Bahai without Muhammad, Sufism without Islam

[Brian2]

No I definitely accept them all. One of the main reasons I accepted Baha’u’llah is because I believed so strongly in Christ. For me to deny Baha’u’llah would be denying Christ.

That is only because you have been brainwashed (or scared) by Baha'i into thinking that.
Baha'u'llah is not even the return of Christ according to what the New Testament tells us, the warnings about false Christs that Christians (and anyone who wants to listen) are given.
No doubt it is possible to accept all of those Baha'i calls Messengers, but it is not possible to accept all their teachings without cognitive dissonance, because their teachings contradict each other.

 

[Brian2]

Yeah, God's messages always need amendments, problem for messengers. He changed Qiblah, what was wrong with Jerusalem?

Baha'i/Baha'u'llah wants Mt Carmel to be the new Jerusalem. In reality it is just another way Baha'u'llah contradicts the Bible about the place where God said He wants to be and spend eternity.

 

[Aupmanyav]

There are millions of nice places on earth. I wonder why God / Allah had to chose such places like Jerusalem or Mecca.

Skógafoss in Skógar, Iceland

Isle of Skye, Scotland

Etc.

 

[firedragon]

Howdy!

I recently had a previous event come to mind. I had met some Bahais and we were talking about religion. The thing that came up was that I didn't believe Muhammad was a prophet but that he was central to Bahai. We ended up talking for awhile never really got past the issue.

So I was wondering, could you be Bahai without believing Muhammad was prophet? I just wanted to hear what Bahai's thought about that.

I had also been thinking about Sufism and how one could embrace quite a bit of Sufism without having to embrace Islam. The book I am reading right now which is a collection of treatises by Ibn Ajiba makes mention of Islam and Muhammad for instance but the concept of oneness is much more central. Whereas the books I have on the Chishti order have Muhammad and Islamic orthodoxy in a much more central role. One could read Rumi without being a Muslim but that also doesn't make one a Sufi.

I have my own opinions on these things but thought it might be interesting to ask what other people thought.

The question about Sufism without Islam is like asking about the ground without the earth.

For Sufi's, Sufism is Islam. It's synonymous. It's just an identification that developed through time.

I can understand a Bahai saying he does not believe Muhammed was a prophet because maybe in his mind Muhammed is not necessary for his theology. But then again, this person has not read a single book written by Bahaullah as central scripture for the Bahai faith. This is truly strange to me. But there could be some one like that. Just unbelievable to me.

I am curious about something you said above. You said "oneness is much more central". What do you mean?

 

[loverofhumanity]

That is only because you have been brainwashed (or scared) by Baha'i into thinking that.
Baha'u'llah is not even the return of Christ according to what the New Testament tells us, the warnings about false Christs that Christians (and anyone who wants to listen) are given.
No doubt it is possible to accept all of those Baha'i calls Messengers, but it is not possible to accept all their teachings without cognitive dissonance, because their teachings contradict each other.

Brainwashed to believe Jesus is my Lord and Saviour? Brainwashed to believe the New Testament is the Word of God? If you say so.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The question about Sufism without Islam is like asking about the ground without the earth.

For Sufi's, Sufism is Islam. It's synonymous. It's just an identification that developed through time.

I can understand a Bahai saying he does not believe Muhammed was a prophet because maybe in his mind Muhammed is not necessary for his theology. But then again, this person has not read a single book written by Bahaullah as central scripture for the Bahai faith. This is truly strange to me. But there could be some one like that. Just unbelievable to me.

I am curious about something you said above. You said "oneness is much more central". What do you mean?

Prophet Muhammad and the Quran are central to Baha’i belief. But it took me time to learn about Prophet Muhammad and the Quran because as a former Christian I had no knowledge of Islam.

 

[firedragon]

Prophet Muhammad and the Quran are central to Baha’i belief. But it took me time to learn about Prophet Muhammad and the Quran because as a former Christian I had no knowledge of Islam.

Not necessary. I believe, as a Bahai, the minimum one could do is read their central scripture. If there was a Bahai who said Muhammed was not a prophet, it's a bit unbelievable to me. But could be.

BTW, I was not referring to learning about the prophet or the Qur'an, but just learning about the Bahai faith as a Bahai. Hope you understand.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Howdy!

I recently had a previous event come to mind. I had met some Bahais and we were talking about religion. The thing that came up was that I didn't believe Muhammad was a prophet but that he was central to Bahai. We ended up talking for awhile never really got past the issue.

So I was wondering, could you be Bahai without believing Muhammad was prophet? I just wanted to hear what Bahai's thought about that.

I had also been thinking about Sufism and how one could embrace quite a bit of Sufism without having to embrace Islam. The book I am reading right now which is a collection of treatises by Ibn Ajiba makes mention of Islam and Muhammad for instance but the concept of oneness is much more central. Whereas the books I have on the Chishti order have Muhammad and Islamic orthodoxy in a much more central role. One could read Rumi without being a Muslim but that also doesn't make one a Sufi.

I have my own opinions on these things but thought it might be interesting to ask what other people thought.

Bahais believe Muhammad was a Messenger of God, but His revelation was meant for previous Age. In another words, in Bahai view, the Sharia Laws of Quran was beneficial only upto the Revelation of the Bab. In current Age, we are given a new Law, through Baha'u'llah in the Most Holy Book (Aka the Aqdas).

 

[firedragon]

Baha'i/Baha'u'llah wants Mt Carmel to be the new Jerusalem. In reality it is just another way Baha'u'llah contradicts the Bible about the place where God said He wants to be and spend eternity.

Which writing of Bahaullah are you referring to?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why not take the interpretation of any of the many divisions of different churches and go by that? That is equally good. You are not offering any additional evidence to prove that the Bahai faith founder was a messenger / manifestation of Allah (other than his vision of the heavenly maiden).

If I chose that path, I would be part of a division, that did not except and embrace the Messengers of any over religions.

I see that is the additional evidence. There has never to date been such an acceptance of race, gender and religion to enable the unity of the entire human race, a unity in out diversity that only requires a small shift in our chosen frames of references. Imagine a change of mind can acheive this, so why do we nit consider our oneness, in our diversity?

Regards Tony

 

[Aupmanyav]

If I chose that path, I would be part of a division, that did not except and embrace the Messengers of any over religions.

How does it matter? Finally, you are going to say that the messages in other religions are corrupted. What you accept in Bahai religion is there is other religions also (Peace and Brotherhood). Which religion does not profess that? You are only adding your Iranian preacher at the top of the list.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

How does it matter?

It matters to me.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

How does it matter? Finally, you are going to say that the messages in other religions are corrupted. What you accept in Bahai religion is there is other religions also (Peace and Brotherhood). Which religion does not profess that? You are only adding your Iranian preacher at the top of the list.

Do you use electricity? What about cars and aeroplanes? Does that mean that because we have advanced that we disrespect the horse and cart, candles and oil lamps of the past?

Because that’s what I think you’re inferring. We’ve moved on to the modern age and require modern laws so God sends a Messenger with laws relevant to todays needs. It doesn’t mean lamps and horses are being disrespected just that we’ve progressed.

But there are some who want us to keep using the candle and horse and buggy. We’ve moved on from that into a new age.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you use electricity? What about cars and aeroplanes? Does that mean that because we have advanced that we disrespect the horse and cart, candles and oil lamps of the past?

Because that’s what I think you’re inferring. We’ve moved on to the modern age and require modern laws so God sends a Messenger with laws relevant to todays needs. It doesn’t mean lamps and horses are being disrespected just that we’ve progressed.

But there are some who want us to keep using the candle and horse and buggy. We’ve moved on from that into a new age.

That is absolutely funny, hilarious.
You Bahais are stuck in 7th Century, IMHO, no better than caterpillars. Still believing in god and messengers, of which you cannot provide even an iota of evidence (of course, Bahaollah coined a new designation for himself, as messenger (nabi) was not available, being appropriated by Mohammad. Bahaollah would have been killed immediately if he called himself 'nabi', therefore, the subterfuge). Still believing in supremacy of the male, and abhorring LGBTQ. And you talk of laws of the new age!

 

[firedragon]

That is absolutely funny, hilarious.
You Bahais are stuck in 7th Century, IMHO, no better than caterpillars. Still believing in god and messengers, of which you cannot provide even an iota of evidence (of course, Bahaollah coined a new designation for himself, as messenger (nabi) was not available, being appropriated by Mohammad. Bahaollah would have been killed immediately if he called himself 'nabi', therefore, the subterfuge). Still believing in supremacy of the male, and abhorring LGBTQ. And you talk of laws of the new age!

It's better than you providing no evidence that Brahman exists, quoting Upanishads like a blind faith based zealot, and ignorant every single faith you are living to insult.

Why don't you honestly educate yourself about other peoples faiths that you wish to insult as a living fuel first?

You don't have clue of what you are talking about. Not a clue.

tell me mate. Where did Bahaullah call himself Nabi? Just asking. What was his theology? What was the so called Akram rasool he was mentioning in Kithab al akdhas? I am no Bahai, but I can recognise shameless people like you. Cheap.

Tell me where you get your information from.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It's better than you providing no evidence that Brahman exists, quoting Upanishads like a blind faith based zealot, and ignorant every single faith you are living to insult.

Where did Bahaullah call himself Nabi?

I do not know why you miss my meaning of Brahman all the time. Brahman is what constitutes all thngs in the universe, all things that you see or are not able to see. And Brahman is 'physical energy'. Don't you accept that all things that exist are constituted by 'physical energy'?

Firedragon, tell me, where did I say that Bahaollah called himself 'nabi'? He could not dare to call himself 'nabi', otherwise he would have been killed in any Muslim country.

But then he created a new label 'maẓhar ẓohūr' and called himself 'one who sends nabīyīn' (Mursil-i-Rusul va Munzil-i-Kutub).
"He describes His station in some of His Tablets as "The Sender of the Messengers and the Revealer of the Books"?" Prithvi Singh's answer to Did Bahá'u'lláh claim to be a Prophet in the KItab-i-Aqdas? - Quora

 

[firedragon]

I do not know why you miss my meaning of Brahman all the time. Brahman is what constitutes all thngs in the universe, all things that you see or are not able to see. And Brahman is 'physical energy'. Don't you accept that all things that exist are constituted by 'physical energy'?

Firedragon, tell me, where did I say that Bahaollah called himself 'nabi'? He could not dare to call himself 'nabi', otherwise he would have been killed in any Muslim country.

But then he created a new label 'maẓhar ẓohūr' and called himself 'one who sends nabīyīn' (Mursil-i-Rusul va Munzil-i-Kutub).
"He describes His station in some of His Tablets as "The Sender of the Messengers and the Revealer of the Books"?" Prithvi Singh's answer to Did Bahá'u'lláh claim to be a Prophet in the KItab-i-Aqdas? - Quora

I am too lazy to go back and look at older posts Aup. But if you didn't say that Bahaullah called himself nabi, I apologise for asking that question.

Haha. Bro, you are wrong. There were many calling themselves various things but they were never "killed" just because they were in a muslim country. Some may have been, but it's not like a general thing like you painted it as. I don't know what you mean by Mazhar Zohur. I have to find out. It maybe parsi. Hmm. Mazhar could mean Zuhur in Arabic. I remember a Bahai gentleman was talking about Zahara which was of course a googled cut and paste.

Mind you, when people share Quora links I don't even click on them. But thank you for giving a source.

Calling yourself Rasool is good enough anyway. He called himself Rasool. Many times in kithab al akdhas.

Cheers.

 

[Brian2]

Brainwashed to believe Jesus is my Lord and Saviour? Brainwashed to believe the New Testament is the Word of God? If you say so.

Brainwashed to believe that Baha'u'llah is the return of Christ.
Brainwashed to believe that you can believe the New Testament to be the Word of God and still be a Baha'i.
Is Jesus your Lord or is it that Baha'is have nobody that they refer to as their Lord?
What does it mean that Jesus is you Saviour?

 

[Brian2]

Which writing of Bahaullah are you referring to?

I was not referring to any specific writings of Baha'u'llah.
I was referring to the teaching of Baha'i that Mt Carmel is where God wants to spend eternity when the Bible tells us that Zion /Jerusalem is that place. (Psalm 132:13,14)

I was referring to the teachings of Baha'i that the word of God will go forth from Zion/Jerusalem, as referring to the Baha'i faith going forth from Mt Carmel. (Isa 2:1-5)

I was referring to the Baha'i teaching that Isa 35:1,2 says that Mt Carmel will see the glory of God when it says that the arid places will see the glory of God.

I was referring to various Baha'i writings I have seen which say that Baha'u'llah was saying Mt Carmel is the New Jerusalem.
I find it is hard to find specific quotes in the official Baha'i writings.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Brainwashed to believe that Baha'u'llah is the return of Christ.
Brainwashed to believe that you can believe the New Testament to be the Word of God and still be a Baha'i.
Is Jesus your Lord or is it that Baha'is have nobody that they refer to as their Lord?
What does it mean that Jesus is you Saviour?

Since you are a Christian person, does it really matter that other teachings say differently?