Posted by Munir A. Qureshi on June 26, 2101 at 16:06:38:

In Reply to: Re: Request For Answer,anon... posted by anon on June 26, 2101 at 12:40:09:

Dear anon,
Thank you for your reply. Please be noted that I am student of Bahai's Religion since a long time and not a bigoted person but like to understand religion in its own sense. Here I am quoting you the two replies already given to 'Sen & Snoj'& I hope that those are sufficient for you also. Please consider:-
1. Thank you for your reply, as you have admitted thatä You can see that the 'unity of science and religion' cannot
mean that they are the same thing. I also want to describe that Bahaullah says to Mr. Karim Khan about the two paths of knowledge , the first is human research which is not able to discover the mysteries of divine knowledge , and the second one as He described on the next pages , the spiritual way to know the mystery of divine knowledge such as miraj also. He describes the spiritual arrangements to know the mystery of miraj. (Did one of the believers in Bahaâi Faith try to achieve?).You also admitted that Knowledge is an ocean, and our sciences a small
cup, but you will not be disagree that Devine knowledge should be final and everlasting. A pure and final thing could not be equal to a little and uncertainty of knowledge. So your principle Unity of Science & Religion is quite disapproved Metter prepared to satisfy the challenges of the modern attacks on the religion.
In reply of my next question you have written thatä The knowledge does indeed change, and therefore the
scriptures become difficult to understand, because the
scriptures are expressed in terms of the knowledge and
language of the people of the time. After some time, some
meanings are lost, or one needs experts to explain the original
meaning. And even when the meaning has been explained, it
is hard for people to understand because they no longer live
(for example) in a world where angels are in the sky and
monsters are in the sea -- as in the Biblical world. But this is
not a problem, because God sends down the Mother Book
again, in a language and shape that is understandable for the
people of the new ageä. I think that for ãyour noble causeä, you want to change the history and so your new meanings were similar to last eras.
On the other hand you turn by reverse gearing and tell us thatä
The unity of religions certainly does not mean that all the
Religionists will have the same ideas! Even the people of one
religion do not have the same understanding of their religion.
But if we suppose that there is a unity, it makes a big
difference to how we get along with people who have different
ideas, and how we can learn to live in societies in which
different religions are present, and are expected to live side-by-
side as equalsä. Do you want to tell that there are no meanings and no understandings of Holly Wordings and in the coming days your theories might be changed by passive of time?
With regards,
Munir A. Qureshi.
2.Thanks for your comments on my reply. Please be noted that I never said that given Devine knowledge mean total Devine knowledge, but the given Devine knowledge must be accurate otherwise there is no need to be given to mankind. If you read The Holly Bible & The Holly Quran, you might be seen the similar wordings about creation of universe, creation of man, angles, Satan, skies, and a no: of other issues, If one of the Holly Book tells us the creation of Adam by special creation and the other describe its creation by evolution than the both are not from the single source. In Qurâan there is a verse ãNothing is said to thee but what was said to the Messengers before thee,ä( 41/43,Ha Mim Sajadah).
I have quoted you the other path of vision from your Holly Book Iqan, but you ignore the subject described there in detail. In your reply you sayä> Ah, but I think you are supposing that when we 'know religion',
we possess divine knowledge, that we have pure and final
Knowledge. But this is clearly not so: religion gives us a finite
Piece of an infinitely large puzzle. <äI again say that given Devine knowledge mean not total Devine knowledge but as for as given to the mankind it should be accurate and final and not be contradictive by the passage of time.
Please be noted that due to change of celestial science by Kepler & Galileo about 4 hundred year ago , several religious issues were criticized and several books were written on those issues just as ãA History of the conflict between science and religionä by willum john draper, in which he object the knowledge of Holly Books. Bahaullah was not the first person who feel to change the meanings of the issues given in the Holly Books, several tried to prove the original meanings and several others choose another path the path of hidden meanings of Holly Wordings. (Bahaullah himself taken some time original meanings of the Holy Books but mostly He adopted the hidden meanings as following Bab.)
Other than Babies &Bahaâi faith who adopted new meanings , several other scholars being in there own religion adopted new meanings , such as in Egypt and in India like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.
So please note that first the science changed & attacked on old theories than due to this some new religions & tribes came into being.
You were not the first persons who told the new theories, but only tried to get advantage from the change of scientific circumstances.
It is strange that the supposed Devine guidance is following the human research. How can you stand by on your next principle Wahdat-e-adyan?
I request other members of this forum to read my question, Mr.Senâs answers and my replies and give their comments ·....
Thanks & regards,
Munir A. Qureshi.
------------------------------------------------
If you want more comments on your fresh reply, please will send you in my fist leisure. Thanking you for giving your attentions.
Munir A. Qureshi.

this topic is closed - post at bahai-library.com/forum