Quotes Series: From Quran- Authored by G-d not by Muhammad

[LuisDantas]

It seems to me to be demonstrably false that "all religions" preach this.

Yes, it is, although who knows who would define what "all religions" are?

Technically, a strict Muslim could simply declare that there are no other religions but Islaam. That would probably be sincere as well, but not very helpful in achieving mutual understanding and respect.

 

[paarsurrey]

Thanks for sharing the Koran verses. Reminds me of Hindu Scriptures declaring "Satyam Shivam Sundaram" (Truth, Godliness, Beauty) and "God is beyond words, they are just used to explain the unexplainable". Sai Baba gave some additional insights about God; are below quotes OK with one, please?

Sai Baba explained about God the following:
The basic truth in all religions…is one and the same. The philosophical ideas or practices and methods of approach may vary but the final objective and goal is only one. All religions proclaim the Oneness of Divinity and preach the cultivation of Universal Love without regard to caste, creed, country or colour.

Swami declared that there is only one God, and He is omnipresent. God is both formless and with numberless forms. All names and forms are his. We should therefore not discriminate between one form (or name) and another, but see all forms and names as the one and same God who is worshipped everywhere.

The true dwelling place of God is the heart of man, and the same God dwells in all beings. All the beings in the universe are the creation of God, and there is nothing in this world that is not divine. All are One. When people observe differences between one and another, these differences arise from our feelings of “mine and yours”. Everything we see in this world is an aspect of divinity. There is nothing else other than this. Only One exists in this world and there is no second.

Albert Einstein explained a similar idea as seen from a scientist's viewpoint:
A human being is part of the whole that we call the universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures, and the whole of Nature in its beauty… We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive.

"All religions proclaim the Oneness of Divinity and preach the cultivation of Universal Love without regard to caste, creed, country or colour"

I agree with the above colored in magenta being an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim.

It seems to me to be demonstrably false that "all religions" preach this.

I only agreed with what I colored in magenta while I was replying the post of our friend @stvdv , one may discuss one's viewpoint with him.
Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes, it is, although who knows who would define what "all religions" are?

Technically, a strict Muslim would simply declared that there are no other religions but Islaam. That would probably be sincere as well, but not very helpful in achieving mutual understanding and respect.

Please read my post #202 .

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

You are certainly peaceful enough here in these forums, at the very least.

I admire that, even while I can't in good faith claim to understand your views.

Speaking of that... would you be willing to try and enlighten me at some point about the matter of Oneness of Divinity?

My own religious views have only a very peripheral and accessory role for divinity concepts, which goes a long way towards explaining why I find Islaam so exotic. From my perspective, it is just way too busy with that God idea for anyone's good.

But if I understand a single thing about Islaam, I understand that it insists on the importance of belief in the One True God, and that it abhors belief in false, other Gods.

That is fairly odd to me, since it is dangerous to rely on the accuracy of one's own understanding of any deity. I would expect a serious religionist to put a lot of effort into not falling into such a trap, no matter how sincerely theistic or monotheistic that person might be.

Still, I have at least a general sense of what is meant by the warning against belief in false gods. It is an odd warning to me, because from where I stand there are no "true" Gods to begin with.

But sure, someone who believes that there both true and false beliefs about God would want to make the difference clear, and all the more so if those god-beliefs happen to be important to him. That is exotic, but fairly internally coherent.

But apparently Islaam goes a bit further than that. There are many indications of something that I just don't quite understand. Some form of perception that for Muslims it is important to understand, accept or believe that "God has no associates". Maybe that is just a warning against polytheism? I am just not sure.

I once described the Qur'an as a connection to Allah and got a respectful but firm response that stated in no unclear terms that it is not so. For some reason that specific Muslim, at least, found it unproper and wrong of me to say that the Qur'an is a connection to Allah.

That sure surprised me. I still don't know what to make of that, truth be told, and I tentatively assume that translation challenges play a role into it. Maybe some word for "connection" in Arabic has stronger conotations than I can guess.

But it may be something more theological in nature as well. Perhaps Allah as described in the Qur'an, that God with no associates, would likewise have no connections to Muslims either for similar reasons?

I hope that you can see what I mean. From my perspective, clearly the God of the Qur'an has associates and the Qur'an is a connection to that God. I don't believe that such a God actually exists, mind you, but as I understand the words' meanings it is just fair, even a simple technical observation, that Allah is associated with, at the very least, the prophets tha the Qur'an specifically names, and that it is just as fair to remark that the Qur'an certainly seems to mean to connect people with the God that it describes.

Do you feel like commenting or clarifying any of the above? Thanks in advance.

"You are certainly peaceful"

Thanks for one's appreciation of my and my community (Ahmadiyya) and my religion (Islam as depicted in Quran) of being peaceful.
I have always regarded one as my fast friend, though at certain points we are on the opposite side or opposite poles, nevertheless the bond of friendship does not break.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

You are certainly peaceful enough here in these forums, at the very least.

I admire that, even while I can't in good faith claim to understand your views.

Speaking of that... would you be willing to try and enlighten me at some point about the matter of Oneness of Divinity?

My own religious views have only a very peripheral and accessory role for divinity concepts, which goes a long way towards explaining why I find Islaam so exotic. From my perspective, it is just way too busy with that God idea for anyone's good.

But if I understand a single thing about Islaam, I understand that it insists on the importance of belief in the One True God, and that it abhors belief in false, other Gods.

That is fairly odd to me, since it is dangerous to rely on the accuracy of one's own understanding of any deity. I would expect a serious religionist to put a lot of effort into not falling into such a trap, no matter how sincerely theistic or monotheistic that person might be.

Still, I have at least a general sense of what is meant by the warning against belief in false gods. It is an odd warning to me, because from where I stand there are no "true" Gods to begin with.

But sure, someone who believes that there both true and false beliefs about God would want to make the difference clear, and all the more so if those god-beliefs happen to be important to him. That is exotic, but fairly internally coherent.

But apparently Islaam goes a bit further than that. There are many indications of something that I just don't quite understand. Some form of perception that for Muslims it is important to understand, accept or believe that "God has no associates". Maybe that is just a warning against polytheism? I am just not sure.

I once described the Qur'an as a connection to Allah and got a respectful but firm response that stated in no unclear terms that it is not so. For some reason that specific Muslim, at least, found it unproper and wrong of me to say that the Qur'an is a connection to Allah.

That sure surprised me. I still don't know what to make of that, truth be told, and I tentatively assume that translation challenges play a role into it. Maybe some word for "connection" in Arabic has stronger conotations than I can guess.

But it may be something more theological in nature as well. Perhaps Allah as described in the Qur'an, that God with no associates, would likewise have no connections to Muslims either for similar reasons?

I hope that you can see what I mean. From my perspective, clearly the God of the Qur'an has associates and the Qur'an is a connection to that God. I don't believe that such a God actually exists, mind you, but as I understand the words' meanings it is just fair, even a simple technical observation, that Allah is associated with, at the very least, the prophets tha the Qur'an specifically names, and that it is just as fair to remark that the Qur'an certainly seems to mean to connect people with the God that it describes.

Do you feel like commenting or clarifying any of the above? Thanks in advance.

"Do you feel like commenting or clarifying any of the above?"

I intend to do so.
First of all my point of view is not based on the "Philosophy", it is based on Quran- the Word of G-d and I quote:

[112:1]بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ﴿۱﴾
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[112:2]قُلۡ ہُوَ اللّٰہُ اَحَدٌ ۚ﴿۲﴾
Say, ‘He is Allah, the One;
[112:3]اَللّٰہُ الصَّمَدُ ۚ﴿۳﴾
‘Allah, the Independent and Besought of all.
[112:4]لَمۡ یَلِدۡ ۬ۙ وَ لَمۡ یُوۡلَدۡ ۙ﴿۴﴾
‘He begets not, nor is He begotten;
[112:5]وَ لَمۡ یَکُنۡ لَّہٗ کُفُوًا اَحَدٌ ٪﴿۵﴾
‘And there is none like unto Him.’
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 112: Al-Ikhlas
Right, please?

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

"Do you feel like commenting or clarifying any of the above?"

I intend to do so.
First of all my viewpoint of view is not based on any pure "Philosophy", it is based on Quran and I quote:

[112:1]بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ﴿۱﴾
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[112:2]قُلۡ ہُوَ اللّٰہُ اَحَدٌ ۚ﴿۲﴾
Say, ‘He is Allah, the One;
[112:3]اَللّٰہُ الصَّمَدُ ۚ﴿۳﴾
‘Allah, the Independent and Besought of all.
[112:4]لَمۡ یَلِدۡ ۬ۙ وَ لَمۡ یُوۡلَدۡ ۙ﴿۴﴾
‘He begets not, nor is He begotten;
[112:5]وَ لَمۡ یَکُنۡ لَّہٗ کُفُوًا اَحَدٌ ٪﴿۵﴾
‘And there is none like unto Him.’
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 112: Al-Ikhlas
Right, please?

Regards

I am of course not proficient in Arabic at all, but I think that you have pointed out a practical need to distinguising between a Creator God and a God who begets.

I understand that the standard interpretation would be that here the Qur'an is stating that God does not have biological sons as such. Fair enough, but not necessarily a clear or inequivocal interpretation.

For all I know, it can be a self-evident, even ridiculously easy distinction for a native writer of Arabic. But I will respectfully point out that it isn't all that evident for me from where I stand.

(I think that we can both simply agree that the God of the Qur'an is presented as Creator of Existence, but feel free to elaborate on that if you want to.)

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't see how my previous post would be at all creative, @stvdv

 

[paarsurrey]

I am of course not proficient in Arabic at all, but I think that you have pointed out a practical need to distinguising between a Creator God and a God who begets.

I understand that the standard interpretation would be that here the Qur'an is stating that God does not have biological sons as such. Fair enough, but not necessarily a clear or inequivocal interpretation.

For all I know, it can be a self-evident, even ridiculously easy distinction for a native writer of Arabic. But I will respectfully point out that it isn't all that evident for me from where I stand.

(I think that we can both simply agree that the God of the Qur'an is presented as Creator of Existence, but feel free to elaborate on that if you want to.)

I usually quote from the link that provides translation by Sher Ali:
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 1: Al-Fatihah
To help understand one could also use the followings:
The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran for word for word translation and grammar.
al-Fatihah 1:1
This site provides 50+ translations of Quran including some rendered by Non-Muslims, Jews and Christians; there is no restriction if some Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism people also do it.
The original text in Arabic is secure and protected. Quran uses about 3000 root-words of vocabulary, not much if one starts learning it.
I understand directly from the original Arabic text, just for information, please.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

I usually quote from the link that provides translation by Sher Ali:
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 1: Al-Fatihah
To help understand one could also use the followings:
The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran for word for word translation and grammar.
al-Fatihah 1:1
This site provides 50+ translations of Quran including some rendered by Non-Muslims, Jews and Christians; there is no restriction if some Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism people also do it.
The original text in Arabic is secure and protected. Quran uses about 3000 root-words of vocabulary, not much if one starts learning it.
I understand directly from the original Arabic text, just for information, please.

Regards

I don't doubt the accuracy nor the availability of the translations or of the original text in Arabic.

But I am still curious on how easy it would be to tell apart the meanings in that language.

 

[paarsurrey]

"Usually a direct word will be prefaced by the word "say." "

Quran is authored by G-d as per the criterion suggested by our Christian friend @Muffled in post #97 in this thread . G-d tells Muhammad with the word "say" and or "قُلۡ" in Arabic original language and I have quoted many such verses in my previous posts .
Yet there are other styles (many of them) that depict that the converse is direct from G-d with Muhammad. Since I daily read some portion of Quran(1/120) very early in the morning, so I will be quoting as I observe them while I read Quran. The words "اَلَمۡ تَرَ" or "Dost thou" is another style:

[31:32]اَلَمۡ تَرَ اَنَّ الۡفُلۡکَ تَجۡرِیۡ فِی الۡبَحۡرِ بِنِعۡمَتِ اللّٰہِ لِیُرِیَکُمۡ مِّنۡ اٰیٰتِہٖ ؕ اِنَّ فِیۡ ذٰلِکَ لَاٰیٰتٍ لِّکُلِّ صَبَّارٍ شَکُوۡرٍ ﴿۳۲﴾
Dost thou not see that the ships sail on the sea by the favour of Allah, that He may show you of His Signs? Therein surely are Signs for everyone who is patient and grateful.
[31:33]وَ اِذَا غَشِیَہُمۡ مَّوۡجٌ کَالظُّلَلِ دَعَوُا اللّٰہَ مُخۡلِصِیۡنَ لَہُ الدِّیۡنَ ۬ۚ فَلَمَّا نَجّٰہُمۡ اِلَی الۡبَرِّ فَمِنۡہُمۡ مُّقۡتَصِدٌ ؕ وَ مَا یَجۡحَدُ بِاٰیٰتِنَاۤ اِلَّا کُلُّ خَتَّارٍ کَفُوۡرٍ ﴿۳۳﴾
And when waves engulf them like so many coverings, they call upon Allah, being sincere to Him in faith; but when He brings them safe to land, then some of them take the right course. And none denies Our Signs save every perfidous and ungrateful person.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 31: Luqman

"Is there any such verse in the Bible of the Christianity where G-d (not Jesus, who Jesus was never god or son of god) has directly, please?
If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
Is there any such verse in Kitab-i-Iqan by Bahaullah (where G-d has directly spoken to Bahaullah, Bahaullah was never a god), there cannot be any as G-d did not speak to Bahaullah directly? If there is any, please quote it here. Right, please?
Is there any such verse from Moses' Torah , please?
If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?"

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

It is easy, it is the Kitab-i-Iqan by Baha'u'llah. It was suggested to you by Tony - Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 3-41 It is the core theological book of Baha'u'llah.

Having said that, the Quran itself is made of an assembly of surahs not all revealed at once, so if one were to assemble the Iqan and the Aqdas it would be 257 +90 = 347 pages, which is less than the 600+ pages of the Quran, so you see in less space Baha'u'llah has offered 2 books which combined would easily be equivalent to the Quran. That being said, the Iqan will suffice for your purposes.

What is the word count of Aqdas and Iqan, please?

Wrong please? Again, again, again, and again, you put too much emphasis on the "Book of Certitude" as the whole of Baha'i Revelation of God, and it is NOT. Your extreme selective bias against the Baha'i Faith is clearly apparent.

Nonetheless, Baha'u'llah proclaim His message a Manifestation of the Word of God.

“From time immemorial,” Bahá’u’lláh, speaking of God, explains, “He, the Divine Being, hath been veiled in the ineffable sanctity of His exalted Self, and will everlasting continue to be wrapt in the impenetrable mystery of His unknowable Essence… Ten thousand Prophets, each a Moses, are thunderstruck upon the Sinai of their search at God’s forbidding voice, ‘Thou shalt never behold Me!’; whilst a myriad Messengers, each as great as Jesus, stand dismayed upon their heavenly thrones by the interdiction ‘Mine Essence thou shalt never apprehend!’” “How bewildering to me, insignificant as I am,” Bahá’u’lláh in His communion with God affirms, “is the attempt to fathom the sacred depths of Thy knowledge! How futile my efforts to visualize the magnitude of the power inherent in Thine handiwork—the revelation of Thy creative power!” “When I contemplate, O my God, the relationship that bindeth me to Thee,” He, in yet another prayer revealed in His own handwriting, testifies, “I am moved to proclaim to all created things ‘verily I am God!’; and when I consider my own self, lo, I find it coarser than clay!”

“The door of the knowledge of the Ancient of Days,” Bahá’u’lláh further states in the Kitáb-i-Íqán, “being thus closed in the face of all beings, He, the Source of infinite grace … hath caused those luminous Gems of Holiness to appear out of the realm of the spirit, in the noble form of the human temple, and be made manifest unto all men, that they may impart unto the world the mysteries of the unchangeable Being and tell of the subtleties of His imperishable Essence… All the Prophets of God, His well-favored, His holy and chosen Messengers are, without exception, the bearers of 114 His names and the embodiments of His attributes… These Tabernacles of Holiness, these primal Mirrors which reflect the Light of unfading glory, are but expressions of Him Who is the Invisible of the Invisibles.”

Friend @shunyadragon
"you put too much emphasis on the "Book of Certitude" "

It ("Kitab-i-Iqan"/"Book of Certitude") was suggested to me for reading as a top Bahaullah's writing for comparative study with Quran, by the Bahaism people themselves.Right, please?

Now one suggests me that "Kitab-i-Iqan"/"Book of Certitude" is not much of value or has no value at all. Right, please?

Regards

 

[stvdv]

Yes, it is, although who knows who would define what "all religions" are?

Technically, a strict Muslim could simply declare that there are no other religions but Islaam

I don't see how my previous post would be at all creative, @stvdv

I thought this was a creative idea to make the definition of "All religions" easier, if one believes "there is no other religion but Islam"

In India I heard a similar expression "There is only 1 religion, the Religion of Love". Together with the 5 pillars that I learned: Truth, Righteousness, Peace, Love and non Violence, of which it is "Love" that binds them all, I found it creative what you said, esp. considering Islam to be "the religion of Peace". So I felt some recognition, as it felt to me similar as "There is 1 Religion, the Religion of Peace (=Love)". All that flashed in a second through my brain, hence I gave you a "creative" frubal.

But, I don't want to give a frubal, that does not feel good for you, so I did remove the frubal (I know that giving wrong frubals is a violation, even if my intention was pure).

 

[shunyadragon]

Friend @shunyadragon
"you put too much emphasis on the "Book of Certitude" "

It ("Kitab-i-Iqan"/"Book of Certitude") was suggested to me for reading as a top Bahaullah's writing for comparative study with Quran, by the Bahaism people themselves.Right, please?

Now one suggests me that "Kitab-i-Iqan"/"Book of Certitude" is not much of value or has no value at all. Right, please?

Regards

With your perspective of Quran ONLY any response to your posts would be inadequate as far as you are concerned. This is the same problematic claim of other ancient religions like Judaism and Christianity. I consider the Quran the Holy Book for the Age, but that age has passed. I believe it is very very obvious that the Quran doe not address the spiritual needs of the contemporary world.

Concerning the Katab-iqan No wrong please? The Katab-iqan is an important scripture in the Baha'i Faitn, but it does not stand alone in the context of the volumes of Baha'i scripture.

You have failed to respond to the contradiction that you consider the only scripture authored by God, yet you acknowledge that there were other Manifestations of God like Buddha who also have their own scripture.

 

[paarsurrey]

With your perspective of Quran ONLY any response to your posts would be inadequate as far as you are concerned. This is the same problematic claim of other ancient religions like Judaism and Christianity. I consider the Quran the Holy Book for the Age, but that age has passed. I believe it is very very obvious that the Quran doe not address the spiritual needs of the contemporary world.

Concerning the Katab-iqan No wrong please? The Katab-iqan is an important scripture in the Baha'i Faitn, but it does not stand alone in the context of the volumes of Baha'i scripture.

You have failed to respond to the contradiction that you consider the only scripture authored by God, yet you acknowledge that there were other Manifestations of God like Buddha who also have their own scripture.

"Manifestations of God like Buddha"

Please don't misrepresent me and quote the post in which I mentioned these words, with highlighting the words "Manifestations of God", about Buddha. Right, please?
I never used these words "Manifestations of God" about Buddha.Right, please?

Regards

 

[shunyadragon]

"Manifestations of God like Buddha"

Please don't misrepresent me and quote the post in which I mentioned these words, with highlighting the words "Manifestations of God", about Buddha. Right, please?
I never used these words "Manifestations of God" about Buddha.Right, please?

Regards

Which other Manifestations of God were you referring to?

 

[paarsurrey]

I thought this was a creative idea to make the definition of "All religions" easier, if one believes "there is no other religion but Islam"

In India I heard a similar expression "There is only 1 religion, the Religion of Love". Together with the 5 pillars that I learned: Truth, Righteousness, Peace, Love and non Violence, of which it is "Love" that binds them all, I found it creative what you said, esp. considering Islam to be "the religion of Peace". So I felt some recognition, as it felt to me similar as "There is 1 Religion, the Religion of Peace (=Love)". All that flashed in a second through my brain, hence I gave you a "creative" frubal.

But, I don't want to give a frubal, that does not feel good for you, so I did remove the frubal (I know that giving wrong frubals is a violation, even if my intention was pure).

"considering Islam to be "the religion of Peace" "

Thanks for one's above words, please.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Which other Manifestations of God were you referring to?

I did not mention that Buddha was a manifestation of G-d. I don't accept that Bahaullah was a manifestation of God, it is a Bahaism concept, I don't have to do anything about this concept.
Manifestation of God is everywhere in the Universe. Right, please?
One is a friend , however, please.

Regards

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I only agreed with what I colored in magenta while I was replying the post of our friend @stvdv , one may discuss one's viewpoint with him.
Right, please?

Regards

So you're just agreeing to a few random words with no particular context?

Owkay.

Doesn't seem to make much sense though.

 

[England my lionheart]

There are two persons one is a human being, and the other is G-d. One has expressed one's view point and there is no compulsion on one to believe in G-d that He Converses with the human beings.
G-d has fixed another method, is there any compulsion on Him to accede to one's viewpoint, please?

Regards

Sure,its called logic,makes sense,then there would be no doubt or disbelief.

 

[paarsurrey]

"Usually a direct word will be prefaced by the word "say." "

Quran is authored by G-d as per the criterion suggested by our Christian friend @Muffled in post #97 in this thread . G-d tells Muhammad with the word "say" and or "قُلۡ" in Arabic original language and I have quoted many such verses in my previous posts .
Yet there are other styles (many of them) that depict that the Converse is direct from G-d with Muhammad. Since I daily read some portion of Quran(1/120) very early in the morning, so I will be quoting as I observe them while I read Quran. The words "اَلَمۡ تَرَ" or "Dost thou" is another style of direct address to Muhammad by G-d. And "یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّبِیُّ" or "O thou Prophet" is yet another one:

[33:2]یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّبِیُّ اتَّقِ اللّٰہَ وَ لَا تُطِعِ الۡکٰفِرِیۡنَ وَ الۡمُنٰفِقِیۡنَ ؕ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ کَانَ عَلِیۡمًا حَکِیۡمًا ۙ﴿۲﴾
O thou Prophet, seek protection in Allah, and follow not the wishes of the disbelievers and the hypocrites. Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, Wise.
[33:3]وَّ اتَّبِعۡ مَا یُوۡحٰۤی اِلَیۡکَ مِنۡ رَّبِّکَ ؕ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ کَانَ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ خَبِیۡرًا ۙ﴿۳﴾
And follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord. Verily Allah is well aware of what you do.
[33:4]وَّ تَوَکَّلۡ عَلَی اللّٰہِ ؕ وَ کَفٰی بِاللّٰہِ وَکِیۡلًا ﴿۴﴾
And put thy trust in Allah, and Allah is sufficient as a Guardian.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 33: Al-Ahzab
Right, please?

1. Is there any such verse in the Torah of the Judaism where G-d has directly addressed Moses, please?If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
2. Is there any such verse in the Bible of the Christianity where G-d (not Jesus, who Jesus was never god or son of god) has directly addressed Jesus, please?If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
3. Is there any such verse in Kitab-i-Iqan by Bahaullah (where G-d has directly spoken to Bahaullah, Bahaullah was never a god), there cannot be any verse as G-d did not speak to Bahaullah directly? If there is any, please quote it here. Right, please?

Regards