Anti-monotheism as a religion

[LuisDantas]

I would assume that parrsurrey is referring to Mira Ghulam Ahmad, was the one who was missed.

So did I. But once he extended the analysis to Judaism and Christianity, Muhammad became another possibility (but not for Muslims, obviously).

Which is interesting, as no one was to come after Muhammad, according to parrsurry and because of that, the Bab and Baha'u'llah could not be considered.

Regards Tony

Well, that is a standard understanding among Muslims. I understand that the Qur'an is fairly clear on that matter. For that reason, and perhaps for little else, the Bahai Faith is not officially a part of Islaam.

But it is a bit more complicated than that. No one was to come as a prophet. And even then there are exceptions - the Mahdi and perhaps Jesus' return.

Although of course that is difficult to fully interpret in any case. There was and there would be no shortage of people after Muhammad. Some of those people would be religious authorities even if only very informally. The objection (or prophecy, if you prefer) only applies to prophets, far as I know... and it is not like we can objectively decide who qualifies as a prophet.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So did I. But once he extended the analysis to Judaism and Christianity, Muhammad became another possibility (but not for Muslims, obviously).

Well, that is a standard understanding among Muslims. I understand that the Qur'an is fairly clear on that matter. For that reason, and perhaps for little else, the Bahai Faith is not officially a part of Islaam.

But it is a bit more complicated than that. No one was to come as a prophet. And even then there are exceptions - the Mahdi and perhaps Jesus' return.

Although of course that is difficult to fully interpret in any case. There was and there would be no shortage of people after Muhammad. Some of those people would be religious authorities even if only very informally. The objection (or prophecy, if you prefer) only applies to prophets, far as I know... and it is not like we can objectively decide who qualifies as a prophet.

Ok, thanks, then parrsurry will clarify.

The way I see this is that in reality no more Prophets did come, in the sense that the message given was further preparation for the 'Day of God'. It is much more than that, but that is another story.

This is the 'Day of God', the fulfillment no less. Thus Muhammad was the 'Seal of the Prophets', the end of Prophecy telling us of this 'Day of God'. This to me, is such a logical explanation and fits in to the Quran and Traditional predictions.

Regards Tony

 

[paarsurrey]

You mean, by failing to acknowledge Muhammad as a legitimate Prophet?

If I understood one correctly.
Judaism people failed three times, Pauline Christianity people failed two times and other Muslims once.

Regards

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If I understood one correctly.
Judaism people failed three times, Pauline Christianity people failed two times and other Muslims once.

Regards

Are you confirming with that reply, this;

Judaisim failed to accept Christ, Muhammad and Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Christianity failed to accept Muhammad and Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Muslims failed to accept Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Regards Tony

 

[paarsurrey]

I would assume that parrsurry is referring to Mira Ghulam Ahmad, was the one who was missed. Which is interesting, as no one was to come after Muhammad, according to parrsurry and because of that, the Bab and Baha'u'llah could not be considered.

Regards Tony

Please read my post #134 again.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Are you confirming with that reply, this;

Judaisim failed to accept Christ, Muhammad and Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Christianity failed to accept Muhammad and Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Muslims failed to accept Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Regards Tony

Yes, please.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

So did I. But once he extended the analysis to Judaism and Christianity, Muhammad became another possibility (but not for Muslims, obviously).

Well, that is a standard understanding among Muslims. I understand that the Qur'an is fairly clear on that matter. For that reason, and perhaps for little else, the Bahai Faith is not officially a part of Islaam.

But it is a bit more complicated than that. No one was to come as a prophet. And even then there are exceptions - the Mahdi and perhaps Jesus' return.

Although of course that is difficult to fully interpret in any case. There was and there would be no shortage of people after Muhammad. Some of those people would be religious authorities even if only very informally. The objection (or prophecy, if you prefer) only applies to prophets, far as I know... and it is not like we can objectively decide who qualifies as a prophet.

Please read my post #134 again.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Ok, thanks, then parrsurry will clarify.

The way I see this is that in reality no more Prophets did come, in the sense that the message given was further preparation for the 'Day of God'. It is much more than that, but that is another story.

This is the 'Day of God', the fulfillment no less. Thus Muhammad was the 'Seal of the Prophets', the end of Prophecy telling us of this 'Day of God'. This to me, is such a logical explanation and fits in to the Quran and Traditional predictions.

Regards Tony

Please read my post #134 again.
Regards

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, please.
Regards

The Bab and Baha'u'llah were Muslims of the Shia line.

Regards Tony

 

[LuisDantas]

Thanks for the clarifications, @paarsurrey

I do not agree with what you say. But it is always a good thing to have a clear understanding of what is said.

Now I want to try and understand what the implications might be.

It is obvious that, while "Messenger of God" may be understood in many different ways and some of those would apply to literal billions of people, both the Bahai Faith and Muslims use very specific, very restrictive meanings for that expression. The Bahai Faith seems to acknowledge perhaps a dozen Messengers in all, although I am really not sure about the specific numbers. It might be a few more or many more, perhaps even thousands. Meanwhile, Ahmadiyya Islaam and Islaam in general acknowledge just about a half dozen people as true Messengers of God.

What does that mean, though? Probably not that there is no way whatsoever for the other billions of people to have some idea of what God wants. Clearly, both Bahais and Muslims believe that such an understanding of God's will is definitely possible and worth pursuing. Even though only a small percentage of them will ever have met such a Messenger in person, they are expected to learn the Message nonetheless.

Do you agree that the above is true according to Islaam, @paarsurrey ?

And is the above true according to the Bahai Faith as you understand it, @Jim ? @adrian009 ? @Tony Bristow-Stagg ?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Thanks for the clarifications, @paarsurrey

I do not agree with what you say. But it is always a good thing to have a clear understanding of what is said.

Now I want to try and understand what the implications might be.

It is obvious that, while "Messenger of God" may be understood in many different ways and some of those would apply to literal billions of people, both the Bahai Faith and Muslims use very specific, very restrictive meanings for that expression. The Bahai Faith seems to acknowledge perhaps a dozen Messengers in all, although I am really not sure about the specific numbers. It might be a few more or many more, perhaps even thousands. Meanwhile, Ahmadiyya Islaam and Islaam in general acknowledge just about a half dozen people as true Messengers of God.

What does that mean, though? Probably not that there is no way whatsoever for the other billions of people to have some idea of what God wants. Clearly, both Bahais and Muslims believe that such an understanding of God's will is definitely possible and worth pursuing. Even though only a small percentage of them will ever have met such a Messenger in person, they are expected to learn the Message nonetheless.

Do you agree that the above is true according to Islaam, @paarsurrey ?

And is the above true according to the Bahai Faith as you understand it, @Jim ? @adrian009 ? @Tony Bristow-Stagg ?

Thank you LuisDantas - The implications are enormous in my opinion;

Are you confirming with that reply, this;

Judaisim failed to accept Christ, Muhammad and Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Christianity failed to accept Muhammad and Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Muslims failed to accept Mira Ghulam Ahmad?

Regards Tony

Yes, please.
Regards

With a confirmation to the question asked, there is no reason that Baha'u'llah can be rejected off hand.

As to your question about the Number of Messengers;

"God hath raised up Prophets and revealed Books as numerous as the creatures of the world, and will continue to do so to everlasting." – The Bab, Selections From the Writings of the Bab, p. 125.

"Unto the cities of all nations He hath sent His Messengers, Whom He hath commissioned to announce unto men tidings of the Paradise of His good pleasure, and to draw them nigh unto the Haven of abiding security, the Seat of eternal holiness and transcendent glory." – Baha’u’llah, Gleanings From the Writings of Baha’u’llah, p. 145.

I see this a great challenge. There appears to be an overriding Message given and from that Message, many are inspired to pass it on in many ways. To me it is easy to conclude this is why we can see many paths to God, or many Gods.

Regards Tony

 

[Jim]

The Bahai Faith seems to acknowledge perhaps a dozen Messengers in all, although I am really not sure about the specific numbers. It might be a few more or many more, perhaps even thousands. Meanwhile, Ahmadiyya Islaam and Islaam in general acknowledge just about a half dozen people as true Messengers of God.

What does that mean, though? Probably not that there is no way whatsoever for the other billions of people to have some idea of what God wants. Clearly, both Bahais and Muslims believe that such an understanding of God's will is definitely possible and worth pursuing. Even though only a small percentage of them will ever have met such a Messenger in person, they are expected to learn the Message nonetheless. ... And is the above true according to the Bahai Faith as you understand it, @Jim ?

I wouldn’t confine it to those terms. For me, it’s about our possibilities in life, individually and collectively, what fun we can have and what good we can do, for ourselves and for all of us, all people all around the world. That’s all part of human nature. I think that the possibilities are the same for all of us, across all lines between all categories, including categories defined by ideology.

I see the different ways of thinking, in different religions and outside of them, as being like flat map projections of the earth’s surface. Each one can be used for navigation, if that’s what you’re trying to do and if you’ve learned to use it that way. Each one is easier to use than others, for some purposes. None of them is the best one for all purposes. I think of all the different ways of thinking in the same way, as projections of our possibilities into our minds.

I also think of it as being like rectangular and polar coordinates. Some problems are easier to solve in polar coordinates, and some are easier to solve in rectangular coordinates, but any problem that can be solved with one system can be solved with the other.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Thanks for the clarifications, @paarsurrey

I do not agree with what you say. But it is always a good thing to have a clear understanding of what is said.

Now I want to try and understand what the implications might be.

Hi @LuisDantas

Its hard to drop in on this thread and explain the last few thousand years of religious history leading up to this moment. To complicate matters we speak different languages. I speak the language of an Abrahamic paradigm. I'm also slowly learning the language of a Dharmic paradigm which is the way you tend to think. With these limitations in mind lets consider some key issues.

It is obvious that, while "Messenger of God" may be understood in many different ways and some of those would apply to literal billions of people, both the Bahai Faith and Muslims use very specific, very restrictive meanings for that expression. The Bahai Faith seems to acknowledge perhaps a dozen Messengers in all, although I am really not sure about the specific numbers. It might be a few more or many more, perhaps even thousands. Meanwhile, Ahmadiyya Islaam and Islaam in general acknowledge just about a half dozen people as true Messengers of God.

The Baha'i Faith uses the phrase 'Manifestation of God' in relation to nine known religious revelations:

The nine religions to which you have referred include both the Bábí and the Bahá'í Dispensations, Bahá'u'lláh being the ninth Prophet in the series. The other Prophets included are Zoroaster, Krishna, Moses, the Christ, Muhammad, Buddha, the Prophet of the Sabaeans Whose name is unrecorded

Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster and Related Subjects

Manifestations of God | What Bahá’ís Believe

What does that mean, though? Probably not that there is no way whatsoever for the other billions of people to have some idea of what God wants. Clearly, both Bahais and Muslims believe that such an understanding of God's will is definitely possible and worth pursuing. Even though only a small percentage of them will ever have met such a Messenger in person, they are expected to learn the Message nonetheless.

Each of these Great Beings revealed both eternal truth (Dharma) and transient laws and principles that were only applicable to the age for which they were revealed. We all have some capacity to access some of these truths or spiritual principles but not nearly to the same degree as the Manifestations. That's why we need these Manifestations individually and collectively. Otherwise we can lose our way. So as humans we are expected to recognise the Manifestations, including the most recent One and follow their Teachings.

The implications are enormous as you have quite rightly highlighted.

Do you agree that the above is true according to Islaam, @paarsurrey ?

And is the above true according to the Bahai Faith as you understand it, @Jim ? @adrian009 ? @Tony Bristow-Stagg ?

Hope that helps.

 

[Marcion]

It is obvious that, while "Messenger of God" may be understood in many different ways and some of those would apply to literal billions of people, both the Bahai Faith and Muslims use very specific, very restrictive meanings for that expression. The Bahai Faith seems to acknowledge perhaps a dozen Messengers in all, although I am really not sure about the specific numbers. It might be a few more or many more, perhaps even thousands. Meanwhile, Ahmadiyya Islaam and Islaam in general acknowledge just about a half dozen people as true Messengers of God.

What does that mean, though? Probably not that there is no way whatsoever for the other billions of people to have some idea of what God wants. Clearly, both Bahais and Muslims believe that such an understanding of God's will is definitely possible and worth pursuing. Even though only a small percentage of them will ever have met such a Messenger in person, they are expected to learn the Message nonetheless.

Could it be true that the monotheistic faiths describe their so-called 'messengers', 'prophets' and 'sons of God' mostly in relation to their perceived harmony with the "Will of God"?

 

[LuisDantas]

Could it be true that the monotheistic faiths describe their so-called 'messengers', 'prophets' and 'sons of God' mostly in relation to their perceived harmony with the "Will of God"?

So it would seem.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Could it be true that the monotheistic faiths describe their so-called 'messengers', 'prophets' and 'sons of God' mostly in relation to their perceived harmony with the "Will of God"?

I see them as the 'Will of God'. If we use the Sun anology, then God is the Sun and the light and heat giving Rays are the Messengers and Prophets. It is not possible for the Sun to decend to the earth, so God gives us a pure person in each age, to give the life giving teachings, the rays of the Sun.

As a Baha'i, I see all Mesengers and Prophets are the Rays from the One Sun.

Regards Tony

 

[paarsurrey]

Thanks for the clarifications, @paarsurrey

I do not agree with what you say. But it is always a good thing to have a clear understanding of what is said.

Now I want to try and understand what the implications might be.

It is obvious that, while "Messenger of God" may be understood in many different ways and some of those would apply to literal billions of people, both the Bahai Faith and Muslims use very specific, very restrictive meanings for that expression. The Bahai Faith seems to acknowledge perhaps a dozen Messengers in all, although I am really not sure about the specific numbers. It might be a few more or many more, perhaps even thousands. Meanwhile, Ahmadiyya Islaam and Islaam in general acknowledge just about a half dozen people as true Messengers of God.

What does that mean, though? Probably not that there is no way whatsoever for the other billions of people to have some idea of what God wants. Clearly, both Bahais and Muslims believe that such an understanding of God's will is definitely possible and worth pursuing. Even though only a small percentage of them will ever have met such a Messenger in person, they are expected to learn the Message nonetheless.

Do you agree that the above is true according to Islaam, @paarsurrey ?

And is the above true according to the Bahai Faith as you understand it, @Jim ? @adrian009 ? @Tony Bristow-Stagg ?

Further to my post #134 , I have to add following principled points :

1. Irrespective of the objections of the relative religions, we have to believe in the Truth of Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, Socrates, as a principal article of our faith, if we deny their being prophets/messengers of G-d, we cannot be Muslims.*1
2. Denial of one prophet/messenger of G-d is denial of all the prophets/messengers of G-d as they are all sent by G-d.And denial of one of them is denial of G-d who has sent them.*2
3. Prophets/messengers have been sent to all the peoples of the World from themselves as Warners and as Guides.*3
4. Quran mention that only some prophets/messengers of G-d has been mentioned in it, and there are others that have not been mentioned.*4
5. It is a wrong notion that only prophets/messengers of G-d from the off-spring of Abraham has been mentioned in Quran. Luqman and Zul-Qurnain (Cyrus the Great of Persia, a Zoroastrian) are two examples.

Regards
_______________
*1
[2:5]
And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and that which was revealed before thee, and they have firm faith in what is yet to come.
[2:6]
It is they who follow the guidance of their Lord and it is they who shall prosper.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 2: Al-Baqarah
*2
*[11:60]
And these were ‘Ad. They denied the Signs of their Lord and disobeyed His Messengers and followed the bidding of every haughty enemy of truth.
[11:61]
And a curse was made to follow them in this world, and on the Day of Resurrection. Behold! the tribe of ‘Ad behaved ungratefully to their Lord. Behold! cursed are ‘Ad, the people of Hud!
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 11: Hud
[2:286]
This Messenger of Ours believes in that which has been revealed to him from his Lord, and so do the believers: all of them believe in Allah, and in His angels, and in His Books, and in His Messengers, saying, ‘We make no distinction between any of His Messengers;’ and they say, ‘We hear, and we obey. We implore Thy forgiveness, O our Lord, and to Thee is the returning.’
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 2: Al-Baqarah
*3
[13:8]
And those who disbelieve say, ‘Wherefore has not a Sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ Thou art, surely, a Warner. And there is a Guide for every people.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 13: Al-Ra`d
*4
[40:79]
And We did send Messengers before thee; of them are some whom We have mentioned to thee, and of them there are some whom We have not mentioned to thee; and it is not possible for any Messenger to bring a Sign except by the leave of Allah. But when Allah’s decree came, the matter was decided with truth, and then there perished those who uttered falsehoods.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 40: Al-Mu'min

 

[LuisDantas]

That is a pretty tall order, @paarsurrey . It is a surprise to learn that Ahmadiyyas entertain such notions.

I still disagree, although I sympathise with the obvious good intentions.

Unfortunately, there are all manners of practical reasons why those intentions can't really materialize far as I can see, and why it would not be very constructive to try quite so hard.

 

[paarsurrey]

That is a pretty tall order, @paarsurrey . It is a surprise to learn that Ahmadiyyas entertain such notions.

I still disagree, although I sympathise with the obvious good intentions.

Unfortunately, there are all manners of practical reasons why those intentions can't really materialize far as I can see, and why it would not be very constructive to try quite so hard.

And as most of the time, I disagree with one.
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

And as most of the time, I disagree with one.
Regards

We do not disagree all that often.

It just turns out that we disagree entirely regarding certain things.