• 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!

Why Bahai

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I can understand why you would say that. The Baha'i Faith is monotheistic and you have a very non-theist view of Buddhism that is shared by many Buddhists in the West.
That is one factor. But above and beyond that, I don't think that non-Abrahamic creeds can or should be fairly represented under an Abrahamic structure.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
@adrian009

Hi Adrian. I hope I have tagged you correctly. Not very learned on this.

I read your post in response to some questions asked in another thread but I am unable to respond there and ask you questions. Thus, I hope you dont mind me asking here.

You have tagged me correctly and I'm happy to answer your questions to the best of my ability.

1. Since your reference links claim that the Quran is Gods word, do your scholarship also believe that the Holy Book (AL kithab al akdhas) is also Gods word? If that is the case do you consider that (since you believe respected Bahaiullah is a rasool) that rasools deliver scripture?

I have never heard of the 'AL kithab al akdhas'. Do you have a link?

The phrase Rasool as I understand it means Islamic Prophet or Messenger.

As Baha'u'llah brought an independent revelation from God, as Muhammad was independent of Christ and Christ was independent of Moses. As you would not call Muhammad a Christian or Jesus an adherent of Judaism, then Baha'u'llah is not technically a Muslim.

2. You have said that the scholarship believes the Torah to be Gods word and is preserved so far. Thus, who do you believe revealed the Torah? Was it Musa? Was it Aaron and Moses both? Who wrote it down? (All this thinking you are referring to the Pentateuch in the OT)

Moses revealed the Torah. Scholars would dispute this of course and no one really knows who wrote it down and we don't have access to any of the original scripts.

3. The scholarly link you have given quotes the Quran mentioning the "Gospel" and generalises that to the whole Bible. Is that the position? Do you consider the whole New Testament as the "Gospel" or any other view is present?

The paper was written for a Western audience. The Gospels in Western culture refer to the first four canonical books in the New Testament. Muslims usually don't believe these Gospels are what Muhammad refers to in the Quran, seeing the Gospels in the Christian Bible as corrupted. To what extent the other New Testaments books (that are not the four Gospels) are authentic is another question. As you will appreciate there is a diversity of views amongst Baha'is. Baha'is are generally positive about the Apostles of Christ including Paul.

4. Respectable Abdul Baha has said this

"You must know the Old and New Testaments as the Word of God"[24] ('Abdu'l-Bahá)

"Surely the Bible is the book of God"[25] ('Abdu'l-Bahá)

But your scholarly reference also states a lot of doubt in the bible. Is there any way you can state clearly?

In taking a genuinely scholarly approach to the Baha'i writings or any scripture there are complex nuances. Saying the Bible is the 'Word of God', needs elaboration. We need to look at what all the relevant writings say, not just take one phrase out of context.

I hope this is not too much work. Haha. After all, you do have your life to tend to. If you have time only.

Thanks in advance.

Peace.

You're welcome. :)
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
That is one factor. But above and beyond that, I don't think that non-Abrahamic creeds can or should be fairly represented under an Abrahamic structure.

The representation of the religions of the world is not under the Abrahamic structure. From the Baha'i perspective it is under the universal structure of the progressive revelation. If one believes them as separate, that too represents an option of belief, which is the option of the believers of most religions considering their own belief is the only true one. An unfortunate divisive perspect that often leads to violence.

Interesting note: Abraham, is A Brahman
 
Last edited:

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
You forgot Mohammad version 2.5, and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad version 3.1 (The Ahmadiyya version).
Bahais say don't use version 3.1, stick to version 3. Software not to be revised for at least 800 years.

Baha'is don't believe the Mirza Ghulam Ahmad version so that's a 0.0

Yes and yes. Luis said, "They are often accused of misrepresenting other creeds. I for one agree that they do indeed misrepresent the non-Abrahamics to a grave degree."

Can you be more specific?

Yeah, they consider the religious books of all religions good enough only to be discarded since their books represent the latest desires of Allah.

Not true. You are misrepresenting my religion. How ironic. :D
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
The representation of the religions of the world is not under the Abrahamic structure. From the Baha'i perspective it is under the universal structure of the progressive revelation.
I stand corrected... but that is still co-opting Dharmas that, frankly, I do not think that the Bahai Faith has a very good grasp of in the first place.

And presenting them as stepping stones for an Abrahamic Creed... I can't in good faith approve of that, sorry.

If one believes them as separate, that too represents an option of belief, which is the option of the believers of most religions considering their on belief is th eony true one. An unfortunate divisive perspect that often leads to violence.

Interesting note: Abraham, is A Brahman

I just don't see an upside to forcing non-Abrahamic (or even Abrahamic) Faiths into a role of selective assimilation into an Abrahamic creed.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Actually, reading Shogi Effendi's writing this is what he says.

"The aim of Bahá’u’lláh, the Prophet of this new and great age which humanity has entered … is not to destroy but to fulfil the Revelations of the past, to reconcile rather than accentuate the divergencies of the conflicting creeds which disrupt present-day society."

That quote alone makes it clear the Baha'i Revelation does not seek to discard or destroy other revelations as falsely claimed by another.

I believe that "Rasool" has been translated as "The Prophet". Effendi is Bahaullah's grandson according to Moojan Momen. I dont know if he wrote in Arabic but I am 100% sure now that the Bahai's believe he was a rasool. Unless of course I am totally mistaken.

I am interested to know what you meant by sender of rasool. You mean he is God himself? Is that what you meant?

Shoghi Effendi was not a Prophets and his writings can not be considered Divine Revelation. He was appointed by Abdu'l-Baha as the leader of the Baha'i Faith and authorised interpreter of the Baha'i writings.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
They say they support all religions, then mention only 9 as legitimate. The rest of us don't count, I guess. I've been through all this before, but for Hinduism, like other faiths, it's a mangled poorly done job of understanding.

What is written about Hinduism came later, and the main person (Moomen, I could have the spelling wrong) was way off.

You are misrepresenting the Baha'i Faith in regards Hinduism.

Just because Shivaism isn't mentioned in the Baha'i writings, doesn't imply this branch of Hinduism is seen as any less legitimate than any other branch of Hinduism.

In regards Hinduism Shoghi Effendi has said:

...Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islám and the religion of the Sabaeans. These religions are not the only true religions that have appeared in the world, but are the only ones which are still existing. There have always been divine prophets and messengers, to many of whom the Qur'án refers. But the only ones existing are those mentioned above.

Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster and Related Subjects
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I stand corrected... but that is still co-opting Dharmas that, frankly, I do not think that the Bahai Faith has a very good grasp of in the first place.

And presenting them as stepping stones for an Abrahamic Creed... I can't in good faith approve of that, sorry.

Sorry, the Baha'i Faith has a more universal view than 'stepping stones' for the Baha'i Faith. co-opting is one of those acrid accusations many religions make of later religions, because they believe their beliefs co-opt older beliefs with what they believe is the ONE true belief. This is often the case with the Gurus of Hinduism. It is obvious that you 'can't in good faith approve of that, sorry,' because of your agenda, but that does not make it so.

I just don't see an upside to forcing non-Abrahamic (or even Abrahamic) Faiths into a role of selective assimilation into an Abrahamic creed.

There is no forcing any one here, if one does no believe no one is forcing you to believe even one Guru claims believe he is the one true Guru that co-opts previous Gurus.

none the less Abraham is literally A Brahman
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
That quote alone makes it clear the Baha'i Revelation does not seek to discard or destroy other revelations as falsely claimed by another.



Shoghi Effendi was not a Prophets and his writings can not be considered Divine Revelation. He was appointed by Abdu'l-Baha as the leader of the Baha'i Faith and authorised interpreter of the Baha'i writings.

According to the Baha'i Faith Shoghi Effendi's and Abdu'l baha's writings are scripture reflect the will of Baha'u'llah.

Nonetheless Krishna, Buddha, and Zoroaster are considered Manifestations of God based on Baha'i scripture as the Baha'i Faith considers scripture in its religion..
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
You are misrepresenting the Baha'i Faith in regards Hinduism.

Just because Shivaism isn't mentioned in the Baha'i writings, doesn't imply this branch of Hinduism is seen as any less legitimate than any other branch of Hinduism.

In regards Hinduism Shoghi Effendi has said:

...Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islám and the religion of the Sabaeans. These religions are not the only true religions that have appeared in the world, but are the only ones which are still existing. There have always been divine prophets and messengers, to many of whom the Qur'án refers. But the only ones existing are those mentioned above.

Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster and Related Subjects

We've been down this road before, and I don't see how I'm misrepresenting anything. It mentions what it mentions. No Siva, no Shakti, no Ganesha, not even Vishnu. Just Krishna. No mention of all the indigenous religions, of Satanism, of Druids, of Druze, only 9 doors, not 2000.

But you're free to toss out allegations. As you know, I'm here because I have an anti-Bahai agenda, and nothing else. (groan)
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Sorry, the Baha'i Faith has a more universal view than 'stepping stones' for the Baha'i Faith. co-opting is one of those acrid accusations many religions make of later religions, because they believe their beliefs co-opt older beliefs with what they believe is the ONE true belief. This is often the case with the Gurus of Hinduism. It is obvious that you 'can't in good faith approve of that, sorry,' because of your agenda, but that does not make it so.

My agenda is indeed one of protecting the diversity of beliefs.

I make no apology.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
We've been down this road before, and I don't see how I'm misrepresenting anything. It mentions what it mentions. No Siva, no Shakti, no Ganesha, not even Vishnu. Just Krishna. No mention of all the indigenous religions, of Satanism, of Druids, of Druze, only 9 doors, not 2000.

But you're free to toss out allegations. As you know, I'm here because I have an anti-Bahai agenda, and nothing else. (groan)

Of course, the Baha'i scripture does not mention all Revelations, and I do not believe the original Druids considered their beliefs as Satanism, because that is most like a much later corruption of Druid cults and revisionists today try to make something of the Druids where there is no evidence to support this.
The only thing that is clear and specific in Baha'u'llah's writings is the Revelation for the Source some call God(s) is universal in human history with all cultures, and based on the writing and the ancient history there may be more than one in Vedic history.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
My agenda is indeed one of protecting the diversity of beliefs.

I make no apology.

Your statements apparently do not reflect the desire of protecting all beliefs including the Baha'i Faith. Since most religions believe in some way or another they co-opt previous religions. What gives in term of who you are selectively protecting?

I do not expect you to apologize, but this response too short to be adequate as a response to my posts,
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Of course, the Baha'i scripture does not mention all Revelations, and I do not believe the original Druids considered their beliefs as Satanism,

I think you misread what I said, I put both Druids and Satanism on the list of unlisted. I didn't make any correlation between the two. Just thinking of random faiths not mentioned, and there are many, as you pointed out.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
According to the Baha'i Faith Shoghi Effendi's and Abdu'l baha's writings are scripture reflect the will of Baha'u'llah.

Of course, you do not believe it so, because you do do not believe in the Baha'i Faith. Nonetheless Krishna, Buddha, and Zoroaster are considered Manifestations of God based on Baha'i scripture as the Baha'i Faith considers scripture in its religion, and you do not determine that..

The scope of Shoghi Effendi's authority is clearly outlined in Abdu'l-Baha's Will and Testament, Shoghi Effendi himself and the Universal House of Justice. Reflecting the will of Baha'u'llah is not the same as Divine Revelation.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say I don't believe in the Baha'i Faith.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
We've been down this road before, and I don't see how I'm misrepresenting anything. It mentions what it mentions. No Siva, no Shakti, no Ganesha, not even Vishnu. Just Krishna. No mention of all the indigenous religions, of Satanism, of Druids, of Druze, only 9 doors, not 2000.

But you're free to toss out allegations. As you know, I'm here because I have an anti-Bahai agenda, and nothing else. (groan)

We have been down this road. You make a statement that has no support from the Baha'i Writings. I correct you and then you accuse me of calling you anti-Baha'i. You're better than that.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
We have been down this road. You make a statement that has no support from the Baha'i Writings. I correct you and then you accuse me of calling you anti-Baha'i. You're better than that.

It wasn't you who claimed I have an anti-Baha'i agenda, but neither did you refute it. Differences of opinion are always there. 'Correcting' is often just offering up an alternative POV. You 'correct' me. I 'correct' you. Who knows? It is the error of omission happening here, so it isn't really clear what your prophet thought of all the other religions besides the one he mentions. He couldn't possibly have known the finer details of all the world's religions, but you might believe he did. I think he could have easily mentioned more than 9, two of which are practically unheard of. The Sikhs, and Jains, amongst others were very there during his time.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
That is one factor. But above and beyond that, I don't think that non-Abrahamic creeds can or should be fairly represented under an Abrahamic structure.

The Baha'i faith certainly does make definitive statements about the nature of the Buddha (Manifestation of God) that many Buddhists such as yourself would not agree with. However there really isn't too much the Baha'i writings themselves have to say about either Buddhism and/or Hinduism and most of it is left to scholars and students of religion to work out.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
The Baha'i faith certainly does make definitive statements about the nature of the Buddha (Manifestation of God) that many Buddhists such as yourself would not agree with. However there really isn't too much the Baha'i writings themselves have to say about either Buddhism and/or Hinduism and most of it is left to scholars and students of religion to work out.
I truly appreciate your frank honesty in this regard. So many folks talk like your prophet was an absolute expert on all things.
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I realize that Baha'is value reconciling irreconcilables and endeavor to do so. And I realize that there are folks who call themselves Christian and believe that they can reconcile irreconcilables. That traditional Jews reject traditional Christianity is nothing new to me; and that traditional Jews and traditional Christians reject Islam comes as no surprise to me either. But what I find surprising are traditional Christians who imagine that reconciliation with Islam or Baha'i religion is possible. IMHO, that's as goofy as traditional Christians who "hope" for the day when traditional Jews in Israel build the Third Temple and accept Jesus. I say: Not until and unless the Most High Himself intervenes.

The 3rd temple I see is confirmed as Baha'u'llah.

The Tablet of the Temple is the opening work in this book;

The Summons of the Lord of Hosts | Bahá’í Reference Library

This was offered to humanity;

"Thus have We built the Temple with the hands of power and might, could ye but know it. This is the Temple promised unto you in the Book. Draw ye nigh unto it. This is that which profiteth you, could ye but comprehend it. Be fair, O peoples of the earth! Which is preferable, this, or a temple which is built of clay? Set your faces towards it. Thus have ye been commanded by God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Follow ye His bidding, and praise ye God, your Lord, for that which He hath bestowed upon you. He, verily, is the Truth. No God is there but He. He revealeth what He pleaseth, through His words “Be and it is”.... "

Regards Tony
 
Top