The flaw... No we can't see the messengers. We can read about them.
I do not consider that a flaw because we can see them through what is written about them.
So you can tell that the messengers are not conmen.
Yes, I can tell which ones are conmen and which ones are not.
So here's some of the messengers accepted by the Baha'i Faith as being true. So did you ever look at these messengers. Did you look at what they did and judged them to be true messengers?
How could I ever know what they did? There is really no way to verify what was written about the older Messengers.
I accepted the Messengers recognized by the Baha’i Faith because I adhere to the Covenant of Baha’u’llah.
Apparently not. Again, you don't "care"? Because you don't live in the past? So how can you say for others to "investigate the truth", but for yourself you say you accept these messengers from the past.
I do not have to “look” at all the Messengers of the past. The past is gone. I do not care what they did because it is ancient history. I believe what Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha wrote about these Messengers. That is all I need to know.
You say you looked at what they did and judged them to be true. But, I guess not.
I never said I looked at what the Messengers of the past did.
All you did is accept what the Baha'i Faith says about them.
Yes, that is what I did because I believe that Baha’u’llah is infallible and that Abdu’l-Baha is the centre of the Covenant so whatever he said is the very truth.
But, you reject what the religions say about their own people. You reject what Hindus believe about Krishna. And you reject what the Jews say about Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses.
I reject some but not all of what they say about them.
Baha'is can say they accept all the other major religions are true all they want, but then when they say what they believe to be true about the other religions, it becomes apparent that they don't really believe in the other religions.
We believe they were established by Messengers of God but then after that they were corrupted by men. So no, we do not believe in the parts of the older religions that have been corrupted.
“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when 172 the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.” Gleanings, pp. 171-172
So any Baha'i can do exactly what you have chosen to do... not even care about studying, learning and understanding enough about the other religions to see if the Baha'i Faith is being honest in what they say about them.
I do not “check” to see if the Baha'i Faith is being honest in what they say about older religions because I believe that Baha’u’llah is infallible and whatever Abdu’l-Baha wrote is true.
I do not care about the older religions because they are not relevant to the present age we live in. As such I consider it a waste of time to talk about older religions unless one likes to study history. As Baha’u’llah wrote, dwelling on stories that are past is a grave mistake and a grievous transgression:
“…… To this testify the records of the sacred books. Were the details to be mentioned, this epistle would swell into a book. Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past. God is Our witness that what We even now mention is due solely to Our tender affection for thee, that haply the poor of the earth may attain the shores of the sea of wealth, the ignorant be led unto the ocean of divine knowledge, and they that thirst for understanding partake of the Salsabíl of divine wisdom. Otherwise, this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.”
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63
That's a flaw in delivery and maybe even part of a con job... to say you "believe" when you don't.
I believe in Baha'u'llah and all the Messengers of the past that are recognized by the Baha’i Faith but I don’t believe in the parts of the religions of the past that have been corrupted by man.
What Baha'is say they believe about the other religions becomes meaningless, because Baha'is only believe in their own made up version of who these messengers were.
Nothing that the Baha’i Faith says about older religions is “made up.” It came from God. By contrast, practically everything the other religions believe is made up by men.
But they reject what the religions themselves say about these people. Baha'is don't believe the Krishna story or the Bible stories of Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses. So what do Baha'is say are the "true" stories about these people? I already posted one early about Noah and it still said he was 950 years old and said nothing of the flood. Where did Baha'u'llah get this?
References to Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses are in
The Kitáb-i-Íqán
Baha’u’llah got His knowledge from God.
“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57
Krishna is too remote in history to know anything about. That is one reason why Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha did not write about Hinduism. The other reason is that it is not relevant to this age.
Are any ancient Hindu scriptures available in their original form?
No not a single hindu scripture is available in its original form because hindus scriptures are very old. No one can find its original written date. In the ancient times, people used to write on leaf in india but they were easily destructible so they were repeated time to time to save the content. Indian history dates back to thousands of years back as now modern days archeologist found many lord shiva statues of stone age. Scientist found out that Ram setu which linked India to Sri lanka is man made as described Ramayan but you cannot find the original writing of ramayan which was possibly destroyed. Many hindus pandulipi is in Germany nowadys as they were taken by them in the pursue of supernatural power and knowledge. Atomic bomb was actually designed by a German scientist based on those pandu lipi. So nowadays no one knows that are there any original scriptures or not. Possibly not.!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sanskrit manuscripts of the Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas are available. There is of course no way to know if these manuscripts are original or not. There is no manuscript of the Vedic Samhitas because they were not written down till a few centuries ago.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No. In fact, there are no Hindu scriptures.
Ideas have been passed on since ages via word of mouth and at a later time (maybe after thousands of years) they were written down. The Hindu scriptures have a huge amount of priestly superstitions in them and the reader has to filter them through his own intelligence.
Are any ancient Hindu scriptures available in their original form? - Quora
While looking through my Word documents I stumbled upon what Abdu’l-Baha said about the older religions. In short, the decline of religion is the cause of the many problems we see in the world today.
“Alas! that humanity is completely submerged in imitations and unrealities notwithstanding the truth of divine religion has ever remained the same. Superstitions have obscured the fundamental reality, the world is darkened and the light of religion is not apparent. This darkness is conducive to differences and dissensions; rites and dogmas are many and various; therefore discord has arisen among the religious systems whereas religion is for the unification of mankind. True religion is the source of love and agreement amongst men, the cause of the development of praiseworthy qualities; but the people are holding to the counterfeit and imitation, negligent of the reality which unifies; so they are bereft and deprived of the radiance of religion. They follow superstitions inherited from their fathers and ancestors. To such an extent has this prevailed that they have taken away the heavenly light of divine truth and sit in the darkness of imitations and imaginations. That which was meant to be conducive to life has become the cause of death; that which should have been an evidence of knowledge is now a proof of ignorance; that which was a factor in the sublimity of human nature has proved to be its degradation. Therefore the realm of the religionist has gradually narrowed and darkened and the sphere of the materialist has widened and advanced; for the religionist has held to imitation and counterfeit, neglecting and discarding holiness and the sacred reality of religion. When the sun sets it is the time for bats to fly. They come forth because they are creatures of the night. When the lights of religion become darkened the materialists appear. They are the bats of night. The decline of religion is their time of activity; they seek the shadows when the world is darkened and clouds have spread over it.” (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Foundations of World Unity, p. 71)
