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

[Trailblazer]

It is such a well-established rational and legal principle

The burden of proof only applies to courts of law where proof is necessary to prosecute a crime but atheists want to apply it to everything a believer says...This is comical at best.

 

[Trailblazer]

No you can't!

I can but I won't because I already know it would only lead to an argument.
I am not stupid.

 

[Trailblazer]

Earlier, you said that you have to go with whatever Bahaullah wrote.
You also said that you don't have the authority to even question the UHJ on any issue, that you know your place.

So, which parts of Bahaism do you disagree with?
Which specific writings of Bahaullah do you not agree with?

(I suspect that you will respond that you do actually agree with all his writings. How could you not? He is god's messenger!).

I do not have to agree or disagree, I can say "I don't know."
I do not necessarily disagree but I 'question' whether God is all-loving.

 

[samtonga43]

Statements such as these are so born out of self inflicted ignorance,

A group of men have decided, based on the words of a man who believes that God spoke to him, on something with which Tb disagrees, but accepts. This is not ignorance on my part, Tony. This is ignorance on the part of Tb.

... that is why Jesus the Christ has disowned the Christianity that is practiced by many today.

To which ‘type’ of Christianity are you referring? What basis do you have for stating that Christ has disowned it?

The acceptance for @Trailblazer is in obedience to God. God does as God so Wills and guides us, as God so chooses.

Why would Tb obey a God she has said many times she does not love? Would fear result in an attempt to obey?

 

[samtonga43]

No, I am not obligated to do what YOU ask me to do. You are not my boss.

Of course you're not obligated to do what I ask you to do, However, I would have thought that your own integrity would compel you to back up your own statement.

Obviously not.

 

[samtonga43]

I do not have to agree or disagree, I can say "I don't know."
I do not necessarily disagree but I 'question' whether God is all-loving.

So you are saying that you don't know which parts of Bahaism you disagree with?
And you don't know which specific writings of Bahaullah you do not agree with?

 

[Trailblazer]

A group of men have decided, based on the words of a man who believes that God spoke to him, on something with which Tb disagrees, but accepts. This is not ignorance on my part, Tony. This is ignorance on the part of Tb.

A group of men have decided at the council of Nicaea that Jesus is God, based on a misinterpretation of words in the New Testament, is what samtonga43 agrees with and accepts as the truth. Doesn't sound very reliable to me, but I won't call you ignorant, just hoodwinked by a bunch of men.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you are saying that you don't know which parts of Bahaism you disagree with?
And you don't know which specific writings of Bahaullah you do not agree with?

No, that is not what I said. I know which parts of the Baha'i Faith and what specific writings of Baha'u'llah I question, but I do not necessarily disagree with them. I just say "I don't know."

I lack certitude that God is all-loving but I never lack certitude that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God. I know that Baha'u'llah cannot be wrong in saying that God is all-loving, so I know I must be wrong and how God can be all-loving in spite of all the suffering in this world is simply something I do not understand, yet.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

To which ‘type’ of Christianity are you referring? What basis do you have for stating that Christ has disowned it?

Every Faith has its winter and is renewed. The new season is no longer the season that was before it.

Luke 13 tells of such a story

".. 25 When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:

26 Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.

27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.

28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

29 And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.

30 And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last...."

My opinion is that the Masters house is the Message of Baha'u'llah and it is the Christains that now have to knock.

Many have entered from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and ...(now).... sit down in the kingdom of God.

Verse 27 thus becomes the passage I offered in my reply.

There are more such passages to be found in the Bible, no Christian should feel they have found the end of all Truth.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Every Faith has its winter and is renewed. The new season is no longer the season that was before it.

Luke 13 tells of such a story

Udo Schaefer also explains this...

“All that lives, and this includes the religions, have springtime, a time of maturity, of harvest and wintertime. Then religion becomes barren, a lifeless adherence to the letter uninformed by the spirit, and man’s spiritual life declines. When we look at religious history, we see that God has spoken to men precisely at times when they have reached the nadir of their degradation and cultural decadence. Moses came to Israel when it was languishing under the Pharaoh’s yoke, Christ appeared at a time when the Jewish Faith had lost its power and culture of antiquity was in its death those. Muhammad came to a people who lived in barbaric ignorance at the lowest level of culture and into a world in which the former religions had strayed far away from their origins and nearly lost their identity. The Bab addressed Himself to a people who had irretrievably lost their former grandeur and who found themselves in a state of hopeless decadence. Baha’u’llah came to a humanity which was approaching the most critical phase of its history.

‘Abdu’l-Baha writes: ‘God leaves not His children comfortless, but, when the darkness of winter overshadows them, then again He sends His Messengers, the Prophets, with a renewal of the blessed spring. The Sun of Truth appears again on the horizon of the world shining into the eyes of those who sleep, awaking them to behold the glory of a new dawn. Then again will the tree of humanity blossom and bring forth the fruit of righteousness for the healing of the nations.’ Paris Talks, p. 32.’

Some conclusions can be drawn from this fundamental belief. First, all religions are divine in essence and consequently there are no religions which contradict or exclude each other, but only one indivisible divine religion which is renewed periodically and according to the requirements of the age, in cycles of about a thousand years: ‘Our command was but one word.’ Qur’an 54:51. It is therefore hardly surprising if many of Baha’u’llah’s teachings are to be found in former religions either expressly or in an embryonic form. As ‘Abdu’l-Baha says, the Baha’i Faith is ‘not a new path to immortality.’ quoted from: Principles of the Baha’i Faith. On account of this transcendent oneness of all religions, Baha’u’llah exhorted His people to associate with followers of all religions in a spirit of loving-kindness and to make of religion a cause of harmony and peace, not of discord and strife, of hate and division.

The second conclusion is that we cannot perceive what the essence of religion is and what it has the power to achieve if we examine the traditional great religions in their present form. They have achieved much but have reached the end of their road; they were the foundation of great cultures and for thousands of years they were the guiding-star of millions of people in their everyday life and activities. But during the course of history they have also accumulated large amounts of historical ballast. They have moved a long way from their origin and are burdened with their followers’ misdeeds and cravings for power. They are no pleasant sight today, least of all to young people, who no longer see in these religions the ‘salt of the earth’ as Jesus called his disciples, Matthew 5:13 but rather the ‘opium of the people’ (Karl Marx). And one is easily inclined to pass judgment on religion as a whole, and to see in it an anachronism of past times, long since overcome, like the belief in demons in former times. But a withered plant does not give us the faintest idea of its blossoming time. In reality, religions are the ‘light of the world’ and, according to Baha’u’llah’s teachings, the foundation of human culture. It is important to understand that they are as necessary for mankind as sunlight for the plant. Without divine revelation, there would be neither progress nor culture: ‘Were this revelation to be withdrawn, all would perish.’ Taken from (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings, XCIII).

(Udo Schaefer, The Light Shineth in Darkness, pp. 24-26)

 

[rational experiences]

The context for homosexuality being immoral is this:
Homosexuality is highly condemned and often a great trial and cause of suffering to a person, as a Bahá'í. Any individual so afflicted must, through prayer, and any other means, seek to overcome this handicap. But, unless the actions of such individuals are flagrantly immoral, it cannot be a pretext for depriving them of their voting rights.
(6 October 1956) [6]
(The Universal House of Justice, 1993 Jun 05, Homosexuality, p. 3)

Homosexuality being condemned in this context is about their actions. We are also to sympathise with a Baha'i who has this orientation. Overcoming this handicap in my opinion is about not acting on our desires in this respect. Even if my opinion is wrong, Shoghi Effendi, who is being quoted here is infallible in matters of science according to Shoghi Effendi himself.

I don't remember that ever being said. Homosexual sex is what is immoral. In context, the actual quote is
. . .Bahá'u'lláh has spoken very strongly against this shameful sexual aberration, as He has against adultery and immoral conduct in general. We must try and help the soul to overcome them.
(25 October 1949)
(The Universal House of Justice, 1993 Jun 05, Homosexuality, p. 3)

As you can see, it about conduct.

This is what Baha'u'llah says about that:

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 Bayan.

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.
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 1)

If you see that the verses of God are nonsense, that is because you are not "detached from all that is in heaven and on earth".

Jesus also said

5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
(King James Bible, Matthew)

This is my final statement.

Pure of heart love all bodies afflicted.

I felt great sorrow for the O angels of God burnt in hell. Once eternal.

Humans ignore the criminal terms of a testimonial that was scientist the man destroyer...gods laws broken. Abberrations to life body consciousness by criminal scientist man had caused.

Legal.... homosexuality was inherited by a changed gods body. Said the law. An abberrations against God that a human caused....so legal said hence...
Alll babies inherit the sin of the parents. Mother mutual holy body to a father's mutual holy body. Holy life.

They bring into the life a baby and God inferred life changed. All babies given sin are innocent in the eyes of God by his life support.

So holy life parents parent sex causes the baby birth.

That baby could be homosexual. As advised. Medical reasoning. Exact. You don't know until it's witnessed.

Baby Grows exhibits behaviour moving into adult life. Witnessed. Human story your life presence had been sacrificed. Loving crying sobbing for their losses ...so sorry for them.

The scientist not the baby was the criminal God law breakers testimony.

You've read the legal summary incorrectly.

It discussed why sexual chemistry consciousness changed its beliefs.

As scientists messed with earths God natural chemicals themselves.

Not just biology terms but conscious terms too. Thinking. Beliefs.

Consciousness is exact and it knows what's correct and what's incorrect from memory.

Yet you cannot deny what God supports as is formed.

Hence the fault men said was not with God it was with man scientist. Satanist.

Notice the legal word fault.

Tectonic earthquake....carpenter symbol.
Fault line.
Human fault scientist.

Fake cross.

Legal cross of four natural sea son in heavens. First not support any scientists one fixed reaction.

Man's fake cross ground mass as adding a calculus first was to remove mass. Gods earths seals. Removed mass not as a cross but a minus.

Gods ownership womb mother was zero not a number.

Was a legal testimony.

A summation in natural life once mother father perfect union balanced. Genesis sacrificed caused by satanic science brother. Testimony why was as reviews of sexuality had changed as it was witnessed changed. Witnessed is exact...sacrificed life.

As it's scientific the mind notified change hated the scientist so the hate was put onto the humans who Inherited.

As it's what hate and anger causes...blame.

The scientist first a natural man's position.

So humans tried to blame his parents as humans first. Conscious mind.

The star fallen was the reason for the advice changed mind of a human first. Not gods fault.

The summation.

So the testimony of the scientist said it was not earth gods fault originally it was Satan's star fault.

God had only ever supported natural life reasoned.

Theist outlawed. No man is God.

Notice his changes however had caused it.

Motivation to change God human man scientist the holy father's life.

 

[CG Didymus]

I never said that or even implied it. Everyone has the right to their opinion.
The problem ensues when people state an opinion as if it was a fact.

You seem to have trouble distinguishing between the two.
Top Tip: A "fact" that you disagree with does not become an "opinion".

You seem to have trouble distinguishing between the two.
Top Tip: An "opinion" that you agree with does not become a "fact".

Where has KWED suggested that an opinion with which they agree becomes a fact?

It is all over this thread. Look for it if you want to find it.

It is all over this thread. Look for it if you want to find it.

IOW "I can't find one".

No, IOW, it is not my job to find one because I was not the one who wanted one.

I looked but couldn't find it. The burden of proof is on you. Please help by providing proof.

You made a positive statement...("It is all over this thread")
But you cannot provide even one example to back up your statement.

I have no burden of proof because I am not trying to prove anything...

I can find more than one example, but it is not my job to do your homework for you.

 

[CG Didymus]

You accept something with which you disagree because a group of men-in-charge have decided it is so?
This is cultish behaviour.

Potentially, that is what we are looking at. To stay in good standings in the Baha'i Faith is to obey what Baha'u'llah, supposedly God, has said and to now do as the UHJ says.

Statements such as these are so born out of self inflicted ignorance, that is why Jesus the Christ has disowned the Christianity that is practiced by many today.

But of course that's our "self-inflicted" ignorance? There's too many cult religions out there that expect their followers to not ask questions and just do as you're told. But now we get into something interesting... Jesus has "disowned" some Christian sects? Yes, Fundamentalist Christians agree with Tony. Catholics, Lutherans, JW's, Mormon and several others, the Fundies believe aren't following the true teachings of Jesus...

To which ‘type’ of Christianity are you referring? What basis do you have for stating that Christ has disowned it?

But then Baha'is come a long and don't believe the Fundies either. So, what Christian sect do Baha'is believe is teaching the truth about God and Jesus? I think the answer is none. But, as usual, there will be no answer given. Oh wait, here's some kind of an answer.

Every Faith has its winter and is renewed. The new season is no longer the season that was before it.

Supposedly, Christianity got replaced by the teachings of Muhammad? So, their spring, summer, fall and winter all happened by 621 AD when Muhammad declared himself a prophet from God? Is that what Baha'is believe? That Christianity has been a "dead" faith ever since?

Or... a religion adapts and changes over time and keeps renewing itself by borrowing from other religions or adapting archaic ideas and adding in things to make the religion more relevant to modern times... or going back to the basics, the fundamentals, and "reviving" itself?

 

[CG Didymus]

So you are saying that you don't know which parts of Bahaism you disagree with?
And you don't know which specific writings of Bahaullah you do not agree with?

Yet, we are expected to look at the Baha'i Faith with an unbiased, open mind... to investigate the truth for ourselves. And if we believe it to be true, join up. But has anybody done such a thorough investigation that they know everything there is to know about Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith? I doubt that very much. So, what happens when they've already committed themselves to following and believing everything about the Baha'i Faith, and then they find out something they disagree with? I'm sure some people drop out, and some people commit themselves even deeper into following their religion. But what has happened to the open mind and being unbiased? Everything, for the true believer, has become their religion. That is what is true. And there is no room for doubt or questioning.

 

[Trailblazer]

@CG Didymus

If I ever want to learn how to post multiple quotes I'll know who to come to.

 

[Trailblazer]

So, what happens when they've already committed themselves to following and believing everything about the Baha'i Faith, and then they find out something they disagree with?

We can disagree and still realize we are wrong and Baha'u'llah was right since He was infallible and we are not.

If we disagree, some of us realize we have an ego problem, but others drop out because they cannot overcome their ego problem and they think they 'know more' than Baha'u'llah, which is logically impossible if He was infallible.

So in the end it all boils down to -- Was Baha'u'llah who He claimed to be? If so, we would be foolish and illogical to think we 'know more' than He knew.

Everything, for the true believer, has become their religion. That is what is true. And there is no room for doubt or questioning.

There is plenty of room for questioning and many things to question, but for Baha'is there is no room for doubt that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be, and that is all the matters at the end if the day and at the end of this life, that and the way we lived our lives...

“The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition of Him Who is the Day Spring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof, hath gone astray, though he be the author of every righteous deed.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 330-331

 

[KWED]

Statements such as these are so born out of self inflicted ignorance,

@Trailblazer stated that she cannot question the rulings of the men on the UHJ, and that she "knows her place". That is a fact supported by her own statements. Perhaps the "self-inflicted ignorance" lies elsewhere?

that is why Jesus the Christ has disowned the Christianity that is practiced by many today.

Has he? How do you know? Have you spoken to him?
Or is that just your opinion?

It is Baha'u'llah that has offered we do not need to understand every aspect of our Faith,

It's a useful insurance policy to claim that we can't understand god's will. It means that any errors, contradictions, etc, can be waved away a "not understanding".
But you wonder why god does that. God goes to all the trouble to create a universe, just so that humans can worship him, then he deliberately makes in difficult for people to do that - unless they happen to have been born into whichever religion god is not allowing to be corrupted at any given time.
It is truly baffling that people can accept this as reasonable and rational.

Cling thou to the hem of the Robe of God, and take thou firm hold on His Cord, a Cord which none can sever.... (and that we).......Beware that the clamor of them that have repudiated this Most Great Announcement shall not deter thee from achieving thy purpose. Proclaim what hath been prescribed unto thee in this Tablet, though all the peoples arise and oppose thee.

So basically, "blindly follow my writings, even if they don't make sense, and ignore any argument or evidence that might contradict or refute it".
It's a sad irony that some followers are so deeply invested in the mindless repetition of platitudes that they don't realise that they are actually arguing against heir own position.

 

[KWED]

The context for homosexuality being immoral is this: Homosexuality is highly condemned

So you admit you believe it is immoral and deserves condemnation. How does your wife feel about that?

and often a great trial and cause of suffering to a person,

Question begging.
The reason that homosexuality is "a great trial and cause of suffering" is because of the homophobic intolerance and bigotry they have to endure.

Any individual so afflicted

Do you think that heterosexuality is "an affliction?

must, through prayer, and any other means, seek to overcome this handicap.

So you think people can be "cured" of homosexuality?
Is your wife "cured"?

But, unless the actions of such individuals are flagrantly immoral, it cannot be a pretext for depriving them of their voting rights.
(6 October 1956) [6]
(The Universal House of Justice, 1993 Jun 05, Homosexuality, p. 3)

What!? Homosexuals can be deprived of the right to vote simply because of homosexual behaviour?

It is literally mind-boggling that you think all this is any kind of defence. You are just making the Bahai position look even more intolerant and bigoted than before you started!

Shoghi Effendi, who is being quoted here is infallible in matters of science according to Shoghi Effendi himself.

Surely this is satire, yes?

I don't remember that ever being said.

It's there, in many Bahai sources.

In context, the actual quote is
. . .Bahá'u'lláh has spoken very strongly against this shameful sexual aberration, as He has against adultery and immoral conduct in general. We must try and help the soul to overcome them.
(25 October 1949)
(The Universal House of Justice, 1993 Jun 05, Homosexuality, p. 3)

Oh, so you admit that it is an accurate quote. So why claim you'd never seen it?

This is what Baha'u'llah says about that:
If you see that the verses of God are nonsense, that is because you are not "detached from all that is in heaven and on earth".

With all due respect, it is those who insist that the god of Bahaism exists, and that Bahaullah was his messenger, who are detached from reality.

This is my final statement.

TBF, there isn't much point in you continuing if all you can present in support of your position are things like "Shoghi Effendi is infallible because Shoghi Effendi says he is".

 

[KWED]

No, it is adherence to the will of God instead of relying upon my own personal opinion.

But you claimed that you disagree with some of it, so you do rely on your personal opinion at times, when it suits you.

 

[KWED]

No, I am not obligated to do what YOU ask me to do. You are not my boss.

You are on a debate forum, and it's how debate works.
Obviously, you don't have to back up your claims but it means that everyone watching will conclude that you just made it up.