That, most certainly, has not been my experience on these forums. On the wiki page, 'Criticism of the Baha'i Faith', you told me you could explain why they were all false accusations. Can you give me any specific examples of where you have doubts.
Maybe the discrepancy between country censuses, and Baha'i claims on population?
I am going to go through this website and address all the points. Here is the first installment.
(
Quotes from Criticism of the Bahá'í Faith)
“A core teaching of the Bahá'í Faith is the unity of all the world's religions; They believe that the teachings of all the major religions are components of a single plan which is directed by the same God, yet that religion is cyclical in nature and becomes corrupted with time.[1] The religions that the Bahá'í Faith claims to be congruent appear to have contradictory teachings. For instance, their attitude toward the Abrahamic prophets (Moses, Jesus, Muhammad) and the way in which followers partake in worship vary significantly among the major religions, and social laws and attitudes vary between traditions.”
The Baha’i Faith does not claim that all religions are the same. We claim they the religions as they were originally revealed are
different because each new Messenger of God has a new message and new social teachings and laws, which are
different in every age, to meet the needs of the times. The religions as they were originally revealed before they were corrupted by human hands did not contradict one another. Using this example they gave, the reason the attitudes towards Abrahamic prophets differs among the different Abrahamic religions is because what was revealed by those Prophets differed according to the understanding and needs of the peoples of that age.
For example, in the days of Moses, it was sufficient for believers to believe that Moses was a Prophet, a man who heard from God but who was not infallible, but when Jesus came He was speaking to a different group of people and they needed to understand that He was speaking
as God, having the same authority as God. Unfortunately, what Jesus said was misconstrued by the Christian Church so they ended up believing that Jesus was God incarnate. But Jesus denied being God on many occasions and said that He was a Prophet and a Mediator between God and man, which is the same thing that Baha’u’llah says about Himself.
Then Muhammad came and claimed to be one among many Messengers of God, which is close to what Baha’u’llah said, which makes sense because this was centuries after Jesus and humanity had progressed so humanity was now ready for a new concept that was to incorporate all the Messengers of the past. But I do not think Muhammad claimed to be infallible (although I am not sure of that, this is what a Muslim told me).
But now Baha’u’llah comes and claims to be infallible... Why? I think the reason is that we are now able and need to understand that a Messenger of God is
also a Manifestation of God so in a sense He is more than just a Messenger; He is God, just not the full Essence of God in the flesh, as Christians believe about Jesus. We need to understand that Baha’u’llah was infallible (as were all the Manifestations of God who preceded Him) because of how important it is to follow His teachings and laws, since so much of the future of humanity hinges on His infallibility.
“The principle of universalism itself has many opponents, such as Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who claims that it not only demeans local and national traditions but also encourages widespread religious supremacy.”
I have heard this criticism before. The Baha’i Faith does not demean the Jewish traditions; we just believe they have been superseded by newer religious traditions that are more suitable for this age in history. Do you really think that the laws in the Old Testament are appropriate for the modern age, death for homosexuals? I don’t.
Logically speaking, if God sent a new Messenger with a new message and said it supersedes the older religions, that is what God did... If not, we can all take out toys and go home. None of this is about religious supremacy. It is just about what God did or did not do.
However, the fact remains that both Jews and Christians believe they are the chosen people of God, so are they not the pot calling the Baha’i kettle black? Jews believe that when the Messiah comes they will be recognized as the “chosen ones” and they will regain the standing they lost when Jesus came. The Torah will be declared the official Book of God for everyone, and everyone will follow the Torah forever. I know this because I have had extended conversations with Jews on another forum. Talk about arrogant.
Of course they will never recognize Baha’u’llah because He has His own Writings, not the Torah. From a Baha’i point of view, the Jews misinterpreted their scriptures just like Christians did. They both believe that their scriptures are
the only scriptures and their religion is
the only religion for all eternity. But how could they both be right, given they disagree about whether Jesus was even sent by God? This is too much of a mess to clean up without a new religion being revealed, and that is one reason Baha’u’llah came.
“Sacks disputes the principle of universalism on the grounds that there may not be just one truth about the essentials of the human condition.[2] Bahá'í authors have tried to refute the criticism by claiming to promote unity in diversity.[3] “
How can there be more than one truth about the essentials of the human condition? There can be different facets of the truth, different ways of looking at the truth, and there can be more than truth about why God created man. Unity in diversity means there is more than one truth and more than one way of looking at the same truth, but these truths cannot contradict each other and still be right because that is illogical.
That is enough for now. I do not want to overwhelm you with a longer post. I will continue to go through this website and respond to all the points made.
