How are these Great Beings explained?

[loverofhumanity]

So, God makes so hard to understand some religions that it fails and gets taken over by power hungry people that use the religion to control and extort the masses? Like God tested Adam and Eve. He puts a tree in the middle of the garden and puts a tempter in the tree to talk Eve into eating the fruit? Sounds like a set up. God knew they would fail, but he put them to the test anyway. I do hope that story is symbolic, but with all the evil in the world... maybe not.

God wants us to prosper and flourish as individuals and as a human civilisation. Now He didn't want to create a race of robots who would obey His every command as He wants us to love Him from our hearts.

So He gave us free will and choice so our love would be genuine and real. In giving us free will, God knew we would not have His Wisdom to always make decisions which lead to our happiness and well being. So He sent Educators with stories, parables and laws and teachings to help encourage us do what is best for ourselves.

Adam and Eve is such a story where God is trying to tell us that if we choose His ways then our earth will be like a garden of Eden, a veritable paradise, otherwise, if we choose worldliness then Cain and Able stories will dominate our world with endless violence, suffering, strife and unhappiness.

We can always choose the garden which would be to choose to allow the teachings of the latest Manifestation to be our guide or we can stay with the Cain and Able self destructive mentality.

It's up to us. All God wants is for us voluntarily to make the choices that will bring us peace and prosperity but as you can see, He doesn't stop us if we choose world wars as He has given us freedom to choose.

 

[siti]

OK - not to worry - here are some words of Abdu'l Baha regarding the historicity of the Torah and the accounts of Moses as confirmed (according to Abdu'l Baha, by both Muhammad and Baha'u'llah):

You may not know that the first address of Muḥammad to His tribe was the statement, “Verily, Moses was a prophet of God and the Torah is a book of God. Verily, O ye people, ye must believe in the Torah, in Moses and the prophets. Ye must accept all the prophets of Israel as valid.” In the Qur’án, the Muḥammadan Bible, there are seven statements or repetitions of the Mosaic narrative, and in all the historic accounts Moses is praised. Muḥammad announces that His Holiness Moses was the greatest prophet of God, that God guided Him in the wilderness of Sinai, that through the light of guidance Moses hearkened to the summons of God, that He was the interlocutor of God and the bearer of the tablet of the ten commandments, that all the contemporary nations of the world arose against Him and that eventually Moses conquered them...

...Bahá’u’lláh, the founder of the Bahá’í Cause, confirms me, saying: “You have been fair and just in your judgment; you have impartially investigated the truth and arrived at a true conclusion; you have announced your belief in Moses a prophet of God and accepted the Torah the book of God.”
​

quoted from: Bahá’í World Faith—Selected Writings of Bahá’u’lláh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá pages 277 and 279 and accessed at the old Bahai Reference Library on 20/04/2017

The Torah includes at least the Midianite genocide commanded by Moses himself - Moses' wife was the daughter of a Midianite priest you may recall (not sure how relevant that is but an interesting fact now that we have the confirmation of Muhammad, Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l Baha of its historicity). It also includes the passing of leadership from Moses to Joshua by divine command to Moses - so presumably, that also legitimizes Joshua's generalship in the conquest of Canaan?

 

[arthra]

Siti,

Thanks for sharing your understanding of the "Midianite genocide" as reported in the Book of Number chapter 31... You note also the reference to Moses "the world arose against Him and that eventually Moses conquered them... " Tribal wars were unfortunately the reality of desert life and in this case Abdul-Baha makes reference to them... The topic of the section where your quote comes from is entitled "Religion and Civilization"... Reading further in the text you may understand though that this is not a glorification of genocide and war:

"...praise and accept the other great messengers who have appeared in the world? What harm could there be in this? What rightful objection? None whatever. You would lose nothing by such action and statement. On the contrary you would contribute to the welfare of mankind. You would be instrumental in establishing the happiness of the world of humanity. The eternal honor of man depends upon the liberalism of this modern age. Inasmuch as our God is one God and the creator of all mankind, He provides for and protects all. We acknowledge him as a God of kindness, justice and mercy. Why then should we, His children and followers, war and fight, bringing sorrow and grief into the hearts of each other? God is loving and merciful. His intention in religion has ever been the bond of unity and affinity between humankind.

"Praise be to God! the mediaeval ages of darkness have passed away and this century of radiance has dawned, -- this century wherein the reality of things is becoming evident, -- wherein science is penetrating the mysteries of the universe, the oneness of the world of humanity is being established and service to mankind is the paramount motive of all existence. Shall we remain steeped in our fanaticisms and cling to our prejudices? Is it fitting that we should still be bound and restricted by ancient fables and superstitions of the past; be handicapped by superannuated beliefs and the ignorances of dark ages, waging religious wars, fighting and shedding blood, shunning and anathematizing each other?"

(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 277)

 

[siti]

Reading further in the text you may understand though that this is not a glorification of genocide and war

Again, this completely misses my point. I am fully aware that Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l Baha and Baha'is today do not, intentionally or otherwise, 'glorify' genocide and war. Neither do the Mahabharata, the Torah or the Qur'an if they are read honestly ans sensibly. But the inescapable fact remains that the reason that the teachings of Krishna, Moses and Muhammad etc. became the established religions of nations, cultures and empires was not the veracity or content of the teachings, but the acts of war and conquest that established the Kingdoms and Caliphates that adopted these teachings as state religions. As I have stated very early in this thread, to suggest otherwise is to deny both the history and the scriptural tradition on which any possible knowledge of the cultures and their associated "Manifestations" is based. Of course tribal warfare was commonplace in the bronze age - everyone knows that. And it was tribal warfare and not specific and ethnically prejudiced divine revelation that determined which cultures (and therefore which religious traditions) ascended to "greatness" and which died out with barely a fragmentary and skeletal remnant to be picked over by subsequent "Great Beings" like "Christ", Muhammad and Baha'u'llah.

In any case, my reason for quoting the passage I did was to establish that Muhammad, Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l Baha all confirmed that they accepted the historical veracity of the existence of Moses and the accounts of his life as recorded in the Torah. Since this includes at least some of the confirmatory evidence that both Israel (nationally) and Judaism (religiously) were established by warfare - according to Baha'i tradition.

 

[danieldemol]

"the difference is we believe that doomsday has already come."
Please elaborate it.
Regards

It is elaborated in the link provided, you can click on the link in the quote of post How are these Great Beings explained?
Please read the link "notes on Baha'i proofs based on the Quran" in the quote

 

[Dawnofhope]

Yes, that's the Vaishnava position, or at least one interpretation of it. I don't think I ever denied that, although this thread is so long, I may have. I can't really speak for Vaishnavas.

Perhaps not. I did have the impression from you that few in Hinduism believed in Krishna as an historic charcter, let alone a Divinely inspired man or Manifestation of God. However its been such a long thread it can be hard to recall who said what to whom. Any ideas about number of adherents of the main branches of Hinduism such as Shaivism or Vaishnavism?

I'm impressed you have persisted with this thread as long as you have, as well as @Carlita and @loverofhumanity

 

[Evie]

Perhaps not. I did have the impression from you that few in Hinduism believed in Krishna as an historic charcter, let alone a Divinely inspired man or Manifestation of God. However its been such a long thread it can be hard to recall who said what to whom. Any ideas about number of adherents of the main branches of Hinduism such as Shaivism or Vaishnavism?

I'm impressed you have persisted with this thread as long as you have, as well as @Carlita and @loverofhumanity

A pity posts vanish if they are not a particular religion. I click on to new alerts only to find the same religion with its pages and pages. I don't bother reading them anymore.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Right - so how did this play out in the conquest of Canaan? What had the Canaanites done to the Hebrews - who, until immediately before the conquest had been in captivity in Egypt for somewhere between a couple of generations and 430 years? And before that, their ancestors were a nomadic tribe out of Mesopotamia that had wandered haplessly into the Canaanite's ancestral homelands and ultimately found themselves at the mercy of a great famine whereupon they had thrown themselves on the mercy of Egypt and - in effect - sold themselves into slavery in order to fill their bellies. The Hebrews - following Moses' commands (but now under the direct leadership of Joshua) were the ones doing the attacking, burning, plundering, assaulting and violating. They were the oppressors - at God's command through the "Manifestation" Moses.

I know the Amalekites kept attacking Israel and wanted to exterminate them and were often attacking women and children. The Jews were forced into a war with this tribe.

AMALEKITE
Nomadic tribe of formidable people that first attacked the Israelites after the exodus at Rephidim. Descendants of Amalek, the grandson of Esau (Gen. 36:12), they inhabited the desolate wasteland of the northeast Sinai Peninsula and the Negev. They were the first to attack Israel after the exodus (Num. 24:20). Israel won the initial battle (Exod. 17:8-16), but later was driven back into the Sinai wilderness by a coalition of Amalekites and Canaanites (Num. 14:39-45). Thereafter the Amalekites waged a barbaric guerrilla war against Israel (Deut. 25:17-19). Fighting continued after Israel settled in Canaan. Because of their atrocities, God commanded Saul to exterminate the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15:2-3). Saul disobeyed and the Amalekites were not defeated completely until late in the eighth century B.C. (1 Chron. 4:43). No archaeological data concerning the Amalekites has been discovered to date. See Exodus; Negev.
LeBron Matthews

 

[Vinayaka]

Bahá’ís recognize the right and duty of governments to use force for the maintenance of law and order and to protect their people.

Hindus view of ahimsa is similar. If we all took an 'absolute ahimsa' view, there would just be one massive genocide, and it'd be over.

 

[Vinayaka]

Some of that happened during Baha'u'llah's lifetime. If he would have been accepted and given the authority to rule over the Earth, I wonder what he would have done? Would he have had the other countries of the world unite and put a stop to the aggression and hostile take over of the land?

Hardly. Like most recent spiritual leaders, he had no actual power.

 

[Vinayaka]

Perhaps not. I did have the impression from you that few in Hinduism believed in Krishna as an historic charcter, let alone a Divinely inspired man or Manifestation of God. However its been such a long thread it can be hard to recall who said what to whom. Any ideas about number of adherents of the main branches of Hinduism such as Shaivism or Vaishnavism?

I'm impressed you have persisted with this thread as long as you have, as well as @Carlita and @loverofhumanity

Estimates vary a lot, because of overlap, as you can imagine. A lot of village Hindus wouldn't even identify with a sect. I've heard Vaishnavism being as high as 60%, but there are several subsects within that too. Hard to tell actually. Even individuals (like the Bahais on here) will have quite differing views.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Perhaps not. I did have the impression from you that few in Hinduism believed in Krishna as an historic charcter, let alone a Divinely inspired man or Manifestation of God. However its been such a long thread it can be hard to recall who said what to whom. Any ideas about number of adherents of the main branches of Hinduism such as Shaivism or Vaishnavism?

I'm impressed you have persisted with this thread as long as you have, as well as @Carlita and @loverofhumanity

HAHA Rare. I was thinking of that myself. I think I can count on one hand how many conversations I was in that was over five pages long.

 

[Vinayaka]

HAHA Rare. I was thinking of that myself. I think I can count on one hand how many conversations I was in that was over five pages long.

I thought of dropping out of this long ago, but your persistence inspired me. This is quite atypical for me as well.

 

[paarsurrey]

@InvestigateTruth is a Baha'i from a Muslim background who can answer all your questions. @loverofhumanity and @arthra are knowledgeable too. The Bab (forerunner to Baha'u'llah) is a Mahdi claimant too so they can't both be right.

Does one mean Bab and Baha'u'llah? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I had never heard of Ghulam Ahmad until I spoke to @paarsurrey on RF a couple of months ago. A reform movement that considers itself part of Islam has little interest to me, as I'm not a Muslim.

btw
One of your coreligionists just posted above pretty much supporting the Baha'i postion that Krishna was a real person that manifests God.

Ahmadiyya is a reform movement of Islam in Islam, and Islam is a universal religion so Ahmadiyya is for everybody whether one is a Muslim or a Non-Muslim. Right?
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

It is elaborated in the link provided, you can click on the link in the quote of post How are these Great Beings explained?
Please read the link "notes on Baha'i proofs based on the Quran" in the quote

Please quote one verse from Quran that supports one's standpoint, the most, for a meaningful discussion.
Regards

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Does one mean Bab and Baha'u'llah? Please
Regards

Hi,

In Bahai view, Islamic sources prophesied about Two Manifestations to appear, one followed by another. According to Islamic sources, These Two are known as the Mahdi (or Qaim) and return of Christ (or Imam Hussein). The first one (the Mahdi) to stay and rule during 7 years, and after Him, the second Manifestation (Christ) rises and to remain on earth for 40 years.
Bahais believe the Bab and Bahaullah fulfilled these prophecies.

 

[Vinayaka]

None of the long established religions accept Bahais as their own, or the Bahai interpretations as accurate. It's a new faith, but basically did come out of Islam, or is the most like Islam.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

None of the long established religions accept Bahais as their own, or the Bahai interpretations as accurate. It's a new faith, but basically did come out of Islam, or is the most like Islam.

My grand parents from one side were Muslims, who became Bahai, and from another side, they were Jews, who became Bahais. But most people do not convert in these years. Initially, most of the followers of Bahaullah, were from Shia Islam, who converted, with some Jews, and Zoroastrians in Persia who converted. Later, among Europians or Americans, most of the ones who converted were from Christian background, and also some indians who were Hindus, converted. But nobody was forced to convert in Bahai History. All were willingly.

 

[Vinayaka]

My grand parents from one side were Muslims, who became Bahai, and from another side, they were Jews, who became Bahais. But most people do not convert in these years. Initially, most of the followers of Bahaullah, were from Shia Islam, who converted, with some Jews, and Zoroastrians in Persia who converted. Later, among Europians or Americans, most of the ones who converted were from Christian background, and also some indians who were Hindus, converted. But nobody was forced to convert in Bahai History. All were willingly.

Very few people in history have been forced to convert. (When you think about it, it makes no sense. How can a gun to the head change someone's belief?) That would be a false conversion anyway. Coerced, deceived, tricked, now that's a different matter altogether.