Apologetics is a branch of systematic theology, although some experience it’s thrust in religious studies or philosophy of religion courses. Some encounter it on the internet for the first time in a more populist and usually much less academic form. As I see it, apologetics is primarily concerned with the protection of a position, the refutation of that position's assailants and, in the larger sense, the exploration of that position in the context of prevailing philosophies and standards in a secular society or, indeed, a religious society. Apologetics, to put it slightly differently, is concerned with answering critical inquiries, criticism of a position, in a rational manner. Apologetics is not possible, it seems to me anyway, without a commitment to and a desire to defend a position. Naturally in life, one takes a position on all sorts of topics, subjects, religions and philosophies.
With that said, though, the activity I engage in, namely, apologetics, is a never ending exercise. The apologetics that concerns me is not so much Christian apologetics or one of a variety of what might be called secular apologetics, but Baha'i apologetics. There are many points of comparison and contrast, though, which I won't go into here. Christians will have the opportunity to defend Christianity by the use of apologetics; secular humanists can argue their cases if they so desire here. And I will in turn defend the Baha'i Faith by the use of apologetics. In the process we will both, hopefully, learn something about our respective Faiths, our religions, our various and our multitudinous positions, some of which we hold to our hearts dearly and some of which are of little interest.
At the outset, then, in this my first posting, my intention is simply to make this start, to state what you might call "my apologetics position." This brief statement indicates, in broad outline, where I am coming from in the weeks and months ahead. -Ron Price with thanks to Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics?" Baha'i Studies Review, Vol. 10, 2001/2002.________________________________
I want in this second part of my first posting to finish, as best I can, outlining a basic orientation to Baha’i apologetics. Critical scholarly contributions or criticism raised in public or private discussions, an obvious part of apologetics, should not necessarily be equated with hostility. Often questions are perfectly legitimate aspects of a person's search for an answer to an intellectual conundrum. Paul Tillich once expressed the view that apologetics was an "answering theology."(Systematic Theology, U. of Chicago, 1967, Vol.1, p6.)
I have always been attracted to the founder of the Baha'i Faith's exhortations in discussion to "speak with words as mild as milk," with "the utmost lenience and forbearance." I am also aware that, in cases of rude or hostile attack, rebuttal with a harsher tone may well be justified. It does not help an apologist to belong to those "watchmen" the prophet Isaiah calls "dumb dogs that cannot bark."(Isaiah, 56:10)
In its essence apologetics is a kind of confrontation, an act of revealing one's true colours, of hoisting the flag, of demonstrating essential characteristics of one's faith, of one's thought, of one's emotional and intellectual stance in life. Dialogue, as Hans Kung puts it, "does not mean self-denial;" but the standard of public discussion of controversial topics should be sensitive to what is said and how. Not everything that we know should always be disclosed; to put this another way, we don't want all our dirty laundry out on our front lawn for all to see or our secrets blasted over the radio and TV.
I want to thank Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics," Baha'i Studies Review, Vol.10, 2001/2) for some of what I write here. Schaefer goes on discussing one's views one's faith which he says "should not be opportunistically streamlined, adapting to current trends, thus concealing their real features, features that could provoke rejection in order to be acceptable for dialogue." To do this puts one in the danger of losing one's identity.
It is almost impossible to carry the torch of truth through a crowd without getting someone's beard singed. In the weeks and months that follow, my postings will probably wind up singing the beards of some readers and, perhaps, my own in the process. Such are the perils of dialogue, of apologetics. Much of Baha'i apologetics derives from the experience Baha'is have of a fundamental discrepancy between secular thought and the Baha'i teachings on the other. In some ways, the gulf is unbridgeable but, so too, is this the case between the secular and much thought in the Christian or Islamic religion or, for that matter, between variants of Christianity or secular thought itself. That is why, or at least one of the reasons, I have chosen to make postings at this forum-this forum invites dialogue.
Anyway, that's all for now. It's back to the autumn winds of Tasmania, about 3 kms from the Bass Straight on the Tamar River. The geography of place is so much simpler than that of the spiritual geography readers at this site are concerned with, although even physical geography has its complexities. Whom the gods would destroy they first make simple and simpler and simpler. I look forward to a dialogue with someone. Here in far-off Tasmania--the last stop before Antarctica, if one wants to get there through some other route than off the end of South America--your posts on this forum will be gratefully received. -Ron Price, Tasmania, Australia.
Full Version: Bahai Apologetics Anyone?
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs
QUOTE (RonPrice @ May 19 2008, 08:44 PM) 
Anyway, that's all for now. It's back to the autumn winds of Tasmania, about 3 kms from the Bass Straight on the Tamar River. The geography of place is so much simpler than that of the spiritual geography readers at this site are concerned with, although even physical geography has its complexities. Whom the gods would destroy they first make simple and simpler and simpler. I look forward to a dialogue with someone. Here in far-off Tasmania--the last stop before Antarctica, if one wants to get there through some other route than off the end of South America--your posts on this forum will be gratefully received. -Ron Price, Tasmania, Australia.
Hello Ron
. I imagine you would enjoy a good dialogue with someone about things you think about and value. You remark the simplicity of terrain versus the complexity of faith, and to me it goes hand in hand in many cases. It is as if the mind and spirit must stay engaged and if not enough is in the environment, they turn inward to trace the lines of the heart....I will look about and brush up on Baha'i enough to at least ask some questions, if this does not take off right away. Your problem is that few really know anything about Baha'i to be debating. But, find an issue and they will debate, know anything or not. I suspect a couple here, do, in fact, know a good deal about it, and that will warm your winter evenings on the computer.
As for apologetics, I have never really gotten into that idea. It supposes an attack, or need to defend. To me, if you know you know the truth, there is nothing to defend. Explain, maybe, if people ask, but not defend, because it should be self evident to anyone who is interested enough to try it, if it is truth.
Philosophically, I am dubious about to what degree Man can even know something like a "perfect" Truth.
Good wishes,
NS
QUOTE (RonPrice @ May 20 2008, 02:44 AM)
Apologetics is a branch of systematic theology, although some experience it’s thrust in religious studies or philosophy of religion courses. Some encounter it on the internet for the first time in a more populist and usually much less academic form. As I see it, apologetics is primarily concerned with the protection of a position, the refutation of that position's assailants and, in the larger sense, the exploration of that position in the context of prevailing philosophies and standards in a secular society or, indeed, a religious society. Apologetics, to put it slightly differently, is concerned with answering critical inquiries, criticism of a position, in a rational manner. Apologetics is not possible, it seems to me anyway, without a commitment to and a desire to defend a position. Naturally in life, one takes a position on all sorts of topics, subjects, religions and philosophies.
With that said, though, the activity I engage in, namely, apologetics, is a never ending exercise. The apologetics that concerns me is not so much Christian apologetics or one of a variety of what might be called secular apologetics, but Baha'i apologetics. There are many points of comparison and contrast, though, which I won't go into here. Christians will have the opportunity to defend Christianity by the use of apologetics; secular humanists can argue their cases if they so desire here. And I will in turn defend the Baha'i Faith by the use of apologetics. In the process we will both, hopefully, learn something about our respective Faiths, our religions, our various and our multitudinous positions, some of which we hold to our hearts dearly and some of which are of little interest.
At the outset, then, in this my first posting, my intention is simply to make this start, to state what you might call "my apologetics position." This brief statement indicates, in broad outline, where I am coming from in the weeks and months ahead. -Ron Price with thanks to Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics?" Baha'i Studies Review, Vol. 10, 2001/2002.________________________________
I want in this second part of my first posting to finish, as best I can, outlining a basic orientation to Baha’i apologetics. Critical scholarly contributions or criticism raised in public or private discussions, an obvious part of apologetics, should not necessarily be equated with hostility. Often questions are perfectly legitimate aspects of a person's search for an answer to an intellectual conundrum. Paul Tillich once expressed the view that apologetics was an "answering theology."(Systematic Theology, U. of Chicago, 1967, Vol.1, p6.)
I have always been attracted to the founder of the Baha'i Faith's exhortations in discussion to "speak with words as mild as milk," with "the utmost lenience and forbearance." I am also aware that, in cases of rude or hostile attack, rebuttal with a harsher tone may well be justified. It does not help an apologist to belong to those "watchmen" the prophet Isaiah calls "dumb dogs that cannot bark."(Isaiah, 56:10)
In its essence apologetics is a kind of confrontation, an act of revealing one's true colours, of hoisting the flag, of demonstrating essential characteristics of one's faith, of one's thought, of one's emotional and intellectual stance in life. Dialogue, as Hans Kung puts it, "does not mean self-denial;" but the standard of public discussion of controversial topics should be sensitive to what is said and how. Not everything that we know should always be disclosed; to put this another way, we don't want all our dirty laundry out on our front lawn for all to see or our secrets blasted over the radio and TV.
I want to thank Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics," Baha'i Studies Review, Vol.10, 2001/2) for some of what I write here. Schaefer goes on discussing one's views one's faith which he says "should not be opportunistically streamlined, adapting to current trends, thus concealing their real features, features that could provoke rejection in order to be acceptable for dialogue." To do this puts one in the danger of losing one's identity.
It is almost impossible to carry the torch of truth through a crowd without getting someone's beard singed. In the weeks and months that follow, my postings will probably wind up singing the beards of some readers and, perhaps, my own in the process. Such are the perils of dialogue, of apologetics. Much of Baha'i apologetics derives from the experience Baha'is have of a fundamental discrepancy between secular thought and the Baha'i teachings on the other. In some ways, the gulf is unbridgeable but, so too, is this the case between the secular and much thought in the Christian or Islamic religion or, for that matter, between variants of Christianity or secular thought itself. That is why, or at least one of the reasons, I have chosen to make postings at this forum-this forum invites dialogue.
Anyway, that's all for now. It's back to the autumn winds of Tasmania, about 3 kms from the Bass Straight on the Tamar River. The geography of place is so much simpler than that of the spiritual geography readers at this site are concerned with, although even physical geography has its complexities. Whom the gods would destroy they first make simple and simpler and simpler. I look forward to a dialogue with someone. Here in far-off Tasmania--the last stop before Antarctica, if one wants to get there through some other route than off the end of South America--your posts on this forum will be gratefully received. -Ron Price, Tasmania, Australia.
With that said, though, the activity I engage in, namely, apologetics, is a never ending exercise. The apologetics that concerns me is not so much Christian apologetics or one of a variety of what might be called secular apologetics, but Baha'i apologetics. There are many points of comparison and contrast, though, which I won't go into here. Christians will have the opportunity to defend Christianity by the use of apologetics; secular humanists can argue their cases if they so desire here. And I will in turn defend the Baha'i Faith by the use of apologetics. In the process we will both, hopefully, learn something about our respective Faiths, our religions, our various and our multitudinous positions, some of which we hold to our hearts dearly and some of which are of little interest.
At the outset, then, in this my first posting, my intention is simply to make this start, to state what you might call "my apologetics position." This brief statement indicates, in broad outline, where I am coming from in the weeks and months ahead. -Ron Price with thanks to Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics?" Baha'i Studies Review, Vol. 10, 2001/2002.________________________________
I want in this second part of my first posting to finish, as best I can, outlining a basic orientation to Baha’i apologetics. Critical scholarly contributions or criticism raised in public or private discussions, an obvious part of apologetics, should not necessarily be equated with hostility. Often questions are perfectly legitimate aspects of a person's search for an answer to an intellectual conundrum. Paul Tillich once expressed the view that apologetics was an "answering theology."(Systematic Theology, U. of Chicago, 1967, Vol.1, p6.)
I have always been attracted to the founder of the Baha'i Faith's exhortations in discussion to "speak with words as mild as milk," with "the utmost lenience and forbearance." I am also aware that, in cases of rude or hostile attack, rebuttal with a harsher tone may well be justified. It does not help an apologist to belong to those "watchmen" the prophet Isaiah calls "dumb dogs that cannot bark."(Isaiah, 56:10)
In its essence apologetics is a kind of confrontation, an act of revealing one's true colours, of hoisting the flag, of demonstrating essential characteristics of one's faith, of one's thought, of one's emotional and intellectual stance in life. Dialogue, as Hans Kung puts it, "does not mean self-denial;" but the standard of public discussion of controversial topics should be sensitive to what is said and how. Not everything that we know should always be disclosed; to put this another way, we don't want all our dirty laundry out on our front lawn for all to see or our secrets blasted over the radio and TV.
I want to thank Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics," Baha'i Studies Review, Vol.10, 2001/2) for some of what I write here. Schaefer goes on discussing one's views one's faith which he says "should not be opportunistically streamlined, adapting to current trends, thus concealing their real features, features that could provoke rejection in order to be acceptable for dialogue." To do this puts one in the danger of losing one's identity.
It is almost impossible to carry the torch of truth through a crowd without getting someone's beard singed. In the weeks and months that follow, my postings will probably wind up singing the beards of some readers and, perhaps, my own in the process. Such are the perils of dialogue, of apologetics. Much of Baha'i apologetics derives from the experience Baha'is have of a fundamental discrepancy between secular thought and the Baha'i teachings on the other. In some ways, the gulf is unbridgeable but, so too, is this the case between the secular and much thought in the Christian or Islamic religion or, for that matter, between variants of Christianity or secular thought itself. That is why, or at least one of the reasons, I have chosen to make postings at this forum-this forum invites dialogue.
Anyway, that's all for now. It's back to the autumn winds of Tasmania, about 3 kms from the Bass Straight on the Tamar River. The geography of place is so much simpler than that of the spiritual geography readers at this site are concerned with, although even physical geography has its complexities. Whom the gods would destroy they first make simple and simpler and simpler. I look forward to a dialogue with someone. Here in far-off Tasmania--the last stop before Antarctica, if one wants to get there through some other route than off the end of South America--your posts on this forum will be gratefully received. -Ron Price, Tasmania, Australia.
Hi Ron,
I have known some very good people of the Bahi Faith, Their beliefs make for A loving Family among imediate and Human Families, No argument here, I don't understand apologetics, simply because it has the word apologise in it, and you sound like it is more a defense of one's belief, than an apology of ones belief. Words>
Any hoo Glad your belief is a loving one.
Look foward to hearing more about it.
Love Omnaka
Ps- The Bahi Family I met in Maui, I did some work for, It was not like work, it was more like Helping a family member and them helping me in return, a very nice exchange. O-
Hi Ron,
I am a part of a Spiritist Apologetic Group (GAE) in Brazil, with a couple of little articles published. See the link bellow (unfortunately in Brazilian Portuguese):
http://www.apologiaespirita.org/
I believe that every idea, to become strong, has to be submitted and survive to criticism. And if I couldn't defend rationally my beliefs, I'd become an unbeliever. This never happened up to now. Some other think they can hide under a veil of mystery, in a question of faith - they say -, as the faith were something that could not be explained, in a silly way to try to escape from the examination. If something cannot survive to an apologetic test, it cannot be an option of truth.
That's my opinion and some other may disagree.
If you want to debate anything, with respect, attacking ideas and not persons, you can count on me, even in PM. I like this. I'm only sorry being a little busy sometimes and don’t have time to follow a subject as much as I would like.
Best Regards.
Rafael.
I am a part of a Spiritist Apologetic Group (GAE) in Brazil, with a couple of little articles published. See the link bellow (unfortunately in Brazilian Portuguese):
http://www.apologiaespirita.org/
I believe that every idea, to become strong, has to be submitted and survive to criticism. And if I couldn't defend rationally my beliefs, I'd become an unbeliever. This never happened up to now. Some other think they can hide under a veil of mystery, in a question of faith - they say -, as the faith were something that could not be explained, in a silly way to try to escape from the examination. If something cannot survive to an apologetic test, it cannot be an option of truth.
That's my opinion and some other may disagree.
If you want to debate anything, with respect, attacking ideas and not persons, you can count on me, even in PM. I like this. I'm only sorry being a little busy sometimes and don’t have time to follow a subject as much as I would like.
Best Regards.
Rafael.
QUOTE (Omnaka @ May 25 2008, 06:18 AM)
Hi Ron,
I have known some very good people of the Bahai Faith. Their beliefs make for a loving family in the human community of families. No argument here, but I don't understand apologetics. It is simply a word I am unfamiliar with and for that I apologise. You sound from your comment that you are defending your beliefs and making an apology for them. Any hoo, I am glad your belief is a loving one. I look foward to hearing more about it.
Love Omnaka
Ps- The Bahai family I met in Maui, and did some work for, was more like helping a family member and them helping me in return, a very nice exchange. --O
I have known some very good people of the Bahai Faith. Their beliefs make for a loving family in the human community of families. No argument here, but I don't understand apologetics. It is simply a word I am unfamiliar with and for that I apologise. You sound from your comment that you are defending your beliefs and making an apology for them. Any hoo, I am glad your belief is a loving one. I look foward to hearing more about it.
Love Omnaka
Ps- The Bahai family I met in Maui, and did some work for, was more like helping a family member and them helping me in return, a very nice exchange. --O
-----------------
Apologetics, Omnaka, is not really about apologizing for one's beliefs, although its sounds from the word that it may be apologizing. I must confess that the experience people have of apologetics ranges from apologizing at one end to vigorous defense at the other. The wikipedia has an excellent definition. The international Baha'i site is: bahai.org and you can learn as much as you like about this Faith at that site. This will save me "reinventing the wheel," as it were. Thanks for your response, Omnaka.-Ron Price, Australia
QUOTE (leafar @ May 26 2008, 03:59 AM)
Hi Ron,
I am a part of a Spiritist Apologetic Group (GAE) in Brazil, with a couple of little articles published. See the link bellow (unfortunately in Brazilian Portuguese):
http://www.apologiaespirita.org/
I believe that every idea, to become strong, has to be submitted and survive to criticism. And if I couldn't defend rationally my beliefs, I'd become an unbeliever. This has never happened up to now. Some others think they can hide under a veil of mystery, in questions of faith. They say that faith is something that can not be explained. This is just a silly way to try to escape from an examination of their beliefs. If something cannot survive a test of apologetic, it cannot be the truth. That's my opinion and some other may disagree.
If you want to debate anything, with respect, attacking ideas and not persons, you can count on me, even in PM. I like this. I'm only sorry being a little busy sometimes and don’t have time to follow a subject as much as I would like.
Best Regards.
Rafael.
I am a part of a Spiritist Apologetic Group (GAE) in Brazil, with a couple of little articles published. See the link bellow (unfortunately in Brazilian Portuguese):
http://www.apologiaespirita.org/
I believe that every idea, to become strong, has to be submitted and survive to criticism. And if I couldn't defend rationally my beliefs, I'd become an unbeliever. This has never happened up to now. Some others think they can hide under a veil of mystery, in questions of faith. They say that faith is something that can not be explained. This is just a silly way to try to escape from an examination of their beliefs. If something cannot survive a test of apologetic, it cannot be the truth. That's my opinion and some other may disagree.
If you want to debate anything, with respect, attacking ideas and not persons, you can count on me, even in PM. I like this. I'm only sorry being a little busy sometimes and don’t have time to follow a subject as much as I would like.
Best Regards.
Rafael.
----------------------
Thanks for your response, Rafael. I, too, am busy as you can see from my taking five months to reply to your post. I very much agree with you that beliefs must be supported by reason. They musty hold water, as they say. I will suggest here that if you are at all curious about the Baha'i Faith you go to ints international site at: bahai.org. If you have any questions after a good read of some of the history and teachings of this new world religion, then let me know and I am happy to respond.-Ron in Tasmania
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.