• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who was Baha'u'llah?

Who was Baha'u'llah?

  • Baha'u'llah claimed to be a Manifestation of God, and truly He was the Manifestation of God.

    Votes: 6 14.3%
  • Baha'u'llah claimed to be return of Christ, but He was a Liar

    Votes: 3 7.1%
  • Bahaullah claimed to be Messenger of God and He was sincere but He was delusional

    Votes: 17 40.5%
  • Baha'u'llah was a good man with good intentions but He knew He is not a Prophet

    Votes: 2 4.8%
  • Bahaullah was a philosopher, and never claimed to be return of Christ

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I don't know and I don't even care

    Votes: 8 19.0%
  • I don't know, because I have not investigated

    Votes: 5 11.9%
  • I don't know for sure, because I cannot figure it out

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It is not possible to really know

    Votes: 1 2.4%

  • Total voters
    42

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The Bible portrays resurrection as physical.

See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have. (Lk 24:39)​
And yet he walked through walls. And yet he didn't appear as himself when he talked with others, they didn't recognize him. They spent the whole day walking and talking with him, and not until the evening until he broke bread with them to they know it was Jesus. He went up from the ground into heaven. And so forth.

Now while one can say there was some "appearance" of Jesus in some fashion or another, clearly this was not a resuscitated corpse. Human bodies don't appear and disappear. They don't walk into rooms through locked doors. They don't change their appearances. They don't levitate. And furthermore, Paul claims to have seen the risen Christ, but that was not a corporeal form. He saw Light and heard a voice. That is not a body walking around after having be revived out of a state of death.

Early Christians debated amongst themselves exactly in what way was Jesus resurrected. These are a few of the reasons they would have.

Clearly, it is spiritual in nature primarily. So what I said about applying ideas of historic fact to something like this, which would be pertinent if were are talking about a purely material reality, is a bit short sighted and missing the actual point, which is about faith, not facts.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
The Bible portrays resurrection as physical.

See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have. (Lk 24:39)​

God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He be revealed, not to all the people, but to witnesses who had been chosen beforehand by God, that is, to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. (Acts 10:41)​
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and yet You will raise it up in three days?” But He was speaking about the temple of His body. (John 2:19-21)​
I have no doubt the gospels say Jesus came back to life in some sort of flesh and bone body. But I have my doubts that the story is true. And I also doubt the Baha'i interpretation that the resurrections was symbolic, and that Jesus rose "spiritually" not physically. But then, who doesn't supposedly rise spiritually after their physical body dies?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I have no doubt the gospels say Jesus came back to life in some sort of flesh and bone body.
Why would it matter if Jesus rose in a physical body or rose in a spiritual body?

Answer: Because if Jesus rose in a physical body Christians can believe they are 'special' because nobody else ever rose from the dead.
Christians believe their religion is superior to all other religions only because Jesus rose from the dead.

So what if Jesus died on the cross? The Bab died in front of a firing squad... Both died as martyrs.

The problem is that the bodily resurrection of Jesus is an unverifiable story, not a historical fact, so Christianity is no more special than any other religion.
 
Last edited:

Muffled

Jesus in me
I have no doubt the gospels say Jesus came back to life in some sort of flesh and bone body. But I have my doubts that the story is true. And I also doubt the Baha'i interpretation that the resurrections was symbolic, and that Jesus rose "spiritually" not physically. But then, who doesn't supposedly rise spiritually after their physical body dies?
I believe you can doubt all you want but you are not a witness and the apostles were.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I believe every born again Christian knows God personally.
I believe nobody knows God personally.
This is why critical thinkers are not convinced that any God exists, nor that any believer has any clue of what they think is true. Can either of you present a case that any god exists? No. Then how do you honestly claim to have any knowledge about any version of god? These claims cancel each other out, and non-belief is the rational position.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
This is why critical thinkers are not convinced that any God exists, nor that any believer has any clue of what they think is true. Can either of you present a case that any god exists? No. Then how do you honestly claim to have any knowledge about any version of god? These claims cancel each other out, and non-belief is the rational position.
Why would a critical thinker care what 'other people' believe about God? What people believe has nothing to do with what is actually true.
Whether anyone can present a case to you that proves to you that God exists has no bearing as to whether God exists or not.

Non-belief is not the rational position just because believers' claims are different. That is what would be expected since there are different religions.
 
Last edited:

F1fan

Veteran Member
Why would a critical thinker care what 'other people' believe about God?
The American Supreme Court, and other courts, making religious-based rulings that harm society. It's good to challenge believers and ask questions. Maybe the believer will realize their beliefs are limited to them and shouldn't apply to others.
What people believe has nothing to do with what is actually true.
Then why believe?
Whether anyone can present a case to you that proves to you that God exists has no bearing as to whether God exists or not.
It means it is nothing more than an idea that doesn't warrant belief.
Non-belief is the rational position because believers' claims are different. That is what would be expected since there are different religions.
Non-belief is the logical default. To a rational mind there has to be substantial evidence for belief to be earned. The more fanyastic the idea, the more evidence is needed.
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
I believe nobody knows God personally.
Ah, the deism inside of the Baha'i Faith.

I believe in mainly two theologies: panendeism and syntheism. My panendeism side would completely agree with you. Nobody knows The Omniverse personally. However, the syntheism side would reject that notion completely. The technology we are using to help create God, including the unity of man that is slowly starting to unravel, is more than apparent to me that people know some aspect of God. In actuality, I would say, nobody knows God personally, but people know a lot and interact with the divinity that is built in the core of Earth and human evolution. In fact, when I answer this question on the Select Smart "What Religion Am I" quiz...

1681931721547.png


I now always answer...

1681931761695.png


But I agree. Very little is known about The Omniverse, except for the fact that in theoretical physics, it's supposed to contain every possible Universe. But the personal God I speak of is Earth and our collective sovereignty and unity of it.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Ah, the deism inside of the Baha'i Faith.
No, that is not deism just because it is not Christianity.
God is not a person so nobody can ever know God 'personally' according to Baha'i beliefs.

The Baháʼí teachings state that there is only one God and that his essence is absolutely inaccessible from the physical realm of existence and that, therefore, his reality is completely unknowable. Thus, all of humanity's conceptions of God which have been derived throughout history are mere manifestations of the human mind and not at all reflective of the nature of God's essence. While God's essence is inaccessible, a subordinate form of knowledge is available by way of mediation by divine messengers, known as Manifestations of God.​

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]
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
No, that is not deism just because it is not Christianity.
God is not a person so nobody can ever know God 'personally' according to Baha'i beliefs.

The Baháʼí teachings state that there is only one God and that his essence is absolutely inaccessible from the physical realm of existence and that, therefore, his reality is completely unknowable. Thus, all of humanity's conceptions of God which have been derived throughout history are mere manifestations of the human mind and not at all reflective of the nature of God's essence. While God's essence is inaccessible, a subordinate form of knowledge is available by way of mediation by divine messengers, known as Manifestations of God.​

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]
You're right. I was wrong. I've heard Baha'is I've talked to on Discord refer to their own religion as deistic at times. Deism implies that a God exists but doesn't interact with people. Your God does interact with people in the form of episodic messengers, so you're right, it really isn't deism. It's probably closer to agnostic theism instead, believing that God interacts with the Universe but is unknowable in many ways. You know your religion better than me and sometimes I confuse deism with agnosticism given the fact that they are similar - a God that does not interact with the Universe would similarly be unknowable to people. I think many Baha'is would reject the idea that they are agnostic but let me remind you there is agnostic atheism and agnostic theism, not everybody who is agnostic is also atheist, although a large portion of them are.

Would you agree that a portion of the Baha'i Faith practices in varying degrees some amount of agnostic beliefs? And, after we die, is God still unknowable to us in the spiritual world, or do we understand Him completely? I'd like to understand better the Baha'i view points of God better due to my natural inclination to really like your religion.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
The American Supreme Court, and other courts, making religious-based rulings that harm society. It's good to challenge believers and ask questions. Maybe the believer will realize their beliefs are limited to them and shouldn't apply to others.
Believers' beliefs should only apply to them and not to others. Religious-based rulings have no place in the secular law books.
Then why believe?
When I said "What people believe has nothing to do with what is actually true" I meant that just because people believe it is true that does not mean it is actually true. It might be true or false.

We believe because we believe our religion is true.
It means it is nothing more than an idea that doesn't warrant belief.
No, that is not what it means. A religion does not warrant belief because someone convinced you it is true. It warrants belief because it is true.
Non-belief is the logical default. To a rational mind there has to be substantial evidence for belief to be earned. The more fantastic the idea, the more evidence is needed.
There is substantial evidence.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I believe you can doubt all you want but you are not a witness and the apostles were.
Were they witnesses of his birth? Him walking on water? Him raising Lazarus from the dead? Healing the lepers? Resurrecting and ascending into the clouds? These aren't normal things. But 2000 years ago, how hard would it have been to say these things happened and to convince people that they did happen?
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
The American Supreme Court, and other courts, making religious-based rulings that harm society. It's good to challenge believers and ask questions. Maybe the believer will realize their beliefs are limited to them and shouldn't apply to others.
Is she serious? People are still tortured and killed because of religion. As we've talked before, what would a world governed by Baha'is look like for gays?

But we are all affected by religious people pushing their beliefs on others. And, although some Baha'is try and deny it, I think that "teaching" their religion is something that is expected of them.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I believe you can doubt all you want but you are not a witness and the apostles were.
Again, I don't doubt that the gospels say that Jesus did come back to life into some kind of flesh and bone body. Yet, the Baha'is say he didn't, that he only rose spiritually. And I don't understand how they can claim the Bible and the NT are true, sometimes. But then in places Baha'is say that it is not 100% authentic. For me, I doubt them both, Christianity and the Baha'i Faith.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Is she serious? People are still tortured and killed because of religion. As we've talked before, what would a world governed by Baha'is look like for gays?
Maybe people are tortured and killed because of religion, but that doesn't mean I approve of that...
In case you missed that post, I said: Believers' beliefs should only apply to them and not to others. Religious-based rulings have no place in the secular law books.

By the time this becomes a Baha'i government there probably won't be any gays.
But we are all affected by religious people pushing their beliefs on others.
No, I don't think that is really the case. In the real world I don't see anyone pushing their beliefs on others, in fact I don't even see that on this forum.
And, although some Baha'is try and deny it, I think that "teaching" their religion is something that is expected of them.
So what if we teach our religion? If we don't teach it, how is anyone ever going to know about it? The statistics are bad enough as it is.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Maybe people are tortured and killed because of religion, but that doesn't mean I approve of that...
In case you missed that post, I said: Believers' beliefs should only apply to them and not to others. Religious-based rulings have no place in the secular law books.

By the time this becomes a Baha'i government there probably won't be any gays.
Are you predicting the USA will have a Baha'i theocracy?

And what will happen to the gay citizens? Your comment sounds ominously familiar. Like 1940's Germany familiar.
No, I don't think that is really the case. In the real world I don't see anyone pushing their beliefs on others, in fact I don't even see that on this forum.
How would there be a Baha'i government? Such a government would by definition make Baha'i belief mandatory.
So what if we teach our religion? If we don't teach it, how is anyone ever going to know about it? The statistics are bad enough as it is.
What good is it doing the Baha'i as it is? I don't see any advantage of those in this community.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Are you predicting the USA will have a Baha'i theocracy?

And what will happen to the gay citizens? Your comment sounds ominously familiar. Like 1940's Germany familiar.
I am not predicting anything because only God knows what the future holds.
I have no idea what will happen to gay citizens, but there is no punishment for what people do in the privacy of their own homes.
How would there be a Baha'i government? Such a government would by definition make Baha'i belief mandatory.
No, absolutely not. Baha'i belief will never be mandatory., it will always be a choice for people to make.
What good is it doing the Baha'i as it is? I don't see any advantage of those in this community.
You'd have to ask the Baha'is what good it is doing for them. I am sure they would be glad to answer.
 

InvestigateTruth

Veteran Member
Are you predicting the USA will have a Baha'i theocracy?

And what will happen to the gay citizens? Your comment sounds ominously familiar. Like 1940's Germany familiar.

How would there be a Baha'i government? Such a government would by definition make Baha'i belief mandatory.

What good is it doing the Baha'i as it is? I don't see any advantage of those in this community.
Just imagine Russia and USA were Bahais. There wouldn't be a chance of war, because Bahai Faith is one throughout the world. But let's say, Russia and USA were Muslims. There is no guarantee there wasn't a war between them. Islam is not one. Christianity is not one. They are all divided sects. So, Baha'i Faith has the potential to unite the world. Other Religions don't, because they did not even maintain unity among themselves. Not because they were not from God, but because their teachings and Laws were for people of the past ages. Bahai Faith is revealed for the age of modernity.
 
Last edited:
Top