Bahai9 - Recent changes [en]

Changing of laws in the Bible

Brettz9 — Sat, 10 Oct 2026 21:48:48 GMT

(Verses appearing to suggest a lack of change in the law)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:48, 10 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==(Verses ~~appearing~~ to suggest a lack of change in the law)==		==(Verses that may appear to suggest a lack of change in the law)==

	“You shall not add to the word I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”		“You shall not add to the word I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”
Line 7:		Line 7:
	"Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever"		"Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever"

	:([[bib:Hebrews 13:8\|Hebrews 13:8]]		:([[bib:Hebrews 13:8\|Hebrews 13:8]])

	==(Verses which suggest a change in the law)==		==(Verses which suggest a change in the law)==

Course:Meetings for teaching/Bounties of God

Brettz9 — Fri, 09 Oct 2026 05:09:29 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:09, 9 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	''This lesson aims to establish the bounties of God ~~(despite our undeserving)~~.''		''This lesson aims to establish the bounties of God.''

	''This page is particularly for Deists or apatheists who cannot believe a God would intervene, care about us, allow suffering, be bountiful, or provide us life in the next world, etc. (even if they accept that a Creator may exist)''		''This page is particularly for Deists or apatheists who cannot believe a God would intervene, care about us, allow suffering, be bountiful, or provide us life in the next world, etc. (even if they accept that a Creator may exist)''

Course:Meetings for teaching/Oneness of God

Brettz9 — Fri, 09 Oct 2026 01:13:16 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:13, 8 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 4:		Line 4:


	{{box\|'''Read all quotations from the following sections.'''}}		{{box\|'''Read all quotations from the following sections. Try to remember some of the implications of a belief in the oneness of God.'''}}

	{{Implications of the Oneness of God}}		{{Implications of the Oneness of God}}
Line 17:		Line 17:


	{{box\|'''Review the following, ~~remembering what~~ kinds of polytheism and idolatry there are.'''}}		{{box\|'''Review the following, taking note of the various kinds of polytheism and idolatry there are.'''}}

	{{polytheism}}		{{polytheism}}

Course:Meetings for teaching

Brettz9 — Fri, 02 Oct 2026 01:27:56 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 1 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Introduction ==		== Introduction ==

	Welcome to a type of '''weekly study meeting''' focused on '''preparing ourselves to better teach the Faith'''! This ongoing meeting for teaching is aimed at learning the '''proofs, prophecies, and the history''' of the Faith in greater depth. Methods of study are to include use of '''study outlines''' so as to help ourselves retain the logical structure and details of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's arguments as well as major events of the Faith's history.		Welcome to a type of '''weekly study meeting''' focused on '''preparing ourselves to better teach the Faith'''! This ongoing meeting for teaching is aimed at learning the '''proofs, prophecies, and the history''' of the Faith in greater depth. Methods of study are to include use of '''study outlines''' so as to help ourselves retain the logical structure and details of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's arguments as well as major events of the Faith's history. '''Dialogues''' and '''study questions''' are also used to reinforce the content and consider its further application.

	The curriculum is '''in a prerelease phase'''.		The curriculum is '''in a prerelease phase'''.

	The course begins for the first class or two with more didactic study of quotations but then shifts to '''more engagement'''.		The course begins for the first class or two with more didactic study of quotations that justify the approach of the class but then shifts to '''more engagement'''.

	Feel free to '''adapt this curriculum''' for your own "meeting for teaching".		Feel free to '''adapt this curriculum''' for your own "meeting for teaching".

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simpler version)

Brettz9 — Fri, 02 Oct 2026 00:06:12 GMT

Evolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:06, 1 October 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:
	'''Navid:''' Exactly. When countless blind parts work together to achieve a complex goal, the parts can't see the big picture. Your hand doesn't know it's helping your eye. A higher intelligence has to set up that teamwork so the system works.		'''Navid:''' Exactly. When countless blind parts work together to achieve a complex goal, the parts can't see the big picture. Your hand doesn't know it's helping your eye. A higher intelligence has to set up that teamwork so the system works.

	'''Maya:''' Fair enough on teamwork, but what about his talk in ''The Promulgation of Universal Peace'' (p. [[pup:82\|82]])? He says a cause must be ~~at least~~ greater than its effect—like a painter being smarter than the painting. But what ~~if consciousness just appears when simple things combine~~? One water ~~drop~~ isn't "wet," but ~~a lot of them~~ together are. Couldn't mindless matter ~~just~~ evolve until minds popped up on their own?		'''Maya''': Fair enough on teamwork, but what about his talk in The Promulgation of Universal Peace (p. [[pup:82\|82]])? He says a cause must be greater than its effect—like a painter being smarter than the painting. But what about evolution? Science shows that over vast periods of time, blind physical processes produce new, emergent properties. One water molecule isn't "wet," but billions together are. Couldn't mindless matter simply evolve through natural selection until minds and consciousness popped up on their own, without any prior design?

	'''Navid:''' ~~He actually~~ tackles that in chapter one of ''Some Answered Questions'' with his "root and branch" example. He asks: can a branch have a higher trait, like thinking or making choices, if that trait is completely missing from its root? Wetness is just molecules sticking together—it's still physical matter. But ~~having~~ thoughts and ~~feelings is completely~~ different from a rock or ~~a beam of light~~. Saying mindless matter created minds out of nothing is like expecting an empty bank account to earn interest. A cause ~~can't~~ give what it doesn't have.		'''Navid''': A Bahá'í would completely concede that evolution happens. We don't deny that life evolves over millions of years through natural processes—that is simply how the physical world develops. But accepting evolution doesn't remove the need for design; it points right back to it.

			Look at how he tackles that objection in chapter one of Some Answered Questions with his "root and branch" example. He asks: can a branch have a higher trait, like thinking or making choices, if that trait is completely missing from its root?

			Wetness is just molecules sticking together—it's still purely physical matter doing physical things. But conscious awareness—having an inner life, thoughts, and feelings—is entirely different from a rock, water, or blind genetic mutations. Saying mindless matter created minds out of nothing is like expecting an empty bank account to earn interest. Evolution explains how the branch grows over time, but a cause cannot give what it doesn't have. Natural selection can only work with what the basic laws of the universe allow. For evolution to produce conscious beings, the capacity for mind had to be built into the "root" of the universe from the start—which suggests an intentional design behind the whole evolutionary process.

	'''Maya:''' But looking at real trees, branches have things roots don't. Flowers and fruit grow on branches, not underground in the roots. So why can't nature be a blind root that eventually grows thinking branches?		'''Maya:''' But looking at real trees, branches have things roots don't. Flowers and fruit grow on branches, not underground in the roots. So why can't nature be a blind root that eventually grows thinking branches?

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Teleological/Dialogue

Brettz9 — Fri, 02 Oct 2026 00:02:54 GMT

evolution

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:02, 1 October 2026
Line 19:		Line 19:
	'''Navid:''' Exactly. His argument is that when you have countless blind, unconscious parts working together toward a unified, complex result, those blind parts can't be aware of the "big picture." A hand doesn't know it’s helping the eye. An unseen, overarching, unifying power—an intellect—is required to coordinate those diverse parts so the whole system functions.		'''Navid:''' Exactly. His argument is that when you have countless blind, unconscious parts working together toward a unified, complex result, those blind parts can't be aware of the "big picture." A hand doesn't know it’s helping the eye. An unseen, overarching, unifying power—an intellect—is required to coordinate those diverse parts so the whole system functions.

	'''Maya:''' I see what you're saying about systemic coordination, but let's look at another text—His talk in ''The Promulgation of Universal Peace'', where He argues that a cause must have all the "perfections" of its effect. By "perfections," He means high-level qualities or capacities, like intelligence or self-awareness. He says a painter must be greater than the painting, so the cause of human intelligence must possess intelligence. But what if consciousness is just an ''emergent property~~''—a~~ new quality that pops up when simple things combine? Like how individual water molecules aren't "wet," but when you combine billions of them, wetness appears. Why couldn't mindless matter evolve ~~over billions of years~~ until consciousness simply popped up as a late-stage byproduct?		'''Maya''': I see what you're saying about systemic coordination, but let's look at another text—His talk in The Promulgation of Universal Peace, where He argues that a cause must have all the "perfections" of its effect. By "perfections," He means high-level qualities or capacities, like intelligence or self-awareness. He says a painter must be greater than the painting, so the cause of human intelligence must possess intelligence. But what if consciousness is just an emergent property along the road of evolution—a new quality that pops up when simple things combine over billions of years? Like how individual water molecules aren't "wet," but when you combine billions of them, wetness appears. Why couldn't mindless matter gradually evolve until consciousness simply popped up as a late-stage byproduct, without needing any conscious intent behind it?

	'''Navid:''' That’s ~~actually~~ the exact objection He addresses in paragraph 6 of that first chapter in ''Some Answered ~~Questions''—the~~ "root and branch" passage. He asks: Is it logically possible for a branch to possess a higher quality—like self-awareness, choice, and intelligence—that is entirely absent in its root? Wetness is just a physical arrangement of molecules sticking together; it’s still just physical matter doing physical things. But subjective, conscious awareness—having an inner life—is a completely different kind of reality than a lump of rock or a wave of light. Claiming that blind, mindless matter generated mind out of ~~nowhere~~ is like saying ~~a zero-dollar~~ bank account can generate real interest. ~~A cause~~ cannot ~~give away~~ a capacity ~~it simply doesn~~'t ~~possess~~ in ~~any form~~.		'''Navid''': A Bahá'í wouldn't deny that evolution happens—the physical universe and biological life undeniably undergo gradual, developmental change over vast stretches of time. Evolution isn't the issue; it’s the physical description of how complex forms unfold. But where design enters is in what that process can actually produce. That’s the exact objection 'Abdu'l-Bahá addresses in paragraph 6 of that first chapter in Some Answered Questions—the "root and branch" passage. He asks: Is it logically possible for a branch to possess a higher quality—like self-awareness, choice, and intelligence—that is entirely absent in its root? Wetness is just a physical arrangement of molecules sticking together; it’s still just physical matter doing physical things. But subjective, conscious awareness—having an inner life—is a completely different kind of reality than a lump of rock or a wave of light. Claiming that blind, mindless matter generated mind out of absolute nothingness is like saying an empty bank account can generate real interest. Even across billions of years of evolution, a process cannot bestow a capacity that isn't grounded in its underlying foundation.

	'''Maya:''' Hold on though—if we take the botanical analogy literally, branches ''do'' have properties that roots don't! A tree's flower or fruit appears on the branch, not down in the dark root system. A root doesn't blossom or photosynthesize light, but the branch does. So why couldn't nature be a blind, dark root that eventually sprouts flowers of consciousness on its branches?		'''Maya''': Hold on though—if we take the botanical analogy literally, branches do have properties that roots don't! A tree's flower or fruit appears on the branch, not down in the dark root system. A root doesn't blossom or photosynthesize light, but the branch does. So why couldn't evolutionary nature be a blind, dark root that eventually sprouts flowers of consciousness on its branches through natural selection?

	'''Navid:''' That’s a really clever biological pushback, but it actually highlights why 'Abdu'l-Bahá uses that specific metaphor. In botany, the capacity to produce flowers, fruit, and leaves isn't absent from the root—it’s encoded in the genetic DNA running through the entire organism from seed to root to tip. The root draws the sap and nutrients ~~specifically ''~~so'' the blossom can bloom. The flower is latent within the nature of the plant from day one.		'''Navid''': That’s a really clever biological pushback, but it actually highlights why 'Abdu'l-Bahá uses that specific metaphor to show design behind evolution. In botany, the capacity to produce flowers, fruit, and leaves isn't absent from the root—it’s encoded in the genetic DNA running through the entire organism from seed to root to tip. The root draws the sap and nutrients precisely so the blossom can bloom. The flower is latent within the nature of the plant from day one; it doesn't appear by pure happenstance.

	If you apply that ~~back~~ to ~~existence~~, 'Abdu'l-Bahá’s point stands: if consciousness "blooms" in humanity (the branch), then the capacity for consciousness must have been latent in the primary Reality (the root) all along. It couldn't be ~~a complete accident~~ springing from a root that is fundamentally, permanently incapable of mind. ~~It means~~ the universe was designed with ~~the~~ potential ~~for mind built~~ into its ~~very core~~.		If you apply that to evolution, 'Abdu'l-Bahá’s point stands: natural selection can only act on the potentials permitted by the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology. If consciousness "blooms" in humanity (the branch), then the capacity for consciousness must have been latent in the primary Reality (the root) all along. It couldn't be an accidental miracle springing from a cosmic root that is fundamentally, permanently incapable of mind. Evolution is the mechanism of growth, but the fact that this long evolutionary tree reliably produces conscious, rational minds indicates that the universe was designed with that very potential structured into its root.

	'''Maya:''' Ah, I see. So if the blossom is implicit in the seed and root, then consciousness can't be an alien accident attached to a dead universe—it means the universe itself is fundamentally oriented toward producing mind.		'''Maya:''' Ah, I see. So if the blossom is implicit in the seed and root, then consciousness can't be an alien accident attached to a dead universe—it means the universe itself is fundamentally oriented toward producing mind.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simpler version)

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 23:33:11 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:33, 1 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 11:		Line 11:
	'''Maya:''' But why does order require a mind? Look at snowflakes or round stars. That's order, but it's just basic physics and chemistry happening automatically. You don't need God to draw each snowflake. Why can't the universe just be mindless matter organizing itself?		'''Maya:''' But why does order require a mind? Look at snowflakes or round stars. That's order, but it's just basic physics and chemistry happening automatically. You don't need God to draw each snowflake. Why can't the universe just be mindless matter organizing itself?

	'''Navid:''' That makes sense if we're only talking about simple shapes. But 'Abdu'l-Bahá is talking about a different kind of order. In his ''Tablet to Auguste Forel'', he compares the universe to a human body or a machine. A snowflake is just a repeating pattern. A body, though, has millions of unthinking cells and organs working together to keep you alive, even though none of them know what the others are doing.		'''Navid:''' That makes sense if we're only talking about simple shapes. But 'Abdu'l-Bahá is talking about a different kind of order. In his ''[https://bahai-library.com/abdul-baha_tablet_auguste_forel Tablet to Auguste Forel]'', he compares the universe to a human body or a machine. A snowflake is just a repeating pattern. A body, though, has millions of unthinking cells and organs working together to keep you alive, even though none of them know what the others are doing.

	'''Maya:''' So he means parts working together as a whole system, not just repeating shapes?		'''Maya:''' So he means parts working together as a whole system, not just repeating shapes?
Line 17:		Line 17:
	'''Navid:''' Exactly. When countless blind parts work together to achieve a complex goal, the parts can't see the big picture. Your hand doesn't know it's helping your eye. A higher intelligence has to set up that teamwork so the system works.		'''Navid:''' Exactly. When countless blind parts work together to achieve a complex goal, the parts can't see the big picture. Your hand doesn't know it's helping your eye. A higher intelligence has to set up that teamwork so the system works.

	'''Maya:''' Fair enough on teamwork, but what about his talk in ''The Promulgation of Universal Peace''? He says a cause must ~~have all the traits of~~ its effect—like a painter being smarter than the painting. But what if consciousness just appears when simple things combine? One water drop isn't "wet," but a lot of them together are. Couldn't mindless matter just evolve until minds popped up on their own?		'''Maya:''' Fair enough on teamwork, but what about his talk in ''The Promulgation of Universal Peace'' (p. [[pup:82\|82]])? He says a cause must be at least greater than its effect—like a painter being smarter than the painting. But what if consciousness just appears when simple things combine? One water drop isn't "wet," but a lot of them together are. Couldn't mindless matter just evolve until minds popped up on their own?

	'''Navid:''' He actually tackles that in chapter one of ''Some Answered Questions'' with his "root and branch" example. He asks: can a branch have a higher trait, like thinking or making choices, if that trait is completely missing from its root? Wetness is just molecules sticking together—it's still physical matter. But having thoughts and feelings is completely different from a rock or a beam of light. Saying mindless matter created minds out of nothing is like expecting an empty bank account to earn interest. A cause can't give what it doesn't have.		'''Navid:''' He actually tackles that in chapter one of ''Some Answered Questions'' with his "root and branch" example. He asks: can a branch have a higher trait, like thinking or making choices, if that trait is completely missing from its root? Wetness is just molecules sticking together—it's still physical matter. But having thoughts and feelings is completely different from a rock or a beam of light. Saying mindless matter created minds out of nothing is like expecting an empty bank account to earn interest. A cause can't give what it doesn't have.

Course:Meetings for teaching/meetings for teaching justification

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 22:42:31 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:42, 1 October 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:


	''The proofs ~~are~~ difficult for some believers to accept. Some may be opposed because they think it takes away mystery from religion. Others may not be intellectually curious enough to persist. Others simply don't know it is enjoined by 'Abdu'l-Bahá. Some know, but mistakenly think spirituality is only to be felt internally~~. Some fear offering proofs is like arguing~~. Some are uncomfortable with attempts to offer proofs which seek to persuade others. Others ~~give up~~ due to finding a lack of receptivity ~~to the proofs as presented by~~ their hearers. The quotes in this introduction to the meeting for teaching address such objections, and thus your learning that they are available in the Writings (and from here) may help you confirm the faith of others who might otherwise be deterred from accepting the need to study and teach these proofs. So it is hoped that you may, like the doctor in the story, not just accept on faith that it is a teaching, but also be prepared to study these quotations deeply enough so as to be able to offer relevant ones, as the need arises, to other friends who may be in doubt about the ~~principles therein~~.''		{{Box\|''The need for study of the proofs is difficult for some believers to accept. Some may be opposed because they think it takes away mystery from religion. Others may not be intellectually curious enough to tolerate uncertainty or persist enough in study to become more adept in them. Others simply don't know study of the proofs is enjoined by 'Abdu'l-Bahá. Some know, but mistakenly think spirituality is only to be felt internally. Some are uncomfortable with attempts to offer proofs which seek to persuade others. Some fear offering proofs with any pushback is like arguing. Others consider study of the proofs hopeless due to finding a lack of receptivity among some of their hearers.''<br><br>

			''The quotes in this introduction to the meeting for teaching address such objections, and thus your learning that they are available in the Writings (and from here) may help you confirm the faith of others who might otherwise be deterred from accepting the need to study and teach these proofs. So it is hoped that you may, like the doctor in the story, not just accept on faith that study of the proofs is a teaching, but also be prepared to study these quotations deeply enough so as to be able to offer relevant ones, as the need arises, to other friends who may be in doubt about the need for study that they convey.''}}

	===Study so as to convey Teachings more accurately to others===		===Study so as to convey Teachings more accurately to others===

Course:Meetings for teaching/curriculum justification

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 22:06:05 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 1 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 3:		Line 3:
	===Proofs===		===Proofs===

	'''''Note''': The way that 'Abdu'l-Bahá uses the term "proofs", it refers to logical proofs, not empirical ones. He is not offering data to prove God but indicating why it is logical to accept God. This does not, however, negate the possibility for all [[miracle\|miracles]]'', nor does it corrupt religion to take away mystery and the need for some faith.		{{box\|'''''Note''': The way that 'Abdu'l-Bahá uses the term "proofs", it refers to logical proofs, not empirical ones. He is not offering data to prove God but indicating why it is logical to accept God. This does not, however, negate the possibility for all [[miracle\|miracles]]'', nor does it corrupt religion to take away mystery and the need for some faith.<br><br>

	''For each quotation, summarize its meaning, and suggest who might be in particular need of hearing it.''		''For each quotation, summarize its meaning, and suggest who might be in particular need of hearing it.''}}

	====Great need for the study of [[proofs]]====		====Great need for the study of [[proofs]]====
Line 32:		Line 32:

	:(From the utterances of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, ''[[Foundations of World Unity]]'', p. [[fwu:65\|65]]; also in ''[[Importance of Deepening Our Knowledge and Understanding of the Faith]]'', no. [https://bahai-library.com/compilation_importance_deepening#60 60])		:(From the utterances of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, ''[[Foundations of World Unity]]'', p. [[fwu:65\|65]]; also in ''[[Importance of Deepening Our Knowledge and Understanding of the Faith]]'', no. [https://bahai-library.com/compilation_importance_deepening#60 60])


			{{Box\|Offering proofs to potentially persuade others does not mean providing them in a dominating manner nor does it mean avoiding listening to people. But it is part of offering a gift one has found.}}

	==== Attempting to convince others is called for by sense of brotherhood ====		==== Attempting to convince others is called for by sense of brotherhood ====

Course:Meetings for teaching/Oneness of God/Dialogue

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:28:04 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:28, 1 October 2026
Line 10:		Line 10:
	'''Elena''': You know, there are actually some benefits to polytheism from an anthropologist's point of view, and I'd be interested to hear what you as a Bahá'í who respects different cultures might think of this. For one, there is a generally higher tolerance and lack of engagement in religious warfare or inquisitions. Polytheists don't tend to treat other gods they encounter as "false." They merely accept them as the gods of that specific people, with no desire to eliminate them.		'''Elena''': You know, there are actually some benefits to polytheism from an anthropologist's point of view, and I'd be interested to hear what you as a Bahá'í who respects different cultures might think of this. For one, there is a generally higher tolerance and lack of engagement in religious warfare or inquisitions. Polytheists don't tend to treat other gods they encounter as "false." They merely accept them as the gods of that specific people, with no desire to eliminate them.

	'''John''': Bahá'ís believe deeply in the concept of "unity-in-diversity" and the practice of consultation. ~~We believe that differences should be respected, even while~~ we hold the theological view that certain current understandings of belief—like polytheism or rigid religious exclusivism—are misguided. Historically, Bahá'ís have demonstrably avoided responding to violence in any organized fashion. Since our prophet-founder Bahá'u'lláh made it clear that religious conflict must be "blotted out" from the Book, peace and non-violence are core to our identity.		'''John''': Bahá'ís believe deeply in the concept of "unity-in-diversity" and the practice of consultation. While we hold the theological view that certain current understandings of belief—like polytheism or rigid religious exclusivism—are misguided, we also believe that differences should be respected and that cultures which hold such beliefs may have other features which are quite positive. Historically, Bahá'ís have demonstrably avoided responding to violence in any organized fashion. Since our prophet-founder Bahá'u'lláh made it clear that religious conflict must be "blotted out" from the Book, peace and non-violence are core to our identity.

	'''Elena''': Okay, the Bahá'í Faith does seem to have avoided those pitfalls, in its however relatively brief history. But what do you say about polytheistic pantheons which recognize distinct gods for various competing forces in human life, like war, love, wisdom, and nature, and how this might better reflect the chaotic and often contradictory nature of human life?		'''Elena''': Okay, the Bahá'í Faith does seem to have avoided those pitfalls, in its however relatively brief history. But what do you say about polytheistic pantheons which recognize distinct gods for various competing forces in human life, like war, love, wisdom, and nature, and how this might better reflect the chaotic and often contradictory nature of human life?

Course:Meetings for teaching

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:13:48 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:13, 1 October 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Welcome to a type of '''weekly study meeting''' focused on '''preparing ourselves to better teach the Faith'''! This ongoing meeting for teaching is aimed at learning the '''proofs, prophecies, and the history''' of the Faith in greater depth. Methods of study are to include use of '''study outlines''' so as to help ourselves retain the logical structure and details of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's arguments as well as major events of the Faith's history.		Welcome to a type of '''weekly study meeting''' focused on '''preparing ourselves to better teach the Faith'''! This ongoing meeting for teaching is aimed at learning the '''proofs, prophecies, and the history''' of the Faith in greater depth. Methods of study are to include use of '''study outlines''' so as to help ourselves retain the logical structure and details of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's arguments as well as major events of the Faith's history.

	The curriculum is '''~~still~~ in ~~development~~'''.		The curriculum is '''in a prerelease phase'''.

	The course begins for the first class or two with more didactic study of quotations but then shifts to '''more engagement'''.		The course begins for the first class or two with more didactic study of quotations but then shifts to '''more engagement'''.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Oneness of God

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:12:30 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:12, 1 October 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	{{box\|Reflect on the themes raised in the following dialogue.}}		{{box\|Reflect on the themes raised in the following dialogue.}}

			==Dialogue on Monotheism and Polytheism==
	{{/Dialogue}}		{{/Dialogue}}

Course:Meetings for teaching/Oneness of God/Dialogue

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:11:55 GMT

Created page with "=== Context === This dialogue takes place in a quiet corner of a university campus courtyard. '''Elena''', a graduate student in anthropology, sits with a notebook open, asking questions. '''John''', a Bahá'í student, is seated across from her, replying on the topic of monotheism and polytheism. === Dialogue === '''Elena''': While I am aware that Bahá'ís accept the essential traditions of various religions, there also seems to be a strong monotheistic focus. Is tha..."

New page

=== Context ===
This dialogue takes place in a quiet corner of a university campus courtyard. '''Elena''', a graduate student in anthropology, sits with a notebook open, asking questions. '''John''', a Bahá'í student, is seated across from her, replying on the topic of monotheism and polytheism.

=== Dialogue ===

'''Elena''': While I am aware that Bahá'ís accept the essential traditions of various religions, there also seems to be a strong monotheistic focus. Is that correct?

'''John''': Yes, the Bahá'í Faith promotes the notion of there being only one God. We also believe that while some religions may currently be associated with polytheism, such as Hinduism, their original teachings were actually monotheistic.

'''Elena''': You know, there are actually some benefits to polytheism from an anthropologist's point of view, and I'd be interested to hear what you as a Bahá'í who respects different cultures might think of this. For one, there is a generally higher tolerance and lack of engagement in religious warfare or inquisitions. Polytheists don't tend to treat other gods they encounter as "false." They merely accept them as the gods of that specific people, with no desire to eliminate them.

'''John''': Bahá'ís believe deeply in the concept of "unity-in-diversity" and the practice of consultation. We believe that differences should be respected, even while we hold the theological view that certain current understandings of belief—like polytheism or rigid religious exclusivism—are misguided. Historically, Bahá'ís have demonstrably avoided responding to violence in any organized fashion. Since our prophet-founder Bahá'u'lláh made it clear that religious conflict must be "blotted out" from the Book, peace and non-violence are core to our identity.

'''Elena''': Okay, the Bahá'í Faith does seem to have avoided those pitfalls, in its however relatively brief history. But what do you say about polytheistic pantheons which recognize distinct gods for various competing forces in human life, like war, love, wisdom, and nature, and how this might better reflect the chaotic and often contradictory nature of human life?

'''John''': While human cultures have come up with some highly creative myths to address those aspects of human nature, monotheism, when properly understood, is also compatible with recognizing various impulses. It just does so without the potential for uncontrolled whimsy and fancy as polytheism may invite. 'Abdu'l-Bahá, for example, speaks of the various motivations of humanity—even things like greed or anger—as being potentially useful if channeled correctly. Bahá'ís see the ''signs'' of God reflected in all things, and believe that the uniqueness found in different things is actually itself a sign of one supreme Creator. We also see nature as reflecting the attributes of God, so we believe in protecting the environment to benefit from the lessons and sustenance it gives us.

'''Elena''': What about accessibility, though? How flawed deities, with their very human emotions and conflicts, can seem much more accessible to regular people than an abstract, perfect God?

'''John''': Bahá'ís look instead to the historical figures, like the Manifestations of God and exemplary individuals throughout history, who overcame trials. We tend to focus more on the capacity for becoming better people rather than dwelling on flaws, though we absolutely recognize that all regular human beings have faults, and indeed we can identify with those who did have them but overcame them.

'''Elena''': Does polytheism not provide a more satisfying answer to the "problem of evil"? When you have malicious gods, or deities fighting and getting angry, it easily explains how evil occurs. With an omnipotent, all-loving God, it is incredibly difficult to understand why evil is permitted to exist.

'''John''': The Bahá'í Writings acknowledge that the related issue of the suffering of innocents is a mystery the mind of man cannot fully fathom. We can only come to terms with it to a certain degree, recognizing that the existence of darkness allows light and good to be demonstrated. But we don't believe this leaves us hopeless; we maintain faith that wrongs will eventually be rectified in the grander spiritual scheme of things.

'''Elena''': Thank you for sharing this with me, John. This has been really insightful.

'''John''': My pleasure, Elena. It was truly enjoyable speaking with you and hearing your anthropological perspective.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Oneness of God

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:11:35 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:11, 1 October 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:

	{{box\|'''For extended course participants, read how [[pantheism]]/panentheism is rejected in the Faith'''}}		{{box\|'''For extended course participants, read how [[pantheism]]/panentheism is rejected in the Faith'''}}


			{{box\|Reflect on the themes raised in the following dialogue.}}

			{{/Dialogue}}

	==Navigation==		==Navigation==
	* [[Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God\|previous]]		* [[Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God\|previous]]
	* [[Course:Meetings for teaching/Bounties of God\|next]]		* [[Course:Meetings for teaching/Bounties of God\|next]]

Course:Meetings for teaching

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 15:43:49 GMT

Introduction

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:43, 1 October 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:
	The course begins for the first class or two with more didactic study of quotations but then shifts to '''more engagement'''.		The course begins for the first class or two with more didactic study of quotations but then shifts to '''more engagement'''.

	Feel free ~~to start your own user page if you wish~~ to '''adapt this curriculum''' for your own "meeting for teaching".		Feel free to '''adapt this curriculum''' for your own "meeting for teaching".

	== Curriculum ==		== Curriculum ==

Course:Meetings for teaching/meetings for teaching justification

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 15:24:23 GMT

(Need for learning these quotes—even if one already has faith in them—so as to share them to confirm belief in others)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:24, 1 October 2026
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 16:		Line 16:


	''The proofs are difficult for some believers to accept. Some may be opposed because they think it takes away mystery from religion. Others may not be intellectually curious enough to persist. Others simply don't know it is enjoined by 'Abdu'l-Bahá. Some know, but mistakenly think spirituality is only to be felt internally. Some fear offering proofs is like arguing. Some are uncomfortable with attempts to offer proofs which seek to persuade others. The quotes in this introduction to the meeting for teaching address such objections, and thus your learning that they are available in the Writings (and from here) may help you confirm the faith of others who might otherwise be deterred from accepting the need to study and teach these proofs. So it is hoped that you may, like the doctor in the story, not just accept on faith that it is a teaching, but also be prepared to study these quotations deeply enough so as to be able to offer relevant ones, as the need arises, to other friends who may be in doubt about the principles therein.''		''The proofs are difficult for some believers to accept. Some may be opposed because they think it takes away mystery from religion. Others may not be intellectually curious enough to persist. Others simply don't know it is enjoined by 'Abdu'l-Bahá. Some know, but mistakenly think spirituality is only to be felt internally. Some fear offering proofs is like arguing. Some are uncomfortable with attempts to offer proofs which seek to persuade others. Others give up due to finding a lack of receptivity to the proofs as presented by their hearers. The quotes in this introduction to the meeting for teaching address such objections, and thus your learning that they are available in the Writings (and from here) may help you confirm the faith of others who might otherwise be deterred from accepting the need to study and teach these proofs. So it is hoped that you may, like the doctor in the story, not just accept on faith that it is a teaching, but also be prepared to study these quotations deeply enough so as to be able to offer relevant ones, as the need arises, to other friends who may be in doubt about the principles therein.''

	===Study so as to convey Teachings more accurately to others===		===Study so as to convey Teachings more accurately to others===
Line 40:		Line 40:
	''In addition to this, the House itself states:''		''In addition to this, the House itself states:''

	"...the friends’ efforts to increase their understanding of the Faith and its teachings are of course not limited to participation in the institute process. Indeed, one strong indicator of an institute’s effectiveness is the thirst it cultivates within those who engage with its materials to continue to study the Cause of Bahá’u’lláh—individually, but also collectively, whether in formal spaces created by the institutions or in more informal settings."		{{quote\|"...the friends’ efforts to increase their understanding of the Faith and its teachings are of course not limited to participation in the institute process. Indeed, one strong indicator of an institute’s effectiveness is the thirst it cultivates within those who engage with its materials to continue to study the Cause of Bahá’u’lláh—individually, but also collectively, whether in formal spaces created by the institutions or in more informal settings."\|Universal House of Justice, to the Conference of the Continental Boards of Counsellors, 30 December 2021, https://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/the-universal-house-of-justice/messages/20211230_001/1#758524503 }}

	:(Universal House of Justice, to the Conference of the Continental Boards of Counsellors, 30 December 2021, https://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/the-universal-house-of-justice/messages/20211230_001/1#758524503 )

	== Connection to 'Abdu'l-Bahá ==		== Connection to 'Abdu'l-Bahá ==
Line 48:		Line 46:
	'' 'Abdu'l-Bahá Himself speaks of "meetings for teaching" where the proofs and history are studied on a regular (weekly) basis:''		'' 'Abdu'l-Bahá Himself speaks of "meetings for teaching" where the proofs and history are studied on a regular (weekly) basis:''

	"Amongst other things is the holding of the meetings for teaching so that blessed souls and the old ones from amongst the believers may gather together the youths of the love of God in schools of instruction and teach them all the divine proofs and irrefragable arguments, explain and elucidate the history of the Cause, and interpret also the prophecies and proofs which are recorded and are extant in the divine books and epistles regarding the manifestation of the Promised One, so that the young ones may go in perfect knowledge in all these degrees."		{{quote\|"Amongst other things is the holding of the meetings for teaching so that blessed souls and the old ones from amongst the believers may gather together the youths of the love of God in schools of instruction and teach them all the divine proofs and irrefragable arguments, explain and elucidate the history of the Cause, and interpret also the prophecies and proofs which are recorded and are extant in the divine books and epistles regarding the manifestation of the Promised One, so that the young ones may go in perfect knowledge in all these degrees."\|[['Abdu’l-Bahá]], ''[[Tablets of the Divine Plan]]'', p. [[tdp:54\|54]]}}

	:([['Abdu’l-Bahá]], ''[[Tablets of the Divine Plan]]'', p. [[tdp:54\|54]])

	===See also===		===See also===

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simpler version)

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 04:17:05 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:17, 1 October 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 31:		Line 31:
	'''Navid:''' Exactly. Instead of treating the human mind like an accidental glitch of matter, he argues that mind and purpose were there at the very start.		'''Navid:''' Exactly. Instead of treating the human mind like an accidental glitch of matter, he argues that mind and purpose were there at the very start.

	'''Maya:''' Looking at it that way—separating basic patterns from coordinated systems, and using that root-and-branch idea—makes his logic much stronger than I thought. I'm still ~~not convinced~~ God exists, but I can see his arguments run much deeper than basic analogies.		'''Maya:''' Looking at it that way—separating basic patterns from coordinated systems, and using that root-and-branch idea—makes his logic much stronger than I thought. But if every complex thing needs a cause or a designer, that brings up the classic question: who created God?

			'''Navid:''' That question assumes God is just another thing inside the universe, like a piece of matter that needs a beginning. But logic tells us the chain of causes can't go back forever—it has to stop at a Self-Sufficient Creator that doesn't depend on anything else. We can't fully understand God's essence or compare God to mere physical matter; we just recognize that this ultimate Source must exist. Also, in the Bahá'í view, creation has always existed in some form alongside God without any beginning. So "creation" isn't a one-time event on a timeline—it's God constantly sustaining existence out of nothingness at every moment.

			'''Maya:''' I see. I'm still grappling with whether God exists, but I can see his arguments run much deeper than basic analogies.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Teleological/Dialogue

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 04:11:52 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:11, 1 October 2026
Line 32:		Line 32:

	'''Navid:''' Exactly. It turns the materialist assumption upside down. Instead of trying to force mind to be an accidental byproduct of mindless matter, He shows that mind and intention are fundamental to the origin of reality.		'''Navid:''' Exactly. It turns the materialist assumption upside down. Instead of trying to force mind to be an accidental byproduct of mindless matter, He shows that mind and intention are fundamental to the origin of reality.

			'''Maya:''' But if every complex thing needs a cause or a designer, that brings up the classic question: who created God?

			'''Navid:''' That question assumes God is just another thing inside the universe, like a piece of matter that needs a beginning. But logic tells us the chain of causes can't go back forever—it has to stop at a Self-Sufficient Creator that doesn't depend on anything else. We can't fully understand God's essence or compare God to mere physical matter; we just recognize that this ultimate Source must exist. Also, in the Bahá'í view, creation has always existed in some form alongside God without any beginning. So "creation" isn't a one-time event on a timeline—it's God constantly sustaining existence out of nothingness at every moment.

	'''Maya:''' I have to admit, reading those passages with that distinction between simple patterns and ''interdependent coordination'', along with the ''root-and-branch'' principle, makes His logic much tighter than I thought at first glance. It doesn't instantly convert me, but it shows His arguments are dealing with deep structural questions rather than simple analogies.		'''Maya:''' I have to admit, reading those passages with that distinction between simple patterns and ''interdependent coordination'', along with the ''root-and-branch'' principle, makes His logic much tighter than I thought at first glance. It doesn't instantly convert me, but it shows His arguments are dealing with deep structural questions rather than simple analogies.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simple version)

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 03:56:33 GMT

Brettz9 moved page Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simple version) to Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simpler version)

New page

'''''Setting:''' A quiet corner of a university library. Maya, an atheist studying philosophy, sits with two books: ''Some Answered Questions'' and ''The Promulgation of Universal Peace''. Navid, a Bahá'í student, sits down with her.''

'''Maya:''' Hey Navid. I’ve been reading these talks by 'Abdu'l-Bahá about whether God exists. His writing is clear, but some of his conclusions feel like huge jumps in logic.

'''Navid:''' Which part feels like a jump to you?

'''Maya:''' Look at chapter one of ''Some Answered Questions''. He says nature follows clear rules, but nature has no mind or will—fire just burns, and water just flows. Then he claims that because nature isn't aware, a conscious God must be running the whole system.

'''Navid:''' Right. He compares unthinking physical matter to the steady, universal laws that guide everything.

'''Maya:''' But why does order require a mind? Look at snowflakes or round stars. That's order, but it's just basic physics and chemistry happening automatically. You don't need God to draw each snowflake. Why can't the universe just be mindless matter organizing itself?

'''Navid:''' That makes sense if we're only talking about simple shapes. But 'Abdu'l-Bahá is talking about a different kind of order. In his ''Tablet to Auguste Forel'', he compares the universe to a human body or a machine. A snowflake is just a repeating pattern. A body, though, has millions of unthinking cells and organs working together to keep you alive, even though none of them know what the others are doing.

'''Maya:''' So he means parts working together as a whole system, not just repeating shapes?

'''Navid:''' Exactly. When countless blind parts work together to achieve a complex goal, the parts can't see the big picture. Your hand doesn't know it's helping your eye. A higher intelligence has to set up that teamwork so the system works.

'''Maya:''' Fair enough on teamwork, but what about his talk in ''The Promulgation of Universal Peace''? He says a cause must have all the traits of its effect—like a painter being smarter than the painting. But what if consciousness just appears when simple things combine? One water drop isn't "wet," but a lot of them together are. Couldn't mindless matter just evolve until minds popped up on their own?

'''Navid:''' He actually tackles that in chapter one of ''Some Answered Questions'' with his "root and branch" example. He asks: can a branch have a higher trait, like thinking or making choices, if that trait is completely missing from its root? Wetness is just molecules sticking together—it's still physical matter. But having thoughts and feelings is completely different from a rock or a beam of light. Saying mindless matter created minds out of nothing is like expecting an empty bank account to earn interest. A cause can't give what it doesn't have.

'''Maya:''' But looking at real trees, branches have things roots don't. Flowers and fruit grow on branches, not underground in the roots. So why can't nature be a blind root that eventually grows thinking branches?

'''Navid:''' In a real plant, the ability to grow flowers isn't missing from the root. The DNA for the whole tree is in the seed and the roots from day one. The root pulls in water and food precisely so the flower can bloom.

If you apply that to reality, his point holds up: if consciousness blooms in human beings, the potential for consciousness had to exist in the source of the universe from the start. It couldn't just be a random accident from a reality that had zero capacity for thought.

'''Maya:''' I get it now. If the flower is already programmed into the seed, then human minds aren't just random accidents in a dead universe. It means reality was built to produce conscious life.

'''Navid:''' Exactly. Instead of treating the human mind like an accidental glitch of matter, he argues that mind and purpose were there at the very start.

'''Maya:''' Looking at it that way—separating basic patterns from coordinated systems, and using that root-and-branch idea—makes his logic much stronger than I thought. I'm still not convinced God exists, but I can see his arguments run much deeper than basic analogies.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course/Dialogue (simple version)

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 03:56:14 GMT

+page

New page

Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Short guided course

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 03:53:12 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:53, 30 September 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:


	{{box\|'''Lastly, let's read the following proof dialogue.'''}}		{{box\|'''Lastly, let's read the following proof dialogue. Also available as a [[/Dialogue (simple version)\|simpler version]].'''}}

	{{Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Teleological/Dialogue}}		{{Course:Meetings for teaching/Existence of God/Teleological/Dialogue}}

Course:Meetings for teaching/Life of Prophets/Bahá'u'lláh/Dialogue

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 01:40:25 GMT

Created page with "'''Setting:''' ''A quiet corner of a university library café. Two colleagues—Julian, an analytical secular humanist, and Samira, a practicing Bahá’í—are sharing tea after reading Chapter 11 of Some Answered Questions.'' '''Julian:''' ''(closing his notebook, smiling gently)'' I appreciate you giving me the text, Samira. It’s an evocative read, and ’Abdu’l-Bahá clearly has a lyrical, persuasive voice. But reading it as someone who values the scientifi..."

New page

'''Setting:''' ''A quiet corner of a university library café. Two colleagues—Julian, an analytical secular humanist, and Samira, a
practicing Bahá’í—are sharing tea after reading Chapter 11 of [[Some Answered Questions]].''

'''Julian:''' ''(closing his notebook, smiling gently)'' I appreciate you giving me the text, Samira. It’s an evocative read, and ’Abdu’l-Bahá clearly has a lyrical, persuasive voice. But reading it as someone who values the scientific method and empirical verification, it feels… logically thin. He talks about unperformed miracles, enemies struck speechless, and political predictions like Napoleon III’s fall. From the outside, that’s classic hagiography. It’s not empirical proof of a divine messenger.

'''Samira:''' ''(nods warmly)'' I completely understand why you see it that way, Julian. Honestly, if you walked into this text expecting a laboratory demonstration or a mathematical proof, you’d be right to feel shortchanged. But let me ask you: do you think ’Abdu’l-Bahá was actually attempting to offer an airtight empirical proof in that passage?

'''Julian:''' Well, he frames it as proof. He literally says, ''"we must be fair and acknowledge what an Educator of mankind this illustrious Being was."'' He cites specific events—like the challenge to the divines regarding a miracle—as decisive evidence.

'''Samira:''' Fair point. But consider the context of how religious figures, especially in that milieu, speak of "proof." In the Bahá’í writings, physical miracles are explicitly relegated to a secondary, almost irrelevant status. 'Abdu'l-Bahá Himself writes that a miracle is only a proof—if at all—for the few people who witness it firsthand. For everyone else across space and time, it’s just hearsay.

What ’Abdu’l-Bahá is presenting here isn't ''empirical proof'' in the hard scientific sense; it’s what we might call '''cumulative, suggestive evidence'''. He is asking the listener to weigh a convergence of historical probabilities.

'''Julian:''' Okay, I can respect that distinction. But let's look at the pieces of that cumulative case. Take the incident with Mullá Ḥasan ‘Amú and the miracle. ’Abdu’l-Bahá says Bahá’u’lláh offered to perform any single test the divines agreed upon in writing, and because they demurred out of fear, it vindicates Him. As a skeptic, my immediate reaction is: ''nothing actually happened.'' Shifting the condition to an impossible administrative hurdle—getting rival clergy to sign a joint document—is a great tactical deflection, not evidence of supernatural power.

'''Samira:''' That’s a sharp observation, and from a strictly forensic standpoint, you’re right: no physical law was suspended that day. But look at the psychology of the situation. Bahá’u’lláh was a prisoner, utterly stripped of worldly protection, facing religious authorities who held the power of life and death over His followers. In Persian society, accusations of heresy were capital sentences.

If He were an imposter, gambling everything on an open challenge—where He explicitly put His life and claim on the line if He failed—would be suicidal. The suggestive evidence isn’t, ''"Look, a magic trick occurred."'' The evidence is the moral posture: complete transparency, radical self-possession, and the fact that His accusers, who had every institutional incentive to expose Him, chose inaction. It’s a study in integrity under extreme asymmetric power.

'''Julian:''' I grant you that it shows profound personal conviction. Socrates drank the hemlock; Giordano Bruno went to the stake. People die for sincere delusions all the time. Sincerity doesn’t make the premise true.

'''Samira:''' Absolutely. Sincerity alone is not enough. That’s why ’Abdu’l-Bahá doesn't stop at personal composure. He points to the generative output of His life.

Consider the setting: Bahá’u’lláh was banished across four empires, confined in the pestilential penal colony of ‘Akká—surrounded by genuine criminals, cut off from libraries, universities, and political influence. Yet from that cell, He didn't produce bitter polemics or revolutionary manifestos. He authored a framework for universal education, the elimination of prejudice, global collective security, and gender equality—ideas that were completely alien to the decadent 19th-century Qajar court He came from.

If a plant sprouts in fertile soil with ample sunlight and water, its bloom is expected. But when a cedar grows out of solid granite in a salt mine, an observer naturally asks: ''What is the life force sustaining this?''

'''Julian:''' That’s an attractive metaphor, Samira. But take the [[Súriy-i-Haykal|Napoleon III tablet]]. Predicting the fall of an overextended autocrat in 1869 Europe isn't necessarily divine prophecy; plenty of political observers in London and Berlin saw the Prussian threat looming. Isn’t that just the Texas sharpshooter fallacy—highlighting the one prediction that landed, while forgetting the generalities?

'''Samira:''' That’s a valid critical lens, and any good historian should apply it. Bahá’ís don't view the Tablet to Napoleon as a crystal-ball party trick. What makes it striking within its context was its moral framing. Napoleon III was arguably the most glamorous monarch in Europe at that moment. Bahá’u’lláh’s warning wasn't a standard diplomatic critique; it warned that because Napoleon had treated human dignity and the cries of the oppressed with indifference, his empire would collapse from within.

Whether you see it as uncanny geopolitical intuition or something higher, it forms part of that larger mosaic: a solitary exile addressing the emperors of the earth not as a supplicant begging for mercy, but with the voice of an unyielding moral judge.

'''Julian:''' So what you’re essentially saying is that while ’Abdu’l-Bahá is building a logical deduction from premises to conclusions, he isn't offering independently verifiable, empirical data—no controlled observations, reproducible tests, or measurable physical evidence that could compel an objective, scientific verdict.

'''Samira:''' Exactly. If God could be proven through an undeniable empirical equation or a repeatable lab test, there would be no moral meaning in faith—it would simply be acknowledging an obvious physical fact, like gravity or atmospheric pressure.

’Abdu’l-Bahá is inviting us to look at the whole arc: the endurance over fifty years of peril, the nobility of character, the transformative effect on thousands of followers who chose martyrdom over recanting, and above all, the enduring relevance of His vision for humanity.

It’s suggestive, circumstantial, and historical. It doesn't force your intellect into submission; it leaves room for human conscience to weigh the evidence and ask: ''Could ordinary human ambition, delusion, or political craft produce this specific fruit under these specific conditions?''

'''Julian:''' ''(pauses, setting down his cup)'' When it’s put that way, I still don't arrive at the supernatural conclusion—I suspect our starting assumptions about the universe are just different. But I can see how, within your framework, it isn't blind credulity. It’s an interpretation of history based on character and social legacy rather than raw dogma.

'''Samira:''' ''(smiles)'' And that kind of open, thoughtful scrutiny is all ’Abdu’l-Bahá ever asked for. The first principle He taught was the independent investigation of truth—even if that investigation starts with healthy skepticism over a cup of tea.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Life of Prophets/Bahá'u'lláh

Brettz9 — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 01:40:15 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:40, 30 September 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 4:		Line 4:

	{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 9/Outline}}		{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 9/Outline}}

			== Study Questions for Chapter 9 of ''Some Answered Questions'' ==

			=== Paragraphs 1 & 2 ===

			# {{Details\|What was the moral, social, and political condition of Persia when Bahá’u’lláh appeared?\|Persia was plunged in the darkest ignorance and consumed by blind fanaticism; foreign travelers deplored that a nation once at the pinnacle of civilization had fallen into utter abasement, desolation, and wretchedness.}}

			# {{Details\|What was Bahá’u’lláh’s family background and upbringing, and did He acquire formal schooling?\|His father was a court minister rather than a divine; Bahá’u’lláh passed His early life in comfort and happiness among Persians of rank, and it was widely known that He never attended school or associated with the learned and clerical classes.}}

			=== Paragraphs 3 & 4 ===

			# {{Details\|How did Bahá’u’lláh respond upon the Báb’s declaration, and how did He champion His Cause?\|He immediately proclaimed the Báb as the "Lord of the righteous" whom all must obey; He openly associated with enemies, adduced decisive proofs and arguments, and exalted the Báb's word with composure despite decrees of massacre, pillage, and annihilation.}}

			# {{Details\|What immediate severe persecutions, material deprivations, and banishments did Bahá’u’lláh suffer?\|He was put in heavy chains, cast into a subterranean dungeon (the Síyáh-Chál), had His extensive ancestral estates completely plundered, was exiled four times from land to land, and was ultimately incarcerated in the Most Great Prison of ‘Akká.}}

			=== Paragraphs 5 & 6 ===

			# {{Details\|How did learned visitors—friends and foes alike—react when questioning Bahá’u’lláh in Ṭihrán, Baghdád, Constantinople, Adrianople, and ‘Akká?\|Scholars, philosophers, and divines of various faiths received complete, convincing answers to every inquiry, and all readily acknowledged that in every human and spiritual perfection He was peerless and unique.}}

			# {{Details\|What mission was entrusted to Mullá Ḥasan ‘Amú by the prominent Muslim divines of Karbilá and Najaf?\|He was sent as their representative to question Bahá’u’lláh; after receiving satisfying answers, he conveyed that while the divines acknowledged His unacquired learning, they demanded a miracle to establish the truth of His claim.}}

			=== Paragraphs 7–10 ===

			# {{Details\|How did Bahá’u’lláh respond to the demand for a miracle, and what condition did He impose?\|He stated that while it is for God to test mankind rather than man to test God, He accepted their request provided the divines assembled, agreed unanimously in writing upon a single miracle, sealed the pact, and accepted it as the definitive test of truth or imposture.}}

			# {{Details\|Why did the divines decline to submit their chosen miracle in writing?\|They feared the outcome, rationalizing that He was a magician who might perform some enchantment that would leave them without recourse, and dared not respond.}}

			# {{Details\|How did Mullá Ḥasan ‘Amú react to the divines’ refusal after leaving Bahá’u’lláh’s presence?\|He kissed Bahá’u’lláh’s knee in reverence, departed, and later traveled to Kirmánsháh and Ṭihrán openly recounting the entire episode and exposing the fear and inaction of the clergy.}}

			=== Paragraphs 11–13 ===

			# {{Details\|What title did even eastern adversaries and enemies use when speaking of Bahá’u’lláh?\|In spite of their enmity, they referred to Him as "the renowned Bahá’u’lláh."}}

			# {{Details\|How did the successive banishments from Persia to Baghdád, Constantinople, and Adrianople affect the spread of the Cause?\|Instead of extinguishing the Faith as intended, each banishment broadened its geographic reach, caused its flame to burn brighter, and attracted diverse peoples and nations.}}

			# {{Details\|Why was the penal colony of ‘Akká chosen as the final place of exile, and how was that intention overturned?\|It was an infamous fortress reserved for murderers, thieves, and highwaymen meant to subject Him and His companions to the direst humiliation and afflictions; instead, it became the means of exalting His Word, transforming Persia, and firmly establishing His teachings across the globe.}}

			=== Paragraphs 14 & 15 ===

			# {{Details\|What extraordinary contrast existed between Bahá’u’lláh’s outward status in ‘Akká and the impression He made on visitors?\|Though technically a captive criminal within a prison of thieves and highwaymen, His tent was pitched on Mount Carmel, He moved with utmost majesty, and visitors invariably exclaimed: "This is not a captive but a king!"}}

			# {{Details\|Which ancient prophetic promises regarding the Holy Land were fulfilled through Bahá’u’lláh’s banishment?\|Prophecies spoken two to three thousand years prior foretelling that the Lord of Hosts would appear and pitch His tent in the Holy Land were fulfilled solely through the hostile exiles orchestrated by His enemies.}}

			=== Paragraphs 16–18 ===

			# {{Details\|What did Bahá’u’lláh write to Emperor Napoleon III in His first and second epistles?\|In the first, He challenged Napoleon to inquire what crime justified His confinement; when Napoleon ignored it, the second epistle (in the [[Súriy-i-Haykal]]) warned that for failing to heed the call, Napoleon would lose his empire and be reduced to naught.}}

			# {{Details\|How was Bahá’u’lláh's warning to Napoleon III historically fulfilled shortly after its circulation?\|The prophecy was widely circulated throughout Persia and India in 1869; in 1870, the Franco-Prussian War erupted unexpectedly, resulting in Napoleon III's resounding defeat, surrender, and utter abasement.}}

			# {{Details\|How did Náṣiri’d-Dín Sháh react when seven leading divines refused to answer Bahá’u’lláh’s epistle and branded Him an enemy of the state?\|The Sháh was sorely vexed, rebuking the divines by pointing out that the letter was a matter of proof, testimony, and truth versus error rather than political enmity, lamenting that despite all royal favors the clergy could not formulate a reply.}}

			=== Paragraphs 19–21 ===

			# {{Details\|What view did non-believers and prominent figures like Siyyid Dávúdí hold regarding Bahá’u’lláh?\|Many foreign observers and non-believers viewed Him as an extraordinary saint, with Siyyid Dávúdí (a Sunní divine of Baghdád) writing a treatise recounting His extraordinary feats and miracles.}}

			# {{Details\|How did the presence of Bahá’u’lláh affect bitter opponents when they arrived intent on debate?\|They were struck with such awe, bewilderment, and amazement that they were reduced to utter silence, unable to utter the arguments they had prepared.}}

			# {{Details\|What makes Bahá’u’lláh’s mastery of Arabic and His written Tablets an extraordinary sign?\|He never studied Arabic, had tutors, or attended school, yet His spoken fluency and Arabic Tablets astonished the most articulate scholars and masters of Arabic literature.}}

			=== Paragraphs 22–26 ===

			# {{Details\|How does Bahá’u’lláh’s open challenge to the sovereign and clergy contrast with earlier Manifestations of God?\|While earlier Manifestations did not offer to submit to whatever arbitrary test or miracle their deniers proposed, Bahá’u’lláh explicitly challenged the Sháh to gather the divines together so proof and testimony could be unreservedly established.}}

			# {{Details\|According to the text, upon what does the future civilization, prosperity, and progress of Persia depend?\|It depends entirely upon the promulgation of the divine teachings and principles revealed by Bahá’u’lláh.}}

			# {{Details\|What striking contrast does 'Abdu'l-Bahá draw between the immediate followers of Christ and those of Bahá’u’lláh?\|Christ personally educated eleven disciples, the foremost of whom (Peter) denied Him thrice when tested; Bahá’u’lláh educated thousands who willingly faced the sword and persecution, raising the cry of "Yá Bahá'u'l-Abhá" with unshakable constancy.}}

			# {{Details\|What conclusion is reached regarding the true station and power of Bahá’u’lláh?\|That He was indisputably a universal Educator of mankind, aided by divine power, who manifested peerless signs and transformed the human world.}}


			{{Box\|Consider the following dialogue for some possible challenges to 'Abdu'l-Bahá's argument.}}

			{{/Dialogue}}

Peter

Brettz9 — Wed, 30 Sep 2026 22:01:28 GMT

In contrast to Peter's three-times denial, Bahá'u'lláh educated people in a short span of time such that even in chains and under threat of swords, they would offer candy to their executioners

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:01, 30 September 2026
Line 111:		Line 111:

	:([['Abdu'l-Bahá]], ''[[Light of the World]]'', par. [https://bahai-library.com/abdul-baha_light_world#tablet67-4 67-4])		:([['Abdu'l-Bahá]], ''[[Light of the World]]'', par. [https://bahai-library.com/abdul-baha_light_world#tablet67-4 67-4])

			"In His blessed lifetime Christ educated, in reality, only eleven souls, the greatest of whom, Peter, nonetheless denied Him thrice when put to the test. Notwithstanding this, behold how the Cause of Christ subsequently pervaded the whole earth! In this day Bahá’u’lláh has educated thousands of souls who, under the threat of the sword, have raised to the highest heaven the cry of “O Thou the Glory of Glories!”17 and whose faces have shone as brightly as gold in the crucible of trials. Infer then from this what shall transpire in the future!"

			:([['Abdu'l-Bahá]], ''[[Some Answered Questions]]'', Chapter 9, par. [[saqp:9-25\|25]])

	==Some dispute the existence of Peter's tomb in Rome==		==Some dispute the existence of Peter's tomb in Rome==

Course:Meetings for teaching/Life of Prophets/The Báb

Brettz9 — Wed, 30 Sep 2026 19:53:50 GMT

Show changes

Course:Meetings for teaching/Life of Prophets/Muhammad

Brettz9 — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 23:29:45 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:29, 29 September 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 4:		Line 4:

	{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 7/Outline}}		{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 7/Outline}}

			== Study Questions ==

			=== Paragraphs 1 & 2 ===

			# {{Details\|Why are many historical accounts concerning Muḥammad in the West inaccurate or distorted?\|They stem either from ill-intentioned or ignorant Christian clergy, or from European historians relying upon unfounded, exaggerated tales circulated by ignorant Muslims who mistakenly thought things like excessive polygamy or bloodshed added to His glory.}}

			# {{Details\|What false conclusion did a Christian priest draw regarding Islam after conversing with a foolish Muslim?\|Because the man boasted that true greatness lay in bloodshed and that a Muslim had beheaded a hundred men in a day, the priest incorrectly concluded that the foundation of Muḥammad's religion consisted in killing.}}

			# {{Details\|What historical proof does the text provide to show that Muḥammad's military campaigns were purely defensive?\|For thirteen years in Mecca, He and His followers patiently endured severe persecution, murder, pillaging, and flight; even after Muḥammad escaped assassination at midnight and fled to Medina, His enemies relentlessly pursued the Muslims to Medina and Abyssinia to annihilate them.}}

			=== Paragraphs 3–6 ===

			# {{Details\|How does the text characterize the barbarity of the pre-Islamic Arab tribes, especially toward infant daughters?\|They buried their infant daughters alive as a point of false honor and pride, with husbands routinely threatening to kill their wives if they gave birth to a daughter.}}

			# {{Details\|What were the prevailing marital and property practices regarding women among those tribes?\|Men could marry as many as a thousand wives, with households often exceeding ten; upon a father's death, stepsons would throw their mantles over their stepmothers to claim them as personal property and slaves, possessing the legal right to beat, starve, imprison, or kill them.}}

			# {{Details\|How did tribal warfare and perpetual raids affect the social status of families?\|Tribes lived by mutual plunder, murder, and enslavement; within a single day, the sons and daughters of princes could be plunged from luxury and high rank into utter abasement, servitude, and being sold to strangers.}}

			=== Paragraphs 7 & 8 ===

			# {{Details\|Why was Muḥammad compelled to take up arms after thirteen years of peaceful endurance?\|Because after the Muslims fled to Medina, the hostile tribes united an army specifically intent on exterminating every man, woman, and child among His followers.}}

			# {{Details\|What comparison does 'Abdu'l-Bahá make between Christ and Muḥammad under identical circumstances?\|While Christ would certainly forgive personal wrongs done to Himself alone, had He been faced with ravenous, bloodthirsty murderers intent on slaughtering and enslaving defenseless women and children, He too would have used all-conquering power to defend the innocent and stay the hand of the oppressor.}}

			# {{Details\|Why was curbing these aggressive tribes described as an act of mercy and bounty?\|Just as a loving friend shatters a cup of poison to restrain someone about to drink it, forcibly restraining savage tribes from murderous violence delivered them from their own bloodthirstiness and protected the innocent.}}

			=== Paragraphs 9 & 10 ===

			# {{Details\|How did Muḥammad specifically treat the Christian community of Najrán?\|He placed them under His direct protection, accorded them complete freedom, and proclaimed that whoever infringed upon their rights would face Him as an enemy before God.}}

			# {{Details\|What rights and protections were granted to Christians and Jews in the edicts of Muḥammad and early Islam?\|Their lives, property, and honor were protected by God; Christian wives were not forced to veil or barred from church, and were buried by priests; Muslims were instructed to help build churches; and Christians were exempted from military combat upon paying a nominal annual tax.}}

			# {{Details\|What example is given of a purely fabricated Muslim tradition born of fanaticism?\|The literal belief that the moon was a small physical object that Muḥammad split in two, casting one half on one mountain of Mecca and the other half on another.}}

			=== Paragraphs 11–13 ===

			# {{Details\|What were the physical and intellectual conditions of the Ḥijáz when Muḥammad appeared?\|It was a barren, treeless, intensely hot desert inhabited by illiterate nomads devoid of learning, where Muḥammad Himself was unschooled and the Qur’án was first written on sheep blade-bones and palm fronds.}}

			# {{Details\|What was Muḥammad's initial reproach to His people, and why did they find it hard to accept?\|He reproached them for rejecting the Torah, the Gospel, Moses, and Christ; they resisted because it required them to acknowledge that their revered pagan ancestors had gone astray.}}

			# {{Details\|Why is the Qur’án considered an extraordinary proof given Muḥammad's background?\|Because an illiterate Man from an unlettered, nomadic society produced a Book of supreme eloquence expounding the perfections of God, prophetic stations, divine laws, and advanced fields of knowledge.}}

			=== Paragraphs 14–16 ===

			# {{Details\|How did the astronomical references in the Qur’án contrast with the prevailing scientific consensus of the time?\|While world mathematicians and philosophers universally adhered to the Ptolemaic geocentric model for fifteen centuries, the Qur’án revealed that the sun is fixed in its place moving about an axis and that celestial bodies swim in their own orbits.}}

			# {{Details\|Why were earlier Muslim divines forced to interpret these astronomical verses figuratively?\|Because the geocentric Ptolemaic system was considered absolute, incontrovertible scientific fact at the time, and the explicit verses directly contradicted it until modern astronomy confirmed the Qur’án's accuracy centuries later.}}

			# {{Details\|What historical contrast existed between the Islamic world and Europe during the Middle Ages?\|While Europe had descended into the darkest depths of barbarity, the Arab and Islamic world fostered an advanced civilization that led all nations in crafts, sciences, mathematics, medicine, and governance.}}

			# {{Details\|What final question does 'Abdu'l-Bahá ask regarding the station of Muḥammad?\|He asks whether an illiterate Man who transformed warring, savage clans into the founders of a glorious, centuries-long civilization of human perfections was not, in all fairness, a true universal Educator.}}

Course:Meetings for teaching/Life of Prophets/Muhammad/Dialogue

Brettz9 — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 23:23:49 GMT

+page

New page

'''Setting:''' ''The living room of a quiet suburban home. Soft light filters in over comfortable armchairs, a low coffee table with tea and cookies, and
open notebooks. The informal study portion of the fireside has just wound down, and the other guests have stepped into the dining room for refreshments.''

'''David (Christian):''' Thanks again for inviting me tonight, Sam. And honestly, thank you for being so open to talking through all this. Not everyone is willing to sit down and really dig into differences in belief like this.

'''Sam (Bahá'í):''' I’m really glad you came, David. Truly. A fireside is meant to be a welcoming space for genuine questions, not just nodding along. What were your thoughts on the reading from ''Some Answered Questions''?

'''David:''' Well, to be candid, I’ve spent some time studying Islam over the years, and listening to ’Abdu’l-Bahá’s chapter on Muhammad… I still have a hard time with quite a few points he makes.

My first real concern is this idea that Christ would have acted the same way regarding the use of force or warfare if He had been in that situation. When you read the Qur’án, you run into verses that sound so jarring to Christian ears. Take this one, for instance:

"And when the sacred months are passed, kill those who join other gods with God wherever ye shall find them; and seize them, besiege them, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way, for God is Gracious, Merciful." (Suráh 9:5)

It’s hard to imagine Jesus speaking or acting like that.

'''Sam:''' That’s a verse people often bring up, and on the surface, it sounds startling. But I’m sure, as someone who defends the Bible, you recognize how vital historical and textual context is before pulling a single passage out. If you keep reading just a few verses down in that exact same chapter, the Qur’án clarifies:

"What! will ye not fight against those Meccans who have broken their oaths and aimed to expel your Apostle, and attacked you first? Will ye dread them? God is more worthy of your fear, if ye are believers!" (Suráh 9:13)

It wasn’t an open-ended mandate against non-believers everywhere; it was addressing specific, hostile tribes that repeatedly violated peace treaties and launched unprovoked attacks against the fledgling community.

'''David:''' Okay, I hear that about self-defense in that immediate setting. But even so, Christ explicitly taught the need to turn the other cheek. When violence broke out at His own arrest, He told Peter: "Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword." (Matt. 26:52). That radical non-resistance feels fundamentally different.

'''Sam:''' It is a profound teaching. But many Christian thinkers and theologians over the centuries—Augustine, Aquinas, and others—have pointed out that the Sermon on the Mount primarily governs personal relations, individual forgiveness, and private retaliation. It wasn’t necessarily teaching that an entire community or government should abandon the duty to protect the vulnerable or defend its people from destruction. When Jesus told Peter to put away his sword, Peter was taking up arms against lawful civil authorities carrying out an arrest, not acting as a magistrate protecting an endangered town.

'''David:''' Fair enough on civil authority, but looking at the history ’Abdu’l-Bahá references, he claims Muhammad did not fight against Christians. Historically, though, didn't early Muslims clash with Byzantine Christians?

'''Sam:''' Yes, there were clashes, but they were rare, exceptional circumstances and not driven by a campaign to eradicate Christianity. Take the Battle of Mu’tah—that was triggered because a Byzantine vassal executed an emissary sent by Muhammad, which was a grave breach of diplomatic immunity at the time. And the expedition to Tabuk was assembled because of reports that Byzantine and allied Christian Arab forces were mobilizing on the border; in the end, no actual fighting took place. The core point ’Abdu’l-Bahá is making is that Muhammad didn’t wage aggressive, instigative holy wars against Christians simply because of their faith.

'''David:''' Let me push on the history from another angle, then. Many Muslim writers—and ’Abdu’l-Bahá seems to echo this—paint pre-Islamic Arabia as utterly barbaric and lawless to highlight the dramatic transformation Muhammad brought. But historians point out that pre-Islamic Arabs already possessed sophisticated customary law, intricate poetic traditions, and thriving trade networks. They weren't just savages waiting to be civilized.

'''Sam:''' That's a valid historical clarification. ’Abdu’l-Bahá often used vivid, hyperbolic expressions typical of Middle Eastern rhetoric to underscore a sharp contrast—he didn’t mean they were literally devoid of every single moral standard or cultural achievement. But we can’t overlook the grim realities that genuinely plagued the region: rampant female infanticide, unchecked tribal blood feuds that lasted generations, and systemic abuse of women and captives.

"And Muhammad’s success wasn't merely a triumph of superior military force. Western historians have noted this as well. For example, in ''History of the Intellectual Development of Europe'', John William Draper writes:

"It is altogether a misconception that the Arabian progress was due to the sword alone. The sword may change an acknowledged national creed, but it cannot effect the consciences of men. Profound though its argument is, something far more profound was demanded before Mohammedanism pervaded the domestic life of Asia and Africa, before Arabic became the language of so many different nations."

He elsewhere asserts:

"Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia, the man who, of all men, has exercised the greatest influence upon the human race—Mohammed, by Europeans surnamed 'the Impostor.' He raised his own nation from Fetichism, the adoration of a meteoric stone, and from the basest idol-worship; he preached a monotheism which quickly scattered to the winds the empty disputes of the Arians and Catholics..."

'''David:''' Still, speaking of historical records, some of the specific documents ’Abdu’l-Bahá mentions in that chapter—like the famous Edict of ’Umar granting protections—are considered dubious or backdated by modern critical historians.

'''Sam:''' We can certainly debate the precise dating or transmission of specific textual edicts. But the larger historical reality remains: the civilization Muhammad inspired was renowned across centuries—even acknowledged by its medieval Christian contemporaries and rivals—for being remarkably tolerant compared to the standards of that era. Minority religious communities were granted protected status, legal autonomy, and freedom of worship.

'''David:''' Even if we grant that, though—even if we recognize social good, ethical reform, or military restraint by Muhammad or some early Muslims—as Christians, we simply don’t view socio-political uplift as evidence of divine revelation. Leaders like Genghis Khan unified fractured, warring tribes and built an astonishingly cohesive empire with its own legal code, but that doesn’t make him a prophet sent by God.

'''Sam:''' I agree with you there. I don't think ’Abdu’l-Bahá was implying that merely unifying people through political will or conquest is a divine credential. Plenty of conquerors have temporarily glued empires together by sheer might, and those empires quickly unraveled. What ’Abdu’l-Bahá is pointing to is the enduring ''spiritual'' transformation—the creation of an abiding moral and spiritual civilization that outlasts empires, transforms hearts, and elevates millions to worship the one true God for centuries. For Bahá’ís, that kind of deep, generational renewal requires the power of the Holy Spirit.

'''David:''' But Sam, for us, God's revelation reached its definitive, complete climax in Jesus Christ. Hebrews 1:1–2 lays this out so clearly:

"In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe."

Because of Christ’s unique identity, we don't believe any subsequent revelation is needed. And on top of that, while Muhammad may have encouraged the Arabs to respect Moses and Jesus, the Qur’án explicitly rejects foundational Christian truths: the divine Sonship of Christ, the Trinity, and the historical reality of the Crucifixion itself. How can we view that as coming from the same God?

'''Sam:''' I completely understand why those differences feel insurmountable from a traditional viewpoint.

From the Bahá’í perspective, we fully affirm the divine Sonship of Christ. However, we understand "Son of God" in a spiritual and symbolic sense rather than a physical or literal one. When the Qur’án strongly denies that God has taken a "son," Bahá’ís see it as refuting the anthropomorphic, literal concept held by some contemporary groups who conceived of God in physical terms.

As for the Crucifixion, the Qur’án’s verse stating that "they killed him not, nor crucified him" is understood in Bahá’í thought spiritually: His persecutors were able to put His physical body on the cross, but they utterly failed to extinguish His reality, His Spirit, or His divine Cause. In that sense, Christ triumphed over death completely—something I think Christians and Bahá’ís can actually find common ground on.

'''David:''' ''(smiling gently)'' It’s certainly a different lens on the text than I'm used to. I still have questions, but I appreciate you walking me through how Bahá’ís connect those dots.

'''Sam:''' And I really appreciate how thoughtfully and honestly you're engaging with it. How about we grab some more tea and see what treats are left in the kitchen?

'''David:''' Sounds great to me.

Course:Meetings for teaching/Life of Prophets/Muhammad

Brettz9 — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 23:23:36 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 29 September 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 7/Outline}}		{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 7/Outline}}

	~~==To-dos~~ for ~~this page==~~
	* ''[[History of the ~~Intellectual Development of Europe]]'' quotations~~		{{Box\|Review this dialogue for a discussion of the themes above.}}

			{{/Dialogue}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:40, 30 September 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 4:		Line 4:

	{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 9/Outline}}		{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 9/Outline}}

			== Study Questions for Chapter 9 of ''Some Answered Questions'' ==

			=== Paragraphs 1 & 2 ===

			# {{Details\|What was the moral, social, and political condition of Persia when Bahá’u’lláh appeared?\|Persia was plunged in the darkest ignorance and consumed by blind fanaticism; foreign travelers deplored that a nation once at the pinnacle of civilization had fallen into utter abasement, desolation, and wretchedness.}}

			# {{Details\|What was Bahá’u’lláh’s family background and upbringing, and did He acquire formal schooling?\|His father was a court minister rather than a divine; Bahá’u’lláh passed His early life in comfort and happiness among Persians of rank, and it was widely known that He never attended school or associated with the learned and clerical classes.}}

			=== Paragraphs 3 & 4 ===

			# {{Details\|How did Bahá’u’lláh respond upon the Báb’s declaration, and how did He champion His Cause?\|He immediately proclaimed the Báb as the "Lord of the righteous" whom all must obey; He openly associated with enemies, adduced decisive proofs and arguments, and exalted the Báb's word with composure despite decrees of massacre, pillage, and annihilation.}}

			# {{Details\|What immediate severe persecutions, material deprivations, and banishments did Bahá’u’lláh suffer?\|He was put in heavy chains, cast into a subterranean dungeon (the Síyáh-Chál), had His extensive ancestral estates completely plundered, was exiled four times from land to land, and was ultimately incarcerated in the Most Great Prison of ‘Akká.}}

			=== Paragraphs 5 & 6 ===

			# {{Details\|How did learned visitors—friends and foes alike—react when questioning Bahá’u’lláh in Ṭihrán, Baghdád, Constantinople, Adrianople, and ‘Akká?\|Scholars, philosophers, and divines of various faiths received complete, convincing answers to every inquiry, and all readily acknowledged that in every human and spiritual perfection He was peerless and unique.}}

			# {{Details\|What mission was entrusted to Mullá Ḥasan ‘Amú by the prominent Muslim divines of Karbilá and Najaf?\|He was sent as their representative to question Bahá’u’lláh; after receiving satisfying answers, he conveyed that while the divines acknowledged His unacquired learning, they demanded a miracle to establish the truth of His claim.}}

			=== Paragraphs 7–10 ===

			# {{Details\|How did Bahá’u’lláh respond to the demand for a miracle, and what condition did He impose?\|He stated that while it is for God to test mankind rather than man to test God, He accepted their request provided the divines assembled, agreed unanimously in writing upon a single miracle, sealed the pact, and accepted it as the definitive test of truth or imposture.}}

			# {{Details\|Why did the divines decline to submit their chosen miracle in writing?\|They feared the outcome, rationalizing that He was a magician who might perform some enchantment that would leave them without recourse, and dared not respond.}}

			# {{Details\|How did Mullá Ḥasan ‘Amú react to the divines’ refusal after leaving Bahá’u’lláh’s presence?\|He kissed Bahá’u’lláh’s knee in reverence, departed, and later traveled to Kirmánsháh and Ṭihrán openly recounting the entire episode and exposing the fear and inaction of the clergy.}}

			=== Paragraphs 11–13 ===

			# {{Details\|What title did even eastern adversaries and enemies use when speaking of Bahá’u’lláh?\|In spite of their enmity, they referred to Him as "the renowned Bahá’u’lláh."}}

			# {{Details\|How did the successive banishments from Persia to Baghdád, Constantinople, and Adrianople affect the spread of the Cause?\|Instead of extinguishing the Faith as intended, each banishment broadened its geographic reach, caused its flame to burn brighter, and attracted diverse peoples and nations.}}

			# {{Details\|Why was the penal colony of ‘Akká chosen as the final place of exile, and how was that intention overturned?\|It was an infamous fortress reserved for murderers, thieves, and highwaymen meant to subject Him and His companions to the direst humiliation and afflictions; instead, it became the means of exalting His Word, transforming Persia, and firmly establishing His teachings across the globe.}}

			=== Paragraphs 14 & 15 ===

			# {{Details\|What extraordinary contrast existed between Bahá’u’lláh’s outward status in ‘Akká and the impression He made on visitors?\|Though technically a captive criminal within a prison of thieves and highwaymen, His tent was pitched on Mount Carmel, He moved with utmost majesty, and visitors invariably exclaimed: "This is not a captive but a king!"}}

			# {{Details\|Which ancient prophetic promises regarding the Holy Land were fulfilled through Bahá’u’lláh’s banishment?\|Prophecies spoken two to three thousand years prior foretelling that the Lord of Hosts would appear and pitch His tent in the Holy Land were fulfilled solely through the hostile exiles orchestrated by His enemies.}}

			=== Paragraphs 16–18 ===

			# {{Details\|What did Bahá’u’lláh write to Emperor Napoleon III in His first and second epistles?\|In the first, He challenged Napoleon to inquire what crime justified His confinement; when Napoleon ignored it, the second epistle (in the [[Súriy-i-Haykal]]) warned that for failing to heed the call, Napoleon would lose his empire and be reduced to naught.}}

			# {{Details\|How was Bahá’u’lláh's warning to Napoleon III historically fulfilled shortly after its circulation?\|The prophecy was widely circulated throughout Persia and India in 1869; in 1870, the Franco-Prussian War erupted unexpectedly, resulting in Napoleon III's resounding defeat, surrender, and utter abasement.}}

			# {{Details\|How did Náṣiri’d-Dín Sháh react when seven leading divines refused to answer Bahá’u’lláh’s epistle and branded Him an enemy of the state?\|The Sháh was sorely vexed, rebuking the divines by pointing out that the letter was a matter of proof, testimony, and truth versus error rather than political enmity, lamenting that despite all royal favors the clergy could not formulate a reply.}}

			=== Paragraphs 19–21 ===

			# {{Details\|What view did non-believers and prominent figures like Siyyid Dávúdí hold regarding Bahá’u’lláh?\|Many foreign observers and non-believers viewed Him as an extraordinary saint, with Siyyid Dávúdí (a Sunní divine of Baghdád) writing a treatise recounting His extraordinary feats and miracles.}}

			# {{Details\|How did the presence of Bahá’u’lláh affect bitter opponents when they arrived intent on debate?\|They were struck with such awe, bewilderment, and amazement that they were reduced to utter silence, unable to utter the arguments they had prepared.}}

			# {{Details\|What makes Bahá’u’lláh’s mastery of Arabic and His written Tablets an extraordinary sign?\|He never studied Arabic, had tutors, or attended school, yet His spoken fluency and Arabic Tablets astonished the most articulate scholars and masters of Arabic literature.}}

			=== Paragraphs 22–26 ===

			# {{Details\|How does Bahá’u’lláh’s open challenge to the sovereign and clergy contrast with earlier Manifestations of God?\|While earlier Manifestations did not offer to submit to whatever arbitrary test or miracle their deniers proposed, Bahá’u’lláh explicitly challenged the Sháh to gather the divines together so proof and testimony could be unreservedly established.}}

			# {{Details\|According to the text, upon what does the future civilization, prosperity, and progress of Persia depend?\|It depends entirely upon the promulgation of the divine teachings and principles revealed by Bahá’u’lláh.}}

			# {{Details\|What striking contrast does 'Abdu'l-Bahá draw between the immediate followers of Christ and those of Bahá’u’lláh?\|Christ personally educated eleven disciples, the foremost of whom (Peter) denied Him thrice when tested; Bahá’u’lláh educated thousands who willingly faced the sword and persecution, raising the cry of "Yá Bahá'u'l-Abhá" with unshakable constancy.}}

			# {{Details\|What conclusion is reached regarding the true station and power of Bahá’u’lláh?\|That He was indisputably a universal Educator of mankind, aided by divine power, who manifested peerless signs and transformed the human world.}}


			{{Box\|Consider the following dialogue for some possible challenges to 'Abdu'l-Bahá's argument.}}

			{{/Dialogue}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:29, 29 September 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 4:		Line 4:

	{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 7/Outline}}		{{/Some Answered Questions, Chapter 7/Outline}}

			== Study Questions ==

			=== Paragraphs 1 & 2 ===

			# {{Details\|Why are many historical accounts concerning Muḥammad in the West inaccurate or distorted?\|They stem either from ill-intentioned or ignorant Christian clergy, or from European historians relying upon unfounded, exaggerated tales circulated by ignorant Muslims who mistakenly thought things like excessive polygamy or bloodshed added to His glory.}}

			# {{Details\|What false conclusion did a Christian priest draw regarding Islam after conversing with a foolish Muslim?\|Because the man boasted that true greatness lay in bloodshed and that a Muslim had beheaded a hundred men in a day, the priest incorrectly concluded that the foundation of Muḥammad's religion consisted in killing.}}

			# {{Details\|What historical proof does the text provide to show that Muḥammad's military campaigns were purely defensive?\|For thirteen years in Mecca, He and His followers patiently endured severe persecution, murder, pillaging, and flight; even after Muḥammad escaped assassination at midnight and fled to Medina, His enemies relentlessly pursued the Muslims to Medina and Abyssinia to annihilate them.}}

			=== Paragraphs 3–6 ===

			# {{Details\|How does the text characterize the barbarity of the pre-Islamic Arab tribes, especially toward infant daughters?\|They buried their infant daughters alive as a point of false honor and pride, with husbands routinely threatening to kill their wives if they gave birth to a daughter.}}

			# {{Details\|What were the prevailing marital and property practices regarding women among those tribes?\|Men could marry as many as a thousand wives, with households often exceeding ten; upon a father's death, stepsons would throw their mantles over their stepmothers to claim them as personal property and slaves, possessing the legal right to beat, starve, imprison, or kill them.}}

			# {{Details\|How did tribal warfare and perpetual raids affect the social status of families?\|Tribes lived by mutual plunder, murder, and enslavement; within a single day, the sons and daughters of princes could be plunged from luxury and high rank into utter abasement, servitude, and being sold to strangers.}}

			=== Paragraphs 7 & 8 ===

			# {{Details\|Why was Muḥammad compelled to take up arms after thirteen years of peaceful endurance?\|Because after the Muslims fled to Medina, the hostile tribes united an army specifically intent on exterminating every man, woman, and child among His followers.}}

			# {{Details\|What comparison does 'Abdu'l-Bahá make between Christ and Muḥammad under identical circumstances?\|While Christ would certainly forgive personal wrongs done to Himself alone, had He been faced with ravenous, bloodthirsty murderers intent on slaughtering and enslaving defenseless women and children, He too would have used all-conquering power to defend the innocent and stay the hand of the oppressor.}}

			# {{Details\|Why was curbing these aggressive tribes described as an act of mercy and bounty?\|Just as a loving friend shatters a cup of poison to restrain someone about to drink it, forcibly restraining savage tribes from murderous violence delivered them from their own bloodthirstiness and protected the innocent.}}

			=== Paragraphs 9 & 10 ===

			# {{Details\|How did Muḥammad specifically treat the Christian community of Najrán?\|He placed them under His direct protection, accorded them complete freedom, and proclaimed that whoever infringed upon their rights would face Him as an enemy before God.}}

			# {{Details\|What rights and protections were granted to Christians and Jews in the edicts of Muḥammad and early Islam?\|Their lives, property, and honor were protected by God; Christian wives were not forced to veil or barred from church, and were buried by priests; Muslims were instructed to help build churches; and Christians were exempted from military combat upon paying a nominal annual tax.}}

			# {{Details\|What example is given of a purely fabricated Muslim tradition born of fanaticism?\|The literal belief that the moon was a small physical object that Muḥammad split in two, casting one half on one mountain of Mecca and the other half on another.}}

			=== Paragraphs 11–13 ===

			# {{Details\|What were the physical and intellectual conditions of the Ḥijáz when Muḥammad appeared?\|It was a barren, treeless, intensely hot desert inhabited by illiterate nomads devoid of learning, where Muḥammad Himself was unschooled and the Qur’án was first written on sheep blade-bones and palm fronds.}}

			# {{Details\|What was Muḥammad's initial reproach to His people, and why did they find it hard to accept?\|He reproached them for rejecting the Torah, the Gospel, Moses, and Christ; they resisted because it required them to acknowledge that their revered pagan ancestors had gone astray.}}

			# {{Details\|Why is the Qur’án considered an extraordinary proof given Muḥammad's background?\|Because an illiterate Man from an unlettered, nomadic society produced a Book of supreme eloquence expounding the perfections of God, prophetic stations, divine laws, and advanced fields of knowledge.}}

			=== Paragraphs 14–16 ===

			# {{Details\|How did the astronomical references in the Qur’án contrast with the prevailing scientific consensus of the time?\|While world mathematicians and philosophers universally adhered to the Ptolemaic geocentric model for fifteen centuries, the Qur’án revealed that the sun is fixed in its place moving about an axis and that celestial bodies swim in their own orbits.}}

			# {{Details\|Why were earlier Muslim divines forced to interpret these astronomical verses figuratively?\|Because the geocentric Ptolemaic system was considered absolute, incontrovertible scientific fact at the time, and the explicit verses directly contradicted it until modern astronomy confirmed the Qur’án's accuracy centuries later.}}

			# {{Details\|What historical contrast existed between the Islamic world and Europe during the Middle Ages?\|While Europe had descended into the darkest depths of barbarity, the Arab and Islamic world fostered an advanced civilization that led all nations in crafts, sciences, mathematics, medicine, and governance.}}

			# {{Details\|What final question does 'Abdu'l-Bahá ask regarding the station of Muḥammad?\|He asks whether an illiterate Man who transformed warring, savage clans into the founders of a glorious, centuries-long civilization of human perfections was not, in all fairness, a true universal Educator.}}