• 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!

Abrahamic Bahai

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
What are some of the major dogmas that Bahai's reject from Christians, Jews, and Muslims?

I know that's sort of broad but I didn't know how else to phrase it without knowing almost zero about Bahai...:eek:
 

jacquie4000

Well-Known Member
I do not know that much either but here is what I found.

Bahaism is said to be the youngest of the world’s independent religions. It was founded in Iran in 1863 and incorporates tenets of both Christianity and Islam.
Bahaism was founded by Mirza Hoseyn ’Ali Nuri who is also known as Baha ’Ullah. Baha ’Ullah claimed that he was a divine manifestation calling himself The Bab (the gate to divine truth).
Participants in the Bahai faith believe in the spiritual unity of all humankind. The Bahai faith is actually quite open and tolerant when it comes to other religions and belief systems.
According to Bahaism the founders and prophets of the prominent religions of the world (Mohammad, Moses, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus Christ etc.) were all sent to earth by one God to offer spiritual guidance to humanity. In addition to these prophets Bahaism recognizes the Bab and Baha ’Ullah, seeing them as the most recent spiritual teachers that have walked on earth.
Participants in the Bahai faith believe that the earth will continue to see new and different prophets in the years to come who will continue to offer guidance to humanity.
Bahaism teaches that:
- All forms of prejudice should be abandoned.
- Men and women should be equal.
- All religions are as one.
- Extreme wealth and extreme poverty should be eliminated.
- Education should be compulsory and universal throughout the world.
- Religion should be in harmony with science and reason.
- It is the responsibility of the individual to search independently for truth.
- A world federal system should be established to facilitate collective security.

Bahai·Bahai
spacer.gif
spacer.gif
•Buddhism•Christianity•Confuciansim•Hinduism•Islam•Jainism•Judaism•Rastafarianism•Scientology•Shinto•Sikhism•Taoism•Voodoo•Zoroastrianism
 

lunamoth

Will to love
Bahaism was founded by Mirza Hoseyn ’Ali Nuri who is also known as Baha ’Ullah. Baha ’Ullah claimed that he was a divine manifestation calling himself The Bab (the gate to divine truth).

Not sure that particular line is accurate. The Bab and Baha'u'llah were two different people.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Victor said:
What are some of the major dogmas that Bahai's reject from Christians, Jews, and Muslims?


It's tough to know where to start with that, as I usually think of it more like "here's what we have in common" and "we believe something like that."

The idea of "progressive revelation" may or may not be one of those.

(Please, members of the religions Victor mentioned, if you see me posting something incorrect, please correct me, ok?)

The essential idea behind "progressive revelation" is that God sends us prophets from time to time because:

1. Humanity is ready for some new lessons
2. Uh...we got a few things wrong
3. Some directives that made sense before no longer apply.

In the case of Islam, Muhammad is believed to be the Seal of the Prophets, and the common understanding of this title is: No more prophets, period. Where our belief is common with Muslims is that there will be no more "minor" prophets.

In the case of Christianity, Jesus is regarded as the last prophet, though He will Return again. We agree about the Return, but look beyond that to God continuing revealing Himself to us through His prophets.

In the case of Judaism, they await the Messiah, but there is (to my knowledge) no overarching idea that God will always keep sending us prophets, even after the Messiah.

We believe that God will never leave any of us in darkness, ever, that humanity is still "growing up" (coming out of turbulent adolescence and into young adulthood now, actually), and will continue to need lessons as long as we have physical existence.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
jacquie4000 said:
- Religion should be in harmony with science and reason.
- It is the responsibility of the individual to search independently for truth.
Two things it has in common with UU beliefs. :)

Off topic, I know, but I come across commonalities so rarely with other religions that I like to point them out when I do.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Hm, another one, and I'm not sure if any other religion has such a belief:

We think of "commandments" as falling into two categories:

1. universal - these are things that never change, such as love your neighbor, be truthful, etc.

2. social - these commandments fit the needs of the time and place where a religion begins. Dietary and marriage laws are a couple of the more obvious examples of this sort of commandment.

We often forsake religions as "outmoded" because, well, it's true: the "social" commandments do get outmoded.

But a Baha'i take on this is: *individuals* do not get to choose what's outmoded or not, because we'll tend to conveniently label anything "outmoded" that we just happen to feel like doing anyway. The human ego is funny that way. ;)

The way the social commandments get changed is when the next Prophet comes -- only he* has the authority to change such things.

*Well, the next one is likely to be a "she" but that's just a guess on my part.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Maize said:
Two things it has in common with UU beliefs. :)

Off topic, I know, but I come across commonalities so rarely with other religions that I like to point them out when I do.

When I take those "beliefs" quizzes, I typically turn up UU, Maize, so maybe the those commonalities are really just an evil UU plot to get us all addicted to coffee. :biglaugh:

Too late! I already am! :thud:
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
lunamoth said:
Bahaism was founded by Mirza Hoseyn ’Ali Nuri who is also known as Baha ’Ullah. Baha ’Ullah claimed that he was a divine manifestation calling himself The Bab (the gate to divine truth).

Not sure that particular line is accurate. The Bab and Baha'u'llah were two different people.

Hm...you've a better eye than I do, lunamoth.

Yeah, the title of "the Bab" was given to Siyyid Ali Muhammad, who's a Prophet Herald figure that came before Baha'u'llah.

The source does seem to have them smushed in together as one person.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Victor said:
So the priesthood is seen as unfair and prejudice?

Oh, I don't think so. Just human is all.

I know a lot of things get laid at the door of Christianity as if it were the working of insane evil plotters or some such thing.

But I don't see it that way at all. I think that earnest people in the history of the Church have had to struggle with difficult issues and find a way to keep unity in the Church, and did the best they could. (Oh, I just thought of a new thread...)

And in our turn, we'll do the same.

Until the next prophet comes to straighten out a few things we could've done better. ;)
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
Booko said:
[/color]It's tough to know where to start with that, as I usually think of it more like "here's what we have in common" and "we believe something like that."

The idea of "progressive revelation" may or may not be one of those.

(Please, members of the religions Victor mentioned, if you see me posting something incorrect, please correct me, ok?)

The essential idea behind "progressive revelation" is that God sends us prophets from time to time because:

1. Humanity is ready for some new lessons
2. Uh...we got a few things wrong
3. Some directives that made sense before no longer apply.

In the case of Islam, Muhammad is believed to be the Seal of the Prophets, and the common understanding of this title is: No more prophets, period. Where our belief is common with Muslims is that there will be no more "minor" prophets.

In the case of Christianity, Jesus is regarded as the last prophet, though He will Return again. We agree about the Return, but look beyond that to God continuing revealing Himself to us through His prophets.

In the case of Judaism, they await the Messiah, but there is (to my knowledge) no overarching idea that God will always keep sending us prophets, even after the Messiah.

We believe that God will never leave any of us in darkness, ever, that humanity is still "growing up" (coming out of turbulent adolescence and into young adulthood now, actually), and will continue to need lessons as long as we have physical existence.

So I suppose the answer to my question is "yes"? Maybe that's not the way it would be worded, but I get the point. ;)

This sounds very similar to LDS in regards to the 3 points you noted and progressive revelation.

Next question:
In the LDS structure, there is a way to find truth and dogma (12 apostles, Prophet). Does such a thing exist in Bahai. If not, how does one know when God has brought a new lesson?
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
Booko said:
Oh, I don't think so. Just human is all.

I know a lot of things get laid at the door of Christianity as if it were the working of insane evil plotters or some such thing.

But I don't see it that way at all. I think that earnest people in the history of the Church have had to struggle with difficult issues and find a way to keep unity in the Church, and did the best they could. (Oh, I just thought of a new thread...)

And in our turn, we'll do the same.

Until the next prophet comes to straighten out a few things we could've done better. ;)

Coolio...but the priesthood is certainly something you guys aren't fond of right?
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Victor said:
This sounds very similar to LDS in regards to the 3 points you noted and progressive revelation.

There are several areas of remarkable similarity between Baha'i and LDS beliefs, despite them obviously beginning in completely separate areas of the world.

I don't think any scholar in his right mind could argue that Baha'u'llah, a Persian exile and prisoner in Akka, and Joseph Smith, an American, could've swapped ideas with each other. It's not like there was email then. ;)

Next question:
In the LDS structure, there is a way to find truth and dogma (12 apostles, Prophet). Does such a thing exist in Bahai. If not, how does one know when God has brought a new lesson?

We look first to the Writings of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and Abdu'l-Baha. The only way something can be considered properly a part of Baha'i Writings is if we have the original and the handwriting is verified and it was written by one of these three Figures. Anything else is not part of the Writings.

In the Writings, there is specific guidance as to who (or what) has the authority to interpret the Writings should any question arise. The first such person was Abdu'l-Baha (son of Baha'u'llah), then Shoghi Effendi Abbas, and now the elected body known as the Universal House of Justice.

Interpretative decisions made by Shoghi Effendi and the "House" are binding. Though if you read them (you can find them online) you'd see they deal with mundane questions about application of, say, laws regarding marriage, burial, etc. and not wider theological points like "the nature of God."

As individuals, one of our principles is "individual investigation of the truth" which means, you have to delve into the Writings yourself and understand as best you can. Oh, that doesn't mean we don't exchange ideas and knowledge -- we do, but there is no *individual* whose opinion can be contrued to be "the correct one."

Even a member of the Universal House of Justice can't claim that sort of authority. He just serves the Institution -- on his own, he's no more "special" than any other Baha'i.

How will we know when God brings a new lesson? As Baha'is, we know one way to know that someone *isn't* a prophet:

CLXVI. Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor. We pray God that He may graciously assist him to retract and repudiate such claim. Should he repent, God will, no doubt, forgive him...Whosoever interpreteth this verse otherwise than its obvious meaning is deprived of the Spirit of God and of His mercy which encompasseth all created things.

(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 344)

It hasn't been a thousand years yet...over 800 to go. And that last sentence leaves out any funny business with the meaning.

As for how to generally recognize a prophet as being a real one, there are many things to look at, but here's some:

- a life of sacrifice in service to humanity
- an upright character
- kindness and justice
- praises the prophets who came before
- knowledge that cannot be explained by mere education

And really, I find Christ's guidance very helpful: The sheep know their Master's voice.

(Erm...which in no way should be read to mean that if someone hasn't heard what I have, they're a goat. :( That's way above my pay grade anyway.)

Also, historically, Prophets seem to turn up in the darkest times and places, so look there. This only makes sense, if you think on it a bit: if everything was hunky-dory, why would God need to send us guidance? You send the Divine Physician where the disease is the worst.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
Victor said:
Coolio...but the priesthood is certainly something you guys aren't fond of right?

I've never heard any Baha'i say anything like that. :confused:

We don't have a priesthood ourselves. But the fact that you have is no issue with us.

It not a normal thing, when a bunch of Baha'is are talking amongst themselves, to make comments that are critical of other religions. At least not that I've seen. We try to stay focused on the job we've been given.

Baha'is don't normally see "different" as being "wrong."

For myself, there are often very good reasons for why other religions do what they do, and I don't assume I will know what those reasons are, or even understand them if I do know about them.
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
Booko said:
I've never heard any Baha'i say anything like that. :confused:

We don't have a priesthood ourselves. But the fact that you have is no issue with us.

It not a normal thing, when a bunch of Baha'is are talking amongst themselves, to make comments that are critical of other religions. At least not that I've seen. We try to stay focused on the job we've been given.

Baha'is don't normally see "different" as being "wrong."

For myself, there are often very good reasons for why other religions do what they do, and I don't assume I will know what those reasons are, or even understand them if I do know about them.

Gotcha.....I know I got that from somewhere in this forum (I'd have to dig for it). But I'll take your word on that. I like your answer better. :p
 

arthra

Baha'i
There is no "priesthood" in the Baha'i Faith... The Baha'is elect their own administration on the local, national and international levels and are responsible for the Faith... No Baha'i by themselves has an Office that places him in authority over another Baha'i...only our elected institutions govern the Faith. We also have an appointive arm that deals with specific functions.

Historically the Faith goes back to the Declaration of the Bab in Shiraz (then Perisa) on May 22-23 1844 and to the Declaration by Baha'u'llah in the Ridwan Garden near Bagdad on April 1863. The Kitab-i-Aqdas revealed by Baha'u'llah and His Will along with the Will and Testament of Abdul-Baha are the bases for our administration and form a covenant which binds the Faith together.

Hope that helps!

- Art
 

9harmony

Member
Booko said:
Hm...you've a better eye than I do, lunamoth.

Yeah, the title of "the Bab" was given to Siyyid Ali Muhammad, who's a Prophet Herald figure that came before Baha'u'llah.

The source does seem to have them smushed in together as one person.

when my daughter took a world religions class in college, the text book listed them as one person, she spent alot of time trying to correct their misconceptions, but when the final exam rolled around, he tested them according to the text book which was inaccurate on many counts. <sigh>

alot of misinformation out there. :(
 

Quiddity

UndertheInfluenceofGiants
Booko said:
There are several areas of remarkable similarity between Baha'i and LDS beliefs, despite them obviously beginning in completely separate areas of the world.

I don't think any scholar in his right mind could argue that Baha'u'llah, a Persian exile and prisoner in Akka, and Joseph Smith, an American, could've swapped ideas with each other. It's not like there was email then.
Oh sorry, I hope I didn’t give you the impression that is where I was taking the similarity. I just used LDS because it’s something I’m more familiar with.
Booko said:
We look first to the Writings of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and Abdu'l-Baha. The only way something can be considered properly a part of Baha'i Writings is if we have the original and the handwriting is verified and it was written by one of these three Figures. Anything else is not part of the Writings.

In the Writings, there is specific guidance as to who (or what) has the authority to interpret the Writings should any question arise. The first such person was Abdu'l-Baha (son of Baha'u'llah), then Shoghi Effendi Abbas, and now the elected body known as the Universal House of Justice.

Interpretative decisions made by Shoghi Effendi and the "House" are binding. Though if you read them (you can find them online) you'd see they deal with mundane questions about application of, say, laws regarding marriage, burial, etc. and not wider theological points like "the nature of God."

As individuals, one of our principles is "individual investigation of the truth" which means, you have to delve into the Writings yourself and understand as best you can. Oh, that doesn't mean we don't exchange ideas and knowledge -- we do, but there is no *individual* whose opinion can be contrued to be "the correct one."

Even a member of the Universal House of Justice can't claim that sort of authority. He just serves the Institution -- on his own, he's no more "special" than any other Baha'i.

How will we know when God brings a new lesson? As Baha'is, we know one way to know that someone *isn't* a prophet:

CLXVI. Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor. We pray God that He may graciously assist him to retract and repudiate such claim. Should he repent, God will, no doubt, forgive him...Whosoever interpreteth this verse otherwise than its obvious meaning is deprived of the Spirit of God and of His mercy which encompasseth all created things.

(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 344)

It hasn't been a thousand years yet...over 800 to go. And that last sentence leaves out any funny business with the meaning.

As for how to generally recognize a prophet as being a real one, there are many things to look at, but here's some:

- a life of sacrifice in service to humanity
- an upright character
- kindness and justice
- praises the prophets who came before
- knowledge that cannot be explained by mere education

And really, I find Christ's guidance very helpful: The sheep know their Master's voice.

(Erm...which in no way should be read to mean that if someone hasn't heard what I have, they're a goat. That's way above my pay grade anyway.)

Also, historically, Prophets seem to turn up in the darkest times and places, so look there. This only makes sense, if you think on it a bit: if everything was hunky-dory, why would God need to send us guidance? You send the Divine Physician where the disease is the worst.
I summarized it in 3 points (correct me if I’m wrong):

-must be the writings of these 3 figures
-Authoritative interpretation and defining is done by Shoghi Effendi and UHJ on non-theological matters.
-Prophet comes every thousand years with certain characteristics and in bad times.

This leads me to my next question. As you know, it is on theological issues that people either divide or unite. Bahai as I see it so far, seems to place more emphasis on non-theological practices as binding rather then on theological ones. How free is the Bahai believer allowed to stretch his/her theological views before it’s going into deep waters? How does one know they are going into deep waters if most theological issues are defined?

Am I completely off my rocker in my understanding? :cover:
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
I summarized it in 3 points (correct me if I&#8217;m wrong):

-must be the writings of these 3 figures
-Authoritative interpretation and defining is done by Shoghi Effendi and UHJ on non-theological matters.
-Prophet comes every thousand years with certain characteristics and in bad times.

This leads me to my next question. As you know, it is on theological issues that people either divide or unite. Bahai as I see it so far, seems to place more emphasis on non-theological practices as binding rather then on theological ones. How free is the Bahai believer allowed to stretch his/her theological views before it&#8217;s going into deep waters? How does one know they are going into deep waters if most theological issues are defined?

Am I completely off my rocker in my understanding?"

That's a very succinct question and gets right down the nit and the grit so to speak.

I think the best answer is that a Baha`i is free to interpret things in just about anyway he needs, BUT he is NEVER allowed to offer that interpretation to others as binding on them in anyway.

One who does demand that other Baha`i's follow his interpretations is violating the covenant which gives no individual the right to do that. He can offer his interpretation as opinion, mind you, but insisting his opinion is correct is never appropriate.

Regards,
Scott
 
Top