Bahai Answer Forum

I am a Baha'i member and an ardent Darwinian and have studied the Baha'i writings in some depth but there seems to be an anomaly in the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá. If you read 'Some Answered Questions' chapters 46-51 he actually disagrees with the mainstream science of Biology and Evolution by Natural Selection. Basically he says that we evolved separately from the animal and have never been an animal. He says that our evolutionary development parallels the development of the embryo in the womb up until it becomes an adult. This would preclude evolution by natural selection. 'Abdul's version is known by scientists as 'Orthogenesis' and was discounted by science many years ago. 'Orthogenesis' basically means 'guided evolution which is pre-planned and does not depend on natural selection. As Professor Richard Dawkins says "evolution doesn't have goals, it just changes." At the same time it can only go forward and not backwards. We have 98.9% of our DNA in common with the chimpanzee which strongly indicates humans and chimpanzees having a common ancestor. We are closer to a chimpanzee than a Horse is to an Ass. If we tried to resolve this issue and simply accept evolution by natural selection then how does that fit in with Progressive Revelation? If we look back at our ancestors such as Australopithecus, Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus and so on, then when did God first start communicating with us and start choosing Prophets? I have a lovely chart I bought from Amazon called 'The Evolutionary Tree of Religion' which shows the early religions from all over the world right up to the modern day and Baha'i Faith is very nicely included. At the bottom of the chart the very earliest religions were either animists or polytheists. Animists worshipped stones and trees and possibly their own ancestors. How do you combine that chart with Progressive revelation and then with Darwinian Evolution? It might sound as though I've got it all worked out but as a Baha'i I am stumped. Can anyone address this problem?

Progressive Revelation
Part 1
Don't forget the Jews don't believe in or even read the New Testament and neither do they believe in Jesus. They believe that he was an impostor and are still awaiting the Messiah. They have no idea who he will be but that it will be obvious when he comes. They believe in the Old Testament which is known as the Tanakh because it contains three sections (i) the Torah (ii) the Nevi'im and (iii) the Kethuvim which has the three initials T, N & K, hence Tanakh. When Abraham said 'they have Moses and the Prophets. let them hear them' he was referring to the Jewish book 'the Tanakh' not the New Testament. Jesus' audience were Jews and Lazarus was a Jew unless he converted. Remember that in those days the world was teeming millions and the Christians only a handful. Just because we all know about Jesus today it doesn't mean that the Jewish populace had any idea who Jesus was. They don't even now. Converts had to be made one heart at a time so it was a very slow process apart from the way Jesus personally taught which was infinitely superior to the way his disciples preached after he was gone. If you preached and drew a crowd most likely the mob would attack you like when Paul preached. So its taken 2,000 years to get this big but its a testimony to the greatness of Christ that there's 2 billion Christians and millions of Churches and I say that as a member of the Bahá'í Faith not Christianity although we are a multi-faith religion in a multi-faith society.
Part 2
May I just add that Jesus wasn't preaching what the people already knew, his message was new and difficult to recognise for the Jews and Gentiles. The Pharisees (clergy) were teaching what the people already knew ie Judaism. Today the Persian Prophet Bahá'u'lláh (1817-1892)is not teaching what the people already know whereas the Christian clergy are teaching what the people already know ie Christianity. Baha'i's believe that the Prophet Bahá'u'lláh is the return of Christ and he has written 100 volumes and spent 40 years in prison and exile. The Baha'i's are heavily persecuted in Iran the land of its birth.
Part 3
Don't forget the Jews believe in the Old Testament (the Tanakh) and not the New Testament. Christianity inherited the Old Testament from the Jews. The Early Christians must have said to themselves "well Judaism is the Old Religion and Christianity is the New Religion, so we will call the Jewish book the Old Testament and the Christian book the New Testament and put it into one Book the Holy Bible." Jesus came at a time when Judaism had become old and corrupt. It was time for a new religion. Jesus sent his followers out to teach His Religion to the whole world. There was a Christian Golden Age. When Christianity came into temporal power and earthly riches it became old and corrupt so it was time for a new Prophet and a new religion so God sent Muhammad with a new religion called Islam. The Prophet Muhammad sent his followers out to teach His Religion to the whole world. Their religion grew until there was an Islamic Golden Age when they were the most advanced Nations on Earth. Eventually it became old and corrupt so it was time for a new Prophet and a new religion so God sent the Báb (the Gate) (1819-1850) who announced the coming of a greater One who would come after Him. The Báb announced His mission in 1844. He sent His followers out to teach His Religion to all mankind. In 1850 the Báb was shot by firing squad. The One promised by the Báb was the Prophet Bahá'u'lláh (1817-1892) who announced his mission in 1853. Once again He sent out His followers to teach His religion to all mankind. He wrote 100 volumes and spent 40 years in prison and exile. His successors were his eldest Son 'Abdu'l-Bahá who wrote many books and Bahá'u'lláh's Great Grandson Shoghi Effendi who wrote many volumes. In the future there will be a Baha'i Golden Age of Peace and harmony between all of the races and religions on Earth. There will be a much more advanced Global Civilization with no more war, starvation, poverty, disease or environmental disaster. Eventually the Bahá'í Faith will become old and outworn and it will be time for a new religion. A new Prophet will come and we will start over again. He will send out his followers to teach His religion to the whole world. Bahá'u'lláh predicted this new Prophet but he said that he won't come for a thousand years. There will be a new Religion with a new Golden Age. Eventually it will become old and outworn and another Prophet will be born and he will start a new Religion so we will start all over again. The Prophets will keep on coming indefinitely.
I wrote this myself so don't worry about copywrite use it if you want to.

Welcome jambun, great to see you here.

There has been advice offered on this by the Universal House of Justice. Sorry I have to go to work, but I will look it up and respond to your question this afternoon. It is morning in Australia.

Regards Tony

Quote from: jambun on Oct 20, 2022, 12:37 AMI am a Baha'i member and an ardent Darwinian and have studied the Baha'i writings in some depth but there seems to be an anomaly in the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá. If you read 'Some Answered Questions' chapters 46-51 he actually disagrees with the mainstream science of Biology and Evolution by Natural Selection. Basically he says that we evolved separately from the animal and have never been an animal. He says that our evolutionary development parallels the development of the embryo in the womb up until it becomes an adult. This would preclude evolution by natural selection. 'Abdul's version is known by scientists as 'Orthogenesis' and was discounted by science many years ago. 'Orthogenesis' basically means 'guided evolution which is pre-planned and does not depend on natural selection. As Professor Richard Dawkins says "evolution doesn't have goals, it just changes." At the same time it can only go forward and not backwards. We have 98.9% of our DNA in common with the chimpanzee which strongly indicates humans and chimpanzees having a common ancestor. We are closer to a chimpanzee than a Horse is to an Ass. If we tried to resolve this issue and simply accept evolution by natural selection then how does that fit in with Progressive Revelation? If we look back at our ancestors such as Australopithecus, Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus and so on, then when did God first start communicating with us and start choosing Prophets? I have a lovely chart I bought from Amazon called 'The Evolutionary Tree of Religion' which shows the early religions from all over the world right up to the modern day and Baha'i Faith is very nicely included. At the bottom of the chart the very earliest religions were either animists or polytheists. Animists worshipped stones and trees and possibly their own ancestors. How do you combine that chart with Progressive revelation and then with Darwinian Evolution? It might sound as though I've got it all worked out but as a Baha'i I am stumped. Can anyone address this problem?

I can only offer these. Th first is from the foreword from the new edition of SOme Answered Questions:

Broad and wide-ranging as the topics treated in Some Answered Questions may be, the book was not intended to be an exhaustive exposition of a self-contained system of thought, as attested by the volume's title. A number of fundamental teachings of the Faith are, therefore, not explicitly mentioned. Moreover, in the course of the months and years that the talks were given, the same topic would sometimes be addressed from different perspectives in separate conversations, with the result that the concepts required to fully understand a given subject may be spread across different chapters, or the contents of a subsequent chapter may form the basis for the understanding of an earlier one. Finally, it should also be noted that, although 'Abdu'l‑Bahá reviewed and corrected the text, He did not attempt in the process to alter the basic form of the replies or to reorganize and consolidate the material. To develop a fuller picture of 'Abdu'l‑Bahá's exposition of a given subject, then, the attentive reader should consider any chapter within the context of the entire book, and the book within the larger context of the entire body of the Bahá'í Teachings.

A notable case in point is the treatment of the subject of the evolution of species, which is taken up explicitly in Part 4, and which must be understood in light of several Bahá'í teachings, especially the principle of the harmony of science and religion. Religious belief should not contradict science and reason. A certain reading of some of the passages found in Chapters 46–51 may lead some believers to personal conclusions that contradict modern science. Yet the Universal House of Justice has explained that Bahá'ís strive to reconcile their understanding of the statements of 'Abdu'l‑Bahá with established scientific perspectives, and therefore it is not necessary to conclude that these passages describe conceptions rejected by science, for example, a kind of "parallel" evolution that proposes a separate line of biological evolution for the human species parallel to the animal kingdom since the beginning of life on earth.

A careful review of 'Abdu'l‑Bahá's statements in this volume and in other sources suggests that His concern is not with the mechanisms of evolution but with the philosophical, social, and spiritual implications of the new theory. His use of the term "species", for example, evokes the concept of eternal or permanent archetypes, which is not how the term is defined in contemporary biology. He takes into account a reality beyond the material realm. While 'Abdu'l‑Bahá acknowledges elsewhere the physical attributes that human beings share in common with the animal and that are derived from the animal kingdom,1 in these talks He emphasizes another capacity, a capacity for rational consciousness, that distinguishes man from the animal and that is not found in the animal kingdom or in nature itself. This unique capacity, an expression of the human spirit, is not a product of the evolutionary process, but exists potentially in creation. As 'Abdu'l‑Bahá explains, "...since man was produced ten or a hundred thousand years ago from the same earthly elements, with the same measures and quantities, the same manner of composition and combination, and the same interactions with other beings—it follows that man was exactly the same then as exists now". "And if a thousand million years hence," He goes on to say, "the component elements of man are brought together, measured out in the same proportion, combined in the same manner, and subjected to the same interaction with other beings, exactly the same man will come into existence."2 His essential argument, then, is not directed towards scientific findings but towards the materialist assertions that are built upon them. For Bahá'ís, the science of evolution is accepted, but the conclusion that humanity is merely an accidental branch of the animal kingdom—with all its attendant social implications—is not.

Another is this from the Universal House of Justice:

The Universal House of Justice
Department of the Secretariat

Dear Bahá'í Friend,

Your email letter dated 19 June 2015 including your thoughtful questions about a paragraph regarding evolution in the foreword to the 2014 edition of Some Answered Questions has been received by the Universal House of Justice, which has asked us to convey to you the following in reply. The delay in our response, which is due to the pressure of work at the Bahá'í World Centre, is regretted.

As you have observed, the purpose of the paragraph in question, which the House of Justice approved for inclusion in the foreword, does not limit how a Bahá'í, as an individual, may personally choose to interpret the Sacred Writings. Yet, the paragraph does not insist that science is "absolute truth", nor, as you seem to conclude, does it attempt to "apologize" for 'Abdu'l-Bahá's statements. Rather, recognizing that He would not make a statement that contradicts reality, the paragraph encourages the friends to use all of the relevant texts on the subject as well as the most accurate and reliable picture of reality that science can provide to try to understand what 'Abdu'l-Bahá actually is conveying.

It is evident that there are instances throughout history when statements made in the Sacred Scriptures that conflicted with the scientific views of the time were confirmed by science itself centuries later. There also may well be statements in the Writings about the material world the veracity of which will be proven by science in future. The notion of scientific "truth" does not encompass every claim or theory asserted in the name of science. But while a great deal of scientific discourse is tentative and subject to change, some scientific statements are accurate and reliable descriptions of reality, and those findings are not in conflict with true religion, that is, with the Revelation and its authorized interpretations. It is for this reason that 'Abdu'l-Bahá emphasizes that religious beliefs should be weighed in the light of science and reason, so that personal interpretations of the meaning of the Revelation, which are also fallible and subject to change, do not lead to incorrect conclusions.

The Master's statements on evolution are subtle and complex and must be understood within the context of the entirety of the Bahá'í teachings, because His statements are both predicated upon and coherent with those teachings. In the passages found in Some Answered Questions, as well as in numerous other Tablets and talks, 'Abdu'l-Bahá elaborates upon the principle of the harmony of science and religion, observes that human beings and animals have in common the same physical nature, emphasizes that it is the mind and the soul that distinguish humanity, and rejects the idea that human beings are merely animals, a haphazard accident, and captives of nature trapped in the struggle for existence. In light of all such statements, it is possible for a Bahá'í to conclude that one can disagree with the materialistic philosophical interpretation of scientific findings—that man is merely an animal and a random expression of nature—without contesting the scientific findings themselves, such as those in genetics which are incompatible with a concept of "parallel" evolution.

Of course, different individuals, using their rational powers to reach personal interpretations of scientific findings and the meaning of Sacred Texts, may come to different conclusions on different questions. This is the inevitable outcome of the independent investigation of truth. On certain matters, there may for a time be a degree of ambiguity; on others, an exchange of views conducted in a consultative spirit may make the truth evident. Yet, in their efforts to explore the ocean of Bahá'u'lláh's Revelation, the House of Justice hopes that the friends will guard against two extremes. The first is to simply dismiss the truths found in the Revelation owing to a dogmatic attachment to materialistic interpretations of scientific findings. The second is to assume that in every instance where one's personal understanding of the teachings conflicts with scientific findings, it is these findings that must change in future, for such a posture would place Bahá'ís in the position of constantly contending with science. Both of these extremes are incompatible with the Bahá'í principle of the harmony of science and religion.

As you consider this matter, you may find of interest the work of those believers who have attempted to correlate 'Abdu'l-Bahá's statements with contemporary science, such as the article "Religion and Evolution Reconciled: 'Abdu'l-Bahá's Comments on Evolution" by Courosh Mehanian and Stephen R. Friberg, published in The Journal of Bahá'í Studies, volume 13, number 1/4, pages 55–93, which may be found at bahai-studies.ca/past-issues

i encourage to read the article mentioned at the end.

To say that 'Abdu'l-Bahá got it right despite what is said by science just because of who he is seems to me downright dishonest. The points on which he disagrees are so fundamental and so basic that science just could not be mistaken. Just read an elementary Biology text book for High School students. If you learn that at school at age 16 then how much do Professors of evolutionary Biology know on the subject? You might as well question Einstein's theories of relativity and just say God is pushing things down rather than it being the curvature of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum.

Quote from: jambun on Nov 24, 2022, 01:18 AMTo say that 'Abdu'l-Bahá got it right despite what is said by science just because of who he is seems to me downright dishonest. The points on which he disagrees are so fundamental and so basic that science just could not be mistaken. Just read an elementary Biology text book for High School students. If you learn that at school at age 16 then how much do Professors of evolutionary Biology know on the subject? You might as well question Einstein's theories of relativity and just say God is pushing things down rather than it being the curvature of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum.

Abdul'baha explains the evolution of man as a distinct species, in the context of the potentialof the spirit. I see Science is yet to explore the Spirit that is behind evolution.

Regards Tony

Quote from: jambun on Nov 24, 2022, 01:18 AMTo say that 'Abdu'l-Bahá got it right despite what is said by science just because of who he is seems to me downright dishonest. The points on which he disagrees are so fundamental and so basic that science just could not be mistaken. Just read an elementary Biology text book for High School students. If you learn that at school at age 16 then how much do Professors of evolutionary Biology know on the subject? You might as well question Einstein's theories of relativity and just say God is pushing things down rather than it being the curvature of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum.

It's not dishonest to say that, just a honest different opinion of what Abdu'l-Baha meant. You could say that Abdu'l-Baha isn't infallible on a matter such as this also, if this is unacceptable to you. Myself, I think that this is probably an interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Writings, but how can I say this with certainty? You can reject the Baha'i Faith as an infallible Revelation if you want if you think Abdu'l-Baha is infallible in everything He said. You would have to if you are consistent with Baha'u'llah appointing Abdu'l-Baha as being the infallible interpreter of what Baha'u'llah said. This would be tantamount to rejecting the infallibility of Baha'u'llah. Of course, you wouldn't have to reject everything that Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah said.

Quote from: Tony Bristow-Stagg on Nov 24, 2022, 05:51 PMAbdul'baha explains the evolution of man as a distinct species, in the context of the potentialof the spirit. I see Science is yet to explore the Spirit that is behind evolution.

Regards Tony

Sorry, I haven't checked in here for a long time, obviously.

Quote from: jambun on Nov 24, 2022, 01:18 AMTo say that 'Abdu'l-Bahá got it right despite what is said by science just because of who he is seems to me downright dishonest. The points on which he disagrees are so fundamental and so basic that science just could not be mistaken. Just read an elementary Biology text book for High School students. If you learn that at school at age 16 then how much do Professors of evolutionary Biology know on the subject? You might as well question Einstein's theories of relativity and just say God is pushing things down rather than it being the curvature of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum.

Another thing you should consider is this, a point I make by quoting Shoghi Effendi on another matter.

In this connection it is interesting to note the answer given by the beloved Guardian's secretary on his behalf to a question about the "fourth heaven" mentioned in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. The translation of the passage is as follows:

As to the ascent of Christ to the "fourth heaven" as revealed in the glorious Book of Íqán, he [the Guardian] stated that the "fourth heaven" is a term used and a belief held by the early astronomers. The followers of the Shí'ah sect likewise held this belief. As the Kitáb-i-Íqán was revealed for the guidance of that sect, this term was used in conformity with the concepts of its followers.

What this means is that some statements in Abdu'l-Baha's explanation about the significance of evolution with regard to man might be incorrect by today's science, but He used what was known then, which might be incorrect today, but was geared to the Baha'is then to show that man was different from animals in a qualitative way. The point still is that man and animals are different in that man has a soul while animals have an animal spirit, and only man has the potential to reflect all of the attributes of God as Baha'u'llah said. I don't know enough to know if on some points He was incorrect by today's science.

Quote from: Truthseeker on Feb 05, 2023, 03:29 AM

Quote from: jambun on Nov 24, 2022, 01:18 AMTo say that 'Abdu'l-Bahá got it right despite what is said by science just because of who he is seems to me downright dishonest. The points on which he disagrees are so fundamental and so basic that science just could not be mistaken. Just read an elementary Biology text book for High School students. If you learn that at school at age 16 then how much do Professors of evolutionary Biology know on the subject? You might as well question Einstein's theories of relativity and just say God is pushing things down rather than it being the curvature of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum.

Another thing you should consider is this, a point I make by quoting Shoghi Effendi on another matter.

In this connection it is interesting to note the answer given by the beloved Guardian's secretary on his behalf to a question about the "fourth heaven" mentioned in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. The translation of the passage is as follows:

As to the ascent of Christ to the "fourth heaven" as revealed in the glorious Book of Íqán, he [the Guardian] stated that the "fourth heaven" is a term used and a belief held by the early astronomers. The followers of the Shí'ah sect likewise held this belief. As the Kitáb-i-Íqán was revealed for the guidance of that sect, this term was used in conformity with the concepts of its followers.

What this means is that some statements in Abdu'l-Baha's explanation about the significance of evolution with regard to man might be incorrect by today's science, but He used what was known then, which might be incorrect today, but was geared to the Baha'is then to show that man was different from animals in a qualitative way. The point still is that man and animals are different in that man has a soul while animals have an animal spirit, and only man has the potential to reflect all of the attributes of God as Baha'u'llah said. I don't know enough to know if on some points He was incorrect by today's science.

Thank you Duane.

My understanding of this subject is that Abdul'baha was explaining that Evolution is as a species, with all the potential inherent qualities already being present right from the beginning.

As such, no matter how a human has evolved, whatever form/s we have taken in this evolutionary process, the potential was that of the Rational Mind, not of an animal.

We really do not know if we will evolve further? I would say we have to, as the rational mind is still not being used to its full potential.

Regards Tony

Quote from: jambun on Oct 20, 2022, 12:37 AMIt might sound as though I've got it all worked out but as a Baha'i I am stumped. Can anyone address this problem?

Personally I think a new approach is needed. The progress of humanity will have to let go of some older theories and Darwinism is most lokely one of those that need to be re-thought.

Science makes new discoveries every day. Baha'u'llah offers civilization is far, far older than we know. We are also not the only creatures in this creation that can know and Love God. There are worlds other than this world and all of it is evolving.

We  an gain an understanding of evolution by the process of birth.Humans are given a soul at conception, that Soul has all the potential, yet it will be a while before it is born, years of maturity and education will be required before that soul can make rational choices relative to their Nature and Nurture and their ability to connect with the Spirit that is the source of our lives.

Regards Tony