The Bahai Faith, Quakers, and Jefferson

[TwoTongues]

[quote=“BigJohn”][quote=“TwoTongues”]
In the first quote earlier, you are claiming that there are major differences between Baha’i and Mormonism. Duh. I am presenting some very clear similarities between the two and refuting some of your claims. It’s not relevant what those other religions believe or historically believe, we’re only discussing Mormonism and Baha’i right now, by your own statement. And not all religions have to hate blacks and gays, which is why I presented the example of Quakers - also to tie it back into the topic title, since we’re getting OT.[/quote]

But it does matter what other religions are like, so that we have a fair comparison and do not unduly create a false sense of similarity. Is the Baha’i Faith more similar to Mormonism than it is dissimilar? There are huge differences, which you have ignored.
[/quote]
When I first replied to this post, it was for two reasons: to disagree with the specific statement you made about the tablets and about lack of kookiness, and to point out some facts about Baha’i, not necessarily claimed by you, that perhaps some people are not aware of. You stated that somehow the existence of angel-buried tablets of Mormonism were different from the Bahai. I presented facts that showed that not only do the Bahai have tablets, they are also supposedly divinely influenced and are considered infallible, so for all intents and purposes, they’re the same level of incredibility. Second, you stated that the Bahai didn’t seem to share some of the kookiness of Mormonism. I agreed that Mormonism has some outlying peculiar beliefs and ceremonies, but that in general, the Bahai also have some kooky beliefs, and you also have to include some of the kooky beliefs of the three main religions behind Bahai - Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism - if the Bahai respect and believe in at least some of the validity of those religions for being from a “higher power”.

And then to present some of the kookiness or evil that the Baha’i religion includes, I presented examples of how they are textually anti-homosexual and racist. If you don’t want to read the details of their anti-homosexuality, or if you feel it has no bearing on the arguments here, feel free to ignore it, but in the context of this topic, I will still present it.

Except for the fact that many other world religions are anti-homosexual, I fail to see how any of that is a “bad argument” or whatever you’re arguing. Of course they’re totally different religions, but they do have a few similarities, and Baha’i has some wacky beliefs and some infallible divinely inspired tablets, despite your earlier claim. So what’s the problem?

[BigJohn]

I have already said:

Mormons are kooks because they believe gold tablets were buried by an angel for Joseph Smith.
The Babi and Baha’i tablets are actually books, similar to the Koran, Bible, Bhagavad Vita, etc.
All religions consider their sacred writings to be inspired by God.

As with being anti-gay and having been racist in the past…so too are many religions.

The point is that your argument has no point.It doesn’t show any meaningful similarity between the Bs and the Ms.

It’s like saying that modern Iowans and ancient Incas were similar because they both cultivated corn, or that Greeks and Chinese were similar because men were the head of the household. They are meaningless statements, unless there is some kind of special relevance to the comparison. Which there isn’t, or at least you haven’t shown one.

The only real similarity between Baha’is- a universalist offshoot of Islam - and Mormonism - a kooky new form of Christianity - is that they are both from the mid-19th century, and share a bit of that “this is the time that was foretold” fervor.

[Zla_od]

Big John, I agree that Mormonism and Baha’i are different in many ways. But I think the comparison is useful, especially for a sense of their institutional cultures. (They have both expelled dissident intellectuals, for example.) I don’t think either one is “cuckoo” or “kooks,” they are for the most part normal people who, like most religions, have some beliefs which seem peculiar to outsiders. (I don’t see much difference between one mode of revelation and another.)

It is easy to think of the Bab as somebody like David Koresh, but he came out of visionary apocalyptic circles in Islam (Shaykhism). By then their beliefs about the meaning of prophecy had changed from things which are basically impossible (the moon turning to blood) to interpretations that someone could actually fulfill. In 19th century Iran this must have offered a tempting opportunity to reinterpret and supersede the Islamic society of that time. Anyway, judge for yourself. Here is a link to a translation of a key Babi text, the Persian Bayan:

h-net.org/~bahai/trans/bayan/bayan.htm

Everyone should understand that according to Baha’i teaching, the teachings of the Bab–some of which, such as his commandment to burn all non-Babi books, may strike modern readers as extreme–have been superseded by the writings of Baha’u’llah, which (like the Bab’s before) are infallible and authoritative (as interpreted and applied by his successors).

TwoTongues, here is an anti-Baha’i polemic (on slavery) similar to what you are describing:

angelfire.com/mo3/bahai/Africans.html

And here is a pro-Baha’i interpretation of of Baha’u’llah’s family servants / slaves (the exact role is a point under discussion):

bahai-library.com/articles/black.pearls.html

For further information, here is are some good links:

bahaisonline.net
kashkul.org/
angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/talisman.html
www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman.htm
(talisman continues as the “talisman9” yahoo group)

And my personal favorite, Brendan Cook’s satire, “The Strange Story of Max the Infallible Donkey”:

bahaisonline.net/index.php?optio … 3&Itemid=2

(Cook remains a Baha’i in good standing, oddly enough.)

[BigJohn]

Institutionally, the 's and M’s do have some similarities, probably because they are very new religions so they haven’t yet gone through so many different fragmentations as Christianity or Islam. But both of these latter also tried to expel and suppress dissidents. It’s just that over time, these dissidents became “respectable”.

The Bab as David Koresh, the wacko from Wacko? Your analogy is anachronistic. In the 19th century and before, there were many people and cult leaders with irrational, non-scientific beliefs. You had kinds of weird cults and mystical beliefs going on around the world. In the context Babism was more normal. Now, and in the USA, people are more rational and scientific, not to mention living lives of greater security and hope, so having someone like Koresh is much stranger and more shocking than it would be 150 years earlier.

Next, you will be arguing that Christianity is racist because of the support for slavery of many church leaders in the Old South, who were similar to Nazis because of their racial views?

[TwoTongues]

[quote=“BigJohn”]I have already said:

Mormons are kooks because they believe gold tablets were buried by an angel for Joseph Smith.
The Babi and Baha’i tablets are actually books, similar to the Koran, Bible, Bhagavad Vita, etc.
All religions consider their sacred writings to be inspired by God.

As with being anti-gay and having been racist in the past…so too are many religions.

The point is that your argument has no point.It doesn’t show any meaningful similarity between the Bs and the Ms.

It’s like saying that modern Iowans and ancient Incas were similar because they both cultivated corn, or that Greeks and Chinese were similar because men were the head of the household. They are meaningless statements, unless there is some kind of special relevance to the comparison. Which there isn’t, or at least you haven’t shown one.

The only real similarity between Baha’is- a universalist offshoot of Islam - and Mormonism - a kooky new form of Christianity - is that they are both from the mid-19th century, and share a bit of that “this is the time that was foretold” fervor.[/quote]
Your defense of Baha’i at the expense of the Mormons re their tablets is only a good argument in your mind; there is no level of “kookiness” difference between the founder of Mormonism claiming to have found angel-buried divinely written tablets and the founder of Bahai claiming to have written divinely-inspired infallible tablets - that fact that the Mormons’ are tabelts and the Bahai’s are just called tablets is neither here nor there.

I am not claiming that Bahai and Mormonism are similar in so many ways, I am claiming that there are similarities, and that Bahai can be kooky too. I made this very clear in my previous post, if my original post wasn’t clear enough. Your corn analogy is spurious as Incans and Iowans are not contemporaries, as the origins of Bahai and Mormonism are. A better analogy would be if the Incans and Aztecs both cultivated corn despite being a couple thousand miles apart - and in fact that would point to further cultural similarities, though in itself might seem like not much of a discriminator. Not all contemporary religions were openly racist against Africans, including Quakers and I would argue Buddhism - though the Buddhists probably didn’t get so many opportunities to hate Africans, they had plenty of opportunities to hate darker skinned and less civilized cultures. So being supposedly divine and pro-peace and then openly despising Africans is a discriminator. Possibly also anti-homosexuality, though since Quakers sprung from Christianity, and I don’t know the old history of Quakers, they may have originally also been against homosexuality.

Of course Bahai these days is universalist and inclusive, something that can not be said about Mormonism. But so what? I’m not arguing they’re particularly similar. You’re arguing against a straw man.

[Zla_od]

Actually my point was to make the Bab sound LESS like Koresh, even though both were firebrand apocalyptics. For example, unlike Koresh, the Bab seems not to have slept with his female followers. Some idea of the Bab’s character can perhaps be gleaned from those Bayan exerpts (linked above), and from “Nabil’s Narrative” (a hagiographic history which is nevertheless very readable): reference.bahai.org/en/t/nz/DB/

Other, more representative Baha’i writings (such as the writings of Baha’u’llah, which anyone interested in the religion should dip into) can be found here: reference.bahai.org/en/

And here are a few musical pieces which I feel bring a whole new dimension to the discussion:

youtube.com/watch?v=kEpoCMEndZI

youtube.com/watch?v=bDNZrW60 … re=related

youtube.com/watch?v=lmR8KCne … re=related

Fox, is this discussion helpful to you? Is there anything you would like to “double-click” on? You seem familiar with Quaker history–or should we focus more on that? Or on Jefferson…?

[BigJohn]

[quote=“TwoTongues”]
Of course Bahai these days is universalist and inclusive, something that can not be said about Mormonism. But so what? I’m not arguing they’re particularly similar. You’re arguing against a straw man.[/quote]

Not quite! You were the one who brought up the supposed similarity, which I thought was inaccurate, in the sense that a partial truth could be called a lie - not that I am calling you a liar.

You can find points of similarity in many things, and differences, and some interpretations are subjective. You obviously feel there is a greater similarity than I do.However, I guess we have both made our points and we can give it a rest? Agree to disagree?

[BigJohn]

Zla’od:

Interesting links, for the most part. That polemical site was a bit trashy though, and it was clearly aimed as a personal attack against a local staff member. I think it’s in bad taste to link to low-class trash like that.

But, what I’m getting from all this is that the people of the 19th and early 20th centuries were very racist by today’s standards,and that included Baha’i leaders.

There was a lot of slavery in earlier Christian and Muslim societies as well.

The main point here is not that there is anything particularly wrong with Baha’is, but rather that they have the misfortune to be so close in time to their mythical origins that many of their revisions can be seriously challenged. And, that there has been such a change in values that even a few hundred years has caused these changes to be so notable that the statements of Baha’i leaders can sound terrible by today’s standards.

[tango42]