![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
The demographics section includes a quote from the World Almanac which claims that Guyana is 7% Bahá'í. I have not been able to find any corroboration of this fact, and both the Guyanese Census [1] and the CIA world factbook [2] seem to contradict the claim. Does anyone have a source which corroborates the World Factbook number? I would hate to have to remove the quote entirely, but if its information is inaccurate I may have to. NoIdeaNick ( talk) 05:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
There are 1996 claims of the Bahá'ís population being over 5% of the population. [3] Large migrations, [4] including many of Bahá'ís left Guyana for other places, especially New York and Toronto. [5] The 2002 national census showed about 0.1%, or 500 [6]. However by 2005 the Association of Religion Data Archives estimated there were some 12000 Bahá'ís and recently the national census notes near 2% (15000) are Bahá'ís as well. [7]
Smkolins ( talk) 23:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Where is the criticism section like that of Islam and Christianity? Also, why are Bahai websites used as sources on this article? That's against the Wikipedia policy on self-promotion and conflicts of interest. -- 07fan ( talk) 02:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
To 07fan, please do not make accusations of bias without significant evidence. Wikipedia policy calls for assuming good faith, and it bears noting that Baha'is are not the only ones who edit the article so it is frankly unfair and prejudicial to blame the lack of a section on 'self promotion.' That being said, if you have neutral and verifiable sources you should be bold and add all pertinent information that improves the article, instead of making unfounded accusations towards all Baha'i editors while not contributing productively to the article. Peter Deer ( talk) 05:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
07fan, I don't know the history of the "criticism" sections for the articles on Christianity and Islam and whether there has been a discussion on having one for this article, although it seems likely that there has been one, although there appears to have been a discussion for this article [added later on,
modify 20:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)]. If my memory serves me from an unrelated connection, the idea is to add any relevant alternative viewpoints in an NPOV and a verifiable way to the relevant section rather than combining them into their own section. There may be a guideline or even policy on this point, and if so, it would be helpful here. As for the use of Baha'i sources, I think the point here is that there should be no self-promotion. If both Baha'is and people who are not Baha'i permit the use of Baha'i sources, then I don't think this issue arises. With most Baha'i sources there will be an obvious editorial bias, for Baha'is are eager to promote their view of things. Among these sources are ones that have reliable information and others that are mostly opinion or unverifiable information. The same can certainly be said for non-Baha'i sources, and it falls upon the editors to use reliable sources, whether they are Baha'i or not, and the readers to have a sense of what they are reading. What is to be avoided is a contest in which two or more sides seek to twist the article in a certain direction, for example, by using sources that are clearly polemical. If there are specific guidelines or policies that you are aware of, perhaps you can bring them up.
modify
20:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I think this article is one sided. For example, the article about the religion's attitude to homosexuality should be linked.-- MacRusgail ( talk) 13:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I am indifferent to the question of whether or not this article needs a special "criticisms" section--that's just a question of organization. But I think that it certainly needs to describe criticisms of the faith in the main article, in order to maintain a neutral point of view. There is a wealth of good articles out there criticizing the Bahá'í faith from a variety of perspectives. For starters, see [8] or [9]. This article is particularly harsh, comparing it to a panopticon: [10] and exploring the opacity of the central authority of the faith, arguing that the central authority makes a deliberate effort to publicly present the faith as more liberal than it actually is. These are all in peer-reviewed academic journals. Cazort ( talk) 23:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
The article says the faith is non-sectarian, but I found this http://bahaifaction.sosblog.com/. Is this true? Should unitarian and reformed bahais be included in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.127.206 ( talk) 08:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
If one were writing an article about the Catholic Church; and someone else pointed out, "Well, you have a renegade priest in South America who went back to the Latin Mass, and he has a couple of hundred ardent followers, and they reject the Pope and have returned to what they believe is true Catholicism," would any essay about Catholicism thereafter have to include reference to this looney priest in order to be deemed fair and complete? Brent Poirier 24.63.162.219 ( talk) 00:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I was thinking it should be appropriate for some mention of Baha'i Schools in the main article. They are a significant undertaking of many Baha'i national communities and we've got articles on several. I could imaging a section under Bahá'í Faith#Involvement in society - make a whole section for Socio-economic development projects and Baha'i schools would be the main component - perhaps even a main article and link to it.... Conversely it would be nice to also have more articles on such schools and other SEDs.... SO much to do.... Smkolins ( talk) 17:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
There's a proposal on Talk:Bahá'í/Bábí split to rename that article and your views are requested on that page. Thanks! AndrewRT( Talk) 20:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Why has the name of Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Nuri been removed from the article? Is not "Bahá'u'lláh" a title meaning "The Glory of Allah"? Rather than using their proper names, should this article instead refer to Jesus as "Christ", and Muhammad as "The Prophet"? IbnRushd ( talk) 02:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Bahá'u'lláh is not a name - it is a title, like "the Christ", or "the Prophet", or "the Buddha". IbnRushd ( talk) 03:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand your response. "Bahá'u'lláh" is a title, not a name. Can you please answer this point? IbnRushd ( talk) 03:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
It does bear noting that He did not refer to Himself as "Mirza Husayn-Ali Nuri: Baha'u'llah" but rather as "Baha'u'llah" specifically, much as Fátimih Baraghání was titled " Tahirih" and used that as her name. Baha'u'llah would sign or seal His tablets and letters with the name Baha'u'llah, and was known by that as a name. I don't know what difference that makes, but it does fit with other such instances where people have chosen titles as their names (examples: Prince was Prince Rogers Nelson, Gautama Buddha was Siddharta Gautama, and Rumi was Mawlānā Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Balkhī). Particularly in English, Baha'u'llah serves as His most well-known and widely accepted name, if not the one He was given by His mother and father. Peter Deer ( talk) 15:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
On User:Wiki-uk/Books/Bahá'í Faith I have created a Wikibook. Let me know your thoughts. My idea is that it's already a bit long (148 pages). Wiki-uk ( talk) 16:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
It is my feeling that this is a minor topic, covered initially in the section above, with plenty of room on the daughter page therein connected. Smkolins ( talk) 00:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Cazort, the book you mentioned as a reference is about religion and homosexuality. This is an issue of relevance and context on the main page in a summary style article. If you find several references summarizing the Baha'i Faith, you won't find the issue of homosexuality highlighted to the such an extent. The discouragement of homosexuality is mentioned twice clearly in the article, and linked to the expanded sub-article. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 03:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
please see Talk:Bahá'í_Faith_by_country#re-catting Smkolins ( talk) 15:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
The reorg by HajHouse, in my mind, is clearly poorer than the current organization. The current teachings section is about the fundamental social principles of the Baha'i Faith, and the laws do not fit in such a section and fit better within the social practices section which includes other day-to-day parts of Baha'i life, which includes worship. Also the consultation with the UN is not important enough to warrant its own section.
The previous organization was done through consensus, so please reobtain consensus when making such large changes. Regards, -- Jeff3000 ( talk) 02:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I changed the phrasing of the statement on underlying unity of the major world religions. And then Jeff3000 changed it to something similar to what it was before. Would Jeff (or anyone) like to explain this? The current wording, "Bahá'í teachings emphasise an underlying unity of the major world religions", take as fact that there is an underlying unity there to be emphasised. Obviously, this is what Bahá'í's believe, but we are supposed to be describing what they believe, not assuming it. Yaris678 ( talk) 16:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd go with Jeff3000's version. If we had to be that nit-picky it would not be a readable article. Prefacing every idea with a disclaimer that it is a belief is not a good idea. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 23:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Jeff3000. The word "an" is better since "the" implies that it is a fact that there is an underlying unity of world religions. This may well be the case (I'm Mormon and I hold a similar belief) but using "an" appears to be a more neutral wording. This appears to be more of a linguistic disagreement since it appears that one or more of you may be British or speak British English. Yaris678 uses "emphasise" which is the "British" spelling while Jeff3000 used "emphasize" which is American English. The use of "the" in American English implies that something is a fact as the sentence was previously worded. Maybe "the" doesn't have the same implication in British English but I don't speak British English so I wouldn't be able to safely make that judgment. This may be where your disagreement originates. If that is the case you should decide which one is a compromise and try to be consistent in whether you use British or American English when writing the article. Yaris678 did suggest a compromise that may work: "Bahá'í teachings emphasise their belief in the underlying unity of the major world religions" but this does still imply that there is an "underlying unity of the major world religion." A better compromise may be along the lines of: "Bahá'ís believe that there is an underlying unity among the major world religions." I hope this helps you. Edward Lalone | ( Talk)
I still prefer the current version because a teaching does not have a belief. Most people here do state the the current version is not ambiguous in the way you are reading it Yaris. Regards, -- Jeff3000 ( talk) 13:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The one-line summary of the Baha'i Faith is mentioned as a "religion founded in Iran in 1863 by Husayn ʿAlī (called Bahaullah) teaching the essential worth of all religions, the unity of all races, and the equality of the sexes." [14]. As this is an actual reference, and is concise and accurate, I think we should stick with its language. Whether or not the statement leads the reader into accepting the teachings as truth is trivial. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 20:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
That doesn't address my points - you are just repeating points you have already made. In case I wasn't clear before:
Yaris678 ( talk) 12:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
OK. Let me take you each in turn.
Jeff3000, Perhaps my clarification wasn't necessary, but you have responded to my points now. Thank you. I agree that some of this is a matter of opinion and I agree that some editors disagree with me. This is why I am discussing it here. Maybe I will persuade you. Maybe you will persuade me.
In response to the substance of your points:
Cunado, Two points about what you have said:
Peter Deer, I think you are agreeing with me. Thank you. But what were you refering to in your point about NPOV and undue weight?
Regards,
Yaris678 ( talk) 22:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
That's a good point... given that we have already mentioned "the spiritual unity of all humankind" the bit about "the oneness of the entire human race and the basic unity of all religions" seems superfluous. Perhaps that paragraph should just start with "In the Baha'i faith, religious history is seen to have unfolded through a series of divine messengers..." Yaris678 ( talk) 19:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me there should be a section about this - how about something like this - insert the following in Bahá'í_Faith#Social_practices:
Since it's inception the religion has had involvement in socio-economic development beginning by giving greater freedom to women, [1] promulgating the promotion of female education as a priority concern, [2] and that involvement was given practical expression by creating schools, agricultural coops, and clinics. [1] The religion entered a new phase of activity when a message of the Universal House of Justice dated 20 October 1983 was released. [3] Bahá'ís were urged to seek out ways, compatible with the Bahá'í teachings, in which they could become involved in the social and economic development of the communities in which they lived. World-wide in 1979 there were 129 officially recognized Bahá'í socio-economic development projects. By 1987, the number of officially recognized development projects had increased to 1482.
Though it might need more update info if someone can help. Smkolins ( talk) 14:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to the references used to see if the recent inclusions are harmonious with the sources? Infallible doesn't seem dubious, but "colossal" seems...well, out of place. Does anyone have access to the source material that could verify that for me? Peter Deer ( talk) 18:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
The article for some time has said the religion was founded in 19th century Persia, while Persia linked to the Persian Empire, which divided up the history of the Iranian Plateau in different empires and dynasties. Now Persian Empire links to Achaemenid Empire, which is the kingdom of Cyrus and Darius. All other empires and dynasties have their own articles, so the only applicable link now would be the Qajar dynasty. I think this development is a good thing, because it's only 20th century nationalism that would make people think that there is something eternal about a nation (e.g. Iran) that can be tracked throughout time. I'm changing the link to point to Qajar dynasty, unless someone has a better idea. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 18:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I think there should be a section but it should be larger and the Texts & Scriptures of the Bahá'í Faith template box should be in it - not sure I agree with the brief descriptions for the various categories referred to but I think it would settle down with some amplification. But as it is it's too understated. What do others think? Smkolins ( talk) 12:43, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
If we're going to have a reactions section I feel it over emphasizes the bulk of the reaction to just Islam. It should note growth of the religion as well as opposition from multiple sources both religious and governmental as well as a kind of current events aspect. The current one seems to isolate, and simplify, all reaction far too narrowly. -- Smkolins ( talk) 22:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear friends,
Although it may possibly be technically correct to say that Bernard Lewis states that Baha'i existence challenges Islamic doctrine of perfection of Muhammad's revelation, given that there are many Baha'i books upholding the perfection of Muhammad's revelation, can term 'perfection' be removed given that the statement is not in inverted commas and thus does not have to be word for word what Mr Lewis stated?
In this way the Wiki article may become more objective even in places where Mr Lewis' comments are not.
Daniel De Mol (
talk)
09:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
With all respect to Editor:Desibhagera, the additions re:Zoroastrianism are too extensive and have not been melded into the article. They have been inserted with no editorial attempt to explain to the reader what is the historic relationship to the subject of the article, the Bahai Faith. These additions should be "undone". Their inclusion and present location will mislead the reader and forstall (and perhaps prevent) understanding of the Bahai Faith.-- Buster7 ( talk) 11:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Recent editing attempts have been put forth regarding marriage and human sexuality. It may be an appropriate time to discuss the topic here before it is brought to the article...
-- Buster7 ( talk) 20:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
could anyone please make a new article presenting alleged prophecies within baha'i scriptures and texts Jigglyfidders ( talk) 14:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
tx Jigglyfidders ( talk) 21:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The article needs to be written from a neutral perspective. The Iranian perspective should definitely be attributed to them, but the perspectives critical of the Iranian perspectives should also be attributed, not merely stated as fact. Bless sins ( talk) 15:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
To moderators: I suggest adding some more Categories, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Religious_organizations or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Organizations_based_in_Illinois . I tried to do it but cancelled my edit, fearing my browser would mess up the non-Roman fonts included in the article. I noticed this lack of categories when searching for places to link to my new page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irfan_Colloquium (in progress). Jonah22 ( talk) 16:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
These edits should probably be reverted. They are clearly well intentioned, but replace "educator" with "Manifestation", remove the reference to males on the House of Justice, and use quotes from bahai.org as a reference. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 22:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree, Jeff, that "divine messenger" fits the neutrality bill (and, much more importantly, the "understandability" and "non-Baha'i jargon" bills) best of all. I have actually gone and changed it. As for "expressing elevated status" - this in itself is probably (in this context) rather less important HERE, Buster. My point was, to repeat myself yet again, that "educator" did this perfectly well already, albeit in a Baha'i jargon sort of way... -- Soundofmusicals ( talk) 00:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
It's a small thing but the citation request might be a bit hard to nail down under Bahá'í_Faith#Persecution - the State Dept reference goes to great length to detail how tightly Islam is controlled but mentions other religions not at all. It doesn't seem hard for me to see that other religions have no recognition in Algeria but it seems very hard to actually document positively instead of by implication.See [18]. Smkolins ( talk) 13:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Although society generally tolerates foreigners and citizens who practice religions other than Islam, some local converts to Christianity kept a low profile out of concern for their personal safety and potential legal and social problems.
or
Ordinance 06-03, which entered into effect in September 2006 and has been enforced since February 2008, limits the practice of non-Muslim religions, restricts public assembly for the purpose of worship, and calls for the creation of a national commission to regulate the registration process. The ordinance requires organized religious groups to register with the Government, controls the importation of religious texts, and orders fines and punishments for individuals who proselytize Muslims. Many representatives of churches and some human rights organizations reported that the Government has not provided the administrative means to process and approve requests to register non-Muslim religious groups under the ordinance. The National Commission for Non-Muslim Religious Services, the governmental entity responsible for regulating the registration process for non-Muslim religious groups, reportedly had not approved any requests for accreditation by non-Muslim religious associations by the end of the reporting period. Christian citizens who converted from Islam reportedly constitute the vast majority of the groups who have sought legal registration.
Yet a couple refs mention a Baha'i population in the low thousands [19], [20], [21]. Smkolins ( talk) 14:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Most sources put the number of adherents of Baha'i at 7 million. Could someone make this change please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwanttoeditthissh ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
A new article! Smkolins ( talk) 00:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Is this an Abrahamic religion? If so, could someone clarify this in the lead with citations please? Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.83.83 ( talk) 19:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, so I'm a N00B to editing Wikipedia, and in my ignorance I posted this exhaustive explaination on the wrong page hoping that someone would change the article for me because I thought I couldn't myself. I have since realized that I can change the article, but rather than waste the long explaination I wrote, I thought I'd post it here so others could read my justifications after I inevitably screw up the post or someone changes it.
I have not included any new sources in my edit since it is largely concerned with the misrepresentation of a source that has already been cited. Most of my edits can be supported by that source. Here is my original post:
Please change
{Bahá'í teachings state that God is too great for humans to fully comprehend, or to create a complete and accurate image of, by themselves. Therefore, human understanding of God is achieved through his revelations via his Manifestations.[15][16] In the Bahá'í religion God is often referred to by titles and attributes (e.g. the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity contradict the Bahá'í view that God is single and has no equal.[17] The Bahá'í teachings state that the attributes which are applied to God are used to translate Godliness into human terms and also to help individuals concentrate on their own attributes in worshipping God to develop their potentialities on their spiritual path.[15][16] According to the Bahá'í teachings the human purpose is to learn to know and love God through such methods as prayer, reflection and being of service to humankind.[15]}
to
{Bahá'í teachings state that God is too great for humans to fully comprehend, or to create a complete and accurate image of by themselves. Therefore, human understanding of God is achieved through his revelations via his Manifestations.[15][16] The Manifestations are thus seen as critical divine intermediaries, necessary for mankind's guidance on the path of God's will. The dual nature of the Manifestations is described by Baha'u'llah as simultaneously human and divine, similar to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.[17]
In the Bahá'í religion God is often referred to by titles and attributes (e.g. the Almighty, or the All-Loving). The Bahá'í teachings state that the attributes which are applied to God are used to translate Godliness into human terms and also to help individuals concentrate on their own attributes in worshipping God to develop their potentialities on their spiritual path.[15][16] According to the Bahá'í teachings the human purpose is to know and love God. Baha'is carry out these teachings through prayer, reflection and being of service to humankind.[15]}
because
1. Source [17]- [Stockman, Robert. "Jesus Christ in the Baha'i Writings". Baha'i Studies Review 2 (1).] concludes that the Baha'i teachings regarding the nature of the Manifestations parallels the concept of Jesus in the Trinity by Christian theologians. To have the original Wikipedia page state the opposite based on this source was a major oversight. The article poses the following points:
a)Jesus refers to Himself as God in some instances and separate from God in others. The Trinity seeks to explain how Jesus could be God and also separate from God. Baha'u'llah also refers to this dual nature, and the author cites a quote.
b) Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha both discussed the Trinity and confirmed that Christians were correct in their conclusion that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all parts of God's nature, while at the same time God was one in His essence (not three separate gods). The author cites two quotes.
c)The analogy of God as the sun and Jesus as a mirror reflecting the light of the sun has been used by theologians to explain the Trinity. The author cites Abdu'l-Baha's use of the same analogy.
2. The article in source [17] also references Baha'u'llah referring to mankind's requirement to accept the Manifestation of God, without Whose guidance they will "be gone astray" and all of their work will amount to nothing. The author states that Baha'is see recognition of the Manifestation as "crucial for one's spiritual progress", hence my addition of the line <The Manifestations are thus seen as critical divine intermediaries, necessary for mankind's guidance on the path of God's will>. This is a key point in Baha'i theology.
3. "Almighty" is a name for God used by Baha'is, similar to "All-Powerful", but one that is more commonly used.
4. <According to the Bahá'í teachings the human purpose is to know and love God. Baha'is carry out these teachings through prayer, reflection and being of service to humankind.[15]> This was changed to emphasize that the Baha'i teaching is that the human purpose is to know and love God. Prayer, reflection, and service are some methods Baha'is might use to achieve these ends, but are not the human purpose themselves or the only means possible. This sentence could be misleading.
Thank you for considering my request for an edit. As you can see, items 1 and 2 are important parts of this article that have been misrepresented or left out. I hope that the article will be edited accordingly. Need to sleep ( talk) 02:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Need_to_sleep
Hello Friends, I've been busy, writing a photographic history book about the [http://www.amazon.com/Bahai-Temple-Images-America-Candace/dp/0738584215/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1288149065&sr=8-1 Baha'i Temple] in Wilmette, for Arcadia publishers. It has 199 historic photographs, and I have digital scans for many more. If I understand the law for copyright correctly, any photo older than 70 years is now in the public domain, so that would include any photo taken before 1940? Rather than load these up on the Creative Commons willy-nilly, do you have a photo wish list these days? I've got some really nice photos of 110 Linden Ave, 536 Sheridan Road, and of Louis Bourgeois. I'm Nonpartisan 03:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by I'm nonpartisan ( talk • contribs)
I would like to request that an article be in Wikipedia on Baha'i's beliefs on the role of the Holy Spirit. Thank you in advance.-- Splashen ( talk) 05:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
The demographics section includes a quote from the World Almanac which claims that Guyana is 7% Bahá'í. I have not been able to find any corroboration of this fact, and both the Guyanese Census [1] and the CIA world factbook [2] seem to contradict the claim. Does anyone have a source which corroborates the World Factbook number? I would hate to have to remove the quote entirely, but if its information is inaccurate I may have to. NoIdeaNick ( talk) 05:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
There are 1996 claims of the Bahá'ís population being over 5% of the population. [3] Large migrations, [4] including many of Bahá'ís left Guyana for other places, especially New York and Toronto. [5] The 2002 national census showed about 0.1%, or 500 [6]. However by 2005 the Association of Religion Data Archives estimated there were some 12000 Bahá'ís and recently the national census notes near 2% (15000) are Bahá'ís as well. [7]
Smkolins ( talk) 23:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Where is the criticism section like that of Islam and Christianity? Also, why are Bahai websites used as sources on this article? That's against the Wikipedia policy on self-promotion and conflicts of interest. -- 07fan ( talk) 02:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
To 07fan, please do not make accusations of bias without significant evidence. Wikipedia policy calls for assuming good faith, and it bears noting that Baha'is are not the only ones who edit the article so it is frankly unfair and prejudicial to blame the lack of a section on 'self promotion.' That being said, if you have neutral and verifiable sources you should be bold and add all pertinent information that improves the article, instead of making unfounded accusations towards all Baha'i editors while not contributing productively to the article. Peter Deer ( talk) 05:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
07fan, I don't know the history of the "criticism" sections for the articles on Christianity and Islam and whether there has been a discussion on having one for this article, although it seems likely that there has been one, although there appears to have been a discussion for this article [added later on,
modify 20:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)]. If my memory serves me from an unrelated connection, the idea is to add any relevant alternative viewpoints in an NPOV and a verifiable way to the relevant section rather than combining them into their own section. There may be a guideline or even policy on this point, and if so, it would be helpful here. As for the use of Baha'i sources, I think the point here is that there should be no self-promotion. If both Baha'is and people who are not Baha'i permit the use of Baha'i sources, then I don't think this issue arises. With most Baha'i sources there will be an obvious editorial bias, for Baha'is are eager to promote their view of things. Among these sources are ones that have reliable information and others that are mostly opinion or unverifiable information. The same can certainly be said for non-Baha'i sources, and it falls upon the editors to use reliable sources, whether they are Baha'i or not, and the readers to have a sense of what they are reading. What is to be avoided is a contest in which two or more sides seek to twist the article in a certain direction, for example, by using sources that are clearly polemical. If there are specific guidelines or policies that you are aware of, perhaps you can bring them up.
modify
20:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I think this article is one sided. For example, the article about the religion's attitude to homosexuality should be linked.-- MacRusgail ( talk) 13:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I am indifferent to the question of whether or not this article needs a special "criticisms" section--that's just a question of organization. But I think that it certainly needs to describe criticisms of the faith in the main article, in order to maintain a neutral point of view. There is a wealth of good articles out there criticizing the Bahá'í faith from a variety of perspectives. For starters, see [8] or [9]. This article is particularly harsh, comparing it to a panopticon: [10] and exploring the opacity of the central authority of the faith, arguing that the central authority makes a deliberate effort to publicly present the faith as more liberal than it actually is. These are all in peer-reviewed academic journals. Cazort ( talk) 23:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
The article says the faith is non-sectarian, but I found this http://bahaifaction.sosblog.com/. Is this true? Should unitarian and reformed bahais be included in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.127.206 ( talk) 08:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
If one were writing an article about the Catholic Church; and someone else pointed out, "Well, you have a renegade priest in South America who went back to the Latin Mass, and he has a couple of hundred ardent followers, and they reject the Pope and have returned to what they believe is true Catholicism," would any essay about Catholicism thereafter have to include reference to this looney priest in order to be deemed fair and complete? Brent Poirier 24.63.162.219 ( talk) 00:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I was thinking it should be appropriate for some mention of Baha'i Schools in the main article. They are a significant undertaking of many Baha'i national communities and we've got articles on several. I could imaging a section under Bahá'í Faith#Involvement in society - make a whole section for Socio-economic development projects and Baha'i schools would be the main component - perhaps even a main article and link to it.... Conversely it would be nice to also have more articles on such schools and other SEDs.... SO much to do.... Smkolins ( talk) 17:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
There's a proposal on Talk:Bahá'í/Bábí split to rename that article and your views are requested on that page. Thanks! AndrewRT( Talk) 20:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Why has the name of Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Nuri been removed from the article? Is not "Bahá'u'lláh" a title meaning "The Glory of Allah"? Rather than using their proper names, should this article instead refer to Jesus as "Christ", and Muhammad as "The Prophet"? IbnRushd ( talk) 02:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Bahá'u'lláh is not a name - it is a title, like "the Christ", or "the Prophet", or "the Buddha". IbnRushd ( talk) 03:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand your response. "Bahá'u'lláh" is a title, not a name. Can you please answer this point? IbnRushd ( talk) 03:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
It does bear noting that He did not refer to Himself as "Mirza Husayn-Ali Nuri: Baha'u'llah" but rather as "Baha'u'llah" specifically, much as Fátimih Baraghání was titled " Tahirih" and used that as her name. Baha'u'llah would sign or seal His tablets and letters with the name Baha'u'llah, and was known by that as a name. I don't know what difference that makes, but it does fit with other such instances where people have chosen titles as their names (examples: Prince was Prince Rogers Nelson, Gautama Buddha was Siddharta Gautama, and Rumi was Mawlānā Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Balkhī). Particularly in English, Baha'u'llah serves as His most well-known and widely accepted name, if not the one He was given by His mother and father. Peter Deer ( talk) 15:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
On User:Wiki-uk/Books/Bahá'í Faith I have created a Wikibook. Let me know your thoughts. My idea is that it's already a bit long (148 pages). Wiki-uk ( talk) 16:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
It is my feeling that this is a minor topic, covered initially in the section above, with plenty of room on the daughter page therein connected. Smkolins ( talk) 00:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Cazort, the book you mentioned as a reference is about religion and homosexuality. This is an issue of relevance and context on the main page in a summary style article. If you find several references summarizing the Baha'i Faith, you won't find the issue of homosexuality highlighted to the such an extent. The discouragement of homosexuality is mentioned twice clearly in the article, and linked to the expanded sub-article. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 03:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
please see Talk:Bahá'í_Faith_by_country#re-catting Smkolins ( talk) 15:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
The reorg by HajHouse, in my mind, is clearly poorer than the current organization. The current teachings section is about the fundamental social principles of the Baha'i Faith, and the laws do not fit in such a section and fit better within the social practices section which includes other day-to-day parts of Baha'i life, which includes worship. Also the consultation with the UN is not important enough to warrant its own section.
The previous organization was done through consensus, so please reobtain consensus when making such large changes. Regards, -- Jeff3000 ( talk) 02:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I changed the phrasing of the statement on underlying unity of the major world religions. And then Jeff3000 changed it to something similar to what it was before. Would Jeff (or anyone) like to explain this? The current wording, "Bahá'í teachings emphasise an underlying unity of the major world religions", take as fact that there is an underlying unity there to be emphasised. Obviously, this is what Bahá'í's believe, but we are supposed to be describing what they believe, not assuming it. Yaris678 ( talk) 16:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd go with Jeff3000's version. If we had to be that nit-picky it would not be a readable article. Prefacing every idea with a disclaimer that it is a belief is not a good idea. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 23:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Jeff3000. The word "an" is better since "the" implies that it is a fact that there is an underlying unity of world religions. This may well be the case (I'm Mormon and I hold a similar belief) but using "an" appears to be a more neutral wording. This appears to be more of a linguistic disagreement since it appears that one or more of you may be British or speak British English. Yaris678 uses "emphasise" which is the "British" spelling while Jeff3000 used "emphasize" which is American English. The use of "the" in American English implies that something is a fact as the sentence was previously worded. Maybe "the" doesn't have the same implication in British English but I don't speak British English so I wouldn't be able to safely make that judgment. This may be where your disagreement originates. If that is the case you should decide which one is a compromise and try to be consistent in whether you use British or American English when writing the article. Yaris678 did suggest a compromise that may work: "Bahá'í teachings emphasise their belief in the underlying unity of the major world religions" but this does still imply that there is an "underlying unity of the major world religion." A better compromise may be along the lines of: "Bahá'ís believe that there is an underlying unity among the major world religions." I hope this helps you. Edward Lalone | ( Talk)
I still prefer the current version because a teaching does not have a belief. Most people here do state the the current version is not ambiguous in the way you are reading it Yaris. Regards, -- Jeff3000 ( talk) 13:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The one-line summary of the Baha'i Faith is mentioned as a "religion founded in Iran in 1863 by Husayn ʿAlī (called Bahaullah) teaching the essential worth of all religions, the unity of all races, and the equality of the sexes." [14]. As this is an actual reference, and is concise and accurate, I think we should stick with its language. Whether or not the statement leads the reader into accepting the teachings as truth is trivial. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 20:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
That doesn't address my points - you are just repeating points you have already made. In case I wasn't clear before:
Yaris678 ( talk) 12:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
OK. Let me take you each in turn.
Jeff3000, Perhaps my clarification wasn't necessary, but you have responded to my points now. Thank you. I agree that some of this is a matter of opinion and I agree that some editors disagree with me. This is why I am discussing it here. Maybe I will persuade you. Maybe you will persuade me.
In response to the substance of your points:
Cunado, Two points about what you have said:
Peter Deer, I think you are agreeing with me. Thank you. But what were you refering to in your point about NPOV and undue weight?
Regards,
Yaris678 ( talk) 22:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
That's a good point... given that we have already mentioned "the spiritual unity of all humankind" the bit about "the oneness of the entire human race and the basic unity of all religions" seems superfluous. Perhaps that paragraph should just start with "In the Baha'i faith, religious history is seen to have unfolded through a series of divine messengers..." Yaris678 ( talk) 19:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me there should be a section about this - how about something like this - insert the following in Bahá'í_Faith#Social_practices:
Since it's inception the religion has had involvement in socio-economic development beginning by giving greater freedom to women, [1] promulgating the promotion of female education as a priority concern, [2] and that involvement was given practical expression by creating schools, agricultural coops, and clinics. [1] The religion entered a new phase of activity when a message of the Universal House of Justice dated 20 October 1983 was released. [3] Bahá'ís were urged to seek out ways, compatible with the Bahá'í teachings, in which they could become involved in the social and economic development of the communities in which they lived. World-wide in 1979 there were 129 officially recognized Bahá'í socio-economic development projects. By 1987, the number of officially recognized development projects had increased to 1482.
Though it might need more update info if someone can help. Smkolins ( talk) 14:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to the references used to see if the recent inclusions are harmonious with the sources? Infallible doesn't seem dubious, but "colossal" seems...well, out of place. Does anyone have access to the source material that could verify that for me? Peter Deer ( talk) 18:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
The article for some time has said the religion was founded in 19th century Persia, while Persia linked to the Persian Empire, which divided up the history of the Iranian Plateau in different empires and dynasties. Now Persian Empire links to Achaemenid Empire, which is the kingdom of Cyrus and Darius. All other empires and dynasties have their own articles, so the only applicable link now would be the Qajar dynasty. I think this development is a good thing, because it's only 20th century nationalism that would make people think that there is something eternal about a nation (e.g. Iran) that can be tracked throughout time. I'm changing the link to point to Qajar dynasty, unless someone has a better idea. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 18:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I think there should be a section but it should be larger and the Texts & Scriptures of the Bahá'í Faith template box should be in it - not sure I agree with the brief descriptions for the various categories referred to but I think it would settle down with some amplification. But as it is it's too understated. What do others think? Smkolins ( talk) 12:43, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
If we're going to have a reactions section I feel it over emphasizes the bulk of the reaction to just Islam. It should note growth of the religion as well as opposition from multiple sources both religious and governmental as well as a kind of current events aspect. The current one seems to isolate, and simplify, all reaction far too narrowly. -- Smkolins ( talk) 22:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear friends,
Although it may possibly be technically correct to say that Bernard Lewis states that Baha'i existence challenges Islamic doctrine of perfection of Muhammad's revelation, given that there are many Baha'i books upholding the perfection of Muhammad's revelation, can term 'perfection' be removed given that the statement is not in inverted commas and thus does not have to be word for word what Mr Lewis stated?
In this way the Wiki article may become more objective even in places where Mr Lewis' comments are not.
Daniel De Mol (
talk)
09:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
With all respect to Editor:Desibhagera, the additions re:Zoroastrianism are too extensive and have not been melded into the article. They have been inserted with no editorial attempt to explain to the reader what is the historic relationship to the subject of the article, the Bahai Faith. These additions should be "undone". Their inclusion and present location will mislead the reader and forstall (and perhaps prevent) understanding of the Bahai Faith.-- Buster7 ( talk) 11:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Recent editing attempts have been put forth regarding marriage and human sexuality. It may be an appropriate time to discuss the topic here before it is brought to the article...
-- Buster7 ( talk) 20:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
could anyone please make a new article presenting alleged prophecies within baha'i scriptures and texts Jigglyfidders ( talk) 14:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
tx Jigglyfidders ( talk) 21:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The article needs to be written from a neutral perspective. The Iranian perspective should definitely be attributed to them, but the perspectives critical of the Iranian perspectives should also be attributed, not merely stated as fact. Bless sins ( talk) 15:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
To moderators: I suggest adding some more Categories, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Religious_organizations or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Organizations_based_in_Illinois . I tried to do it but cancelled my edit, fearing my browser would mess up the non-Roman fonts included in the article. I noticed this lack of categories when searching for places to link to my new page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irfan_Colloquium (in progress). Jonah22 ( talk) 16:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
These edits should probably be reverted. They are clearly well intentioned, but replace "educator" with "Manifestation", remove the reference to males on the House of Justice, and use quotes from bahai.org as a reference. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 22:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree, Jeff, that "divine messenger" fits the neutrality bill (and, much more importantly, the "understandability" and "non-Baha'i jargon" bills) best of all. I have actually gone and changed it. As for "expressing elevated status" - this in itself is probably (in this context) rather less important HERE, Buster. My point was, to repeat myself yet again, that "educator" did this perfectly well already, albeit in a Baha'i jargon sort of way... -- Soundofmusicals ( talk) 00:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
It's a small thing but the citation request might be a bit hard to nail down under Bahá'í_Faith#Persecution - the State Dept reference goes to great length to detail how tightly Islam is controlled but mentions other religions not at all. It doesn't seem hard for me to see that other religions have no recognition in Algeria but it seems very hard to actually document positively instead of by implication.See [18]. Smkolins ( talk) 13:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Although society generally tolerates foreigners and citizens who practice religions other than Islam, some local converts to Christianity kept a low profile out of concern for their personal safety and potential legal and social problems.
or
Ordinance 06-03, which entered into effect in September 2006 and has been enforced since February 2008, limits the practice of non-Muslim religions, restricts public assembly for the purpose of worship, and calls for the creation of a national commission to regulate the registration process. The ordinance requires organized religious groups to register with the Government, controls the importation of religious texts, and orders fines and punishments for individuals who proselytize Muslims. Many representatives of churches and some human rights organizations reported that the Government has not provided the administrative means to process and approve requests to register non-Muslim religious groups under the ordinance. The National Commission for Non-Muslim Religious Services, the governmental entity responsible for regulating the registration process for non-Muslim religious groups, reportedly had not approved any requests for accreditation by non-Muslim religious associations by the end of the reporting period. Christian citizens who converted from Islam reportedly constitute the vast majority of the groups who have sought legal registration.
Yet a couple refs mention a Baha'i population in the low thousands [19], [20], [21]. Smkolins ( talk) 14:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Most sources put the number of adherents of Baha'i at 7 million. Could someone make this change please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwanttoeditthissh ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
A new article! Smkolins ( talk) 00:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Is this an Abrahamic religion? If so, could someone clarify this in the lead with citations please? Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.83.83 ( talk) 19:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, so I'm a N00B to editing Wikipedia, and in my ignorance I posted this exhaustive explaination on the wrong page hoping that someone would change the article for me because I thought I couldn't myself. I have since realized that I can change the article, but rather than waste the long explaination I wrote, I thought I'd post it here so others could read my justifications after I inevitably screw up the post or someone changes it.
I have not included any new sources in my edit since it is largely concerned with the misrepresentation of a source that has already been cited. Most of my edits can be supported by that source. Here is my original post:
Please change
{Bahá'í teachings state that God is too great for humans to fully comprehend, or to create a complete and accurate image of, by themselves. Therefore, human understanding of God is achieved through his revelations via his Manifestations.[15][16] In the Bahá'í religion God is often referred to by titles and attributes (e.g. the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity contradict the Bahá'í view that God is single and has no equal.[17] The Bahá'í teachings state that the attributes which are applied to God are used to translate Godliness into human terms and also to help individuals concentrate on their own attributes in worshipping God to develop their potentialities on their spiritual path.[15][16] According to the Bahá'í teachings the human purpose is to learn to know and love God through such methods as prayer, reflection and being of service to humankind.[15]}
to
{Bahá'í teachings state that God is too great for humans to fully comprehend, or to create a complete and accurate image of by themselves. Therefore, human understanding of God is achieved through his revelations via his Manifestations.[15][16] The Manifestations are thus seen as critical divine intermediaries, necessary for mankind's guidance on the path of God's will. The dual nature of the Manifestations is described by Baha'u'llah as simultaneously human and divine, similar to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.[17]
In the Bahá'í religion God is often referred to by titles and attributes (e.g. the Almighty, or the All-Loving). The Bahá'í teachings state that the attributes which are applied to God are used to translate Godliness into human terms and also to help individuals concentrate on their own attributes in worshipping God to develop their potentialities on their spiritual path.[15][16] According to the Bahá'í teachings the human purpose is to know and love God. Baha'is carry out these teachings through prayer, reflection and being of service to humankind.[15]}
because
1. Source [17]- [Stockman, Robert. "Jesus Christ in the Baha'i Writings". Baha'i Studies Review 2 (1).] concludes that the Baha'i teachings regarding the nature of the Manifestations parallels the concept of Jesus in the Trinity by Christian theologians. To have the original Wikipedia page state the opposite based on this source was a major oversight. The article poses the following points:
a)Jesus refers to Himself as God in some instances and separate from God in others. The Trinity seeks to explain how Jesus could be God and also separate from God. Baha'u'llah also refers to this dual nature, and the author cites a quote.
b) Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha both discussed the Trinity and confirmed that Christians were correct in their conclusion that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were all parts of God's nature, while at the same time God was one in His essence (not three separate gods). The author cites two quotes.
c)The analogy of God as the sun and Jesus as a mirror reflecting the light of the sun has been used by theologians to explain the Trinity. The author cites Abdu'l-Baha's use of the same analogy.
2. The article in source [17] also references Baha'u'llah referring to mankind's requirement to accept the Manifestation of God, without Whose guidance they will "be gone astray" and all of their work will amount to nothing. The author states that Baha'is see recognition of the Manifestation as "crucial for one's spiritual progress", hence my addition of the line <The Manifestations are thus seen as critical divine intermediaries, necessary for mankind's guidance on the path of God's will>. This is a key point in Baha'i theology.
3. "Almighty" is a name for God used by Baha'is, similar to "All-Powerful", but one that is more commonly used.
4. <According to the Bahá'í teachings the human purpose is to know and love God. Baha'is carry out these teachings through prayer, reflection and being of service to humankind.[15]> This was changed to emphasize that the Baha'i teaching is that the human purpose is to know and love God. Prayer, reflection, and service are some methods Baha'is might use to achieve these ends, but are not the human purpose themselves or the only means possible. This sentence could be misleading.
Thank you for considering my request for an edit. As you can see, items 1 and 2 are important parts of this article that have been misrepresented or left out. I hope that the article will be edited accordingly. Need to sleep ( talk) 02:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Need_to_sleep
Hello Friends, I've been busy, writing a photographic history book about the [http://www.amazon.com/Bahai-Temple-Images-America-Candace/dp/0738584215/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1288149065&sr=8-1 Baha'i Temple] in Wilmette, for Arcadia publishers. It has 199 historic photographs, and I have digital scans for many more. If I understand the law for copyright correctly, any photo older than 70 years is now in the public domain, so that would include any photo taken before 1940? Rather than load these up on the Creative Commons willy-nilly, do you have a photo wish list these days? I've got some really nice photos of 110 Linden Ave, 536 Sheridan Road, and of Louis Bourgeois. I'm Nonpartisan 03:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by I'm nonpartisan ( talk • contribs)
I would like to request that an article be in Wikipedia on Baha'i's beliefs on the role of the Holy Spirit. Thank you in advance.-- Splashen ( talk) 05:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)