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

[Link]

Good point.

If people make claims they better be 100% sure, else they have to admit later on they were wrong, say "sorry" (problematic for many)
Hence I love RF for having this particular RF Rule. It's the best. If all follow this RF Rule, we might have much more Peace on RF

I think the point of the analogy is that we either are all the mercy of fake Prophets and whatever they tell us a verse means and hence it becomes impossible for God to even limit a time to when he sends a Prophet or put end to Prophethood, or we stick to our guns with what we know God means. If we go the sophistry route, that means we all should follow Maitreya since he is the last claiming Prophet and is interpreting all the holy texts to his favor, while we can't know what seal or Bab's limitation to 1000 years means or Baha'allahs limit to 1000 years means, so we have to follow the Maitreya who alone can manifest the clear interpretation and meaning while it would unclear in our heads!

 

[stvdv]

My point is when you twist words, you can make anything mean anything

I agree 100% with you. And it's even easy to twist verses.

I would never twist Koran verses IF the other is not imposing his view on me and telling me that "my view is wrong", without "in my humble opinion"

When violating RF Rule#8, I take the opportunity to creatively "twist His Book's verses", BUT, and here lies the difference, I make it a big deal, to phrase it in a very respectful way, like "it might also mean this and that". That is the key to good communication. But again, I would not even do this, if the other treats my Religion (and other (non) Faith) respectful

 

[Link]

IMHO: The Maitreya, introduced by Benjamin Creme I believe, is a beautiful concept. But for so many decades they claim "this and that will happen" etc, but still we are waiting. One thing I know, B.C is an artist. So IMHO, this is just his "Master Piece". I can't prove it of course, just my guess. Time will tell. I hope I am wrong. Would be nice to have such a powerful Avatar as the Maitreya on earth (when I am also on earth). Benjamin Creme was very generous complimenting my Master, I must say. He called my Master Cosmic Avatar, whereas Maitreya is called Planetary Avatar. Personally I am not a fan of this "Mine is bigger than yours" concept. They give everyone a number from 1 to 10 or something like that. I think that is not a healthy approach to reach World Peace. But that is just my personal opinion. Hence I stay far away from Benjamin Creme and his concept.

The Quran is a high masterpiece from God, even Bahais and their chosen leaders like Shokh Efendi would say, it's eloquence is not to be compared to Baha'i writing, and that Quran is superior in this respect.

But Quran says if he replaces a proof by a proof or guidance by guidance, be brings something similar or better. He did neither with Bahai texts, the eloquence of Quran is another plain even according to Baha'i founding leaders!

 

[Link]

I agree 100% with you. And it's even easy to twist verses.

I would never twist Koran verses IF the other is not imposing his view on me and telling me that "my view is wrong", without "in my humble opinion"

When violating RF Rule#8, I think, I take the opportunity to creatively "twist His Book's verses", BUT, and here lies the difference, I make it a big deal, to phrase it in a very respectful way, like "it might also mean this and that". That is the key to good communication. But again, I would not even do this, if the other treats my Religion (and other (non) Faith) respectful

The thing is Shiites acknowledged by Baha'is to have followed the rightful successors. I once provided a hadith from Al-kafi that interprets "he is the seal of Prophets so there is no Prophet after him" and he "he sealed the revelations so there is no book (revealed) after Quran" in Al-kafi by words of Imam Baqir (as).

There are many of these hadiths, include Imam Ali (as) when mourning Prophet said "revelations have come to end with you when they never came to the end of the death of those before you (from the Prophets)". This in Nahjul Balagha.

We have a lot of ahadiths, in this respect, yet @InvestigateTruth insists there are no hadiths that imply no more revelations to be revealed or that Quran is that last divine book, or that there is no Nabi after the Prophet.

If there was to be a Prophet after Mohammad, Shiites would have recorded it from the Imams. Instead, all they have to clutch on is the Qaim will bring a new book and new religion, which if you read all our hadiths explaining what that means, says Quran would be so misunderstood and distorted despite it being protected, that it's a new book when Imam Mahdi comes. And I feel that today because my interpretation of Quran is not all near the same as the Quran most Muslims believe in. And that the religion have so many innovations that it will be a whole new religion. Where they supposed to be metaphoric, they go literal. Where Quran and hadiths are literal, they go metaphoric.

It's too much. God is a honest speaker.

 

[stvdv]

I think the point of the analogy is that we either are all the mercy of fake Prophets and whatever they tell us a verse means and hence it becomes impossible for God to even limit a time to when he sends a Prophet or put end to Prophethood, or we stick to our guns with what we know God means. If we go the sophistry route, that means we all should follow Maitreya since he is the last claiming Prophet and is interpreting all the holy texts to his favor, while we can't know what seal or Bab's limitation to 1000 years means or Baha'allahs limit to 1000 years means, so we have to follow the Maitreya who alone can manifest the clear interpretation and meaning while it would unclear in our heads!

Yes, I understand "the point of your analogy". And I agree. And good even to point it out, as people doing it are still not aware they do it.

I think it also boils down to:
If we talk about Religion, then we talk about believe system (faith)
Faith is a personal matter, so don't make claims about it
And when talking about other's faith, definitely refrain
And belittling other's faith is a definite "don' go"

Don't you agree?

 

[Link]

Yes, I understand "the point of your analogy". And I agree. And good even to point it out, as people doing it are still not aware they do it.

I think it also boils down to:
If we talk about Religion, then we talk about believe system (faith)
Faith is a personal matter, so don't make claims about it
And when talking about other's faith, definitely refrain
And belittling other's faith is a definite "don' go"

Don't you agree?

I agree. And on shiachat.com, I use to defend the right of Bahais to be respected and they should be given rights in Iran. I said, even, the killing of the Bab was wrong per Quran.

A fake Prophet per Quran should be allowed to preach lest a true Prophet is not!

Falsehood allowed to be spoken and propagate by government, lest truth is not!

This can be proven by Quran, and Iran is wrong to not allow freedom of religion to Bahais and Babis.

 

[stvdv]

The Quran is a high masterpiece from God, even Bahais and their chosen leaders like Shokh Efendi would say, it's eloquence is not to be compared to Baha'i writing, and that Quran is superior in this respect.

But Quran says if he replaces a proof by a proof or guidance by guidance, be brings something similar or better. He did neither with Bahai texts, the eloquence of Quran is another plain even according to Baha'i founding leaders!

Your reply to my post has nothing to do with my post. Did something go wrong, and you thought you were replying to someone else??

 

[Link]

Yes, I understand "the point of your analogy". And I agree. And good even to point it out, as people doing it are still not aware they do it.

I think it also boils down to:
If we talk about Religion, then we talk about believe system (faith)
Faith is a personal matter, so don't make claims about it
And when talking about other's faith, definitely refrain
And belittling other's faith is a definite "don' go"

Don't you agree?

This also true, because, everyone can have misconceptions and we don't know who is being honest or not to themselves.

I've researched the Bahai interpretation of day of judgment for example, and it's not convincing to me. I can see how it can be convincing to a bahai if he doesn't take account all verses about the subject, but since I am really familiar with the Quran, this was also a big reason that I didn't research too much further.

 

[Link]

Your reply to my post has nothing to do with my post. Did something go wrong, and you thought you were replying to someone else??

No it's due to with the fact, you see that this person is not who he makes himself out to be. I'm saying, at the end, Bahais comparing their text to Quran, realized Quran eloquence and formation is greater in eloquence, and acknowledged this. This is what I'm saying. But this man (the Maitreya) he thinks he so clever, yet some people actually do believe in him! It's sad, that some people follow him, but it's true. It was a comment, on Quran, and how yet people are yet to bring the like of it. At the end, Ba'ahallah and Maitreya maybe very clever is what I'm saying, but God's words are unparalled.

Also Bahais have a line of successors aside from the committee of justice they got going. There is two claimants of successors to Shokh Efendi, they just not family related, which is problematic per Quran, but so is a house of justice taking the position of authority of God a problem per Quran.

So they keep talking about unity, while there is division!

 

[stvdv]

I use to defend the right of Bahais to be respected and they should be given rights in Iran. I said, even, the killing of the Bab was wrong per Quran.

A fake Prophet per Quran should be allowed to preach lest a true Prophet is not!

Falsehood allowed to be spoken and propagate by government, lest truth is not!

This can be proven by Quran, and Iran is wrong to not allow freedom of religion to Bahais and Babis.

I fully agree.
And I fully agree with the points you made, that Bahai must be careful not to fall in the trap of Bahai writings are superior or more up to date, with the idea, that older writings are now insufficient as to reach our ultimate goal in life, thereby belittling the other writings. This is just "not done".

Of course there might be the possiblity that errors snuck in ancient writings. They had not computer backup system like we have now. And their recording devices were not as accurate as we have now. But as long as the others don't impose their errors on me, I see no problem and no need to correct them. Again it all boils down to "do not make claims where it's just faith/belief/Religion".

 

[Link]

I fully agree.
And I fully agree with the points you made, that Bahai must be careful not to fall in the trap of Bahai writings are superior or more up to date, with the idea, that older writings are now insufficient as to reach our ultimate goal in life, thereby belittling the other writings. This is just "not done".

Of course there might be the possiblity that errors snuck in ancient writings. They had not computer backup system like we have now. And their recording devices were not as accurate as we have now. But as long as the others don't impose their errors on me, I see no problem and no need to correct them. Again it all boils down to "do not make claims where it's just faith/belief/Religion".

It's okay to make claims, if you can support it. To be honest, the Quran only said Mohammad is the Seal of Prophets once, because God realized, this is going to be controversial. It's in a chapter where it's defending Mohammad about Zaid and his wife for example, and all sorts of other things, putting it into context.

It's not easy because all before Mohammad, they predict Prophets to come. And now putting an end, this is a serious claim. Revelations from God always guided humanity, and now we don't have one till the day of judgment? Huge question mark here! like ????????????????? Why?

But that chapter 33 doesn't explain fully why, it hints some reasons, but this is something the whole of Quran has to explain. To understand why, you have to understand the position of Ahlulbayt and the global warner the Mahdi which per Quran, not a town or city will remain but be destroyed or punished heavily (if they reject him and his miracles) before the day of judgement.

There are many prophecies in Quran pertaining to the Mahdi. It maybe most world accepts him, it maybe very few does, it maybe no one does, and all destroyed. None of these are written, and not even God fully knows which one will happen, but he knows which one is more likely to happen, and can know to some degree what would happen if brings the Mahdi now.

We wish to hasten the Mahdi but only on Good terms. If the good terms are not here, then it maybe, better we delay. But if we delay and don't bring good terms, and believers get oppressed, then it's upon God to deliver the believers irrespective of the destruction of their enemies.

But let's hope he becomes a mercy spread to all humans!

 

[firedragon]

I take utmost care to phrase my posts as "opinion", using "might", "Hypothetically", "I don't know for sure", "IMHO", "I believe", "I think" etc
You many times do not this and phrase your replies as a claim (fact), as in below reply.

That was not my opinion i was quoting, it was your opinion i was quoting.

Maybe if you read through carefully you would understand what someone is saying.

Have a good day brother. All good. Peace.

 

[Earthtank]

The explanation by Ba'ahallah to "seal of the Prophets" doesn't make sense to me.

The following is from Kitabal Itqan.

Likewise, from this statement it is made evident that the term "last" is applicable to the "first," and the term "first" applicable to the "last;" inasmuch as both the "first" and the "last" have risen to proclaim one and the same Faith.
Notwithstanding the obviousness of this theme, in the eyes of those that have quaffed the wine of
knowledge and certitude, yet how many are those who, through failure to understand its meaning, have allowed the term "Seal of the Prophets" to obscure their understanding, and deprive them of the grace of all His manifold bounties! Hath not Muhhammad, Himself, declared: "I am all the Prophets?" Hath He not said as We have already mentioned: "I am Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus?" Why should Muhammad, that immortal Beauty, Who hath said: "I am the first Adam" be incapable of saying also: "I am the last Adam"? For even as He regarded Himself to be the "First of the Prophets" — that is Adam — in like manner, the "Seal of the Prophets" is also applicable unto that Divine Beauty. It is admittedly obvious that being the "First of the Prophets," He likewise is their "Seal."
The mystery of this theme hath, in this Dispensation, been a sore test unto all mankind. Behold, how many are those who, clinging unto these words, have disbelieved Him Who is their true Revealer. What, We ask, could this people presume the terms "first" and "last" — when referring to God — glorified be His Name! — to mean? If they maintain that these terms bear reference to
this material universe, how could it be possible, when the visible order of things is still manifestly existing? Nay, in this instance, by "first" is meant no other than the "last" and by "last" no other than the "first."


Some comments, God could've said in Quran something to that meaning, and Muslims would understand it metaphorically, for example, if Quran said, "it's as if Mohammad is all the Prophets" but not with stating Mohammad is the seal of Prophets to mean this.

It's too much. This means the impression is Mohammad is the last Prophet, but all it means, is the Prophets are all one another. This frankly, doesn't make sense, and you can deny any clear meaning of a verse in this respect.

Baha'allah acknowledges Du'a Nudba and this prayer contradicts the Bahai religon


"Among those writings are the following words recorded in the "Prayer of Nudbih"" That is from Baha'allah, he quotes it and quotes a lot from it in kitabal Itqan to prove his philosophy. While he went into great lengths to explain seal of Prophets, to mean all Prophets are each other, and not that Mohammad is really the seal, what he seemed to have forgotten to explain is a famous hadith.

"You have the position to me as Aaron does to Moses except that there is no Prophet after me"

This is a famous hadith in both Sunni and Shiite hadiths, but, say Baha'is wanted us to question it, they can't really, when it's in Du'a Nudba as well.

And in Du'a nudba there is other things said about the Mahdi to him, for example, if we can find a way to meet, I highly suggest people to read Du'a Nudba. It's on right here if anyone is interested: Dua nudba

The day of judgment

This was all said to be about Baha'allah, and frankly that's crazy to me.

No Ahlulbayt - 12 Imams or Imam alive now for Bahais.

The Bab didn't have an Ahlulbayt like the structure of guidance in Quran. Neither did Baha'allah. Instead you have this committee. Sorry, Ahlulbayt and chosen ones and the kings of God not supposed to replaced by some committee!

while the long explanation is appreciated, you could have simply said "because it does not make any sense and contradicts the very foundations it was built on"

 

[stvdv]

So they keep talking about unity, while there is division!

My Master said this when talking about unity. For me, this is the only way to "not judge others" and see unity:

DO not compare the various manifestations of the Divine and pronounce judgment, declaring that Rama is greater than Krishna or Siva superior to Vishnu. This line of thought is poisonous and harmful to the devout aspirant. You do not know your own self, but yet, how dare you pronounce judgment on personalities and powers you have never experienced or understood. Rama is as unknown to you as Christ and so it is best to keep silent, and revere both with equal ardour. For all are manifestations of the same Divine Effulgence

 

[Link]

My Master said this when talking about unity. For me, this is the only way to "not judge others" and see unity:

Naturally, the Current set of Guides will be better then past. This is the nature of them, because, they aside from their words, are supposed to poles of power drawing us to God. Per Quran, when Mohammad and his family, became the stars of this world, that is Mohammad and his soon to be successors (even the ones yet to come to this world) took on the sky and heavenly roof as stars of guidance and lights, things changed for soothsayers. They were and still today can't steal sayings from God's plans. God reveals his summarized plan in the night of Qadr, and unveils it through out the year. The friends of the leader and guide of our time and the ones connected to the family of the reminder in the true spiritual light form and connected through the Mahdi from this world to the heavenly sky, they are also protected by armor and seek Ahlulbayt to armor them and help them as weapons and missiles against devils. The veil and protection, is such that devil and envious eyes, cannot pierce.

This altered history - though people don't know how. But in the past, predictions of soothsayers where highly accurate with respect to the future. Now, they still make predictions per knowledge of Jinn and their predicting power, but are unprepared for God's plan which is to counter Satanic plans.

In this regard, they had the world in their hands, till somethings went unpredictably wrong. And things inshallah will continue to go wrong to Satan's plan for the world.

 

[stvdv]

Seal of Prophets might mean "no more Prophets will come"
But it also might mean something different. Only God knows
I do not know. Humans can only speculate about God IMO

God says it, and it means that.

That was not my opinion i was quoting, it was your opinion i was quoting.

Okay. Sorry I misunderstood. Thanks for pointing out my huge reading error.
So you agree that "Seal of Prophet" does not necessarily mean "final Prophet" and that I got it completely right when saying:

Seal of Prophets might mean "no more Prophets will come"
But it also might mean something different. Only God knows
I do not know. Humans can only speculate about God IMO

You surprise me here. Then I indeed misread what you wrote. Sorry again for reading your reply not in the positive way.

 

[Link]

Okay. Sorry I misunderstood.
So you agree that "Seal of Prophet" does not necessarily mean "final Prophet" and that I got it completely right when saying:


You surprise me here. Then I indeed misread what you wrote. Sorry again for reading your reply not in the positive way.

Brother, might or might not are relative. You are right 3:7 says there is unclearness from it and clear signs, but there is a way to recognize clear meanings and clear signs.

What you are saying it's not clear to everyone it means last Prophets and not clear to you. What he is saying, it's clear to him and there is a way to know the clear meaning.

The bridge will happen, when you begin, to discuss the norms of language and contextual nature of Arabic and primary meanings to secondary meanings. That is in Arabic, usually primary meanings take on meaning unless there is good reason to assume the opposite.

I'm not aware of alternative meanings of Seal then to mean final in this respect, but say there was, it would be a very secondary meaning, that needs the primary meaning to be impossible.

 

[stvdv]

It's okay to make claims, if you can support it.

I agree.
Do you think it's possible to prove that the claim "this Koran verse" is true, by using "other Koran verses"?
"Seal of Prophets" meaning "this is the final Prophet; there will be no other" can only be proven if "future history" proves there was no other

To be honest, the Quran only said Mohammad is the Seal of Prophets once

Thanks. I did not know that.

because God realized, this is going to be controversial.

Does the Koran says this? Otherwise how do we know?
We can't know, I think, that it's "because God realized" unless we are clairvoyant and able to read God's mind. Which I doubt. Don't you think?

 

[Link]

It's the chapter, you have to be familiar with Quran. All major controversial issues is in Chapter 33.

 

[stvdv]

I'm not aware of alternative meanings of Seal then to mean final in this respect

IMO:

I can think of alternative meanings of Seal, as I have given quite a few already in this thread.

But you seem to miss the point I make here all the time (or I misunderstand RF Rule#8). Islam is a belief-system, not a fact-system.
Belief system means: not making claims; esp. when belittling other (non) faith. Hence the RF Rule "In my opinion"
In this case "Bahai faith". Because, I will spell it out once more, If you claim "Muhammad is the final Prophet" then you belittle Bahai to ZERO

What he is saying, it's clear to him

That is the correct way to say such a thing

and there is a way to know the clear meaning.

That is the wrong way to say it IMO. You should add "In my opinion" when you are on RF, otherwise you implicitly belittle Bahai and violate RF Rule#8

1) Telling Bahais that Muhammad is the Final Prophet = feels like telling their Religion+Prophet is bogus = attempt to convert them away from their religion
2) Bonus: IF Bahais would tell Bahaullah is the Final Prophet for the next 1000 years, then they make the same mistake, and also violating RF Rule#8
Both can tell whatever they like, IF they add "IMHO" when comparing religions. Seems to be a huge deal to certain people, I totally don't understand this.
I know that in fashion/porn industry it's all about outer appearances, like "I have the biggest, the most beautiful etc.". spirituality should be different IMO

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.