How are these Great Beings explained?

[CG Didymus]

I would say that Constantine adopted it as the state religion. Then after that missionaries in the latter centuries. You might want to elaborate. I’m interested in your view to learn from your view point. Christianity did have a lot of problems around the time of Muhammad appearing and I think there were wars and disputes then. Hardly any love. But the message of love is still there for those who want it.

Constantine's conversion I think was a big part in the making of Christianity into a major religion. Then, he made the leaders get together and figure out exactly what they believed in. Of course the message of love is in there, but it's in Judaism too... Love your neighbor as yourself. But when do religions actually do that?

Even with the Baha'is, could you go into an Isis stronghold and tell them you love them? Or, go into Saudi Arabia and say that Baha'u'llah has come with a new message of peace and love? Unfortunately, it ain't how this world works. And to quote Trump... "Sad"

 

[oldbadger]

There are just under 16 million worldwide at this time, and just under 71,000 missionaries. If you miss seeing them, I could arrange a visit.

Hi Katzpur...
That is many more than I realised.
We never turn any visitor from our home, but it's true to say that I am a Deist and my wife a skeptical Agnostic. But she offers brilliant hospitality to all. I seem to remember that Mormons do not drink coffee? If true then her very good capuccini will just have to remain off the menu.
We have been debating bible prophetical numerology, so my question is, do you have any biblical prophesy of Joseph Smith's ministry?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, let's get it right. So with reincarnation do you agree that it is not your belief and faith, "but it could be true."?

And about giving more of self... when and where do you stop? Never? Can you really give it all? Is that practical? Is it possible? Do you feel you have given and are giving all of your self every day to serve mankind? Or, is there more that you can give?

I see reincarnation had a meaning other than how it is currently seen.

A link to what we need to consider in Service and Charity.

Baha'i Writings on Charity

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Lovely! But as is the Baha'i wont in discussions of this nature you have completely missed the point - Baha'u'llah quotes - get it - quotes - a passage that he believes is in the Gospel - but there is no such passage - he either made that up - or - more likely IMO simply copied from a book about the Gospel account and did not bother to check the Bible account itself. In either case, it IS an error - because there is no Gospel passage that actually states that the disciples father had already died and Baha'u'llah erroneously states that there is.

The passage is in the Bible, so that is not the issue.

I do not need to argue this.

Regards Tony

 

[oldbadger]

Yes, happens all the time, unfortunately. It's a very common complaint of ex-Baha'i', at least in what I've read. I think most prophet based religions have a sense of 'we're the lucky ones. It's on this thread.

Being proud of your humility has tremendous irony in it, whomever it comes from.

For the individual it can become a debilitating dilemma.

Yes................
And........ at any point where we review all, and then tell the World about how we overcame our impoverished upbringing and lowly circumstances to triumph through our diligence and determination........ we fail, yet again.

Humility is a fickle willow-the-wisp which does not allow folks to grasp hold of it as a medal.

 

[Katzpur]

Hi Katzpur...
That is many more than I realised.
We never turn any visitor from our home, but it's true to say that I am a Deist and my wife a skeptical Agnostic. But she offers brilliant hospitality to all. I seem to remember that Mormons do not drink coffee? If true then her very good capuccini will just have to remain off the menu.

Poor missionaries.

We have been debating bible prophetical numerology, so my question is, do you have any biblical prophesy of Joseph Smith's ministry?

Nothing specific to Joseph Smith, I don't believe. Of course, we do believe that certain biblical passages are referencing the "restoration" of Christianity as it existed anciently, which is what Mormonism claims to be.

I just noticed that you're from England. My husband and I spent a months in the UK just over two years ago. We drove 2,950 miles, from as far north as Inverness to as far south as London. What a beautiful part of the world and what charming people! Wish I could have met you while we were there.

 

[siti]

Nowhere in the quote, Bahaullah said He read the book. You seem to read more than what the quote says. You can underline the part of the quote which says He read the book. Obviously you cannot, because it does not say that, unless you make your own interpretation. Again, you did not prove that Bahaullah had to read, in order to know.

OK - here's the entire passage with the bits that show that he read the book underlined. However, I think I am beginning to understand how the idea of truth revealed without the requirement to read might be attractive...

"For instance, a certain man, 23 reputed for his learning and attainments, and accounting himself as one of the pre-eminent leaders of his people, hath in his book denounced and vilified all the exponents of true learning. This is made abundantly clear by his explicit statements as well as by his allusions throughout his book. As We had frequently heard about him, We purposed to read some of his works. Although We never felt disposed to peruse other peoples’ writings, yet as some had questioned Us concerning him, We felt it necessary to refer to his books, in order that We might answer Our questioners with knowledge and understanding. His works, in the Arabic tongue, were, however, not available, until one day a certain man informed Us that one of his compositions, entitled Irshadu’l-‘Avám, could be found in this city. From this title We perceived the odour of conceit and vainglory, inasmuch as he hath imagined himself a learned man and regarded the rest of the people ignorant. His worth was in fact made known by the very title he had chosen for his book. It became evident that its author was following the path of self and desire, and was lost in the wilderness of ignorance and folly. Methinks, he had forgotten the well-known tradition which sayeth: “Knowledge is all that is knowable; and might and power, all creation.” Notwithstanding, We sent for the book, and kept it with Us a few days. It was probably referred to twice. The second time, We accidentally came upon the story of the “Mi’ráj” of Muḥammad, of Whom was spoken: “But for Thee, I would not have created the spheres.” We noticed that he had enumerated some twenty or more sciences, the knowledge of which he considered to be essential for the comprehension of the mystery of the “Mi’ráj”. We gathered from his statements that unless a man be deeply versed in them all, he can never attain to a proper understanding of this transcendent and exalted theme. Among the specified sciences were the science of metaphysical abstractions, of alchemy, and natural magic. Such vain and discarded learnings, this man hath regarded as the pre-requisites of the understanding of the sacred and abiding mysteries of divine Knowledge."

Book of Certitude (page 184)

How, in the name of...whatever...did Baha'u'llah "accidentally" come across a particular "story" whilst "referring" to a book he had to wait for in order to comment on it without reading the blasted thing?

 

[CG Didymus]

Nice to hear from you. This thread doesn't seem to be slowing down too much, does it?

How do you do it? And how many threads are you posting on? I'm on page 696 now. I hope there's something on Revelation coming up, but if not, I understand. Chapter 17 is going to be an important one. It has a built in interpretation of some of the characters in it.

 

[siti]

You and I can discuss as we are. It does not mean we socialize. Does it?

We are socializing - moreover, we are sharing ideas - you can't help doing that when you have a conversation - even if it is in the modern context of "social media". Its absolute rubbish to suggest that Baha'u'llah did not socialize (or associate) with scholars. It is patently obvious that he did and that he learned from them - the fact oozes out of everyuthing he wrote - he quotes the Bible (inaccurately - which suggests he got his ideas about some of it from other sources) and the Qur'an incessantly - he quotes Sufi poetry...anyway, as I said - we've already had this discussion - it is preposterous to suggest that Baha'u'llah neither read not associated with scholars.

 

[oldbadger]

I see reincarnation had a meaning other than how it is currently seen.

Regards Tony

I see Bahai has a meaning other than how it is currently portrayed by bahais.

 

[siti]

Really? You consider that a misquote? Then perhaps when Jesus said to him "let the dead bury their dead" , He also misunderstood that the person was not really dead?!

It is a misquote even if it is a reasonable assumption because Baha'u'llah claims that the Gospel account says something that the Gospel account does not say. In any case, which "dead" was Jesus recommending should be left to "bury their dead"? It is perfectly obvious that Jesus was making a point about spirituality (or lack thereof) here and not proposing that we have zombies conduct funerals. Please try to respond intelligently.

 

[CG Didymus]

Look at the big picture. In the end the bible carried Christs Faith through to the Last Days, but with veils.

Had the Christains read the Bible correctly, they would have also accepted Muhammad, look how much bloodshed would have been prevented.

Instead Muhammads Revelation prevailed in the Holy land as per the Prophecy. By this time Christianity was in its winter.

The Faith of Muhammad also brought about many great things, but as they too started moving away from the Guidance of Muhammad, wars became the winter if both Islam and Christianity.

The big picture is noted in the Bible, it can be no other way, or it is all False.

Regards Tony

"What would be left to that people to cling to..."? That's the thing, the early Christians didn't have a canonized set of Scripture yet. By the time they did, the common people weren't allowed to read it, and most couldn't read anyway. It wasn't the NT that they were clinging to. It was whatever they were being told by Christian leaders. And Christianity was dominated by the Roman Church. And what were they teaching the people? Jesus rose from the dead. The devil is out to get you, etc. So the Church is what they clinged to.

 

[oldbadger]

We are socializing - moreover, we are sharing ideas - you can't help doing that when you have a conversation - even if it is in the modern context of "social media". Its absolute rubbish to suggest that Baha'u'llah did not socialize (or associate) with scholars. It is patently obvious that he did and that he learned from them - the fact oozes out of everyuthing he wrote - he quotes the Bible (inaccurately - which suggests he got his ideas about some of it from other sources) and the Qur'an incessantly - he quotes Sufi poetry...anyway, as I said - we've already had this discussion - it is preposterous to suggest that Baha'u'llah neither read not associated with scholars.

The son of a very wealthy, influential and powerful minister he would have had the bery best private tuition.
He may have been a hafiz which is how he makes mistakes about the bible.
I absolutely doubt the claims that he had no education; it was of the best, just focused to its own cultures etc.

 

[siti]

The passage is in the Bible, so that is not the issue.

I do not need to argue this.

The passage is in the Bible twice - but nowhere does it mention that the man's father had died. That part of Baha'u'llah's quote is in error - which would be an honest and insignificant mistake if you or I had made it - but we are not (or at least I'm not) claiming infallibility.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

OK - here's the entire passage with the bits that show that he read the book underlined. However, I think I am beginning to understand how the idea of truth revealed without the requirement to read might be attractive...

"For instance, a certain man, 23 reputed for his learning and attainments, and accounting himself as one of the pre-eminent leaders of his people, hath in his book denounced and vilified all the exponents of true learning. This is made abundantly clear by his explicit statements as well as by his allusions throughout his book. As We had frequently heard about him, We purposed to read some of his works. Although We never felt disposed to peruse other peoples’ writings, yet as some had questioned Us concerning him, We felt it necessary to refer to his books, in order that We might answer Our questioners with knowledge and understanding. His works, in the Arabic tongue, were, however, not available, until one day a certain man informed Us that one of his compositions, entitled Irshadu’l-‘Avám, could be found in this city. From this title We perceived the odour of conceit and vainglory, inasmuch as he hath imagined himself a learned man and regarded the rest of the people ignorant. His worth was in fact made known by the very title he had chosen for his book. It became evident that its author was following the path of self and desire, and was lost in the wilderness of ignorance and folly. Methinks, he had forgotten the well-known tradition which sayeth: “Knowledge is all that is knowable; and might and power, all creation.” Notwithstanding, We sent for the book, and kept it with Us a few days. It was probably referred to twice. The second time, We accidentally came upon the story of the “Mi’ráj” of Muḥammad, of Whom was spoken: “But for Thee, I would not have created the spheres.” We noticed that he had enumerated some twenty or more sciences, the knowledge of which he considered to be essential for the comprehension of the mystery of the “Mi’ráj”. We gathered from his statements that unless a man be deeply versed in them all, he can never attain to a proper understanding of this transcendent and exalted theme. Among the specified sciences were the science of metaphysical abstractions, of alchemy, and natural magic. Such vain and discarded learnings, this man hath regarded as the pre-requisites of the understanding of the sacred and abiding mysteries of divine Knowledge."

Book of Certitude (page 184)

None of the part you quoted, states He actually read it.

How, in the name of...whatever...did Baha'u'llah "accidentally" come across a particular "story" whilst "referring" to a book he had to wait for in order to comment on it without reading the blasted thing?

I have already quoted how He said He knew all things. He is saying He is the Manifestation of God, the all knowing. How strange you cannot refute His claim, and yet you think He is not who He claimes to be.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The passage is in the Bible twice - but nowhere does it mention that the man's father had died. That part of Baha'u'llah's quote is in error - which would be an honest and insignificant mistake if you or I had made it - but we are not (or at least I'm not) claiming infallibility.

This is where misunderstanding is. You think Bahaullah is 'quoting' the Bible. He is telling the story in the Bible in His own summary or words, and if you think God cannot do that, and He must quote word to word, then you need to explain why God needs to.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It is a misquote even if it is a reasonable assumption because Baha'u'llah claims that the Gospel account says something that the Gospel account does not say. In any case, which "dead" was Jesus recommending should be left to "bury their dead"? It is perfectly obvious that Jesus was making a point about spirituality (or lack thereof) here and not proposing that we have zombies conduct funerals. Please try to respond intelligently.

I already replied to this. It is perfectly fine, and people often say that, a particular story is written in the Bible, and yet they do not mean to quote it. They just give a summary of it, in a way they want to refer to its concept. I don't see why God cannot do that. So, Bahaullah can know the quote precisely, yet He summarizes it in His own way. How do you know that is not the case?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

...he learned from them - .

To prove this, you would need to specifically quote an authentic historical evidence which shows Bahaullah did not know something and then He learned it from the scholars. You would also need to show how that historical account is authentic and accurate. Fair? Because, I can show you many historical accounts that people narrated about the Bab and Bahaullah that they knew what was on the mind of someone else without the person actually talked about. So, why not accepting these?

 

[siti]

I already replied to this. It is perfectly fine, and people often say that, a particular story is written in the Bible, and yet they do not mean to quote it. They just give a summary of it, in a way they want to refer to its concept. I don't see why God cannot do that. So, Bahaullah can know the quote precisely, yet He summarizes it in His own way. How do you know that is not the case?

OK - so that means that the disciple's father had already died (on the grounds that Baha'u'llah, the infallible Manifestation of God says so even though it is not in the actual Gospel account) - so which "dead" people was Jesus recommending should perform the burial? Please answer the question this time.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

"What would be left to that people to cling to..."? That's the thing, the early Christians didn't have a canonized set of Scripture yet. By the time they did, the common people weren't allowed to read it, and most couldn't read anyway. It wasn't the NT that they were clinging to. It was whatever they were being told by Christian leaders. And Christianity was dominated by the Roman Church. And what were they teaching the people? Jesus rose from the dead. The devil is out to get you, etc. So the Church is what they clinged to.

In a talk about science and religion Abdul'baha has said this;

"....All religions of the present day have fallen into superstitious practices, out of harmony alike with the true principles of the teaching they represent and with the scientific discoveries of the time. Many religious leaders have grown to think that the importance of religion lies mainly in the adherence to a collection of certain dogmas and the practice of rites and ceremonies! Those whose souls they profess to cure are taught to believe likewise, and these cling tenaciously to the outward forms, confusing them with the inward truth."

Bahá'í Reference Library - Paris Talks, Pages 141-146

If you read this link above the talk before it is on the search for Truth.

Regards Tony