-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Answered Prayers
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
InChrist
Free4ever
Yes, I think you are correct. The NT warns of false gospels and teachings; one big one over the last few decades has been the “prosperity” or “name it and claim it” (unbiblical) gospel pushed by a number of televangelists.
I am aware of the small Covernant Breaker groups. This in itself renders them with no right to use the name. I have already said the handful that broke away will come to naught.
It only takes one person for a website. No Covernant Breaker will succeed in growing a Faith called Baha'i, nor will they succeed if they use other adjectives or Nouns with Baha'i, like orthodox or free. Read the Mason Reamy section of your link to see what will happen to those that try.
As an example how many people are behind this website?
Normanton Baha'i
normantonbahai.com
Regards Tony
to be aware of other Baha'i groups and simultaneously to deny other Baha'i groups is to mislead people in my view.
Shame on you Tony.
All that is testimony to is how little effect the majority Baha'i of Normanton are having in my view Tony.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
You think that I have to "trust" the rubber duck when I explain my problem to it?
The power of the placebo is the delusion btw.
???
Sure.
Doesn't matter to the underlying facts though.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
I do too.
Well, if prayer doesn’t help you, I’m sure you have another way. Maybe just your own capacity.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Ironically, the evidence suggests otherwise.
Not for me
I think many people misunderstand those to points. Certainly there are abuses to those two points. In Deut 28:1-14, He did enumerate a prosperity based on God. Would that have changed with the Gospel?
Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
That is speculation. I am well aware of that and most Baha'is I know are aware of that. I like Wikipedia but it is not perfect.
To go through the divisions that came about, Abdu'l-Baha's half brother Muhammad Ali tried in vain to get a significant following in blatantly trying to usurp the clear designation in Baha'u'llah's will that Abdu'l-Baha was to succeed Him. As far as I know, the Covenant-Breakers from that attempt don't even exist at all today. Then Abdu'l-Baha had a Will and Testament designating Shoghi Effendi as His successor. There is a group of people called Free Baha'is that still exist today that violated that. For one thing they hired someone that claimed the Will and Testament is a forgery. In my opinion that falls apart when you look at all the evidence, but I won't go into that at this time. There is a motive for some of these people that they don't like the Administrative Order advocated in this Will and carried out by Shoghi Effendi. The third break has nothing to go for it. The Guardian was clearly supposed to be passed on to a descendent or relative of each Guardian, and the man that violated that, Mason Remey and claimed to be the next Guardian was not related to Shoghi Effendi, and initially he signed a statement saying that there was no Guardian designated by Shoghi Effendi. This has since been sub-divided into various claimants to be the third Guardian. There has been no unified group of people under one Guardian since Remey died.
All in all, the group of Covenant-Breakers that didn't recognize Shoghi Effendi as the Guardian has the most plausible argument going for them, but their group is still small. Just the observation of the wonderful job Shoghi Effendi did puts that whole thing into doubt, and there are other arguments in favor of his appointment being valid.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
To try to fool people into thinking that those Covenant-breakers are actually 'Baha'i groups' is to mislead people in my view.
Shame on you Daniel.
Since my claim is that to be a Baha'i group simply means to profess allegiance to Baha'u'llah it is not misleading at all Trailblazer.
That is the context in which @Stevicus understood it, your claims about whether or not they are *true Baha'i* is irrelevant to the fact that they are Baha'i whether true or otherwise in my view.
As for claiming that I try to mislead people the irony is not lost on me at all in my opinion.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
One who professes allegiance to Baha'u'llah believes and follows what He wrote regarding the succession of authority.
Sounds like a no true Scotsman approach to me.
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
Do y’all seriously not recognize the “No True Scotsman Fallacy” here?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
There is no fallacy since those so-called Baha'is are not Baha'is. They are fakes.
No true Scotsman arguments arise when someone is trying to defend their ingroup from criticism (ingroup bias) by excluding those members who don't agree with the ingroup. In other words, instead of accepting that some members may think or act in disagreeable ways, one dismisses those members as fakes. Jun 5, 2023
No True Scotsman Fallacy | Definition & Examples - Scribbr
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
There is no fallacy since those so-called Baha'is are not Baha'is. They are fakes.
No true Scotsman arguments arise when someone is trying to defend their ingroup from criticism (ingroup bias) by excluding those members who don't agree with the ingroup. In other words, instead of accepting that some members may think or act in disagreeable ways, one dismisses those members as fakes. Jun 5, 2023
No True Scotsman Fallacy | Definition & Examples - Scribbr
That's precisely what you are doing as I see it. You are trying to defend your ingroup (Baha'i) from the criticism of being divided, you are dismissing those Baha'i members who disagree with the (haifa based) universal house of justice as fakes.
It could have easily been given as a textbook example of the fallacy in my view.