What constitutes a Prophet of the God of Abraham?

[Trailblazer]

Either one of you can answer this. I have no problem with Baha'is saying that Jesus or Baha'u'llah are a "perfect" reflection of God and had a two-fold nature. However, if Baha'is include Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha or Muhammad in there, then... I don't see it. Show me why any of them are more than a Holy man, a sage, or an ordinary prophet? New cycles? A new religion? East and West flooded with light? Sent forth to the entire world?

So why do Baha'is elevate them to this higher level of having a "two-fold" nature? Especially those others, Adam, Noah, and Abraham. Buddha should be yet another category.

These are valid questions but I don't have the answers. Other than what Baha'ullah wrote in The Kitab-i-Iqan concerning these 'other Prophets' that are described in the Old Testament, I do not know why they are considered Manifestations of God with a twofold nature. On this thread @ adrian009, gave me the list of Prophets who are considered to be Manifestations of God, so maybe you could ask him why that has come to be a Baha'i belief.

For me, the Baha'i Faith is just trying to find a way to make all religions seem like they are "one". Baha'is make them all come from the same source, the Abrahamic God.

All we Baha'is are saying is that all the revealed religions (religions that had a Messenger/Prophet) came from God; we are not trying to say that all religions are one, in the sense of being the same. We believe that religions are all different, and there is no reason to think they could ever be combined into one, without losing the teachings of each one, and we are not stating that as our goal.

Baha'is do not believe that there is an 'Abrahamic God,' we believe that there is just one true God, the God who has revealed all the religions through His Messengers throughout human history.

But that God doesn't fit very well with all religions. So Baha'is have to make him fit into religions like Hinduism and Buddhism. All it accomplishes is it forces Baha'is to have to explain their way out of tons of contradictory Scriptures from the other religions. It makes for some great debates.

Baha'is do not have to make anything FIT anywhere. All true religions stand on their own merit, they do not have to FIT in with the Baha'i Faith. All religions are different so they have their own scriptures which are different from other religious sculptures. If they were the same, there would have been no reason for God to send new Messengers in every age. Moreover, how humanity progressed from age to age and from religion to religion is not a straight line.

“The Purpose of the one true God, exalted be His glory, in revealing Himself unto men is to lay bare those gems that lie hidden within the mine of their true and inmost selves. That the divers communions of the earth, and the manifold systems of religious belief, should never be allowed to foster the feelings of animosity among men, is, in this Day, of the essence of the Faith of God and His Religion. These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 287-288

But it kind of defeats the purpose of bringing people of all religions together, because, whether they want to or not, whether they believe it or not, the Baha'i Faith doesn't really believe in any of the other religions.

That is patently false. First, Bahais are not trying to bring people of all the religions together into one religion, the Baha'i Faith. People of the older religions can either choose to became Baha'is or not and if they do the are no longer a member of their respective religion.

Secondly, just because we believe as you said that older religions are teaching false beliefs and have created false doctrines, that does not mean that those religions as revealed by God are false.

They believe that it's time to move on. Those religions might have been right ages ago. They might have helped many people, but they are not the religion of today. I think that is being more honest, but it still isn't going to make a lot of friends with the people of the other religions.

Yes, that is what I believe because that is essentially what Baha'u'llah wrote, and unlike many Baha'is I do not try to sugar coat it because I consider that dishonest.

Most Baha'is I know want to have it both ways; they say they believe Baha'u'llah was infallible but then they dismiss what He wrote and sweep it under the carpet so they won't hurt anyone's feelings. Baha'u'llah either wrote the following of He didn't. I am sorry if people don't like it but sweeping it under the carpet is not the solution because that misrepresents the Baha'i Faith beliefs. Moreover, do Christians sweep it under the carpet their belief that Jesus is the Only Way?

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 171

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Either one of you can answer this. I have no problem with Baha'is saying that Jesus or Baha'u'llah are a "perfect" reflection of God and had a two-fold nature. However, if Baha'is include Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha or Muhammad in there, then... I don't see it. Show me why any of them are more than a Holy man, a sage, or an ordinary prophet? New cycles? A new religion? East and West flooded with light? Sent forth to the entire world? What religion and what book did Adam, Noah and Abraham bring? Even Moses, do you really think he wrote the first five books of the Bible? And did he "found" Judaism? Muhammad, sure he had a book and a religion. But were Moses and Muhammad "perfectly" polished mirrors? I doubt it. Prophets? Sure, but I don't think they, even by their own followers, were ever considered "manifestations".

So why do Baha'is elevate them to this higher level of having a "two-fold" nature? Especially those others, Adam, Noah, and Abraham. Buddha should be yet another category. I thought he found a way for any one to reach enlightenment. He didn't teach that others could gain "manifestationhood". Then the one I left out, Krishna. He was not a manifestation but an incarnation. And he was only one of many. And Baha'is don't include any of the other incarnations of Vishnu on any of their lists of manifestations.

For me, the Baha'i Faith is just trying to find a way to make all religions seem like they are "one". Baha'is make them all come from the same source, the Abrahamic God. But that God doesn't fit very well with all religions. So Baha'is have to make him fit into religions like Hinduism and Buddhism. All it accomplishes is it forces Baha'is to have to explain their way out of tons of contradictory Scriptures from the other religions. It makes for some great debates. But it kind of defeats the purpose of bringing people of all religions together, because, whether they want to or not, whether they believe it or not, the Baha'i Faith doesn't really believe in any of the other religions.

They believe all of them have gone astray and are teaching false beliefs and have created false doctrines. You're maybe the only Baha'i that has said things like that... that it's time to move on. Those religions might have been right ages ago. They might have helped many people, but they are not the religion of today. I think that is being more honest, but it still isn't going to make a lot of friends with the people of the other religions.

I see sharing what Baha'u'llah offered is Honest, giving my take on it all, is not.

It is Bahaullah that offered to us that all Messages are from the same One God. All else I offer is explained in the Baha'i Writings.

The rest is up to you and all others CG.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I see sharing what Baha'u'llah offered is Honest, giving my take on it all, is not.

Why isn't it honest to give tour take on it, if you are telling the truth as you interpret what Baha'u'llah wrote?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why isn't it honest to give tour take on it, if you are telling the truth as you interpret what Baha'u'llah wrote?

More of a play on words.

If my take on it is that God does not exist, then I may think I am offering good advice, but when I read what Baha'u'llah offered, I would most likely be seen as wrong.

That concept goes right down to any interpretation of what is written. Baha'u'llah says offer the pure unaltered Word for a reason.

Look how many misunderstandings have been raised on RF, when we put our ideas into the mix.

The best we can do, is offer more of what Baha'u'llah offered in response to a reply we see is not in tune with what Baha'u'llah offerd. It does not mean we have understood the passage as it was intended.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

The best we can do, is offer more of what Baha'u'llah offered in response to a reply we see is not in tune with what Baha'u'llah offerd. It does not mean we have understood the passage as it was intended.

That's true, we might have misunderstood any given passage and when it us clearly written we can just post the passage, but I see nothing wrong with introducing the passage if it was something we were discussing with someone.

 

[Unity of Mankind]

For me, the Baha'i Faith is just trying to find a way to make all religions seem like they are "one". Baha'is make them all come from the same source, the Abrahamic God. But that God doesn't fit very well with all religions. So Baha'is have to make him fit into religions like Hinduism and Buddhism. All it accomplishes is it forces Baha'is to have to explain their way out of tons of contradictory Scriptures from the other religions. It makes for some great debates. But it kind of defeats the purpose of bringing people of all religions together, because, whether they want to or not, whether they believe it or not, the Baha'i Faith doesn't really believe in any of the other religions.

The Baha'i Faith is not just trying to find a way to make all religions seem like they are "one." They are all one from the same source, God, or they are not. However, they are not one in their individual messages which were separately designed for the circumstances of humanity when they appeared.

IMO, if you are serious about wanting to know what the Baha’i Faith actually teaches you must access official Baha’i source materials.

I recommend considering what is contained in “Some Answered Questions” which is contained in the “Baha’i Reference Library.” In it there are five parts beginning with PART ONE: ON THE INFLUENCE OF THE PROPHETS IN THE EVOLUTION OF HUMANITY, PART TWO: SOME CHRISTIAN SUBJECTS, PART THREE: ON THE POWERS AND CONDITIONS OF THE MANIFESTATIONS OF GOD, PART FOUR: ON THE ORIGIN, POWERS AND CONDITIONS OF MAN AND PART FIVE: MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

The advantage you will have by accessing official Baha’i source materials is that it will enable you to have an overall perspective rather than limiting your having to depend on responses from individuals who are adherents of the Baha’i Faith like myself who can’t possibly accurately know everything that has so laboriously been gathered in such extensive materials.

If you want a link to the materials sited above let me know.

 

[Aupmanyav]

They are all one from the same source, ..

What about the authenticity of the source, editor and the publisher?

 

[Unity of Mankind]

What about the authenticity of the source, editor and the publisher?

I recommend reading and considering what the message is in ... "the source, editor and the publisher" before judging its authenticity or worthiness.

 

[Marcion]

So you have someone you refer to and consider an authority on these matters just as I have somebody, Baha'u'llah, who I consider an authority. From a logical point of view, it seems as if the important question is whether Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be, the Voice of God, because if He was that would mean that whatever He wrote is the truth about Prophets, and Jesus, and everything else.

At some point in our lives we all have to pick a belief, or we can remain undecided. I picked my belief over 50 years ago and I have found no reason to switch.

The main reason that I prefer Ba'Ba' over Baha'u'llah is that I'm not a religious person by nature, I prefer a more scientific or rational approach to life and to spirituality.

I cannot verify if the frame of those three successive Mahakaula's or Bhagavans is historically correct but in fact I find the personalities of Shiva and Krishna very attractive anyway, at least in the way Ba'ba' describes them.
50 Years is a long time, I came to this path not before the age of twenty.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I recommend reading and considering what the message is in ... "the source, editor and the publisher" before judging its authenticity or worthiness.

I have read that and I do not find even an iota of what I can term as evidence.

 

[Trailblazer]

The main reason that I prefer Ba'Ba' over Baha'u'llah is that I'm not a religious person by nature, I prefer a more scientific or rational approach to life and to spirituality.

The primary reason I believe in Baha'u'llah is because of all the evidence that supports His claim to be the return of Christ, the Messiah, and the Promised One of all the religions. I would be on the first train out of Dodge if I was not entirely certain of who Baha'u'llah was, because being a Baha'i is no walk in the park.

Another reason I believe in Baha'u'llah is because I believe He offered a rational approach to life and to spirituality.

I am also not a religious person by nature, which explains why I feel like a fish out of water whenever I am around other Baha'is who pray and carry on other rituals.

 

[Marcion]

The primary reason I believe in Baha'u'llah is because of all the evidence that supports His claim to be the return of Christ, the Messiah, and the Promised One of all the religions. I would be on the first train out of Dodge if I was not entirely certain of who Baha'u'llah was, because being a Baha'i is no walk in the park.

Another reason I believe in Baha'u'llah is because I believe He offered a rational approach to life and to spirituality.

I am also not a religious person by nature, which explains why I feel like a fish out of water whenever I am around other Baha'is who pray and carry on other rituals.

From my viewpoint the way Baha'u'llah speaks or writes is quite religious.
I don't think in terms of belief (or disblief) but I view the titles Prophet, Christ, Messiah or Promised One for Jesus as man-made titles that do not reflect the reality about the historical Jesus.

Tantra-Yoga is not a religion, it is a way of life, a system of spiritual practices.
The personalities of the great Tantric Masters Shri Shiva and Shri Krishna were after centuries absorbed into religious traditions but they originally taught tantric practices rather than religious practices. In the same way I see Jesus as a teacher of tantric practices as well.

Which does not mean that there is not a certain amount of tantric practices in certain religious traditions as well. Washing before prayers or meditation in the Muslim fashion e.g. is a tantric practice. And for all I know there may have been quite tantric personalities among the prophets also.

The Mormon faith also has such a special frame, they place Adam, Moses, Jesus and Joseph Smith in a similar row of special personalities but I'm not sure how they call them exactly.

There are probably more traditions that do this kind of thing in different ways.

 

[CG Didymus]

All we Baha'is are saying is that all the revealed religions (religions that had a Messenger/Prophet) came from God;

Yes and they have progressively given more information. But all we have to do is go back to the NT and we already have a religion that got started by what people said about Jesus and the things he taught. We don't know what was really "revealed" by Jesus. Then go back to the origins of Hinduism. Who revealed those teachings? Krishna didn't come until later. And, did he write the Bhagavad-Gita? He was just one of many avatars of Vishnu. But I rarely hear Baha'is mention anything about the previous incarnations.

The Baha'i Faith is not just trying to find a way to make all religions seem like they are "one." They are all one from the same source, God, or they are not. However, they are not one in their individual messages which were separately designed for the circumstances of humanity when they appeared.

Well, I think, in a way you are. What do Baha'i mean by "progressive revelation"? Isn't it that all religions came from the same source and that the only differences between them are the social teachings. But that the spiritual teachings remain the same. Yet, all the religions teach different things. What I've heard from Baha'is is that this is because the followers of the religion added in man-made traditions and misinterpreted the Scriptures. But, on top of that, it is the followers of the religion that wrote the Scriptures. So until Muhammad and The Bab and Baha'u'llah, those other religions that Baha'is recognize as "true" revealed religions, weren't. We have no way of knowing what the prophet really said and did... or if he was even real, or just based on legends.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes and they have progressively given more information. But all we have to do is go back to the NT and we already have a religion that got started by what people said about Jesus and the things he taught. We don't know what was really "revealed" by Jesus. Then go back to the origins of Hinduism. Who revealed those teachings? Krishna didn't come until later. And, did he write the Bhagavad-Gita? He was just one of many avatars of Vishnu. But I rarely hear Baha'is mention anything about the previous incarnations.

That's right, we don't know what was really revealed by Jesus or any of the other Messengers of God except the Bab and Baha'u'llah, because the Bab and Baha'u'llah were the only ones who ever wrote anything in their own pens.

 

[Unity of Mankind]

Well, I think, in a way you are. What do Baha'i mean by "progressive revelation"? Isn't it that all religions came from the same source and that the only differences between them are the social teachings.

Although it is a Baha’i teaching that all religions came from the same source, God, it is not true that the only differences between them are the social teachings. They also differ in the intensity of their spiritual light or principles because all life is about change. So IMO progressive revelation from the stand point of change can be likened to education. Educationally humans in their earliest development could be likened to being in kindergarten. Later on humans progressively advanced to the level of grade school, high school, and so on to higher education.

However, IMO, when using the educational way of seeing progressive revelation one must not leave out the insertion of human errors that tainted what education the Prophets brought them before, thereby necessitating future Prophets to include corrections. An example of this can be seen in the New Testament of the Bible wherein Jesus spoke of the spirit of truth bringing to remembrance whatsoever He had taught them after He was gone.

You point out Baha’is say “...followers of the religion added in man-made traditions and misinterpreted the Scriptures. But, on top of that, it is the followers of the religion that wrote the Scriptures. So until Muhammad and The Bab and Baha'u'llah, those other religions that Baha'is recognize as "true" revealed religions, weren't. We have no way of knowing what the prophet really said and did... or if he was even real, or just based on legends."

Although I don't have written quotes from Baha'u'llah readily at hand He does verify and testify about the transcendence of Jesus Christ. As I understand it before the four Gospels of the Apostles Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were written down their contents were firstly conveyed by oral tradition by followers after their deaths. Muslims believed, as I recall, that all records of the teachings of Jesus were lost but Baha'u'llah refutes that. How else could followers of Christ be held accountable by God?

 

[Trailblazer]

From my viewpoint the way Baha'u'llah speaks or writes is quite religious.

Yes, I'd have to agree with you on that since Baha'u'llah wrote a lot about religion and stressed its importance. For example:

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

I don't think in terms of belief (or disblief) but I view the titles Prophet, Christ, Messiah or Promised One for Jesus as man-made titles that do not reflect the reality about the historical Jesus.

These titles are just descriptive and they underestimate the true reality if Jesus, which we cannot really know.

Tantra-Yoga is not a religion, it is a way of life, a system of spiritual practices.
The personalities of the great Tantric Masters Shri Shiva and Shri Krishna were after centuries absorbed into religious traditions but they originally taught tantric practices rather than religious practices. In the same way I see Jesus as a teacher of tantric practices as well.

Which does not mean that there is not a certain amount of tantric practices in certain religious traditions as well. Washing before prayers or meditation in the Muslim fashion e.g. is a tantric practice. And for all I know there may have been quite tantric personalities among the prophets also.

The Mormon faith also has such a special frame, they place Adam, Moses, Jesus and Joseph Smith in a similar row of special personalities but I'm not sure how they call them exactly.

There are probably more traditions that do this kind of thing in different ways.

Thanks for explaining about spiritual practices. I have never been much for any set practices because I would feel too constrained, even though I have to admit that they are probably beneficial.
As a Trailblazer, I have always done my own thing, so I do not conform to Baha'i standards either.

 

[Marcion]

Thanks for explaining about spiritual practices. I have never been much for any set practices because I would feel too constrained, even though I have to admit that they are probably beneficial.
As a Trailblazer, I have always done my own thing, so I do not conform to Baha'i standards either.

Spiritual practices however are essential for spiritual growth.
In a spiritual path there is a spiritual philosophy that is derived mostly from the practices which make up the path.
In religion this coupling to actual practices is only minor, it consists largely of pure theory.

The genuine teachings of Jesus are mostly spiritual philosophy based on tantric practices.
The large body of added Christian teachings in the New Testament is mostly religious in nature.
The idea of successive religious prophets (intended in that way by God) is not a tantric idea but a religious one, I don't see that is has a base in reality.

Having said that, the mentioned prophets may have also given some tantric type of teachings. But I would not dare to say if there is a progression in the extent and depth of those teachings from one to the next.
Stressing the unity between people is always a good thing but such a message is only strong when based on real facts.

 

[Trailblazer]

Spiritual practices however are essential for spiritual growth.
In a spiritual path there is a spiritual philosophy that is derived mostly from the practices.

Can you give me some examples of spiritual practices?
Baha'is might include prayer, meditation and fasting as spiritual practices.
Spiritual practices are important for individual spiritual growth, but I focus more upon collective spiritual growth.

The genuine teachings of Jesus are mostly spiritual philosophy based on tantric practices.

How would you define tantric practices?

 

[Marcion]

Can you give me some examples of spiritual practices?
Baha'is might include prayer, meditation and fasting as spiritual practices.
Spiritual practices are important for individual spiritual growth, but I focus more upon collective spiritual growth.

A society may advance collectively in its socio-spiritual culture, but progress is on the individual level, it is your own mind expanding towards the Cosmic Consciousness (God).

Any practice that leads to the expansion of your mind towards the Supreme is a spiritual practice. You can think of meditation, certain ideations in day to day life and any other supporting practice such as yoga, inward and outward cleanliness, fasting, collective meditation, pure diet, following moral codes based on love for and service to the Supreme, etc.

How would you define tantric practices?

Tantra means liberation ('tra') from ignorance or darkness ('tan'). So any intuitive or introspective practice that has this liberating or expansive effect is a tantric practice.

Vedic practices are different (not tantric). You can think of e.g. making physical offerings to God or gods, going on pilgrimages to so-called holy places, the ritual use of fire, water or incense, praying to God to do things for yourself or for others, asking priests to say prayers on your behalf, etc.

In most religions there is a mixture of tantric and vedic practices. Vedic practices are more extrovertive and tantric practices are introvertive. The more tantric the path, the speedier the spiritual growth of the spiritual aspirant will be.

 

[CG Didymus]

Rama gets nearly the same amount of worship as Krishna, and most certainly He's at the same level, according to Hindus. Besides that, all the sects of Hinduism besides Vaishnavism are ignored entirely. I'm happy with that. I don't feel the need to be part of this invented tribe.

Good to see you're still at it, offering up the alternative POV. You must feel outnumbered at times.

Hey, how are you? Yes, I'm usually outnumbered two to one, Trailblazer and Tony. But I don't really expect much from the Baha'is. They are essentially saying, in as nice a way possible, that all the other religions are wrong, and a "true" spiritual person would be able to recognize Baha'u'llah as the new prophet/messenger/manifestation for today. I must have asked a dozen times now for them to tell me of any other religion that practices and teaches the truth from God. I don't think they can, because they believe that their religion is the only one that is right.

It becomes meaningless for them to say they believe in Krishna, and then say that he is not an incarnation of Vishnu and that reincarnation is a false belief. They do they same with Jesus. The prophet/messengers that they believe in are defined by them. And the easiest one for them to redefine from Hinduism is Krishna. But they ignore everything else about Hinduism. And by acknowledging Krishna, they think they can move on to another prophet/messenger and say, "See, it is all a progression. All of them spoke the truth for their time, but that time has passed. We've now moved on to a new messenger that has brought new knowledge."

But what can they say to you? A follower of a type of Hinduism that doesn't believe in Krishna? And what do they tell those Hindus that follow Rama or something other than Krishna? They have to say that all of you are wrong... That Krishna is indeed a "manifestation" of God... That you should believe in him. But then, what do they expect you to believe about him? Not what Hindus believe about him, but what Baha'is believe about him. And that's my problem with the Baha'i Faith. They gloss over or ignore so much about the other religions.

And I interpret that as them saying... "Hey, we have a great religion that will fix the world and bring about peace and harmony. So don't worry about the other religions. They were all okay, but they don't have the answers for today's problems. And, you know what, they all promised a new messenger would come. And guess what? Our guy, Baha'u'llah is him. He is the promised one of all religions. So climb aboard the Baha'i peace train and let's bring peace and unity to the world." But can they deliver? Can the things Baha'is say to do actually work? Are they working? I don't know. But I keep asking?