Would/Should God communicate directly to everyone in the world?

[Trailblazer]

So its slightly like that of JWs I guess.. For instance lets say, you read some of the Baha’i writings and disagree with whatever interpretation the UHJ had come up with and you started posting this here on the forum, wouldn't you be breaking the rules then?

No, absolutely not. We are free to interpret the Baha’i Writings however we want to, and Baha’is do not all agree as to what they mean. In case you have not noticed, there are quite a few Baha’is on this forum and we are all quite different, although some of us are more similar to each other.

There are official interpretations of the Baha’i Writings, from Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi, but even then we are free to disagree with them. Like I said, the only time the UHJ gets involved is when someone breaks with the Covenant by trying to strike out on their own and start a new religion and calling it the Baha’i Faith. There are a few so-called religions, what some people consider sects of the Baha’i Faith; but they are not sects, they are Covenant Breaker religions. There is only one Baha’i Faith, the Baha’is who are faithful to the Covenant. Baha’is have to accept the authority of the UHJ and the other central figures of the Baha’i Faith, Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.

Even if you remain and still claimed to be a Baha’i, but based on your own reasoning and logic had gotten to the conclusion that what Baha'u'llah really meant was something different. How would that be handled?

Like I said above, we are all free to interpret what Baha’u’llah meant based upon our own reasoning and logic. The laws are pretty straightforward, so only if we are flagrantly breaking a law in public and bringing disrepute to the Faith our voting rights could be taken away, but that would never be handled by the UHJ, it would be handled by the LSA (Local Spiritual Assembly) in our geographical area.

What I mean with it being sort of like JWs, is because the rules etc. are decided by Governing body and then distributed to the rest, so guess they would have to follow the rules and if not then they will go through a trial. Now JWs as far as I know, use God and the bible as their guide for the rules. But if I remember correctly, didn't you say that Baha'u'llah made someone responsible for interpreting his writing, meaning making him or them, the deciding factor of how and what to believe and if you disagree with them, then its just to bad or what?

There are the Baha’i teachings and the Baha’i Laws. We are free to interpret and apply the Baha’i teachings however we choose to. The only rules we have are the Baha’i Laws and those were decided upon by Baha’u’llah. The Kitáb-i-Aqdas – The Most Holy Book is Bahá'u'lláh's Book of Laws, written in Arabic around 1873 while He was still imprisoned within the city of 'Akká.

The UHJ does not decide how things will be or how they will be understood. We are free to interpret the Baha’i Writings however we want to but if we have questions about what they mean or how to apply them we can write to the UHJ.

The UHJ only has authority to make decisions about principles or actions which are not expressly revealed in the Writings of Baha'u'llah. It also legislates as to when it is timely for certain of the Laws of Baha’u’llah in the Aqdas to be practiced, but the UHJ has no authority to change anything that was written by Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha or Shoghi Effendi, although that can comment upon what was written in letters to the Baha’is or help Baha’is understand what the Writings mean, but ONLY if a Baha’i writes to the UHJ and requests help.

Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi were the appointed interpreters of the Writings of Baha’u’llah, since authority passed to them after Baha’u’llah dies by virtue of the Will of Baha’u’llah, and they wrote many books explaining the Baha’i Faith which reflect the Writings of Baha’u’llah, but are easier for some people to understand since the language is not as ornate. Again, we are free to disagree with any of the Writings of the Baha’i Faith, it is only behaviorsthat might bring disrepute to the Faith that could be problematic.

For example, the local LSA might step in if they found out a man and a woman were living together as a couple and they were not married since it is clearly stated in the Book of Laws that Baha’is cannot have any kind of sexual relations outside of marriage. Even if they were not having sexual relations, if people knew they were Baha’is and living together as a couple most people would assume that so it reflects badly on the Baha’i Faith.

I don't think everything revolves around the bible, but I would say that for those religions which base their beliefs on it, then it clearly does.

The only religion that bases their beliefs upon the Bible is Christianity. Judaism bases their beliefs upon the Torah and the Tanakh.

Again if you remove the bible all of these religions would never have come into existence in the first place.

That is true only in the sense that the Bible had to be revealed before the Qur’an and the Writings of Baha’u’llah because that was necessary for the spiritual evolution of humanity. You should read this:

The Heart of the Gospel is a book that was written by a Christian clergyman who resigned his orders after 40 years to become a Baha’i. It explains how the Bible fits into history.

I. The Bible as Universal History
II. History as Spiritual Evolution

Hinduism and Buddhism which have nothing to do with what we are talking about, as you are neither of them. But from what I can see and understand about the Baha’i faith, it does use the bible as a source for the belief and therefore the bible is relevant.

As I said before, the Baha’i Faith DOES NOT use the Bible as a source of belief in any manner shape or form. The Baha’i Faith is an *independent* revelation from God. The Writings of Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi are what the Baha’i Faith is based upon. Have you ever seen me quote the Bible to explain Baha’i Faith beliefs? No, Baha’is only refer to the Bible when we are explaining how we believe in progressive revelation or when we are explaining how Baha’u’llah fulfilled the prophecies in the Bible, OT and NT.

Even if Baha'u'llah rarely mentions Jesus or Moses, these characters come from the bible and not Hinduism for instance. Had the bible not existent, then Baha'u'llah would have had no God to speak of or it would have been a completely different one. So I don't see why you keep referring to the bible as if it doesn't really matter?

God existed before the Bible was written and was revealed in various scriptures throughout human history. It is true that Abraham introduced the one true God of monotheism, but logically speaking that God existed before that; in fact that God has always existed.

I am not saying that the Bible does not matter. I am only saying that it does not take precedence over the Writings of Baha’u’llah and it is not applicable to the new age in which we live. The spiritual teachings in the Bible are eternal and they will always be relevant, but the messages from God and the social teachings and laws in the Bible are not pertinent to this new age, so as I see it, Jews and Christians are stuck in a kind of time warp, living in the past. Of course, they are not going to see it that way because they do not believe in Progressive Revelation.

“The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213

“The Prophets of God should be regarded as physicians whose task is to foster the well-being of the world and its peoples, that, through the spirit of oneness, they may heal the sickness of a divided humanity. To none is given the right to question their words or disparage their conduct, for they are the only ones who can claim to have understood the patient and to have correctly diagnosed its ailments. No man, however acute his perception, can ever hope to reach the heights which the wisdom and understanding of the Divine Physician have attained. Little wonder, then, if the treatment prescribed by the physician in this day should not be found to be identical with that which he prescribed before. How could it be otherwise when the ills affecting the sufferer necessitate at every stage of his sickness a special remedy? In like manner, every time the Prophets of God have illumined the world with the resplendent radiance of the Day Star of Divine knowledge, they have invariably summoned its peoples to embrace the light of God through such means as best befitted the exigencies of the age in which they appeared.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 80

The Bible laid the foundation for the spiritual evolution of humanity. If the Bible had not existed it would have been impossible to move on to the next stage in the spiritual evolution of humanity so in that sense was it necessary to be revealed before the Qur’an and the Writings of Baha’u’llah.

Referring to God while addressing the Muslims who said that the Bible had been corrupted, Baha’u’llah wrote that the Bible had not been corrupted except in a few instances and that the Bible is “His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 89

I get, that you are of the impression that for the most part nothing in the bible can be considered reliable when it comes to God. But again that logic makes no sense taking into account that your own religion is based on it.

The Bible is reliable to a certain extent but it is not as reliable as the Qur’an or the Writings of Baha’u’llah, since we do not even know who most of the authors were and none of the authors were Messengers of God, they were ordinary men.

No, the Baha’i Faith IS NOT based upon the Bible, it is based upon the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.
I think you should read that entire book entitled The Heart of the Gospel.
It is free to read online and you can even buy the paperback if you want to.

(Continued on next post)

 

[Trailblazer]

Even if you refer to Islam as being more accurate, it also rely on the bible and share a lot of stories with it.

Even though the Qur’an shares stories that are in the Bible, it is still a new and separate revelation from God to humanity. The idea of revelations is that they come from God speaking to the Messengers (Prophets) through the Holy Spirit and they result in anew religion. Each revelation is a new revelation that supersedes the previous revelations and abrogates the dispensations of the past religions. The religions themselves are never abrogated but the dispensations are. That means that the teachings in the older religions were valid for the ages in which they were revealed but they are not valid for the subsequent ages.

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

I haven't read all of the Baha’i teachings, but it doesn't seem to offer any explanations to these earlier stories, but rather that we accept the characters and then we just continue with our own revelations, as if one is just suppose to ignore the basis for which your belief is based. Its a very strange way of looking at it I think.

The Bible is not the basis for the Baha’i Faith beliefs. The Revelation from God to Baha’u’llah is the basis. Maybe you will understand better if you read that book I cited above.

Also why I mentioned to you in an earlier post in the other discussion, that it seems like the Baha’i faith is about Baha'u'llah and have very little to do with God.

Goodness gracious! ~~ No, the Baha’i Faith is about God, God as He was revealed by Baha’u’llah, just as Christianity is about God, God as revealed by Jesus Christ.

“Their belief or disbelief in My Cause can neither profit nor harm Me. We summon them wholly for the sake of God.”
Gleanings, p. 85

“Incline your ears to the counsels which this Servant giveth you for the sake of God. He, verily, asketh no recompense from you and is resigned to what God hath ordained for Him, and is entirely submissive to God’s Will.” Gleanings, p. 127

“Say: God is My witness! I have wished nothing whatever for Myself. What I have wished is the victory of God and the triumph of His Cause.He is Himself a sufficient witness between you and Me. Were ye to cleanse your eyes, ye would readily perceive how My deeds testify to the truth of My words, how My words are a guide to My deeds.” Gleanings, pp. 256-257

Because again, whenever I ask into God, I reference the Bible, but I don't think, from any of the things you have quote from Baha'u'llah that there is anything talking about God, where the bible got it wrong or where Islam got it wrong and how these stories are actually suppose to be understood.

A large part of the book I often quote from entitled Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh is talking about God, and many of the other Writings of Baha’u’llah talk about God.

You reference the Bible because that is the only text you consider authoritative regarding God, and that is understandable because it was the longest running revelation from God to humanity. However, it is not the current Word of God, so it is like reading a history book.

“They that valiantly labor in quest of God, will, when once they have renounced all else but Him, be so attached and wedded unto that City, that a moment’s separation from it would to them be unthinkable. They will hearken unto infallible proofs from the Hyacinth of that assembly, and will receive the surest testimonies from the beauty of its Rose, and the melody of its Nightingale. Once in about a thousand years shall this City be renewed and readorned….

That City is none other than the Word of God revealed in every age and dispensation. In the days of Moses it was the Pentateuch; in the days of Jesus, the Gospel; in the days of Muhammad, the Messenger of God, the Qur’án; in this day, the Bayán; and in the Dispensation of Him Whom God will make manifest, His own Book—the Book unto which all the Books of former Dispensations must needs be referred, the Book that standeth amongst them all transcendent and supreme.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 269-270

Like Adam and Eve, Im a little confused, because you write that you don't believe the Adam and Eve story and original sin, so how is it suppose to be understood according to Baha'u'llah? The Bible got it wrong, but what about Islam, which is clearly based on the bible, they got it right? Or is the story not true at all, and if not what is the creation story according to the Baha’i faith?

Abdu’l-Baha explained one way we can understand that story in Some Answered Questions: 30: ADAM AND EVE

In short, Baha’is do not believe that the world was created in six days, but rather life on earth evolved over time. I just read recently somewhere in the Baha’i Writings that humans have always existed even though they did not always exist on planet Earth. That was new to me and I wish I could remember where I read it.

Trailblazer said: As Baha’is, we are going to believe whatever Baha’u’llah wrote because we believe He is inerrant.

A statement like this makes my atheistic heart bleed

You are suppose to believe him or anyone else for that matter, if what they are saying is true, not because you believe he is inerrant.

Why do you feel that way? If Baha’u’llah was not inerrant in what He revealed about God, how could we trust His Writings? How could we trust what He is saying is true if it is subject to error (being false?) This is a logical proposition. If Baha’u’llah was a Manifestation of God, then His Will was identical to the Will of God. God is inerrant so Baha’u’llah also has to be inerrant. Please read the following passage very carefully:

“The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same. By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself. This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast in their belief.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 166-167

And the way you figure out whether he is telling the true or not, is by being critical and follow the evidence. If there is no compelling evidence then you ought not be skeptic until such evidence appear.

I fully agree with you on that. We should not just accept that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God because He claimed to be one. We need to look at all the evidence that supports His claim.

 

[Nimos]

For example, the local LSA might step in if they found out a man and a woman were living together as a couple and they were not married since it is clearly stated in the Book of Laws that Baha’is cannot have any kind of sexual relations outside of marriage. Even if they were not having sexual relations, if people knew they were Baha’is and living together as a couple most people would assume that so it reflects badly on the Baha’i Faith.

So from all you have written regarding this (Just quoted a portion of it), it seems like its pretty much like how JWs does it. Just with slightly different rules and name for the different things.

The only religion that bases their beliefs upon the Bible is Christianity. Judaism bases their beliefs upon the Torah and the Tanakh.

Yes, I was just making are general reference to the bible, as you can refer to the Jewish one as the Hebrew bible.

The Bible is reliable to a certain extent but it is not as reliable as the Qur’an or the Writings of Baha’u’llah, since we do not even know who most of the authors were and none of the authors were Messengers of God, they were ordinary men.

How do you know that? A lot of prophecies you claim to be true comes from the writings of these, which in some cases are said to be revealed to them by God. If we assume that God is real, then why would he reveal anything to these people if they are not "special". Following that logic, then we could remove 90% of the bible (Hebrew and Christian one) according to you, because it would not be relevant. Even the stories of Moses, we have no clue who wrote them either. It is just assumed that Moses might have written them, which at least to me, based on how it is written, is not likely and furthermore we know Moses dies before the last book is finished, so he clearly didn't write that part.

But also, in that case, the Quran speaking of him and all the other characters in it, like Noah, Abraham, Adam and Eve is just not of any importance. Which means that Muhammad is "copying" stories and characters from a unreliable source into the Quran, which then later end up being referenced in the Bahai faith. Simply using what to me, appears to be a logic based on simply choosing what parts of the bible one think ought to be true and which doesn't.

Since we have no clue who wrote the stories/books with Moses in them, why would you assume that these are more accurate and reliable than one of the others for which we also don't know who wrote them? How do you make that distinction?

Goodness gracious! ~~ No, the Baha’i Faith is about God, God as He was revealed by Baha’u’llah, just as Christianity is about God, God as revealed by Jesus Christ.

That is what I don't understand, if I wanted to learn about what Bahai believe about God, which are reliable information where would I go? Because you stated several times now, that both the Bible and the Quran is not all that reliable, so why would I care to spend time on them if the information and stories are not to be trusted. I read the story about Adam and Eve you quote and clearly based on that, this is not true either. So according to Bahai faith, how did God create everything, because throwing out the Adam and Eve one there is no creation story. So are we just to assume that is happened at some point, without any details of how and why. Because in that analysis or what to call it about Adam and Eve, what this person is talking about, doesn't really makes a lot of sense I think. Its sort of like when Christians say that they don't really believe it either and that is just a symbolic story. And then when later asked how they explain the linage from Jesus to Adam as written in Luke, you just don't get an answer.

So how does Baha'u'llah explain the creation?

And furthermore, between Adam and Eve and Noah, is there a shift when the story becomes real and reliable or not? Or where does this shift happen. This is the exactly the same issue Christians run into, and can only assume its the same for Muslims.

It is very clear from what this person wrote about Adam and Eve that he does not buy it either, yet it doesn't prevent him for analyzing and metaphor the hell out of it, without any context to rest of the bible, where they refer to them.

Luke 3:23-25
23 Jesus himself was about 30 years old when he began his ministry. He was (so it was thought) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli,
24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai,
...
.
38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Will get back to this one in a second, but why would they add Adam here if they did not believe he existent?

Genesis 5:5
5 Adam lived a total of 930 years and then died.

Why would they write how old he became?

Hosea 6:7
7 "But like Adam, they broke the covenant; in this they have acted deceitfully against me.

1 Corinthians 15:45
45 This, indeed, is what is written: "The first man, Adam, became a living being." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Yet more references to Adam.

Now I know that you say that you do not rely on the bible, and I also know I keep asking into it. But I think its because I don't really get my point across good enough. So I try again

Even if you do not think of the bible as being all that important or reliable, you do still think that Jesus was a messenger of God, if im not mistaken. So the question, as that to Christians, still remains the same. When looking at the linage above in Luke 3:23-38, how do you explain that? Did they just make it up? Which of the characters in the list are not true, where does the break occur? Because the biblical writers do not appear to be in doubt about this. And ultimately this lead to one of the characters that you claim is one of the messengers and you believe have existed.

Now my point is that, you have people even today, believing in heaven and hell, satan and so forth. So if they can believe that, why should it be considered unlikely for the ancient Jews to not believe Adam was real? Which would explain why there are all these references to him, that he have an age, children and so forth. If they truly thought all of this was just symbolic, then why do that, it makes no sense.

So whether you agree that the bible is all that important for Bahais, then this does talk about one of your messengers that you believe is true, doesn't that ought at least a bit of explanation? Especially if Jesus is considered more important than Baha'u'llah, which obviously might not be the case, as I see it

Why do you feel that way? If Baha’u’llah was not inerrant in what He revealed about God, how could we trust His Writings? How could we trust what He is saying is true if it is subject to error (being false?) This is a logical proposition. If Baha’u’llah was a Manifestation of God, then His Will was identical to the Will of God. God is inerrant so Baha’u’llah also has to be inerrant. Please read the following passage very carefully:

Because its backwards reasoning or what to call it.

I really like Neil deGrasse Tyson, because he seems like a down to earth person, which are very good at communicating scientific topics, with good credentials and a good grasp on reality, and in general a person who seem to be a good person. So I have a lot of respect for him and what he does. But for me, to claim that due to this, he must be errant is just wrong. I trust what he is saying, but to approach everything he says as if nothing was ever wrong, is not how one does it. Each claim or thing he say, have to stand on their own. I might be less likely to double check it, because of the trust I show him. But I would never start out with saying, "Because its Neil deGrasse Tyson, it must be true", I would always go, this is what he claims, then check it from other sources and then draw the conclusion, that he was in fact right or wrong. Obviously only if its something that I really care about, for most things I would just accept it, as I have little to loose should it turn out that it was wrong. But then again, im not devoting my life to follow some person telling me how to live either. And I doubt I could ever become religious, as I would constantly demand evidence for anything someone was telling me, if it affected my life.

If your position is that a person is always right, then there is no reason to be critical or skeptic towards anything they say and that leads to being ignorant. The huge difference between a person like Neil deGrasse Tyson or anyone else that speak about scientific issues, is that they will very often, say that this is either the current understanding or theory etc. Rather than speaking as if something is absolutely true. They pretty much only do that, when it have been proven to such extend that it would be none sense not to do it. But even then, if you push them, they will eventually say that nothing is absolute.

 

[Trailblazer]

How do you know that? A lot of prophecies you claim to be true comes from the writings of these, which in some cases are said to be revealed to them by God. If we assume that God is real, then why would he reveal anything to these people if they are not "special". Following that logic, then we could remove 90% of the bible (Hebrew and Christian one) according to you, because it would not be relevant. Even the stories of Moses, we have no clue who wrote them either. It is just assumed that Moses might have written them, which at least to me, based on how it is written, is not likely and furthermore we know Moses dies before the last book is finished, so he clearly didn't write that part.

But also, in that case, the Quran speaking of him and all the other characters in it, like Noah, Abraham, Adam and Eve is just not of any importance. Which means that Muhammad is "copying" stories and characters from a unreliable source into the Quran, which then later end up being referenced in the Bahai faith. Simply using what to me, appears to be a logic based on simply choosing what parts of the bible one think ought to be true and which doesn't.

No, Muhammad did not copy anything from the Bible, He received His own revelation from God. If the stories are similar that is because all the Messengers of God (Prophets are one soul and the same person:

“The Bearers of the Trust of God are made manifest unto the peoples of the earth as the Exponents of a new Cause and the Revealers of a new Message. Inasmuch as these Birds of the celestial Throne are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God, and as they all arise to proclaim His irresistible Faith, they, therefore, are regarded as one soul and the same person. For they all drink from the one Cup of the love of God, and all partake of the fruit of the same Tree of Oneness.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 50

Because they are one soul and the same person, that is why Muhammad claimed to be all the Prophets, and why He could have memories of having been the previous Prophets, which would explain why some of the stories in the Qur’an are the same as the stories in the Bible.

“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 Muḥammad, 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 Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 161-162

Since we have no clue who wrote the stories/books with Moses in them, why would you assume that these are more accurate and reliable than one of the others for which we also don't know who wrote them? How do you make that distinction?

I do not assume that they are more accurate.

That is what I don't understand, if I wanted to learn about what Bahai believe about God, which are reliable information where would I go? Because you stated several times now, that both the Bible and the Quran is not all that reliable, so why would I care to spend time on them if the information and stories are not to be trusted.

You would go to the Writings of Baha’u’llah, and I would start with Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh

It is called Gleanings because it is kind of an extraction of information from various Tablets... From the Introduction of Gleanings:

“Gleanings is excerpts from various Tablets. In the introduction to Gleanings it explains how it is organized into five parts. Part one, pages 1-46, proclaims this as the “Day of God.” Part two, pages 46-136, concerns the Manifestation of God and His significance. Part three, pages 136-200, deals with basic questions concerning the soul and its immortality. Part four, pages 200-259, concerns the spiritual aspects of the World Order and the Most Great Peace. Part five, pages 259-346, deals with the duties of the individual and the spiritual meaning of life.” Gleanings

The Qur’an is definitely more accurate than the Bible because it was revealed by Muhammad to scribes who wrote it down, so it is the words of Muhammad. Such cannot be said about the Bible. We do not know that the words attributed to Moses or Jesus were their actual words, and it would be logically impossible since nobody who even knew Moses or Jesus wrote those Books of the Bible.

The Writings of Baha’u’llah were either written in His Own Pen or they were dictated to His secretary, Mírzá Áqá Ján, who wrote as Baha’u’llah spoke, after which time Baha’u’llah reviewed everything that was written and stamped it with His official seal. You cannot get much more authentic than that.The Qur’an is not as authentic as the Writings of Baha’u’llah because there is some question as to the names of the scribes and there was more than one scribe. Still, it is more authentic than the Bible. With the Bible, one has to trust that the Holy Spirit was involved in its writing, guiding the authors and that is a big assumption.

I read the story about Adam and Eve you quote and clearly based on that, this is not true either. So according to Bahai faith, how did God create everything, because throwing out the Adam and Eve one there is no creation story. So are we just to assume that is happened at some point, without any details of how and why.

According to the Baha’i Faith, God and God’s Creation have always existed and humans have always existed. Humans did not always exist on Planet Earth, they evolved over time, but there are many other planets in the Universe that sustain life and humans existed on those planets.

“As to thy question concerning the origin of creation. Know assuredly that God’s creation hath existed from eternity, and will continue to exist forever. Its beginning hath had no beginning, and its end knoweth no end. His name, the Creator, presupposeth a creation, even as His title, the Lord of Men, must involve the existence of a servant.” Gleanings, p. 150

You can read the whole passage on these pages: Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 150-151

So how does Baha'u'llah explain the creation?

Baha’u’llah also wrote about the origin of Creation in this Tablet, but I cannot say that I understand what He wrote:

“As regards thine assertions about the beginning of creation, this is a matter on which conceptions vary by reason of the divergences in men’s thoughts and opinions. Wert thou to assert that it hath ever existed and shall continue to exist, it would be true; or wert thou to affirm the same concept as is mentioned in the sacred Scriptures, no doubt would there be about it, for it hath been revealed by God, the Lord of the worlds. Indeed He was a hidden treasure. This is a station that can never be described nor even alluded to. And in the station of ‘I did wish to make Myself known’, God was, and His creation had ever existed beneath His shelter from the beginning that hath no beginning, apart from its being preceded by a Firstness which cannot be regarded as firstness and originated by a Cause inscrutable even unto all men of learning.

That which hath been in existence had existed before, but not in the form thou seest today. The world of existence came into being through the heat generated from the interaction between the active force and that which is its recipient. These two are the same, yet they are different. Thus doth the Great Announcement inform thee about this glorious structure. Such as communicate the generating influence and such as receive its impact are indeed created through the irresistible Word of God which is the Cause of the entire creation, while all else besides His Word are but the creatures and the effects thereof. Verily thy Lord is the Expounder, the All-Wise.” Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140

There are probably other Writings about the origin of Creation but it has never been a burning issue for me so I never looked for them.

(Continued on next post)

 

[Trailblazer]

Will get back to this one in a second, but why would they add Adam here if they did not believe he existent?

It is difficult to say what the writers of the Bible were thinking and why they wrote what they wrote. Fortunately for me since I am a Baha’i I do not need to figure all that out, since I refer to the Baha’i Writings as my Source of information on all God-related matters.

Genesis 5:5
5 Adam lived a total of 930 years and then died.

Why would they write how old he became?

I have no idea but I do not believe anyone ever lived for 930 years so that is not literally true.

Hosea 6:7
7 "But like Adam, they broke the covenant; in this they have acted deceitfully against me.

1 Corinthians 15:45
45 This, indeed, is what is written: "The first man, Adam, became a living being." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Yet more references to Adam.

I rely upon what Abdu’l-Baha and Baha’u’llah wrote about Adam. Baha’is do not believe that Adam was the first man, we believe He was the first Prophet in the Adamic Cycle of religion; but there were many cycles of religion before the Adamic cycle, so we know man has existed a lot longer than 6000 years.

Now I know that you say that you do not rely on the bible, and I also know I keep asking into it. But I think its because I don't really get my point across good enough. So I try again.
Even if you do not think of the bible as being all that important or reliable, you do still think that Jesus was a messenger of God, if im not mistaken. So the question, as that to Christians, still remains the same. When looking at the linage above in Luke 3:23-38, how do you explain that? Did they just make it up? Which of the characters in the list are not true, where does the break occur? Because the biblical writers do not appear to be in doubt about this. And ultimately this lead to one of the characters that you claim is one of the messengers and you believe have existed.

Yes, Baha’is believe that Jesus was a Messenger of God, what we normally refer to as a Manifestation of God. Why do you think the lineage in the Bible is important? I cannot say if it is accurate or not but if it is accurate where did they get their information?

Now my point is that, you have people even today, believing in heaven and hell, satan and so forth. So if they can believe that, why should it be considered unlikely for the ancient Jews to not believe Adam was real? Which would explain why there are all these references to him, that he have an age, children and so forth. If they truly thought all of this was just symbolic, then why do that, it makes no sense.

As noted above, Baha’is believe that Adam was a real person, a Prophet, but that is not what Jews and Christians believe. At some point in time, people have to decide what they are going to believe, an ancient book like the Bible or the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

So whether you agree that the bible is all that important for Bahais, then this does talk about one of your messengers that you believe is true, doesn't that ought at least a bit of explanation? Especially if Jesus is considered more important than Baha'u'llah, which obviously might not be the case, as I see it.

Some Baha’is feel a need to study the Bible, some don’t. We know enough about Moses and Jesus from what Baha’u’llah wrote so we do not really need to understand the Bible. We have our hands full just reading the Baha’i Writings and understanding them.

Jesus is not considered more important than Baha’u’llah. All the Messengers are to be considered equal in stature although some had a more vital mission than others had. Clearly, Jesus and Bahaullah are the greatest Messengers of God that ever lived because of the importance of their respective missions.

Because its backwards reasoning or what to call it.

I really like Neil deGrasse Tyson, because he seems like a down to earth person, which are very good at communicating scientific topics, with good credentials and a good grasp on reality, and in general a person who seem to be a good person. So I have a lot of respect for him and what he does. But for me, to claim that due to this, he must be errant is just wrong. I trust what he is saying, but to approach everything he says as if nothing was ever wrong, is not how one does it. Each claim or thing he say, have to stand on their own. I might be less likely to double check it, because of the trust I show him. But I would never start out with saying, "Because its Neil deGrasse Tyson, it must be true", I would always go, this is what he claims, then check it from other sources and then draw the conclusion, that he was in fact right or wrong.

If your position is that a person is always right, then there is no reason to be critical or skeptic towards anything they say and that leads to being ignorant. The huge difference between a person like Neil deGrasse Tyson or anyone else that speak about scientific issues, is that they will very often, say that this is either the current understanding or theory etc. Rather than speaking as if something is absolutely true. They pretty much only do that, when it have been proven to such extend that it would be none sense not to do it. But even then, if you push them, they will eventually say that nothing is absolute.

The crux of the issue here is that you are talking about a man, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and I am talking about a Manifestation of God. A Manifestation of God is a man but He also has a divine nature and everything He reveals is what He heard from God, so that is why He is inerrant. That means everything Baha’u’llah wrote is inerrant. Logically speaking, since the Will of Baha’u’llah is identical to the Will of God, and God is infallible, that means Baha’u’llah has to also be infallible. Are any ordinary human beings infallible?

 

[Moz]

It is difficult to say what the writers of the Bible were thinking and why they wrote what they wrote. Fortunately for me since I am a Baha’i I do not need to figure all that out, since I refer to the Baha’i Writings as my Source of information on all God-related matters.


I have no idea but I do not believe anyone ever lived for 930 years so that is not literally true.

I rely upon what Abdu’l-Baha and Baha’u’llah wrote about Adam. Baha’is do not believe that Adam was the first man, we believe He was the first Prophet in the Adamic Cycle of religion; but there were many cycles of religion before the Adamic cycle, so we know man has existed a lot longer than 6000 years.


Yes, Baha’is believe that Jesus was a Messenger of God, what we normally refer to as a Manifestation of God. Why do you think the lineage in the Bible is important? I cannot say if it is accurate or not but if it is accurate where did they get their information?

As noted above, Baha’is believe that Adam was a real person, a Prophet, but that is not what Jews and Christians believe. At some point in time, people have to decide what they are going to believe, an ancient book like the Bible or the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

Some Baha’is feel a need to study the Bible, some don’t. We know enough about Moses and Jesus from what Baha’u’llah wrote so we do not really need to understand the Bible. We have our hands full just reading the Baha’i Writings and understanding them.

Jesus is not considered more important than Baha’u’llah. All the Messengers are to be considered equal in stature although some had a more vital mission than others had. Clearly, Jesus and Bahaullah are the greatest Messengers of God that ever lived because of the importance of their respective missions.

The crux of the issue here is that you are talking about a man, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and I am talking about a Manifestation of God. A Manifestation of God is a man but He also has a divine nature and everything He reveals is what He heard from God, so that is why He is inerrant. That means everything Baha’u’llah wrote is inerrant. Logically speaking, since the Will of Baha’u’llah is identical to the Will of God, and God is infallible, that means Baha’u’llah has to also be infallible. Are any ordinary human beings infallible?

At some point in time, people have to decide what they are going to believe, an ancient book like the Bible or the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

Perfect. Because despite all the Baha'i appeals to the contrary you can not believe both.

 

[Nimos]

I do not assume that they are more accurate.

This is what I find strange, because if none of the stories in the bible are trustworthy or accurate then you solely believe these characters like Moses or Jesus exists, because Baha'u'llah refer to them. And you said in an earlier reply that he hardly speak of them, so in your opinion we know pretty much nothing about any of them, to the point where it all simply comes down to Baha'u'llah being inerrant and therefore it must be true. is that correct?

The Qur’an is definitely more accurate than the Bible because it was revealed by Muhammad to scribes who wrote it down, so it is the words of Muhammad. Such cannot be said about the Bible.

You are aware that it is not certain when exactly these texts were written down, the scribes did not sit around a fireplace with Muhammad telling these stories, while they wrote it down.

Muslims believe that the Quran was orally revealed by God to the final prophet, Muhammad, through the archangel Gabriel (Jibril) incrementally over a period of some 23 years, beginning on 22 December 609 CE, when Muhammad was 40, and concluding in 632, the year of his death.

According to tradition, several of Muhammad's companions served as scribes and recorded the revelations. Shortly after his death, the Quran was compiled by the companions, who had written down or memorized parts of it. The codices showed differences that motivated Caliph Uthman to establish a standard version, now known as Uthman's codex, which is generally considered the archetype of the Quran known today. There are, however, variant readings, with mostly minor differences in meaning.

Based on this the Quran is written down based on memories and some writings from a period of 23 years. Try to remember a story or event you were told some 20 years ago and write it down and see how accurate that is. And as you can also see, the codices showed differences so Caliph Uthman made a standard version.
Im not saying that the Quran therefore is inaccurate, but simply that a lot of it is based on people's memory and also the ancient biblical stories that are in it, happened a long time ago, so they would have to remember those as well. To me, putting it all togther I just don't see how the Quran can be claimed to be more accurate than the bible.

According to the Baha’i Faith, God and God’s Creation have always existed and humans have always existed. Humans did not always exist on Planet Earth, they evolved over time, but there are many other planets in the Universe that sustain life and humans existed on those planets.

So Bahai's believe that there are humans living on others planets or have been? And then "we" were transported here, or the DNA were, by God or what? Not really sure I understand what you mean?

Baha’u’llah also wrote about the origin of Creation in this Tablet, but I cannot say that I understand what He wrote:

I would agree, I don't get it either.

Yes, Baha’is believe that Jesus was a Messenger of God, what we normally refer to as a Manifestation of God. Why do you think the lineage in the Bible is important? I cannot say if it is accurate or not but if it is accurate where did they get their information?

Because the linage is like a timeline of when these events were suppose to have happened. And furthermore, how would Jesus exists if we for instance remove one of the people in the list. Obviously one could argue that the list is wrong, which then throws doubt on the validity of all the stories in the bible.

It is not explained where the list come from, so one can assume that they told each other or maybe God told them or something, have no clue how one is suppose to understand it.
I would agree with you that the list is not accurate and is made up, as I doubt, most people can remember there fathers father for more than just a few generations back. But obviously, as I see it, the list is there to connect the stories to Jesus and show how he is a descendant of Adam, because I think it would give him credibility, you have to remember that people valued traditions and history back then. So rather than Jesus just popping out of the blue, claiming this and that. I think it was important for the Jews, that he had a connection to people of the past. But again, this is just me guessing.

As noted above, Baha’is believe that Adam was a real person, a Prophet, but that is not what Jews and Christians believe. At some point in time, people have to decide what they are going to believe, an ancient book like the Bible or the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

I don't know what current Christians or Jews believe about Adam, I tend to agree with you though that for the most part they do not believe he existed. However I do think the ancient Jews believed he did.

The crux of the issue here is that you are talking about a man, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and I am talking about a Manifestation of God. A Manifestation of God is a man but He also has a divine nature and everything He reveals is what He heard from God, so that is why He is inerrant. That means everything Baha’u’llah wrote is inerrant. Logically speaking, since the Will of Baha’u’llah is identical to the Will of God, and God is infallible, that means Baha’u’llah has to also be infallible. Are any ordinary human beings infallible?

Baha'u'llah was a man, claiming or claimed to be a Manifestation of God. That does not make it true. This was the point I was trying to make in the last post, if you start out by saying that he is not just a normal man, but a Manifestation of God, then obviously you can also start to claim that he is inerrant. But drawing the conclusion that he is not just a simple man, but more, that requires some damn good evidence and unless this can be proven, then I think its a false position to take.

Its like me, making a claim that Neil deGrasse Tyson can't lie, because that is how God created him, because he is special. Based on this claim, I then conclude that everything he say must therefore be true. Therefore it is pointless for me to question anything he say.
That is perfectly logical and reasonable to do, as long as I use such a starting claim, without even questioning or demanding evidence for that in the first place.

 

[Trailblazer]

At some point in time, people have to decide what they are going to believe, an ancient book like the Bible or the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

Perfect. Because despite all the Baha'i appeals to the contrary you can not believe both.

I can believe both and I do. I just interpret the Bible differently than Christians, but since they all interpret the Bible differently, I see no reason why I cannot also do so.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is what I find strange, because if none of the stories in the bible are trustworthy or accurate then you solely believe these characters like Moses or Jesus exists, because Baha'u'llah refer to them. And you said in an earlier reply that he hardly speak of them, so in your opinion we know pretty much nothing about any of them, to the point where it all simply comes down to Baha'u'llah being inerrant and therefore it must be true. is that correct?

I do not know which Bible stories are trustworthy or accurate. All I was saying is that I do not assume the stories with Moses are more accurate than any other stories.

Yes, the reason I believe that Jesus and Moses exist is because Baha'u'llahbreferred to them. I cannot say if I would believe they exist based solely upon the Bible, because I never thought about it before I became a Baha’i so it was a moot point. What Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha wrote about Jesus and Moses is enough for me to know their primary purpose as a Prophet/Messenger of God. I do not need to know all the details delineated in the Bible. Some of them might be accurate and some not. Yes, I believe that what Baha’u’llah wrote was inerrant so for me it makes more sense to read what He wrote than to take chances of believing what the Bible says.

Based on this the Quran is written down based on memories and some writings from a period of 23 years. Try to remember a story or event you were told some 20 years ago and write it down and see how accurate that is. And as you can also see, the codices showed differences so Caliph Uthman made a standard version.
Im not saying that the Quran therefore is inaccurate, but simply that a lot of it is based on people's memory and also the ancient biblical stories that are in it, happened a long time ago, so they would have to remember those as well. To me, putting it all togther I just don't see how the Quran can be claimed to be more accurate than the bible.

To me that says that those companions wrote down what Muhammad said (His revelations) as he was having them and then after Muhammad’s death the scribes compiled them into the Qur’an. Some of it was memorized and some of it had been recorded. Nothing of this sort happened with the Bible since nobody who wrote it even knew Moses or Jesus in person, so how could they ever know what Moses or Jesus had said? There is also a much larger passage of time between when Moses and Jesus did what was attributed to them in the Bible and when it was written down by the authors of the Bible, who are unknown. That is a huge difference.

Baha’u’llah got revelations from God through the Maid of Heaven, the same way Muhammad got them through the Angel Gabriel, both through the Holy Spirit. The revelations to Baha’u’llah lasted about 39 years, from 1852 till 1891, which is when he wrote His last Tablet, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf. That explains why the Writings of Baha’u’llah are a lot more voluminous than the Qur’an.

So Bahai's believe that there are humans living on others planets or have been? And then "we" were transported here, or the DNA were, by God or what? Not really sure I understand what you mean?

I do not really understand it myself but other Baha’is might know more about it. It is my understanding that humans existed on other planets long before they existed on Earth but humans evolved on Earth although humans were always a distinct species, and not an animal.

Evolution

In regards to evolution and the origin of man, `Abdu'l-Bahá gave extensive comments on the subject when he addressed western audiences in the beginning of the 20th century. Transcripts of these talks can be found in Some Answered Questions, Paris Talks and the Promulgation of Universal Peace. `Abdu'l-Bahá describes the human species as evolving from a primitive form to modern man, but that the capacity to form human intelligence was always in existence.[citation needed]

`Abdu'l-Bahá's comments seem to differ from the standard evolutionary picture of human development, where Homo sapiens as one species along with the great apes evolved from a common ancestor living in Africa millions of years ago.

While `Abdu'l-Bahá states that man progressed through many stages before reaching this present form, `Abdu'l-Bahá states that humans are a distinct species, and not an animal, and that in every stage of evolution through which humans progressed, they were potentially humans.

But at all times, even when the embryo resembled a worm, it was human in potentiality and character, not animal. The forms assumed by the human embryo in its successive changes do not prove that it is animal in its essential character. Throughout this progression there has been transference of type, a conservation of species or kind. Realizing this we may acknowledge the fact that at one time man was an inmate of the sea, at another period an invertebrate, then a vertebrate and finally a human being standing erect. Though we admit these changes, we cannot say man is an animal. In each one of these stages are signs and evidences of his human existence and destination.[21]

Mehanian and Friberg wrote a 2003 article describing their belief that `Abdu'l-Bahá's statements can be entirely reconciled with modern science. Mehanian and Friberg state that `Abdu'l-Bahá's departures from the conventional interpretation of evolution are likely due "to disagreements with the metaphysical, philosophical, and ideological aspects of those interpretations, not with scientific findings."[5] And to this end `Abdu'l-Bahá suggested that a missing link between human and apes would not be found.[22] The idea of a missing link per se was abandoned by science in favor of the idea of evolutionary transitions.[23][24]

There are some differences between `Abdu'l-Bahá's statements and current scientific thought. The Bahá’í perspective that religion must be in accordance with science seems to suggest that religion must accept current scientific knowledge as authoritative; but, according to Mehanian and Friberg, this is not necessarily always the case as in their view the present scientific point of view is not always correct, nor truth only limited to what science can explain.[5]

Oskooi chose the subject of evolution and Bahá'í belief for his 2009 thesis, and in doing so reviewed other Bahá'í authors' works on the subject. He concluded that, "The problem of disharmony between scripture and science is rooted in an unwarranted misattribution of scriptural inerrancy."[25] In other words, he believes that `Abdu'l-Bahá made statements about biology that were later proved wrong, and that `Abdu'l-Bahá's infallibility should not be applied to scientific matters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baha'i_Faith_and_science

Because the linage is like a timeline of when these events were suppose to have happened. And furthermore, how would Jesus exists if we for instance remove one of the people in the list. Obviously one could argue that the list is wrong, which then throws doubt on the validity of all the stories in the bible.

I kind of understand what you are trying to do, look at parts of the Bible to determine if they fit together and validate other parts. The problem with trying to do that is as you said… “It is not explained where the list come from, so one can assume that they told each other or maybe God told them or something, have no clue how one is suppose to understand it.”

I would agree with you that the list is not accurate and is made up, as I doubt, most people can remember there fathers father for more than just a few generations back. But obviously, as I see it, the list is there to connect the stories to Jesus and show how he is a descendant of Adam, because I think it would give him credibility.

That is a good assessment of why that list is there, to connect the stories to Jesus and show how he is a descendant of Adam, because I think it would give him credibility. It would be interesting to ask a Christians how the authors of the Bible would or could have known all of that.

I don't know what current Christians or Jews believe about Adam, I tend to agree with you though that for the most part they do not believe he existed. However I do think the ancient Jews believed he did.

It is my impression that most Christians believe Adam was a real person, the first man, and Eve was the first woman, and that they lived in a real Garden of Eden, but of course these would be the literalists. Jews also believe that Adam was the first man. I just cannot understand how rational people could believe these things, as that would mean that mankind is only 6000 years old. I guess that is one reason I am a Baha’i.

Baha'u'llah was a man, claiming or claimed to be a Manifestation of God. That does not make it true.

Of course His claiming that does not make it true. It is either true or false, logically speaking.

This was the point I was trying to make in the last post, if you start out by saying that he is not just a normal man, but a Manifestation of God, then obviously you can also start to claim that he is inerrant. But drawing the conclusion that he is not just a simple man, but more, that requires some damn good evidence and unless this can be proven, then I think its a false position to take.

I agree that damn good evidence is required but for logical reasons that can never be proven as a fact, not anymore than anything related to God can be proven as a fact. For Baha’u’llah there is evidence but not proof because nobody can prove that God ever spoke to anyone. But just because we cannot prove it does not mean that God did not speak to the Manifestations of God. We have to take that on faith, but faith must always be coupled with evidence because otherwise it would be blind faith.

 

[Nimos]

I do not really understand it myself but other Baha’is might know more about it. It is my understanding that humans existed on other planets long before they existed on Earth but humans evolved on Earth although humans were always a distinct species, and not an animal.

Just wondering, when you read or are handed something like this, does that not trigger you to ask for an explanation, as this sounds like a pretty extraordinary thing?

Why is Bahai people not bombarding whoever claimed this or whoever can answer this for some clarification, really don't get it?

I kind of understand what you are trying to do, look at parts of the Bible to determine if they fit together and validate other parts. The problem with trying to do that is as you said… “It is not explained where the list come from, so one can assume that they told each other or maybe God told them or something, have no clue how one is suppose to understand it.”

Compare it to the answer above? Is that a lot difference? You have some extraordinary claims and since you say that Baha'u'llah is inerrant, clearly there must be a very good explanation to the human from other planet thing?

So you seem to have no issue throwing the bible in the bonfire so to speak, when it comes to trusting it. Yet humans from other planets, you accept that as being true?

It is my impression that most Christians believe Adam was a real person, the first man, and Eve was the first woman, and that they lived in a real Garden of Eden, but of course these would be the literalists. Jews also believe that Adam was the first man. I just cannot understand how rational people could believe these things, as that would mean that mankind is only 6000 years old. I guess that is one reason I am a Baha’i.

Again, humans from other planets? I don't want to step on it. But try to put it in perspective, some believe humans are 6000 years old, which you find irrational for someone to believe in. But people from other planets is not? And even if you don't personal believe that, it was said by one of those, I assume you think is inerrant.

I have to stress it again, that I don't think I will ever understand religious rationality, its just all over the place. And its not only because of what you write, but find it with others as well. The ability to completely deny or consider something none sense and a fairy tale, while pretty much in the very next sentences turn 180 degree and accept something that is equally strange, as if that is perfectly logic and rational to believe. I really think that is one of the things that baffle atheists the most

 

[Trailblazer]

Just wondering, when you read or are handed something like this, does that not trigger you to ask for an explanation, as this sounds like a pretty extraordinary thing?

Yes, I considered it fascinating when I heard it, but as usual I was too busy to look into it at that time. I figured I could put it in my back pocket and get back to it later.

Why is Bahai people not bombarding whoever claimed this or whoever can answer this for some clarification, really don't get it?

The information is all available to read in various Baha’i Writings and in other books and articles written by Baha’is, and many of them are scientists. Now that we have the internet, there is no end to the information we can find. I just have not had the time.

Compare it to the answer above? Is that a lot difference? You have some extraordinary claims and since you say that Baha'u'llah is inerrant, clearly there must be a very good explanation to the human from other planet thing?

There probably is; I just have never taken the time to look for it. Other Baha’is who have more of an interest in it would know a lot more than me. For example, the owner of Planet Baha’i is into astronomy and he knows a lot more than I do about scientific subjects. If you really want to know more about these sorts of things maybe you can post on some Baha’i forums or ask some scientifically inclined Baha’is on this forum.

So you seem to have no issue throwing the bible in the bonfire so to speak, when it comes to trusting it. Yet humans from other planets, you accept that as being true?

No, I am not throwing the Bible in the bonfire but to me the idea of humans having lived on other planets is more realistic than many of the stories in the Bible (e.g., parting the Red Sea, belly of a whale, Noah’s Ark, the bodily resurrection and ascension of Jesus).

Of course it could not be proven now that humans existed on other planets before humans existed on earth, but maybe someday science will be able to prove that. I wish I could remember where I heard that or from whom. I’ll try to remember.

Again, humans from other planets?

I don't want to step on it. But try to put it in perspective, some believe humans are 6000 years old, which you find irrational for someone to believe in. But people from other planets is not? And even if you don't personal believe that, it was said by one of those, I assume you think is inerrant.

I don’t know why it would be impossible for humans to exist (or for humans to have existed before present humans on this planet) if the environment of those planets was suitable to life. Even now, scientists have not ruled out the possibility that there could be life on other planets. Why not some kind of human life?

I have to stress it again, that I don't think I will ever understand religious rationality, its just all over the place. And its not only because of what you write, but find it with others as well. The ability to completely deny or consider something none sense and a fairy tale, while pretty much in the very next sentences turn 180 degree and accept something that is equally strange, as if that is perfectly logic and rational to believe. I really think that is one of the things that baffle atheists the most.

What seems strange to people is very subjective and it varies between individuals. What seems strange to me is Adam and Even and a Gaden of Eden and all the stuff in Genesis, but many people do not consider that strange at all and they interpret Genesis literally. Many Christians believe that when Jesus comes floating down from heaven in the clouds He wil wave a magic wand and make everything right, even reverse climate change, so humans won’t have to do anything. Some Christians even believe that God is going to recreate the Garden of Eden and that the ‘saved’ will live on earth for all of eternity.... and you think the Baha’i beliefs are strange because we believe that there was life on other planets before there was life on Earth? We also believe that there is ife on other planets now. The fact that this has not yet been discovered by scientists does not mean it does not exist...

“As to thy question concerning the worlds of God. Know thou of a truth that the worlds of God are countless in their number, and infinite in their range. None can reckon or comprehend them except God, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.” Gleanings, pp. 151-152

“Verily I say, the creation of God embraceth worlds besides this world, and creatures apart from these creatures. In each of these worlds He hath ordained things which none can search except Himself, the All-Searching, the All-Wise. Do thou meditate on that which We have revealed unto thee, that thou mayest discover the purpose of God, thy Lord, and the Lord of all worlds. In these words the mysteries of Divine Wisdom have been treasured.” Gleanings, pp. 152-153

“Thou hast, moreover, asked Me concerning the nature of the celestial spheres. To comprehend their nature, it would be necessary to inquire into the meaning of the allusions that have been made in the Books of old to the celestial spheres and the heavens, and to discover the character of their relationship to this physical world, and the influence which they exert upon it. Every heart is filled with wonder at so bewildering a theme, and every mind is perplexed by its mystery. God, alone, can fathom its import. The learned men, that have fixed at several thousand years the life of this earth, have failed, throughout the long period of their observation, to consider either the number or the age of the other planets. Consider, moreover, the manifold divergencies that have resulted from the theories propounded by these men. Know thou that every fixed star hath its own planets, and every planet its own creatures, whose number no man can compute.” Gleanings, pp. 162-163

Please bear in mind that what I am posting are excerpts from longer Tablets of Baha’u’llah. Some of these Tablets have probably not been translated into English in their entirety. If you want to know more about this I can put some posts out on the Baha’i Forums and on Planet Baha’i, as soon as I have time.

 

[Nimos]

I don’t know why it would be impossible for humans to exist (or for humans to have existed before present humans on this planet) if the environment of those planets was suitable to life. Even now, scientists have not ruled out the possibility that there could be life on other planets. Why not some kind of human life?

Obviously nothing is impossible, but evolution is not a guided process, in the sense that, because we have certain lifeforms here on Earth then the exact same ones would evolve elsewhere on other planets with similar conditions as ours. Earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old, which means that the amount of time modern humans (Homo sapiens) have lived here, is like a blink of an eye compared to it (est. 200000 - 300000 years). Imagine what have happened on Earth during all those years, so using such logic, it would be more likely to find dinosaurs than humans, as they have been far superior to us, when it comes to surviving and living in accordance with nature.

Modern humans and our explosion in technology and production, just looking at the past 2000 years, and already scientist are referring to our way of living as the next mass extinction comparable to that which killed off the dinosaurs, and again we are talking about roughly 2000 years.

The amount of things that would have to align through all this time, even for humans to evolve here on Earth, is almost impossible to imagine. Take a single event, like the dinosaurs going extinct. Had that not happened then they would most likely still dominate the Earth even today or some sort of offspring from them. The death of them allowed for the mammals to take over the Earth and ultimately evolve into what we have today. Next you have the human intelligence, which capacity exceed all of the other 99.8% of all animals that have ever lived on Earth, which is now extinct and even today, we are the only species with such highly developed intelligence, which could indicate that it is not a very common treat among animals. And even for the most of modern humans existence we have been under pressure and even on the brink of going extinct ourselves. So adding just these factors into the equation and ignoring all the others that have been happening throughout these 4.6 billion years , it truly would require some sort of God, should we discover similar lifeforms on other planets, which have developed into something that we would classify as being humans.

To me, the odds of that is so small that I would consider it impossible.

and you think the Baha’i beliefs are strange because we believe that there was life on other planets before there was life on Earth? We also believe that there is ife on other planets now. The fact that this has not yet been discovered by scientists does not mean it does not exist...

Im referring to all of these, not only Bahai faith. As you said with Adam and Eve etc. It works both ways. People willing to believing that Adam and Eve have literally existed as the Bible says, but find it irrational that humans might have or does lived on other planets as well, is equally irrational in my eyes. My point is the unpredictable way of approaching or accepting one belief, but not something else, if both are of similar nature.

Its like someone saying "I believe in ghosts, but people that are religious are just not rational for believing such thing when there are no evidence." to me these fall in the same category. One can not justify one type of supernatural without evidence and then at the same time condemn other peoples supernatural beliefs, because they can't provide evidence for theirs.

So sorry if I made it sound like, it was only the Bahai faith, it was meant more in general.

 

[Shia Islam]

If God exists and God is omnipotent, hypothetically speaking God could communicate directly to everyone rather than communicating through Messengers/Prophets. By everyone I mean every one of the 7.53 billion people in the world.

1. Do you think God (if God exists) would communicate directly to everyone?

• If you think that God would do this, please explain why you think so.
• If you think that God would not do this, please explain why you think so.

2. Do you think it is *reasonable* to expect God (if God exists) to communicate directly to everyone?

• If you think that is a reasonable expectation, please explain why you think so.
• If you think it is an unreasonable expectation, please explain why you think so.

3. Do you think that *rational people* would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?

• If you think rational people would expect God to do that, please explain why you think so.
• If you think rational people would not expect God to do that, please explain why you think so.

Practically, God communicates directly with his servants who have purified their hearts and whom god is pleased with.

By reading God’s words, you hear God, and by praying and asking God while you see the results, you are talking to God.

In our religious sources, it is emphasized that God is seen by the hearts.

Good luck!

 

[Trailblazer]

So adding just these factors into the equation and ignoring all the others that have been happening throughout these 4.6 billion years, it truly would require some sort of God, should we discover similar lifeforms on other planet, which have developed into something that we would classify as being humans.

That is a good point and that of course is what I believe, that it required a God.

To me, the odds of that is so small that I would consider it impossible

To me, the odds of there being a God are certainly not small, and if there is a God, God has been guiding the evolutionary processes here on Earth as well as all throughout the Universe, and since God would be omnipotent and omniscient, anything is possible.

Im referring to all of these, not only Bahai faith. As you said with Adam and Eve etc. It works both ways. People willing to believing that Adam and Eve have literally existed as the Bible says, but find it irrational that humans might have or does lived on other planets as well, is equally irrational in my eyes.

It is just the way you look at this, your perspective. Sure it is possible that Adam and Eve literally existed but it goes against science to believe that they were the first man and woman who came into being 6000 years ago. The Book of Genesis goes against science because we know that humans were not created in one day, they evolved over a long period of time. We also know that humans have existed for about 66 million years, not for a mere 6000 years.

By contrast, it does not go against science to say that there might be life on other planets because it is entirely possible. Science has not discovered everything that exists, new discoveries are being made every day. Nobody knows what the future holds.

My point is the unpredictable way of approaching or accepting one beliefs, but not something else, if both are of similar nature.

Its like someone saying "I believe in ghosts, but people that are religious are just not rational for believing such thing when there are no evidence."to me these fall in the same category. One can not justify one type of supernatural without evidence and then at the same time condemn other peoples supernatural beliefs, because they can't provide evidence for theirs.

But there is nothing supernatural about the possibility of life, even human life, on other planets and it is not similar to believing that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman since that contradicts what is known by science.

So sorry if I made it sound like, it was only the Bahai faith, it was meant more in general.

That’s okay, I take no offense and I do not take it personally.

 

[Nimos]

To me, the odds of there being a God are certainly not small, and if there is a God, God has been guiding the evolutionary processes here on Earth as well as all throughout the Universe, and since God would be omnipotent and omniscient, anything is possible.

But that is the issue, because evolution is not guided. Even if you throw in God, he would have had to interfere with every single step on the way, for things to evolve into what they are. Humans did not evolve into what we are, because evolution or God thought it would be good, but because of the conditions under which we lived, which means how the environment around us was/is, which also is evolved based on the conditions for which they live. So its a bottom up process and not top to bottom design.

I think if there was a God, we would see clear evidence for it actually being a top to bottom design.

By contrast, it does not go against science to say that there might be life on other planets because it is entirely possible. Science has not discovered everything that exists, new discoveries are being made every day. Nobody knows what the future holds.

I firmly believe that there is life out there and probably lots of it.

But there is nothing supernatural about the possibility of life, even human life, on other planets and it is not similar to believing that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman since that contradicts what is known by science.

But also there is nothing supernatural about saying that God doesn't exist, which is also not contradicted by science as we have no evidence for one. So following the same logic, the most rational standpoint would be to say that God does not exist. Just as we would say that Adam and Eve doesn't. But it is only when we throw God into the equation, we can talk about Adam and Eve. So obviously science does not support either them or God himself.

But to find humans on other planets having evolved similar or close to similar to us here on Earth have, is not as far as I know supported by science either, or at least expected as a possibility. Because we are talking about such a long time, billions of years, where conditions would have to be just right for these to having evolved like here on Earth. I assume when you say human life, we are talking about some sort of species so closely related to us that we can mate with them right?

 

[CG Didymus]

But that is the issue, because evolution is not guided. Even if you throw in God, he would have had to interfere with every single step on the way, for things to evolve into what they are.

Great questions and answers Nimos. But why, if there was a God, would that God use an evolutionary process to get to where he wanted human civilization to get to? And that is supposed to be a peaceful world that knows and love God? He's freakin' God, just create people the way you want them?

But no, God wants to see us struggle. As little single cells things swimming in slime. Getting eaten by other bigger and meaner little creatures. Then one day, after billions of years we got to be some kind of fury creature with four legs. Then with two legs and two arms. Still getting killed and eaten by other animals, until now... now we can kick their &*%^ and kill them, along with each other. But, is evolution over? Are going to change into something else? Are other animals going to evolve too and be something that they aren't? But then the weird thing is... it's supposedly the spiritual world that matters. We die here and then our spirit lives on in some spiritual realm? Did our spirits evolve too? I think Baha'is say we do. We can work our way closer and closer to that "All-Loving creative force that has been putting all living things through all of this.

 

[Nimos]

Great questions and answers Nimos. But why, if there was a God, would that God use an evolutionary process to get to where he wanted human civilization to get to? And that is supposed to be a peaceful world that knows and love God? He's freakin' God, just create people the way you want them?

Obviously agree, evolution with God makes no sense, there is no need for it, if there is a God. Since lifeforms evolve based on the condition under which they live. It should make no difference to God, if he created them complete or whether he would have to interfere for billions of years in all aspect of these conditions, so we are talking making sure every plant, bacteria etc. survive exactly as they need to for us to evolve to what we are. There is no benefit in evolution, if there is a God.

But no, God wants to see us struggle. As little single cells things swimming in slime. Getting eaten by other bigger and meaner little creatures. Then one day, after billions of years we got to be some kind of fury creature with four legs. Then with two legs and two arms. Still getting killed and eaten by other animals, until now... now we can kick their &*%^ and kill them, along with each other. But, is evolution over?

Also if one is religious and accept that evolution is the way science suggest, then you would still have to look at this whole process with at least some sort of confusion I would think. Because if we are to believe that the scriptures are correct and God is interested in humans, then we would have to accept, that for billions of years, God have spend the majority of time, not really caring that much about humans, but rather having fun with dinosaurs and all sorts of other creatures. And then suddenly after this very long period of time, roughly 2-4000 years ago, he decide that humans became interesting. It doesn't really seem to fit all that well with scriptures and how special we are made out to be in the eyes of God.

But then the weird thing is... it's supposedly the spiritual world that matters. We die here and then our spirit lives on in some spiritual realm?

The afterlife makes just as little sense as well. If the grand plan is for humans to get into heaven or to some better place, Then why not simply put them there straight away and those of us, that is clearly not worthy enough to get there, is just wasting our time here, and im not just talking about atheists, but all people that do not accept the biblical God. none of these will make it either.

Then there is the idea that we are going to be saved and Jesus second coming. But saved from what exactly? If we all end up being judged by God in the end anyway, then there is no reason for any of us to wait for Jesus to come back, it makes no difference, whatsoever. And so far every single human that have lived and died, have not yet experienced this second coming, which just further underline that it is for no importance.

 

[CG Didymus]

The afterlife makes just as little sense as well. If the grand plan is for humans to get into heaven or to some better place, Then why not simply put them there straight away

Yeah, it's a little crazy. God makes a human animal and then sticks a, I would presume, perfect soul into that body. Then, in the end, judge that soul for letting the desires of the body do evil things? You know to me, I'd much rather believe that people made up their gods and religions. And part of it was to control the people and make them obey the rules of that society. And, since not even Baha'is believe in all religions, like the religions of the Greeks and Romans and Egyptians and others, that these religions were made up by people. They made mythical gods and used the religions to get people to follow the rules and the ruler of the land.

 

[Trailblazer]

But that is the issue, because evolution is not guided. Even if you throw in God, he would have had to interfere with every single step on the way, for things to evolve into what they are. Humans did not evolve into what we are, because evolution or God thought it would be good, but because of the conditions under which we lived, which means how the environment around us was/is, which also is evolved based on the conditions for which they live. So its a bottom up process and not top to bottom design.

I should not have said what I said because there is no reason to think that God is guiding the evolutionary processes. God probably set the processes in motion, but after that God allowed them to unfold as you outlined: Humans evolved into what we because of the conditions under which we lived, which means how the environment around us was/is, which also is evolved based on the conditions for which they live.

I think if there was a God, we would see clear evidence for it actually being a top to bottom design.

Why do you think that?

But also there is nothing supernatural about saying that God doesn't exist, which is also not contradicted by science as we have no evidence for one.

That is true. It is a logical possibility that God does not exist since there is no verifiable proof that God exists.

So following the same logic, the most rational standpoint would be to say that God does not exist.

I do not know what that is the most rational standpoint, because in that case we would have to explain where all the religions and their scriptures came from. Not only would we have to say that men who were not in any way divinely inspired wrote all those scriptures, but we would have to come up with a motive, a reason why men would go to all that trouble.

On top of that, we would have to explain why most people in the world, about 93% of the world population, believes in a God or gods; it makes no sense to me that all these people could be deluded and irrational.

Just as we would say that Adam and Eve doesn't. But it is only when we throw God into the equation, we can talk about Adam and Eve. So obviously science does not support either them or God himself.

No, science does not support the existence of Adam and Eve or God, because these are outside the purview of science, but true religion supports the existence of science and says that science is just as important as religion.

An essential Baha’i teaching is the harmony of science and religion. That does not mean that science and religion are the same as religion addresses morality and the spiritual virtues we need to acquire whereas science addresses the material world and the practical needs of man for living on earth. Science and religion are different domains of knowledge but religion should not contradict science. It is a Baha’i teaching that if religion contradicts science it is no more than superstition.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá said:

I have spoken to you of some of the principles of Bahá’u’lláh: The Search after Truth and The Unity of Mankind. I will now explain the Fourth Principle, which is The Acceptance of the Relation between Religion and Science.

There is no contradiction between true religion and science. When a religion is opposed to science it becomes mere superstition: that which is contrary to knowledge is ignorance.

How can a man believe to be a fact that which science has proved to be impossible? If he believes in spite of his reason, it is rather ignorant superstition than faith. The true principles of all religions are in conformity with the teachings of science.

The Unity of God is logical, and this idea is not antagonistic to the conclusions arrived at by scientific study.

All religions teach that we must do good, that we must be generous, sincere, truthful, law-abiding, and faithful; all this is reasonable, and logically the only way in which humanity can progress.

All religious laws conform to reason, and are suited to the people for whom they are framed, and for the age in which they are to be obeyed......

It is impossible for religion to be contrary to science, even though some intellects are too weak or too immature to understand truth.

God made religion and science to be the measure, as it were, of our understanding. Take heed that you neglect not such a wonderful power. Weigh all things in this balance. Paris Talks, pp. 141-142, 145

From: FOURTH PRINCIPLE—THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE RELATION BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE

But to find humans on other planets having evolved similar or close to similar to us here on Earth have, is not as far as I know supported by science either, or at least expected as a possibility. Because we are talking about such a long time, billions of years, where conditions would have to be just right for these to having evolved like here on Earth. I assume when you say human life, we are talking about some sort of species so closely related to us that we can mate with them right?

No, it is not supported by science because there would be no reason for science to think that there would be human-like life on other planets. I am not really sure where I heard or read that humans have always existed but like anything else I might have been mistaken or understanding what I heard out of context. But now I feel a need to find out more because it is bothering me that I said that and could be mistaken, so I will probably try to find out more about it by posting it on a Baha’i forum.

I was looking on the internet for something about it but I do not think I will find it there. However, I did find this article that will clear up any misconceptions I might have given you about the Baha’i view of evolution:

On Human Origins: A Bahá’í Perspective

 

[Trailblazer]

Great questions and answers Nimos. But why, if there was a God, would that God use an evolutionary process to get to where he wanted human civilization to get to?

As I just told Nimos, I do not think that God used the evolutionary process; rather, God probably set it in motion and allowed it to unfold naturally the way Nimos described it.

And that is supposed to be a peaceful world that knows and love God? He's freakin' God, just create people the way you want them?

If you think that way, maybe you should join the Christians and believe in the Adam and Eve story rather than in evolutionary theory.

But no, God wants to see us struggle. As little single cells things swimming in slime. Getting eaten by other bigger and meaner little creatures. Then one day, after billions of years we got to be some kind of fury creature with four legs. Then with two legs and two arms. Still getting killed and eaten by other animals, until now... now we can kick their &*%^ and kill them, along with each other.

Yes, apparently there is a reason why we need to struggle according to the way God set it up. Whether God wants to see us struggle is another matter, we cannot know what God wants just by observing our predicament.

Clearly, this world is a storehouse of suffering, as Abdu'l-Baha said, and it does not seem like a loving God would set it up this way, not to me. You won't see any Baha'i apologetic coming from me. What makes it all the worse is the uneven distribution of suffering and the suffering of innocents. It is almost enough to make me an atheist.

We die here and then our spirit lives on in some spiritual realm? Did our spirits evolve too? I think Baha'is say we do. We can work our way closer and closer to that "All-Loving creative force that has been putting all living things through all of this.

That is true, we are supposed to be growing spiritually in this world in order to be closer to God in the spiritual world. I for one am in no hurry to be close to the God that allowed all this suffering, but maybe I will change my mind before I die.