Is Baha'u'llah true or false Prophet?

[Pete in Panama]

But we're using the tiles as an analogy about religion. Other than your religion, the Baha'i Faith, do all the other religions have things that have been added in and things that they believe that are problems and hard to accept?

To just look at the "Golden Rule" and whatever else they have in common, is fine, but what are the differences? Are these differences important?

Should we disregard and actually do away with the differences and only focus on the things that the religions have in common? If so, now add your religion into the mix. Should we disregard those things that are distinctive to only the Baha'i Faith and only take as being true those things that the Baha'i Faith has in common with all the other religions?

But there's been so many religions. And even the religions that are still practiced today have so many beliefs that contradict the beliefs held in some of the others. Baha'is don't focus much on the religions of the past. Like those from China, Egypt, Greece and others. Baha'is only focus on a few religions that are still practiced today. And even with those, Baha'is have to make adjustments to some of the beliefs held by the followers in those religions. That is, focus on the differences, and not ignore them, and find a way to explain them away.

To me, "consorting" with people in the other religions doesn't mean much when Baha'is believe they have replaced the teachings and practices of all those other religions. Whether Baha'is want to admit it or not, they are here to promote their religion and their beliefs. That is what is true and real and necessary according to what Baha'is believe. As is obvious here on the forum, anyone who disagrees with the Baha'i beliefs is wrong.

Which is okay, sort of, it is what Baha'is think is the truth. But, to those of us who challenge the beliefs and claims of the Baha'i Faith, it is Baha'is acting just like all those "true believers" in any other religion... It is your truth that is The Truth. We are all wrong and need to see the light as you see it.

Your understanding appears to be along the lines that Baha'is seek to replace the teachings and practices of other religions. That makes sense considering we live in a world w/ contending religious sects each trying to outdo the other. That's one way of looking at it and it's not the only way

Moses did not tell the Israelites that Abraham's teachings had to be replaced. What he did do was he added the 10 commandments. Jesus emphasized that he came to fulfill the law of Moses, not to end it. Sure, there were some Christians who've killed Jews and some Muslims who've killed Christians, but the overwhelming mass of believers has built on and extended the previous teachings.

You hear in the news these days about the killing in Israel. That's what we get in our news. You're not hearing about the Jews having Muslims over for dinner to watch a soccer game on TV because that's not news even though it happens far more often. If we want to know what's going on we look at what the vast majority are doing and we ignore the noisy few.

 

[CG Didymus]

Moses did not tell the Israelites that Abraham's teachings had to be replaced.

And what were the teachings of Abraham? Did Abraham bring a new book with new social laws? Was he the founder of a new religion? Baha'is don't even agree with what is written in the Bible about which son was taken to be sacrificed. Replacing, changing, reinterpreting is what gets done when one religion claims to be the successor of a past religion. And Baha'is believe their religion had replaced them all.

And as far as people from one religion getting along with people from another, I see it all the time... except it's with people that have a liberal view of their religion... not a literal/conservative/fundamentalist view. Put those people in a room together and see if they can get along. Oh, and I have seen Baha'is arguing with Christians and people in other religions. And, to me, it's not surprising, because Baha'is do believe their religion is better and truer than any other religion being believed and practiced on Earth today.

I doubt very much that there is one that a Baha'is can say is "okay" just as it is. There's going to be some belief that Baha'is are going to say is not true and has been added in or has been misinterpreted from the Scriptures of that religion. Scriptures that Baha's don't even believe are 100% authentic... except maybe the Quran. Ignore the problems? Ignore the differences? Can Baha'is take a "liberal" not so literal view of their Scriptures and beliefs in order to get along with the people in other religions? If so, just how liberal will a Baha'i go or can go before they're no longer a believer in Baha'u'llah?

 

[Pete in Panama]

And what were the teachings of Abraham? Did Abraham bring a new book with new social laws? Was he the founder of a new religion?

Thanks for the stimulating my grey matter, it took some study but I knew it was there somewhere.

Here's one source (from here):

• Lesson One: Abraham was Ready to Obey God
• Lesson Two: Abraham Obeyed God When It Did Not Make Sense
• Lesson Three: Abraham Did Not Delay Obeying
• Lesson Four: Abraham Would Not Let Anyone Interfere with Him Obeying
• Lesson Five: Abraham Understood Obedience Is Worship
• Lesson Six: Abraham Trusted God
• God’s Sovereignty Should Give Us Confidence

--which is interesting because I'd have thought that the emphasis would have been on the fact that Abraham led the people of God from the area that is now present day Iraq and he was the first to claim Canaan as God's promised land. It was that promise that was the basis of Moses' quest to bring the people of Israel back to Canaan in compliance w/ Abrahamic Law.

Please let me add here that none of this matters to you and me because you insist that the religions disagree no matter what & I see the issue as complex. That's fine w/ me & I'm willing to chat on subjects where we can exchange info.

 

[Muffled]

Maybe we can agree that you're dividing people up in two groups, the ones who're right and the others who are wrong.

My thinking is that there are other approaches, including the idea that both sides are right and folks are seeing different things from different viewpoints. We live in an interesting world w/ a lot going on and my take is that the only wrong choice is to chose to be on the side we'll call "right" and to put down anyone who's different. A better idea (imho) is that we need cooperation and interchange, and that if two people are fighting about religion then they're both wrong.

Can we work from there?

If you keep insisting that black is white, it is not a viewpoint problem but a problem accepting the truth that white is white and black is black.

 

[Muffled]

Baha'ullah was not formally educated, nor was He a philosopher. He was a Messenger of 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. The learning current amongst men I studied not; their schools I entered not. Ask of the city wherein I dwelt, that thou mayest be well assured that I am not of them who speak falsely. This is but a leaf which the winds of the will of thy Lord, the Almighty, the All-Praised, have stirred. Can it be still when the tempestuous winds are blowing? Nay, by Him Who is the Lord of all Names and Attributes! They move it as they list. The evanescent is as nothing before Him Who is the Ever-Abiding. His all-compelling summons hath reached Me, and caused Me to speak His praise amidst all people. I was indeed as one dead when His behest was uttered. The hand of the will of thy Lord, the Compassionate, the Merciful, transformed Me.”
Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57

I am a messenger of God and a better one than the B man because I have God in me and he did not.

 

[Muffled]

Spiritual truths are not linked to where a person dies. Bahaullah spoke truth as he understood it and in so doing lead people closer to God.

I believe that doesn't say much. You could say the same thing about Nietzsche.

 

[Trailblazer]

I am a messenger of God and a better one than the B man because I have God in me and he did not.

Nobody has God in them.

 

[Colt]

Nobody has God in them.

Yes you do, be still and listen. He is there waiting patiently for you to seek him.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes you do, be still and listen. He is there waiting patiently for you to seek him.

It all depends upon what you mean by "God in them." What I meant is that God is not 'literally' living inside of the human body.
Referring to God as "that Reality which abideth within thee" Baha'u'llah indicates that God is within us but I do not understand what that means.

“Wert thou to ponder in thine heart, from now until the end that hath no end, and with all the concentrated intelligence and understanding which the greatest minds have attained in the past or will attain in the future, this divinely ordained and subtle Reality, this sign of the revelation of the All-Abiding, All-Glorious God, thou wilt fail to comprehend its mystery or to appraise its virtue. Having recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding of that Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the futility of such efforts as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the created things, to fathom the mystery of the Living God, the Day Star of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This confession of helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every mind to make is in itself the acme 166 of human understanding, and marketh the culmination of man’s development.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 165-166

 

[Pete in Panama]

If you keep insisting that black is white, it is not a viewpoint problem but a problem accepting the truth that white is white and black is black.

So where we are is you disagree w/ what I said which you considered being the same as saying black is white, and I said that it's wrong--

--to chose to be on the side we'll call "right" and to put down anyone who's different. A better idea (imho) is that we need cooperation and interchange, and that if two people are fighting about religion then they're both wrong.

Sounds like you're saying you've decided you're right and anyone w/ a different point of view is wrong, and that you don't want cooperation.

Thanks for your time.

 

[syo]

Fraud.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Fraud.

A common definition of "fraud" is--

fraud​

frôd​

noun​

1. A deception practiced in order to induce another to give up possession of property or surrender a right.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3. One that defrauds; a cheat.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.​

--and I was wondering if one of these was what u were thinking and also could you please share w/ u how you feel the term applies to this thread?

 

[syo]

A common definition of "fraud" is--

fraud​

frôd​

noun​

1. A deception practiced in order to induce another to give up possession of property or surrender a right.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3. One that defrauds; a cheat.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.​

--and I was wondering if one of these was what u were thinking and also could you please share w/ u how you feel the term applies to this thread?

Bahaulah is fraud.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Bahaulah is fraud.

You don't seem willing to clarify. If that's because you don't want to talk about it then I can respect your preference and let you be. otoh if you're afraid that your comments wouldn't be welcome then please consider that my thinking is that this is an important subject --one that should be discussed.

 

[CG Didymus]

You don't seem willing to clarify. If that's because you don't want to talk about it then I can respect your preference and let you be. otoh if you're afraid that your comments wouldn't be welcome then please consider that my thinking is that this is an important subject --one that should be discussed.

Joseph Smith? Fraud or man of God? Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? Fraud or man of God? Both of them started religious groups that have more followers than Baha'u'llah. And, unless you think they were sent by God, then that shows that people are easily fooled.

Is the Baha'i community really that great that people will look at it and say, "Wow, these people know God. They are filled with love and definitely practice what they preach"? Or is more like, "Huh, just another bunch of people that think they have found God and the truth. But most don't seem like they're all the spiritual. Some yes, but most no." I know Baha'is are supposed let deeds, not words, be their adorning. But how many follow that and live it?

That's another place where "fraud" or "hypocrites" can be applied. And I know Baha'is, Christians and all the others that believe in one religion or another are only fallible people and doing the best they can. But, especially for those people in religions that preach/teach/or in some way promote their religion as the absolute truth, they better actually live it themselves. There's true love and then there is a put-on type of love that is there only to get in good with a person to push their religion.

 

[syo]

You don't seem willing to clarify. If that's because you don't want to talk about it then I can respect your preference and let you be. otoh if you're afraid that your comments wouldn't be welcome then please consider that my thinking is that this is an important subject --one that should be discussed.

What is there to clarify?

 

[Pete in Panama]

What is there to clarify?

Huh, sounds like there's nothing to discuss then.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Joseph Smith? Fraud or man of God? Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? Fraud or man of God? Both of them started religious groups that have more followers than Baha'u'llah. And, unless you think they were sent by God, then that shows that people are easily fooled.

Is the Baha'i community really that great that people will look at it and say, "Wow, these people know God. They are filled with love and definitely practice what they preach"? Or is more like, "Huh, just another bunch of people that think they have found God and the truth. But most don't seem like they're all the spiritual. Some yes, but most no." I know Baha'is are supposed let deeds, not words, be their adorning. But how many follow that and live it?

That's another place where "fraud" or "hypocrites" can be applied. And I know Baha'is, Christians and all the others that believe in one religion or another are only fallible people and doing the best they can. But, especially for those people in religions that preach/teach/or in some way promote their religion as the absolute truth, they better actually live it themselves. There's true love and then there is a put-on type of love that is there only to get in good with a person to push their religion.

Sounds like you have very strong opinions here & I wouldn't want to risk antagonizing you by questioning them. What I was interested in discussing w/ syo was what was how he would be able to identify the return of the Presence of the Christ.

 

[Pete in Panama]

What is there to clarify?

Something I just remembered. Please tell me if you accept the Christ as a Prophet, as the Son of God? Maybe we can start there in agreement.

 

[syo]

Something I just remembered. Please tell me if you accept the Christ as a Prophet, as the Son of God? Maybe we can start there in agreement.

My interest in christ is NONE.