Question
So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”
But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.”
The man asked him, “What is your name?”
“Jacob,” he answered.
Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel (Heb. He Struggles with God), because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome.”
Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.”
But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there.
So Jacob called the place Peniel (Heb. Face of God), saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel, and he was limping because of his hip.
Genesis 32:24-31
Originally this blog was intended to be dedicated to Bahá’í apologetics. Since I started the blog I have strayed from that a bit, and become more and more convinced of the need for a good bit of Bahá’í apologetics online. So I have a question for you all, non-Bahá’í, born Bahá’í, convert, ex-Bahá’í, enrolled, unenrolled, etc. What issues in the Bahá’í Faith have you struggled to understand, accept, reconcile? What issues may have caused you trouble accepting the Faith, have tested your Faith, caused you to resign, stand in the way from accepting the Faith, or presented challenges to overcome? I mean theological issues, social teachings, practices, anything. If you want to give me detail you can, if you don’t fine.You are free to comment anonymously, or to email me at shalomatnight @ gmail . com
I will then be looking at these issues, studying the writings, my own experiences/beliefs and those of others and sharing my thoughts. There are issue that I have had these experiences with and I will share them. I would like to explore practical apologetics, especcially as I unfortunately see Bahá’ís online acting in ways online that I would call polemics under the guise of apologetics. Earnest discussion of faith, proofs and evidences, and life experiences are the apologetics I want to pursue.
Greetings -
I am a committed Baha’i, and I am also unconditionally supportive of the principle of separation of “church” and state, given human history. I am unclear as to the Baha’i position on this – I realize there is controversy among Baha’is on this point. I have not read Sen’s book on this yet, but intend to obtain and read it. Being always wary of people who are certain they have God on their side, and who believe they know the will of God for other human beings, particularly when such people have the power of a political state behind them, I believe this is the most important issue for Baha’is to settle among themselves. Some Baha’is seem to believe that Baha’u'llah intended the eventual development of a “Baha’i state,” which would entail all citizens, including non-Baha’is, being subject to Baha’i law. Others seem to feel that there is room for disagreement on this issue, based on authoritative Baha’i writings.
Religion, any religion, with the backing of political power, is a fearsome thing in my view. I don’t need to go over our history as a human race with all the abuses committed in the name of religion – we’re all aware of those. How can Baha’is think themselves immune to this kind of abuse, if they were to obtain political power?
I am very interested to hear your experience and opinions on this subject.
Thank you for giving opportunity for discussion.
Barb Ruth-Wright
Barb Ruth-Wright
16 July, 2008 at 9:27 am
> What issues in the Bahá’í Faith have you struggled to understand, accept, reconcile?
> What issues may have caused you trouble accepting the Faith, have tested your
> Faith, caused you to resign, stand in the way from accepting the Faith, or presented
> challenges to overcome? I mean theological issues, social teachings, practices,
> anything.
Hey Gerald,
A. My main issues, from when I was active in the face-to-face community, were:
1. Complaints and appeals either disappeared or I was asked to forgive and forget and move on.
2. Projects, whether they succeeded or failed, weren’t openly reviewed and learned from. (I don’t count, “It must have had a great effect in the spiritual world, because it didn’t have one in the physical world” as a review.)
In consequence, I was being asked to trust a process and an authority that refused to be answerable to anything — including failure to meet its own stated goals.
I was someone who believed in the Baha’i faith as a force for social change. I lost faith in that before regaining it. I also now increasingly recognise that being a force for social change requires much more than a focus on social issues. That may seem to be blindingly obvious, but that’s what I learned, all the same.
B. My main issue now that I’m active in the unaffiliated community:
I accept the authority of the House as Head of the Faith because I have no reason to think that it’s been formed in other than a legitimate way, but I also have direct experience of its (at best) poor governance. For example, it removed Alison Marshall from membership in a move that cut across processes it had set in train via the NZ NSA, then it either failed to see that an error had been made, or figured it could rule by fiat.
Even though I don’t think the House is propositionally inerrant, I face cognitive dissonance because the other meanings of isma/masum — such as not knowingly doing wrong and the ability to recognise and repair errors — are also not evident in the behaviour of the House towards Alison Marshall.
Where am I at the moment on that? I pretty much treat the House like I do the New Zealand government, whose authority I also accept. And I’m pretty comfortable with that. But I figure many mainstream Baha’is and institutions could have trouble with that position. …So I mention it.
Most other problems in the mainstream community can arguably be traced to what I consider to be idolatry towards the House. The community seems to be conforming — to Ruhi, IPGs and study circles — rather than diversifying. Rule of thumb: If it’s not endorsed by the House, it’s not being done.
I guess I’ve seen the problems I’ve outlined above as challenges to overcome, and, instead of resigning or “losing my faith” I’ve re-interpreted my Baha’iness — in part to make sense of what’s going down. I think you’ll find that a lot of the “apostates and marginals” will have done the same.
I’m sorry I couldn’t just give you a tidy list.
not Steve Marshall
18 July, 2008 at 3:32 pm
“Earnest discussion of faith, proofs and evidences, and life experiences are the apologetics I want to pursue.”
Awesome. I do occasionally enjoy slumming it online through those places that engage in polemics. I enjoy the perspective, but I know there’s little to be had in meaningful dialog.
Like Barb, I am also an advocate for separation between church & state, but only because the state of our current societies. I think this separation is reasonable and appropriate at this point in time. When the worlds’ societies undergo the gradual transformation to “something more Baha’i in nature”, I think the adoption of a Baha’i state will be a natural one… one made by a society’s willing submission to the Will of God. I believe the transition will be gradual… I believe it will be compassionate. I am not ignorant of human history though. I foresee how Baha’is could abuse political power… but speculating on this future is neither here nor there. Scripture tells us to have a pure, kind and radiant heart… let’s start there and first get people to submit to that idea.
Being outside of the registered Baha’i community, I go online to connect with Baha’is and I hear stories like those from Steve. It’s enough to make me pause … to reconsider whether I want to fully join the more mainstream and registered Baha’i Community. When I prayed and meditated on the different matters, I sensed that people were accustomed to a Baha’i Faith that operated differently… and nothing can create fear like change. I sense the Faith has grown and evolved in the last 10 years, and it is more out of a practical need that some changes have come to pass. I sense there’s a practical need to establish common doctrines to ensure a degree of unity within the community. I sense priorities and goals are such that concerns are ignored because there are other pressing matters. I don’t sense malice in the stories I hear… just the occasional “passion for the Faith” that isn’t properly tempered by something like humility, patience, or some other virtue. We’re all imperfect, and I know it’s hard to accept the flaws of others. I have a hard enough time accepting my own.
These are just speculations from an outsider though. At some point in time, I hope to make the effort to rejoin the Baha’i community. I haven’t done so yet, largely because it would bring strife into my marriage. When the time comes though, I think I shall be mindful of the intent behind actions, and do my best to judge with humility and patience. Until then, there’s little for me to judge.
As for my challenges… well, it’s mostly the basics for me. I have enough challenges coming to terms with living my daily duties in life… in the end, it always comes down to submitting to Scripture and learning to kill my selfish pride & ego a little bit at a time.
Badhras
9 August, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Actually… this isn’t a challenge so much for me to accept, but it’s one that puts my wife and I at odds… the issue of homosexuality.
I’ve got no issue with gays and lesbians. In fact, I’m going to a lesbian wedding later this month. However, I can’t say I endorse gay marriage (e.g. I wouldn’t vote to make it legal in my place of residence). I’m going as a friend and because my wife is a bridesmaid. The wedding is happening whether or not I go, so why not go and maybe I’ll learn something new.
In any case, my wife finds my belief that “homosexuality is wrong” as problematic. Most of the lesbians we know have a history of male sexual abuse in their past and have serious trust issues with men (understandably so). Most of the gay males just seem wired differently… e.g. we could see the gay happening before they even knew it.
For my wife, both are sufficient reasons to pursue a homosexual lifestyle… and well, I’m fine with that. It doesn’t change the fact that scripture says it’s wrong and that I agree with it. It’s not like I’m telling anybody that they have to sign up for a Baha’i lifestyle or else. Heck. It’s not like my marriage is legit by Baha’i Law since I technically married my wife without first having mailed my Baha’i card back to the NSA with a big *F*U* letter way back when. (Yeah, I’m working on getting that part fixed.) Still… I’m not one to throw rocks at gay people, other than doing what my conscience tells me… and it says to be kind above all things and search for justice.
Whatever path of thinking I pursue… there’s not a compelling scientific or humanistic reason to condemn a homosexual lifestyle other than some dumb “if we were all gay, we wouldn’t exist” kind of dumb reasoning. The reason seems more spiritual to me, but I can’t quite place it. I also sense we’re at a point where there isn’t an equitable solution that is just… societal culture and science have to evolve a bit more.
Still, even speculative thinking results in rather upsetting responses. ‘What if we had a cure for “the gay”?’ just comes off as insensitive. ‘What if we fixed enough of society’s other ills that little girls don’t grow up with male trust issues?’… that just seems unlikely any time soon.
Badhras
9 August, 2008 at 8:38 pm