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

[KWED]

We only have to concern ourselves with the age we live in,

Meaning what? Don't learn from the past? Don't plan for the future?
And how do you define "age"?

we have the bounty of learning from the past.

"Bounty"?
And you just said that we only concern ourselves with the here and now.
As usual, when only talking in unthinking dogmatic platitudes, you end up contradicting yourself.

The Message for this age is how we can obtain unto the most great peace. Unfortunately that was rejected before we were born, so our concern is the Lesser Peace.

How does that work? Why can't people of this age accept the Great Peace? Why are we bound by the events of a previous age?

So why is the majority of humanity not embracing that opportunity?

So you think the only way to achieve peace and stability in the world is by becoming a Baha'i?

Why are you not on-board and helping?

Erm, I am. I am a member of a progressive liberal, socialist movement. I donate and volunteer and protest and campaign and vote.
What are you doing? Sitting at home praying to a god who you hope will stop promoting the violence and intolerance that has been his trademark for millennia?

The best hope for humanity is through universal, liberal, secular education, and liberal socialist policies. Whenever people try and impose "god's message" on society, it just makes things worse.
Look around the world. Which are the most peaceful, safest, healthiest, best social welfare, etc, societies? They are almost all liberal and god-less. Reason not dogma is the way forward.

That is how God works the plan for humanity, God gives us the choices, but because God knows what we will choose,

So the future is inevitable. We can't change it, otherwise god would not know what it is.

the plan still unfolds amongst the sufferings we cause to our own selves.

What is his "plan", and why doesn't it involve reducing the suffering?

Knowing this, why would we still reject God's advice?

1. Knowing what? You haven't actually presented anything of substance.
2. What "advice"? What does he actually want us to do? Practical specifics please, not platitudes.

 

[KWED]

I don't want to discuss this any more. This has become a fruitless discussion now. See the above post.

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noticed that when Baha'is are pressed beyond the usual platitudes and Bahaullah quotes, they often become prickly or withdrawn.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?

 

[loverofhumanity]

I keep coming across this same argument from Baha'is - that they have "done their own investigation" and found convincing evidence for Bahaullah actually being an actual messenger of an actual god. Yet when I study the sources they cite, I find nothing but vague platitudes and unsupported claims, not dissimilar to other religious texts and messengers.
So given this, what is it about Bahaullah's writings that convinces you that he really is an actual messenger of an actual god? Specifics please, rather than more platitudes like "His Self, Writings and Life". Actual passages that we can examine.
Thanks

Baha’u’llah wrote on numerous topics. What specific topic are you interested in to know what He said about it?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Who purifies our hearts?

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

 

[KWED]

Baha’u’llah wrote on numerous topics. What specific topic are you interested in to know what He said about it?

Anthropogenic climate change.

 

[Trailblazer]

Who purifies our hearts?

We do, with the assistance of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your beliefs have implications. You cannot simply ignore them when they are uncomfortable.

Wanna bet? That is what most believers do, but I prefer the rational approach.

 

[Trailblazer]

The messages differ more with place and culture than with time.
Take the year 900AD. There were many different, conflicting religions around the world
Move on 500 years. Many of those religions still exist with their conflicting messages.

The messages of the revelations from God differ over the course of time, but they do not contradict each other.
The reason there are religions with conflicting beliefs is because the religions become corrupted by man over the course of time and as such they are no longer what was originally revealed by God. That is why Baha'u'llah enjoined us to look at God's Manifestation for this age, which is Baha'u'llah.

“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. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.”
Gleanings, p. 171-172

The reason these religions still exist is because people do not normally embrace any religion that was revealed after the religion they believe in, so for example Jews have not embraced Christianity or Islam and Christians have not embraced Islam. Believers tend to stay with the religions they were raised in unless they have a reason to change.

So why did humanity in 1st century Palestine require a subservient monotheism, but humanity in 8th century Mesoamerica require polytheistic human sacrifice?

All so-called religions are not based upon a revelation from God, many religions are man-made. Polytheistic human sacrifice was not revealed by a Messenger of God so it is not a religion of God.

So what "practical applications" for the modern world does Bahaism provide?

Bahá'í teachings - Wikipedia

So, what was the "disease" that polytheistic human sacrifice was the "remedy" for?

I do not know why human sacrifices were conducted but they were not a remedy 'from God' for any disease, since it was not based upon a revelation from God.

 

[Trailblazer]

You said...
"Yes, if someone actually met Baha'u'llah that might be proof"
You really need to try and keep track of what you are saying.
(This is what happens when your position is not based on reason or rational argument. When you simply contradict any argument that refutes your position without really thinking through the implications, you will keep having this problem. It's like the old adage about lying. You can't forget what you made up if you stick to the truth)

I said it might be proof, I did not say it would be proof.
That means it would be proof to some people but it would not be proof to everyone.

But as we have already established, none of that is "evidence". They are merely vague platitudes that you find convincing for some reason.

His Person, His Revelation (what He did on His mission), and His Writings is the evidence of who He was. Some people find this convincing, some don't, since humans are very diverse and look at things very differently.

 

[Trailblazer]

No, they absolutely do not. Even the fundamental nature of god differs massively.

All 'true' religions teach spiritual truths that are eternal; some of these truths are faith, knowledge, certitude, justice, piety, righteousness, trustworthiness, love God, love your neighbor, benevolence, purity, detachment, humility, meekness, patience and constancy.

The reason that different religions differ in their beliefs about the nature of God is because (a) God was revealed differently in different ages, according to man's ability to understand God, and (b) what was revealed about God by God was corrupted by man over time.

Ah, so your claim about all religions being the same only applies to the Abrahamic religions. So god only sent messengers to the Middle East in the last 3000 years. Therefore all other religions from other times and places are wrong. Which contradicts your claim that god sent messengers to all people and all times.

No, it does not only apply to the Abrahamic religions. Just because the quote says it is the essence of the Law of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá’u’lláh, that does not mean that the same spiritual truths are not shared by other religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism.

Why was slavery "necessary" to some cultures in the 19th century, but not others?
Why was slavery ever "necessary" at all?

Slavery might have been necessary in some cultures at certain times in history, but I do not know that God ever enjoined anyone to have slaves.

But you just claimed that "morality" varies with time and place so that claim is meaningless.

No, I did not claim that morality varies with time and place, but what is considered moral according to the Laws of God does change over time. For example, in Islam it was customary and morally acceptable to have up to four wives, but Baha'u'llah limited the number of wives to one.

Why did god need there to be Islamic Empires that resulted in massive oppression and suffering?

It was not God that needed that to be the case, it was man. God gave man free will to choose and that is what man chose to do.

1. Every megalomaniac emperor/ideologue dreams of world domination. Nothing miraculous about that.
2. Every rational person wants people to live in peace and cooperation. Nothing miraculous about that.

World unity and the oneness of mankind in no way implies world domination..
I never said that people living in peace and cooperation is miraculous, but no religion other than the Baha'i Faith had the teachings and an actual plan that will allow that to take place.

That still doesn't explain why there have been, and still are so many contradictory and incompatible religions around the world.

I already explained why in a previous post. The primary reason why the major religions have contradictory teachings and are incompatible is because they have been changed and corrupted by man over time.

 

[Trailblazer]

So how are we meant to tell the difference between different religions, and different versions of one religion that are designed to look like different religions?

I do not understand what you are asking.
I don't think it really matters if we fully understand what happened in the religions of the past because the past is gone. I think we need to focus on the present age and the needs of these times, as Bahaullah said: “Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.” Gleanings, p. 213 .

So why was god's message for the 1st century peaceful monotheism, but his message for the 8th century was polytheistic human sacrifice?

God's message was never polytheistic human sacrifice.

Utter nonsense. The evidence shows completely different and conflicting messages, both at different times and the same time.

Different messages came from God in different ages but God never revealed conflicting messages. Man changed and misinterpreted the scriptures so they then appeared to conflict with other religions.

The evidence shows that religion was defined by the culture that invented it. Peoples living in the same region at the same time could have completely different messages.

Those were NOT messages from God, they were what man did with the scriptures, how they interpreted them and applies them to their lives, in order to accommodate their various needs and desires.

None of this makes any sense if there is one god with one fundamental message. However it makes perfect sense if religions are culturally-driven, man-made phenomena.

Religions are revealed by God through Messengers but over time they are altered by man and they become culturally-driven, man-made phenomena.

There is one God but there is not only one message from God that is applicable to all of time. As man and the world we live in changes, God reveals a new messages that are pertinent to the times we live in, at which time the messages contained in the previous religions are no longer needed, since they have fulfilled their purposes. However, as I said before, the spiritual truths will remain valid for all time since they are eternal.

“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

You are simply refusing to look at the evidence logically or rationally, because you need the evidence to fit you established conclusion, rather than drawing conclusions from the evidence - which is how rational thinking works.

I could say the same thing about you. You are drawing conclusions from your understanding of 'what you believe happened' with the various religions, and since you have a different understanding of what happened you come to different conclusions.

I have drawn my own conclusions from the evidence and you have drawn different conclusions since you view the evidence differently.

 

[CG Didymus]

From what I have found in life, there is only one God.

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

 

[CG Didymus]

I finished with this and the many Godless exchanges RF now delivers.

Matter of fact, I do not look forward opening the RF forum anymore, I dread these exchanges.

Good bye and all the best.

Regards Tony

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.

 

[rational experiences]

Who purifies our hearts?

Is a humans thesis about heavens CH gas spirits in man's sciences. As and about heavens teachings only.

Man's awareness only.

Not about any human. Said by human inventors lord theists trade of machine invention resources.

Over lords. Liars. Theists.

As earths planet heavens natural mass presence isn't any humans theory.

Any type of heavens reaction is owned by the total heavens mass. No separate reaction exists. It's what a heavens first does as its owned body. Natural.

Man lives inside the heavens says the part I use I won't change...himself. but the part everything and everyone else I will remove. The heavenly mass position theory as the resource.

First position a human theist thinks within is heavens natural position.

The heavens as God owned was taught you man don't own it. You only survive by living inside of it.

I want a machine to burn it up to zero nothing. As in the beginning earth his machine owned no gas heavens. Said a man pretending he's God.

In thesis he pretends for zero nothing by calculus. In cosmic space history energy as burning mass only was theoried the two body types...held energy and cold space vacuum forcing conversions.

Is his direct human thesis. No heavens in that scenario.

Only energy as a hot cold mass existed. The position his machine doesn't own. He pretends his machine will own it however. Mass energy fixed held in space channelled into machine. Fixed purpose. Lying.

Just a theme O earth as gods natural mass history. Yet notice how just a man theories upon its natural history.

So men even themed the heavens owns sun particles that isn't separate. If the mass heavens didn't exist natural owner of anything in it....nor would a human theist live to discuss other subjects.

Heavens owns why the particles are present and it keeps us safe from it. Ignored by men thinking I want.

Subjects of separation gets life destroyed. As no man is God a teaching.

Father said our brother is so greedy as a country's brother by ego and human control ....says let me put a flag onto a natural body I don't even own. Now I'll claim I own it.

Cosmos owns it. A greater God in his thoughts.

Lords of trade inventive man can't flag an atmosphere.

Get your greedy message destroyer brother yet?

Instead he wants to claim a human is personally lord God heavens owner status I claim to flag his humans personal ownership in machine resources. I must somehow give myself status to claim I own it all.

As if he can channel what God owns into his machine. As he now owned it all by his human say so.

His human science earth strings to practice science owns by thinking only direct line calculus to nuclear sludge. Of earths science only format.

His new machine doesn't begin from sludge.
Nor does his first his reaction. Theory.

His thesis however is all about nothing first position coldest space zero. No thing. No earth mass in fact.

It's all about space holes. Another topic and subject. He chooses to link all the subjects together himself.

In science his mind strings back to nuclear sludge. As he doesn't own nothing in science terms. A human living on earth.

He then says I have yet not owned a space zero as sludge still exists. The theory. I want the last bit of science energy for extra resourcing.

Electricity begins in thesis from coal burnt out as all life position bio gone eradicated first.

Nuclear begins as no earth base for any biology to even exist. The theory exactly advised.

The themes for his assessed comments are included in stories but has no position in the exact machine or exact reaction. Yet he included the subjects. Is How you get life destroyed.

Is the human we've been fighting against to survive after earths ice age. Technology destroyer man. As he lies as he uses all natural subjects also. In theorising.

Lord of trade and lording over everyone and everything was just as a greedy lying human. The theist human claiming separate advices for thesis.

As it's a theists human testimonial proof. About the human destroyer mentality. Only a data correlation.

The bahuallah realisation said man's mind was theorising temple pyramid science again. A war was fought to stop it's practiced rebuilding.

Is why men today won't listen to any type of humans spiritual advice.

As God was why man's life was saved on earth versus his thesis brain changed theists human by star fall.

Men stated what hadn't come into earths atmosphere had saved life. It wanders past.

Entry by a large body mass like Russias hit could be triggered inside our atmosphere was only about Satan's star.

Ice men said was the saviour of life.
Star fall it's destruction.

Obvious human belief in thesis was argued in relativity about a star or God earths status.

Muslim theists versus bahuallah realisations of his day.

Bahuallah said gods earth message just as before said gods bodies had saved the life of humanity.

It's only interpreters today who don't use the total human topic subject reason to write articles and argue who are incorrect. And when a testimony was finished it had been.

Bahuallah was new advice not old advice. New had to be compared to old for substantiation.

 

[rational experiences]

Realisation conscious human equal family history first.

Subjected to slavery civilisation gain rich man control. Claimed illegal as human abuse history.

Humans tried to unite under a new governing mutual equality for family as conscious spiritual human healing advices. Just teachings.

Was the right for human rights by being informed. That we did own the rights of family first. Living on gods earth as named so by humans living on the planet to name it.

Is the actual teachings.

Consciousness said we knew and were advised what change meant. Life losses as spiritually.

As we were still in the eternal beings body as the experience. Creation removed from it first.

We only inherited life on earth after its heavens mass evolved.

Why we are acutely naturally aware of all things.

Why we knew to cause change was wrong as you become a lesser presence.

Exact warnings to our own self.

 

[KWED]

Wanna bet? That is what most believers do, but I prefer the rational approach.

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"?

 

[KWED]

The messages of the revelations from God differ over the course of time, but they do not contradict each other.

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

The reason there are religions with conflicting beliefs is because the religions become corrupted by man over the course of time and as such they are no longer what was originally revealed by 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.

That is why Baha'u'llah enjoined us to look at God's Manifestation for this age, which is Baha'u'llah.

“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.

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?

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. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.”

Gleanings, p. 171-172

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

The reason these religions still exist is because people do not normally embrace any religion that was revealed after the religion they believe in, so for example Jews have not embraced Christianity or Islam and Christians have not embraced Islam. Believers tend to stay with the religions they were raised in unless they have a reason to change.

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.

All so-called religions are not based upon a revelation from God, many religions are man-made.

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?

Polytheistic human sacrifice was not revealed by a Messenger of God so it is not a religion of God. I do not know why human sacrifices were conducted but they were not a remedy 'from God' for any disease, since it was not based upon a revelation from God.

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?

 

[KWED]

I said it might be proof, I did not say it would be proof.
That means it would be proof to some people but it would not be proof to everyone.

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.

His Person, His Revelation (what He did on His mission), and His Writings is the evidence of who He was.

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?

Some people find this convincing, some don't, since humans are very diverse and look at things very differently.

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.

 

[KWED]

All 'true' religions teach spiritual truths that are eternal; some of these truths are faith, knowledge, certitude, justice, piety, righteousness, trustworthiness, love God, love your neighbor, benevolence, purity, detachment, humility, meekness, patience and constancy.

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"?

The reason that different religions differ in their beliefs about the nature of God is because (a) God was revealed differently in different ages, according to man's ability to understand God, and (b) what was revealed about God by God was corrupted by man over time.

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?

No, it does not only apply to the Abrahamic religions. Just because the quote says it is the essence of the Law of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá’u’lláh, that does not mean that the same spiritual truths are not shared by other religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism.

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

Slavery might have been necessary in some cultures at certain times in history,

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

but I do not know that God ever enjoined anyone to have slaves.

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.

No, I did not claim that morality varies with time and place,

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?

but what is considered moral according to the Laws of God does change over time. For example, in Islam it was customary and morally acceptable to have up to four wives, but Baha'u'llah limited the number of wives to one.

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.

It was not God that needed that to be the case, it was man. God gave man free will to choose and that is what man chose to do.

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

World unity and the oneness of mankind in no way implies world domination..

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?

I never said that people living in peace and cooperation is miraculous, but no religion other than the Baha'i Faith had the teachings and an actual plan that will allow that to take place.

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 already explained why in a previous post. The primary reason why the major religions have contradictory teachings and are incompatible is because they have been changed and corrupted by man over time.

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

 

[KWED]

I do not understand what you are asking.

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?

I don't think it really matters if we fully understand what happened in the religions of the past because the past is gone. I think we need to focus on the present age and the needs of these times, as Bahaullah said: “Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.” Gleanings, p. 213 .

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.

God's message was never polytheistic human sacrifice.

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?

Different messages came from God in different ages but God never revealed conflicting messages. Man changed and misinterpreted the scriptures so they then appeared to conflict with other religions.

Those were NOT messages from God, they were what man did with the scriptures, how they interpreted them and applies them to their lives, in order to accommodate their various needs and desires.

Religions are revealed by God through Messengers but over time they are altered by man and they become culturally-driven, man-made phenomena.

There is one God but there is not only one message from God that is applicable to all of time. As man and the world we live in changes, God reveals a new messages that are pertinent to the times we live in, at which time the messages contained in the previous religions are no longer needed, since they have fulfilled their purposes. However, as I said before, the spiritual truths will remain valid for all time since they are eternal.

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.

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

As I predicted, you are ignoring the evidence that religion changes with place rather than time, and keep repeating the flawed claim that religion c=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 could say the same thing about you. You are drawing conclusions from your understanding of 'what you believe happened' with the various religions,

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.

and since you have a different understanding of what happened you come to different conclusions.

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