How are these Great Beings explained?

CG Didymus said:

Where is it in the NT where Jesus changed these laws?

So the thing about nations. So then no nations until Muhammad. What did Jesus bring? Since it has to be a progression... it has to be something less than nations. So cities? Then before Jesus, what did that manifestation bring? Unity of the village? And then the one before him? And so on. Only problem is... didn't we have great empires going why back? So I don't see how the Baha'i explanation about how each manifestation brought larger groups of people into larger societal groups.

Click to expand...

1. He declared in His Sermon on the Mount, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5: 38–39). Thus, the law of an “eye for an eye” was primarily a social law that was modified by Jesus and was not a timeless spiritual principle.

2. Indeed, anyone who violates the Sabbath “shall surely be put to death” (Exodus 31: 14). However, Jesus performed acts of healing and charity on the Sabbath. The Gospel of John relates, “And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (John 5: 16–17). Likewise Jesus said, “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath” (Mark 2: 27–28).

“Jesus’ attitude toward the Sabbath, coupled with the tradition that his resurrection occurred on the first day of the week (Sunday; cf. Matt. 28: 1), meant that Sunday rather than the Sabbath (Saturday) became the chief liturgical day for Christians.”

(Meeks, ed., The HarperCollins Study Bible, p. 1878; “Sabbath,” in Achtemeier, ed., The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, p. 955.)

3. Jesus also altered the Jewish law of divorce. In the Old Testament, Moses said, “When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her; then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house” (Deuteronomy 24: 1). But Jesus said, “Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matthew 19: 8–9).

Advancement is not always measured quantitatively but also qualitatively. Christ brought a better quality of life and a more humane lifestyle.

loverofhumanity said:

Well we hope it doesn’t come to that and are striving to promote unity and harmony between religions, races and nations.

We believe in the goodness of all people so we hope that it won’t get to that stage but with all the nukes in the world anything could happen.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I finally caught up to the latest posts. So what about the degrees of goodness... and badness? Since right now we can use the excuse that nobody's perfect. But what about in a Baha'i world? Won't a little bit of anger, selfishness, greed and all the other negative things still exist?

CG Didymus said:

Yeah, I finally caught up to the latest posts. So what about the degrees of goodness... and badness? Since right now we can use the excuse that nobody's perfect. But what about in a Baha'i world? Won't a little bit of anger, selfishness, greed and all the other negative things still exist?

Click to expand...

This is one description which throws into contrast the current world and what a future golden era of human civilisation will be like...

Women

For instance [in the future] should a woman ..., who is unsurpassed in her beauty and adorned with the most exquisite and priceless jewels, travel unveiled and alone, from the east of the world to the west thereof, passing through every land and journeying in all countries, there would be such a standard of justice, trustworthiness and faith on the one hand, and lack of treachery and degradation on the other, that no one would be found who would wish to rob her of her possessions or to cast a treacherous and lustful eye upon her beauteous chastity!...’

Greed

He is My true follower who, if he come to a valley of pure gold will pass straight through it aloof as a cloud, and will neither turn back, nor pause. Such a man is assuredly of Me. From his garment the Concourse on high can inhale the fragrance of sanctity... And if he met the fairest and most comely of women, he would not feel his heart seduced by the least shadow of desire for her beauty.

So the people of humanity’s golden age will not view lust and possessions as valuable as they do now. Good character, trustworthiness and truthfulness will be more important then.

Vinayaka said:

Depends how you define 'rant' I guess. It comes up quite a bit, yes, it does. And there is always plenty that the Baha'i' adherents say to defend the position. The idea of equality is just plainly a myth, when he top is what it is. Sorry, but no explanation works.

How many of the Baha'i's on this thread have written to the House of Justice to complain about the unfair treatment of women when it comes to being elected to the highest court of Baha'i'?

Click to expand...

I noticed you didn't respond to any of my questions about equality of women in Hinduism, particularly in roles such as priests.

https://www.quora.com/Why-cant-women-be-the-purohit-priest-for-the-temples-in-India

Can women be priestesses?

The history of treatment of women in India in the past and in the present has been a source of concern, and with Hinduism you have had thousands of years to get it right.

At least the Baha'is are open and have some meaningful data that can be viewed by all.

Baha'is are of course free to write to the Universal House of Justice and some have.

Women on the Universal House of Justice

CG Didymus said:

Yes, it weaves around. So we already are finished with the first Woe, supposedly Muhammad. Now chapter 11 goes back to Islam?

Click to expand...

Chapter 11 sets the scene for the emergence of the Baha'i Faith and the second and third woes.

CG Didymus said:

And like I've asked before, What about all the things that happened in the Christian world?

Click to expand...

Part of chapter 9 that I have just explained to you concerns changes in the Christians world.

CG Didymus said:

The Popes, Martin Luther, the Inquisition, the British Empire, the European discovery of the New World, the rise of the U.S. and the world wars, the things happening right now, with environmental problems and militant Islam, China and Russia, North Korea.... none of this is prophesied in Revelation?

Click to expand...

Sounds like you are thinking about it from a protestant Christian POV, and a twenty first century perspective. It was written nearly two thousand years ago. Broader processes are examined as well as specific events in Abrahamic religious history.

CG Didymus said:

Only things about Islam and the Baha'i Faith?

Click to expand...

No. Christianity, Islam, world events, and the Baha'i Faith. Its all there.

CG Didymus said:

So why did God already establish not harming animals in Hinduism and then tell the Jews to kill animals and burn them up? What kind of progression does God have going? If each manifestation took humans to the next level, then should Hindus have followed the Laws of Judaism and leave their spiritual teachings?

Click to expand...

That would be a reasonable argument if each manifestation was teaching the world! They weren't. Hinduism didn't have any influence on the Hebrew people as Judaism didn't have much influence on India. They were geographically and culturally disconnected.

CG Didymus said:

What was taught in the gospels and in the rest of the NT? Baha'is say they have the true meaning of it from Baha'u'llah. What is the true meaning?

Click to expand...

You want me to explain the entire NT from a Christian and Baha'i perspective? Please be more specific.

CG Didymus said:

Does the Baha'i Faith believe the next world is on a spiritual plane? Is there evil on it?

Click to expand...

Life and Death | What Bahá’ís Believe

The Baha'i teachings state that there is no such physical place as heaven or hell, and emphasise the eternal journey of the soul towards perfection. They explain that references to “heaven” and “hell” in the Holy Scriptures of other religions are to be understood symbolically, describing states of nearness to and distance from God in this world and in the realms beyond. Abdu'l-Baha has said that when human beings “become illuminated with the radiance of the sun of reality, and ennobled with all the virtues, they esteem this the greatest reward, and they know it to be the true paradise. In the same way they consider that the spiritual punishment…is to be subjected to the world of nature; to be veiled from God; to be brutal and ignorant; to fall into carnal lusts; to be absorbed in animal frailties; to be characterized with dark qualities…these are the greatest punishments and tortures…”

Heaven and Hell | What Bahá’ís Believe

CG Didymus said:

Don't Baha'is deny the literal interpretation of the miracles in the NT?

Click to expand...

No, only the literal physical resurrection of Jesus.

CG Didymus said:

The Baha'i interpretation makes less sense. Jesus died and rotted away? But his followers said they saw him and spoke with him and make his resurrection the main focal point of way he came to Earth? Like Paul said...

1 Corinthians 15:13-15 …13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith. 15In that case, we are also exposed as false witnesses about God. For we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead, but He did not raise Him if in fact the dead are not raised.…

Click to expand...

Paul never saw the resurrected Christ, but had a blinding vision of Him on the road to Damascus.

Acts 9:1-10

And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.
And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.
And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.
And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.

Yet he likens his experience (where he clearly did not see the resurrected Christ, to those who supposedly did)

1 Corinthians 15:4-8

CG Didymus said:

And that statement of Paul makes the Baha'i interpretation of the resurrection being the coming to life of his followers by starting to teach his word makes absolutely no sense.

Click to expand...

So Jesus physically ascending into the sky and stratosphere to be with His heavenly Father makes more sense to you? I suppose logic, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Carlita said:

Looks like Equal Rights for Women started in 1866 in America
Which started the Women's suffrage movement in about 1920.
At 1920 it became constitutional.
Abdu’l-Bahá l came to the states around the same time. He probably supported the admendment already supported by many people before 1920.

Click to expand...

`Abdu'l-Bahá said, in 1911, that women should be elected to the local governing bodies existing in the United States.

Spiritual Assembly - Wikipedia

This was based on guidance in the Kitab-i-Aqdas written by Baha'u'llah in 1873. It wasn't based on the women's suffrage movement in the USA.

oldbadger said:

OK, but I have referred you to clear evidence that in other places this still occurs today.

Click to expand...

No you have not, I was quoting a 1988 set of meetings in Normanton Qld where Assembly of God Pastors would rudely barge in on meetings spitting their fire. I gave no date. There was no talking with them as they continued with a yelling fest with no interest but to disrupt a peaceful loving meeting.

Would have been better if I called the Police, than try to calm them down, they left still spitting their fire. Interestingly they are both in the grave yard here now, and I still get to say a prayer at their graves.

To add to this any congregation member in the meeting would be told they could no longer have thier children at the Christain School for attending Baha'i Functions.

Again, instead of agreeing or saying the behaviour was unacceptable, you have chosen to use it in another manner.

Stay well and happy - Regards Tony

adrian009 said:

It is true that we have something to learn from everyone we come in contact. Many decision in life are not necessarily a choice between right or wrong, but they can often be choices between the best of two options. Do I stay or do I go for example. Shall I walk this road or another?

Click to expand...

Diverting the topic again, (sigh). So the topic was about prophets being true or false, and only those two choices. It wasn't about roads. Is there a middle ground anywhere for that, for your prophet, in your mind?

CG Didymus said:

It is so much like the same old thing. Mormons, JW's and other Christians say the same thing... "We are true." They will show the written proof in their writings. And say, "You see, it so clear and obvious." No, it is not obvious. Not if they and others, including the Baha'is, think they have the correct beliefs. As soon as they believe that, it makes all others false.

Sure, I believe anybody that follows the basic teachings of the Baha'i Faith will become better people. But, so will Mormons, JW's and other Christians... and... I think even people that follow Hinduism. But, is everything in all those different religious beliefs true? I don't think they have to be... only believed to be true for the followers.

Click to expand...

I don't see it in true/false terms. In the dharmic faiths it isn't dual like that. So I wouldn't look at a teaching and say whether or not it was true or false. I'd look at it and ask, 'is it helpful, or not helpful?' Helpful, in this case,would be something that generally leads you towards dharma or God, or not.

In Abrahamism you have all these dual concepts ... good/evil, God/devil, true/false, etc. Dharmic folds don't THINK that way.

adrian009 said:

I noticed you didn't respond to any of my questions about equality of women in Hinduism, particularly in roles such as priests.

Click to expand...

We're very unequal, in terms of gender roles. The temple priest is traditionally a male gender role. Monasteries, traditionally, are of two kinds, male and female. There are some reasons for this, and all gender roles in any society.

But the difference is that we don't claim we're equal, like Baha'i' do. So it's not the fact that the UHJ is all male, it's the fact that you say Baha'i' authority bodies are open to all, but then the action directly contradicts that.

We accept gender roles. The equality stuff happens in other areas of life where there are no gender roles, like in simply being a devotee of God. My priest here explained that ideal attitude well to me when we travelled together. He said, 'When the devotee steps into the temple, that step is a great equaliser. (Hindu temples have definitive doorways and boundaries between inside and outside.) and I treat everyone exactly the same ... rich, poor, old, young, male, female, etc.

oldbadger said:

Anyway, maybe his motive was to de-stabilise Islam?

Click to expand...

That's a new thought for this thread. Thanks. Sounds quite likely, and certainly Baha'i' is an improvement on Islam.

loverofhumanity said:

Well he changed the law of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth to love thy neighbor.

Click to expand...

That was an Abrahamic law, not found in dharmic faiths, and good on you, but please don't suggest it was anything new to the world. Gandhi spoke against it really well in his famous quote, drawing on ancient Hindu scriptures, and his own common sense.

loverofhumanity said:

Where the conflicting religions can live side by side in peace.

Click to expand...

At this point in time there is only one religion causing great turmoil, (yes there are minor skirmishes elsewhere, often not religion themed though) and perhaps only the radical element of that one. So I would change 'religions' to 'religion'. I don't like being lumped in with that.

adrian009 said:

Tahirih was encouraged to remove her veil exposing her face demonstrating that Sharia law had been superseded by the new Teachings of Bab. At this stage there was no democracy and few rights for women.

Click to expand...

In that one small locality, sure. Surely you're not suggesting the indigenous peoples' women all over the world were wearing veils. In the warmer climates, they wore very little, let alone veils.

Vinayaka said:

Diverting the topic again, (sigh). So the topic was about prophets being true or false, and only those two choices. It wasn't about roads. Is there a middle ground anywhere for that, for your prophet, in your mind?

Click to expand...

Diverting? No. Misunderstanding each other. That's more likey.

Baha'is generally don't use the word prophet a lot. Its much more part of the language and traditions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The words are Manifestation of God and there then are a galaxy of spiritually inspired people. We all are to some extent, although a few are in total darkness and seem to have an aversion to the light.

The station of the Manifestation is twofold. One is in the spiritual realm of God, the other is in the human realm. Ultimately their spiritual station is a mystery incomprehensible to humans.

For Baha'is to know the Manifstation of God, is to know God. Thats very different from Hinduism. However we all have varying human degrees of capacity. We all have some insight and we all are blind.

Can Baha'u'llah whom Baha'is believe to be the Manifestation of God for this day and so providing a message from God Himself be wrong? Baha'is believe he can not. Can Baha'is misunderstand His message and miscommunicate it? Definitely.

Does that answer your question?

adrian009 said:

Diverting? No. Misunderstanding each other. That's more likey.

Baha'is generally don't use the word prophet a lot. Its much more part of the language and traditions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The words are Manifestation of God and there then are a galaxy of spiritually inspired people. We all are to some extent, although a few are in total darkness and seem to have an aversion to the light.

The station of the Manifestation is twofold. One is in the spiritual realm of God, the other is in the human realm. Ultimately their spiritual station is a mystery incomprehensible to humans.

For Baha'is to know the Manifstation of God, is to know God. Thats very different from Hinduism. However we all have varying human degrees of capacity. We all have some insight and we all are blind.

Can Baha'u'llah whom Baha'is believe to be the Manifestation of God for this day and so providing a message from God Himself be wrong? Baha'is believe he can not. Can Baha'is misunderstand His message and miscommunicate it? Definitely.

Does that answer your question?

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't, so I'll try to re-word it, to avoid further diversion. Do you believe, that in regard to the 'Manifestation of God' named Baha'u'llah, that there are only two choices to evaluating him? The one choice being that he is a true manifestation, and the other choice being that he is a false manifestation? (A yes or no answer will suffice, quite adequately.)

adrian009 said:

It is correct that New Zealand was the first country that allowed women to vote in national elections.

The first event that really put Baha'u'llah on the map promoting women's rights was the conference at Badasht in 1848.

Conference of Badasht - Wikipedia

Tahirih was encouraged to remove her veil exposing her face demonstrating that Sharia law had been superseded by the new Teachings of Bab. At this stage there was no democracy and few rights for women.

Táhirih - Wikipedia

A Gathering of the Poems of Tahirih

Click to expand...

Thank you. Will have a look through later. Why would dates designated how soon people supported voting for women? (That's what the original OP said that Bahai were the first to support women's rights to vote rather than rejecting the Shia law in support of Islamic women's rights) and where is Badasht? I can't find it. It's not in a Western country, I would guess?