Who Was Baha’u’llah, and How Can We Evaluate His Claims?

[ppp]

What do you mean? What is UHG?

It is an interjection expressing disgust or revulsion.

 

[CG Didymus]

When we sit down and study it CG it all points to the fact God is One and that good and Evil are all part of this world. We can make as many God's as we wish to.

Sorry not time to explore this deeply.

Regards Tony

Yes, I agree. We can make Gods. But do you agree that some people in some cultures have made up their own Gods and religions? And even in the ones that you believe are true religions from God, even Baha'is agree that people have changed the meanings and have added their own false beliefs into the supposed original message. So, what do we really know about God? For Baha'is, it is what the Baha'i Faith tells you about and what the Baha'i Faith tells you about what the other religions "originally" believed about God. But by what they believe today... Baha'is really don't believe what the other religions teach.

So, you don't have to tell me what you'll find if you search it out and find out what any of the other religions believe about God, Gods or no Gods or additions of lesser evil Gods... You don't believe any of those things are true. But where is this mysterious "original" message the Baha'is talk about? It's nowhere to be found. And I don't think it was ever there. People had Sun Gods, wind Gods, fertility Gods, good Gods, bad Gods, and maybe a supreme God mixed in there too. None of those Gods were provable or real. And the God Baha'is talk about is still invisible, unknowable, and unprovable... except for what the Baha'i Faith tells about him.

 

[Truthseeker]

Oh, and Baha'u'llah and his ability to tell people about those books. Well, let's take a look at what he said about

Among the Prophets was Noah. For nine hundred and fifty years He prayerfully exhorted His people and summoned them to the haven of security and peace. None, however, heeded His call. Each day they inflicted on His blessed person such pain and suffering that no one believed He could survive. How frequently they denied Him, how malevolently they hinted their suspicion against Him! Thus it hath been revealed: “And as often as a company of His people passed by Him, they derided Him. To them He said: ‘Though ye scoff at us now, we will scoff at you hereafter even as ye scoff at us. In the end ye shall know.’”3 Long afterward, He several times promised victory to His companions and fixed the hour thereof. But when the hour struck, the divine promise was not fulfilled. This caused a few among the small number of His followers to turn away from Him, and to this testify the records of the best-known books. These you must certainly have perused; if not, undoubtedly you will. Finally, as stated in books and traditions, there remained with Him only forty or seventy-two of His followers. At last from the depth of His being He cried aloud: “Lord! Leave not upon the land a single dweller from among the unbelievers.”
Obviously, he hadn't read the Genesis account of Noah. No flood, no ark, no animals. Where did this story come from? From an Islamic tradition? Or is this brand new information never before told?

The 950 years is from Genesis. That figure is not in the Qur'an. The quote that begins with "And as often as a company..." is from the Qur'an. The books referred to are not either the Bible or the Qur'an. Perhaps they are commentaries or histories common to the people in Persia. In any case He says " These you must certainly have perused; if not, undoubtedly you will." The traditions are stories that Muhammad or the Imams told that were passed down orally. It's significant that He said "Finally, as stated in books and traditions, there remained with Him only forty or seventy-two of His followers." That indicates He knows of conflicting books and traditions and is citing both the number forty and seventy two. This all indicates the collating of quite an impressive array of sources together in one paragraph. I also point out here that Baha'u'llah wrote the whole Book of Certitude in a couple of days. He didn't have time to look up all the things He cited in that book, and He presented it all in what I find a persuasive and cogent way. Pay attention @KWED!

 

[Truthseeker]

You did not impugn my character, Truthseeker.
You impugned your own character.

You don't accept my apology? Yes, I impugned my own character, too.

 

[Truthseeker]

I agree that taking some Bible verses too literal causes all sorts of problems. But taking things too loose makes them kind of meaningless. Like if I was a Jew, and read in Matthew how he uses Isaiah to say that the virgin birth was prophesied, that would be enough for me to reject Jesus. But then Matthew go on about the killing of the boys in Bethlehem and quotes a verse as that event was predicted. Then something about God calling his son out of Egypt and that he'd be called a "Nazarene"?

I know what you mean! Virgin was a Greek translation of young woman, and there are surrounding verses in Isaiah that seem to make this look like nonsense. Isaiah was referring to a contemporary situation. However, I don't completely rule out that this verse has a double meaning. I simply don't know. The Nazarene bit was complete nonsense, it wasn't in the Old Testament, I don't know where he got that from. However, none of this detracts from the station of Jesus. That a fallible source says these things means nothing to me.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The question is... where in any of the gospels do the writers switch from telling about the events they believe really happened to telling of a symbolic parable? Which verse do you see where they made that switch?

Then about it being a vision? Why then does Jesus say to touch him and see that he is not a ghost but has flesh and bone? Then the quote from Acts where it says he proved himself to be alive? I think that is exactly what they wanted people to know and believe... that Jesus had risen, in some kind of body that had flesh and bone, from the dead. Looking back at that and so many other stories in the Bible and for lots of us today, we'd say that was all make believe. If the Baha'is said that, I'd have no problem... But you don't.

Baha'is say those verses are "true"... symbolically, not literally. No, I don't agree. It was written as if the event really happened. When Jesus told a parable, it was made clear it was a parable. When people were saying things metaphorically it was clear it was metaphorical. The resurrection of Jesus was told as if it really happened. Again, if it didn't really happen, then they were lying and the resurrection was a hoax.

As I explained before the interpretation of the Holy Books is only known fully by God and Baha’u’llah we believe was the One Who unravelled the mysteries. In His Book of Certitude which Shoghi Effendi says ‘broke the seals’ of the Books, He explains these things.

For example, Baha’u’llah speaks about stars appearing in the heavens heralding a Manifestation as meaning both the physical heaven and earthly beings who will herald the Messenger. So very often there’s both a physical and spiritual meaning but to find them one has to read Baha’u’llah’s Works and research them.

Here’s one from two different chapters of the Book of Revelation. It’s lengthy but we Baha’is don’t interpret as you know, we rely on the Manifestation of God. Firstly It is Baha’u’llah Who clearly states they have got it wrong which has led them to deny the truth.


“know that the Christian and Jewish peoples have not grasped the intent of the words of God and the promises He hath made to them in His Book, and have therefore denied His Cause, turned aside from His Prophets, and rejected His proofs” (Baha’u’llah)

Revelation Chapt 1 & ch 19

“He saith: “His eyes were as a flame of fire”, and “brass-like were His feet”, and
“out of His mouth goeth a two-edged sword”. How could these words be literally
interpreted? Were anyone to appear with all these signs, he would assuredly not
be human. And how could any soul seek his company? Nay, should he appear in one
city, even the inhabitants of the next would flee from him, nor would any soul
dare approach him! Yet, shouldst thou reflect upon these statements, thou
wouldst find them to be of such surpassing eloquence and clarity as to mark the
loftiest heights of utterance and the epitome of wisdom. Methinks it is from
them that the suns of eloquence have appeared and the stars of clarity have
dawned forth and shone resplendent.


Behold, then, the foolish ones of bygone times and those who, in this day, await the
advent of such a being! Nor would they ever bear allegiance unto him except
that he appear in the aforementioned form. And as such a being will never
appear, so too will they never believe. Such indeed is the measure of the
understanding of these perverse and ungodly souls!”

Excerpt from
Gems of Divine Mysteries
Bahá’u’lláh

 

[Truthseeker]

That is what everyone says about their sacred texts. Polytheistic, monotheistic and non-theistic religions alike. People from all traditions sincerely believe that they see the spirit of their respective scriptures. Even the scriptures that directly contradict one another. Even the scriptures that directly contradict yours.

Are the people who claim to see the spirit of their scriptures wrong when they call your scriptures misguided or demonic?

It seems to me that we have a world full of religious people denigrating intellectual knowledge, in favor of what you call seeing the spirit of their scriptures, because it allows y'all to believe the doctrine that y'all are attached to.

That's true. We must all strive to see the spirit of our own and other people's scriptures. We can all be wrong. There is nothing wrong with intellectual knowledge, but intellectual is not enough. It skims the surface if it has no heart to it.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The question is... where in any of the gospels do the writers switch from telling about the events they believe really happened to telling of a symbolic parable? Which verse do you see where they made that switch?

Then about it being a vision? Why then does Jesus say to touch him and see that he is not a ghost but has flesh and bone? Then the quote from Acts where it says he proved himself to be alive? I think that is exactly what they wanted people to know and believe... that Jesus had risen, in some kind of body that had flesh and bone, from the dead. Looking back at that and so many other stories in the Bible and for lots of us today, we'd say that was all make believe. If the Baha'is said that, I'd have no problem... But you don't.

Baha'is say those verses are "true"... symbolically, not literally. No, I don't agree. It was written as if the event really happened. When Jesus told a parable, it was made clear it was a parable. When people were saying things metaphorically it was clear it was metaphorical. The resurrection of Jesus was told as if it really happened. Again, if it didn't really happen, then they were lying and the resurrection was a hoax.

Baha’u’llah gave us the keys and explained that resurrection is a spiritual meaning not physical. If He’s the Promised One then He speaks the truth.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Oh, and what about this?

Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad was an Indian religious leader and the founder of the Ahmadiyya movement in Islam. He claimed to have been divinely appointed as the promised Messiah and Mahdi—which is the metaphorical second-coming of Jesus.​

If you reject him are you rejecting Jesus? No, you probably reject him and him only. And do you use scriptural knowledge to reject him? What else would you use? I'd imagine you'd check if what he claimed fits with what you know about what the true Messiah will be like and what he will do. And, if this person doesn't fit those requirements, you reject him as a false Messiah. So, what if to me, the Bab and Baha'u'llah don't fit the requirements? Am I really rejecting Jesus? And about having a "pure heart"... lots of people fall for a smooth talking, charismatic spiritual leader, and were wrong. Shouldn't they have used a little spiritual knowledge?

These are things between you and yourself to determine just as I have to decide for myself from my own investigation and everyone else. There are certain requirements in the Holy Books to go by to help in one’s search. But the end decision rests with each individual.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Baha’u’llah gave us the keys and explained that resurrection is a spiritual meaning not physical. If He’s the Promised One then He speaks the truth.

Your belief, though he gave no evidence, of there being a God, or Gods promise of sending anyone, or him being the one, that could stand even a slightest scrutiny.

 

[loverofhumanity]

But the NT was written in the common Greek, but Baha'is use the KJV. And then about the "details"... It's hard to figure out what the point was sometimes because of all the flowery language.

Hi CG,

It’s freezing here about 0° at night so I’m usually under blankets keeping warm.

I always consider you a friend which means it doesn’t matter if we don’t agree. So please always feel welcome to continue our discussions.

I can see both you and I have had many very meaningful and enlightening discussions. Firstly I just want to say a big THANK YOU for asking the questions you do because they are very, very good questions and I learn a lot from you.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Not all Baha'is share that view and I am one of them who doesn't.

#4 shunyadragon, Today at 8:58 AM

"God Passes by", by Shoghi Effendi is a great reference for this topic.

In the end, Shoghi Effendi offered the references are so numerous that.....

"...To attempt an exhaustive survey of the prophetic references to Bahá’u’lláh’s Revelation would indeed be an impossible task. To this the pen of Bahá’u’lláh Himself bears witness: “All the Divine Books and Scriptures have predicted and announced unto men the advent of the Most Great Revelation. None can adequately recount the verses recorded in the Books of former ages which forecast this supreme Bounty, this most mighty Bestowal.”..."

Bahá'í Reference Library - God Passes By, Pages 89-103

Regards Tony

 

[ppp]

That's true. We must all strive to see the spirit of our own and other people's scriptures. We can all be wrong.

You can all be wrong, with there being no such thing as spirit save in a metaphorical way.

There is nothing wrong with intellectual knowledge, but intellectual is not enough. It skims the surface if it has no heart to it.

That is your assumption. The assumption necessary to support the belief to which you are attached.

 

[KWED]

The same One God. They one and all guide us to the same light.

They are all in fact showing us their own Oneness, as they are all born from the Holy Spirit, whereas we are born of the human spirit.

So all the Messengers are the light shining from the One God.

Regards Tony

In which case, why have there been so many contradictory and conflicting messages?
Why would god deliberately confuse the issue that way and make it look as though he was just made-up in the image of the culture of his creators?

 

[KWED]

I wonder, I am sure some who met Baha'u'llah were given such a demonstration.

In fact there are stories of what happened after Baha'u'llah did.

One ran into the sea and drowned himself. Baha'u'llah said that act was forgiven.

There are many recorded stories, but it is of no use telling them. As it is not proof to those that did not receive the demonstration.

Regards Tony

So, if anyone is driven to extraordinary acts by a person or idea, that person or idea must necessarily be a messenger or message of god?
Would Shiite Muslims blowing themselves up in Sunni mosques be proof that Ali was the true successor to Muhammad?

 

[KWED]

Yes, if someone actually met Baha'u'llah that might be proof but that is no longer possible.

What about all those people who met him and didn't conclude he was a messenger of god? What is that "proof" of?[/QUOTE]

 

[KWED]

"God Who is the Author of all life can alone take it away, and dispose of it the way he deems best.

So babies dying in agony from congenital conditions is because god "deems it the best way to dispose of their lives"?
Why do you worship such a monster?

 

[KWED]

When we sit down and study it CG it all points to the fact God is One and that good and Evil are all part of this world.

No. When we "sit down and study it" objectively, without the presumption atet there is one god, it all points to societies inventing gods that mirror their circumstances. There is no better explanation.

We can make as many God's as we wish to.

Which is exactly what we did.
If you accept that we invent our own gods, and that people genuinely believe in them - how do you know that your own is not made-up?

 

[KWED]

We can all be wrong.

True.

intellectual is not enough. It skims the surface if it has no heart to it.

You could be wrong.

 

[KWED]

"God Passes by", by Shoghi Effendi is a great reference for this topic.

In the end, Shoghi Effendi offered the references are so numerous that.....

"...To attempt an exhaustive survey of the prophetic references to Bahá’u’lláh’s Revelation would indeed be an impossible task. To this the pen of Bahá’u’lláh Himself bears witness: “All the Divine Books and Scriptures have predicted and announced unto men the advent of the Most Great Revelation. None can adequately recount the verses recorded in the Books of former ages which forecast this supreme Bounty, this most mighty Bestowal.”..."

Bahá'í Reference Library - God Passes By, Pages 89-103

Regards Tony

We don't have to examine them all. We only have to find one that is wrong. That has already been done.