Answered Prayers

[danieldemol]

People misunderstand posts all the time since no post can be tailored so it is understood by everyone as the writer intended it to be understood.
It might have been misleading but I straightened it out with @Stevicus later.

Yes you straightened it out under cross-examination, but there is no guarantee you would have done that had you not had someone familiar with your semantic games cross-examining your words in my view.

 

[Stevicus]

The Universal House of Justice, the elected 9 representatives are the only Body that can give that sanction.

It is not taken lightly and every person would have been given ample opportunity for consultation, or invitations to consult.

Regards Tony

Only the Universal House of Justice (UHJ) can decide that.

No, probably not, because they would probably question the legitimacy of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah.
@TransmutingSoul would know about the history behind that.

They do call themselves Baha'is, but I can call myself married even though I am a widow.

So then, we're talking about some sort of official designation made by a centralized authority. (I don't think "married" vs. "widowed" would be comparable, since those are legal distinctions which carry legal weight in secular society.)

Of course, as an American citizen who believes in the First Amendment and the separation of church and state, I believe it's anyone's right to declare their beliefs and identify with whatever religion they wish. Likewise, I respect the right of an organization's leadership to expel or kick out anyone they wish and say "you're not one of us anymore." It happens in political parties, and it's happened in religions as well. That's why there's a whole plethora of Christian sects out there. Is there anyone who can say who is a "true Christian"?

As an agnostic and non-theist, I often look at these kinds of disputes and disagreement among believers and find myself asking: Why don't they just let go of it and let God decide if their beliefs are correct or not?

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes you straightened it out under cross-examination, but there is no guarantee you would have done that had you not had someone familiar with your semantic games cross-examining your words in my view.

There were no semantic games.

 

[Little Dragon]

God's foreknowledge does not cause anything to happen. People cause things to happen by making choices and acting on them.

I didn't say it did. I said if He already knew (the outcome of every action and inaction). Then why make changes later just because it suits a human better? Why change what was already predestined and preordained? Makes no sense at all.

 

[Trailblazer]

As an agnostic and non-theist, I often look at these kinds of disputes and disagreement among believers and find myself asking: Why don't they just let go of it and let God decide if their beliefs are correct or not?

Ultimately, God will decide.

 

[Trailblazer]

I didn't say it did. I said if He already knew (the outcome of every action and inaction). Then why make changes later just because it suits a human better? Why change what was already predestined and preordained? Makes no sense at all.

God sometimes makes changes to the fate of a person if it is an impending fate, but God won't do that unless he chooses to.

“Know thou, O fruit of My Tree, that the decrees of the Sovereign Ordainer, as related to fate and predestination, are of two kinds. Both are to be obeyed and accepted. The one is irrevocable, the other is, as termed by men, impending. To the former all must unreservedly submit, inasmuch as it is fixed and settled. God, however, is able to alter or repeal it. As the harm that must result from such a change will be greater than if the decree had remained unaltered, all, therefore, should willingly acquiesce in what God hath willed and confidently abide by the same.​

​

The decree that is impending, however, is such that prayer and entreaty can succeed in averting it.”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 133​

Note that it says it “can succeed” not that it “will succeed.”

What that amounts to is that we are completely at the mercy of God...

 

[Dao Hao Now]

No there is no contradiction. It is just a basic understanding of the Covernant given by Baha'u'llah

That “basic understanding” is of course open to interpretation as is any written document.

There is no fuzzy line up and until the transition from the Guardian to the Universal House of Justice. That transition was handled well by the majority and was an opportunity for the Covernant Brekers to make another attempt.

In other words there were in fact others that interpreted it differently that were out voted by a majority……correct?

If you can manage to tear yourself away from the legalese of this covenant and attempt to view this as a disinterested party (difficult I know), it is starkly obvious…..

You’re claiming that when a Baha’i follower who by your own words “was a staunch believer and was responsible of bringing many souls into the faith, who was known as a learned Baha'i”,
is adjudicated by the Universal House of Justice
to be a “covenant breaker” and from that moment forward according to the majority opinion (which you obviously share)
is no longer a “staunch believer” and no longer a “learned Baha’i”……..correct?

Surely you can manage to recognize that the once “staunch believer who was responsible of bringing many souls into the faith, who was known as a learned Baha’i” hadn’t changed his convictions and maintains the same “staunch belief” and is no less learned as he was before the adjudication by the UHJ and therefore still identifies as Baha’i…….yes?
And one might presume (as is often in these cases) sees himself and followers of keeping what they interpret as the “true” faith.

An honest disinterested party would see this as a division/split (choose your semantically preferred word here).
Not withstanding the club rules that claims “no backsies!”

So we have an example of what was a group of people, that the majority of which determined that a minority of people within that group failed to live up to the standards of that majority, and then declared that the said minority were no longer “true” members of the majority’s group.
And, when the minority insisted that they were what the group had started out as…,
the majority then declares the minority as “fakes”

That IS the No True Scotsman.
Do you truly not see that?
Or are you just too entrenched and invested in your argument to admit it?

 

[Little Dragon]

God sometimes makes changes to the fate of a person if it is an impending fate, but God won't do that unless he chooses to.

Yes, I find that puzzling. What kind of grand plan involves interventions? Why would this God wish to answer some prayers and not others in an effectively arbitrary manner. On a whim? Why answer the prayer about getting a new job instead of the prayer for an end to starvation or a recovery from a deadly illness? I am being rhetorical, thinking aloud. Why this chaos? That's my final thought.

 

[Little Dragon]

What that amounts to is that we are completely at the mercy of God...

Terrifying. If you believe, of course. Not that I do. Obviously.

 

[Trailblazer]

That IS the No True Scotsman.
Do you truly not see that?

Big deal if it is No True Scotsman.

That does not have any bearing upon the Truth of the matter, whatever it is.

 

[Trailblazer]

Terrifying. If you believe, of course. Not that I do. Obviously.

It is only terrifying if one does not trust God to have their bests interests in mind.

 

[Little Dragon]

It is only terrifying if one does not trust God to have their bests interests in mind.

Precisely. An unknowable and unpredictable entity of infinite power, is indeed terrifying.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That is your interpretation of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah. As such it does not constitute "proof" in my view.

It requires no interpretation as it is written in clear language and obvious meaning in regards to Abdu'l-Baha and the Authority given to Him.

Kitáb-i-ʻAhd - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"...The Will of the divine Testator is this: It is incumbent upon the Aghsán, the Afnán and My Kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: 'When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root.' The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. Thus have We graciously revealed unto you Our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful. Verily God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch [Muḥammad ʻAlí] to be beneath that of the Most Great Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. He is in truth the Ordainer, the All-Wise. We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed..."

Thus Abdul'baha had full Authority. Then in the will and Testament of Abdul'baha, He appointed Shoghi Effendi. There can be no breaking this Covernant and it is clearly written.

Baha'u'llah also allowed for the Universal House of Justice, it is a integral part of the Covernant.

There is truckloads of original, signed, sealed and authenticed authorised writing's on this topic.

It all adds up to the obvious spiritual sickness of a Covenant Breaker, that they alone have the correct interpretation, in other words, making themselves God, a plague that has inflicted all past faiths.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Precisely. An unknowable and unpredictable entity of infinite power, is indeed terrifying.

It is a healthy fear, knowing that Love is the animating force.

The fear is our judgement.

"Bring thyself to account each day ere thou art summoned to a reckoning; for death, unheralded, shall come upon thee and thou shalt be called to give account for thy deeds."

Baha’u’llah, Arabic Hidden Words, #31

Shoghi Effendi explained it in this manner.

"...Perhaps the friends do not realize that the majority of human beings need the element of fear in order to discipline their conduct? Only a relatively very highly evolved soul would always be disciplined by love alone. Fear of punishment, fear of the anger of God if we do evil, are needed to keep people’s feet on the right path. Of course we should love God – but we must fear Him in the sense of a child fearing the righteous anger and chastisement of a parent; not cringe before Him as before a tyrant, but know His Mercy exceeds His Justice!" Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 238

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That “basic understanding” is of course open to interpretation as is any written document

No it is clear and precise from Baha'u'llahto Abdul'baha we have this from the "Book of the Covernant".

"The Will of the divine Testator is this: It is incumbent upon the Aghsán, the Afnán and My Kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: 'When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root.' The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. Thus have We graciously revealed unto you Our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful. Verily God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch [Muḥammad ʻAlí] to be beneath that of the Most Great Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. He is in truth the Ordainer, the All-Wise. We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed."

Then Abdul'baha appoints Shoghi Effendi clear and precise, with the Authority given to Shoghi Effendi.

There is no, absolutely no, wriggle room.

Regards Tony

 

[danieldemol]

It requires no interpretation as it is written in clear language and obvious meaning in regards to Abdu'l-Baha and the Authority given to Him.

Kitáb-i-ʻAhd - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"...The Will of the divine Testator is this: It is incumbent upon the Aghsán, the Afnán and My Kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: 'When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root.' The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. Thus have We graciously revealed unto you Our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful. Verily God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch [Muḥammad ʻAlí] to be beneath that of the Most Great Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. He is in truth the Ordainer, the All-Wise. We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed..."

Everything up to here is more or less factual given some slight leeway for it being a UHoJ approved translation, what follows below is your interpretation;

Thus Abdul'baha had full Authority. Then in the will and Testament of Abdul'baha, He appointed Shoghi Effendi. There can be no breaking this Covernant and it is clearly written.

Baha'u'llah also allowed for the Universal House of Justice, it is a integral part of the Covernant.

There is truckloads of original, signed, sealed and authenticed authorised writing's on this topic.

It all adds up to the obvious spiritual sickness of a Covenant Breaker, that they alone have the correct interpretation, in other words, making themselves God, a plague that has inflicted all past faiths.

Regards Tony

You'll notice that in the section of the kitab-i-Ahd that you quoted there is mention of "We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed..."

Therefore there is room to interpret Baha'u'llah's covenant as appointing 'the greater' (a reference to Mirza Muhammad ʻAli) as being appointed after Abdul-Baha.

So by slightly different interpretation it becomes possible to see majority Baha'i as those deviating from Baha'u'llah's covenant.

Also the Kitab-i-Ahd extract you provided does not mention Abdul-Baha as being infallible so the possibility of Abdul-Baha making a ruling against the meaning of the Kitab-i-Ahd is possible depending on how it is interpreted. Which possibly renders the will of Abdul-Baha irrelevant to the will of Baha'u'llah (or Kitab-i-Ahd)(the latter seeming to be what the Unitarian Baha'i claim to follow).

But it gets worse than that in my view. We simply do not know the full text of the Kitab-i-Ahd as Abdul-Baha concealed part of it and the Universal House of Justice located in Haifa chose to imitate Abdul-Baha in disallowing its release. Thus it is entirely possible that Mirza Aqa Jan is mentioned in it as well.

 

[Little Dragon]

Fear of punishment, fear of the anger of God if we do evil, are needed to keep people’s feet on the right path. Of course we should love God – but we must fear Him in the sense of a child fearing the righteous anger and chastisement of a parent;

The fear of righteous punishment is not the emotion that moderates my behaviours. I think, if that is all that stops a person from doing terrible things, then there is a real problem there that needs addressing, possibly by mental health professionals. I would call that, personality disorder management via negative reinforcement. The state in which a person restrains themselves for fear of any negative consequences.

Personally I think fear itself is an unhealthy emotion, that ought not be encouraged, Unless you're a conscienceless psychopath with no internal moral compass.

I fear no God but I do not hurt others because in doing so, I would feel their pain and or loss and guilt would gnaw at my psyche. Until I corrected the matter, if that was possible. I hope that people learn to live without fear and know the difference between right and wrong without someone telling them what to think, instead learning how to think, self critically and reflectively, at all times. We must be the merciless watchers of ourselves. IMO there is no God to benchmark what is right or wrong. No writings no opinions either, can really define them in some absolute universal truth. One can only in the here and now, do what instinct and intuition is telling you to do. Should you be lucky enough to possess the capacity for empathy and remorse.

 

[Trailblazer]

Everything up to here is more or less factual given some slight leeway for it being a UHoJ approved translation

What about the original writings in Persian or Arabic that required no translations? Baha'is who understand those languages can read those.

what follows below is your interpretation;

You'll notice that in the section of the kitab-i-Ahd that you quoted there is mention of "We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed..."

Therefore there is room to interpret Baha'u'llah's covenant as appointing 'the greater' (a reference to Mirza Muhammad ʻAli) as being appointed after Abdul-Baha.

'When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root.' The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá]. Thus have We graciously revealed unto you Our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful. Verily God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch [Muḥammad ʻAlí] to be beneath that of the Most Great Branch [ʻAbdu'l-Bahá].

No, there is no room for any other interpretation. The station of the Greater Branch is beneath the station of the Most Great Branch.
The Greater Branch might be greater than some other branch but it is not greater than the Most Great Branch. Most Great means there cannot be any station that is Greater.

So by slightly different interpretation it becomes possible to see majority Baha'i as those deviating from Baha'u'llah's covenant.

Only in your dreams.

But it gets worse than that in my view. We simply do not know the full text of the Kitab-i-Ahd as Abdul-Baha concealed part of it and the Universal House of Justice located in Haifa chose to imitate Abdul-Baha in disallowing its release. Thus it is entirely possible that Mirza Aqa Jan is mentioned in it as well.

Conspiracy theories abound.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Everything up to here is more or less factual given some slight leeway for it being a UHoJ approved translation, what follows below is your interpretation;

You'll notice that in the section of the kitab-i-Ahd that you quoted there is mention of "We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed..."

Therefore there is room to interpret Baha'u'llah's covenant as appointing 'the greater' (a reference to Mirza Muhammad ʻAli) as being appointed after Abdul-Baha.

So by slightly different interpretation it becomes possible to see majority Baha'i as those deviating from Baha'u'llah's covenant.

Also the Kitab-i-Ahd extract you provided does not mention Abdul-Baha as being infallible so the possibility of Abdul-Baha making a ruling against the meaning of the Kitab-i-Ahd is possible depending on how it is interpreted. Which possibly renders the will of Abdul-Baha irrelevant to the will of Baha'u'llah (or Kitab-i-Ahd)(the latter seeming to be what the Unitarian Baha'i claim to follow).

But it gets worse than that in my view. We simply do not know the full text of the Kitab-i-Ahd as Abdul-Baha concealed part of it and the Universal House of Justice located in Haifa chose to imitate Abdul-Baha in disallowing its release. Thus it is entirely possible that Mirza Aqa Jan is mentioned in it as well.

There is no wriggle room at all. It is only a fabrication of those that do not accept the covenant because they want the power / influence / possessions, or for those that have little or no knowledge of the Written Documents and of all the sundry messages given by Baha'u'llah and Abdul' Baha on this topic.

That is all I need to say. It is plain and it is simple.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

One can only in the here and now, do what instinct and intuition is telling you to do. Should you be lucky enough to possess the capacity for empathy and remorse.

But if people do not possess that capacity they commit all kinds of heinous crimes.
Fear of God might prevent some people from committing crimes but it is certainly no panacea.