If a person claiming to be Christ comes today, how do you know it is really *not* him?

[Trailblazer]

Which Baha'u'llah did not do in my view, eg did not teach us how to genuinely love gays by not fining them into poverty, did not adequately teach Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi how to love alleged covenant breakers and smeared those who rejected him saying, "Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth."

Source: Bahá'í Reference Library - The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, Pages 185-241

That smearing also not being genuinely loving in my view.

You are quoting a snippet out of a longer passage where Baha'u'llah was addressing a king. Baha'u'llah was not smearing those who rejected him. He was addressing a king, and he was referring to those who disbelieve in God. "Nothing whatever can deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him from betraying his neighbour, nothing can induce him to walk uprightly."

"Hearken, O King,11 to the speech of Him that speaketh the truth, Him that doth not ask thee to recompense Him with the things God hath chosen to bestow upon thee, Him Who unerringly treadeth the straight Path. He it is Who summoneth thee unto God, thy Lord, Who showeth thee the right course, the way that leadeth to true felicity, that haply thou mayest be of them with whom it shall be well.

Beware, O King, that thou gather not around thee such ministers as follow the desires of a corrupt inclination, as have cast behind their backs that which hath been committed into their hands and manifestly betrayed their trust. Be bounteous to others as God hath been bounteous to thee, and abandon not the interests of thy people to the mercy of such ministers as these. Lay not aside the fear of God, and be thou of them that act uprightly. Gather around thee those ministers from whom thou canst perceive the fragrance of faith and of justice, and take thou counsel with them, and choose whatever is best in thy sight, and be of them that act generously.

Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth. He that acteth treacherously towards God will, also, act treacherously towards his king. Nothing whatever can deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him from betraying his neighbour, nothing can induce him to walk uprightly.

Take heed that thou resign not the reins of the affairs of thy state into the hands of others, and repose not thy confidence in ministers unworthy of thy trust, and be not of them that live in heedlessness. Shun them whose hearts are turned away from thee, and place not thy confidence in them, and entrust them not with thine affairs and the affairs of such as profess thy faith. Beware that thou allow not the wolf to become the shepherd of God’s flock, and surrender not the fate of His loved ones to the mercy of the malicious. Expect not that they who violate the ordinances of God will be trustworthy or sincere in the faith they profess. Avoid them, and preserve strict guard over thyself, lest their devices and mischief hurt thee. Turn away from them, and fix thy gaze upon God, thy Lord, the All-Glorious, the Most Bountiful. He that giveth up himself wholly to God, God shall, assuredly, be with him; and he that placeth his complete trust in God, God shall, verily, protect him from whatsoever may harm him, and shield him from the wickedness of every evil plotter. (The Summons of the Lord of Hosts. pp. 209-211)

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, Pages 185-241

 

[BrokenBread]

You will know it is not Him because he will come in his own name , not in the Father's name
But this is a moot point because this Jesus who is the Christ has declared that he will be received anyway .

John 5:43
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

 

[stvdv]

Since English appears to be your second language perhaps some leeway can be given for what appears to be your inability to grasp that words mean what they really mean and as such, had Baha'u'llah meant "he who disbelieves in truth is neither trustworthy nor truthful" he could have said as much instead of slipping in the word "God" where it apparently does not belong in my view.

That has nothing to do with language. That only has to do with difference of interpretation.

My Master, Sai Baba, has told us "Truth is God", and "(divine)Love is God" and Dharma is God

Hence, that's why I read verses different than you, and I come to different conclusions

IF I see a verse (claim) that conflicts the context it is written in
I first give the expert (Shoghi Effendi) the benifit of the doubt
Then I look again, now from all possible angles
Until I find the interpretation that solves all conflicts

This I have done with Shoghi Effendi's words. And I was successful and found the interpretation that solves all conflicts with other major Scriptures on Truth, that I know.

 

[stvdv]

1. It is only after long analysis.

That's what I assumed

2. Me, and lack of confidence! If it was that I would not be making these statements.

Why belittle Faith?

3. Does commonsense demands acceptance of what was written 2,000 years ago

No, I was only talking about "belittling Faith"

1. My experience with 'Advaita' Buddhism and other unpretentious pagan religions is very nice.

That was my impression of you

The problem is only with so-called One God and his messengers.

Aha

I myself have a 'problem' with the Faiths that demands Supremacy and Disdain towards other (non) Faith: I see the followers of certain Faiths claim 'our Faith is superior and our Scripture too', which implies Superiority and Disdain

So, if I understand correctly, you don't have a problem with Faith 'an sich', but more with Religious people belittling your (or other's) way of life in the name of Faith

Spirituality is not dependent on religions.

My exact words in a thread I posted a few months ago, so I agree completely.

IMO: Spirituality does not need the word or concept of God either. IF people like God, it's fine, if others prefer without using God or concept of God, that's fine too. God concept is not superior nor inferior.

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. he was referring to those who disbelieve in God. "Nothing whatever can deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him from betraying his neighbour, nothing can induce him to walk uprightly."

"Hearken, O King,
Beware, O King,

Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth. He that acteth treacherously towards God will, also, act treacherously towards his king. Nothing whatever can deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him from betraying his neighbour, nothing can induce him to walk uprightly.

Take heed that thou resign not the reins of the affairs of thy state into the hands of others, and repose not thy confidence in ministers unworthy of thy trust, and be not of them that live in heedlessness. Shun them whose hearts are turned away from thee, and place not thy confidence in them, and entrust them not with thine affairs and the affairs of such as profess thy faith. Beware that thou allow not the wolf to become the shepherd of God’s flock, and surrender not the fate of His loved ones to the mercy of the malicious. Expect not that they who violate the ordinances of God will be trustworthy or sincere in the faith they profess. Avoid them, and preserve strict guard over thyself, lest their devices and mischief hurt thee. Turn away from them, and fix thy gaze upon God, thy Lord, the All-Glorious, the Most Bountiful. He that giveth up himself wholly to God, God shall, assuredly, be with him; and he that placeth his complete trust in God, God shall, verily, protect him from whatsoever may harm him, and shield him from the wickedness of every evil plotter. (The Summons of the Lord of Hosts. pp. 209-211)

This is an absolutely foolish statement. Do you think it applies to all atheists or most? You have interacted with many atheists in this forum. Do you find us doing that? We do evil, we betray our neighbors, don't we walk proudly upright with eyes looking up straight, are we threacherous?
Stop this Biblical speak, speaketh, treadeth, summoneth, showeth, leadeth, mayest. What are you trying to prove? Does it change the fact that the translations were done in 20th Century and not in the First Century. You are faking ancientness.
And who king he was writing to? Did the said king even give two hoots for Bahaollah?

This I have done with Shoghi Effendi's words. And I was successful and found the interpretation that solves all conflicts with other major Scriptures on Truth, that I know.

Abbas and Shoghi were apologists for Bahaollah, father of one and the great grandfather of another. What they wrote is different from what Bahaollah wrote. And Bahaism was their family enterprise.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is an absolutely foolish statement. Do you think it applies to all atheists or most? You have interacted with many atheists in this forum. Do you find us doing that? We do evil, we betray our neighbors, don't we walk proudly upright with eyes looking up straight, are we threacherous?

No, the atheists I know from this forum don't do any of those things. Baha'u'llah was addressing a king, He was not addressing atheists.

 

[danieldemol]

You are quoting a snippet out of a longer passage where Baha'u'llah was addressing a king. Baha'u'llah was not smearing those who rejected him. He was addressing a king, and he was referring to those who disbelieve in God

That king Baha'u'llah was addressing was a believer in God but not in Baha'u'llah, it was from this context we see in Baha'u'llah's eyes that to merely believe in God is not enough in my view.

You are correct about one thing though, it is a smear against atheists as well, although I don't see why you think that makes it ok.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Exactly my point. Believe and live in Truth trumps believe in Jesus and not live in Truth

So, the way I interpreted this Bahai verse, makes more sense than how @danieldemol interpreted it, right?

To find the truth, one must be trustworthy and truthful themselves, as they must be genuinely after Justice.

The first two hidden words hint at our ability to acheive this, so no matter your faith or no faith, if you live these two hidden words, truth will be attracted to you.

O Son of Spirit!
My first counsel is this: Possess a pure, kindly and radiant heart, that thine may be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable and everlasting.

O Son of Spirit!
The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

To the contrary in my view if you'd been following along you would know it is confirmed by Baha'i scholars such as Chistopher Buck who published the (Haifan) UHoJ letter confirming it's truth in his book symbol and Secret, and therefore it is your own bias in rushing to a hasty conclusion without all the facts that lays exposed for all to see Tony

One scholarship work that does not indicate what you hoped it indicates, but what you want it to indicate.

Regards Tony

 

[danieldemol]

One scholarship work that does not indicate what you hoped it indicates, but what you want it to indicate.

Regards Tony

To the contrary in my view, here is what it says;

"It is important to note that the stylistic and grammatical changes mentioned above took place over time—often it was Zayn himself that suggested them—and therefore the various manuscripts differ somewhat, one from the other"

Source on page 29 at Bahai-library.com at the following link;
https://bahai-library.com/pdf/b/buck_symbol_secret.pdf

This is obviously showing that some human had to suggest stylistic and grammatical changes to God's alleged revelation over a period of time because Baha'u'llah was apparently unable to forsee the clamour that his mistakes would create in my view.

 

[LuisDantas]

I would neither know nor care.

A minor reason is my belief that identity is fragile and ephemeral.

The main reason is pure lack of concern. I would care for wisdom if I found it. Not for Jesus, who I doubt ever existed.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This I have done with Shoghi Effendi's words. And I was successful and found the interpretation that solves all conflicts with other major Scriptures on Truth, that I know.

Abbas and Shoghi were apologists for Bahaollah. What they wrote is different from what Bahaollah wrote.

 

[stvdv]

Abbas and Shoghi were apologists for Bahaollah, father of one and the great grandfather of another. What they wrote is different from what Bahaollah wrote. And Bahaism was their family enterprise.

Yes, I know ... enterprise invites untruth

Still, there can be truth in their words
Still, people can interpret positively
or negatively, what has been said

 

[Aupmanyav]

No, the atheists I know from this forum don't do any of those things. Baha'u'llah was addressing a king, He was not addressing atheists.

Then why was Bahaollah railing against those who did not accept God and him as the messenger of God. In 19th Century, I do not think there were that many atheists. And if people believed in God, does that make it necessary for them to accept Bahaollah as God's messenger?
Which king? And what was the King's response to Bahaollah's missive? 'Throw this letter from the pretentious/uneducated Iranian into the wastepaper basket'? I am sure that the King's secretaries did that even without informing the king.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then why was Bahaollah railing against those who did not accept God and him as the messenger of God.

Where was he railing against those who did not accept Him as a messenger of God?

In 19th Century, I do not think there were that many atheists.

No, there were probably not that many atheists since most people were Christians or Muslims.

And if people believed in God, does that make it necessary for them to accept Bahaollah as God's messenger?

No.

Which king? And what was the King's response to Bahaollah's missive?

I don't know which king He was addressing in that particular passage and I don't know what that king's response was.

 

[Trailblazer]

Abbas and Shoghi were apologists for Bahaollah. What they wrote is different from what Bahaollah wrote.

Yes, what they wrote was different. Why would apologists for Baha'u'llah write something different?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, what they wrote was different. Why would apologists for Baha'u'llah write something different?

They do so to camouflage the silliness in the original statement.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Where was he railing against those who did not accept Him as a messenger of God?
I don't know which king He was addressing in that particular passage and I don't know what that king's response was.

That is what you quoted in Bahaollah's letter to (an unnamed) king.
You have the resources of your House of Justice at your disposal and have been promoting Bahaiism in this forum for the past 7 years and you do not know which king Bahaollah was writing to! Is the king as fictitious as your One God and the mission of his most recent manifestation?
Was it the Prussian king? Do you know his response or that too you do not know? What kind of incompetent influencer are you?

 

[Feedmysheep]

Matthew is Jesus-speak. Thessalonians is Paul-speak. Whenever the two show ANY inclinations of differing, I go with Jesus.
Jesus is speaking to the inner being of individuals. Paul is speaking to the leadership of a new congregation of followers. It the difference of hearing the wisdom of the ages and the political advice of the era. Let those who have "ears to hear", hear the message they need for today.

Spice could you give me your, let's say, two biggest examples the Apostle Paul contradicting the speaking of Jesus?
Maybe you could start with something in one of the Thessaloninan letters.

I believe Paul was a very faithful and pioneering Christian showing others how to enter into
the experience of living by Christ.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

To the contrary in my view, here is what it says;

"It is important to note that the stylistic and grammatical changes mentioned above took place over time—often it was Zayn himself that suggested them—and therefore the various manuscripts differ somewhat, one from the other"

Source on page 29 at Bahai-library.com at the following link;
https://bahai-library.com/pdf/b/buck_symbol_secret.pdf

This is obviously showing that some human had to suggest stylistic and grammatical changes to God's alleged revelation over a period of time because Baha'u'llah was apparently unable to forsee the clamour that his mistakes would create in my view.

That does not need a response, but to say again, you are grasping for straws.

Regards Tony