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

[CG Didymus]

That is not the spirit it works in CG.

If one does not want to submit to those that are elected, I would strongly suggest they are not ready to be a Baha'i.

On the Local and National level, if one is not happy with a decision, one can asked the Universal Justice for clarification. That answer requires submission.

I did this once and was rightly put in my place by the Universal House of Jusrice reply.

I need to read that, to see that I needed to submit to what an NSA had already offered, that it was me that was pig-headed.

That issue was about a Temple for the Solomon Islands in Honiara. At least I got to pray on the site where it will be built, on many weekends, over a couple of years.

Regards Tony

Yes, if you are a Baha'i, go ahead and submit to the nine men at the top. Call them "infallible". If the Baha'is writings say to do something, then Baha'is should do it. But... we know lots of Baha'is don't. So what do you do with them? Pray for them? Admonish them? Deepen them? Leave to grow on their own?

 

[samtonga43]

A clear cut case of psychological projection. The reason it is projection is because you are the one who keeps calling out fallacies you 'believe' I commit.

LOL!! Now this IS psychological projection. Do you read your own posts? The evidence that you are doing this is plastered all over this forum, no need for me to present it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, if you are a Baha'i, go ahead and submit to the nine men at the top. Call them "infallible". If the Baha'is writings say to do something, then Baha'is should do it. But... we know lots of Baha'is don't. So what do you do with them? Pray for them? Admonish them? Deepen them? Leave to grow on their own?

I do not know any Baha'i personally that has not chosen to embrace the Covenant of Baha’u’llah.

My prayers are for every soul past present and future CG.

May God grant us all the wisdom of oneness.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

The ones on here seem to.

I care about your opinion, and my opinion is that Baha'is should care about your opinion too. A religion that is supposedly going to unite all people and they say they don't care about another person's opinions?

What was "miraculous" about his execution?

I was told it was 750 men with rifles... and they all missed. Why didn't they just get one or two guys that could shoot straight?

 

[samtonga43]

There will be no defense until you explain why it is Bandwagon and Genetic.
You cannot just throw out names of fallacies and not explain how I committed them.
That is like going into a court of law and accusing someone of a crime and not presenting any evidence that a crime has been committed.

I really should not have to explain this to you, Tb, and I won’t be doing it again. You are going to have to work things out for yourself. I’ll help you out this time. Here is what you said:--
"The United States Supreme Court is the highest level of the judiciary branch. Out of 115 justices that have served on the court, only five have been women. Three are currently serving: Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Amy Coney Barrett".
Your logical fallacy is bandwagon
You say another group have had few women serving, and so it’s OK for your group to have no women serving. This is irrational. Your logical fallacy is genetic

So what? Just because many people would label it as sexism that does not mean it IS sexism.
If you are claiming it is sexism becaue many or most people believe it is sexism, that is the fallacy of argumentum ad populum.

Please show me where I said, or even implied, that it is sexism because many or most people believe it is sexism. Another red herring.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so." Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

Wow! I had no idea!!! (sarcasm)

Because that is how people function within a society. People do not make big changes overnight, they make changes gradually, because people have to have time to adjust to new ideas.

You’d better get started then, because you’re way behind.

I said that in the future there might be women on the UHJ, but I did not say this would not happen in this age. It sounds like you just committed the fallacy of jumping to conclusions.

It sounds like this to you because you are not as rational as you think you are. A faith for this age should not be in the position of forbidding women from serving in one of its most important groups. If you think that I just committed the fallacy of jumping to conclusions, then you just committed the fallacy of jumping to conclusions.

It is not irrational to admit I don't know something. It's called humility.

Correct. But you have now built another strawman. I did not say that it is irrational to admit you don't know something. Now I suggest you look back, re-read, find out what I DID say, and address that. I cannot keep explaining all of your logical fallacies. You will only learn if you work it out for yourself.

It is not an error just because I don't know the reason. If you read the article on that website I provided you could figure out a possible reason why there are no women on the UHJ - yet.

The reason can only be prejudice. There may be multiple reasons for this prejudice, but it can only be prejudice. This is so obvious, Tb.

To be Continued...

 

[Trailblazer]

But the claim is he is The Return of everybody ever promised. His message is The Message that is to fulfill everything. So, he is much more than a prophet, he is The Prophet. And if that is true, then the whole world should turn to him and follow his teachings. Because part of the claim is that those teaching will heal the world, that they will bring peace and unity to the world. If that's true, it would be stupid to reject him.

Yet, some of us do.

I wonder why anyone would want to take a chance like that? What if it is true?
If true, it is not only a matter of peace and unity for the world, it is also a matter of individual salvation.

 

[Trailblazer]

To be Continued...

To what end?
Fallacy of this and fallacy of that is not going to accomplish anything except to make you believe you know more than me.

You are not going to change what God has willed with your 'personal opinions' about the Baha'i Faith. Baha'is are imperfect, but the Baha'i Faith is still the religion of God for this age.

Imagine that, you know more about how to run a religion of God than a Messenger of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

LOL!! Now this IS psychological projection. Do you read your own posts? The evidence that you are doing this is plastered all over this forum, no need for me to present it.

The evidence that you are calling out fallacies is plastered all over this forum, just as I said.

samtonga43 said:
Of course you created a straw man.
Your logical fallacy is the fallacy fallacy
This is the fallacy of Unwarranted Assumption.

#1088 samtonga43, Today at 9:18 AM

samtonga43 said:
Your logical fallacy is bandwagon
Another red herring.
But you have now built another strawman.

#1105 samtonga43, 33 minutes ago

 

[CG Didymus]

Of course it can. It offers more that one already has. Obviously one is going to drink that first cup, so more cups are clearly desirable. and effective.
You really should try and think beyond these meaningless platitudes.

And if we make the comparison to any of the other religions, lots of people in those other religions think their cup is full also... Especially the Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christians. But what is it that their cup is full of? And even most Baha'is would agree that those the cup those Christians have is full of wrong interpretations and false beliefs. But the Baha'i cup? That's what we been asking... "Just what is it you're drinking? Are you sure it's not Kool-Aid?"

Is what they believe compatible with science? By their own beliefs it should be...

Abdu’l-Baha "…weigh carefully in the balance of reason and science everything that is presented to you as religion. If it passes this test, then accept it, for it is truth! If, however, it does not so conform, then reject it, for it is ignorance!"

The Bahá’í view is that true science and true religion are completely compatible: Any religious belief which is not conformable with scientific proof and investigation is superstition, for true science is reason and reality, and religion is essentially reality and pure reason; therefore, the two must correspond...​

 

[rational experiences]

In natural life which we all own. Human miracles have been received without anyone else involved.

Which proves an affected changed human can display phenomena causes are involved. If they received change they can still be receiving change.

First position not human owned is natural mass. Mass is the heavens body separated as itself.

Causes ice the saviour not and never was a man melting changing all types of bodies. In the heavens..... Hot water into cold water. Cold water colder. Hot gases cooled ....colder gases colder.

Not human controlled.

We know it's separate as we fall to the ground die decompose become bone like stone god. First God rock. Not owner of the heavens mass.

Basic human advise don't self idolise just because you get changed. Seeing men invented machine technology that changed human life themselves.

Mind and body changed it stated.

The warning.

I got messages too

I've seen miraculous healing. I saw it wasn't my ownership. I didn't charge as I didn't own it. I was advised not to build a healing venue as I owned a direct spiritual humans teaching.

Don't self idolise stated.

Misconception greedy man position theist I want to give status to owning myself by any man's term about any claim I make as just a human man.

Upon any type of body I think about. I would go to a planet put my human flag on it saying it's mine. Greed evil motivation real.

The defined teaching false preaching about false gods. About humans. Behaviour of changed human minds.

Was the testimonial.

As natural holy healthy spiritual natural man was first.

Inherited changed man's life involving heavens phenomena the human teaching why no man is God.

Now science man today started preaching science of religion as just a man of science. Said no need to fear today as he had caused it. As just the man.

Knew

Says if I don't stop God human theist who consciousness hates and agrees with humans karmic destruction as you deserve it...when in fact innocent humans die in the same occurrence.

By God bible statements exact destruction of life. Why I never read the bible but I had to study it to discuss concepts.

Innocent life reads evil and agrees.

Says he's more rational. As the scientist. My spiritual realisations natural are more rational actually.

He is in fact scared and aware humans would accept all life on earth destroyed in a God science act himself. Because innocent humans hated science brother as Satanists.

The exact psychological reasoning.

As a man human is just a man human first.

The bible had been shut. As it was a legal testimony against human scientists.

As science was repracticed the books quotes re read as it was proof just human written with technology that had nearly destroyed all life on earth.

As it was a shut book quoting from it now isn't going to save life.

You need to take communal world humanity action.

 

[CG Didymus]

I do not know any Baha'i personally that has not chosen to embrace the Covenant of Baha’u’llah.

This is what I said...

If the Baha'is writings say to do something, then Baha'is should do it. But... we know lots of Baha'is don't.

So, do all people claiming to believe in the Covenant of Baha'u'llah following everything taught in the writings and follow and obey all the things the UHJ asks of them? I wouldn't suspect they would. I'd imagine very few, if any, go to the extreme of following all the teachings.

 

[Spirit of Light]

If it was just a matter of believing he was a spiritual teacher like or spiritual master where people could take what they wanted or needed and apply his teaching to their lives that would be different. But the claim is he is The Return of everybody ever promised. His message is The Message that is to fulfill everything. So, he is much more than a prophet, he is The Prophet. And if that is true, then the whole world should turn to him and follow his teachings. Because part of the claim is that those teaching will heal the world, that they will bring peace and unity to the world. If that's true, it would be stupid to reject him.

Yet, some of us do. How do we evaluate his claims? For the Jews, what was supposed to happen when the Messiah come? For the Christians, what was supposed to happen when Jesus returned? And so on down the list of religions. Did this person who took the title of Baha'u'llah fulfill all those things? On one hand Baha'is say "yes" he did, then they turn around and downplay the importance of the prophecies.

But something else is important in all this, and that is what you're saying about religious "labels". Just what have people committed themselves to when they sign a card declaring their belief in Baha'u'llah? They are part of a religious community that expects them to behave certain ways and to believe certain things. But the depth of knowledge and commitment varies greatly between Baha'is. Some become "inactive". Some only attend feasts occasionally. Others get involved and serve on their LSA's. They teach the faith. Some become pioneers and go off to far off places.

Taking that label, and saying they believe Baha'u'llah is a manifestation of God, should mean a total commitment to the Cause. But because that is not what happens. Too many people just do the minimum, and some, the inactive ones, who knows? Is the Baha'i Faith even something they even think about anymore? This same thing happens in other religions where a declaration of beliefs is expected. I think it's a problem with all "organized" religions. It's too easy to get lost in the crowd and just become a nominal believer. The Baha'i Faith has that problem. And what I think might be happening is some people don't totally believe. They've signed a card that says they believe, but they don't know for sure. So definitely, people shouldn't take the label until they know for sure. But how does a person ever know for sure?

Baha'is here say they "know" for sure, but all they know for sure is that they believe it... on faith... 'Cause they can't prove or show any objective evidence. So, what do they have that any other similar religion that has a prophet making claims that he has been sent from God? Like Born-Again Christians, they've committed themselves to believing the Bible very literally. So now they have to say they believe in Creation, the Flood, Jesus walking on water and rising from the dead and ascending into the clouds. How they going to prove any of that? All they can say is, "The Bible says it and I believe it." It's nonsense to some of us to believe those things that literally and strongly, but it works. It changes their lives. They believe in a three-part God, a devil and hell, and that they inherited sin because of Adam. Crazy stuff to some of us. But they feel it, believe it, and live it.

And how different is their beliefs to the claims and beliefs of the Baha'is? I'm sure when they apply the teachings of Baha'u'llah that their lives change. They can feel it, and they become more spiritual. But it completely contradicts what those Born-Again Christians believe. That's why I don't necessarily believe any of these beliefs are true, but because they are believed to be true, they become true to the Baha'i or to the Christian, and it changes their lives. They both work, but they both might not be true. And, definitely, each believes the other is false. So yeah, I don't what to take that kind of label for myself. But I still think that if Baha'u'llah is who he claims to be, everyone should follow him. But is he?

You are free to think and believe anything you want, just like RF members who are Baha'i has their right to believe Baha'u'llah was The Prophet as you called it.

 

[KWED]

Logical reasoning leads to the understanding that women can perform exactly the same duties of service as men. Heavy weight-lifting is not one of the duties, is it?

There are women who can lift much heavier weights than I can, so even that wouldn't be a logical reason for excluding women.

 

[KWED]

A clear cut case of psychological projection.
The reason it is projection is because you are the one who keeps calling out fallacies you 'believe' I commit.
The evidence that you are doing this is plastered all over this forum, no need for me to present it.

With all due respect, you are the one who has been repeatedly and erroneously accusing others of fallacious argument.
This is just another example of you simply denying reality and saying whatever suits you at any given time.

 

[KWED]

The scripture came from the Messengers of God, either directly or indirectly.
The Messengers did not have a belief, they received A revelation from God.

So you are claiming that before his first "revelation", Bahaullah did not believe in the existence of a god who revealed messages to messengers?
Are you sure about that?

 

[KWED]

That's true, but I have never refused to back up my claims with evidence, always stating that there is no' proof' that will be universally accepted, and we can only prove the truth of the claim to ourselves.

Here we go again...
"I have not refused to support my claim, I have merely said that my claim can't be supported".

 

[KWED]

God does not have to decide, as if He was thinking it over ... God just knows.

Where does that knowledge come from?

God is not subject to any external concepts since God is not subject to anything external to Him.
God does not have to adhere to anything except what He chooses to adhere to.

So the knowledge comes from himself. It is therefore subjective and he could have chosen to accept murder as good and love as bad.

You make a good point. Scripture tends to anthropomorphize God.

And as scripture is god's message as revealed to his messengers, it is therefore god anthropomorphising himself. Therefore it is the correct way to see him. QED.

God has feelings,

You just said he doesn't have feelings or emotions.

but they are not the same as human feelings. We cannot understand how God experiences or expresses feelings since we cannot understand God's intrinsic nature.

If you can't understand them, how can you know what they are like or not like?

"While the Baháʼí writings teach of a personal god who is a being with a personality (including the capacity to reason and to feel love), they clearly state that this does not imply a human or physical form.[2] Shoghi Effendi writes:

What is meant by personal God is a God Who is conscious of His creation, Who has a Mind, a Will, a Purpose, and not, as many scientists and materialists believe, an unconscious and determined force operating in the universe. Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms, and does by no means attempt to define the essence of Divinity which is obviously beyond any human comprehension. To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.[15][16] "

God in the Baháʼí Faith

Straw man. No sceptic claims that god has a human, physical form.
However, he could have one if he chose to, so it would be wrong to claim that he can't. And if god can appear on earth in human form, how do we know that he hasn't?

God knows what is good or bad because God is all-knowing and all-wise.
What is moral 'according to God' is revealed by God through the Messengers.
But good and bad exists in humans as a brute fact, independently of God.

You seem confused here. Either...
Good and bad are brute facts that exist independently of any context, in which case it is a force external to god that he is bound by.
Or...
Good and bad originate from god, in which case they are subjective and could be anything.

 

[KWED]

Only in your personal opinion.

No so...
Bahaiism is "A very small and new religion, with relatively few followers". That is a demonstrable fact.
"followers, who blindly parrot the meaningless platitudes of their charismatic leader" - we repeatedly see Bahai's here quoting the vague platitudes of Bahaullah. That again is a demonstrable fact.
"Cult" - A system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a particular figure or object. A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange (OED)

You may not agree with all that, but it is not merely opinion. Ironically, that it is just option is just your opinion.

I do not support it, I accept it.

Do you agree with it or not?

I did not say that... The mis-translation of one word does not imply that.
Sure, there could be other mistranslations of words, but the overall message is what is important, not the details.

If it is just a mistranslation, why does the Bahai establishment not amend the translation and allow women on the UHJ?

The wisdom of the exclusion of women to date.
Abdu'l-Baha was referring to what was in place at the time of writing but that does not mean it will be in place forever.

So at the moment, and until there is a new message, women are excluded. It is not a "mistranslation".

The point is that Baha'u'llah never intended to exclude women from the UHJ permanently.

1. That is just your opinion.
2. So he did exclude them for an indeterminate time.

Baha'u'llah was not sexist,

We judge people on their words and deeds. He showed sexist discrimination by excluding women from the UHJ.

quite the contrary. Many of His most eloquent prayers refer to handmaidens

You do realise that "handmaiden" is a term for a female servant.
A female servant. A subservient partner or element. - (Oxford English Dictionary)
"the term handmaiden generally implies lowly status." Handmaiden - Wikipedia

No, the quote does not say that. Read it again, in context:

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 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.

A temporary exclusion may be intended. working out of that answer in the future implies that we will gradually come to better understand what Baha'u'llah's intentions were with regard to women on the UHJ and put them in place.

Bahai's cannot decide that Baha'u'llah was wrong if they disagree with what He said. They can only strive to understand what He meant by what He said.

So if "A temporary exclusion may be intended" then the answer may be a permanent one.

Articles say different things....This is only one article with one perspective. Other articles give possible reasons.

You cited that article as support for your claim that the exclusion was a mistake, or accurate but temporary (you seem unclear which). It actually confirms that is is accurate and permanent.

The UHJ says "the exclusion is "neither amenable to change nor subject to speculation about some possible future condition", which contradicts that it is not permanent and will change in the future" because we are not supposed to speculate.
But I can speculate if I want to.

So the UHJ Staes that Bahaullah's exclusion will not change (so is permanent), and you should not claim that it might change - but you disagree with them. Good for you. You should always question authority.

As I said, "bear in mind it is not an official Baha'i website and these is misinformation on other parts of the website. However, I think what it says about women on the UHJ is correct."
Just because some information on the website is incorrect that does not mean that all of the information on the website is incorrect.

So you earlier criticised the site for being fraudulent and containing fabrications - but if there is something you agree with, it's suddenly an acceptable source?
That is the very definition of "cherry-picking"!

To think that way is black and white thinking and it is a fallacy.

Sometimes it is a question of "either/or".
Either the source is reliable, or it isn't. To accept an known unreliable source simply because it corresponds to your existing position is committing a basket of fallacies.

No, I did not say that.
I said "disinformation about the Baha'i Faith gives the Baha'is an opportunity to present correct information, which provides free advertising."

IOW, people pointing out that Bahaiism promotes sexism, homophobia and barbaric punishment provides free publicity. And you assume the publicity is favourable because you assume everyone will accept your arguments. However, it is clear that not everyone does accept your arguments - probably because they are contradictory, nonsensical, or merely confirm the initial accusation.

How would you know if they care?

Because you spend so much time trying to defend it.

Accepted by whom?

Society in general. Dictionaries The law. You know, inconsequential stuff like that.

A morally corrupt society?

"Morally corrupt" because it refuses to consider sexist discrimination, homophobia and barbaric punishment as "morally acceptable"?

Aside from that, you are misrepresenting the Baha'i position.
There is no sexism and there is no homophobia and there is no burning people 'to death.'
We already covered this so no need for a recap.

Yet again, you demonstrate simple denial. The evidence is conclusive from Bahai scriptures.

A good attempt at avoidance.

I am not avoiding your point because not is not a point at all... because I do not claim that Christianity is free from sexism, homophobia and barbaric punishments.

A failed argument only in your opinion.

 

[KWED]

You are responding to a post I wrote on Monday. Time marches on and as a result of some research I think I now know what the reason was.

Before that discovery, I believed (not assumed) that there was a reason because Abdu'l-Baha said that the reason would be revealed in the future.

So, can you finally explain, concisely, the reason for excluding women from the UHJ. Because so far you have presented a scatter-gun of vague, contradictory or illogical claims.

 

[KWED]

There is more than one way the fallacy can be applied. It is a hasty generalization because you have made hasty conclusions without considering all of the variables.

Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.

Faulty generalization - Wikipedia

What "variables"?
Bahai scripture contains sexist discrimination, homophobia, and barbaric punishment.
No one is claiming that all Bahai scripture is sexist, homophobic and barbaric, so your accusation of hasty generalisation is unfounded.
Would you accuse a dentist of "hasty generalisation" when he points out that one of your teeth is rotten and should be removed? "But what about all the good teeth?" you cry.

Yet again, you demonstrate your inability to correct apply informal fallacies.

That the rules laid down by God through Baha'u'llah are sexist and homophobic is only your personal opinion, it is not a fact. That is what completely eludes you.

Yeah, it is pretty clear now that you have no idea what "your opinion" actually means.
Basically, you seem to think that any fact that you find unwelcome can be dismissed as "opinion".