Re: The Point
- From: smaneck@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 17:07:18 CST
diamondsouled wrote:
Hello Susan,
I never said any such thing Susan. I've made it very clear that
society needs to be protected from those who committ criminal acts
Larry,
That is not the same thing as holding them responsible for their acts.
We need to be protected from paranoid schizophrenics who get a hold of
AK47s. That doesn't mean they are responsible for what they do.
I fail to see the difference between being flawless and propositional
inerrancy. If a person flawlessly reflects the will of God how can they
be mistaken?
They can't be mistaken about anything involving the Will of God. They
could conceivably be wrong about what day they wrote a letter to so and
so.
If Baha'is ever carry out what Baha'u'llah's law in the Aqdas states
Susan and begin to burn those who burn houses how do you think that
will reflect on Baha'is and the Baha'i faith, even though they will
literally be carrying out what they believe is the actual word of God?
First off, we would be in no position to carry out such laws unless
nearly everyone on the planet was already a Baha'i. In that case, there
would be no alcohol fetal syndrome becuase there would be no alcohol.
As for the law itself, I've already indicated there are a number of
ways in which the House of Justice could apply it. There is nothing in
the verse itself which requires anyone to be burned alive.
Now you're stating that I'm saying Baha'u'llah is a liar as well as a
hypocrite Susan when I've never stated any such thing.
You are very sneaky about this. You say 'believers' think He is
infallible rather than state the truth, namely that Baha'u'llah
*claimed" to be infallible.
Sad. You would
do better to use logic and reason as well as quotes from the writings
to argue your points Susan rather than resorting to putting words in my
mouth you know are untrue and only aimed to arose emotions.
I do. I produce the quotes where Baha'u'llah said the very things that
you are falsely ascribing to believers as though they made it up
themselves.
If a person is unaware of something and states a thing which is based
on their current understanding they are not lieing but only speaking
from a lack of understanding. This doesn't make the person a liar, or a
hypocrite for that matter.
Larry, the claim to infallibility is such that a person cannot possibly
claim it unless they actually possess it or are the very epitomy of
evil. Because unless you are truly perfect, the inability to
acknowledge ones failings and sinfulness constittues what the Bible
called a sin against the Holy Spirit, a sin which by its very nature is
unforgiveable. The more radical the self-deception involved the more
radical the evil produced. As the Qur'an says: "And be ye not like
those who forget God, and whom He hath therefore caused to forget their
own selves. Such men are the evil doers." (Qur'an 59:19). Radical evil
is measured, not so much by the extent of one's sin, but by one's
refusal to acknowledge it. Such people are what the psychiatrist Scott
Peck terms the "People of the Lie." As Scott Peck notes: "Evil is not
committed by people who feel uncertain about their own righteousness,
who question their own motives, who worry about betraying themselves.
The evil in this world is committed by the . . . self righteous who
think they are without sin because they are unwilling to suffer the
discomfort of significant self-examination." (People of the Lie, p.
72).
So you are accusing Baha'u'llah of something much more serious than
telling a lie.
Either that or He was telling the truth. Given the nature of His
claims, I see no other alternatives.
Susan
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Point
- From: Carl Brehmer
- Re: The Point
- References:
- The Point
- From: diamondsouled
- Re: The Point
- From: smaneck
- Re: The Point
- From: diamondsouled
- The Point
- Prev by Date: Re: Devotionals
- Next by Date: Re: What is FIR?
- Previous by thread: Re: The Point
- Next by thread: Re: The Point
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
