I don't like to speak for Bahaullah or the Bahai faith, but the image of a lonely or imprisoned "me" or "self" is a (also?) a mystical image of the soul longing for liberation or being (one) with God? Of course I have no idea how this was really meant by Bahaullah.
-
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!
Is Baha'u'llah true or false Prophet?
- Thread starter Faithofchristian
- Start date
I don't like to speak for Bahaullah or the Bahai faith, but the image of a lonely or imprisoned "me" or "self" is a (also?) a mystical image of the soul longing for liberation or being (one) with God? Of course I have no idea how this was really meant by Bahaullah.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Can you rephrase?
Jedster
Flying through space
I had the same thoughts.
spirit_of_dawn
Active Member
If Baha'u'llah had said I am lonely and imprisoned there would be no problem, but he states that he is a lonely and imprisoned God.
The 'me' in 'me, the lonely and imprisoned' need not refer to Bahaullah in person, it could also refer to all the Atmans in the universe which are in fact indistinguishable from the universal soul (Paramatman or Brahma or God) and are therefore one.
Of course it would be a bit strange to talk of God as imprisoned, but I have no real experience with the imagery and way of expression of Bahaullah.
Mark 10:18 would make it more complicated
"And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."
Regards Tony
Not really. Christ is both God and man, as well as a teacher and role model for humans. Sometimes He spoke with His humanity and vocation as a role model in mind, like there. Other times, He revealed His Divinity, like in John 8:58. He also didn't object to Thomas calling Him "my Lord and my God!" in John 20:28.
As you are now explaining it further, that now makes your explanation more complex.
Why is your more complex opinion not word salad?
Regards Tony
I gave a simple answer to a simple yes or no question. You and your co-religionists have yet to do even that. Even my explanation to your quandry didn't require paragraph after paragraph, and I think it was quite clear
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
If it was that obvious people wouldnt debate over 2000 years.
The vast majority of Christians have been Trinitarian for centuries. There's not much of a debate over it. The Internet doesn't reflect the real world.
You are welcome to consider it is a yes and no answer. I see If it was a yes or no answer, no explanation is needed.
As Christianity needed to agree upon a complex Doctrine to explain this, It must be they did see it as more complex than a yes or no.
Regards Tony
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
Yes, and many other Christians who had different view, were killed for having different view. Does majority view means the truth?
It's still a yes or no question that was answered with one word. Don't get mad at me that none of you are able to do that. You're just trying to turn it around on me and it's not working.
Who was killed for not being Trinitarian?
My point is that it's not really a subject of debate in Christianity. Only some small sects are non-Trinitarian.
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
But in early Christianity, and until the third or fourth centuries, it was a subject of debate. Even now, between mainstream, some believe He was only Son of God, and not God. The verses of Bible appear to be contradictory. Sometimes they denote Jesus was a Prophet. Sometimes son of God. Some may be interpreted as God. You surely know it is quite unclear, that is why they came up with a Trinity Doctrine to explain it.
And when it is not logical, they say, God is not comprehensible. But, honestly in Bahai Faith it is much more clear. Bahais do not debate about nature of Bahaullah. They all agree, He was Manifestation of God, and Not the incarnation of God. God does not take a physical form.
Keep trying to turn it around on me but you still can't answer a simple question. That's not my problem.
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
I gave you simple answer. The Spirit of Baha, is Spirit of God, so, if you ask if Bahaullahs Spirit was God, my answer is a Yes. Bahaullah's physical body and individuality is not God.
It is like a Lamp. The Lamp and the light. The individuality of Bahaullah is like Lamp. The Light Manifested from the Lamp, is God. Just an analogy. But, when a Lamp is lighted, the light and the lamp are together and inseparable, so, is Bahaullah. Would He only consider himself with no light, it is no different, it is coarser than clay as He says. But since God who is the Light is manifested from Him, He proclaims that He is verily God, as He said in the Quote.
That is not a simple answer. Lol.
Are you saying his soul is God, but not his body?
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
I added some more to my last post.
But, His Soul is not God. His soul has the capability of manifesting God perfectly. Our ordinary human soul does not have that capability. So, God is manifested from His Soul. There is a difference between soul and Spirit in this case. The Soul is that Lamp. The Spirit is the Light. Now, they come together, and make One being. The God manifested from the Soul. All The attributes and powers of God appears, from the Soul.