On May 14, 9:19 pm, "Kent Johnson" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> That wasn't me. That was macleod.
Sorry. Yes, I realized that right after I went back and read what I
wrote.
> What I said on the subject, to macleod, was this:
> Others' beliefs are not my concern. I happily share my religion
> with people who, apparently, don't think their deeds are im****tant, but
> following the laws are im****tant in minuscule detail. I can't think of
any
> other belief that would irk me more.
I have see that kind of "legalism" in many of the religious groups I
have studied. Some of the most legalistic people are also the least
altruistic.
> A theoretical Baha'i creationism doctrine could be developed, expounded,
> criticized, ridiculed, and renewed. I have no doubt but such a thing
will
> happen, and probably sooner than later. No one will be excommunicated
for
> such a doctrine. I personally will lend my voice to their right to
believe
> such nonsense and remain Baha'i.
Well, such a creationist perspective already exists under the
misnomer, "parallel evolution." (I say "misnomer," since the term
"parallel evolution" in biology refers to something quite different.)
It is not much different from old-earth creationism.
> As an individual, let me take this op****tunity to mention, yet again, my
> responsibility is to"conduct and de****t yourselves ...."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Tablets of Abdu'l-Baha v1, p. 41)
Yes,
Mark Foster
|
