Baha'i for Beginners

Status
Not open for further replies.

Livindesert

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2005
2,314
59
✟2,834.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In other words, your revelation is esoteric. Only the few insiders know what is really going on. I think that you have been reading to many Illuminati books.:D Shi'a mysticism at its best! Understand that the Bible has its own hermeneutics. You should learn how to use it so you want obliterate the Bible's meanings any more.

As far as mysticism :)
Matthew 13:10-17 (New International Version)



10The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" 11He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13This is why I speak to them in parables:
"Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'[a] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
 
Upvote 0

pawnraider

Member
Nov 22, 2007
930
36
✟24,749.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Jesus's words alone with nothing else were enough for many to turn to him. Jesus himself says his testemony is valid on his own behalf. Also don't forget about the rich man's relatives.
You must understand that we believe in Jesus' diety which is one of the quantifying factors for our beliefs. And it wasn't because of who Moses was but who and what he was pointing to.
 
Upvote 0

peaceful soul

Senior Veteran
Sep 4, 2003
5,986
184
✟7,592.00
Faith
Non-Denom
As far as mysticism :)
Matthew 13:10-17 (New International Version)



10The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" 11He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13This is why I speak to them in parables:
"Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'[a] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

Yet again, you try to make parallelisms to create a point that is not really a point. Speaking in parables is not mysticism. Parables are analogous. They don't seek to create new meanings as is the case for mysticism. The context of that passage point out several things:

1) Not all people will understand. Not everyone is conditioned to listen and contemplate.
2) Not all people will want to understand because of the hardness of their hearts. It is just like you when you suppress the knowledge that we supply to you and you continually don't listen but find cute parallels that totally miss the point in many cases. You don't listen when we tell you that reading Baha'i texts won't help you understand Christian texts since the context and meanings of words will be different.

You may think that this continual misuse of scripture is cute, but you suffer in the end because you still fail to get the meanings of the Bible. You should reevaluate how you approach the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

peaceful soul

Senior Veteran
Sep 4, 2003
5,986
184
✟7,592.00
Faith
Non-Denom
originally posted by Livindesert

Peacful soul I already addressed Montalban's question. Here I will re-post.

Where did you address the circular logic of your prophet?

Jesus's words alone with nothing else were enough for many to turn to him.

That is somewhat misleading since Jesus had a good following and a good reputation in the areas where He frequented. Some accepted Him because of His reputation (including miracles) and with the belief that He was the Messiah figure prophesied. They just didn't say 'I believe you' without some kind of evidence. Some people accepted Him more readily than others because they already had some kind of intuition of Him from His reputation. Some of them perhaps saw Him do miracles and were convinced by what. Most people didn't come to faith in Him in that manner. His disciples were some of the most difficult to convince, although they spent so much time around him.

Jesus himself says his testemony is valid on his own behalf. Also don't forget about the rich man's relatives.

I remember verses saying that it wasn't He alone that validated His claims. There were always at least two witnesses presented in a testimony. This theme is carried throughout the Bible.

What about the rich man's relatives?
 
Upvote 0

Livindesert

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2005
2,314
59
✟2,834.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
originally posted by Livindesert



Where did you address the circular logic of your prophet?



That is somewhat misleading since Jesus had a good following and a good reputation in the areas where He frequented. Some accepted Him because of His reputation (including miracles) and with the belief that He was the Messiah figure prophesied. They just didn't say 'I believe you' without some kind of evidence. Some people accepted Him more readily than others because they already had some kind of intuition of Him from His reputation. Some of them perhaps saw Him do miracles and were convinced by what. Most people didn't come to faith in Him in that manner. His disciples were some of the most difficult to convince, although they spent so much time around him.



I remember verses saying that it wasn't He alone that validated His claims. There were always at least two witnesses presented in a testimony. This theme is carried throughout the Bible.

What about the rich man's relatives?

If you look at my posts I already addressed the two witnesses with a quote directly from Jesus. As far as our linage from our Abrahamic side

Judaism-Christianity-Islam-Babism-Baha'i

We already mentioned the Miracle at the Bab's execution which was also witnessed by western observers, In the Baha'i dispensation miracles are generally between God and oneself.We have brought up already how those leaders countries were thrown to ruin who did not recognize him when he sent his letters.But one of Baha'u'llahs miracles was

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]And this is one of Bahá’u’lláh’s greatest miracles: that He, a captive, surrounded Himself with panoply and He wielded power. The prison changed into a palace, the jail itself became a Garden of Eden. Such a thing has not occurred in history before; no former age has seen its like: that a man confined to a prison should move about with authority and might; that one in chains should carry the fame of the Cause of God to the high heavens, should win splendid victories in both East and West, and should, by His almighty pen, subdue the world. Such is the distinguishing feature of this supreme Theophany-Abdu'l-Baha[/FONT]
 
Upvote 0

peaceful soul

Senior Veteran
Sep 4, 2003
5,986
184
✟7,592.00
Faith
Non-Denom
If you look at my posts I already addressed the two witnesses with a quote directly from Jesus. As far as our linage from our Abrahamic side

Judaism-Christianity-Islam-Babism-Baha'i

We already mentioned the Miracle at the Bab's execution which was also witnessed by western observers, In the Baha'i dispensation miracles are generally between God and oneself.We have brought up already how those leaders countries were thrown to ruin who did not recognize him when he sent his letters.But one of Baha'u'llahs miracles was

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]And this is one of Bahá’u’lláh’s greatest miracles: that He, a captive, surrounded Himself with panoply and He wielded power. The prison changed into a palace, the jail itself became a Garden of Eden. Such a thing has not occurred in history before; no former age has seen its like: that a man confined to a prison should move about with authority and might; that one in chains should carry the fame of the Cause of God to the high heavens, should win splendid victories in both East and West, and should, by His almighty pen, subdue the world. Such is the distinguishing feature of this supreme Theophany-Abdu'l-Baha[/FONT]

You are addressing someone else.
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
56
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Not sure what I have not answered.
I asked about your prophet's circular logic. I find your response disengenous given you raised those issues about following Abraham to attempt to answer that -albeit a false analogy.

As I say, we operate on two different systems.
Anyway the stories of Abraham and Noah shows that sometimes even for huge earth changing events God will tell one person what to do and the rest have to follow him.
And still you persist! :sigh:

What people followed Noah?
Now also you say a manefestaitions testemony is not valid alone but I think it is as dose Jesus in my view.

Again this is you attempting to dodge my question, the one you claim not to know.

Instead of providing evidence other than circular logic for your own prophet's claims you try to dodge this by asking me to examine other people's claims; Abraham and Noah, now Jesus.

Instead of answering my question, you divert.

We operate on two different systems. Baha'i selective responses, dodging, etc.
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
56
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
You must understand that we believe in Jesus' diety which is one of the quantifying factors for our beliefs. And it wasn't because of who Moses was but who and what he was pointing to.

Livindesert's unable to provide evidence to support his own prophet. Instead, he chooses to have us examine everyone else!
 
Upvote 0

peaceful soul

Senior Veteran
Sep 4, 2003
5,986
184
✟7,592.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Livindesert's unable to provide evidence to support his own prophet. Instead, he chooses to have us examine everyone else!

That is a good observation.:thumbsup: I have been seeing this very often when they don't have an adequate response. They start using parallelisms to draw attention away from the question. The parallelisms are designed to link the Baha'i perspective with the other religion being discussed. The similarities are supposed to negate the point against them. Basically, it says that your religion does too or this occurs in your religion too. In that way, their issues don't seem all that alien to others.

I am noting his lack of support for the circular argument.
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
56
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
That is a good observation.:thumbsup: I have been seeing this very often when they don't have an adequate response. They start using parallelisms to draw attention away from the question. The parallelisms are designed to link the Baha'i perspective with the other religion being discussed. The similarities are supposed to negate the point against them. Basically, it says that your religion does too or this occurs in your religion too. In that way, their issues don't seem all that alien to others.

I am noting his lack of support for the circular argument.

Baha'i here have problems with analogy - ingrained in the idea that a 'manifestation' is their god like a mirror reflects light perfectly :confused: forgetting for a moment that a mirror isn't that which it reflects

But as a tactic it is very much employed here - diversion. More than a month ago, before he became Baha'i Livindesert claimed that if people read Baha'i stuff they'd just become Baha'i. He hadn't at that stage, thus undermining his own argument. I raised this with him for weeks. He dodged it, ignored it, and then asked me what question it was that I'd asked. I reposted it. He ignored it again.

Here he does it again, by both attempting to dodge the question then asking me what the question is again.

It's one thing Baha'i have in common with Islamic posters here
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Sen McGlinn

Bahai
Mar 28, 2010
62
14
Visit site
✟15,204.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Baha'i here have problems with analogy - ingrained in the idea that a 'manifestation' is their god like a mirror reflects light perfectly :confused: forgetting for a moment that a mirror isn't that which it reflects

You've said this many times, and at least 3 times I have told you, NO, the Bahais do not believe the manifestation is God, that's something our opponents SAY we believe, in order to justify persecuting the Bahais. If you persist in joining that group of opponents, have a good look around at your companions there: islamic fundamentalists and Iranian Mullahs.

Wouldn't you rather join the people of truth, and discuss the Bahai Faith on the basis of the things Bahais actually believe, rather than the lies told about us?
 
Upvote 0
I

Insubres

Guest
You've said this many times, and at least 3 times I have told you, NO, the Bahais do not believe the manifestation is God, that's something our opponents SAY we believe, in order to justify persecuting the Bahais. If you persist in joining that group of opponents, have a good look around at your companions there: islamic fundamentalists and Iranian Mullahs.

Wouldn't you rather join the people of truth, and discuss the Bahai Faith on the basis of the things Bahais actually believe, rather than the lies told about us?

The truth is though, some of the letters of Baha'u'llah do sound like he is claiming to be God. Look at his letter to Kaiser Wilheim for instance where he says "O KING of Berlin! Give ear unto the Voice calling from this manifest Temple: Verily, there is none other God but Me, the Everlasting, the Peerless, the Ancient of Days." Also, before you say "But maybe that is a translation problem.." the official English translations are, per the Universal Court of Justice, Shoghi Effendi or Baha'u'llah himself, I can't remember who exaclty, now more authoritative than the originals.
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
56
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
You've said this many times, and at least 3 times I have told you, NO, the Bahais do not believe the manifestation is God, that's something our opponents SAY we believe, in order to justify persecuting the Bahais. If you persist in joining that group of opponents, have a good look around at your companions there: islamic fundamentalists and Iranian Mullahs.
Five days ago I quoted Bruce saying that. Post #903. Bruce said it 2 years ago.

Wouldn't you rather read what I write and address that?
 
Upvote 0
I

Insubres

Guest
The letter to Queen Victoria, too..

O QUEEN in London! Incline thine ear unto the voice of thy Lord, the Lord of all mankind, calling from the Divine Lote-Tree: Verily, no God is there but Me, the Almighty, the All-Wise! Cast away all that is on earth, and attire the head of thy kingdom with the crown of the remembrance of thy Lord, the All-Glorious. He, in truth, hath come unto the world in His most great glory, and all that hath been mentioned in the Gospel hath been fulfilled.

Also seems to throw the completely transcendental god bit right out the window doesn't it. You may say "It's metaphorical" but what is the thing then with all these scriptures that when they're really metaphorical or poetic or whatever they're always "verily" and "in truth"! You can't do "in truth, in the most great glory" metaphorically.
 
Upvote 0

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
56
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The truth is though, some of the letters of Baha'u'llah do sound like he is claiming to be God. Look at his letter to Kaiser Wilheim for instance where he says "O KING of Berlin! Give ear unto the Voice calling from this manifest Temple: Verily, there is none other God but Me, the Everlasting, the Peerless, the Ancient of Days." Also, before you say "But maybe that is a translation problem.." the official English translations are, per the Universal Court of Justice, Shoghi Effendi or Baha'u'llah himself, I can't remember who exaclty, now more authoritative than the originals.

Baha'i texts do (as my understanding is) say that it is not incorrect to call a manifestation god.

Here's another Baha'i saying it...

"considering the dual aspect of a Manifestation, if
a human being was to call a Manifestation "God", then
that would be in a sense the truth - because a Manfestation
is the closest thing a human being can get to knowing
and understanding God - in a real sense, Baha'is believe
that the Manifestation is "God in human form"'
Some Answered Questions: A Critical Analysis (energy able sense aspect time) - Mombu the Religion Forum
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Montalban

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
35,424
1,509
56
Sydney, NSW
✟42,787.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The letter to Queen Victoria, too..



Also seems to throw the completely transcendental god bit right out the window doesn't it. You may say "It's metaphorical" but what is the thing then with all these scriptures that when they're really metaphorical or poetic or whatever they're always "verily" and "in truth"! You can't do "in truth, in the most great glory" metaphorically.

Queen Victoria got junk mail?
 
Upvote 0
I

Insubres

Guest
Oh, BTW, I just received a package of books on Mahayana Buddhism and the back of one "The Practice of the Bodhisattva Dharma" by Master T'ai-Hsu says Maitreya/Metteyya (Sanskrit/Paali versions of his name), the universally recognized "next [public teaching world helping] Buddha" (sammyaksabuddha) in all Buddhist traditions, is supposed to reincarnate on Earth in 5.7 billion years so the whole idea that Baha'u'llah was Maitreya/Mettaya is completely untenable at this point.
 
Upvote 0
I

Insubres

Guest
Queen Victoria got junk mail?

Apparently all the rulers and anyone with a public address got similar letters... well, Baha'u'llah sent them. I'm absolutely certain none of them actually heard anything about them. Anyone that really imagines any royal even hears of the mail they get from insignificant people must have lived in... wait, yeah, anyone that imagines that royals even hear of the mail they get from insignificant people lived in prisons all their life.
 
Upvote 0
I

Insubres

Guest
Like, seriously, this sounds like he is calling himself God:

“O CONCOURSE of monks! Seclude not yourselves in…”
O CONCOURSE of monks! Seclude not yourselves in churches and cloisters. Come forth by My leave, and occupy yourselves with that which will profit your souls and the souls of men. Thus biddeth you the King of the Day of Reckoning. Seclude yourselves in the stronghold of My love. This, verily, is a befitting seclusion, were ye of them that perceive it. He that shutteth himself up in a house is indeed as one dead. It behoveth man to show forth that which will profit all created things, and he that bringeth forth no fruit is fit for fire. Thus counselleth you your Lord, and He, verily, is the Almighty, the All-Bounteous. Enter ye into wedlock, that after you someone may fill your place. We have forbidden you perfidious acts, and not that which will demonstrate fidelity. Have ye clung to the standards fixed by your own selves, and cast the standards of God behind your backs? Fear God, and be 96 not of the foolish. But for man, who would make mention of Me on My earth, and how could My attributes and My name have been revealed? Ponder ye, and be not of them that are veiled and fast asleep. He that wedded not (Jesus) found no place wherein to dwell or lay His head, by reason of that which the hands of the treacherous had wrought. His sanctity consisteth not in that which ye believe or fancy, but rather in the things We possess. Ask, that ye may apprehend His station which hath been exalted above the imaginings of all that dwell on earth. Blessed are they who perceive it.

Again, this ain't my translation or the translation of someone else who has erred, the English translations are the authoritative ones now so if they messed up the whole system has messed up.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Sen McGlinn

Bahai
Mar 28, 2010
62
14
Visit site
✟15,204.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
The truth is though, some of the letters of Baha'u'llah do sound like he is claiming to be God. Look at his letter to Kaiser Wilheim for instance where he says "O KING of Berlin! Give ear unto the Voice calling from this manifest Temple: Verily, there is none other God but Me, the Everlasting, the Peerless, the Ancient of Days." Also, before you say "But maybe that is a translation problem.." the official English translations are, per the Universal Court of Justice, Shoghi Effendi or Baha'u'llah himself, I can't remember who exaclty, now more authoritative than the originals.

That's not a logical conclusion: God spoke through the burning bush, and said "I am that I am." Do you conclude that (the) Bush is God? :)

Sometimes the prophets speak as men, and say "God told me so-and-so." Sometimes the voice of God speaks through them. And when they do, sometimes, people don't "get it" and think that the speaker they can see actually IS God. Which is pretty weird, when you think about it.

Bahai scriptures are only considered authoritative if there is an authenticated original text (Persian, Arabic, sometimes Turkish): the translations derive their authority from the original, not vice versa.
We are told "to quote and consider as authentic only such translations as are based upon the authenticated text of His recorded utterances in the original tongue." (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 5
ht tp:/ /reference.bahai.org/en/t/se/WOB/wob-2.html#pg5 )


No translation - including those of Shoghi Effendi, which have the highest status - is final. There are different translations for different purposes. Shoghi Effendi for example produced a translation of the Hidden Words for devotional purposes, but in his introduction he referred readers to Stannard's more literal translation for study purposes. In his introduction to his translation of the Kitab-e Iqan, he called it "one more attempt" to translate the book and referred to future translators.

When Bahai communities with small numbers and little expertise are translating scriptures into their own tongue, they generally use the English translation because English-Xhosa bilingual people are easier to find than Persian-Arabic-Xhosa people with a good background knowledge of Islam and Persian literary conventions. That background knowledge is already incorporated in the authorised English translations. You can read a letter from Shoghi Effendi to one of the German Bahais on this issue here:

ht tp:/ /reference.bahai.org/en/t/se/LDG2/ldg2-70.html#pg66

It's a pragmatic policy: as the expertise develops, it is possible to tweak existing third-language translations by reference to the original, just as it's possible to improve on the authorised English translations.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.