« The Baha'is in Iran on the receiving end of karma | Main | Indonesia true Baha'i online »

August 15, 2015

Comments

Ian RoeBuck

Excellent exposition of the main problems with the article in defense of a fallible UHJ. The spacious argument that the UHJ can be infallible in its decisions in the legislative fields and still be fallible in exposition and elucidation of the Writings is ludicrous, and particularly when he then goes to point out that a Guardian could require them to reconsider a decision, but then states they could go ahead and decide against the Guardian, and that this would be OK and would have no consequences. What nonsense! It is clear that if the members individually or collectively were to go against the Guardian's interpretation and continue the legislation after the reconsideration, the Guardian would likely have no alternative but the use his right to expel members of the UHJ and do so collectively or individually depending on who voted against the Guardian. It is clear that his presuppositions concerning the infallibility of the UHJ and the no need for the Guardianship have led him to interpret the Writings to allow this when his very interpretation itself is unauthorized and unpermitted by the Writings.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Notice:

  • Copyright © 2001-2016 - Jeffrey Goldberg All Rights Reserved This is a personal web site offered in loving service to the fourth Guardian of the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh, Nosrat’u’llah Bahremand,
  • The Orthodox Bahá'í Faith has no affiliation with the Bahá'í Faith presently headquartered in Wilmette, Illinois or Haifa, Israel. Opinions expressed are those of the blog author only who is solely responsible for its content, and are not necessarily the opinion of the Orthodox Bahá'í Faith or its members.

May 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

*****