks a Muslim, don't you believe Jesus was Messiah? They do, but the Muslim view on Jesus is different from Christians view on Jesus.
For example, Bahais don't believe there was a 12th Imam born before, and he was alive for thousands of years.

Lol. So who said that your belief is exactly the same? This is the definition of a strawman.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Lol. So who said that your belief is exactly the same? This is the definition of a strawman.
But Bahais don't believe Imams were like Pops, as you said here:

JG. Some might take this in a demeaning manner, but don't understand the Bahai theology from the Bahai's in this forum. Initial queries are fine, but nothing deeper.

Anyway, the most basic Bahai theology is that the entire Bible, the Qur'an, and some of the Bahai writings were all inspired by God. They also have a slinging faith that there were 12 imam's or spiritual leaders like the Pope who spoke "For God".

Thus, if there is a heaven and hell concept in the Bible or the Qur'an, the Bahai faith by default believes in them. Also, Bahaullah's own writing speaks of hell. Also mind you, it directly repeats "ajjahama" which means "The fires in hell".

I am not demeaning their faith. Just stating facts about the Bahai theology.

Peace.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
IIRC, our thoughts are generated at the chemical level via the change in action potential of sodium and potassium ions across the synaptic gap. Or millions of synaptic gaps. And those chemical interactions are standard interactions. How does something non-material interact with those ions, and what exactly does it change about the physical substrate of the brain?

Does this imply that thought content is in those ions? Are they locating thoughts? What entity/identity is having those thoughts?

Either the brain emits consciousness, transmits consciousness, or permits consciousness. Psychiatrist Ian McGhilchrist states this.

How do they know when a thought originates? To when the thought executes an action? How precise is that measure?

So there is an unconscious to conscious response time. The will seems to generate movement by feeling and familiarity as well as thought commands as becomes conscious to do so.

From unconscious storage of memories to becoming conscious enough to will choice an action from unconscious it seems there is a subliminal conscious states as well as explicit conscious states.

Thinking about thinking I often react subconsciously with movements and familiarity.

Things I've mastered happen seemingly faster and automatically with very little need of conscientious thought. I don't have to make conscientious choices in this mode. When I have explicit consciousness I'm much more deliberate and I go slower; it's more focused.

Non material substance could be the control that initiates the thoughts in the first place. How one would rule that in or out is a matter of exact, precise measurement. Control is first, thought comes second, action comes third.

I cannot model a physical representation of thought location and content. What or whom is having the thought?

I think this is not something easily grasped.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
But Bahais don't believe Imams were like Pops, as you said here:

Haha. That was an explanation to someone else, not to a Bahai. This is the second strawman. Why is that?

Ill tell you what. You are just responding for the sake of debating someone somehow. Let me make it clear so that you can try not to keep doing this.

Everything fundamentally believed by Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Hindu's, etc etc that the Bahai's claim were all of the same source and they were all manifestations of God etc etc etc, are just claims but you don't believe the same and in fact are directly opposing them.

So now you can't go picking small things that you differ from all of these faiths and keep making statements like "but we are a tad different here".

Clear? Let me say this again. In fundamental beliefs, the Bahai faith is absolutely different from all of these faiths.

).
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Haha. That was an explanation to someone else, not to a Bahai. This is the second strawman. Why is that?

Ill tell you what. You are just responding for the sake of debating someone somehow. Let me make it clear so that you can try not to keep doing this.

Everything fundamentally believed by Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Hindu's, etc etc that the Bahai's claim were all of the same source and they were all manifestations of God etc etc etc, are just claims but you don't believe the same and in fact are directly opposing them.

So now you can't go picking small things that you differ from all of these faiths and keep making statements like "but we are a tad different here".

Clear? Let me say this again. In fundamental beliefs, the Bahai faith is absolutely different from all of these faiths.

).

No reliable ' . . .in fact' here. Only an egocentric view where my religion is right, and others appear different and wrong.

These are very biased assumptions from someone who believes it is justified to persecute condemn, , and execute, Baha'is in Islamic countries.

Yes the Baha'is believe that all of humanity received Revelation from God throughout human history. Non our left alone and separate from God, That is a human choice. To disagree and believe in the unity of religions is not against anyone. Yes, the different religions like Islam each believe they are the only true religion including the different sects of Islam each believes they are the only way. There are many contradictions here concerning conflicting religious claims from the fallible human perspective, What Criteria outside these conflicting often combative beliefs to judge which one is the true one, It is obvious that the religions have become exclusive and indeed combative (not religions of peace) over time attached to one culture and often a prisoner of the language and narrow worldview of the original ancient scripture

Actually, from the outside more objective perspective if there is not a universal God that reveals his message to humanity all religions are likely wrong. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam could hardly claim to be universal from their narrow cultural and tribal perspective rooted in ancient history rejecting all others who believe differently..
 
Last edited:

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
They find meaning in the spiritual teachings that they apply to their lives. When the spiritual teaching works it produces proof that they have a truth.
That is confirmation bias, pot hoc ergo propter hoc, wishful thinking, etc. It is not "proof" or "evidence".

Here's one argument for a self existing reality that is the foundation of all realities.
How about you briefly explain the argument rather than expecting me to watch a video?

That definition of faith is bogus.
Oh dear.
I guess when we are allowed to redefine words to suit our own purpose, anything is possible.
Your definition of bogus is bogus. ;)
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
So any hell is a result of those choices, as hell is remoteness from God.
It is choosing the darkest room when one is invited outside into the fullness of the mid day sun.
That analogy only makes sense if you accept there is a dark room in the first place. If your reality consists only of sunlit rooms and the great outdoors, the threat of a dark room is meaningless.

People who believe in god will not choose hell.
For people who do not believe in god, hell does not exist so it is not a choice.
Your concept of hell as a punishment for not believing in god is utterly incoherent.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
"It is incumbent upon everyone to firmly adhere to God’s straight Path. Were He to pronounce the right to be the left or the south to be the north, He speaketh the truth and there is no doubt of it." Baha'u'llah.
So you admit that Bahais (once they have accepted Bahaism) are required to blindly follow dogma.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Those religious sects are not after truth they are after dominion.
Their god has stated that he wants his followers to achieve dominion of his word, including by using violence and threats.

My original point is that there are reasons for faith.
Faith and religion can be quite well explained. We know why people are attracted to god claims. We also know that these claims are often demonstrable nonsense.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
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"

One could claim that you should investigate, not follow blindly etc etc, but the reality could be different. This is just an article, not doctrine. And you should read the books written by Abdul Baha. In the quotes in the article you shared in some areas he says to investigate his own teachings, and in some areas he tells you to investigate, but the Bahai's believe some things with no investigations whatsoever.

I think you should do a little more research. Actually read their books, their quotes from the Qur'an, Bible, and other stuff like the Mahdhi, quotes from ahadith, and verify the viability of the faith claims on these things. I have never found a single Bahai in this forum who has investigated them openly. Their faith has been already built, and the investigation is post hoc ergo propter hoc. It's like painting a bulls eye around the already planted arrow or bullet.

The reason I say this or at least one of the reasons is that their claims of the Bible, Buddhist scripture and the Qur'an are largely just false. They have not read them and they don't know what the books actually say, but a lot of times they claim to have "studied" them all. When a question is asked, it will be skirted around rather than answering. That means there has been no investigation. If you want, I can give you many examples and you can address them with "investigation" or ask a Bahai to respond with investigation. The Bahai's are nice people no doubt. That does not mean people could disagree. And there is no point making things up to appease people. It's a bad choice to make in my personal opinion.

Maybe your idea is something like a perennial philosophy. Maybe that's how your empathy works. It's all good for you individually, but does not apply to everyone everywhere. Hope you understand.

Good topic.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
One could claim that you should investigate, not follow blindly etc etc, but the reality could be different. This is just an article, not doctrine. And you should read the books written by Abdul Baha. In the quotes in the article you shared in some areas he says to investigate his own teachings, and in some areas he tells you to investigate, but the Bahai's believe some things with no investigations whatsoever.

I think you should do a little more research. Actually read their books, their quotes from the Qur'an, Bible, and other stuff like the Mahdhi, quotes from ahadith, and verify the viability of the faith claims on these things. I have never found a single Bahai in this forum who has investigated them openly. Their faith has been already built, and the investigation is post hoc ergo propter hoc. It's like painting a bulls eye around the already planted arrow or bullet.

The reason I say this or at least one of the reasons is that their claims of the Bible, Buddhist scripture and the Qur'an are largely just false. They have not read them and they don't know what the books actually say, but a lot of times they claim to have "studied" them all. When a question is asked, it will be skirted around rather than answering. That means there has been no investigation. If you want, I can give you many examples and you can address them with "investigation" or ask a Bahai to respond with investigation. The Bahai's are nice people no doubt. That does not mean people could disagree. And there is no point making things up to appease people. It's a bad choice to make in my personal opinion.

Maybe your idea is something like a perennial philosophy. Maybe that's how your empathy works. It's all good for you individually, but does not apply to everyone everywhere. Hope you understand.

Good topic.
Thank you for your reply @firedragon but I have no need for explanation other than from those who follow Baha'i when it comes to Baha'i faith. Outsiders who isn't Bahai's are not who i seek advice from now.
 
Top