Why I didn't believe in Bahaism when I researched it.

[Link]

Have you researched Abdul Baha's comments in "Some Answered Questions" about the Book of Revelation where he says that the year 1260 in the Islamic calendar is the predicted time for the return of Christ? In there he also says the Muhammad and Ali are the "two witnesses" and that Muhammad, The Bab, and Baha'u'llah are the "Three Woes" of the Book of Revelation? If you have, could you comment on them?

Circumstantial evidence is never proof. The Quran clearly says conjecture doesn't avail regarding the truth anything.

I believe the Quran shows exactly how Mohammad is in the Torah but without directly quoting the Torah. Instead, paraphrasing a response from Moses to something after and this is paraphrased in so many ways to keep the meaning and make us see the first reference to Mohammad in the Torah. But it's not forced upon us. As well as other subtle ways. Mohamad and his family to me, are in the Torah, but to see how Quran shows that, you have to understand Quran at a good level/

And once Quran get's you reflecting in that matter, it doesn't matter if you believe or don't, the reflecting will manifest wonders of Quran that eventually you will understand and believe.

This is the approach of Quran. But the explicit opposite to the subtle nature of Bahai writings to Quran, it put's too much on conjecture. That said, there is symbolic language in the Torah right down to the Gospels pertaining to the stars, moon and sun for example or the spirit of God on the water, and the 6 days, etc, all this requires reflection, but it's not to be explicitly stated by God but rather God is subtle in his approach.

Holistic understanding is better. The same is true of how Mohammad is proven to be in the Gospels. It comes with understanding holistically, then becomes clear.

There is a reason why God didn't quote from the Torah and say this how Mohammad is in there. You either see it and it's fine and doesn't need all this blabber or you don't. If you don't, Quran will make you reflect over the Torah and Gospels in the proper manner through the help of Ahlulbayt.

In this trial, it comes down to one thing. Will you rely on God to make you reflect over Quran, Bible, etc, and other holy books around the world revealed before them, and in that respect go God's chosen household of the revelation, or will you go to people like Priests and Clergy of Muslims, etc.

Literally, will you rely on humans not chosen by God or will you hold to his rope. In this dialogue, there is a trial.

When you begin to reflect and seek - and give the chosen ones a chance and their sayings a chance, I believe the truth in Quran and Tanakh or Torah and Gospels, becomes clear.

It's the noise of envious hearts that make truth hard to get to.

That said, circumstantial evidence is never proof, and I believe Bahaism is built on that, it's built on possibility but never proven any of their possibilities are the true way God intended and his words therein.

Honestly, the over-assertiveness but emptiness of Bahai prophecies speak for themselves. They got no proofs. This is why they have to even make the day of judgment to be ambiguous symbolic reference to their Prophets, because they got literally nothing.

 

[firedragon]

The language of the Hadithes I quoted is classic arabic, same classic arabic used at the time of Muhammad and Imams. I read their Arabic too.

No its not. In that case brother, with all due respect you have not figured out how to distinguish between the languages and linguistics. Anyway, the language being classical or not is not my argument. You misread it. And you are also misrepresenting the linguistics. Tell me, why does Majlis use a Ya in a Fee sound if that is classical arabic of the Quran?

I have been always aware that Hadithese were mostly collected more then a couple centuries after Muhammad.

But the hadith you are quoting is much later than even that.

I have done a lot of research on hadithes. It is very rare a hadith is false. From my experience more than 99% of hadith are in agreement with Quran.

1. If that is the case, how do you explain a Sarih Hadith?
2. Who are the Muthallis and on what basis do you say they are all 99% authentic?
3. What about the hadith that says the earth along with other seven earths is floating on top of a large fish while its swimming in the sea? Is that also correct and in agreement with the Quran?
4. What is the difference between a mathrook and muthawathir ahadith and why are some of them not Sarih?

You are making claims so please respond carefully to each point in order to verify your claims.

Peace.

 

[CG Didymus]

Circumstantial evidence is never proof. The Quran clearly says conjecture doesn't avail regarding the truth anything.

I believe the Quran shows exactly how Mohammad is in the Torah but without directly quoting the Torah. Instead, paraphrasing a response from Moses to something after and this is paraphrased in so many ways to keep the meaning and make us see the first reference to Mohammad in the Torah. But it's not forced upon us. As well as other subtle ways. Mohamad and his family to me, are in the Torah, but to see how Quran shows that, you have to understand Quran at a good level/

And once Quran get's you reflecting in that matter, it doesn't matter if you believe or don't, the reflecting will manifest wonders of Quran that eventually you will understand and believe.

This is the approach of Quran. But the explicit opposite to the subtle nature of Bahai writings to Quran, it put's too much on conjecture. That said, there is symbolic language in the Torah right down to the Gospels pertaining to the stars, moon and sun for example or the spirit of God on the water, and the 6 days, etc, all this requires reflection, but it's not to be explicitly stated by God but rather God is subtle in his approach.

Holistic understanding is better. The same is true of how Mohammad is proven to be in the Gospels. It comes with understanding holistically, then becomes clear.

There is a reason why God didn't quote from the Torah and say this how Mohammad is in there. You either see it and it's fine and doesn't need all this blabber or you don't. If you don't, Quran will make you reflect over the Torah and Gospels in the proper manner through the help of Ahlulbayt.

In this trial, it comes down to one thing. Will you rely on God to make you reflect over Quran, Bible, etc, and other holy books around the world revealed before them, and in that respect go God's chosen household of the revelation, or will you go to people like Priests and Clergy of Muslims, etc.

Literally, will you rely on humans not chosen by God or will you hold to his rope. In this dialogue, there is a trial.

When you begin to reflect and seek - and give the chosen ones a chance and their sayings a chance, I believe the truth in Quran and Tanakh or Torah and Gospels, becomes clear.

It's the noise of envious hearts that make truth hard to get to.

That said, circumstantial evidence is never proof, and I believe Bahaism is built on that, it's built on possibility but never proven any of their possibilities are the true way God intended and his words therein.

Honestly, the over-assertiveness but emptiness of Bahai prophecies speak for themselves. They got no proofs. This is why they have to even make the day of judgment to be ambiguous symbolic reference to their Prophets, because they got literally nothing.

Thank you very much. That was an amazing answer.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

God is one.

Irrelevant to misquoting the Quran and saying the rasools are also all "One".

You give a wikipedia reference, and it would quote the surathul ihlas to explain tauheed. Not what you are trying to imply. You are quoting sources you yourself do not uphold or/and do not understand.

You are quoting some arabic words above. Tawhid, wahid, ahad, etc. tell me. What does ahadhin mean?

I admit I am no scholar, but in matters of Spirit and God, sometimes, actually most times, that is a barrier. One of the greatest Muslim scholars in the time of Baha'u'llah was shown the error of having pride in knowledge when a blacksmith, with logic showed the error of an Islamic tradition. He ended up becoming a great Baha'i Scholar, gifted a knowledge that He knew was not his to own.

Thus when I read the Quran, I take from its meaning as God gives my heart, not what many may want it to mean, my heart embraces the explanations given by both the Bab and Baha'u'llah, so I see the Quran with the light given in a New Day of God.

Oneness to me is simple, we are all enamating from One Source, we are all created, an act of God. I see that is also appliable to the Messengers, but they are not moulded from clay as humans are. I see they are the source of our life, they are the Light of God we can see. This is what the Bab offered to the Shah;

"The substance wherewith God hath created Me is not the clay out of which others have been formed. He hath conferred upon Me that which the worldly-wise can never comprehend, nor the faithful discover." Epistle to Muhammad Shah, Selections from the Writings of the Báb

To understand this oneness, is to consider that all the Messengers are born of the Same Holy Spirit, they are One and all, the same light of God, we see the same Sun reflected in each mirror. On the other hand in this world when we limit our vision we see them as all exponents of different Books and different Laws with different Messages.

It is the white light refracted through a prisim where we see all the wave lengths as all the colours of the One Rainbow.

Always happy to discuss

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Circumstantial evidence is never proof. The Quran clearly says conjecture doesn't avail regarding the truth anything.

Honestly, the over-assertiveness but emptiness of Bahai prophecies speak for themselves. They got no proofs. This is why they have to even make the day of judgment to be ambiguous symbolic reference to their Prophets, because they got literally nothing.

Thank you very much. That was an amazing answer.

The question was is Muhammad foretold in the Book of Revelation as per the talk given by Abdul'baha, a talk that is supported by dates given by Christian Scholars.

It is logical Christ does talk of Muhammad, the next Covenant to come.

I see the quandary, if you affirm that Revelation does give great detail on the revelation of Muhammad, then it opens the door to the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Regards Tony

 

[Pastek]

Now, I ask this question from you: if God had also revealed Islam to Moses, why did God ask the Jews to keep covenant of sabbath, but no such a covenant is required by Muslims? It seems God had a different requirement from the People of Moses than People of Muhammad.

The Sabbat was deecred to them for a reason. That's why it's not imposed to us.

1.124 The sabbath was only appointed for those who differed over it. And indeed, your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ.

Here the tafsir of Ibn Kathir :
(...) It was said that Allah prescribed this day for the Children of Israel through His Prophet Musa, but they changed it and chose Saturday because it was the day on which the Creator did not create anything, as He had completed His creation on Friday.
Allah made observance of the Sabbath obligatory for them in the laws of the Tawrah (Torah), telling them to keep the Sabbath. (...)
Mujahid said: "They observed the Sabbath (Saturday) and ignored Friday.'' Then they continued to observe Saturday until Allah sent `Isa bin Maryam. It was said that he told them to change it to Sunday, and it was also said that he did not forsake the laws of the Tawrah except for a few rulings which were abrogated, and he continued to observe the Sabbath until he was taken up (into heaven).
Afterwards, the Christians at the time of Constantine were the ones who changed it to Sunday in order to be different from the Jews, and they started to pray towards the east instead of facing the Dome (i.e., Jerusalem). And Allah knows best.

QuranX.com The most complete Quran / Hadith / Tafsir collection available!

And by the way Jesus made already some changes concerning their religion :

3.50 And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me.

Jesus was healing people and preaching during the sabbat.

Let me ask you a question. When God sent Moses to His people, did He complete His religion for them, or He left them with an incomplete religion?

I never said their religion wasn't complete.
I said that "your" Book is not necessary because everything end with the Quran.
And we can eventually go back to the Bible to understand better some verses/prophecies etc.

I don't know how this verses is relevant regarding finality of a religion. Can you elaborate?

It goes with the following verse cause God was talking about 2 Books.
I couldn't only quote the 2nd verse alone. So that you understand that the other Book was the Torah.
There's nothing better than those 2 Books.

Yes, Bahais follow a newer scriptures. Because Bahais believe God send a more recent Scripture, which is more suitable for this new Age. Bahais believe, each Book of God is only meant for period. It is mentioned in the Quran as well. See 13:38-40

What does your Book say that is not in the Quran or the Bible already and that we needed to know ?

 

[Pastek]

The Quran was Revealed between 610-632 and concerned a peoples and time very different from today. The Baha’i Writings extends from 1844 to 1892 and concerns the time we live in today.

Are you telling us that other prophets may come ?
With eventually others Books adapted to their time ?

 

[firedragon]

I admit I am no scholar, but in matters of Spirit and God, sometimes, actually most times, that is a barrier. One of the greatest Muslim scholars in the time of Baha'u'llah was shown the error of having pride in knowledge when a blacksmith, with logic showed the error of an Islamic tradition. He ended up becoming a great Baha'i Scholar, gifted a knowledge that He knew was not his to own.

Thus when I read the Quran, I take from its meaning as God gives my heart, not what many may want it to mean, my heart embraces the explanations given by both the Bab and Baha'u'llah, so I see the Quran with the light given in a New Day of God.

Oneness to me is simple, we are all enamating from One Source, we are all created, an act of God. I see that is also appliable to the Messengers, but they are not moulded from clay as humans are. I see they are the source of our life, they are the Light of God we can see. This is what the Bab offered to the Shah;

"The substance wherewith God hath created Me is not the clay out of which others have been formed. He hath conferred upon Me that which the worldly-wise can never comprehend, nor the faithful discover." Epistle to Muhammad Shah, Selections from the Writings of the Báb

To understand this oneness, is to consider that all the Messengers are born of the Same Holy Spirit, they are One and all, the same light of God, we see the same Sun reflected in each mirror. On the other hand in this world when we limit our vision we see them as all exponents of different Books and different Laws with different Messages.

It is the white light refracted through a prisim where we see all the wave lengths as all the colours of the One Rainbow.

Always happy to discuss

Regards Tony

Great. Peace.

 

[Link]

Are you telling us that other prophets may come ?
With eventually others Books adapted to their time ?

They believe there will be but put a 1000 year limit for it. Bab did the same but Baha'allah interpreted in a weird way. Baha'allah added the clause "whoever interprets this in other then it's clear intended meaning" but Maitreya reasons with Bahais that only an infallible manifests the clear intended meaning and knows how to manifest it's clear intended meaning to everyone, and so claims he is a Prophet after Baha'allah and interprets the 1000 years similar as did Baha'allah did with the Bab's limit to 1000 years and says that is it's clear meaning and argues the similarity.

So I'm going to ask Bahais, why don't they follow Maitreya or take him seriously?

 

[firedragon]

The question was is Muhammad foretold in the Book of Revelation as per the talk given by Abdul'baha, a talk that is supported by dates given by Christian Scholars.

It is logical Christ does talk of Muhammad, the next Covenant to come.

I see the quandary, if you affirm that Revelation does give great detail on the revelation of Muhammad, then it opens the door to the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Regards Tony

Who wrote Revelations?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The Sabbat was deecred to them for a reason. That's why it's not imposed to us.

1.124 The sabbath was only appointed for those who differed over it. And indeed, your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ.

Here the tafsir of Ibn Kathir :
(...) It was said that Allah prescribed this day for the Children of Israel through His Prophet Musa, but they changed it and chose Saturday because it was the day on which the Creator did not create anything, as He had completed His creation on Friday.
Allah made observance of the Sabbath obligatory for them in the laws of the Tawrah (Torah), telling them to keep the Sabbath. (...)
Mujahid said: "They observed the Sabbath (Saturday) and ignored Friday.'' Then they continued to observe Saturday until Allah sent `Isa bin Maryam. It was said that he told them to change it to Sunday, and it was also said that he did not forsake the laws of the Tawrah except for a few rulings which were abrogated, and he continued to observe the Sabbath until he was taken up (into heaven).
Afterwards, the Christians at the time of Constantine were the ones who changed it to Sunday in order to be different from the Jews, and they started to pray towards the east instead of facing the Dome (i.e., Jerusalem). And Allah knows best.

QuranX.com The most complete Quran / Hadith / Tafsir collection available!

And by the way Jesus made already some changes concerning their religion :

3.50 And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me.

Jesus was healing people and preaching during the sabbat.



I never said their religion wasn't complete.
I said that "your" Book is not necessary because everything end with the Quran.
And we can eventually go back to the Bible to understand better some verses/prophecies etc.



It goes with the following verse cause God was talking about 2 Books.
I couldn't only quote the 2nd verse alone. So that you understand that the other Book was the Torah.
There's nothing better than those 2 Books.



What does your Book say that is not in the Quran or the Bible already and that we needed to know ?

So, just as you said, there were some laws or decrees, that were given to previous people, but they are not longer necessary for Muslims. Likewise I am saying the same. There are many things in Quran, that is no longer required, so, Allah replaced those laws, with the new Laws in Aqdas.
And just as you agree, the religion before Quran, were Islam, even they had different name, and laws, likewise, a Revelation from God after Quran, with different name and Laws, is still Islam. Because islam just means submission to God. So, if you ask what Thinkgs, Bahai Law has that Quran does not have, and what thing are changed, it is a subject of a thread. But, every law is changed. Obligatory prayers, fasting, law of marriage. To equality between men and women, 19 days feast, universal house of justice, local and national spiritual assemblies....and just more and more. ... laws of punishment for stealing and adultry...etc.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Who wrote Revelations?

According to Book of revelation, it came from God. And if it was not from God, why did God allow such a book to be written on His name to misguide people? Why the Quran does not say, Book of revelation is not from God?
Do you believe Quran has the name of All prophets and the name of all Books ever revealed by God? Where in Quran, God does make such a claim?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Who wrote Revelations?

I see it is a difficult quandary for you, if that is the best you can offer about God's Word.

I am in no doubt God is the source of Revelation, just as God is the source of the Quran.

In fact Muhammad is foretold in Revelation leaving no doubt about that at all.

Regards Tony

 

[Pastek]

So, if you ask what Thinkgs, Bahai Law has that Quran does not have, and what thing are changed, it is a subject of a thread. But, every law is changed. Obligatory prayers, fasting, law of marriage. To equality between men and women, 19 days feast, universal house of justice, local and national spiritual assemblies....and just more and more. ... laws of punishment for stealing and adultry...etc.

I didn't know that. I believed it was the same Law.

 

[firedragon]

I see it is a difficult quandary for you, if that is the best you can offer about God's Word.

I am in no doubt God is the source of Revelation, just as God is the source of the Quran.

In fact Muhammad is foretold in Revelation leaving no doubt about that at all.

Regards Tony

Well, my faith is not based on who or which book seems to speak about my prophet. My faith is based on Aqal as Islam has been teaching from the beginning.

If you or anyone tells me some faith statement like you did I do my research about the authenticity of everything with any and every model of criticism possible. So just because some one tells me to believe this book is gods word with a reasoning like yours, since it speaks of your prophet you should believe it’s Gods word I don’t accept it.

So you can believe in a book that’s not authenticated by any methodology. And have subtle insults which you think reading between the line is I’ll not comprehend. Invalid.

cheers.

 

[firedragon]

According to Book of revelation, it came from God. And if it was not from God, why did God allow such a book to be written on His name to misguide people? Why the Quran does not say, Book of revelation is not from God?
Do you believe Quran has the name of All prophets and the name of all Books ever revealed by God? Where in Quran, God does make such a claim?

According to Book of revelation, it came from God. And if it was not from God, why did God allow such a book to be written on His name to misguide people? Why the Quran does not say, Book of revelation is not from God?
Do you believe Quran has the name of All prophets and the name of all Books ever revealed by God? Where in Quran, God does make such a claim?

Quran says that people wrote books by their own hands and claimed they are from God.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Quran says that people wrote books by their own hands and claimed they are from God.

Yes, and in that case Allah made it clear, it was not from Him. But with regards to Book of Revelations, Allah does not say, it was not Him who revealed. The Book of revelation written by John, who was an apostle of Christ. In the Quran, Allah briefly mentioned He had sent down revelations to Jesus apostles.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, and in that case Allah made it clear, it was not from Him. But with regards to Book of Revelations, Allah does not say, it was not Him who revealed. The Book of revelation written by John, who was an apostle of Christ. In the Quran, Allah briefly mentioned He had sent down revelations to Jesus apostles.

1. Allah does not make it clear that any book is "Not" a revelation specifically. There were many many books in that case. Do you think the Epistle of Barnabas was Gods word? It was in the bible in the 4th century. What about other books that were in the early bibles? e.g. Shepard of Hermas, Clement, etc!

2. Quran does not mention that Jesus's disciples received any revelations. Revelations means Wahi. You said you are proficient in arabic enough to compare arabic languages, so show me in the Quran where it says that disciples received scripture, wahi, from God. To receive wahi, you have to be a rasool. So show me.

3. There is no evidence that revelations was written by whoever you think this John is. You are making an assumption.

By the way, you forgot to answer some questions after you made the claims i asked questions about. Did you miss it? Let me furnish it again so it will not be missed again brother. Please substantiate your claims.

Your Claims are below in italic and different colour so that its easy to distinguish.

1. I have done a lot of research on hadithes. It is very rare a hadith is false. From my experience more than 99% of hadith are in agreement with Quran.
2. The language of the Hadithes I quoted is classic arabic, same classic arabic used at the time of Muhammad and Imams. I read their Arabic too.

My questions to that claim.

1. If that is the case, how do you explain a Sarih Hadith?
2. Who are the Muthallis and on what basis do you say they are all 99% authentic?
3. What about the hadith that says the earth along with other seven earths is floating on top of a large fish while its swimming in the sea? Is that also correct and in agreement with the Quran?
4. What is the difference between a mathrook and muthawathir ahadith and why are some of them not Sarih?

You are making claims so please respond carefully to each point in order to verify your claims.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, and in that case Allah made it clear, it was not from Him. But with regards to Book of Revelations, Allah does not say, it was not Him who revealed. The Book of revelation written by John, who was an apostle of Christ. In the Quran, Allah briefly mentioned He had sent down revelations to Jesus apostles.

You made this claim: "The language of the Hadithes I quoted is classic arabic, same classic arabic used at the time of Muhammad and Imams. I read their Arabic too."

Can you show me how one would spell the word "Lucy" in the classical arabic of the Quran and the MSA of the Hadith book you are quoting? I would respect your expertise since you have claimed this above.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

1. Allah does not make it clear that any book is "Not" a revelation specifically. There were many many books in that case. Do you think the Epistle of Barnabas was Gods word? It was in the bible in the 4th century. What about other books that were in the early bibles? e.g. Shepard of Hermas, Clement, etc!

2. Quran does not mention that Jesus's disciples received any revelations. Revelations means Wahi. You said you are proficient in arabic enough to compare arabic languages, so show me in the Quran where it says that disciples received scripture, wahi, from God. To receive wahi, you have to be a rasool. So show me.

3. There is no evidence that revelations was written by whoever you think this John is. You are making an assumption.

By the way, you forgot to answer some questions after you made the claims i asked questions about. Did you miss it? Let me furnish it again so it will not be missed again brother. Please substantiate your claims.

Your Claims are below in italic and different colour so that its easy to distinguish.

1. I have done a lot of research on hadithes. It is very rare a hadith is false. From my experience more than 99% of hadith are in agreement with Quran.
2. The language of the Hadithes I quoted is classic arabic, same classic arabic used at the time of Muhammad and Imams. I read their Arabic too.

My questions to that claim.

1. If that is the case, how do you explain a Sarih Hadith?
2. Who are the Muthallis and on what basis do you say they are all 99% authentic?
3. What about the hadith that says the earth along with other seven earths is floating on top of a large fish while its swimming in the sea? Is that also correct and in agreement with the Quran?
4. What is the difference between a mathrook and muthawathir ahadith and why are some of them not Sarih?

You are making claims so please respond carefully to each point in order to verify your claims.

Oh dear, some hard questions from me.

1. The apostle of Barabas was not considered holy by the Chrisitans, so, there was no need for Allah to tell them, it is not from God. But Book of revelation was being part of the holy books of Chrisitans and was believed to be an inspiration from God, so, if it was not really from God, He would have asked them not to use it.

2. Some of the verses of Quran are allusions. They are revealed in a brief and condensed form. The verse I was referring is 5:111

"And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims".

It is not like, just Allah said one sentence to them "be muslims". This is just an allusion to a fact the Allah was making communications with them. They were inspired men, not just an ordinary believers. Why would God inspired them, but He does not directly inspire me and you? It is because they had a mission, and that was writing the Bible!
The verses of Quran are meant to ponder upon.


3. I read many Hadithes in arabic, and to me they are consistently classical Arabic.
I don't have knowledge of various hadith types you are referring. To me, it has no benefit. When I find a hadith, I compare with Quran. If it is compatible with Quran, and has its roots in Quran I take as authentic. If it contradicts Quran, I don't consider it authentic. I don't believe to classify hadithes as weak, strong, Hassan,...etc is any proof for authenticity. If a weak hadith is compatible with Quran, I take it as authentic. If a strong hadith contradicts quran, I take it as a false hadith.