Who Was Baha’u’llah, and How Can We Evaluate His Claims?

[rational experiences]

Humans know we came from unconditional love. Eternal being. We left. We inherited karma.

Yet we now live in conditions.

A fact.

Reactive heavens. Reactive earth. Seasons. Weather changes. Nature food water changes.

Conditions.

We know the place we live with isn't loving. But we know we were.

So we try to relate spiritual answers to our own spiritual diversity and awareness.

And we prove to ourselves awareness changed.

As science says reactive creation is still creating evolving.

So it's not finished to own peace.

It's reactive only.

We however crave peace. For our spirituality.

At times we are unrealistic about trying to convince others about realising a spiritual family purpose.

So make excuses. Not wanting to blame as it is negative. Can cause acute anger instead of being spiritual.

When we demand that all things wrong be righted.

We learnt a living being made a mistake and named it change. And change is not known until all things changing end

So we don't know yet.

It's still changing.

Hence if a spiritual human doesn't want to be negatively negated they make excuses for the higher being and it's not relative.

As I learnt we aren't blamed and it is what it became. So we need to accept an unconditional loving being put us into a never ending changing creation.

And it's not our fault. It just happened.

But I also learnt my brother who did wrong in life to his family learnt and knew. He tried to copy and believed in causing change himself via science.

Why we state we learnt once change caused evil. So don't believe in forcing change.

Why he implemented legal as a human to try to establish family rights and order in life. To govern by mutuality and equality.

And made a promise to achieve in his owned testimonial to father.

Who he had betrayed.

Is what I learnt.

As father his spiritual consciousness my brother betrayed.

Why the teaching stated sacrifice life you then learn the truth about father versus our brothers wrong choices.

Men still learning about father.

 

[Trailblazer]

So how do you rationalise Bahaullah implying that babies dying in agony from congenital conditions is "God's best way of disposing of their lives"?

Please show me where Baha'u'llah ever implied that.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you claim that there is nothing contradictory in any of the religions found around the world over the last 5000 years?
Really???

I never claimed that. I said that the reason there are 'apparent' contradictions is because these are no longer what revealed because the religions have corrupted. The other reason is because these so-called religions are not true religions from God that were revealed by a Messenger of God.

This claim simply has no evidence to support it.
You cannot present any early scriptures of Hinduism, Norse gods, Greek pantheon, Mesoamerican polytheism, etc, etc, that show this "corruption". There is no record of any "messengers" preaching anything even vaguely resembling Bahaiist monotheism.

The fact that all the religions have different interpretations of whatever was written in the early scriptures is the evidence, The fact that there are numerous sects of all these religions shows that people believe different things thus they have interpreted whatever scriptures were available in different ways. This is called deductive reasoning. The same thing has happened in all the older religions, including Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

I do not consider Norse gods, Greek pantheon, or Mesoamerican polytheism to be true religions because they were not revealed by a Messenger of God. I believe that Hinduism is a true religion that is associated with Krishna, but it is the oldest religion in the world, and it has no single known founder. There is no evidence of monotheism in Hinduism because that was before monotheism was revealed by the Messengers, starting with Abraham.

So once again, you are reduced to "Bahaullah is god's messenger because Bahaulla said he is. And we know we can trust what he says because he is god's messenger."

Seriously, how can you present an argument like that with a straight face?

No, I did not say that Baha'u'llah is God's Messenger "because He said He is." Show me where I ever said that. You are taking what I said and creating a straw man.

I said: "That is why Baha'u'llah enjoined us to look at God's Manifestation for this age, which is Baha'u'llah." The fact that Baha'u'llah enjoined us to look at Him does not equate to "Baha'u'llah was a Messenger because He said so."

At least a dozen times I have said that I believe that Baha'u'llah is a Messenger because of the evidence and I have delineated what that evidence is. Dozens of times I have said a claim is not evidence that the claim is true, it is the evidence is what supports the claim that shows it is true.

IOW - "Other religions are wrong because they are different to what I say".

Another straw man, completely unrelated to what I posted in that quote, which states that the older religions have been corrupted. At least argue against what I said, not what I never said.

Sure, the fact that the older religions have been corrupted by man means they are wrong n many ways, but all the true religions still retained elements of truth. The Baha'i Faith is a new religion and it also has protections that Baha'u'llah put in place to prevent corruption by man, so it has not been corrupted.

The early rise in Islam was fuelled to a large degree by the conversion of Jews, Christians and Pagans. The spread of Christianity relied on people converting from other faiths.

That's true when the religions are young and just becoming established, but that is not generally the case after the religion become established, and that is why we do not see many Jews or Christians converting to Islam now.

And yet, their followers are just as convinced they are real as you are about Bahaiism, and they claim to have "evidence", just as you do. So how do you know their certainty is wrong and yours is right?

Why would it matter if the followers are just as convinced? What people believe is not what makes a religion true since people are capable of believing just about anything.

My certainty comes from my own investigation and what is now in my own mind. Baha'u'llah enjoined a true seeker to discover the truth by looking at the Messenger for themselves and not believe what other people say or do. That is so important that it is found in the first page of The Kitab-i-Iqan (The Book of Certitude).

“IN THE NAME OF OUR LORD, THE EXALTED, THE MOST HIGH.

No man shall attain the shores of the ocean of true understanding except he be detached from all that is in heaven and on earth. Sanctify your souls, O ye peoples of the world, that haply ye may attain that station which God hath destined for you and enter thus the tabernacle which, according to the dispensations of Providence, hath been raised in the firmament of the Bayán.

“The essence of these words is this: they that tread the path of faith, they that thirst for the wine of certitude, must cleanse themselves of all that is earthly—their ears from idle talk, their minds from vain imaginings, their hearts from worldly affections, their eyes from that which perisheth. They should put their trust in God, and, holding fast unto Him, follow in His way. Then will they be made worthy of the effulgent glories of the sun of divine knowledge and understanding, and become the recipients of a grace that is infinite and unseen, inasmuch as man can never hope to attain unto the knowledge of the All-Glorious, can never quaff from the stream of divine knowledge and wisdom, can never enter the abode of immortality, nor partake of the cup of divine nearness and favour, unless and until he ceases to regard the words and deeds of mortal men as a standard for the true understanding and recognition of God and His Prophets.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 3-4

What it essentially says in bold italics at the end is that we will never discover the truth for ourselves if we use the words and deeds of other people as a standard by which to understand God and His Prophets. In other words, we cannot measure truth according to what other people say, think or do. We have to investigate the truth for ourselves.

How do you know? The people practicing it were convinced their gods were real. Their priests claimed to be in contact with those gods. They saw evidence that the sacrifices produced results.
What makes you so certain that yours isn't made up rather than theirs?

The way I know is that I have looked at the Baha'i Faith for over 51 years, so I have had plenty of time to investigate and confirm what I believed when I discovered the faith in 1970.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But do Baha'is believe there are other spirit-beings? Which, to us, would be god-like.

From what I understand CG is that the Messengers are the light of God in this world.

Us born of the human spirit get our life and light from the Messengers, to the extent we impart what they have taught us.

Thus some souls are indeed gifted in this life to burn brightly, some not so brightly and some not to be ignited at all.

We are told to look for the light, no matter from where it shines. As a Baha'i I am not guaranteed to be a source of light, the name Baha'i does not mean I automatically share the light. Only by our choices and actions can we polish the lamp of our souls.

There are many saints and special people in this world CG, many that share the light of God.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

I believe in the philosophy of the day of judgment and what it promises in that regard as shown in Quran. I also believe in interpreting God's words in a manner that respects language norms and doesn't make God words into a play thing.

I also believe in the concept of "Ahlulbayt" and continuous need of guidance in a form of a Guide and spirit of light from him.

Since Bahai Faith interprets day of judgment to be about a founding Prophet/Messenger, and interprets "seal of Prophets" in a sophistry manner where all Prophets are first and last and each other type meaning to do away with the clear meaning, and the lineage of Baha'allah didn't continue his mission and it ended with his offspring leaving his religion eventually , each of these issues suffices for me to reject the Bahai faith.

That said additional reasons:

(1) Mohammad (s) is sent to all humanity per Quran, so his Nubuwa and Resalah can't be abrogated.
(2) Bahai scripture is no where near on par with Quran and God doesn't replace a sign except bringing something like it or better.
(3) Twelve Successors is a sacred unchangeable number to every founder per Quran and Sunnah, which Bahaism failed to uphold.
(4) The whole DOOR TO MAHDI, then "I am the MAHDI", then "I am a Prophet" Bab wise, shows it's a lie to me, there was no need to change three phases. It's so silly to take it seriously.
(5) The Mahdi is a huge trial per Quran, because, just as cities were often destroyed, the same can happen again, but the stakes are higher, because Mohammad (S) is sent to all people, and all cities per Quran are under threat and will be destroyed if they rebel, disbelieve, and seek to oppress believers, and this is found in Surah Isra: ...not a city but we will destroy it or punish it severely, before the day of judgement...
(6) Isa (a) is alive per Quran and you have to really be obtuse to twist that, and I can't do all this sophistry twisting... sorry not for me

 

[TransmutingSoul]

How will the Baha'i Faith bring peace and unity to the world if Baha'is can't even find ways to be "one" with and show love towards people that disagree with them? Again, to paraphrase Abdul Baha', if a person has ten bad faults and only one good one, disregard the bad ones and focus on the one good one. In the ways some Baha'is present themselves and the Faith, it is the cause of division.

Peace and unity will definitely not come about by meaningless exchanges CG. It will also not come about by Godless mindsets.

You are correct in that a line must be found, here is the thought you may have been considering.

"Consort with all men, O people of Bahá, in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship. If ye be aware of a certain truth, if ye possess a jewel, of which others are deprived, share it with them in a language of utmost kindliness and good-will. If it be accepted, if it fulfil its purpose, your object is attained. If any one should refuse it, leave him unto himself, and beseech God to guide him. Beware lest ye deal unkindly with him..."

So there has to be a time when we leave it all alone and depart in peace, leave it alone.

Thus in that sense you are correct, there was definite an aspect in that reply that appeared as unkindly.

But can it be said, that it is unkind to offer to another, that a godless mindset is a major part of humanities ills? How do we offer that? Baha'u'llah has given writings on the topic and are those warnings only meant for the converted, or are they hard lessons that need to be shared, especially to those that could benefit from them?

Baha'u'llah put these thoughts in a Tablet he sent to a ruler of Islam about the godless mindset.

"As for those who believe not in the signs of God, or that they shall ever attain His Presence, these of My mercy shall despair, and these doth a grievous chastisement await." And likewise He saith: "And they say, 'What! when we shall have lain hidden in the earth, shall we become a new creation?' Yea, they deny that they shall attain the Presence of their Lord." And likewise He saith: "They truly doubt the Presence of their Lord. He, verily, overshadoweth all things." And likewise He saith: "Verily, they who hope not to attain Our Presence, and find their satisfaction in this world's life, and rest on it, and who of Our signs are heedless -- these! their abode the fire, in recompense of their deeds!.."

Bahá’u’lláh, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 115

Here is another CG

"..For they who turn away from their Lord in this day are in truth accounted amongst the dead, though to outward seeming they may walk upon the earth, amongst the deaf, though they may hear, and amongst the blind, though they may see, as hath been clearly stated by Him Who is the Lord of the Day of Reckoning: "Hearts have they with which they understand not, and eyes have they with which they see not...." They walk the edge of a treacherous bank and tread the brink of a fiery abyss. They partake not of the billows of this surging and treasure-laden Ocean, but disport themselves with their own idle words..."

Bahá’u’lláh, Gems of Divine Mysteries, p. 48-49

Thus, that seems clear that this mindset, one that had no God, will not even be part of building the foundation for even a lesser peace. I personally see it is a cancer that will need to be cut off.

This is not about the person CG, it is the mindset I talk of. My father has this mindset, so I hope that shows how we can indeed live together in peace all the while offering that change will not happen within that mindset, that change is needed.

Now the discussion could be what is a mindset that is Godly? It may be an athiest can have a Godly mindset, but not attribute it to any God.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

There is a living witness/leader/guide/spirit of light/holy spirit/spirit of God's Command/king/representative of God in all times per both Quran and hadiths. This is another good reason to reject Bahai Faith.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I have noticed that when Baha'is are pressed beyond the usual platitudes and Bahaullah quotes, they often become prickly or withdrawn. If you have trouble justifying your claims, perhaps the problem is with the claim rather than the person challenging it?

That is because Baha'u'llah has given us a line not to cross when God has been rejected.

It is not easy for us to see that line.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is one post that you avoided that I really want you to address before you go.

You said...
"God Who is the Author of all life can alone take it away, and dispose of it the way he deems best."

So babies dying in agony from congenital conditions is because god "deems it the best way to dispose of their lives"?
Why do you worship such a monster?

Your beliefs have implications. You cannot simply ignore them when they are uncomfortable.
I understand that it must be difficult for you to work this through rationally and logically, but I really want you to have a go because it really is very important.

The answer to this requires acceptance of an all Loving God.

There is much written on this topic in the Baha'i Writings, but I see not point sharing it, as it comes back to the question I have asked of you.

Do you believe in God?

If you do not, then no answer I give will be considered in any positive light. It will just be used for more negative content.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

First you said it might be proof.
I then pointed out a problem with that claim.
You responded with "that is not any sort of proof. Why would it be?"
Which is a categorical denial that it is even possible, conditional proof.
You are contradicting yourself again.

It always helps to see what was said in context...

KWED said: So you admit that a person's reaction to meeting Bahaullah is not any sort of proof that he was an actual messenger of god.
TB said: Yes, I that is not any sort of proof. Why would it be?

Then later I said "it might be proof, I did not say it would be proof."

That means a person's reaction to meeting Baha'u'llah would be proof to some people but it would not be proof to everyone.

That means it would not prove that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God as a known fact that everyone would believe; we can only prove it to ourselves, and then we believe it.

Indeed. It is evidence that he was a man claiming to be a messenger of god. But many people have made similar claims. Do you accept them as genuine as well?

AGAIN, the claim is not the evidence; the evidence supports the claim. Many people have made similar claims but they do not have the evidence to support their claims so I do not accept them as genuine.

Indeed. Some people examine such claims critically. Others accept what they like the sound of and rationalise through confirmation bias/cognitive dissonance. Others still simply follow what they have been raised to believe.

Only one of those is a rational approach.

I examined the claims critically and continue to look at the evidence for as well as the evidence against because I do not want to believe something that is not true. If I encounter something that does not make sense to me, I question it, rather than just believing it because it is in the Baha'i Writings. Imo, if Baha'is or any religious believers are unwilling to question their beliefs that shows that they are afraid of what they might find that might call their beliefs into question.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is because Baha'u'llah has given us a line not to cross when God has been rejected.

Do you have any passages that say that we should not converse with atheists?
Sometimes it is a matter of how we interpret the passages.

What constitutes rejection of God? I do not consider disbelief to be rejection because one cannot reject an entity they do not believe exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

Thus, that seems clear that this mindset, one that had no God, will not even be part of building the foundation for even a lesser peace. I personally see it is a cancer that will need to be cut off.

I see that as a rather extreme view, equating atheists with a cancer, and saying that only believers can be part of building the new world order.
There are a lot of atheists who are good people working for good causes and contributing to change in the world.

Since you are a big fan of Abdu'l-Baha, I will remind you what He said:

"Let all your striving be for this, to become the source of life and immortality, and peace and comfort and joy, to every human soul, whether one known to you or a stranger, one opposed to you or on your side. Look ye not upon the purity or impurity of his nature: look ye upon the all-embracing mercy of the Lord, the light of Whose grace hath embosomed the whole earth and all who dwell thereon, and in the plenitude of Whose bounty are immersed both the wise and the ignorant. Stranger and friend alike are seated at the table of His favour. Even as the believer, the denier who turneth away from God doth at the same time cup his hands and drink from the sea of His bestowals.

It behoveth the loved ones of the Lord to be the signs and tokens of His universal mercy and the embodiments of His own excelling grace. Like the sun, let them cast their rays upon garden and rubbish heap alike, and even as clouds in spring, let them shed down their rain upon flower and thorn. Let them seek but love and faithfulness, let them not follow the ways of unkindness, let their talk be confined to the secrets of friendship and of peace. Such are the attributes of the righteous, such is the distinguishing mark of those who serve His Threshold."

('Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, pp. 256-57)

"How ignorant therefore the thought that God who created man, educated and nurtured him, surrounded him with all blessings, made the sun and all phenomenal existence for his benefit, bestowed upon him tenderness and kindness, and then did not love him. This is palpable ignorance, for no matter to what religion a man belongs even though he be an atheist or materialist nevertheless God nurtures him, bestows His kindness and sheds upon him His light."

('Abdu'l-Baha, Star of the West, Vol. 8, issue 7, p. 78)

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Do you have any passages that say that we should not converse with atheists?
Sometimes it is a matter of how we interpret the passages..

Yes it is not a line of faith or no faith.

The line is that of idle disputation. The way we see that will differ with each individual.

What constitutes rejection of God? I do not consider disbelief to be rejection because one cannot reject an entity they do not believe exists.

That is also an individual journey of understanding, to which would be as many views as there are humans.

Abdul'baha talks about what it is to be a Materialist.

"One of the strangest things witnessed is that the materialists of today are proud of their natural instincts and bondage. They state that nothing is entitled to belief and acceptance except that which is sensible or tangible. By their own statements they are captives of nature, unconscious of the spiritual world, uninformed of the divine Kingdom and unaware of heavenly bestowals. If this be a virtue the animal has attained it to a superlative degree, for the animal is absolutely ignorant of the realm of spirit and out of touch with the inner world of conscious realization. The animal would agree with the materialist in denying the existence of that which transcends the senses. If we admit that being limited to the plane of the senses is a virtue the animal is indeed more virtuous than man, for it is entirely bereft of that which lies beyond, absolutely oblivious of the kingdom of God and its traces whereas God has deposited within the human creature an illimitable power by which he can rule the world of nature." ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Bahá’í World Faith, p. 235-236

Does this passage answer your question?

"They that have disbelieved in God and rebelled against His sovereignty are the helpless victims of their corrupt inclinations and desires. These shall return to their abode in the fire of hell: wretched is the abode of the deniers!"

Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 284

I have no set mind on the matters, I am open to other frames of references.

I personally cannot see how one who has disbelief in a God can consider this passage.

"The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded."
(“Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh”, p. 286) [6]

Maybe an athiest could shed light as to how they may embrace "the counsels which the Pen of the Most High" without accepting there is a God.

I had an OP that offered maybe there are many Athiests that do already embrace those Councels, yet are unaware they are of God. Yet those that responded in that OP did not explore that possibility.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I see that as a rather extreme view, equating atheists with a cancer, and saying that only believers can be part of building the new world order.
There are a lot of atheists who are good people working for good causes and contributing to change in the world.

It's all about frame of references. I am not saying what you think is being said, I am not saying what you have offered in your reply.

A godly mindset is that of virtues, for the virtues to have a lasting effect, they have to been born from God.

Maybe this verse shows you my thoughts. Always happy to get a different perspective.

Question. -- It is said in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas "...whoso is deprived thereof, hath gone astray, though he be the author of every righteous deed." What is the meaning of this verse?

Answer. -- This blessed verse means that the foundation of success and salvation is the knowledge of God, and that the results of the knowledge of God are the good actions which are the fruits of faith. If man has not this knowledge, he will be separated from God, and when this separation exists, good actions have not complete effect. This verse does not mean that the souls separated from God are equal, whether they perform good or bad actions. It signifies only that the foundation is to know God, and the good actions result from this knowledge. Nevertheless, it is certain that between the good, the sinners and the wicked who are veiled from God there is a difference. For the veiled one who has good principles and character deserves the pardon of God, while he who is a sinner, and has bad qualities and character, is deprived of the bounties and blessings of God. Herein lies the difference. Therefore, the blessed verse means that good actions alone, without the knowledge of God, cannot be the cause of eternal salvation, everlasting success, and prosperity, and entrance into the Kingdom of God.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions, p. 237

I think there is a greater error as well. One that says they have faith, but then does not practice the virtues, that is far worse, as I have seen that in my own self. Thus what I offer is not in the light of self righteousness.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Since you are a big fan of Abdu'l-Baha, I will remind you what He said:

"Let all your striving be for this, to become the source of life and immortality, and peace and comfort and joy, to every human soul, whether one known to you or a stranger, one opposed to you or on your side. Look ye not upon the purity or impurity of his nature: look ye upon the all-embracing mercy of the Lord, the light of Whose grace hath embosomed the whole earth and all who dwell thereon, and in the plenitude of Whose bounty are immersed both the wise and the ignorant. Stranger and friend alike are seated at the table of His favour. Even as the believer, the denier who turneth away from God doth at the same time cup his hands and drink from the sea of His bestowals.

It behoveth the loved ones of the Lord to be the signs and tokens of His universal mercy and the embodiments of His own excelling grace. Like the sun, let them cast their rays upon garden and rubbish heap alike, and even as clouds in spring, let them shed down their rain upon flower and thorn. Let them seek but love and faithfulness, let them not follow the ways of unkindness, let their talk be confined to the secrets of friendship and of peace. Such are the attributes of the righteous, such is the distinguishing mark of those who serve His Threshold."

('Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, pp. 256-57)

"How ignorant therefore the thought that God who created man, educated and nurtured him, surrounded him with all blessings, made the sun and all phenomenal existence for his benefit, bestowed upon him tenderness and kindness, and then did not love him. This is palpable ignorance, for no matter to what religion a man belongs even though he be an atheist or materialist nevertheless God nurtures him, bestows His kindness and sheds upon him His light."

('Abdu'l-Baha, Star of the West, Vol. 8, issue 7, p. 78)

Thank you for those quotes, it is always great to read and meditate on what Abdul'baha has explained about what Baha'u'llah offered.

I will just offer all are welcome in my home.

We could also have the same discussions while partaking of coffe/tea and gastronomic delights.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

1. Bare question begging. You are just saying that the only true religions are the ones that are similar to your preferred one.
2.Judaism, Christianity and Islam do not necessarily preach those. They all promote intolerance an violence against those that do not conform.
3. What are even things like "detachment" and "constancy"?

1. That is a straw man. All true religions are not similar to the Baha'i Faith.
2. Judaism, Christianity and Islam do 'preach' those. It was only the 'followers' of those religions who promoted intolerance an violence against those that do not conform. This is part of the corruption of religion I keep talking about.
3. Detachment is not being attached to things of this material world, including what happens to us in it. Constancy is being patient and remaining steadfast in times of trials. All true religions teach these things.

I have repeatedly shown that religions vary with place rather than time, so why do you keep repeating this claim and avoid dealing with its obvious flaw? Is it because it's something Bahaullah said so you can't accept it is wrong?
What was it you were saying earlier about believers not being comfortable with accepting the errors in their beliefs?

I did not say that religions do not vary with place, I only said they differ over time. One does not preclude the other.
Progressive revelation is a core teaching of the Baha'i Faith...

Progressive revelation is a core teaching in the Bahá'í Faith that suggests that religious truth is revealed by God progressively and cyclically over time through a series of divine Messengers, and that the teachings are tailored to suit the needs of the time and place of their appearance.[1][2] Thus, the Bahá'í teachings recognize the divine origin of several world religions as different stages in the history of one religion, while believing that the revelation of Bahá'u'lláh is the most recent (though not the last—that there will never be a last), and therefore the most relevant to modern society.[1 ]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_revelation_Baha'i

Baha'u'llah never said that religions do not vary with place.
The belief states that the teachings of a Messenger of God are tailored to suit the needs of the' time' and 'place' of their appearance.

So how are the "laws of the Abrahamic tradition" shared by Hinduism and Buddhism?

That quote can be misleading. When Abdu'l-Baha said "it is the essence of the Law of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá’u’lláh, he meant that the same spiritual truths are shared by other religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism, he did not mean that the laws that apply to social matters such as marriage and divorce and penalties for adultery and murder, etc. are the same in all the religions. Clearly they aren't the same.

It was never "necessary". However, it was beneficial to the owners.

Maybe it wasn't necessary, but fir whatever reason it as part of those cultures in certain places and times in history.

Have you not read any Abrahamic scriptures? They all treat slavery as an accepted fact of life. There is never any mention that is in any way "wrong" or should be abolished.

I do not care what the older Abrahamic scriptures say as those revelations have been abrogated by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah so I consider them outdated.. Baha'u'llah abolished slavery.

The Bahá'í sacred writings explicitly prohibit slavery, and the teachings of the Bahá'í Faith emphasize the promotion of equality, justice and unity.

Faith in Action to End Slavery - Free the Slaves

1. But it clearly does, so it is irrelevant whether you accept it or not.
2. You claimed that god reveals different messages to suit different peoples and times. If what is "moral" is what god reveals, then what is moral must necessarily change.
3. Are you now claiming that everything in the Toraj, Bible and Quran is still morally acceptable?

So morality does change with time and place?

The fact that you can so clearly contradict yourself in the same post speaks volumes of how rational your approach is to examining your beliefs.

What is allowed by God in His Law in certain times and places is what God considered moral for those times and places so there was no contradiction.
For example, the Laws of Islam God allowed up to four wives, but Baha'i Law's limits the number of wives to one.

So god allows man to decide what is moral and want isn't?

God allows man to decide 'what man considers moral' and to act on it since man has free will.
Man does not set the standards as to what is actually moral, God sets those standards.

But that is the only way to achieve it because people inherently desire independence and autonomy. Have you not noticed that when given the opportunity, people choose to smaller, independent nations that embrace cultural individuality rather than opt for large-scale assimilation with others?

World unity and the oneness of mankind does not mean assimilation of everyone into one world government. There will always be independent nations that embrace cultural individuality.

What is that "actual plan", in practical terms?
BTW, Islam certainly had a plan. "Fight the people until there is no more conflict and all religion is for Allah". A clear plan for a world united under one faith, living in peace.

I suggest you read up on what Baha'u'llah envisioned if you want to know what the actual plan is.

The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh

And yet, as I have pointed out, you cannot provide any evidence to support that claim.

The evidence is the corruption and changes you can see if you look at the history of those religions. It is not my job to do your homework.

 

[samtonga43]

James 4:8

Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.

Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me Psalm 51:10 ESV

You got it!

 

[Trailblazer]

You said...
"there have been different messages revealed in every age, in order to suit the needs of the age in which the message was revealed"

You also claim that some of the religions in different ages were not revealed by god.
So, if we have a place and time in the past where there are different religions that are both different to Bahaism, how do you know which is from god and which isn't?

The way we know if a religion is from God is if it was revealed by a Messenger of God.

And yet you earlier claimed that the essence of everything, that does not alter, is "the Law of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad".
Now you claim that the needs of current circumstances are more important.

What is not altered are the spiritual teachings of al the great religions but those are not the same thing as the message from God that is suited to the needs of the times.

I am not saying that the needs of current circumstances are more important; both the spiritual teachings and the message for this age are important. The message for this age is the oneness of mankind and world unity. This cannot be achieved if people do not follow the spiritual teachings of religion; faith, knowledge, certitude, justice, piety, righteousness, trustworthiness, love of God, benevolence, purity, detachment, humility, meekness, patience and constancy, showing mercy to the poor, defending the oppressed.

You don't know that. There were certainly many religions who believed it was. They saw evidence to support their belief, just as you do. They would claim that your wishy-washy monotheism was never god's message. As do today's Hindus, Sikhs, and even Muslims and Christians. So how can we objectively determine who is right and who is wrong?

As I have said before, what people believe is no indication of what is actually true. You could say the same thing about me, but I am not saying it is true because "I" believe it is true.

There is no way we can objectively determine who is right and who is wrong because religion is not subject to proof. All you can do is investigate the religions and decide what to believe, if anything.

You are just repeating the same flawed claim. You are simply rejecting other beliefs because they don't correspond to yours, just as they would all do with yours. You haven't actually advanced the argument any further.

No, I am rejecting 'some' of the other beliefs because they contradict a belief I have already determined is true. The other believers do the same with my beliefs and that is their prerogative.

I just respond to posts. I am not here to convince anyone that my beliefs are true as that is not a job Baha'u'llah gave me to do.

As I predicted, you are ignoring the evidence that religion changes with place rather than time, and keep repeating the flawed claim that religion varies with time because it's something Bahaulla said, and you can't accept that he is wrong about anything.

The major religions we see today are essentially unchanged from their origins, but the religions originating in different parts of the world show far greater variation even if they existed at the same time.

Bahaullah's claim would seem to be simply an attempt to add legitimacy to his claim to be a new messenger for a new age.

I believe that religions vary over time because that is exactly what I see, not just because Baha'u'llah said it. When I say religions vary over time, I mean that different religions are revealed over time, I did not mean that the same religions vary over time.

The essential beliefs or the major religions are unchanged but the religions have been corrupted by man over time so they no longer rest on the original foundations.

You said that the religions originating in different parts of the world show far greater variation even if they existed at the same time. What you are referring to as a religion is not what I consider a religion so we are talking at cross purposes.

Erm, no.
I said you are looking for justification for your existing conclusion.
You just said that I am drawing conclusions from examining the evidence.

I do not need to justify my conclusions to anyone except myself, and I came to my conclusions by examining the evidence. The same applies to you, you just came to different conclusions.

My "understanding" is based on evidence. On observation. Yours is based on what Bahaullah said.

You are wrong about that. My "understanding" is based on evidence and observation coupled with what is in the Baha'i Writings.

 

[Trailblazer]

Does this passage answer your question?

"They that have disbelieved in God and rebelled against His sovereignty are the helpless victims of their corrupt inclinations and desires. These shall return to their abode in the fire of hell: wretched is the abode of the deniers!"

Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 284

I have no set mind on the matters, I am open to other frames of references.

Just off the top of my head I would say that passage needs to be understood in context.

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.

They that have disbelieved in God and rebelled against His sovereignty are the helpless victims of their corrupt inclinations and desires. These shall return to their abode in the fire of hell: wretched is the abode of the deniers!”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp, 284-285

The quote is not primarily about disbelief in God, it is also about rebelling against God's sovereignty in favor of one's corrupt inclinations and desires. I believe that they will be consigned to hell, which is what I think Baha'u'llah was referring to at the end of the following passage: "If it fail, however, in its allegiance to its Creator, it will become a victim to self and passion, and will, in the end, sink in their depths.” It is self and passion that causes one to sink into the depths, not simply non-belief in God.."

“Thou hast asked Me concerning the nature of the soul. Know, verily, that the soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem whose reality the most learned of men hath failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind, however acute, can ever hope to unravel. It is the first among all created things to declare the excellence of its Creator, the first to recognize His glory, to cleave to His truth, and to bow down in adoration before Him. If it be faithful to God, it will reflect His light, and will, eventually, return unto Him. If it fail, however, in its allegiance to its Creator, it will become a victim to self and passion, and will, in the end, sink in their depths.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 158-159

 

[Trailblazer]

I personally cannot see how one who has disbelief in a God can consider this passage.

"The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded."
(“Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh”, p. 286) [6]

Maybe an atheist could shed light as to how they may embrace "the counsels which the Pen of the Most High" without accepting there is a God.

I think an atheist can embrace those counsels without belief in God. They could consider Baha'u'llah a wise man with good ideas, but not a Messenger of God. I knew an atheist once who thought that way and he had 'all about Baha'u'llah' on his website! He was a humanist like @It Aint Necessarily So and some other atheists on this forum.