How are these Great Beings explained?

[oldbadger]

Not just suspicions here. It results in loss of membership, and if taken to extreme, declared a Covenant Breaker. Thank God for free societies.

Fair enough.
But if you get in a good point for truth on here, the answers that reply tend to get more personal, more aggressive.

Insidious suggestions about one's inner character, even. Extend that into a Bahai World. ( *shivers*)

 

[Vinayaka]

Insidious suggestions about one's inner character, even.

The most common accusation is simply that non-Baha'i haven't looked hard enough. This without any inkling whatsoever of what another person has or hasn't done. It is just a false relationship of cause-effect. "IF you did your research, YOU WOULD agree with me. Obviously!" It's sad.

 

[oldbadger]

It's a pattern. I call it 'prophet syndrome'. It's the need for some special man who can do everything. Infallibility and more. Little wonder Superman comics were popular. Perhaps it's a psychological reaction to finding out your own Daddy isn't perfect, so you have to replace him with some mythical figure that is. It's so odd to me, and so totally unnecessary. Life goes on perfectly fine without the belief in one.

I understand that some men are exceptionally wise, even Self-realised, but when its stretched way beyond that into this tall tale fantasy figure of glowing perfection and unending glowing attributes, it can only be understood as some deep psychological need that some of us don't understand because we've never been there.

One wonders if these guys ever had to eat physical food or go to the loo.

I don't mind hearing about these Great Beings, and wish that more Ancient Great Beings could be included.

But when somebody tries to spoon feed to me the idea that the son of a wealthy powerful Muslim received no education, after my reading about his specialised training, plus the fact that he was a Muslim son, it considered by all Muslims that the Qu'ran was everything that a Muslim needed for life's preparation, then I really do need to scratch that irritation.

As you could see from the reports back in 2011 (now turned around) Muslims are most keen for their children to KNOW the Qu'ran. It's never changed in hundreds and hundreds of years.

 

[oldbadger]

The most common accusation is simply that non-Baha'i haven't looked hard enough. This without any inkling whatsoever of what another person has or hasn't done. It is just a false relationship of cause-effect. "IF you did your research, YOU WOULD agree with me. Obviously!" It's sad.

Yep.....
Veiled from the truth through ...... whatever.......

So....... working on the balance of probabilities, and taking an absolute flyer of a guess, could I be so forward as to presume, and suggest that you won't be declaring yourself for Bahai anytime soon?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Obviously a person can reject stuff if the laws and ordinance don't make sense. Common sense can easily prevail over stuff that makes no sense to an individual. That's as far as any 'investigation' has to go really. I personally couldn't be member of any faith that is loaded with contradictory messages. But some people, because of their nature, can. Same as buying a car. Some people could never buy with a standard transmission, because they wouldn't be able to drive it.

It seems to me those who say that some of the Baha'i Laws or teachings contradict some other Baha'i teachings, think that the Laws are supposed to be black and white without exceptions or variations. But in my view, the Laws must have exceptions and variations based on situations.
These are not contradictions, but certain exceptions are made in the Laws which have a wisdom in each case. We may or may not know their wisdom, but again, when it is established that a Person is a Manifestation of God and has manifested signs of divinity and supernatural power, we must not doubt, even if some of His commands may appear contradictory to us. It has a wisdom, we may not know.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yep.....
Veiled from the truth through ...... whatever.......

So....... working on the balance of probabilities, and taking an absolute flyer of a guess, could I be so forward as to presume, and suggest that you won't be declaring yourself for Bahai anytime soon?

I will if you will.

 

[Vinayaka]

These are not contradictions, but certain exceptions are made in the Laws which have a wisdom in each case.

Yes that is your view. You're a Baha'i. The UHJ and its predecessors are infallible.

But suppose a local Canadian hospital board had a stipulation that only men could sit on the board of directors. I presume you'd be okay with that? I mean. women couldn't handle that responsibility, could they?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Yes that is your view. You're a Baha'i. The UHJ and its predecessors are infallible.

But suppose a local Canadian hospital board had a stipulation that only men could sit on the board of directors. I presume you'd be okay with that? I mean. women couldn't handle that responsibility, could they?

Good question. The judgement if something is correct or wrong is always done by weighting the action against a standard which is the balance. Different people or cultures have different standards and opinions, and each may argue and provide their reason why choosing only men for board of a hospital is right or wrong. In Canada as far as I know, it is against law to choose only from men, as this may be considered discrimination against a gender. Now, choosing the members of universal House of Justice is based on Baha'i standards, and is weighed against its own balance which is the Laws of Aqdas. So, these two examples are different and are not comparable. In the same way that for instance it may be asked, is it fair that only women must bear a child, and go through the difficulties for 9 months. If we answer based on the Law of nature, then it is what it is.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The most common accusation is simply that non-Baha'i haven't looked hard enough. This without any inkling whatsoever of what another person has or hasn't done. It is just a false relationship of cause-effect. "IF you did your research, YOU WOULD agree with me. Obviously!" It's sad.

It is not just about doing research. It has much to do with having a fair judgement.

 

[Vinayaka]

In the same way that for instance it may be asked, is it fair that only women must bear a child, and go through the difficulties for 9 months. If we answer based on the Law of nature, then it is what it is.

Not a fair comparison at all. Are you saying women aren't capable of serving on the UHJ because of something physical? What part of nature makes them inept, according to Baha'i?

Of course the Baha'is are free to make up their own laws in regard to this, but to expect others to view it as equality is preposterous. That's where the contradiction lies. Equality for all... but wait a minute, yes equality for all ... but, but, but ... oh yeah, there's that problem of homosexuals and women. You see, there would be no contradiction if you didn't preach equality for all.

 

[Vinayaka]

It is not just about doing research. It has much to do with having a fair judgement.

I totally agree. And billions of people have seen their judgement (to not accept Baha'u'llah as their prophet, the greatest of all time, the most wondrous, the Sun, the Giver all there is, etc. ) to be fair in their minds. Heck, I don't believe in prophets and avatars and manifestations period. Same with lots of people. Are you now saying it is because we cannot make fair judgement? That we're irrational? That we all lack the brainpower Baha'is do? What exactly are you saying here? That we're just all plain stupid?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Yes, if a million (exaggeration for effect) people investigate something, I'm sure one or maybe even two would find something all the rest disagreed with. This is selective anecdotal evidence at its best, clearly, as I can't see the Baha'i sharing information of anyone who came to the other conclusion. Of course they would all be wrong.

Lots of people have indeed investigated and found lots and lots of contradictions, trouble in paradise, and more. Baha'i's eill only share the stories that agree with the agenda.

I remember a Sai Baba acquaintance here who was bragging to me how some Bigshot in the local community had joined him in the acceptance of Sai Baba as God. (Yes, they claim Sai Baba to be the avatar of all avatars! Same belief as Baha'i, different person) When I reminded him of the hundred or so who hadn't, he shut up.

You like to use the word 'brag' a lot. I suppose its it part of the 'respect diversity' yet have disdain for anything that isn't Hinduism contradiction I have become acquainted with. I like to look at the facts and leave it at that.

Growth of religion - Wikipedia

 

[Dawnofhope]

What...... like you, who opposes the very foundation of Christian doctrine?
And just how many 'sides' of how many mainstream beliefs have I ended up on?
Your prejudice is showing as strongly as your agenda, imo.


No you don't. You don't believe in the raising of dead bodies, you don't believe in the resurrection......... you don't have a conservative leaning towards Christianity, or so we have read.

It's the old double-think again, you'll be with it when it suits, and against it when it does not suit.

Now off you go and find any case of that with me......... Funny thing, that.

Irenaeus was around not too long after the book of revelation was written.To write off everything he says because he believed in the resurrection seems harsh. He highlighted a transcription error with 666 and sure enough we have a fragment a few hundred years that says 616, instead of 666. Not surprisingly we have no bible translations with 616.

 

[oldbadger]

I will if you will.

No deal, then.

 

[oldbadger]

Irenaeus was around not too long after the book of revelation was written.To write off everything he says because he believed in the resurrection seems harsh. He highlighted a transcription error with 666 and sure enough we have a fragment a few hundred years that says 616, instead of 666. Not surprisingly we have no bible translations with 616.

Couldn't help me too much in my studies about historic Jesus.
Heavily influenced by John, and his Faith was Orthodox.

The 616 can be calculated direct from prophecy, or so I understand. If that had been more helpful, for instance, if it had sent the result to the birth year of Bahauallah, which number do you think Bahai might have chosen?

It's all crazy anyway, to dismiss Spiritualism, Mediums, Healers, Fortune Tellers, Soothsayers etc whilst clinging so closely to numerology and the very word 'spiritual' .... just seems like yet another version of double-think double-speak.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You like to use the word 'brag' a lot. I suppose its it part of the 'respect diversity' yet have disdain for anything that isn't Hinduism contradiction I have become acquainted with. I like to look at the facts and leave it at that.

Growth of religion - Wikipedia

Very Interesting figures. So no God, or religion not based on God, grows faster than mainstream religions, with the Baha'i Faith also growing fast in the background.

Interesting that has been foretold by Baha'u'llah.

I hope all is well.

Regards Tony

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Good question. The judgement if something is correct or wrong is always done by weighting the action against a standard which is the balance. Different people or cultures have different standards and opinions, and each may argue and provide their reason why choosing only men for board of a hospital is right or wrong. In Canada as far as I know, it is against law to choose only from men, as this may be considered discrimination against a gender. Now, choosing the members of universal House of Justice is based on Baha'i standards, and is weighed against its own balance which is the Laws of Aqdas. So, these two examples are different and are not comparable. In the same way that for instance it may be asked, is it fair that only women must bear a child, and go through the difficulties for 9 months. If we answer based on the Law of nature, then it is what it is.

Good argument.

In America, we are somewhat sliding towards equality for men and women. So told, women still get paid less and some jobs women could do are denied because they are women not because of the physical qualifications they passed and work capable of doing but by their genetalia. These are physical/outside/of man things that separate men from women. The fight goes on.

Spiritually, in the bible (if bahai agrees with it), men and women are separated. Its not symbolism but a way that women are subordinate to authority for "eating the first apple." Its purely cultural. Culture and spirituality cannot be separated.

Spiritually and symbolically, what makes the spiritual nature of women different than that of man? Outside of UHJ politics, what is the basis for men as authority compared to women in Islamic culture and how, if bahai sees material as symbolism as compared to spirituality, how does the physical parts of a female dictate what role she plays in in regards to both bahai religion and its politics?

Another interesting question in relation. Many religious deem transgender is a disorder. If a male is a female or female a male, then their spiritual and inner being is that of the mental gender they do not have when they were born physically opposite; so, to relate, physically they are male. Spiritually (analogy) they are female.

Does gender play apart on UHJ religion and political decisions on role of women and men or just their sex?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Very Interesting figures. So no God, or religion not based on God, grows faster than mainstream religions, with the Baha'i Faith also growing fast in the background.

Interesting that has been foretold by Baha'u'llah.

I hope all is well.

Regards Tony

Yes, and it reminds me what Baha'ullah wrote, at the time that the Bab was Martyred along with 20000 of His followers, when the Bab'i Faith was almost exterminated.

"Consider, how great is the change today! Behold, how many are the Sovereigns who bow the
knee before His name [Muhammad]! How numerous the nations and kingdoms who have sought the shelter of His shadow, who bear allegiance to His Faith, and pride themselves therein! From the pulpit-top there ascendeth today the words of praise which, in utter lowliness, glorify His blessed name; and from the heights of minarets there resoundeth the call that summoneth the concourse of His people to
adore Him. Even those Kings of the earth who have refused to embrace His Faith and to put off the garment of unbelief, nonetheless confess and acknowledge the greatness and overpowering majesty of that Daystar of loving-kindness. Such is His earthly sovereignty, the evidences of which thou dost on every side behold. This sovereignty must needs be revealed and established either in the lifetime of every Manifestation of God or after His ascension unto His true habitation in the realms above."

 

[Vinayaka]

You like to use the word 'brag' a lot.

Some, yes. It's the colloquial version of 'overuse of superlatives'. I do read the quotes, sometimes.

 

[siti]

Good, then you should be able to quote all those that put those predictions into writing as proof.

In 1863, the Belgian Ambassador to Paris wrote of sensing "a widespread unease that once again the French were on the threshold of great unknown events...on every side I hear repeated ' if we are not at 1847, we are at least at 1845'" (Quoted by Cambridge historian JPT Bury in Napoleon III and the Second Empire, 1964, p.108)

In this quote, the references to 1845 and 1847 refer to the events leading up to the 1848 revolution that had ultimately brought Napoleon III to power as the elected President of the Second Republic after the overthrow of the monarchy of Louis Phillipe I - the last King of the French. The implications of those comments were pretty obvious - that many people - not just those who wrote it down - felt that Napoleon's days at the helm of the French nation were numbered.

So there is one - Eugene Beyens not only predicting the downfall of Napoleon III six years before Baha'u'llah wrote his letter, but capturing the mood of the French people who clearly anticipated further political turmoil. Were they all inspired?