• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How are these Great Beings explained?

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
You had mentioned your experience of the resurrection through traditions in the Catholic Faith and I'm Good with that. My experience of the resurrection is not dependant on a church but through relationships with God and people.

My experiences of the resurrection through the traditions of the Church is the experience and relationship with god and people. ;)How do you separate them?

Thank you. I do appreciate the differences between the two faiths as they stand in relationship to God. Buddha came from a Hindu background. It would be interesting to explore to what extent he agreed with the Faith of Hinduism from where he grew up.

True. I actually haven't thought about doing that. I know The Buddha talks a lot about Brahma as compared to his enlightenment since before he was a Bodhisattva practicing Hinduism and esoteric rituals he concluded that the gods (Hindu) weren't the way to be enlightened. So, instead, he meditated, became enlightened, and gave his first discourse. I can't remember when he said he was a bodhisattva between the two events. He still acknowledges Brahma and the Hindu gods but not in the manner Bahai say that he "spoke" about god-especially-a god that did not exist in his country (He didn't mention Allah).

The clearest example would probably be the Christians having a different understanding of the Hebrew Bible to the Jews, in particular how Jesus is viewed as a fulfilment of prophecy. The Jews will deny there is any verses that support Jesus being the Messiah whereas the Christians will see about two or three hundred verses that they believe relates specifically to Jesus as the Christ. I know you don't agree with it, but Chrisitanity would never have emerged as a religion if the apostles had not taught this. They taught it because it was the truth.

I don't disagree that Christianity came from the OT. I mean, Jesus full bibliography is in the first pages of each gospel. I do lean towards the Jewish point of view. I'ma look at this later "Why Jews don't believe in Christ" but it looks like it has both christian and Jewish arguments of why they believe what they do. I mean, even when Jesus put himself equal to god, that was a big no-no for the Jews and I can see why.

You believe the bible is inspired, so it's hard to make an argument against it for learning when it's like challenging god to you. Makes for a one-sided argument, ya think?

Like you, I am more comfortable with the view of Muslims towards Christians than the view of Christiinas towards Muslims.

Oh? You're Christian. How does that work. o_O

A while ago you and @Vinayaka told me you didn't like how much the Baha'is were quoting so I pretty much stopped. The point you made was that we really need to have a conversation and the quotes were getting in the way. I don't talk to my friends in Baha'i quotes so I've adapted.:)

Haha. Thank gosh. That would be a weird conversation with your friends. I learn from experiences and put things in your own words. One of your peers felt they couldn't do that as well enough as Bahaullah; so, I bite my tongue here and there. @Vinakaya is correct.

Laws around crime and punishment, fasting and prayers are examples of transient teachings compared to the Eternal. The Jews believe their Covenat with God is Eternal and will not change. Thats one reason amongst many the Jews disagree with the Christians...and the Baha'is too.

Yeah. I notice you guys (and your websites) disagree with a lot of ritual practices. I don't know if you understand how the relationship with god and his people are interconnected with the rituals, fastings, and prayers. Not everyone is a ritual person, really.

Great. That's what I was getting at as this principle applies to to a certain extent to the Abrahamic Faiths too. The words of Noah and Abraham have largely disappeared for example.

Exactly. I thought you guys meant the decay of the Dhamma as in the principles of life. The Buddha has Bodhisattvas and gods to protect the written Dhamma but, yes, he did say they will decay. But the Dhamma-the principles of life-will not.

All the Abrahamic Faiths have very able and capable scholars that defend their positions very well. I was referring to Jewish Scholars and what they would say about the original tablets that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai. They don't have them.

I wouldn't know. I know that they said every synagogue has the writings of Moses just as every Parish has the Eucharist. I think it's the Law of Moses, if I'm not mistaken.

I wasn't referring to the Catholic Church but rather the history of the Jewish peopple as recorded in the OT. That being said, my experience as Christian from a Protestant background is different than yours as a Catholic.

Extremely :)

I can see how you draw from your Catholic experience. A relationship with God is a living thing in my day to day life so although we are in different places I appreciate your experiences both religious and cultural that you bring to these discussions that is so enriching. :)

If I could separate the abrahamic god from christ's spirit and believe that god, then I'm all for it. Since I only know god of abraham through christ's spirit (sacraments), I'm kind of half in half in understanding what you're saying.

But no worries. I like talking to you. You make me think.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Again, I don't see the connection. Jesus also said don't look to scriptures for the truth but look to him. If you want answers, ask christ not scripture. This verse is another way to say don't look at the Law (the written Hebrew scriptures) because even the Law of Moses testifies to Christ-so he says look to him to get to god.

I think you are just making the Scriptures say, what you wanted to say. Jesus emphasized more on the Spirit of acts, rather than outward works and Laws, as the Jews were just emphasizing too much on outward Laws.
On the other hand, Jesus, and the writers of Bible emphasized so much on Scriptures, and what is written. Here are some verses:


"For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope."

Romans 15:4

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work."

2 Timothy 3:16-17

".... For what does the Scripture say?...."

Romans 4:1-25


These and many other instances in Bible proves, the Authors of Bible, referred to Scriptures in order to validate their sayings. This is the way of discussing Religions belief from Jesus, and Authors of Bible.


I remember that one. If you're trying to refute The Catholic Churches (Roman and not) it won't work. That's what they believe. The Church, as I quoted, are built on the apostles of christ. Doesn't matter if it's Peter, John, or Paul. It is what it is.

What's your point?



Okay........???

What does this have to do with my saying The Church is the body of christ built on the apostles and the cornerstone as Jesus?

My point is not refute anyone. It is to point out that, the sources of Religions are their written Scriptures. It is the Book of a Religion, if one wants to talk about the beliefs of a particular religions. All Religions have Scriptures. The saying of Buddha, Krishna,..etc have been considered by the Scholars of Religions as the source of studying, and discussion.

Moreover, if we want to learn about physics, we must learn it from Scientist, or those physic PHDs who wrote books. If we want to learn about History, we must learn from the history books written by good historians.
I find it strange that when people want to learn or talk about religions, they do not want to learn it from the Founders of Religions. Instead they want use their imaginations, to make up ideas, or refer to what ordinary people (believers or non-believers) say. So, that was the point I was trying to make.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I think you are just making the Scriptures say, what you wanted to say. Jesus emphasized more on the Spirit of acts, rather than outward works and Laws, as the Jews were just emphasizing too much on outward Laws.
On the other hand, Jesus, and the writers of Bible emphasized so much on Scriptures, and what is written. Here are some verses:


"For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope."

Romans 15:4

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work."

2 Timothy 3:16-17

".... For what does the Scripture say?...."

Romans 4:1-25


These and many other instances in Bible proves, the Authors of Bible, referred to Scriptures in order to validate their sayings. This is the way of discussing Religions belief from Jesus, and Authors of Bible.




My point is not refute anyone. It is to point out that, the sources of Religions are their written Scriptures. It is the Book of a Religion, if one wants to talk about the beliefs of a particular religions. All Religions have Scriptures. The saying of Buddha, Krishna,..etc have been considered by the Scholars of Religions as the source of studying, and discussion.

Moreover, if we want to learn about physics, we must learn it from Scientist, or those physic PHDs who wrote books. If we want to learn about History, we must learn from the history books written by good historians.
I find it strange that when people want to learn or talk about religions, they do not want to learn it from the Founders of Religions. Instead they want use their imaginations, to make up ideas, or refer to what ordinary people (believers or non-believers) say. So, that was the point I was trying to make.

Im busy now but you are using the bible to refute the bible?

Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

You search the Scriptures, because you suppose that in them you will find the Life of the Ages; and it is those Scriptures that yield testimony concerning me;

John 5:39

I cant reply to the rest of your post now but clarify this. You are telling me you rather go to scripture than to christ??? :shrug:

I know you guys dont talk to god directly. I find that odd whether you believe god is the bible or jesus. The scriptures you quote say the inspired authors speak and testify of jesus. You depend on them as if they have eternal life. As if they are jesus himself.

Thats silly.
 
Last edited:

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Anyone can post anything and claim it to be from the Baha'i writings.

Any Baha'i remotely acquainted with the baha'i writings and its spirit can readily detect that you are not quoting from authentic Baha'i writings.

The Baha'i sites make anything negative in the writings hard to find. Tons of "selected" writings. Others have pointed them out.

You folks are claiming mistranslation, etc. So -

I actually went back to other Baha'i threads here to see what people had said in the past (just put Bahai in the search above.) What I found was a consistent method of shut down. Say it wasn't from an accepted Baha'i site, - or it wasn't an accepted Baha'i translation. The "accepted" translation from the "accepted" site is never given.

SO - if you are going to claim such - POST the ACCEPTED version so we can see for ourselves.

Baha'ullah said,

'You, oh friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists.' http://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/b/MR/mr-217.html#pg216

*
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Michael Sours covers the resurrection really well as well as a number of other Christian topics such as the Divinity of Christ, Salvation, and the Exclusive claims of Jesus. He has a trilogy of books that I found excellent.

https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Biblical-Evidence-v-1/dp/1851680187/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_c

You seem very acquainted with various the nuances on this topic:)

Thank you again, I had a look at the link, do not think I have read his books to date. Cost is about $120AUD to get hold of them

I like that I have found the more we know, the more we know we do not know.

We can only little by little day by day let the Unconstrained shine through. Self is one great battle. :) May the Unconstrained shine through all people.

I enjoy your postings, I see a good balance.

Prayers assured for you and all, regards Tony
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Yes there are texts that go back further saying it was Isaac and there are also texts in Buddhism that make no mention of God. Original Texts can be also be lost which is what we are told with regards to Buddhism, that Buddhists do not possess Buddha's original Teachings.

The original reference to Ismael may have been lost also.

How to make ALL "accepted" religions conform to yours -

Just claim they have lost the original true teachings, - and your leader has God's ear, and knows all.

*
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The Baha'i sites make anything negative in the writings hard to find. Tons of "selected" writings. Others have pointed them out.

You folks are claiming mistranslation, etc. So -

I actually went back to other Baha'i threads here to see what people had said in the past (just put Bahai in the search above.) What I found was a consistent method of shut down. Say it wasn't from an accepted Baha'i site, - or it wasn't an accepted Baha'i translation. The "accepted" translation from the "accepted" site is never given.

SO - if you are going to claim such - POST the ACCEPTED version so we can see for ourselves.

Baha'ullah said,

'You, oh friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists.' http://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/b/MR/mr-217.html#pg216

*

There is no Approved English translation to date.

Baha’u’llah, Majmū`iyi alwāḥ mubāraki, p. 216.

"أنتم يا أحبّاء اللّه کونوا سحابَ الفضل لمن آمن باللّه
و آياتهِ و عذابَ المحتوم لمن کفر باللّه و أمره و کان من
المشرکين"

Any provisional translation needs to be viewed with caution as many have been done by people hostile to the Faith, or without the knowledge to do an accurate translation.

This passage and this topic has been discussed on Baha'i Forums in the past.

Baha'u'llah's orders and sayings about non-Baha'is - Baha'i Forums

Regards Tony
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Okay. Now I can do this. You can read the bible anyway you want. I'm looking at it objectively because I not see it as the word of god. It talks about god. People are inspired by god. I can write a book about god just as Moses. I don't see how time period and they're not being here to defend themselves make their words more valid than my words from the same god.

think you are just making the Scriptures say, what you wanted to say. Jesus emphasized more on the Spirit of acts, rather than outward works and Laws, as the Jews were just emphasizing too much on outward Laws.

I emphasis that you are looking at scriptures as if they obtain eternal life. Scriptures do not. Jesus is the intermediary to god in Christianity not scriptures. Scriptures talk about Christ. Christ talks for god. God gives christ his Law (another word for words of authority). He calls his Law human incarnate. That human incarnate is called the Word. That Word is called jesus christ. When you talk to jesus christ, you're talking of the Word. Jesus testifies to the words of the bible. When you read them, you read about christ.

When you talk to christ, you talk to god. It is very easy to understand.

Also, outward acts are what you do to worship god. Without the acts, what do you, stand still?

On the other hand, Jesus, and the writers of Bible emphasized so much on Scriptures, and what is written. Here are some verses:

Jesus emphasis Hebrew scriptures because they talk of the Word of god. Logically, when you go to a book to find god, you are using it as an idol. That is why jesus said the Jews were looking to scripture in the wrong way. They were using scripture as an idol to god's son.

"For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope."

Romans 15:4

For example, above talks of instruction for people to have hope. Yes, people go to scripture for guidance but do not replace guidance and instruction for the person who gave it. That is jesus point.

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work."

2 Timothy 3:16-17

Another example, all the authors have been inspired by god. You would never have Moses tell you he wrote the tablets god (not Bahaullah) written as Laws for His (not Moses's People). Muhammad would never tell you the Quran was written by him. Bahai, it seems, and Christians are the only ones who mistake the message/Word and messengers/prophets for the person who sent them.

Don't understand how you get it mixed up.

".... For what does the Scripture say?...."

Romans 4:1-25

Scripture points to Christ.

These and many other instances in Bible proves, the Authors of Bible, referred to Scriptures in order to validate their sayings. This is the way of discussing Religions belief from Jesus, and Authors of Bible.

I'm not saying the Bible is wrong. That's your thing not mine. I'm saying you are making the bible god. The bible testify's to christ. Christ doesn't testify to the bible. (John 5:39 is becoming my favorite verse now).

My point is not refute anyone. It is to point out that, the sources of Religions are their written Scriptures. It is the Book of a Religion, if one wants to talk about the beliefs of a particular religions. All Religions have Scriptures. The saying of Buddha, Krishna,..etc have been considered by the Scholars of Religions as the source of studying, and discussion.

That's your belief. Krishna has nothing to do with this.

The Buddha's words (not Words) just talks about the principles of life. They are not sacred-sacred words do not decay. You mention his words do decay.

The bible testify's to christ. Christ talks about the bible which testify's of him. You're looking in a book and not to christ.

All I know of Muhammad is he would never equate a book to god and no person for that matter.

Zoroaster I have no clue.

Moreover, if we want to learn about physics, we must learn it from Scientist, or those physic PHDs who wrote books. If we want to learn about History, we must learn from the history books written by good historians.

If we want to learn about the Passion, we go to Christ.
If we want to learn how to say the Lord's Prayer, we go to the Bible.

If we want to learn how to make a relationship with god in Islam, you go to god.
If you want to know what to say to him, you go to the Quran.

If you want to be spiritually connected, you go to the source.
If you want instruction and guidence so you can be connected (if you can't do it alone like Hindus and Buddhist) you go to your preferred scripture.

Can you see the difference between the use of scripture and the source?

I find it strange that when people want to learn or talk about religions, they do not want to learn it from the Founders of Religions. Instead they want use their imaginations, to make up ideas, or refer to what ordinary people (believers or non-believers) say. So, that was the point I was trying to make.


Well, I don't have that negative view of people. If I did, humanity would never have peace.

On that note, I like how people say what they mean from their experiences with their faith. For example, if someone said "this is how you pray in these exact words" I'd nod and say-okay, I understand. If someone said, "this is how I see this prayer in the eyes of god; this is what he told me." Then I say, ooooh that is how faith and spirituality works.

Not through words but through the source.

If you don't know the difference, it's pure idolism.

That is the technical definition. In my opinion you can believe what you want. From Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism, it doesn't' work that way.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
There are pilgrim notes on this, I find it of interest;

"....Concerning the location of the burial site of Jesus' sacred remains, a letter dated 22 March 1982 written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer states:

Pilgrims have recorded in their notes oral statements made by 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi to the effect that the disciples hid the body of Christ by burying it under the wall of Jerusalem, and that it is now under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The House of Justice knows of nothing in the Writings of the Faith, however, explicitly confirming these statements."

Resurrection and Return of Jesus

Hope all is well, Regards Tony

Most "Pilgrims" traveled hundreds of years later. Most following Constantine's mother. She decided where these events took place.

*
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
There is no Approved English translation to date.

Baha’u’llah, Majmū`iyi alwāḥ mubāraki, p. 216.

"أنتم يا أحبّاء اللّه کونوا سحابَ الفضل لمن آمن باللّه
و آياتهِ و عذابَ المحتوم لمن کفر باللّه و أمره و کان من
المشرکين"

Any provisional translation needs to be viewed with caution as many have been done by people hostile to the Faith, or without the knowledge to do an accurate translation.

This passage and this topic has been discussed on Baha'i Forums in the past.

Baha'u'llah's orders and sayings about non-Baha'is - Baha'i Forums

Regards Tony

How convenient. :rolleyes:

In other words you folks telling us such, was bull. From your site.

“And you, O friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists,”
(The consensus reached regarding this quote is that some form of torment has been prescribed, this might be spiritual/mental or physical, I am not going to argue on what this torment may be)

and

Maediyie Asemani vol. 8
با نفوس معرض كه اعراضشان ظاهر شده معاشرت و تكلم و ملاقات جايز نه"
"Socializing, speaking with, and meeting those who have turned away [from Baha'u'llah] and have made apparent their turning away/denial/opposition is not allowed." (not to be mixed up with covenant-breakers)
(The consensus reached is that speaking, meeting, and socializing with the group of people shown in bold is not allowed. I am not going to argue on which group was meant by Baha'u'llah).

*
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
How convenient. :rolleyes:

In other words you folks telling us such, was bull. From your site.

“And you, O friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists,”
(The consensus reached regarding this quote is that some form of torment has been prescribed, this might be spiritual/mental or physical, I am not going to argue on what this torment may be)

and

Maediyie Asemani vol. 8
با نفوس معرض كه اعراضشان ظاهر شده معاشرت و تكلم و ملاقات جايز نه"
"Socializing, speaking with, and meeting those who have turned away [from Baha'u'llah] and have made apparent their turning away/denial/opposition is not allowed." (not to be mixed up with covenant-breakers)
(The consensus reached is that speaking, meeting, and socializing with the group of people shown in bold is not allowed. I am not going to argue on which group was meant by Baha'u'llah).

*

The person that posted this to that site is hostile to the Faith and is the source of the bad translations you post.

You obviously went to his post, which is the first post and used the same material to confirm the inaccuracy.

Did you not read the replies? As It then goes on to supply more incorrect translations and meanings with further advice as why they are inaccurate.

The Baha'is attempted to give all those posts balance. There are 4 pages to this thread.

Regards Tony
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
The person that posted this to that site is hostile to the Faith and is the source of the bad translations you post.

You obviously went to his post, which is the first post and used the same material to confirm the inaccuracy.

Did you not read the replies? As It then goes on to supply more incorrect translations and meanings with further advice as why they are inaccurate.

The Baha'is attempted to give all those posts balance. There are 4 pages to this thread.

Regards Tony

Yes, I read a couple of pages of replies from - people, - for and against, - not translators, or official Baha'i translation.

It tells us this has not been translated into English. How convenient.

I've already said it is very hard to find anything "negative" posted on the site you folks want us to use. That is very convenient to push the message you want.

Other people challenging Baha'i, - is how we learn of problems in Baha'i teachings.

I have repeated several times - if you don't like the translation given, - then POST the Baha'i translation. In English so we can actually read it.

I have to agree with this reply from your site. -

"Good morning Romane,
The problem I see in your argument is that you are providing me with an answer that might be acceptable to a Baha'i, but inapplicable to a non-Baha'i. It sums up to something like this: "since the UHJ has not yet given a verdict on this quote or hasn't translated it, then we will simply ignore it." As as a non-Baha'i I find this justification unacceptable.

I also find it unacceptable that every time there is a problematic/questionable law or saying in the teachings of Baha'u'llah, it is simply disregarded by using statements such as "this is intended for the future" or "the world has not yet reached the needed maturity for this law." I also find it incorrect to use Islam as an example to justify this argument. Even-though it didn't happen in a fortnight but the flowers of Islam bore fruit whilst Muhammad was still alive and the laws he provided were implemented likewise. I think 150 years are more than enough to serve the purpose."

*
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
How to make ALL "accepted" religions conform to yours -

Just claim they have lost the original true teachings, - and your leader has God's ear, and knows all.

*

It's not about acceptance or conforming but about rejuvenating humanity spiritually. It's about raising up a new race of virtuous people, spiritual people, who will no longer tolerate war or racial, religious and national or any forms of discrimination.

It's about re building of a peaceful society inclusive of all and a society governed by justice not money, by virtue and sanctity not personal ambition.

We're talking here about the dawning of a world spiritual Civilisation which is where we believe humanity is headed. It's about cooperation not competition.

The divisive influence of religious sectarianism has torn our world apart. There is no unity within religions and between religions. There is no religion today that is not divided within itself. That is because they have gone away from their original teachings to love one another.

That is what Baha'u'llah came to bring back to our world - love for each human being for all humanity. We cannot have peace unless we all become lovers and well wishers of all humanity.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Yes, these are the Baha'i' beliefs. There are only two possible ways it can happen. One is to convert everyone to Baha'i' which doesn't seem likely, and the other would be to kill all the non-Baha'i' which actually seems more likely than the first option.

It would end diversity, eliminate many religions entirely, we'd lose many languages, cultures, and much more. A horrible grey scenario, I'm afraid.

I think you still don't understand what Baha'u'llah is speaking about. Bodies like the League of Nations, the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the EEU, ASEAN, these are all established by non Baha'is aren't they? They serve all humanity don't they? This is humanity coming together and working together. This is what Baha'u'llah teaches. To come together and consult together and work together for the betterment of all peoples.

These organizations Baha'is would say are 'Baha'i inspired' because they are not Bahá'í bodies but are spoken of in our teachings before they were even established.

So when there is a world parliament Baha'i will obey it. If the governments choose an Auxilliary world language we will support it as we do the projects of the UN and UNICEF now and many, many other humanity organizations. We are on the same side as human rights and religious equality.

The world and its peoples are themselves establishing the teachings of Baha'u'llah by their own choice as they feel international bodies are the way to go. For some strange reason, people and governments seem to be agreeing with and implementing, of their own volition, most of the teachings and exhortations written by Baha'u'llah over a century ago.

It's astounding! If you read and study Baha'u'llah's Words you will find they look exactly like a mirror image of what's happening in the world today. The world is uniting.

So it's the world establishing His principles and it isn't the result of the whole world becoming Baha'i's and they are doing it of their own volition so nobody is being harmed. It's their choice.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Yes, this is the Baha'i' belief.

It's just history, and 'luck of the draw'. Nothing special. Lots of other people have had huge effects. Of course some of these effects have been horrible, leading to wars. If these guys would have been wiser, violence would have been totally abolished.

I bet the world's rich and famous wished they knew how to tap into such 'luck'. But they never have been able to.

Please note that wars, violence and hatred were never taught by any of the Manifestations so we need to make a clear distinction in our minds between what They taught and what was the behaviour of those who claimed belief and their sincerity.

If Christ said to love your enemies and Christians go to war with each other it's impossible to blame anybody but Christians for disobedience to their own religion. People are told to love but they still have the choice to hate. We are not robots. But a Christian or Muslim who hates is not a religious person even though they may claim to be.

All these wars you refer to are against the teachings of all the Prophets. It was always against what They taught.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
I don't know what happened to the body of Christ, just as I don't know the whereabouts of everyone who died 2,000 years ago. But I do know that Jeus died physically and His remains are on earth somewhere. I know He didn't rise from the dead and ascend into the stratosphere. That may have been plausible in a bygone era but its a belief that has lost its credibility now.

Hi Adrian!

It is intriguing to note that Bahá'í pilgrims who asked 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi about Jesus's body say that both men stated that "the disciples hid the body of Christ by burying it under the wall of Jerusalem, and that it is now under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre." The Universal House of Justice adds that there is "nothing in the Writings of the Faith, however, explicitly confirming these statements.

Resurrection and Return of Jesus

Here is the pilgrim's note. I agree the remains are in earth.


People wonder what happened to the body of Christ after the crucifixion. It was buried by the disciples under the wall of Jerusalem to protect it from the Roman legions. It remained buried there for some 260 years. It remained buried under the wall of Jerusalem until the mother of the Emperor Constantine, who had herself become a Christian, came to Jerusalem and had the Church of the Holy Sepulcher built – at which time the body of Christ was removed from under the wall of the city and was placed under the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. And that is where it is today. The Baha’is should be aware of this fact when they visit the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which is the holiest place in Christendom.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
There are pilgrim notes on this, I find it of interest;

"....Concerning the location of the burial site of Jesus' sacred remains, a letter dated 22 March 1982 written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer states:

Pilgrims have recorded in their notes oral statements made by 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi to the effect that the disciples hid the body of Christ by burying it under the wall of Jerusalem, and that it is now under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The House of Justice knows of nothing in the Writings of the Faith, however, explicitly confirming these statements."

Resurrection and Return of Jesus

Hope all is well, Regards Tony

Just posted this same reply. Are you my twin by any chance?
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Those kinds of things, and their sneakiness, depends on the individual. Some individuals would downplay the Baha'i' stuff to the non-Baha'i' parents. Of course if anyone signs their kid up for anything, they take the responsibility for their child being taught the concepts herein. Not really fair to complain after the fact, unless there was no full disclosure. Such things like, 'We will teach that of all these manifestations, Baha'u'llah was the greatest." should be right there at the outset.

I'm not too keen on espousing Baha'u'llah as the 'greatest' or 'superior', as Baha'u'llah Himself as said all the Manifestations of God are essentially equal in station. Arguing Baha'u'llah has the revelation or message to humanity that is most relevant today is a stronger position and more consistent with Baha'i theology.

Religious education of children is quite an emotive issue for many that evokes concerns about abuse and brainwashing. In New Zealand as a secular country we don't have any official or endorsed religious education in schools at all, though there is bible studies in some school if school boards permit it but always with an opt out option.

Religious schools are an exception, and some schools have a history of promoting a very one sided worldview.

India is a secular country, yet there are pressures from Hindu Nationalists to have it become a Hindu country as Pakistan is Muslim. I wonder how that will play out in schools in India and what are the existing arrangements are for religious education of children in India today?
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
It's not about acceptance or conforming but about rejuvenating humanity spiritually. It's about raising up a new race of virtuous people, spiritual people, who will no longer tolerate war or racial, religious and national or any forms of discrimination.

It's about re building of a peaceful society inclusive of all and a society governed by justice not money, by virtue and sanctity not personal ambition.

We're talking here about the dawning of a world spiritual Civilisation which is where we believe humanity is headed. It's about cooperation not competition.

The divisive influence of religious sectarianism has torn our world apart. There is no unity within religions and between religions. There is no religion today that is not divided within itself. That is because they have gone away from their original teachings to love one another.

That is what Baha'u'llah came to bring back to our world - love for each human being for all humanity. We cannot have peace unless we all become lovers and well wishers of all humanity.

It is a nice idea, - but, - obviously people are pointing out problems with some of Baha'u'llah's writings concerning Pagans, force, etc.

You will not ever get everybody under one religion. Lots of people are Atheist, or Polytheist, and you would have to kill them, or force them into your religion. And that is why people are bringing up the more forceful writings. You don't have the right to do such. In fact it would make you no different then the other murdering religions of Abraham.

As for that, - "It's about cooperation not competition." - You want them under your particular brand of religion, - and that is competition.

*
 
Top