Baha'i Baha'i: The dubious morality of Shunning of Covenant Breakers; Burning Arsonists alive

[Wgw]

I would very much like more information regarding how covenant breakers are treated in the Baha'i Faith, as I have found a number of criticisms of this practice on the Net that seemed a bit evocative of what one hears about Scientology disconnection.

Edit: No need,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant-breaker

How do Baha'is therefore seek to justify this practice? It seems to me rather morally dubious. We do not treat the excommunicate this way in Orthodox Christianity.

Even more morally dubious seems to me the directive to burn arsonists alive:

"Should anyone intentionally destroy a house by fire, him also shall ye burn; should anyone deliberately take another's life, him also shall ye put to death. Take ye hold of the precepts of God with all your strength and power, and abandon the ways of the ignorant. Should ye condemn the arsonist and the murderer to life imprisonment, it would be permissible according to the provisions of the Book. He, verily, hath power to ordain whatsoever He pleaseth."

I would argue that even life imprisonment is grossly inappropriate in many cases, given that many arsonists are minors, or mentally ill; what is more, intentionally destroying a house by fire might be justified in some cases relating to the management of wildfires.

However, the mere suggestion of an auto da fe for arsonists is quite beyond the pale.

 

[drstevej]

This is the proper forum for this thread:
http://www.christianforums.com/forums/christianity-and-world-religion.76/

You might PM a mod and ask that the thread be relocated.

 

[Wgw]

This is the proper forum for this thread:
http://www.christianforums.com/forums/christianity-and-world-religion.76/

You might PM a mod and ask that the thread be relocated.

Well, let me clarify: I wish to debate a Baha'i member on this issue, in that what I have read on this point seems to suggest that their shunning of "covenant breakers" is objectively immoral. My OP was intended to address the possibility this information might be wrong, however, since posting it, I have come across material in the Kitab-al-Aqdas that suggests these characterizations are not wrong.

What is more, I also very much am troubled by the extreme suggestion of burning arsonists alive. I have modified the OP accordingly.

 

[Arthra]

How do Baha'is therefore seek to justify this practice? It seems to me rather morally dubious. We do not treat the excommunicate this way in Orthodox Christianity.

I'd be willing to provide information on the subject... The article you cited in Wikipedia is fairly accurate for starters. I think though if you checked orthodox history there are examples of people condemned as heretics, schismatics, apostates.

what I have read on this point seems to suggest that their shunning of "covenant breakers" is objectively immoral.

You should probably do some reading in Baha'i history... The last person I recall that was considered a covenant breaker was well over ten years ago. I happened to have interacted briefly with him online. There have been relatively very few covenant breakers designated as such in recent years.

As to arsonists the section you refer to in the Kitab-i-Aqdas is not enforced ... that is, some laws require the interpretation and explanation of the supreme body the House of Justice and as such it is not enforceable today... If life is lost from the acts of an arsonist life imprisonment is also permitted:

"Shoghi Effendi, in response to a question about this verse of the Aqdas, affirmed that while capital punishment is permitted, an alternative, "life imprisonment", has been provided "whereby the rigours of such a condemnation can be seriously mitigated". He states that "Bahá'u'lláh has given us a choice and has, therefore, left us free to use our own discretion within certain limitations imposed by His law".

http://www.bahai-library.com/writings/bahaullah/aqdas/notes.html#n87