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

[KWED]

Personally I see it is a bounty Women have been exempted from this service, as it allows them to serve in a capacity that will be of a great benefit to humanity. That is the education of the children and youth that build our future.

So the reason why it is not sexist discrimination to exclude them from serving on the UHJ is because they can now stay home and look after the children, cooking, cleaning, etc, and not worrying their pretty little heads about important, man stuff.

Can you even hear yourself?

 

[KWED]

sexism: prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.

You do not KNOW that the restriction is based upon prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination.

Dear god, it's like a foreign language...
"Women are excluded from doing job x" is sexist discrimination, regardless of what the excuse is!
Claiming that it is not sexist discrimination because you don't know why they are being discriminated against has to be one of the most bonkers arguments you have come up with yet.

You absolutely do not know that, you just assume it to be the case.
All you have is a personal opinion, but you are stating it as a fact.
If it is a fact you should be able to prove it.

We know that they are discriminated against because of their sex - because their sex is the reason given for their exclusion!
It really isn't that difficult. It's just that ol' cognitive dissonance again.

Again, you are wrong and again you are committing the fallacy of jumping to conclusions. An opinion about homosexuality and a Baha'i Law that prohibits homosexual sex does not equate to 'a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.'

homophobia: dislike of or prejudice against gay people.

Bahaullah prohibited and condemned it. Clear homophobia.
Shoghi Effendi called it "shameful sexual aberration". That is the definition of homophobia.
It is irrelevant why a person exhibits homophobia.

I just explained that in the previous post. Baha'u'llah did not say they would be burned alive, He said "him also shall ye burn."

Perhaps English isn't your first language, but the two things mean exactly the same. You are really struggling now.

But even if He meant they are to be burned alive that is not the definition of brutal and barbaric.
It is only YOUR OPINION that it would be brutal and barbaric, it is not a fact.

This is getting ridiculous now.
You think that burning someone alive is not brutal and barbaric?
You have lost your moral compass, which often happens to religionists when they are made aware of the brutal barbarity, intolerance or prejudice their religion contains and they feel obliged to defend it.

You continue to twist my words and imply that I said something I did not say.

I did not say that I can just ignore his laws for the present. I never said that.

You said that you only have to "go by what Bahaullah says" concerning the future.
That necessarily implies that you don't have to "go by what he says" regarding the present.

Maybe you are having trouble keeping up. I already explained that when I said that 'we only have to go by what Baha'u'llah says concerning the future' that was in the specific context of what will happen in the future, it had nothing to do with following Baha'i Laws. I never said that we can just ignore His laws for the present.

Your problem is that you keep making statements without appreciating their implications. It often happens when you argue from acquired dogma rather than from considered, rational positions.

 

[Link]

Just want to point out, last elections from what I remember in Iran, resulted in more women governors then men in Iran.

Whether women should or not govern, I think we have to see real life applications and asses. Who does better? Are men over all better in this then women. I think all evidence is showing there is no evidence men are more suited. They both perform well.

I am aware there is a letter in nahjul balagha that says women should not govern and take positions of government, but I think there is many reasons (including the life of Fatima (a) and Zainab (a) and Ma'asooma (a)) that show there is no basis to this and that line is probably a fabrication attributed to Ali (a) as the letter also says women should all stay in their homes and not be let out in public and not work in general, and is every extreme.

I think Khadija (a) working and mixing in public also disproves this. Also, there would be no wisdom of Hijaab if women can't work or can't govern in my view. It defeats the whole purpose of the veil in Islam clothing wise.

God know best what the true rulings are and which hadiths have been fabricated and which are guidance, and so does the Imam of time, who we await for his return.

 

[Link]

There also a few hadiths that say women should not govern aside from that letter. They are weak in chains of individuals relaying hadiths, not deemed connected or from unknown or untrustworthy people.

But the hadiths should be assessed. I think proper evidence in real life is showing women are as capable as men in government.

God knows best.

 

[Link]

Khadija (a) was a boss of traders include Mohammad (s). So I think that is a sort of power/authority/governor. Why not allowed in public government?

Imams (a) says everything taught in Islam can be proven and has a wisdom, they should be sought for it.

I've seen hadiths forbid women from government but none of them seem to give a reasonable explanation to it. The one place where there is an elaborate explanation, makes, women appear as sluts who can't control themselves, and that they should not work or mix in public or leave the house in general which can't really be taken seriously, and that's the letter in Nahjul balagha.

 

[KWED]

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

Without the context you cannot know the implication.

So you don't know the "context", or you aren't going to tell me?

I did not say it was not God. It is God since God created the material world,

So you admit that it is god who compels babies to suffer and die from congenital conditions.

Baha'u'llah did not say that only God can dispose of life, in the way he deem best, Shoghi Effendi said that.
Baha'u'llah did not say that we are compelled to suffer things like illness, Abdu'l-Baha said that.

Ok. So you don't consider their statements to be accurate, meaningful or important.

I did not claim that God is not responsible for babies dying in agony from congenital conditions.
Indirectly God is responsible since God created the conditions under which thye can exist, be they inherited or caused by environmental factors.

So you admit that god is responsible for babies dying in agony from congenital conditions.

No, because God does not deliberately cause a death.

So god does stuff by accident, or without realising he's doing it?
Your argument is becoming more and more incoherent.

Typical atheist... God could prevent it because God is omnipotent.

An entirely logical and reasonable observation. Which part of it are you struggling with?

If God set it up so there would be suffering and death, why would God rush in and play Superman and prevent it?

Indeed. If a terrorist sets up a bomb to go off in a theatre, why would he rush in and defuse it?

Expecting God to play Superman is childish.

Oh my word. It is religionists who claim that god has super powers. I am merely asking why he refuses to use them to help people. I certainly would. Wouldn't you?

Don't worry, God does not need your worship.

It seems he does. He even states that he does in the Quran - "We created mankind only to worship me".

Choosing to reject God us your loss, not God's.

It's a moral position. Just because Hitler was real didn't mean he was worthy of the adoration heaped on him. Stating up to monsters, even if it means risking our life, is one of the most meaningful things we can do.

Some suffering is because of sin and lack of personal responsibility, external neglect, or other factors, just not ALL of the suffering is because of these things.

So what is the suffering of the baby dying in agony from a congenital condition "because of"?
You already admitted that god is responsible for it, so it is therefore "because of god".

 

[Trailblazer]

Women on the Universal House of Justice
by / on behalf of Universal House of Justice

1988-05-31
date of original: 1998

We have been informed of a paper, presented at a recent New Zealand Bahá'í Studies conference [online here], which raises the possibility that the ineligibility of women for membership on the Universal House of Justice may be a temporary provision subject to change through a process of progressive unfoldment of the divine purpose. We present the following points as a means of increasing the friends' understanding of this established provision of the Order of Bahá'u'lláh that membership of the Universal House of Justice is confined to men.

Read more: Women on the Universal House of Justice

The exclusion of women from the Universal House of Justice today is observed by the Baha'i community primarily in obedience to these letters of the Guardian. Most Baha'is assume that this exclusion was intended to be a permanent one. However, since this instruction of the Guardian is tied so closely to the meaning of the one Tablet of 'Abdu'l-Baha which promises that the wisdom of the exclusion of women will become manifest in the future, and since it is known that the meaning of the Tablet was that women should be excluded only temporarily from the Chicago House, the assumption that women will be permanently excluded from the current Universal House of Justice may be a faulty one. A temporary exclusion may be intended.

The answer to this question, as with all other questions in the Baha'i community, will have to be worked out over time. The elements of dialogue, struggle, persistence and anguish which are so evident in the history of the gradual participation of women on local Baha'i administrative bodies will, no doubt, all attend the working out of that answer in the future. These elements are all present today.

Read more: https://bahai-library.com/Women on the Universal House of Justice

 

[KWED]

That is what I have always claimed.

1. that the religions of the past were actually valid and from God at one point, but are no longer valid or applicable
2. that earlier messages were corrupted by man over time.

Here we go again. You are all over the place, playing theological whack-a-mole.
You initially claimed that earlier religions were not corrupted...

Baha'u'llah did not claim that "All previous religions were corrupted versions of the one true religion."
He claimed that there is only one true religion of God that is revealed in various stages over time.

Now you claim that earlier religions were from god and were corrupted.

Debate with you is pointless because whatever argument is presented, you will simply claim the opposite, even if it means repeatedly contradicting yourself.

 

[Link]

Some if not many (don't know the number) hadiths say 50 women will be with Imam Mahdi (a) and are of his officials during revolution and rise and that they are included in his government and governors.

So this why you have to know there are contradictions in hadiths. Some point they should govern and participate in politics, others, not. Some say they can work, others say they should not.

As for staying home and not participating in public politics, Zainab (a) and Fatima (a) showed opposite. As for working and being a boss, Khadija (a) did that and had many men working under her.

As government, we see 50 women will be of the government of Imam Mahdi (a).

 

[KWED]

Women on the Universal House of Justice
by / on behalf of Universal House of Justice

1988-05-31
date of original: 1998

We have been informed of a paper, presented at a recent New Zealand Bahá'í Studies conference [online here], which raises the possibility that the ineligibility of women for membership on the Universal House of Justice may be a temporary provision subject to change through a process of progressive unfoldment of the divine purpose. We present the following points as a means of increasing the friends' understanding of this established provision of the Order of Bahá'u'lláh that membership of the Universal House of Justice is confined to men.

Read more: Women on the Universal House of Justice

The exclusion of women from the Universal House of Justice today is observed by the Baha'i community primarily in obedience to these letters of the Guardian. Most Baha'is assume that this exclusion was intended to be a permanent one. However, since this instruction of the Guardian is tied so closely to the meaning of the one Tablet of 'Abdu'l-Baha which promises that the wisdom of the exclusion of women will become manifest in the future, and since it is known that the meaning of the Tablet was that women should be excluded only temporarily from the Chicago House, the assumption that women will be permanently excluded from the current Universal House of Justice may be a faulty one. A temporary exclusion may be intended.

The answer to this question, as with all other questions in the Baha'i community, will have to be worked out over time. The elements of dialogue, struggle, persistence and anguish which are so evident in the history of the gradual participation of women on local Baha'i administrative bodies will, no doubt, all attend the working out of that answer in the future. These elements are all present today.

Read more: https://bahai-library.com/Women on the Universal House of Justice

So there is a possibility that the discriminatory ruling by Abdulbahah may be reversed by the more progressive Bahais of today.
Excellent news!

 

[KWED]

A Fireside is an event held in a Bahá'í home to teach the Bahá'í Faith.

Fireside - Bahaipedia, an encyclopedia about the Bahá'í Faith

What if the house doesn't have a fireplace?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If the Bahai scriptures are miracles, then make a thread, showing this. I've read some of them, and they appear bad to me. So go ahead and show it like I'm doing in signs of eloquence of Quran thread.

This is an important topic, as Baha'u'llah has taken miracles off the table as a proof of a Messenger. This is another example how many require a literal revelation, they demand miracles that their senses can perceive.

It was a test the Mullah wanted to use against Baha'u'llah, yet Baha'u'llah used that material desire against the Mullah.

He accepted the challenge to produce a miracle with a condition. That all the Mullah must agree to the miraculous event they wanted Baha'u'llah to produce and when Baha'u'llah then subsequently did as they requested, they had to submit to the Message Baha'u'llah was giving fron Allah.

So the result was they could not agree on a Miracle, they said what happens if Baha'u'llah is some sort of wizard and produced what they asked. They never took up the challenge.

That is exactly how miracles play out. What Christian will accept the miracles of Muhammad? Which Jew had accepted the miracles of Jesus and Muhamma?

If we are to learn from history, then this is the greatest lesson, miracles are not proof of a Messenger. This is the age of the maturity of mankind, we are to balance the Word of God with reason and science.

Skin does not talk, the blind do not see, the death do jot hear, bones do not rose from graves in a literal sense. They all have meaning in spiritual metephor.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

This is an important topic, as Baha'u'llah has taken miracles off the table as a proof of a Messenger. This is another example how many require a literal revelation, they demand miracles that their senses can perceive.

It was a test the Mullah wanted to use against Baha'u'llah, yet Baha'u'llah used that material desire against the Mullah.

He accepted the challenge to produce a miracle with a condition. That all the Mullah must agree to the miraculous event they wanted Baha'u'llah to produce and when Baha'u'llah then subsequently did as they requested, they had to submit to the Message Baha'u'llah was giving fron Allah.

So the result was they could not agree on a Miracle, they said what happens if Baha'u'llah is some sort of wizard and produced what they asked. They never took up the challenge.

That is exactly how miracles play out. What Christian will accept the miracles of Muhammad? Which Jew had accepted the miracles of Jesus and Muhamma?

If we are to learn from history, then this is the greatest lesson, miracles are not proof of a Messenger. This is the age of the maturity of mankind, we are to balance the Word of God with reason and science.

Skin does not talk, the blind do not see, the death do jot hear, bones do not rose from graves in a literal sense. They all have meaning in spiritual metephor.

Regards Tony

So he didn't perform miracles, just bluffed?

 

[KWED]

No, I believe that He was Messenger of God so I choose to accept whatever he says.

No, I do not assume, I believe that God is all-good. God is not subject to being moral as only humans can be moral. God sets the standards for morality, He is not subject to them.

Morality is the belief that some behaviour is right and acceptable and that other behaviour is wrong.
A morality is a system of principles and values concerning people's behaviour, which is generally accepted by a society or by a particular group of people.
Morality definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

I could not give a tinker's damn what society accepts, I only care about what God accepts.
Modern society accepts all kinds of immoral behavior.

If morality is just whatever god subjectively decides it is, how do you know it is necessarily "good" or "bad"?

 

[Link]

What Christian will accept the miracles of Muhammad? Which Jew had accepted the miracles of Jesus and Muhamma?

Yet if former generations accepted the signs in form of miracles and accept God's proofs who perform them and power displayed by such signs, per Quran, God would never stop sending them.

He only ever stops sending them in any period, after the former generations denied them.

So they are meant to be in the open. Ghayba was meant to be prevented and hadiths prophecizing it are warnings if we go astray and don't help Imams (a) enough.

Imam Hassan Al-Askari (a) gathered an army as a last attempt to keep the ghayba from happening, but Shiites failed to help him enough, and the sadness of disappearance of the Mahdi (A) as the Prophecies conditioned if we disobey God and follow the ways of disobedience of Bani-Israel regarding their Messengers and leaders with our leaders, came to pass.

Warnings in Quran and Sunnah, are meant to be avoided.

God warned miracles would disappear if the first generations deny them and why this results in Ghayba of such signs in the open, Quran has explained through out.

وَمَا مَنَعَنَا أَنْ نُرْسِلَ بِالْآيَاتِ إِلَّا أَنْ كَذَّبَ بِهَا الْأَوَّلُونَ ۚ وَآتَيْنَا ثَمُودَ النَّاقَةَ مُبْصِرَةً فَظَلَمُوا بِهَا ۚ وَمَا نُرْسِلُ بِالْآيَاتِ إِلَّا تَخْوِيفًا | Nothing keeps Us from sending with the signs except that the former people denied them. We gave Thamud the she-camel as an eye-opener, but they wronged her. We do not send the signs except as warning. | Al-Israa : 59

 

[KWED]

I said that Hinduism is a religion of God, I did not say polytheism is true.

Hinduism is a polytheist religion. If it is "a religion of god", then polytheism is a religion of god, by definition.

I do not know what happened to Hinduism.

How do you know anything happened to it? It has always been polytheistic.

I never said that I believe in those religions to cover my bases.

You said... "I believe in God and Jesus so I am covered. Who is covering your bases?"
I believe in those religions because it is a Baha'i belief that they are true religions.

This has nothing to do with sincerity. It is about what is actually true. Since there is only one true God monotheism is true, according to my beliefs.

What about the various Hindu gods? You just claimed that it is god's religion as well.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But you are claiming that there was light from the sum before the sun existed. Which is obvious nonsense.

That is not what was offered. For every religion there is the dawn of the new day and also a day when the sun sets and darkness sets upon that religion. Thus God again sends another Messenger, which the light permeates humanity before it rises above the horizon.

The influence of the Word of God is already penetrating the minds of men who are awake before the dawn.

Now if you want to know how God has created this reality, then this provisional Tablet provides detail to be considered. It tells us of the Spiritual birth of the Messengers of God, which is a number that can not be calculated and that this process mirrors how this material existance came into being.

Tablet of the Universe

Regards Tony

Our senses cannot detect that which is not real.
However, we can imagine things that are not real. The trick is understanding what is real and what is imaginary. Some people are unable to tell the difference, apparently.

Our physical senses are indeed unreliable. Yet our spiritual capacity enables us to find a balance. If we do not use our spiritual capacity, we can become captive to nature, which is the illusion.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

@TransmutingSoul

There are over 100 miracles of Mohammad (s) recorded in Sunni books. Say some are fabrications, you can't dismiss them all if you give hadiths weight. There are many I don't know how much in Shiite books as well of Mohammad (s).

Also, we have Imams (a) doing many miracles including raising dead to life and other miracles.

There are also many miracles recorded of Imam Ali (a) in Sunni sources as well, including lifting a giant door/gate in Khaybar and using it in battle.

The number of killed by Imam Ali (a) in battles was not normal and this recorded in both sources. So miracles of Mohammad (S) and Ali (a) are recorded both sunni and Shiite sources.

As for rest of Imams (a), if you don't give weight to twelver hadiths on it, you should see historical and Sunni sources, they have a section of "Karamat" of Saints in their view, and you can read about these. They call them honors of friends of God, and don't see them as miracles, but they include things which are no doubt signs and miracles. Imam Hassan (a) to the next Imam Hassan (a) (11th Imam), are recoded to all sort of miracles in Sunni sources, just look up section of "Karamat" in their books. So many miracles recorded.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you don't know the "context", or you aren't going to tell me?

You cited it out of context so you find the context. It is not my job to do your homework.

So you admit that it is god who compels babies to suffer and die from congenital conditions.

No, it is just part of life in a material world. God does not compel them to suffer.

Ok. So you don't consider their statements to be accurate, meaningful or important.

I did not say that. I consider them accurate.

So you admit that god is responsible for babies dying in agony from congenital conditions.

No, it is just part of life in a material world. God does not compel them to suffer.

So god does stuff by accident, or without realising he's doing it?
Your argument is becoming more and more incoherent.

God did not do it at all. It is just part of life in a material world.

An entirely logical and reasonable observation. Which part of it are you struggling with?

A completely illogical and unreasonable expectation. Which part of it are you struggling with?

Indeed. If a terrorist sets up a bomb to go off in a theatre, why would he rush in and defuse it?

Fallacy of false equivalence because God is not a man. Also, God did not set up a bomb or anything else. Suffering is just part of life in a material world. You can get over it or continue to whine but it won't make any difference because the world exists as it was created. Took me years, but I finally accepted that.

Oh my word. It is religionists who claim that god has super powers. I am merely asking why he refuses to use them to help people. I certainly would. Wouldn't you?

What you would do is irrelevant because you are a human, not God.
Fallacy of false equivalence.

God is under no obligation to humans. Whatever we get is by His mercy.
God does help people but only when He chooses to. God does only what He chooses to do.

It seems he does. He even states that he does in the Quran - "We created mankind only to worship me".

God enjoins worship ONLY for our benefit. God does not need anyone's worship.

It's a moral position. Just because Hitler was real didn't mean he was worthy of the adoration heaped on him. Stating up to monsters, even if it means risking our life, is one of the most meaningful things we can do.

God is not a monster just because YOU do not like what He does or doesn't do. NOTHING could be more illogical and self-centered. That is akin to a child saying that daddy is a monster because he won't buy me a bicycle, very childish.

But it is your choice if you want to believe God is a monster. You cannot hurt God, nobody can hurt God; you only hurt yourself even if you don't realize it.

So what is the suffering of the baby dying in agony from a congenital condition "because of"?
You already admitted that god is responsible for it, so it is therefore "because of god".

It is just part of life in a material world. God is only responsible in the sense that he created the material world. That means God is also responsible for every thing you enjoy about the material world.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So the reason why it is not sexist discrimination to exclude them from serving on the UHJ is because they can now stay home and look after the children, cooking, cleaning, etc, and not worrying their pretty little heads about important, man stuff.

Can you even hear yourself?

They are your thoughts, not mine, nor I would offer does any Baha'i think that.

Regards Tony