• 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!

Baha'i faith is not blind faith.

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
"Soon shall the blasts of His chastisement beat upon you, and the dust of hell enshroud you. .. Ere long, will God, with the Hand of Power, strip them of their possessions, and divest them of the robe of His bounty. To this they themselves shall soon witness."
Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 208

"The gates of Hell have opened wide to receive thee, O thou who hast turned away from thy Lord, the Unconstrained! Repair unto its fire, for it yearneth after thee."
Bahá’u’lláh, The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, p. 178

"They that have disbelieved in God and rebelled against His sovereignty are the helpless victims of their corrupt inclinations and desires. These shall return to their abode in the fire of hell: wretched is the abode of the deniers!"
Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 284

"Likewise apprehend thou the nature of hell-fire and be of them that truly believe."
Baha'u'llah, Suriy-i-Vafa

".. if thou remainest, at the moment of death, a disbeliever in the signs of thy Lord thou shalt surely enter the gates of hell, .."
The Báb, Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 19

These quotes indicate that Bahais have a normal hell with hell-fire.
Yikes!
"Meet the new god
Same as the old god"
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Though, I picked up the impression I had from other Baha'is here, who hint that hell is simply separation from God.
I have never understood that argument.
I you don't believe in god in the first place, how is separation from him a punishment?
And for those who would be affected, the believers, they believe so aren't going to be separated anyway.
Just another meaningless religious platitude that unravels on close examination - something that believers rarely subject their beliefs to.
 

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
So what's the benefit of worshiping it and following its rules (which still include some of the usual stuff like homophobia)?

I certainly wouldn't know. Abrahamic faith in general is not an area where I have much expertise.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Such as?

Tell that to the OED!

"Faith: Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof."

They find meaning in the spiritual teachings that they apply to their lives. When the spiritual teaching works it produces proof that they have a truth.

Here's one argument for a self existing reality that is the foundation of all realities.


That definition of faith is bogus.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
They find meaning in the spiritual teachings that they apply to their lives.
Sure. But "finding meaning" is not the equivalent to being true. Christian dominionists and ISIS both find meaning in the spiritual teachings that they apply to their lives.
When the spiritual teaching works it produces proof that they have a truth.
Miasma theory worked, but it wasn't the truth. Geocentrism worked, but it wasn't the truth. Slavery worked, but it wasn't the truth. Women being morally or intellectually inferior to men worked, but it wasn't the truth.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Here's one argument for a self existing reality that is the foundation of all realities.
He stumbles a little in the beginning of his argument -- "some part of reality cannot not be". While it is necessarily true that non-being cannot be, he fails to justify his "some part" of his statement. And without that justification, his first premise fails.

I grant axiomatically that reality must have always existed. I do not grant that there is "some part" of reality that never existed as an axiom. That must be demonstrated.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
"Soon shall the blasts of His chastisement beat upon you, and the dust of hell enshroud you. .. Ere long, will God, with the Hand of Power, strip them of their possessions, and divest them of the robe of His bounty. To this they themselves shall soon witness."
Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 208

"The gates of Hell have opened wide to receive thee, O thou who hast turned away from thy Lord, the Unconstrained! Repair unto its fire, for it yearneth after thee."
Bahá’u’lláh, The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, p. 178

"They that have disbelieved in God and rebelled against His sovereignty are the helpless victims of their corrupt inclinations and desires. These shall return to their abode in the fire of hell: wretched is the abode of the deniers!"
Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 284

"Likewise apprehend thou the nature of hell-fire and be of them that truly believe."
Baha'u'llah, Suriy-i-Vafa

".. if thou remainest, at the moment of death, a disbeliever in the signs of thy Lord thou shalt surely enter the gates of hell, .."
The Báb, Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 19

These quotes indicate that Bahais have a normal hell with hell-fire.

They offer the consequences of our choices.

So any hell is a result of those choices, as hell is remoteness from God.

It is choosing the darkest room when one is invited outside into the fullness of the mid day sun.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I didn't think the Baha'i God threw anyone in hell.

Then JG, you don't know anything about the Bahai theology.

No, I don't. I'm open to correction.

Though, I picked up the impression I had from other Baha'is here, who hint that hell is simply separation from God.

@JustGeorge You are correct. Hell is remoteness from God.

The consequences of that remoteness are found in all religious scriptures, it is only fair we are given the warnings along with the promise of what acceptance can bring.

Reward and punishment are part of this existence, how can we know justice if there is no injustice?

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The principles of the Teachings of Baha’u’llah should be carefully studied, one by one, until they are realized and understood by mind and heart — so will you become strong followers of the light, truly spiritual, heavenly soldiers of God, acquiring and spreading the true civilization…. – Abdu’l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 22.

Independent Investigation of Truth

The teaching say, a baha'i should investigate deeply until understood by heart and mind, that means there is no blind faith nor a "read the scripture and blindly believe what you read"
I trump your Abdulbaha quote with a conflicting one from Bahaullah himself...
"It is incumbent upon everyone to firmly adhere to God’s straight Path. Were He to pronounce the right to be the left or the south to be the north, He speaketh the truth and there is no doubt of it."
This clearly prescribes blind adherence to dogma, even if it seems nonsensical.

I guess you're back to cherry picking. Which one do you prefer?

@Seeker of White Light statement is correct.

It is by that independent investigation that we find that Baha'u'llah was trustworthy and truthful.

When we then subsequently embrace the advice Baha'u'llah has given by God, we know it is trustworthy and truthful and can embrace this passage in that knowledge.

"It is incumbent upon everyone to firmly adhere to God’s straight Path. Were He to pronounce the right to be the left or the south to be the north, He speaketh the truth and there is no doubt of it." Baha'u'llah.

An example of this is that a great Majority of Muslims think Muhammad is the last Messenger, Baha'u'llah has proven that is wrong. That reflects the passage quoted above.

Regards Tony
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Sure. But "finding meaning" is not the equivalent to being true. Christian dominionists and ISIS both find meaning in the spiritual teachings that they apply to their lives.

Miasma theory worked, but it wasn't the truth. Geocentrism worked, but it wasn't the truth. Slavery worked, but it wasn't the truth. Women being morally or intellectually inferior to men worked, but it wasn't the truth.

Those religious sects are not after truth they are after dominion.

One day we should find that physicalism works but is not the truth. There are logical arguments against physicalism.

My original point is that there are reasons for faith. These topics can be argued ad infinitum.

 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
He stumbles a little in the beginning of his argument -- "some part of reality cannot not be". While it is necessarily true that non-being cannot be, he fails to justify his "some part" of his statement. And without that justification, his first premise fails.

I grant axiomatically that reality must have always existed. I do not grant that there is "some part" of reality that never existed as an axiom. That must be demonstrated.

So us humans always existed?

What about matter/anti matter annihilation?

It's not so certain that our universe, or whatever began to exist of it, is self existing.

So the argument is valid, and in need of demonstration. Ok.

These are arguments that can be very lengthy.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Those religious sects are not after truth they are after dominion.
According to your spiritual beliefs. According to theirs you aren't after the truth. [shrug] Faith is not a reliable way of attaining truth.

One day we should find that physicalism works but is not the truth. There are logical arguments against physicalism.
Do you mean actually mean physicalism (philosophical naturalism) or do you mean methodological naturalism? I haven't seen anyone here assert physicalism. It's pretty rare.

My original point is that there are reasons for faith. These topics can be argued ad infinitum.
Sure there are reasons for faith. There are reasons for everything that people do. From cooking their food to taking coffee enemas. Just saying there are reasons does not indicate that the reasons are good ones.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
What about matter/anti matter annihilation?
What about it? Are you thinking that the energy is lost? The collision of an electron and a positron (anti-electron) results in high energy photons. Nothing is lost.

It's not so certain that our universe, or whatever began to exist of it, is self existing.
I was not talking about our universe. I was talking about reality, of which our universe is a part.

So the argument is valid, and in need of demonstration. Ok.
I think you are trying to say that the argument is sound. Valid just means that it is properly structured. A valid argument can be incorrect.
e.g. All ducks are purple. Martha is a duck. Therefor Martha is purple.
That is a valid argument, but it is not sound because at least one premise is incorrect.
Hid argument is valid in structure, but his premise is unjustified, therefore his argument is not sound.

These are arguments that can be very lengthy.
They can.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
According to your spiritual beliefs. According to theirs you aren't after the truth. [shrug] Faith is not a reliable way of attaining truth.


Do you mean actually mean physicalism (philosophical naturalism) or do you mean methodological naturalism? I haven't seen anyone here assert physicalism. It's pretty rare.


Sure there are reasons for faith. There are reasons for everything that people do. From cooking their food to taking coffee enemas. Just saying there are reasons does not indicate that the reasons are good ones.

There are reasons for having faith. How many people actually have faith before they find out what they have faith in is not how religion goes about acquiring faith in something. It's a non starter.

All that exists is physical. I'm quite fine with methodological naturalism as the only way science can work. I'm talking about the philosophical position. I've never heard anyone logically validate their position that all that exists is physical. It's an assumption based on sense experience. It's rooted in subjective experience. Space and time, matter and energy in a 4 dimensional framework is all that exists; that's physicalism.

Not all phenomenon can be explained solely in physical terms. The usefulness of empiricism is never an issue for me. Yet science itself is not necessarily offering truth value, nor is it the only method of knowing things. It's mankind's conceptualization of the natural world. QM, and GR don't even talk to each other agreeably.

Unless you are refuting Abrahamic God scriptures in their literal interpretations, I see no use of arguing religion with science. Religion usually ends up being a philosophical battle of intuitions. Who has the best intuition and why?

Religion applies to the edification of one's personal existence so that they can grow in character, and strength in issues of relationships and inner experience. Often that implies a spiritual destiny to be sought after. That often involves God(s). It doesn't have to though. I don't see how science should even enter into a religious discussion this way.

If one is talking to an atheist, then you have to start at the beginning with general religious arguments. Of course a lot of religion is based on personal subjective experience. Spirituality usually refers to inner experience. How does one validate their inner experience and what wisdom is correct for that. Again not a scientific argument.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Hmm. that's interesting. Don't you believe in the Imami doctrine? I mean you personally.
It's like if one asks a Muslim, don't you believe Jesus was Messiah? They do, but the Muslim view on Jesus is different from Christians view on Jesus.
For example, Bahais don't believe there was a 12th Imam born before, and he was alive for thousands of years.
 
Top