Meet the New Universal House of Justice

The scrutineers where scrutinizing so hard they are still squinting, the counters were counting (and re-counting), Counsellor Penny Walker, as chairperson of the convention, kept imploring the tellers to not actually look at the ballots because they didn’t need to use their own eyes, they could just look through the eyes of the UHJ!

Thankfully they paid her as much attention as those kitschy drapes behind the main stage. And the results:

Farzam Arbab, Kiser Barnes, Peter Khan, Hooper Dunbar, Firaydoun Javaheri, Paul Lample, Payman Mohajer, Shahriar Razavi, and Gustavo Correa.

I’m shocked! SHOCKED I tell ya!!

Who could have ever imagined this surprising upset?

All seven incumbents: re-elected. And in place of the two retirees? who are the two new entrants?

Both previous members of the International Teaching Center - in turn previously appointed by the Universal House of Justice.

By the way, since usually the names are announced in descending order of votes, we can see that the two new ITC, oops! I mean UHJ members are the ones with the least votes.

I couldn’t help but chuckle when I read this excerpt from the official Baha’i News Service:

During the voting, a number of procedures were taken to ensure the integrity of the balloting process – some of which were visible and others less so.

Foremost, the current Universal House of Justice was seated as a body, front and center, as obvious observers to the process.

Yes! What a strategic technique to insure integrity and remove any hint of electioneering or campaigning! Sitting prominently in visual range of everyone who is about to cast a ballot. That is the best way not to influence anyone in any way to vote for the incumbents.

I’ve put together the membership details of the Universal House of Justice from its inception, up to and including this new election. The details include the individual members, when they were elected, how long they served, how they departed (death or retirement) and what their prior position was within the Baha’i Administration:

Read this doc on Scribd: Membership of the UHJ

I’ve hastily scribbled some thoughts below the data. You are welcome to study it and arrive at your own. Especially one which contradicts mine.

For those taking note, the trend that many had observed within the membership, namely moving away from National Spiritual Assembly (NSA) members to International Teaching Center (ITC) is now complete.

This is the first year - please mark it down on your calendar - that all of the members of the Universal House of Justice have been plucked from the ITC.

Which, I need not remind you, is itself appointed by the UHJ. So we now have come full circle. A bit like recycling I suppose. Hey, I’m all for helping the environment and recycling. Except in this case, what is being recycled, in a closed loop, are ideas.

Related:

44 Responses to “Meet the New Universal House of Justice”


  1. 1 Baquia

    Burning Berni,
    after having smelling salts liberally applied - I nehe’ever considered that Dr. Maneck could in any way be wrong about anything - I am wide awake yet again. Please don’t shock me like that again.
    I do have to grudgingly give you credit though… although, Dr. Maneck is always right… she must be! what is my world coming to?
    Hope you made some coin with the bookies ;-)

  2. 2 Priscilla Gilman

    This chart is great—the whole thing laid out. Thanks.

  3. 3 Bird

    Baquia you are a clever and wonderful soul. I did catch that article from 2005 last year and wondered if your predictions would come true.
    Can you tell me who is going to win the US election? LOL…

    I am truly sorry to find muse in it all but how can anyone not. Funny assesment about Susan…

    Priscilla - love the energy from your blog too..

    People like you keeping the coals lit.

    Bird

  4. 4 Steve Marshall

    Hi Baquia,

    I admit that those guys at the BWC do have some fancy buildings for admin and stuff. But when a big event comes up, they have to hire a hall just like the rest of us. That’s reassuring. And I think the Haifa Conference Centre was done up real nice. Unlike you, I reckon the drapes are lovely. They give a solid marble-column look, but without the cost or the pesky flakiness. Appearance is everything at these events.

    Check out the big image of the drapes and the voting process. The momentous event is evidently providing hours of excitement for the audience. As you can see, some people are eagerly photographing or video-recording the proceedings — you can see the glow of tiny LSD viewfinders in the darkened auditorium.

    I’ve enhanced part of the big image, so you can just make out what’s displayed on one of the LCD screens. Maybe the display I’ve focused on is not from a camera, though. It seems to be displaying a rather familiar web-page…

  5. 5 Christie

    Hi Baquia,
    I have been following your blog for a couple of months now, as far as I’m concerned you and some of your regular commentator are the few remaining sensible voices in a Faith totally weighed down by its administration and ham-fisted attempts at indoctrination (eg Ruhi Process) which are in total contradiction to the Baha’i principles of equality and independent investigation of thought.
    Regarding the Universal House of Justice, I have to admit to me, as a woman, it will never be a true and transparent representation of all Baha’is because it can only ever be all male. Yes, yes, before everybody replies with various references to the Writings, I know that it has been decreed so and so it shall be. I also know that when asked to explain WHY, Shogi Effendi basically couldn’t give a straight answer, instead it was one of those we-can’t-explain-the-mystery-that-is-God replies. I’m interested to know what your thoughts are?

  6. 6 anonymuz

    Hi Baquia,
    I have been following your blog for a couple of months now, as far as I’m concerned you and some of your regular commentator are the few remaining sensible voices in a Faith totally weighed down by its administration and ham-fisted attempts at indoctrination (eg Ruhi Process) which are in total contradiction to the Baha’i principles of equality and independent investigation of thought.
    Regarding the Universal House of Justice, I have to admit to me, as a woman, it will never be a true and transparent representation of all Baha’is because it can only ever be all male. Yes, yes, before everybody replies with various references to the Writings, I know that it has been decreed so and so it shall be. I also know that when asked to explain WHY, Shogi Effendi basically couldn’t give a straight answer, instead it was one of those we-can’t-explain-the-mystery-that-is-God replies. I’m interested to know what your thoughts are?

    intellectual and human curiosity always seem to be the motivating factor in asking such questions. I always like to think that the next manifestation of God would be a women…She comes to the UHJ and says, ok, now women can join. So God decrees…

    I honestly think of it as a test. Despite the urge to write that off as simple religious apathy, why not have faith in the simplicity of the answer and move on. Why, do you want to be on the UHJ?

  7. 7 White Hanky

    Baquia:
    Before Craig jumps in here with his usual wit, let me be the First:
    ‘Greet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss’ (referring to the newly re-cycled UHJ)
    and to respond to anonymuz’ statement regarding the very intelligent question from Christie as to why those among us who are cloven not crested are denied Service on that August Body…
    Yes Dammit..I would like the CHOICE to Serve, thank you very much.
    Shanti
    WH

  8. 8 Mavaddat

    Although I suspected as much before, it is now my firm conviction that Bahá’ís are not familiar with their own authoritative and holy writ; otherwise, they would not be surprised with its male bias, lack of term limits, and impossibility of female prophets.

    To wit, anonymuz writes:

    I always like to think that the next manifestation of God would be a women…She comes to the UHJ and says, ok, now women can join. So God decrees…

    This is a pitiful abnegation of moral conscience commonly expressed by Bahá’ís who see the inequity of the current male-only scheme but would rather wait idly by for God to confirm what they already know to be true: that men and women are equal (not in the lame sense of “equal” as employed by the Bahá’í Faith, but really equal). I for one say, Why should we have to wait for God to confirm what we already know to be moral?! I say, If God hasn’t the courage to embody full gender equality in his Earthly institutions, then I say to hell with God. But I’m getting off track. My point is that beyond being an abnegation of moral conscience, this is also an expression of pure ignorance and unfamiliarity with the Bahá’í writings.

    For as ‘Abdu’l-Bahá did write:

    As regards the holy verse, the intention of the reference to ‘male, not female’, is the first-born son, for in all the Divine Dispensations the first-born son hath enjoyed a special distinction. Refer ye to the Torah and the Gospel, and likewise to the traditions related from aforetime. Read ye the story of Esau, Jacob and the sons of Isaac in the Torah, that it may become apparent that in all the divine Dispensations the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright, let alone the vanities of this world. Even the just laws current amongst civilized states and peoples have also accorded to the first-born son a special distinction.

    It’s really quite simple, people: If your religion is not moral, then you have a moral obligation to leave your religion. Morality, like politics, is not something that you take-or-leave in a package. That is the epitome of the lazy person’s way to forming their ethical (or political) decisions.

  9. 9 Grover

    I think women are just as capable as men at being on the UHJ. The reason why no reason was ever given as to why women should not be on the UHJ was because there was never any good reason.

    The question is: how can you be a convincing advocate for equality between men and women and not let women be on the UHJ?

  10. 10 anonymuz

    I think women are just as capable as men at being on the UHJ. The reason why no reason was ever given as to why women should not be on the UHJ was because there was never any good reason.

    The question is: how can you be a convincing advocate for equality between men and women and not let women be on the UHJ?

    Mavvaddatt et al,

    you have to believe in God first before you can say to hell with him. I get a real kick out of how much people attempt to explain through their fancy terms learned in philosophy class the apparent discrepancies within the writings. Following the path of Ahmad Sohrab, Kheyrullah, does not really appeal to me. I have read their reasoning and there is nothing different from what is being talked about 100 yrs later.

    If you desire to serve on the UHJ then I would recommend first serving on an assembly of some sort. The members usually are reluctant because its tedious, long, and stressful work. Frankly I have no desire to serve on an assembly because I feel my strengths lie elsewhere…usually those who do serve are very capable administrators…not fluffy internet commentators that smack of ego.

    All in all this largely western group of disaffected “intellectuals” does no service to those who truly have sacrificed for the Faith. Your attempts at socratic methods to analyze something that is essentially unknowable are a waste of time. Why dont you try to do something truly productive for your fellow man..or woman?!

    Lastly, the most wasteful, hurtful, pointless and ultimately useless action that can be taken by believers in the Baha’i faith, former and current, is to sit around and talk about it. Why don’t you make a sacrifice and help out in a developing country for the rest of your life instead of blowing hot air? Those who do nothing but talk and waste time trying to convince other people of their point of view are no better than the likes of Ann Coulter or Bill Oreilly.

    In all honesty I respect your search for truth, and ultimately your desire to be correct. It is obvious you each have your own respective ways of going about it and you are indeed entitled. I have been down this path of hyper skepticism myself and questioned my own soul, faith, family, religion, etc…I even called Haifa in the middle of the night once and talked to a member of the UHJ for an hour, had never personally met him before either. No joke. Ultimately, to find serenity, peace within yourself and the world around you, which is arguably the goal of life, you have to be reserved and look to the next life because this one is really screwed up. I have heart felt concern and I sincerely pray for those I read about online who describe their struggles with the Faith, its administration, God etc…I wish I could be there to give them a hug. But, I learned the only way to get through it and return to a healthy spiritual existence is to be able to let go of what you think you know.

  11. 11 Andrew

    Oh them fancy philosophy class terms!

    Mavaddat *is* doing something truly productive for humanity:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVdpOOQZvOQ

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZMWMgkhF3g

  12. 12 Andrew

    White Hanky wrote:

    “Greet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss”

    This is also what Tahirih challenged. See:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ6TrvvoJUA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0agCqpnXIwI

  13. 13 Mavaddat

    anonymuz writes,

    you have to believe in God first before you can say to hell with him.

    No, not really. If God exists and doesn’t have the courage to perscribe real gender equality, then such a God would not be a moral God and to him I would say, To hell with you, sir.

    I get a real kick out of how much people attempt to explain through their fancy terms learned in philosophy class the apparent discrepancies within the writings.

    The vocabulary I employ is fancy, eh? So… Have you ever actually read anything by Shoghi Effendi? Bahá’u'lláh? Ever heard of them? Hm? This only further proves my point: Bahá’ís are completely ignorant of their own holy writ.

    Following the path of Ahmad Sohrab, Kheyrullah, does not really appeal to me. I have read their reasoning and there is nothing different from what is being talked about 100 yrs later.

    I gather here that you think I’m advocating for some kind of alternative authority to the UHJ. I’m not. I’m suggesting maybe it’s time to give up our child-like need for infallible adult figures and grow up. Grow up.

    If you desire to serve on the UHJ …

    I don’t.

    All in all this largely western group of disaffected “intellectuals” does no service to those who truly have sacrificed for the Faith. Your attempts at socratic methods to analyze something that is essentially unknowable are a waste of time. Why dont you try to do something truly productive for your fellow man..or woman?!

    Again, our poster demonstrates his or her tottering ignorance of the Bahá’í writings. For those even marginally familiar with the Bahá’í writings, it is clear that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá was an advocate and employer of the Socratic method. For example, regarding the demonstration of what our ignorant friend calls a “waste of time”, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá writes:

    First of all, let us determine whether these Prophets were valid or not by using rational proofs and shining arguments, not simply by quoting traditionary evidences, because traditions are divergent and the source of dissension.

    And regarding Socrates, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá writes:

    As to deistic philosophers, such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, they are indeed worthy of esteem and of the highest praise, for they have rendered distinguished services to mankind.

    And also:

    The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions.

    Compare that to the sentiment put in the mouth of Socrates by Plato in his famous dialogue, The Republic:

    What, then, we thought we saw there [justice in the state] we must refer back to the individual [interpersonal justice] and, if it is confirmed, all will be well. But if something different manifests itself in the individual, we will return again to the state and test it there and it may be that, by examining them side by side and rubbing them against one another, as it were from the fire-sticks we may cause the spark of justice to flash forth, and when it is thus revealed confirm it in our own minds.

    In fact, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s own philosophy was so closely resembling the Platonic picture of Socrates that I would say he was an unconscious plagiarist of that school of thought. So much for our poster’s disparaging of the Socratic method.

    Lastly, the most wasteful, hurtful, pointless and ultimately useless action that can be taken by believers in the Baha’i faith, former and current, is to sit around and talk about it.

    Once again showing your profound ignorance with the Bahá’í writings. You not only contradict yourself by doing precisely what you say is a waste of time (i.e., sitting around and talking about the Bahá’í Faith), but you also contradict all the proselytizing and indoctrination efforts that are promoted by the Bahá’í Faith and its authorities, which are nothing more than sitting around and talking. Alright. I’m done with this.

  14. 14 anonymuz

    Mavaddat,

    I agree with you in the irony of us sitting here going back and forth. But, in my own defense at work we spend all day on the computer and have free access to the net with no restrictions. In any case, guilty as charged.

    But, I have to say that its not my ignorance of the writings that leads me to say what I said. I have read it all and although that does not make me an expert, it does entitle me to claim that if you use the writings, as you have in proving your points, then you should acknowledge that there are passages and verses that are supportive of more authoritative positions. I could easily find the quotes to support my own arguments and maybe I should start doing so.

    The way you quote Abdul’Baha to ultimately belittle the Faith and what its rules are, is unfortunate. You also blanket statement Baha’is in general which is also a sign of your deep seated dissatisfaction. I believe the Socratic references he uses are in support of coming to productive and divine conclusions. I have faith in that. If you have come to the conclusions you have, whatever they may be, although they appear to be unproductively skeptical, then you have only yourself and your faculty to share that with. Remember–one passage may mean many things to many people.

    In the end, The Baha’i Faith is young and so are its institutions, adherents and positions. Giving in to such dismissal of God and religion at such a young age and with such little experience gives me hope that you will come around.

  15. 15 Dan Jensen

    Bravo Baquia. Very cool chart. It seems like just yesterday I was joyously opening the BWC gates for all those holy guys, back when Pete K. was a mere UHJ apprentice at the ITC. Back then (1986-87) we had three IBC vets, and were looking to a future of purely elected UHJs. Whoops! Sueprize! Fast-forward a generation and presto! 100% self-appointed UHJ! My have we come a long way in no time at all.

  16. 16 Andrew

    “In the end, The Baha’i Faith is young and so are its institutions, adherents and positions. Giving in to such dismissal of God and religion at such a young age and with such little experience gives me hope that you will come around.”

    “Woe betide thee, O quarrelsome disbeliever in the manifold proofs of the resplendent Daystar of the ancient splendor, the splenderous ancient! For verily it behooveth thee to parketh thy brain at the manifest door of the Blessed Beauty, that thou mayest thoroughly lobotomize thyself through thy total immersion in the most sacred and august writings of the most august and sacred Personage, more moster than the mostest most of the mostest. We haveth hope that thou shalt indeed come around, for verily, we haven’t much else of substance to offer.” Ba’howl’la la la, “Kitab-i-Mavaddat”

  17. 17 Carm-again

    Mavaddat wrote: “Although I suspected as much before, it is now my firm conviction that Bahá’ís are not familiar with their own authoritative and holy writ; otherwise, they would not be surprised with its male bias, lack of term limits, and impossibility of female prophets. To wit, anonymuz writes…”

    let me see if I understand this correctly. You have a SUSPICION that Baha’is are not familiar with their own holy writ. This suspicion has been CONFIRMED by a post by anonymuz - one person. This is your scientific/philosophical/rational approach? Suspicions confirmed by posts? Do you have empirical data which would be support your general conclusion about Baha’is?

    I suppose this global community who are all ignorant includes not only everyone in every country and at every level of involvement but scholars including Momen, Schaefer, Rafati and many others? I am sure you are aware that if you made any such statement about any group in one of yourstudent essays your professors would require you to back it up with empiricaldata. Suspicions confirmed by your assumptions simply are not adequate.

    But why should I be surprised? Andrew claimed that atheists are the fastest growing group in the world. he still has not cited any reference to data which supports his claim. He also invoked postmodernity as his basis for refuting the Faith but could not provide a satisfactory answer to Mills’ or Chomsky’s criticisms of postmodernity which I provided.

    “The criticism of postmodernism as ultimately meaningless rhetorical gymnastics was demonstrated in the Sokal Affair, where Alan Sokal, a physicist, proposed and delivered for publication an article purportedly about interpreting physics and mathematics in terms of postmodern theory, which he had deliberately written in a completely nonsensical fashion, including several in-jokes mocking postmodernism. It was nevertheless published by Social Text, a “cultural studies” journal active in the field of postmodernism, as a serious postmodernist work. Sokal arranged for the simultaneous publication of another article describing the former as a successful experiment to see whether a postmodernist journal would publish any nonsensical article with big words that flattered the editors’ political views, triggering an academic scandal. Sokal later published a book with Jean Bricmont called Intellectual Impostures, which expands upon his criticism of postmodernism.”

    “Biologist Richard Dawkins believes that postmodernists generally are intellectual charlatans who deliberately obscure weak or nonsensical ideas with ostentatious and difficult to understand verbiage.”

    If, as a Baha’i, I am being told that what I believe is nonsense based on current fashionable thinking I do expect at least a minimal effort to defend that intellectualposition (especially considering the many problems with postmodernity).

    If it seems improbable to link your comment based on suspicion with Andrew it is because I find that, likeAndrew and other critics,your logic is sometimes flawed when used in critiquing not only the Baha’is but religion in general. Instead, point this out are dismissed for their “screed” as Andrew categorized my points in his “agent provacateur” role.

    Mavaddat, I would really like to see some data which supports your suspicions. Andrew, I would really also appreciate some data which supports your assertions about the growth of atheism. Some defence of postmodernism would also be appreciated if you expect me to “DEAL WITH IT” as you pointedly put it.

    The problem with the tone of the assertions I read here is that we Baha’is are “damned if you do and damned if you don’t.” If we are as ignorant of our holy writ as Mavaddat claims we are a bunch of moral midgets. If the Ruhi method is implemented to ensure Baha’is become more knowledgeable about the Faith we are accused of “indoctrination” and brain-washing. Okay, I know this is a rants site but I expect some minimal degree of support when blanket statements are made andr intellectual currents of thought are cited as the basis for criticisms.

    Carmen

    I link Andrew’s

  18. 18 Carm-again

    If I had the time I would start an atheism rants site except that I am not an atheist ;( I just recalled a major study published in Scientific American circa 1971/72 in which a number of scientists attempted to calculate the probability of creation as we know it having come into being by chance. Alhough the results didn’t change their own belief or disbelief in a First Cause the probability that there wasn’t a Creator was so unlikely that the analogy they came up with was that of tossing all the letters in a dictionary up into the air and expecting them to land in perfect order arranged as in a dictionary from A-Z.

    This reminds me of John Lennox’s “God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?” I think He is very much alive and well despite the current popularity of some atheist scientists :)

    Carmen

  19. 19 Craig Parke

    Anonymuz Wrote:

    All in all this largely western group of disaffected “intellectuals” does no service to those who truly have sacrificed for the Faith. Your attempts at socratic methods to analyze something that is essentially unknowable are a waste of time. Why dont you try to do something truly productive for your fellow man..or woman?!

    You seem to be quite judgmental of people here. How do you know what anyone’s here’s service has been in the Baha’i Faith? You come across as very young and insufferably middle class. You come across as someone who has never been tested in life.

    I served faithfully, steadfastly, and honorably in many capacities for almost FOUR DECADES in the Baha’i Faith. I voted in 32 straight elections in person until 4 years ago when I realized I can no longer sit in the same room with people who allowed their religion to be brutally sodomized like this by a tiny group of people who have gamed the electoral process to achieve lifetime incumbency for their own petty personal psychological needs and personal neurotic system of self-definition.

    As to “sacrifice”, the Baha’is of the world, including the Iranian Baha’is in the diaspora on my dime as a U.S. military veteran, cannot spell the word! There is zero sacrifice in the Baha’i Faith compared to the hell the soldiers of the nations of the world were sent into in the 20th Century.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPU4p7UQOtU

    They were essentially slaughtered because the hapless Baha’is of the world for the last 100 years could not teach their religion out of a paper bag decade after decade while the world was destroyed TWICE! It is a religion of talentless, uncreative, passive-agressive cowards, who could not run a shift at McDonalds. The new Ruhi system of blind rote indoctrination won’t work either. It is a Theocracy of Dunces.

    But the World Age WILL go on and find life in the hearts of PEOPLE WHO HAVE GUTS and can get things done whether they have ever heard of Baha’u'llah (or Jesus or Buddha or Krishna for that matter either) or not.

    My oldest sister and brother-in-law along with many other fine and brave souls including several young women from the U.S., Canada, and Japan (3 of whom lost their lives there) have been ON THE GROUND in Afghanistan for the last 7 years running the medical relief effort for the ENTIRE United States of America there. DEEDS NOT WORDS. My sister and the 3 women that perished had more CAN DO GUTS in their little fingers than any current male member of the election gamed UHJ Little Lord Fonteroy Theorist Boys Club.

    So if you want to go to Afghanistan just say the word and my sister can get you to the Frontier Quarter with Pakistan. You’ll be dead within 48 hours. But she speaks fluent Farsi and can enquire about your fate. Just tell her where to send your body.

    Or I will be glad to drive you to the U.S. Armed Forces recruiting office and you can fight and die in Iraq. Maybe you’ll learn about “S A C R I F I C E” there when you come back with no arms or legs or blinded for life. There are now about 150 blinded for life from their severe wounds. Maybe you will be number the 151st?

    The Baha’i Faith is a religion of people whose greatest trauma they have ever faced in their sheltered little lives is getting a “C” on a term paper.

    I’m sick of it. And I am sick of limited people who come on these sites and try to dismiss people who post here as being “disaffected intellectuals” who did no service compared to those who “truly have sacrificed” for the Faith.

    You don’t know a thing about anyone here or the history of their long service in the Faith.

  20. 20 P

    Hi Anonymuz, here is another little story for you. Since the Iranian revolution, more people have been imprisoned, tortured and executed for the crime of homosexuality in Iran- than have Bahais. When was the last time you heard any Persian Bahai or heck anyone from Bahai administration condemned such persecution in Iran. I never have. In fact, I have heard many Persian Bahais (including my own mother) get offended at the thought of equating these two atrocities. I guess to Persian Bahais the blood of a 17 year old boy being hanged for being gay just isn’t as important as the story that you posted. I sympathize for the Bahais in Iran, I just wish Bahais would sympathize for others.

  21. 21 Craig Parke

    Anonymuz,

    8 million soldiers died in World War I just on the Western front alone.

    Where were the Baha’is?

    NO WHERE TO BE FOUND!

    Just pulling on their puds in endless, dysfunctional meetings, completely cut off from Almighty God.

    100 million human beings died in World War II.

    Where were the Baha’is?

    NO WHERE TO BE FOUND!

    Just pulling on their puds in endless, dysfunctional meetings, completely cut off from Almighty God.

    Shoghi Effendi honored the ashes of the Jews at Auschwitz-Birkenau, the blood of the millions of soldiers of the Allied Nations that fell in battle, and the pennies of widows and orphans in the Great Depression who built the Baha’i Faith by taking their money and flying to London on the lam to buy cheap furniture and dying there without having appointed a Living Guardian in his lifetime or written a Will and Testament of ANY KIND as he was SUPPOSED TO DO if he was going to be FAITHFUL TO THE COVENANT as EXPRESSLY STATED in the Will and Testament of Abdu’l-Baha. He WAS NOT FAITHFUL to his SACRED TASK. He completely failed his duty to all future Baha’is which we are now. This was a DIRECT COSMIC INSULT to the sacrifice of millions of human beings in World War II for a better future world as expressed by Abdu’l-Baha in 1912 and the hopes of the poor who had put their hopes in the Faith in those long years.

    It’s time to tell the truth and speak frankly.

    The Administrative Order did NOT live up to the hopes of the rank and file in ANY Era so far.

    As to your story, I am tired of hearing the sob stories of the limp wristed weak passive-aggressive personality Baha’is in Iran. Get over it. If 300,000 Iranian Bahai’s would have GONE TO THE WALL for the last 100 years in a MASSIVE RIVER of NEVER ENDING BLOOD against the bad karma of their own first civilization of slaughter in human history (The Persian Empire invented crucifixion don cha know…) and the hapless tribal clan dick measuring contest “civilizations” of illiterate Bedouin, maybe American soldiers would not have to be in the Middle East right now and the American people spend a trillion dollars to fight your wars for you. Maybe the people of Iraq should have gotten off their knees themselves and overthrown Saddam if they had any guts as a nation. They didn’t because they are A NATION OF SHEEP AND COWARDS. Same when they were being slaughtered in the Iran-Iraq War. You get the government you deserve. The same is true of us as Americans in the nightmare we are currently in.

    If you are Iranian, which I now think you are, and you are in the West with freedom of conscience, freedom of thought, and freedom of speech to post on this blog, then thank somebody in the West! Thank Thomas Jefferson who basically believed that all organized religion is a fraud and all “religious” people are profoundly mentally ill. I knew William Sears, Mr. Furatan, and Dr. Ruhe. They were all tremendous human beings. Very, very fine men. I loved the faith when it had intelligent and real people in it. But the Baha’i Faith has not yet produced one Thomas Jefferson. That slave owning, slave banging U.S. Founding Father has done far more good than anyone will in the Baha’i Faith for the next 500 years and counting.

    Ask yourself what is wrong with a culture that produces a “Sarbazan Gumnam Imam Zaman (the unknown soldiers of the Lord of the Age)”? The people of the Middle East can take their neurotic martyrdom cultures and jam them where the sun don’t shine. The Baha’is too. The Middle East will never produce a decent rock guitarist or a starting Quarterback in the NFL who can audible a play on the spur of the moment at the line of scrimmage. The Middle East are cultures of teenage boys with weapons who can’t get a date. Why? Because religion in these cultures is toxic brain chemistry. I’m sick of it. Let all the Baha’is be martyrs in their exact same culture of their own making.

    You and I are apparently both Baha’is! Times have changed.

    I will never take anything you say seriously until you have the guts to post your real name. This is my real name. I don’t give a shit anymore. So be it. I fear no one. If the “Administrative Order” doesn’t like how I think, they know where to find me.

    No more group think anywhere on Earth.

    There was a lot of good in the Baha’i Writings. Too bad it all went into the hands of organizational psychopaths and sociopaths as all organized religions did that have gone before it.

    Too bad it came from Iran.

  22. 22 Bird

    Baquia for some reason I am not getting the follow ups to the convo, could you check on this for me?

    Love the whole dialog.

    Just read about Ruth White today, first time, wow, did that lady give Shoghi Effendi a run for his money. The best bit in it all was the the part, let me get it.. brb… here it is

    “Shoghi Effendi does not attribute much importance to those who deny the authenticity of the Will because their attitude is not due to a desire to seek the truth, but merely oppose and bring doubt to others.”

    I didn’t get that from her Libray of Congress additions. Wow, will the fun ever end?

  23. 23 Carm-again

    This reminds me of John Lennox’s “God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?” I think He is very much alive and well despite the current popularity of some atheist scientists :)

    I had wanted to provide some comments on Lennox’s book but I was too sleepy. I recall that Mavddat had promised to provide a refutation of Hatcher’s attempts to prove God’s existence in “Minimalism: A Bridge between Classical Philosophy and the Baha’i Revelation” so I will wait patiently for that and then respond to it. In the interim re Lennox’s book:

    “In this very readable and well-researched book John Lennox does a brilliant job of exposing the real issues involved in any discussion of the relationship between science and religion. The fundamental point, which he makes so well, is that the debate is NOT about science VERSUS religion, but has to do with different world views (namely naturalism - the view that there is nothing but nature and the material world - contrasted with theism - the view that there is a God ) and the relationship of each with science. Dr Lennox then asks the all-important question: Which world view sits most comfortably with science?

    What is so important about this book is that it does not counter the popular rhetoric and sloganeering (characteristic of many of those who believe that naturalism is the world view that is the logical consequence of science) with more of the same. In his careful and systematic examination of the scientific evidence Dr Lennox shows that science is not only highly consistent with a theistic world view, but even points towards it. To this end he takes us on a journey that considers the history and limits of science, as well as many of its most up-to-date findings including modern evolutionary theory, design theory, irreducible complexity and information theory. Bringing to bear his analytical and logical skills as a research mathematician, he also exposes many fallacious arguments that are often used to “prove” that science has buried God.

    I highly recommend this book to anyone who seriously wishes both to understand the real nature of the debate that is currently receiving much exposure in the media, and to come to a conclusion based on evidence and reason rather than prejudice and emotion.”

    Nigel Cutland
    Professor of Pure Mathematics
    University of York, UK

    Another reviewer: ” After reading The God Delusion a year ago I became gripped and eventually spellbound by the God vs. no god debate that seems more and more to be occupying the collective attention of our culture. In my desire to gain a fuller understanding of both perspectives, I’ve since immersed myself in the most popular literature on the subject (penned by Harris, Dawkins, Hutchings, Davis, Flew, McGrath, Collins, DeSuza etc.). The arguments and lines of reasoning expressed in John Lennox’s book entitled “God’s Undertaker” are, by far, the most deep and insightful I’ve read on the subject to date.

    Lennox begins God’s Undertaker by making a critical distinction between science and materialist/naturalist philosophy that, in and of itself, provides a resounding response in the negative to the question posed in the book’s subtitle (Has science buried God?). Lennox explains that science in an uncontaminated form seeks exclusively to explore the universe by examining its physical properties and apparent laws without making claims about what might or might not exist beyond its own domain. Science therefore neither rules out nor affirms the existence of the supernatural. Naturalism, on the other hand, is philosophically bound to a preconceived notion regarding the nature of reality; namely that it is limited exclusively to the substantial and, consequently, that truth can only be found through an examination of material phenomenon. In short, it is naturalism, not science, which is at odds with theism.

    Lennox goes on to illustrate the importance of making such a distinction by pointing out the deceptive and duplicitous way in which materialists use the well earned respect of science to cloak arguments against the existence of God that not only lack scientific support but are in fact faith based and not scientific at all! Lennox hammers home the irony of this point, giving no slack to the likes of Dawkins who, while blindly ascribing god-like qualities to neutrons and electrons, mockingly portray theists as deluded dunces who base their lives on a completely imaginary deity.

    Lennox is no enemy of science. He is a purist who believes that what science points to is equally as important as what it explicitly reveals. Consequently, he is not only in awe of what science has achieved but he enthusiastically declares the important role science has played in the development of his own belief in God. Anchored by the very science that has been high jacked by Dawkins and company, Lennox demonstrates that belief in a single all powerful God is not only rational but is in fact the best conclusion one can draw from the known physical universe. Lennox does this in the heart of God’s Undertaker by engaging the scientific arguments used by materialists head-on in an “ask for no quarter, give no quarter” fashion that pays homage to his Celtic heritage.

    Specifically, Lennox confronts the naturalist’s take on cosmology, microbiology, evolution, and biogenesis and mounts a particularly robust argument for an intelligently designed universe in later chapters devoted to information science. While it is beyond the scope of this review to elucidate each of Lennox’s arguments, I will state that I found them to be well-balanced and, in most cases, compelling. I highly endorse this read for anyone interested in the origins of our universe.”

    Carmen

  24. 24 Christie

    Thank you to everyone who gave their opinions regarding my comment re: women and the UHJ. I didn’t personally agree with everything said, but that’s what is fantastic about this forum, and as usual I found many of your comments fascinating and thought-provoking.
    In answer to your question Anonymuz, yes, I desperately want to be on the UHJ and the my lack of dangly bits is ruining my life and future aspirations! (only joking). I found it a bit disappointing that a lot of your criticism was more like a personal attack on people you know nothing about than reasoned argument. Doesn’t seem very Baha’i to me.
    Thank you for the many helpful suggestions about what I could do with my life. I have served on many Assemblies, thank you, not that it would bring me any closer to the UHJ (no dangly bits, you see, same problem). I live and work within a disadvantaged community and have done for the past twenty odd years, living simply, a “Back to Basics” Baha’i as I like to call it. No, I’m not telling you this because I think I’m so fantastic and deserve a medal for my self-sacrifice, what I’m doing is absolutely nothing compared to the people Craig is talking about. I’m just telling you to point out that it is unwise to frame your defences of your faith as personal attacks which make presumptions about people you know absolutely nothing about. I’m not making any assumptions about what you do or don’t do for the Baha’i Faith, so please give me the same courtesy.
    Yes, I could have faith in the simplicity of the answer about women and the UHJ, and many Baha’is do, that is fine and I have no problem with that. But you can’t have it both ways. Baha’is cannot then turn around and proclaim that one of the core principles of the Faith is “equality of men and women”, because that is simply not born out in the teachings about inheritence rights or administration. It is a total misrepresentation to use this core principle to attract people to the Faith without making them aware of the teachings on this issue, and this is unfortunately what happens.
    Craig, so much of what you say resonates with me. “Paris Talks” was my initial introduction into the Baha’i Faith. I have read it innumerable times now, and each time I cannot help thinking to myself “What happened? Where did it all go wrong?”

  25. 25 Anonymuz

    But you can’t have it both ways. Baha’is cannot then turn around and proclaim that one of the core principles of the Faith is “equality of men and women”, because that is simply not born out in the teachings about inheritance rights or administration. It is a total misrepresentation to use this core principle to attract people to the Faith without making them aware of the teachings on this issue, and this is unfortunately what happens.

    Dear Christie,

    I read your initial reply and felt sorry that something I said may have offended you personally. But then I re-read and I didn’t see where I actually said something specifically. In any case, I think thats what you mean, don’t be so general. OK. I will use my own experiences. I do apologize if my comments were interpreted the wrong way.

    I do want to address the underlying theme that so many of the disaffected folks seem to bring up again and again.

    Ours is the duty to ponder these things in our heart, to strive to widen our vision, and to deepen our comprehension of this Cause, and to arise, resolutely and unreservedly, to play our part, however small, in this greatest drama of the world’s spiritual history.

    — Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Bahá’u'lláh, p. 26

    Make no mistake that this is a struggle of a spiritual and divine kind. The answers we try to unwrap on the blogs, forums, etc, are our worldly attempts at tackling what is ultimately nothing more than a test. We vent our frustrations and articulate our opinions with knowledge and historical examples and experience. I often ask myself, how much easier all this would have been if Shoghi Effendi would have left a will, or if women were on the House of Justice, or if we the resources to make political moves like Craig seems so upset we haven’t. But, then I am reminded that each of these instances have provided an opportunity to test the Faith of the believers. Yes, TEST YOUR FAITH. Faith is Faith is Faith is Faith.

    On these forums and blogs we are mostly debating and searching for intellectually satisfying answers. These answers have been mostly un-helpful for most because they are seated with their own intellectual positions and are not really interested in changing their minds. Only trying to question and convince people of their own. What a merry-go-round.

    The daily action we take in our lives as Baha’is in our communities are in my opinion, not really sacrifices. I do not feel terribly burdened by cleaning up after feast, or by preparing the writings, or even by pioneering. Its all small potatoes. Easy stuff. My struggle is in trying to help others with their struggles. I sincerely care with all my heart about the feelings and souls that seem to be hurt by what they see happening in the community, then they come online and make it worse. In any case, I take satisfaction in knowing that the online medium works sometimes, and sometimes it doesn’t to help with others in their journey. Last night at the Center there was a new Baha’i and we had a very productive talk about what comes next…

    maid-servant of God! Chant the Words of God and, pondering over their meaning, transform them into actions! I ask God to cause thee to attain a high station in the Kingdom of Life forever and ever.

    — `Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 85

    The cause of God is like unto a college. The believers are like unto the students. The college is founded for the sake of the acquirements of science, arts and literature. If the sciences are not achieved and the scholars are not educated the object of the college is not achieved. The students must show the results of their study in lives. Now the friends must so live and conduct themselves as to bring greater glory and results to the religion of God. To them the cause of God must be a dynamic force transforming the lives of men and not question of meetings, committees, futile discussions, unnecessary debate and political wire-pulling.

    — `Abdu’l-Bahá, Star of the West, 7, no.18[7 Feb. 1917], 178

    Now surely, if ever, is the time for us, the chosen ones of Bahá’u'lláh and the bearers of His Message to the world, to endeavor by day and by night, to deepen, first and foremost, the Spirit of His Cause in our own individual lives, and then labor, and labor incessantly to exemplify in all our dealings with our fellow-men that noble Spirit of which His beloved Son `Abdu’l-Bahá has been all the days of His life a true and unique exponent. … Let us, with a pure heart, with humility and earnestness, turn afresh to His counsels and exhortations, and seek from that Source of Celestial Potency all the guidance, the spirit, the power which we shall need for the fulfillment of our mission in this life.

    — Shoghi Effendi, Bahá’í Administration, p. 35

  26. 26 P