Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Please excuse the interruption, but HOW do you think that it will ever be discovered IF God really DID do it?
-
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!
Baha'i and Messengers
- Thread starter ppp
- Start date
Weelllllll, if I answered that honestly and in the context of your request, all it would do is drag us down into another one of your, "I have evidence" as opposed to my " but it is not "empirical evidence" debacles.
ALL I will say however, is it would require God to actually DO something that could not be disproven or discounted by conventional means. Notice I said GOD and not some measly human substitute.
Ok?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Good luck getting God to DO something.... I think you and Dotsman should team up. Maybe you two could convince God to prove His existence.
Sorry lady, but your response is completely out of the context of my remark, which was in response to the querie of HOW the Bahais were planning on getting THEIR plan implemented.Good luck getting God to DO something.... I think you and Dotsman should team up. Maybe you two could convince God to prove His existence.
Besides I have NO intentions of trying to get God so DO ANYTHING......YOU know that, I know that.....dunno about Dotsman.
Dunno is OK if that is your choice.
Personally I was not looking to find out, it basically fell in my lap as a married a wonderful woman with a very spiritual heart.
It was 4 years before the day came when I was put in a place to make a choice.
Regards Tony
No we don’t necessarily. In point of fact, this kind of question — as to what sense can be made of the fact that all of the different Teachers who have come spoke differently about themselves, with Jesus Christ and Lord Krishna (for instance) saying “I am God.”, Muhammad and Moses proclaiming themselves to be Messengers of God, and The Buddha claiming to be a man Awakened to Truth — was asked of Bahá’u’lláh.
In the same text that our friend @TransmutingSoul quotes from, but in a later passage, He replies with this:
“By virtue of this station they have claimed for themselves the Voice of Divinity and the like, whilst by virtue of their station of Messengership, they have declared themselves the Messengers of God. In every instance they have voiced an utterance that would conform to the requirements of the occasion, and have ascribed all these declarations to Themselves, declarations ranging from the realm of Divine Revelation to the realm of creation, and from the domain of Divinity even unto the domain of earthly existence. Thus it is that whatsoever be their utterance, whether it pertain to the realm of Divinity, Lordship, Prophethood, Messengership, Guardianship, Apostleship, or Servitude, all is true, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Therefore these sayings which We have quoted in support of Our argument must be attentively considered, that the divergent utterances of the Manifestations of the Unseen and Day Springs of Holiness may cease to agitate the soul and perplex the mind.”
He was originally speaking to the claims among the Abrahamic religions about Abraham and Moses, Jesus Christ and The Prophet Muhammad, but the general idea of what He’s essentially saying would apply just as well to Zarathustra, Lord Krishna, and Shakyamuni Buddha. No matter what they’ve claimed of themselves — whether to be God Himself, a Prophet, a Servant of God, or an Enlightened Man — it is the truth.
Last edited:
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
No, it's not that one. It is this one...
The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh
Seven letters written by Shoghi Effendi and addressed to the Bahá’ís of the United States and the West, first collected in 1938, comprising “The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh”, “The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh: Further Considerations”, “The Goal of a New World Order”, “The Golden Age of the Cause of Bahá’u’lláh”, “America and the Most Great Peace”, “The Dispensation of Bahá’u’lláh”, and “The Unfoldment of World Civilization”.
I did a word search and several times "new world order" came up...Seven letters written by Shoghi Effendi and addressed to the Bahá’ís of the United States and the West, first collected in 1938, comprising “The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh”, “The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh: Further Considerations”, “The Goal of a New World Order”, “The Golden Age of the Cause of Bahá’u’lláh”, “America and the Most Great Peace”, “The Dispensation of Bahá’u’lláh”, and “The Unfoldment of World Civilization”.
The central, the underlying aim which animates it is the establishment of the New World Order as adumbrated by Bahá’u’lláh. The methods it employs, the standard it inculcates, incline it to neither East nor West, neither Jew nor Gentile, neither rich nor poor, neither white nor colored. Its watchword is the unification of the human race; its standard the “Most Great Peace”; its consummation the advent of that golden millennium—the Day when the kingdoms of this world shall have become the Kingdom of God Himself, the Kingdom of Bahá’u’lláh.
But I messed up. You said, "One world order". Let me check that one. This is close...
“That which the Lord hath ordained as the sovereign remedy and mightiest instrument for the healing of all the world is the union of all its peoples in one universal Cause, one common Faith. This can in no wise be achieved except through the power of a skilled, an all-powerful and inspired Physician. This, verily, is the truth, and all else naught but error… Consider these days in which the Ancient Beauty, He Who is the Most Great Name, hath been sent down to regenerate and unify mankind. Behold how with drawn swords they rose against Him, and committed that which caused the Faithful Spirit to tremble. And whenever We said unto them: ‘Lo, the World Reformer is come,’ they made reply: ‘He, in truth, is one of the stirrers of mischief.’” “It beseemeth all men in this Day,” He, in another Tablet, asserts, “to take firm hold on the Most Great Name, and to establish the unity of all mankind. There is no place to flee to, no refuge that any one can seek, except Him.”
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Just with the people in the Hebrew Bible, the Jews don't make them "manifestations". Not even Moses. Then the NT doesn't make them manifestations. I don't know, does the Quran? Especially Abraham and Moses? But the Baha'i Faith does make them manifestations. Yet, Baha'is don't necessarily believe the stories about them in the Bible are historically true and accurate. But the one I question the most is Adam. Why would he be a manifestation? If Baha'is believe the creation story is metaphorical why can't Adam be metaphorical too? Yet he gets a cycle named after him.
Well, your first few statements are absolutely true, CG. In general, because our Faith is an Abrahamic one, we do believe in the individuals mentioned. When you talk about the idea that Bahá’ís have of the Manifestations of the Names and Attributes of God, it’s important to understand from where the concept originates and what it’s connected to. As with everything else, I’m gonna give you my short explanation and link to an article that goes more in-depth.
The concept of the Manifestation of God in the Bahá’í Faith…it’s a paradox, no doubt. It’s sourced in Islamic theology and philosophy, Biblical concepts as well as the philosophical thought of Aristotle and the Neoplatonist philosopher Plotinus.
The Concept of Manifestation in the Bahá'í Writings
As for Adam specifically, to a certain extent, Adam is taught as either a metaphorical representation for either humanity as a whole (in the context of the Hebrew Bible) or the First Believer in God, or The First Manifestation in the last cycle…uhhhh, there are a couple of different ideas and interpretations of who He was and how the story of creation told in the Bible went down.
Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 122-126
Last edited:
ppp
Well-Known Member
This is not an epistemology. . Epistemology is a methodology for determining whether what you claim to know is true or not true. What you have written in your sections on epistemology and ontology is simply what you believe.
Maybe one day. I am focused on the ugartic texts at the moment and the Canaanite religion before the Hebrews spun off of it.
I don't think you are understanding me. Let me rephrase.
If the person does not have a rational basis to conclude that their idea is correct, then the person has no rational justification to hold that the are correct. Even if, coincidentally, the idea is true.
If I conceive of an alien with a fluorine based biology today, and one happens to arrive next week, my conception has nothing to do with the reality. I am not "right" in any meaningful sense.
Are you sure you agree? Because what I am saying is that I have seen no indication from believers or text, that any such sound logical structures have been employed to get one from reality to either messengers or a god.
I see what you are saying, and I will assume that those I have heard say otherwise were either misinformed, or misspoke.
But of course saying that Jesus is God directly conflicts with Islam. And that he was God's only begotten son directly conflicts with Judaism. And possibly with your own religion - was B of a different nature nature from Jesus in your beliefs?
That makes me wince. What about people who are already Baha'i? Gay kids grow to adulthood in your faith. Are they encouraged to engage in normal adult relations with the people to whom they are attracted?
Did Baha'i support marriage equality prior to it passing? Do they now? Do they consider marriage between gay people to be actual marriages? Are those marriages as moral as straight marriages? When two husbands go to pound town are they acting morally?
You don't need to answer these if you want to move on. But if any of the answers are no, that is social discrimination.
Brian2
Veteran Member
That might depend on the sort of evidence you accept.
Personally I would say that there is zero evidence that the universe came into existence any other way.
Brian2
Veteran Member
How is the Baha'i teaching any better because of that?
Brian2
Veteran Member
I think it is the fear of God which is the beginning of wisdom. Once you say God is wrong then you are heading down the path of ignorance.
Because it is the fulfilment of that which you were promised in the Bible.
Say, Lo! The Father is come, and that which ye were promised in the Kingdom is fulfilled! This is the Word which the Son concealed, when to those around Him He said: ‘Ye cannot bear it now.’ And when the appointed time was fulfilled and the Hour had struck, the Word shone forth above the horizon of the Will of God. Beware, O followers of the Son, that ye cast it not behind your backs. Take ye fast hold of it. Better is this for you than all that ye possess. (Baha’u’llah)
Brian2
Veteran Member
That is right. Baha'u'llah claims to be the Father (that is, he claims to be God) while denying that the Son is God.
I would say that the teaching about the Trinity is what Jesus meant when He said they could not bear it at that particular time.
It is interesting that Baha'u'llah claimed to be the Father but not be the Father at the same time.
Can you explain that?
Baha’u’llah said about Jesus: He it is Who purified the world. Blessed is the man who, with a face beaming with light, hath turned towards Him.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Baha'u'llah said a lot of things.
So how can Baha'u'llah be the Father (God) but not God at the same time?
Another question: How can Baha'u'llah be the Glory of God when God said that He would not give His glory to anybody else?
Jesus said He would return in the role of the Father. Baha’u’llah is not God but Christ returned as the Father.
Matthew 16:27
For the Son of man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he will give to every man the reward of his works.
Perhaps I didn’t understand the exact question being asked. My apologies.
How do we establish what we can know as far as our religion is concerned?
Well, there are four primary ways that we can do this. To speak briefly:
1. Sense Perception
2. Reason
3. Religious Tradition
4. Inspiration
Each one of these, for us, is reliable but not entirely perfect.
If you’re asking me for something a bit more detailed, you can read the following paper.
https://bahai-library.com/pdf/t/terry_abdulbaha_epistemology.pdf
As to an ontology fleshed out from the Bahá’í Writings, there was a study of it done by Ian Kluge:
https://bahaiphilosophy.com/wp-cont...AI-ONTOLOGY-AN-INITIAL-RECONNAISSANCE1361.pdf
I see. As a person who’s rather fond of ancient history and religion, I’d like to know what you think about the Ugartic texts. I’ve not perused them, myself, but I am curious.
I see. Though, I would disagree with the assertion that you’re making on account of the fact that your logic here is off.
You are right in, quite honestly, the only way that counts. Your fundamental claim accords with fact or reality.
If a person makes a claim of something, yet they cannot justify said claim, then the most that can honestly be said is something along the lines of
“Your claim may accord with the facts or they may not, as such I cannot reject it outright. However, because you cannot justify your claim, I have no reason to accept it.”
Ah, okay. I understand.
I haven’t seen it either in this thread, at least in the way that you require.
They’re not necessarily misinformed. It’s the same teaching, just offered from different perspectives.
In some sense (that whole “station of pure abstraction and essential unity” thing I spoke of earlier), Jesus (as all the other Manifestations) is Divine. Yet, in another sense (“the station of distinction”), He is not. Broadly speaking, God in His most Exalted Essence does not incarnate.
And no, Bahá’u’lláh and Jesus are both Manifestations of God.
I see. I can only ask what relevance does a moral and ethical issue have when discussing metaphysics?
Last edited:
Baha'u'llah has explained this in great detail and it is applicable to all the Messengers including Jesus, who was also an 'Annointed One' Christ is not a surname, it is the given station of the Messenger. They one and all are born of the flesh, but in reality, they are already annointed of the Holy Spirit.
They appear to us in that two fold station. On one hand we see a man like others, on the other they are the Annointed 'Self of God' amongst us, they are all we can know and see of God. All other thoughts as to what God is, is but our own vain imaginings.
So the Son is a station, the Father is a station bestowed by God, it is but the same Holy Spirit.
That is why Jesus offered the flesh amounts to nothing and that it is the Spirit that is life, that is why when Jesus asked the Disciples as to who he was, he confirmed Peter's answer that he was 'Christ', thus confirming he was Annointed by God in the Station of the Holy Spirit, the 'Self of God' amongst us.
They are the Word of God, the Attributes made flesh, not God in Essence who forever remains exalted over all creation, access to the knowledge of God is barred.
Now we can consider that Jesus when he is talking about the the Father is greater than I, Jesus is really talking about his own Essence and his promise to return as the Father, not as the Son, but as the Father, the same Holy Spirit. Remember Jesus said he had to go away so the Father could come, that the Father would have a new Name, a name we would only accept, if we accepted the Father. Jesus would bring a new Jerusalem, a new Law sent out from Zion all as the Father, the Kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven.
There is so much to consider, so much to unravel, when God has given us all Truth.
Regards Tony
Last edited: