Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
In my opinion @loverofhumanity shouldn't just be including "major" religions.
-
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!
What if we accepted each others Religion?
- Thread starter loverofhumanity
- Start date
Okay, so obtain a public general statement from the (Haifan) Baha'i Universal House of Justice to the effect that could any individual remain adamant after loving deepening that Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi are not infallible and remain in good standing and with full voting and administrative privileges in the Baha'i community? - I doubt you could even obtain that in my view.
Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
It would be wonderful if you were the head of the Baha'i Faith.
Baha'is accept the Founders and Scriptures of all the major religions.
The only thing we do not accept are the interpretations of others as they do not constitute part of the original teachings.
The reason we read from the Dhammapada, the Old Testament, New Testament, Quran, Bhagavad-Gita and Zoroastrian scriptures in all our services across the world is because we sincerely believe in them. Just not the manmade stuff like interpretations and sermons.
We accept the Founders, so we accept Christ, Buddha, Muhammad, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses and all their Holy Books.
Not to accept the conflicting and contradicting interpretations of individual believers which are in the millions does not constitute rejecting their religion. Even Christians are divided amongst themselves as to the true meaning of the Bible as are Muslims the Quran and other religions as well.
Please be fair and just. We accept all the major religions just not the man-made interpretations which are not a part of the original scripture.
Whatever has good merit and serves mankind well is accepted by Baha'is as well.
Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
Okay.
No amount of proselytizing this view of yours, is going to change our minds.
Regards Tony
Any wisecrack to avoid addressing the central point in question, am I right?
Of course not, you are determined to hold your view in spite of the contrary evidence in my view.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Yes, and that's why I think it can't work. We will have leaders just as corrupt as the ones we have now.
And then give them the authority to make decisions and the power to enforce them?
But, even if it was Baha'is in control, I wouldn't trust them with that kind of power and authority either. But at least they might be a little more just and fair.
Okay, what is the "good"? And what do we do with the rest?
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Do you really? Let's see.
Ah, you accept the "original" teachings... Just not those "interpretations."
Again, you say not those manmade interpretations. So, those Scriptures you mention, are those what you're calling the "original" teachings?
With Christianity... is it "founded" on the teachings of Jesus or Paul? Or the beliefs of the Early Church leaders as they met and decided what was orthodoxy and what was heresy?
Then the on going Hindu problem. Krishna is a God or at least an incarnation of a God in a major sect of the religion we call Hinduism. He didn't "found" Hinduism. And he is one of many incarnations of Vishnu. Why don't the Baha'is mention any of them?
And you mention Moses. Did he "found" Judaism? Then what about Adam, Noah and Abraham? Are they also considered "manifestations" by the Baha'i Faith? If so, what religions did they "found"?
Again, are you calling those Scriptures you mentioned earlier as being the "original" Scriptures of those religions? And if so, are they all self explanatory or do they all need some interpretation?
I think they all do need some interpreting. And who does that interpreting? Probably the religious leaders in that religions. But Baha'is don't agree with their interpretations. Baha'is like the interpretation of those other religions that are made by their prophet and religious leaders.
So, what do you get? Krishna did not teach reincarnation. Buddha did teach about God. Jesus did not physically rise from the dead.
Yeah, don't go by what the followers of those religions believe. Go by what the Baha'i Faith says... which is an interpretation of those Scriptures.
And, ironically, Baha'is say with the Bible stories like the ones about Creation and the Flood, the obvious and literal meaning found in the Bible, is the wrong interpretation. For the Baha'is, the correct interpretation of those stories is the symbolic interpretation made by the Baha'is. So, not interpreting them, but taking them as being true as written, was the wrong thing to do. Baha'is believe they should have interpreted them.
Hey, it works for you. And you believe it. What can I say? Accept that I disagree.
Thus why it is called the Lesser Peace CG. It is during the Lesser Peace that the majority of the world will eventually see the wisdom in the system offered by Baha'u'llah.
Link from above reply
The above reply is in an OP exploring this.
Regards Tony
Its amazing what one can dig up when they do a little googling. Take the following link for example;
An excerpt of messages from the (Haifan) Baha'i Guardian Shoghi Effendi;
'“Ruhi’s sister married covenant-breaker Feyzi, whose mother joined and supported arch-enemy Muhammad Ali and whose father ‘Abdu’l-Bahá denounced openly and repeatedly as His deadly enemy. Ruhi’s family concurred. Inform all believers (that) all manner (of) communication (with) excommunicated family (is) forbidden.” (Signed) Shoghi Rabbani. (Cablegram received November 10, 1941.)
“(The) flagrant disloyalty (of) Rubi’s family compels me (to) disclose information so long (and) patiently withheld (from) American believers concerning his failure (to) obtain my approval (of) his second visit (to) America. His subsequent conduct regarding his marriage, which I refrained from revealing (to) anyone except your Assembly, as well as Foad’s departure (to) England without my knowledge, should now be made known (to) believers. Confident (of) unshakable steadfastness (of) exemplary American Bahá’í Community.” (Signed) Shoghi Rabbani. (Cablegram received November 10. 1941,)
To these messages the Assembly sent this cable on November 17: “Informing friends (of your) message (about) Ruhi’s family. Assure complete obedience protection unity (of) sacred Faith.”'
Some questions I would have if I were a critical thinker in my view (*wink wink*).
If Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi are not viewed as infallible with respect to the Baha'i Faith why would Ruhi's sister marrying so called, "Covenant Breaker" Feyzi be enough to get them expelled from the Baha'i Faith? After all they could just claim that since Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi are not infallible with respect to interpretation of the Baha'i writings then their declaration of individuals as covenant breakers carries no authoritative weight as it could be a fallible declaration.
Why would the agreement of Ruhi's family to the marriage be enough to get the family expelled from the Baha'i Faith if this could just be a fallible decree by fallible Shoghi Effendi?
Why would Foad Afnan's (Fuad Afnan?) moving to England without informing Shoghi Effendi of his departure be enough to get him expelled if this could just be a fallible decree of fallible Shoghi Effendi?
Just for fun I've included a link to a forum which I won't name run by Baha'i where they are asked, "Can you believe in Baha'u'llah without believing in Shoghi Effendi?" the top answer with 19 votes was, "
'Please never speak to a real life Baha’i like this
you can of course believe in Bahá’u’lláh without believing in the authority of our Guardian, but there is no way you can be a Baha’i in any concrete sense if you do not recognize Abdu’l-Bahá, the Guardian and the House of Justice'
Source:
All relevant remaining answers were pretty much a paraphrase with approx 3 relevant answers being a lengthy treatise on the Covenant of Baha'u'llah.
Here is an extract from the (Haifan) Baha'i Universal House of Justice on the Infallibility of Shoghi Effendi;
'". . . It is not for individual believers to limit the sphere of the Guardian's authority, or to judge when they have to obey the Guardian and when they are free to reject his judgment. Such an attitude would evidently lead to confusion and to schism. The Guardian being the appointed interpreter of the Teachings, it is his responsibility to state what matters which, affacting the interests of the Faith, demand on the part of the believers complete and unqualified obedience to his instructions."'
Source: Bahá'í Library Online
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I do not 'believe' in Shoghi Effendi, not anymore than I believe in Abdu'l-Baha, since they are not messengers of God.
I usually agree with what they wrote, but not always. I definitely agree with what Shoghi Effendi wrote regarding sexual issues.
*shrugs* If the (Haifan) UHoJ came to know you would first be counselled, then when you insisted that you believe in Baha'u'llah but not Shoghi Effendi you would be expelled as a Covenant Breaker in my view.
The fact that your online Baha'i friends are protecting you would only be seen as a form of corruption by the UHoJ if they are consistent in their treatment of so called covenant breakers. As you can see from post #1,973 the American NSA has shunned people for merely associating with people who only implicitly challenged Shoghi Effendi's infallibility by disobeying him. In explicitly stating your disbelief in Shoghi Effendi's infallibility you have gone far beyond what those poor shunned people have done as I see it.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
The UHJ could not care less what I believe. What I believe is my own business.
I think you need to read up on what a Covenant-breaker is. I do not actively promote schism or oppose the legitimacy of the chain of leadership succession.
AI Overview
Learn more…
A covenant breaker is a person who has been excommunicated from the Baháʼí community for breaking the Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh. This is the most severe punishment in the Baháʼí Faith, and is reserved for those who actively promote schism or oppose the legitimacy of the chain of leadership succession. Excommunication is rare and is not used for other transgressions, such as intellectual dissent, conversion to other religions, or community standards.
Ha ha, if you are so confident in that write to the (Haifan) Baha'i UHoJ and ask them the general question, "Is telling people that one believes in the infallibility of Baha'u'llah but not Abdul-Baha or Shoghi Effendi considered a form of opposing the legitimacy of the chain of leadership succession and or covenant breaking if the person doing it publicly and adamantly insists on their statement even after loving admonition?"
That way you are not dobbing yourself or anyone else in, but you will get to know what the UHOJ really believes.
Remember the (Haifan based) Bahai Community is run by the (Haifan) UHoJ, *not* by ChatGPT in my view.
The reason God sent Baha'u'llah is because His laws are relevant for our day and age and our problems. World peace is needed now and unity between religions and the oneness of all people. If people can understand that there is a Manifestation of God for each age, then we can have understanding between religions that all are true and only the social teachings have been adapted to suit the needs of the time.
No one race or religion or nation is superior to another. Today, we are all one human family.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Curious, do you suppose that the Buddhist or Hindu philosophy that predates Baha’u’llah is irrelevant/outdated? That’s quite literally what you are saying, correct?
I explained very clearly that the virtues and spiritual teachings of all religions are one and all true. Only the interpretations and peoples understanding differ, but they are not part of the original teachings.
There are promises in many religions that one day the interpretation will come (Quran) and the Books will be unsealed (Daniel and Revelation) That Krishna will come to renew religion (Bhagavad-Gita) and so on. One, if he or she is sincere in their beliefs, cannot divorce the promise of interpretation or a Promised One to appear. We believe Baha'u'llah is the Promised One of all religions and the Manifestation of God with teachings which are relevant for this age.
The oneness of humanity. That the world is but one country and mankind its citizens are concepts which were never taught by previous Manifestations because at that time much of the world had not been explored and nations had not yet been formed. But by the time of Baha'u'llah, we see nationhood is established and world communications such as the internet have been invented. So, world unity is now possible.
The reality of the world we live in is that we need unity and peace between the races, nations and religions and Baha'u'llah has already established a peaceful and united world community comprising all races, nations and religions and calling all people to reconciliation and to see each other as one human family. Let the religions come together and all nations be as allies and races see each other as equal human beings. That's what Baha'u'llah is calling people to.