Continuing Revelation

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
I have read that the Baha'i goal is to convert everybody in the world and establish a universal theocracy, but I have never read about using force.

I would not call it a 'theocracy.' Baha'is believe that the world is evolving towards world peace and global governance, while at the same time our own elected administrative institutions develop. At some point in the distant future they will merge together to form a Baha'i Commonwealth. We don't know how that will occur or even what it will look like, but we do know force cannot be used to achieve that end, so I'm guessing it will be through consultation and democratic processes. I also presume that the majority of people would be Baha'is long before that happens.

It would match Muslim thinking I suppose.

No, it does not. While Islamic teachings can be interpreted as using force to establish an Islamic government, Baha'i Teachings cannot as Baha'u'llah explicitly prohibited four things:

1. The waging of jihad.
2. The burning of books
3. The shunning of different religious communities
4. Genocide

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

Albion said:
No. It was when I was a visitor to their temple.

https://www.bahai.us/bahai-temple

Ah, I got you. It was a visitor's guide. These are just ordinary Baha'is who volunteer to guide visitors at the temple usually for a few weeks. They are not official spokesmen and I doubt very much if they even have a script. They have no more authority than the ushers at your church.

Albion · Sep 18, 2015

smaneck said:
Ah, I got you. It was a visitor's guide.

If it were a visitor's guide, I'd have said that.

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

LoAmmi said:
When I take that and combine it with the multitude of statements in the Torah and Prophets that He is one and there is none other beside Him, the idea that the plural word is trying to show more than one falls apart unless we agree the text is not internally consistent.

I'm not sure it is entirely consistent. What I see in the Tanakh is a gradual movement towards monotheism which reaches its high point in the second half of the Book of Isaiah. Before that we read references to God holding court with the gods. Or depicted as anthropomorphic, walking in the Garden with Adam and Eve. Later no man can see Him and live. Earlier He is receives burnt offerings which is the way in which gods in the Mediterranean world were thought to eat. Later He insists on righteousness and that He isn't hungry. At first the Hebrew people are told not worship other gods because He is the one who brought them out of Egypt, that He is a jealous God and they owe it to Him. Only later, in Isaiah 45 is it affirmed (in the face of Zoroastrian dualism) that there is only one God and there is none other beside Him, even if it means ascribing evil to God.

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

Albion said:
If it were a visitor's guide, I'd have said that.

I don't know of anyone else that speaks to you when you visit the Temple.

cloudyday2 · Sep 18, 2015

smaneck said:
For Baha'is a Manifestation is not simply someone who receives a message from God, but who exhibits in their own Person everything we can understand about God humanly speaking. I don't think that can be said of Joseph Smith. Manifestations of God are perfect mirrors reflecting the names and attributes of God. That is why we don't think Christians are wrong when they say Jesus is God. We just think He is God in the sense that He manifests His attributes, not that He incarnates God Essence.

The dog is not bothered by the leash because it means a walk with his favorite person.

You seem to think there is analogy between the two. Only in your imagination.

What the Baha'i Faith emphasizes is unity in diversity.

Is that supposed to be a meaningful statement? If you are insinuating that Baha'is isolate themselves from the outside world, you couldn't be more wrong!

And you know this how?

And you know this how? The only people Baha'is shun are those making false claims to leadership. In other words they are trying to form separate sects with themselves as the leaders. It has nothing to do with being 'freethinking.'

It is pretty obvious you know nothing about the system.

I don't know much about Baha'i, but I have googled some testimonies of people who quit the Baha'i religion. They seemed to be very intelligent and kind people, and they were not crusading against Baha'i; they were simply explaining their reasons for quitting.

Generally, you can learn more about a religion by talking to the ex-members instead of the members, because they have removed their rose-colored glasses. Of course you have to watch out for people who are angry at their old religion. I didn't see much of that in the ex-Bahai testimonies. They seem to be a mild-mannered bunch.

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

pawnraider said:
Pray tell what was Jesus' "understanding of His station"?

What I'm saying is that everything Jesus said about Himself fits into the Baha'i paradigm of Manifestation much better than it does the Christian concept of Incarnation and the Trinity.

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
I don't know much about Baha'i, but I have googled some testimonies of people who quit the Baha'i religion. They seemed to be very intelligent and kind people, and they were not crusading against Baha'i; they were simply explaining their reasons for quitting.

Okay, so you got your information from those who left the Faith not those within it. If they weren't crusading against Baha'i, why would they be making testimonies against it on the internet. In any case, it is unlikely you met anyone who was being shunned.

Generally, you can learn more about a religion by talking to the ex-members instead of the members, because they have removed their rose-colored glasses.

That's a very debatable proposition.

LoAmmi · Sep 18, 2015

smaneck said:
I'm not sure it is entirely consistent. What I see in the Tanakh is a gradual movement towards monotheism which reaches its high point in the second half of the Book of Isaiah. Before that we read references to God holding court with the gods. Or depicted as anthropomorphic, walking in the Garden with Adam and Eve. Later no man can see Him and live. Earlier He is receives burnt offerings which is the way in which gods in the Mediterranean world were thought to eat. Later He insists on righteousness and that He isn't hungry. At first the Hebrew people are told not worship other gods because He is the one who brought them out of Egypt, that He is a jealous God and they owe it to Him. Only later, in Isaiah 45 is it affirmed (in the face of Zoroastrian dualism) that there is only one God and there is none other beside Him, even if it means ascribing evil to God.

Deut 4:35

35 To you it was shown so that you would acknowledge that the Lord is God; there is no other besides him.

39 So acknowledge today and take to heart that the Lord is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.

LoAmmi · Sep 18, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
Generally, you can learn more about a religion by talking to the ex-members instead of the members, because they have removed their rose-colored glasses. Of course you have to watch out for people who are angry at their old religion. I didn't see much of that in the ex-Bahai testimonies. They seem to be a mild-mannered bunch.

More in what sense?

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

jackcv said:
Attached is a Christmas Carol that my friend and I wrote almost verbatim from the Quran several years ago.

A rather like the one with the refrain that goes "Allah, la, la, la, la, la, la, la."

smaneck · Sep 18, 2015

LoAmmi said:
Deut 4:35

35 To you it was shown so that you would acknowledge that the Lord is God; there is no other besides him.

39 So acknowledge today and take to heart that the Lord is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.

I believe Deuteronomy was written post-exile.

LoAmmi · Sep 18, 2015

smaneck said:
I believe Deuteronomy was written post-exile.

I don't, so we'll just be at an impasse here.

cloudyday2 · Sep 18, 2015

LoAmmi said:
More in what sense?

Ex-believers give a more candid/unbiased picture of the religion. I learned much more about Christianity by talking to ex-Christians than I did by talking to Christians. I had no idea there were such varying theologies and practices in Christianity. People who are still believers feel too much loyalty to wash their dirty laundry in front of non-believers.

LoAmmi · Sep 18, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
Ex-believers give a more candid/unbiased picture of the religion. I learned much more about Christianity by talking to ex-Christians than I did by talking to Christians. I had no idea there were such varying theologies and practices in Christianity. People who are still believers feel too much loyalty to wash their dirty laundry in front of non-believers.

I'd be curious about what those who went away from Judaism feel about the faith. I know a few who became atheists but don't have anything bad to say really except they don't believe. I know a few who became Christian and they tend to have nice things to say just that we "missed the boat". Granted, I usually tell them I didn't miss it, they just can't see they're swimming in the ocean with no boat. It's fun.

I think you can learn about the experiences of those within the religion but that isn't the religion itself. If you wanted to learn Judaism, though, I'd send you to many of the books I have read on it so you can learn what the sages have said over the last few thousand years to understand it. A lot of times people who leave religions don't have the knowledge of the religion but rather their personal experience with it.

fatboys · Sep 18, 2015

LoAmmi said:
We're kind of back to the entire meaning of the word, aren't we? That we don't view is as us blessing Him. It wouldn't make any sense to do so since we cannot bless the source of all blessings. But if the wording there indicates that we are to recognize His status as that, which is how it has been interpreted, there's no problem.

To put it another way, we don't pat Him on the head and say good job, yeah? Even if we praise Him, it isn't from a position of power, as someone doing the blessing has a position of power.

The part in Deut you might be talking about actually is telling the priests to bless part of the tabernacle in His name.

I think we might be talking past each other.

Why'd you think we can not bless God. If we follow his laws and become what he wants us to become how is that not blessing him.

LoAmmi · Sep 18, 2015

fatboys said:
Why'd you think we can not bless God. If we follow his laws and become what he wants us to become how is that not blessing him.

What does bless mean to you?

fatboys · Sep 18, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
Ex-believers give a more candid/unbiased picture of the religion. I learned much more about Christianity by talking to ex-Christians than I did by talking to Christians. I had no idea there were such varying theologies and practices in Christianity. People who are still believers feel too much loyalty to wash their dirty laundry in front of non-believers.

I have always enjoyed your posts but I have to say that this argument is way apart from reality. Those that leave Mormonism are so biased that many times what they think is truth is just the opposite. Especially if they are posting on the Internet. I personally have known many ex Mormons and from their statements either they never knew the teachings of they are distorting on purpose or they have forgotten what was taught. I have a good friend who left the church a few years ago. Well 10 years. Anyway we were talking about some of the teachings and she went on about the after life as she understood it to be from a Mormons perspective. I was disappointed because I know that is not what I taught her in Sunday school class. When I corrected her she acted like it was the first time she had heard it. This not a isolated case. Over the years I have spoken with many ex Mormons who say some of the most outlandish things. Never were some of these things ever taught yet they have picked up and believed it was a teaching. Then they sometimes turn it into the reason they left. So I strongly disagree

pawnraider · Sep 18, 2015

Arthra said:
The Qur'an does refer to Jesus as Messiah...

See

"...The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him..."

(The Qur'an (Pickthall tr), Sura 4 - Women:171)

Then one has to wonder what their definition for "Messiah" is. We have a bit of a clue in this verse itself. The Muslims claim that He was only a messenger of their god and nothing more while we Christians believe Him to be much more than just a messenger.

pawnraider · Sep 18, 2015

jackcv said:
I note, Pawnraider, that you still have not thought about, or made the slightest real effort to answer my simple question. Beware that you do not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain in your prayers - for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Actually, I have. You're just choosing to ignore it. I did give the verse that should have answered your question.

Continuing Revelation

Baha'i

Baha'i

Facilitator

Baha'i

Baha'i

Generic Theist

Baha'i

Baha'i

Dispassionate

Dispassionate

Baha'i

Baha'i

Dispassionate

Generic Theist

Dispassionate

Senior Veteran

Dispassionate

Senior Veteran

Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency