Infallibility

[Trailblazer]

Yes I know what your point was - ah - but Baha'u'llah himself wrote it down - therefore it must be from God, whereas the Christian and Muslim claims of succession are mere tradition. My point is anybody can write anything down and claim divine revelation. On that basis there is no difference between the Pope and Abdu'l Baha in terms of "conferred infallibility" - except the fact that they both get stuff wrong of course!

The Christian claims of succession are not in agreement and the Muslim claims of succession are not in agreement. If they were, there would be no sects of Christianity and no sects of Islam.

Since Protestant Christians do not agree that the Pope got "conferred infallibility" there is a difference because all Baha'is agree that Abdu'l-Baha got "conferred infallibility".

True, anybody can write anything down and claim divine revelation, so the only salient point is whether Baha'u'llah really got a revelation from God... If He did then everything flows from that; if He didn't then it is a waste of time to even talk about any of this.

 

[siti]

True, anybody can write anything down and claim divine revelation, so the only salient point is whether Baha'u'llah really got a revelation from God... If He did then everything flows from that; if He didn't then it is a waste of time to even talk about any of this.

I don't think it is a waste of time to talk about why some people believe patent absurdities whilst simultaneously dismissing the beliefs of others on the grounds of patent absurdity. I honestly want to understand why people do that - and how they (can possibly) justify it to their own intellect - the Baha'i religion is a case in point.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think it is a waste of time to talk about why some people believe patent absurdities whilst simultaneously dismissing the beliefs of others on the grounds of patent absurdity. I honestly want to understand why people do that - and how they (can possibly) justify it to their own intellect - the Baha'i religion is a case in point.

All I can say is that if I was not a Baha'i, I would not waste my time talking about it.
And I do not like talking about the other religions that preceded Baha'i because I believe they have been abrogated by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. I do not care what happened in the past. The past is gone. I consider it a waste of precious time to rehash older scriptures, but to each his or her own.

I do not know what you mean by patent absurdities. Don't you ever wonder what the purpose of our existence is? I cannot imagine existing just for this material world. It is so empty and meaningless, and so boring.

Do you want the short version of why I am a Baha'i and not one of those other older religions? The reason is that the Bahai Faith theology of progressive revelation and the soul and the afterlife makes sense and none of the other religions make sense, except maybe Islam. However, the fact that Islam claims that Muhammad is the final Prophet disqualifies it in my eyes.

The other obvious reason is because we have the Original Writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha, and Shoghi Effendi, and we have no original scriptures from the older religions. That is just too precarious for me, besides the fact that the older scriptures are near impossible to understand and make sense of. If anyone knew what they meant, there would not be so much disagreement among their followers.

Besides that, except for the eternal spiritual verities, their scriptures have nothing that humanity needs in the present age whereas the Baha'i Faith does.

There are just so many reasons I am a Baha'i and not another religion. I do not even like religion but I made an exception for Baha'i because there is no way I could ever prove it false. There is just too much evidence that shows it is true.

 

[siti]

All I can say is that if I was not a Baha'i, I would not waste my time talking about it.

But since you are a Baha'i, wasting your time talking about it is a religious obligation I suppose?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But since you are a Baha'i, wasting your time talking about it is a religious obligation I suppose?

One of the most humbling thoughts we have been given about Faith is worth considering here. This passage hints to what I will offer;

Matthew 20:16 "So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen."

We could in view of that passage ask why it is the simple people that first accept the Message, only to then have to share with the learned, who will in most situations look unkindly upon them?

Shoghi Effendi was asked why Persia and America had the bounty of the proclamation of a new Message. His reply was along the line that it was they who had sunk to the lowest levels of degradation and Materialisim and had dire need of change.

This passage says a lot, note the part about submission;

"O ye loved ones of God! In this, the Bahá’í dispensation, God’s Cause is spirit unalloyed. His Cause belongeth not to the material world. It cometh neither for strife nor war, nor for acts of mischief or of shame; it is neither for quarrelling with other Faiths, nor for conflicts with the nations. Its only army is the love of God, its only joy the clear wine of His knowledge, its only battle the expounding of the Truth; its one crusade is against the insistent self, the evil promptings of the human heart. Its victory is to submit and yield, and to be selfless is its everlasting glory. In brief, it is spirit upon spirit." Abdu’l-Baha

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

We could in view of that passage ask why it is the simple people that first accept the Message, only to then have to share with the learned, who will in most situations look unkindly upon them?

You mean like this...

I do not like talking about the other religions that preceded Baha'i because I believe they have been abrogated by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. I do not care what happened in the past. The past is gone. I consider it a waste of precious time to rehash older scriptures

...for example?

It is really funny how you guys happily reduce the religious traditions of others to anachronistic irrelevance and then cry foul when someone suggests the same about yours. And I was responding to @Trailblazer - whose view seems to be (according to her own comments) that any religious tradition that preceded the Baha'i faith is not even worth spending time discussing. I know you don't all believe that, but you did not have to weigh in with an "unkindness" protest if the cap did not fit.

 

[Trailblazer]

But since you are a Baha'i, wasting your time talking about it is a religious obligation I suppose?

Yeah it is, an obligation, one I did not fulfill most of my life, so I am trying to make up for lost time.
I do not mind talking about Baha'i, it is the older religions I mind talking about because I do not see the point, since their Dispensations have been abrogated. I do not care if people do not like me saying that, they can blame Shoghi Effendi because he is the one who said that in God Passes By.

“In conclusion of this theme, I feel, it should be stated that the Revelation identified with Bahá’u’lláh abrogates unconditionally all the Dispensations gone before it, upholds uncompromisingly the eternal verities they enshrine, recognizes firmly and absolutely the Divine origin of their Authors, preserves inviolate the sanctity of their authentic Scriptures, disclaims any intention of lowering the status of their Founders or of abating the spiritual ideals they inculcate, clarifies and correlates their functions, reaffirms their common, their unchangeable and fundamental purpose, reconciles their seemingly divergent claims and doctrines, readily and gratefully recognizes their respective contributions to the gradual unfoldment of one Divine Revelation, unhesitatingly acknowledges itself to be but one link in the chain of continually progressive Revelations, supplements their teachings with such laws and ordinances as conform to the imperative needs, and are dictated by the growing receptivity, of a fast evolving and constantly changing society, and proclaims its readiness and ability to fuse and incorporate the contending sects and factions into which they have fallen into a universal Fellowship, functioning within the framework, and in accordance with the precepts, of a divinely conceived, a world-unifying, a world-redeeming Order.” God Passes By, p. 100​

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You mean like this...

...for example?

It is really funny how you guys happily reduce the religious traditions of others to anachronistic irrelevance and then cry foul when someone suggests the same about yours. And I was responding to @Trailblazer - whose view seems to be (according to her own comments) that any religious tradition that preceded the Baha'i faith is not even worth spending time discussing. I know you don't all believe that, but you did not have to weigh in with an "unkindness" protest if the cap did not fit.

No not like that at all.

Sorry you took that personally and I was not even thinking of you when I wrote that. I was thinking of both the days of Christ and that of Muhammad.

I was not thinking of any one of us on RF at all and with this dispensation many divines were the first to embrace the message.

It was a general statement, that I see we all need to consider.

Peace be with you, regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

And I was responding to @Trailblazer - whose view seems to be (according to her own comments) that any religious tradition that preceded the Baha'i faith is not even worth spending time discussing.

That is my personal thing, it is not a thing other Baha'is share... As I said before I do not even like talking about religion at all, so having to talk about one religion is enough for me. And as I just said, I do not see any reason to talk about Dispensations of the past which have been abrogated. Time is short and I have better things to do.

 

[siti]

I was not even thinking of you when I wrote that.

That's funny - but you were responding to my post weren't you? I'm sensing a bit of wriggling here - again!

 

[paarsurrey]

An edge or a hedge? Anyway, as @Tony Bristow-Stagg has pointed out, both the Christian and Muslim traditions do indeed have a succession of authority delineated by the founders - Peter and the Catholic Church in the first case and Ali and the Shia Imams in the second. So are Tony's claims false?

"Muslim traditions do indeed have a succession of authority delineated by the founders" Unquote.

Sorry.
There is no teaching of racial succession of authority mentioned in Quran.
If yes, then please quote the verse from Quran with the verses in the context for correct understanding of the same. And then please support one's point of view from them.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

All I can say is that if I was not a Baha'i, I would not waste my time talking about it.
And I do not like talking about the other religions that preceded Baha'i because I believe they have been abrogated by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. I do not care what happened in the past. The past is gone. I consider it a waste of precious time to rehash older scriptures, but to each his or her own.

I do not know what you mean by patent absurdities. Don't you ever wonder what the purpose of our existence is? I cannot imagine existing just for this material world. It is so empty and meaningless, and so boring.

Do you want the short version of why I am a Baha'i and not one of those other older religions? The reason is that the Bahai Faith theology of progressive revelation and the soul and the afterlife makes sense and none of the other religions make sense, except maybe Islam. However, the fact that Islam claims that Muhammad is the final Prophet disqualifies it in my eyes.

The other obvious reason is because we have the Original Writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha, and Shoghi Effendi, and we have no original scriptures from the older religions. That is just too precarious for me, besides the fact that the older scriptures are near impossible to understand and make sense of. If anyone knew what they meant, there would not be so much disagreement among their followers.

Besides that, except for the eternal spiritual verities, their scriptures have nothing that humanity needs in the present age whereas the Baha'i Faith does.

There are just so many reasons I am a Baha'i and not another religion. I do not even like religion but I made an exception for Baha'i because there is no way I could ever prove it false. There is just too much evidence that shows it is true.

"However, the fact that Islam claims that Muhammad is the final Prophet disqualifies it in my eyes." Unquote.

It is final in status not in time, please.
Regards

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That's funny - but you were responding to my post weren't you? I'm sensing a bit of wriggling here - again!

At least it made you happy

Wriggle..what for?

I was giving thoughts about how Gods Messages to date have been spread and that prophecy suggested a repeat of the past, but I was not accusing you personally.

In fact I was thinking more of myself, with with no interest in Faith at all, came upon and now support Faith.

If I was to think of your connection to this, you have told me you have had some journey with a lot of search, I had none.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

"Muslim traditions do indeed have a succession of authority delineated by the founders" Unquote.

Sorry.
There is no teaching of racial succession of authority mentioned in Quran.
If yes, then please quote the verse from Quran with the verses in the context for correct understanding of the same. And then please support one's point of view from them.

"Racial succession" - what on earth are you talking about? "Mentioned in Qur'an" - where did I make that claim? What I said was that Muslim traditions do indicate a line of succession of religious authority following the founders - Ali and the 12 Imams in the case of Shi'a Islam...

One should read posts more carefully. Please.

 

[siti]

At least it made you happy

Your posts always make me happy Tony!

If I was to think of your connection to this, you have told me you have had some journey with a lot of search

Perhaps the journey is the destination - perhaps spiritually, once you reach a fixed religious abode, you only have room to "wriggle" - not to stretch out and reach for new horizons - perhaps it is all ultimately a process (like everything else) - no permanent solutions, no infallible revelations, no eternal truths, just a continually evolving "spiritual dimension" to the process we call "life". Perhaps that's why "revelators" like Baha'u'llah have to write so much - not because there is so much to be written about some eternal truth, but because there isn't one - its all just a continually unfolding "story" in which we are all ultimately bit part players whose involvement is ultimately insignificant but nevertheless indelible - ripples on an infinite pond that never actually decay completely but quickly become undetectable to any observer. I know we want to believe that its more than that - but maybe it isn't and maybe that's the reason people respond either negatively or indifferently to revelations that are so plainly composed of divine truth to one person and so plainly absurd to the next. The problem is - if you want to unify religion, you have to get past that problem - and claims of infallibility and abrogation, progressive revelation and sealings and unsealings of prophecy will not help at all. Christ was either the fulfillment of OT prophecy or he was not, Muhammad was either the seal of the Prophets or he was not, Baha'u'llah was either the one and only "Manifestation" for the current period of human history or he was not. If you permit fallibility then maybe none of them were who they claimed to be, if you do not then at least two out of the three were either mistaken or lying.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Perhaps the journey is the destination - perhaps spiritually, once you reach a fixed religious abode, you only have room to "wriggle" - not to stretch out and reach for new horizons - perhaps it is all ultimately a process (like everything else) - no permanent solutions, no infallible revelations, no eternal truths, just a continually evolving "spiritual dimension" to the process we call "life". Perhaps that's why "revelators" like Baha'u'llah have to write so much - not because there is so much to be written about some eternal truth, but because there isn't one - its all just a continually unfolding "story"

You may not be aware, but Baha'u'llah has said more or less that it is an unfolding story, we may have just got out of primary school. Christ said I have more to say unto you and the Spirit of Truth was to guide us to all Truth.

Baha'u'llah has said we were not ready for the potency of this Revelation and withheld many things and many writings were thrown into the tigress river.

It is as Baha'u'llah said, we are part of an "ever advancing civilization".

I can only say I agree that we must turn to the source of that Truth as man can not do it alone.

Unfortunatly, we will now find that out in a major way, what we have sown in greed, hate and predudices, will reap a harvest.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

we must turn to the source if that Truth as man can not do it alone.

You say you agree but this statement is the opposite of what I was saying. There is no "source of truth" except the imaginations of humans.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You say you agree but this statement is the opposite of what I was saying. There is no "source of truth" except the imaginations of humans.

I agreed with the unfolding Revelation a continued search after Truth.

Then you are saying imaginations are a source of Truth

I just say Imagination has a source outside our physical body and meat processor.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

"However, the fact that Islam claims that Muhammad is the final Prophet disqualifies it in my eyes." Unquote.

It is final in status not in time, please.
Regards

What do you mean by final in status?
What do you mean by not final in time?
Do you mean another Prophet will come?

 

[paarsurrey]

"Racial succession" - what on earth are you talking about? "Mentioned in Qur'an" - where did I make that claim? What I said was that Muslim traditions do indicate a line of succession of religious authority following the founders - Ali and the 12 Imams in the case of Shi'a Islam...

One should read posts more carefully. Please.

"What I said was that Muslim traditions do indicate a line of succession of religious authority following the founders - Ali and the 12 Imams in the case of Shi'a Islam..." Unquote.

My comments were on the point mentioned by one, not personally on one, sorry.
Shiasm and Bahaism following them as it was founded in Iran and also because it suits them believe in the racial succession in spiritual matters. This concept does not belong to Quran.
I believe this also reflects on fallibility of Bahaullah.
Sorry, again.
Regards