Continuing Revelation

Status
Not open for further replies.

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
The question was asked as to what was meant by continuing revelation or Progressive Revelation as Baha'is prefer to call it. Since the question was off-topic for that thread I thought I would post a new thread addressing that question.

Continuing revelation is based on the premise that God will never leave humanity alone and that divine revelation did not therefore end with the Bible or the Qur'an. Mormons, I think it can be said, believe in continuous revelation at least since Joseph Smith, having routinized it within their church structure. For them each prophet is said to be elected by the divinely guided leadership.

The Baha'i concept of continuing revelation operates quite differently. We see God as revealing Himself through His Manifestations, individuals who don't merely receive a revelation from God but embody in their own Persons everything we can know about God humanly speaking. Centuries or even a millennium may pass before the appearance of a new Manifestation. How do we test the validity of a claimant? First, there is the Person of the Manifestation Himself. Second, there is the Word which He reveals and third there is the transforming potency of His revelation.

For instance, when I was a Christian I believed in Christ because of what I read about His life in the Gospels. I couldn't read those without seeing God in Jesus. Likewise I believed in the Bible as the Word of God because through it I heard God speak. Finally there was the ability of the Christian message to bring about spiritual transformation. All these proofs I saw in Christianity applied to the Baha'i Faith as well.
The performance of miracles or fulfillment of prophecy, in my book are secondary matters at best.

Ultimately, i suppose this all boils down to "ye shall know them by their fruits."
 
  • Like
Reactions: jenny1972

Winken

Heimat
Supporter
Sep 24, 2010
5,709
3,505
✟168,847.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
For instance, when I was a Christian I believed in Christ because of what I read about His life in the Gospels. I couldn't read those without seeing God in Jesus. Likewise I believed in the Bible as the Word of God because through it I heard God speak. Finally there was the ability of the Christian message to bring about spiritual transformation. All these proofs I saw in Christianity applied to the Baha'i Faith as well.

The performance of miracles or fulfillment of prophecy, in my book are secondary matters at best.

Ultimately, i suppose this all boils down to "ye shall know them by their fruits."


Sounds like you could joyfully return to your Christian roots.
 
Upvote 0

jackcv

Newbie
Oct 30, 2010
341
22
British Columbia, Canada
✟9,132.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Hello. Smaneck. Thanks for starting this thread. I was trying to figure out how to do it.
Here is a recap of 3 posts that got us here:

redleghunter said:
I've seen a few comments about continuing revelation on this thread. Can you explain this a bit more? Also, with continuing revelation, within your church, what is used as an infallible standard to test the truth claims of the new revelations? Thanks.

Very productive questions. Smanek gave a thoughtful response. I appreciate [his explanation] about Baha'i doctrine. For example:

smaneck said:
Continuing revelation is based on the premise that God will never leave humanity alone and that divine revelation did not therefore end with the Bible or the Qur'an.

Does this not make perfect sense? If there is a consistent message in the Bible, it is that God speaks to men, women and children, members of all religions. Also to fish, donkeys, winds, waves and fig trees.

If our HaShem/Father in heaven was suddenly going to stop this millennia-old covenant pattern, wouldn't He state that clearly, more than once?

He didn't.

Now, perhaps I can clarify the LDS Christian view somewhat.

smaneck said: Mormons, I think it can be said, believe in continuous revelation at least since Joseph Smith, having routinized it within their church structure. For them the issue of legitimacy doesn't arise because each prophet is said to be elected by the divinely guided leadership.

Well, in fact the issue of legitimacy arose from the very beginning, and continues in full force today. The Prophet Joseph suffered for months under the burden of being the only witness to angelic visitations, the voice of God, the golden plates (the ancient source of the Book of Mormon). He was ecstatic when, through revelation, God called 3 credible, sober men to see the plates and personally see an angel, hear the voice of the Lord, and then 8 others who saw and handled the plates, and they gave their testimonies under oath.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are taught repeatedly and publicly to call upon God individually for the Holy Spirit to witness to each of us "if these things are not true". We and our children are taught this, and given the exact, 5 step procedure which one needs to follow in order to assure ourselves of the promised answers (Moroni 10:4-5). We believe that personal revelation is the sine qua non of true religion.

We are likewise obligated and urged to obtain for ourselves God's endorsement of the callings and directions of the living prophets, seers and revelators today, as well as our local bishop, Relief Society president, and all others who (we believe) the Savior has called "by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands, to preach the gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof."

Thank you for explaining your church doctrine on continuing revelations. However, unanswered was what does your church use as the infallible standard for truth claims? Meaning any new revelation must be tested as we are to test all spirits. Also the standard applied to a prophetic message, using the OT and NT, must come to 100% fulfillment or the prophet and prophecy are not from YHWH.

Excellent questions.

Isn't the only infallible test on earth knowing the voice of the Spirit, and knowing how to obtain its guidance? Is this not a major component of the grace of God? (John 16:13) I believe that until one has learned to recognize that Divine, still, small voice, one’s faith is equivalent to whistling in the dark. Forgive me if I was not clear about that.

We are taught that personal revelation almost always comes in answer to a question - usually an urgent question. Then the Lord says, as you observed, that we must do our homework. One may not receive an answer because, "you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right. (D&C 9:7-9)


BTW, I am confident that this is available to every Christian, Hindu, Sikh, Baha'i, Jew or gentile on earth who prays in the name of Jesus Christ, whether that one knows his given name or not. (Joel 2:28; Acts 10:34; Isa 58:6-12)

As for 100% fulfillment of prophecy, how would one know that? "Now we see through a glass darkly." The only infallible way, I suggest, is the manner I have described above.

How about we start a totally new thread on this topic so we don't derail the present one which is focused on gender issues. How about if Jack starts it out by explaining the five criteria within the LDS church? I would point out however, that you are making assumptions we might not all share. For instance, not all religions laying claim to revelation are churches. Nor do all necessarily believe there is an infallible standard for measuring truth claims. To 'test spirits' for instance, in the Baha'i Faith would be meaningless since we have no concept of an Evil Spirit aside from the one that might whispers in our own souls.
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
The problem with judging a tree by its fruits (i.e. judging a person's claim to being a Manifestation by the wisdom of the writings), is that many Baha'i's seem to elevate Baha'ullah's writings to the same inerrant status that many Christians elevate the KJV. The Baha'i with this mindset naturally validates his/her preconception that Baha'ullah was indeed a Manifestation. There is no real skeptical analysis except in the early stages before conversion. Of course this is true of all religions to varying degrees as far as I know.
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
There is a mental illness called "delusional disorder". This is related to schizophrenia except that the hallucinations are less significant than the delusional beliefs. Unlike people with schizophrenia, people with delusional disorder are completely sane and functional in all areas except for the delusional belief. Often spouses are the only people who realize there is a problem. Even psychotherapists are often unable to diagnose the illness, because these people seem so rational. In many cases the psychotherapists are persuaded that the spouse has the problem instead of the person with delusional disorder.

One common form of delusional disorder is "grandiose type" (previously called "messiah type" until this was renamed to avoid offending religious people)
Grandiose type: delusion of inflated worth, power, knowledge, identity or believes himself/herself to be a famous person, claiming the actual person is an impostor or an impersonator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The question was asked as to what was meant by continuing revelation or Progressive Revelation as Baha'is prefer to call it. Since the question was off-topic for that thread I thought I would post a new thread addressing that question.

Continuing revelation is based on the premise that God will never leave humanity alone and that divine revelation did not therefore end with the Bible or the Qur'an. Mormons, I think it can be said, believe in continuous revelation at least since Joseph Smith, having routinized it within their church structure. For them each prophet is said to be elected by the divinely guided leadership.

The Baha'i concept of continuing revelation operates quite differently. We see God as revealing Himself through His Manifestations, individuals who don't merely receive a revelation from God but embody in their own Persons everything we can know about God humanly speaking. Centuries or even a millennium may pass before the appearance of a new Manifestation. How do we test the validity of a claimant? First, there is the Person of the Manifestation Himself. Second, there is the Word which He reveals and third there is the transforming potency of His revelation.

For instance, when I was a Christian I believed in Christ because of what I read about His life in the Gospels. I couldn't read those without seeing God in Jesus. Likewise I believed in the Bible as the Word of God because through it I heard God speak. Finally there was the ability of the Christian message to bring about spiritual transformation. All these proofs I saw in Christianity applied to the Baha'i Faith as well.
The performance of miracles or fulfillment of prophecy, in my book are secondary matters at best.

Ultimately, i suppose this all boils down to "ye shall know them by their fruits."

FWIW, this perspective champions two concepts that are fatal to any religion. Or to put it another way, they open the door to any purely artificial religion.

1. There is no timeless standard to guide men because any innovation or change can be attributed to new revelation. That's how women's ordination was argued in the face of overwhelming evidence that stood against it and nothing really that argued in favor of the change except, of course, "The Holy Spirit has changed his mind. Trust me (i.e. whoever the speaker is) on that."

and

2. The idea that truth of any religion is to be judged solely by its fruits. No, we may be able to identify a true faith by its fruits, but the inverse doesn't hold. There are many charitable, peaceful, and fair-minded people quite apart from what their religious convictions are--or whether they have any at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ContraMundum
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
The problem with judging a tree by its fruits (i.e. judging a person's claim to being a Manifestation by the wisdom of the writings), is that many Baha'i's seem to elevate Baha'ullah's writings to the same inerrant status that many Christians elevate the KJV.

You realize the KJV is a translation, not the Bible? If by this you mean we consider Baha'u'llah's Writings themselves to be the standard upon which spiritual truth is measured, that would be correct. But I would not ascribe propositional inerrancy to the Writings. In other words, I don't rely on them in matters of history or science. In any case the Writings only become a source of authority after our investigations have determined that Baha'u'llah is indeed a Manifestation of God.

The Baha'i with this mindset naturally validates his/her preconception that Baha'ullah was indeed a Manifestation. There is no real skeptical analysis except in the early stages before conversion. Of course this is true of all religions to varying degrees as far as I know.

It is the process which proceeds conversion where one determines the validity of someone's claim to have received revelation. Might that choice have to be re-evaluated at some point? Quite possibly, but I don't do it with ever verse Baha'u'llah reveals. I did it when I first began reading His Writings before I became a Baha'i.

In the thread where this discussion was first started it was suggested that we had to have an 'infallible standard' for determining who was a Prophet. I submit that no such standard exist because it is up to the individual to independently investigate truth for themselves and no individual is infallible. Ian Semple, a prominent Baha'i described ones personal responsibility in these terms:
  1. The foundation for all development is to know oneself and to accept one's own responsibility for one's own life.
2. The next step is to learn that for a person to follow his own inclinations in everything leads to chaos in his own life and in society as a whole.

3. This leads one to search for an external source of authority, for what is truth. When one thinks one has found such a source it is essential to validate it. To fail to do so is to sacrifice one of the most fundamental rights and duties of a human being.

4. Having decided that a source of authority is valid, and that one wishes to obey it, one can only put this into practice if one understands what that source of authority requires.

5. Finally, unless one uses one's intelligence and good judgment in exercising one's obedience to authority, one may well end up doing the opposite of what it really intends.

All five of these processes require the exercise of one's reasoning powers. They are the negation of the concept of "blind obedience" [taqlid] and I believe that this concept of blind obedience is contrary to the spirit of the Faith. Obedience, for a Bahá'í is the free exercise of one's will to follow what one believes to be right. Blind obedience is the abdication of one's free will.
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
There is a mental illness called "delusional disorder". This is related to schizophrenia except that the hallucinations are less significant than the delusional beliefs. Unlike people with schizophrenia, people with delusional disorder are completely sane and functional in all areas except for the delusional belief. Often spouses are the only people who realize there is a problem. Even psychotherapists are often unable to diagnose the illness, because these people seem so rational. In many cases the psychotherapists are persuaded that the spouse has the problem instead of the person with delusional disorder.

That is generally the case only in paranoid schizophrenia. Most schizophrenics with delusions become so disorganized in their thinking that it is pretty obvious something is wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seashale76
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
FWIW, this perspective champions two concepts that are fatal to any religion. Or to put it another way, they open the door to any purely artificial religion.

1. There is no timeless standard to guide men because any innovation or change can be attributed to new revelation. That's how women's ordination was argued in the face of overwhelming evidence that stood against it and nothing really that argued in favor of the change except, of course, "The Holy Spirit has changed his mind. Trust me (i.e. whoever the speaker is) on that."

Funny, I was born and raised in a liberal Christian Church which allowed women into the ministry but there was no question whatsoever of using a new revelation to justify that. But I must say I find your reference to a "timeless standard to guide men" in suppressing women's equality to be rather telling. And yes, in the Baha'i Faith it is revelation which justifies the equality of women and men and you are quite right that the continued suppression of women depends on keeping religion stagnate.
To my mind this is one of the reasons for the necessity of continuing revelation.

2. The idea that truth of any religion is to be judged solely by its fruits. No, we may be able to identify a true faith by its fruits, but the inverse doesn't hold. There are many charitable, peaceful, and fair-minded people quite apart from what their religious convictions are--or whether they have any at all.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. We are talking religions not individuals.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
That is generally the case only in paranoid schizophrenia. Most schizophrenics with delusions become so disorganized in their thinking that it is pretty obvious something is wrong.
That's true of schizophrenia, but "delusional disorder" is different from schizophrenia. They are both psychosis, but people with delusional disorder seem completely normal except for the delusional belief. If the delusional belief is compatible with the religion and culture, and the person has some charisma and wisdom, then the world gets a new religion. There is an organization called the Icarus Project with a similar view except that they see this type of mental illness as a blessing to society.

Apart from their delusions, people with delusional disorder may continue to socialize and function in a normal manner and their behaviour does not generally seem odd or bizarre. However, the preoccupation with delusional ideas can be disruptive to their overall lives. For the diagnosis to be made, auditory and visual hallucinations cannot be prominent, though olfactory or tactile hallucinations related to the content of the delusion may be present
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder

The Icarus Project is a media and activist endeavor that is part of a larger consumer/survivor/ex-patient mental health movement characterized by the view that many phenomena commonly labeled as mental illness should actually be regarded as "dangerous gifts".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icarus_Project

Another link:
http://theicarusproject.net/about-us
 
Upvote 0

Arthra

Baha'i
Feb 20, 2004
7,060
572
California
Visit site
✟71,812.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Who can experience new revelations and how frequently the new revelations are expected affects the unity of the religion. Also new interpretations of the old revelations can be equivalent to new revelations. FWIW

I'll assume you are posing a question? I would say off hand that new revelations... as they occur generally challenge the old order.. priesthood or ordinances... as in the case of Jesus. Buddha challenged the prerogatives of the Brahmin cast.. Generally there is a social upheaval or shake-up involved. As Mahdi the Bab challenged the order of the Mullahs and so on.

So the revelation is also a social upheaval and usually addresses a challenge to the way things were done in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I'll assume you are posing a question? I would say off hand that new revelations... as they occur generally challenge the old order.. priesthood or ordinances... as in the case of Jesus. Buddha challenged the prerogatives of the Brahmin cast.. Generally there is a social upheaval or shake-up involved. As Mahdi the Bab challenged the order of the Mullahs and so on.

So the revelation is also a social upheaval and usually addresses a challenge to the way things were done in the past.
I didn't think about the revolutionary nature of revelations, but that is true.

I was thinking about how different religions have different policies on prophets.
- Judaism believes the prophets are history, but Judaism has kept its theology relevant by interpreting the existing revelations in new ways.
- Baha'i isn't expecting another prophet for centuries, but I believe central authorities apparently rule on the meaning of Baha'ullah's writings (?)
- Catholicism is similar to Baha'i with the Vatican as central authority.
- Islam believes Muhammad was the final prophet. I'm not sure if there is a central authority in Islam. We have the Sunni and Shia schism.
- Protestantism is very decentralized with new inspirations and interpretations. The central authority seems to be the Bible. Lots of schisms result from this democratic approach.
- Mormonism seems to expect prophecies only from the central authorities, so that maintains unity (?)
 
Upvote 0
Mar 21, 2013
1,454
148
✟10,605.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
- Baha'i isn't expecting another prophet for centuries, but I believe central authorities apparently rule on the meaning of Baha'ullah's writings (?)

No, the Universal House of Justice is specifically not given the power of making binding interpretations of the Baha'i scriptures. With the passing of the Guardian of the Baha'i Faith, the door to authorized interpretation is closed (until the coming of the next Manifestation of God, in more than 800 years).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
- Baha'i isn't expecting another prophet for centuries, but I believe central authorities apparently rule on the meaning of Baha'ullah's writings (?)

Not exactly. The Universal House of Justice is empowered to make new laws in keeping with the needs of the time. They also can make decisions as to the applicability of existing Baha'i laws but they don't interpret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

seashale76

Unapologetic Iconodule
Dec 29, 2004
14,001
4,395
✟171,309.00
Country
United States
Faith
Melkite Catholic
Marital Status
Married
That is generally the case only in paranoid schizophrenia. Most schizophrenics with delusions become so disorganized in their thinking that it is pretty obvious something is wrong.
Very true. When someone has grandiose delusions, it is apparent. There a lot of Jesus Christs, St. Michaels, and Queens of England pregnant with Prince William's baby in psych wards.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

seashale76

Unapologetic Iconodule
Dec 29, 2004
14,001
4,395
✟171,309.00
Country
United States
Faith
Melkite Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The problem with judging a tree by its fruits (i.e. judging a person's claim to being a Manifestation by the wisdom of the writings), is that many Baha'i's seem to elevate Baha'ullah's writings to the same inerrant status that many Christians elevate the KJV. The Baha'i with this mindset naturally validates his/her preconception that Baha'ullah was indeed a Manifestation. There is no real skeptical analysis except in the early stages before conversion. Of course this is true of all religions to varying degrees as far as I know.
Okay- I think this post qualifies as a valid rebuttal- but the psychiatric disorder stuff in your additional posts is going too far. I'm obviously not Baha'i and I don't believe as they do or think their religion is true. However, there is a line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.