• 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!

How are these Great Beings explained?

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
True. But I personally have no reason to doubt it either. With the hard-set minds I've seen, it would be difficult to come to compromise if either person, fro example, expressed any doubts about infallibility or other dogma. Divorce isn't easy in Hinduism either, for similar reasons. Baha'i' statistics are incredibly difficult to figure, for lots of reasons. The small number makes it so it may not even be on the charts of major researchers, there is a tendency to really downplay or altogether ignore any negatives, and more. But I digress. Certainly I've never sen any studies to the contrary either. Lots of claims, but no actual studies.

I think its best to work with what we know, rather than what we don't. I'm not aware of any studies that have looked specifically at divorce rates in Baha'i communities and until there is some evidence to suggest that Baha'i marriage rates or better or worse than the communities they are based in, it is just speculation. I think a more fruitful area of exploration might be to consider factors that result in success and failure of marriages.

One of the most obvious causes of divorce is infidelity and the Baha'i writings are very clear about chastity and monogamy. Another is that prospective partners often don't really know each others or themselves prior to marriage. Sexual attraction can distort reasonable decision making. Once again this is addressed in the Baha'i writings with Abdu'l-Baha's advice to become thoroughly acquainted with each other's characters prior to marriage and the consent of parents.

Yet another cause is lack of love and general unkindness and abuse. The Baha'i writings are strong on love and good character.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Re divorce ... here's another link, just a discussion on reddit about it, not an anti-Baha'i' site, but has differing opinions too.

A couple of questions for you re divorce in Bahai community • r/bahai

So the point? That a Baha'i is human and no less subject to moral decline that any other human?

Yes then, we are our worst enemies as Baha'u'llah has said;

"........ He, Who is the Eternal Truth, beareth Me witness! Nothing whatever can, in this Day, inflict a greater harm upon this Cause than dissension and strife, contention, estrangement and apathy, among the loved ones of God......."

This advice is timeless and is reflected in all Faiths.

We are young and still learning.

Regards Tony
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Tony, clarify this.

Could it be you are not Tolerant of what Baha'u'llah has offered from God. He is the Mesenger and we but share what is on the Table.

Bahaullah offers one out of many messages. Some messages he does not offer are those that do not come from god. Messages that come from god(s) do not come from the same god Bahaullah believes in. So he only offers his teachings (his own set of food) not a banquet. If he offered a banquet of everyone's, it would be contradicting what he is saying. He doesn't.

The Banquet Host has provided all the choices, has left no one without a favorite dish. All Humanity are at the Banquet table.

You missed my point above and in my last post. You mentioned Bahaullah offered something we can choose to accept or not. Bahaullah has given us a choice (one choice) not many. He has not given us a choice to believe in religions without god. He gave us an ultimatum that if we do not, we will not have greater peace. Where in Bahaullah's scriptures does it say we can gain greater peace without god?

I fully accept you do not eat some of what is offered on that table, but consider it will remain on the table for others to choose.

It's alright to leave it on the table. Of course, you accept and respect people's choices. That is not my point, though.

Why would it remain on the table? In my class, we usually take leftovers with us rather than wait respectfully for others to choose to eat our food or not.

My other question that you didn't answer is, why not put your (and everyone else) put you guys food aside and make a new dish together? You can use the same ingredients from your own food, but why not a new dish together rather than wait for others to chose your dish without needing to force them?

I hope you get my point without seeing it negatively.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I think its best to work with what we know, rather than what we don't. I'm not aware of any studies that have looked specifically at divorce rates in Baha'i communities and until there is some evidence to suggest that Baha'i marriage rates or better or worse than the communities they are based in, it is just speculation. I think a more fruitful area of exploration might be to consider factors that result in success and failure of marriages.

One of the most obvious causes of divorce is infidelity and the Baha'i writings are very clear about chastity and monogamy. Another is that prospective partners often don't really know each others or themselves prior to marriage. Sexual attraction can distort reasonable decision making. Once again this is addressed in the Baha'i writings with Abdu'l-Baha's advice to become thoroughly acquainted with each other's characters prior to marriage and the consent of parents.

Yet another cause is lack of love and general unkindness and abuse. The Baha'i writings are strong on love and good character.

Of course that avoids the question of deception, but that's fine. Did you have an opportunity to read the third 'link' I gave? One chap indicated that the National Council or whatever its called would have the data. I think marriage at all cost is overrated personally. I've seen a few too many quite unhappy marriages. I've read a lot of the Baha'i' stuff on it, and it seems like you guys are trying, as are many faiths. and counsellors. You and I would have a few minor disagreements I suspect.

In my limited experiences with divorces, there were many causes. One was religious intolerance, one was infidelity, another was total neglect, etc. I wouldn't guess as to which cause is the most common. Before I was married, I had figured it down to being a lot more about when you marry than who you marry. In other words, maturity as a person.

The non-acceptance of gay marriage would be one. I've known children of gay marriages. and it seems to me if some young adult were asked, 'Which of the these two choices would you take: two Dads or Moms who loved each other and raised you well, or a Mom and Dad who fought all the time, never spent any time with you, etc. which would you choose? I think that answer is obvious.
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
. He has not given us a choice to believe in religions without god.

Yes the feast we share is with God.

Consider you did not accept the invitation and feast at other tables.

I know you would love to have some of the food from the table we have been asked to invite you to. ;)

I hope you get my point without seeing it negatively.

Ha ha. If we get to share a meal, it is always good. :hugehug:

Not in mine.

Ha ha, if we looked I am sure we can find a quote from the original source that will help us understand this more!

Unless you are saying this does not exist at this time in your Faith at all.

Be always happy and joyful now :grinning:

Regards Tony
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Unless you are saying this does not exist at this time in your Faith at all.

I may have misunderstood, Tony. Wouldn't be the first time. I was going by Baha'u'llah's quote, and since he's irrelevant to my faith, and not of my faith, and whose words varies greatly from my faith. Yes I would agree that He does not exist in my faith at all, just as reincarnation, a knowable God, using icons to worship, monasticism, etc. doesn't exist in the Baha'i' faith.

As for finding a quote in Hindu scripture, sure you can find anything. You can take Sanskrit, pretend you know the language, and translate it into pretty much anything at all. Anti-Hindus have already done that.

Edited... But with most of his quotes, because they're written in such archaic language,l I often just get confused trying to decipher what the heck he is trying to say.
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Bahaullah offers one out of many messages. Some messages he does not offer are those that do not come from god. Messages that come from god(s) do not come from the same god Bahaullah believes in.

There is One God, this is the feast offered.

"This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures."

You are invited to this table, you do not have to come.

You can feast at any table you say is other Gods, or not Gods table. I choose the feast of the One God :)

Regards Tony
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Consider you did not accept the invitation and feast at other tables.

Actually, during our ceremony, we eat each other's food. Though, we don't usually have American since everyone has ate that at least once in their lifetime here in the states. If everyone wanted everyone else to try their food but they didn't want to try anyone else's, I don't see that as a solution. So, would it be helpful that everyone make a new dish rather than half the class wanting the other to eat their dish without trying others out?

And if they try other dishes out, try not to put the recipe into your own meals unless you ask. A lot of people are very personal with their dishes and it takes a lot of openness and trust to share their cultural food with others.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
You are invited to this table, you do not have to come.

You can feast at any table you say is other Gods, or not Gods table. I choose the feast of the One God :)

My whole entire point in this whole thread is: If you want greater world peace with all humanity, we have to have some type of agreement with each other. Maybe make food together instead? I ate at your table 8,690 times. Peace starts with We not you and not I.

Maybe try some of my food sometime?
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
My whole entire point in this whole thread is: If you want greater world peace with all humanity, we have to have some type of agreement with each other. Maybe make food together instead? I ate at your table 8,690 times. Peace starts with We not you and not I.

Maybe try some of my food sometime?

Ha ha, after that many feasts, we are all to full to eat. :glomp:

Time to go to sleep, wake up and get some exercise.

Regards Tony
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course that avoids the question of deception, but that's fine. Did you have an opportunity to read the third 'link' I gave? One chap indicated that the National Council or whatever its called would have the data. I think marriage at all cost is overrated personally. I've seen a few too many quite unhappy marriages. I've read a lot of the Baha'i' stuff on it, and it seems like you guys are trying, as are many faiths. and counsellors. You and I would have a few minor disagreements I suspect.

In my limited experiences with divorces, there were many causes. One was religious intolerance, one was infidelity, another was total neglect, etc. I wouldn't guess as to which cause is the most common. Before I was married, I had figured it down to being a lot more about when you marry than who you marry. In other words, maturity as a person.

The non-acceptance of gay marriage would be one. I've known children of gay marriages. and it seems to me if some young adult were asked, 'Which of the these two choices would you take: two Dads or Moms who loved each other and raised you well, or a Mom and Dad who fought all the time, never spent any time with you, etc. which would you choose? I think that answer is obvious.

I have looked at the third link. It is interesting reading the responses and some of the comments are insightful but it doesn't give us any qualitative data that would help us know whether or not divorce rates amongst Baha'is are different to the community they live in. I presume some National Spiritual Assemblies would record statistics and would be the best institutions to do so, but am unaware of any such data being made public.

I would hope that religious intolerance wouldn't be an issue amongst Baha'is. My wife isn't a Baha'i, we've been married for over 17 years and have 2 teenage sons. We get on fine.

It would be a challenge for someone who grows up a Baha'i or becomes a Baha'i who is gay, but its just something to be worked through like most things in life.

I don't believe there is a major problem with Baha'i marriages or that Baha'is have anything to hide.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I honestly feel you're using the bible as an idol in place of god and christ himself.

Interesting comment @Carlita.

First, as a Baha'i I worship God as so see God reflected in Christ. The bible represents much of what we know of the life and teachings of Jesus. Therefore I hold the Bible in high regards, but it is God and His Manifestations that I revere. Therefore I wouldn't agree with using the bible as an idol as you say.

Second, we are discussing the alleged physical resurrection of Christ, so it is really an argument in part about the validity of science and reason over religion. A physically resurrected man ascending into the sky, contradicts science and reason, so we need to consider alternative meanings for what is written in the bible rather than taking it literally.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Second, we are discussing the alleged physical resurrection of Christ, so it is really an argument in part about the validity of science and reason over religion. A physically resurrected man ascending into the sky, contradicts science and reason, so we need to consider alternative meanings for what is written in the bible rather than taking it literally.

I've said, though, if you're talking about superman, no he did not rise. The alternative meanings I've mentioned is union with christ through Mass via the life-scripture and prayer, death-confession, and resurrection-communion and prayer.

I don't see it symbolically. Real people actually go through the act of the literal passion of christ.

How can you see god literally but a lot of scripture symbolically?

Can you provide other alternatives to believing the literal resurrection of christ? If it's only symbolic (or spiritual, if you like), why wouldn't god be the same? Can you prove god exists by science (not testimony) or is that an experience just the same as how I described the resurrection?
 
Last edited:

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
It is easy to take quotes of a religion out of context and portray it as being something it isn't. We need to look at all the writings to gain balance and perspective.
Women having babies does not lock women into household servitude. Each family is free through consultation where men and women are equals to decide how best to manage the roles of caring for children, managing the home, and providing an income. Sometimes the most practical approach is for the man to stay at home and for the woman to work and there is absolutely nothing that stops a couple from making such a decision. Baha'i couples often have to make the same compromises as any other couple. For example the women because of her education may be in a better position to support the family financially. Sometimes it is simply preference rather than necessity that causes coupes to reverse roles.
Do assemblies step in and try to counsel the couples to take more traditional roles. No.

LOL! Unless the HUSBAND says NO! That is lack of true equality.

Abdu'l-Baha who said this, wished only to be know as 'Servant of God' which is what name literally means if translated. As Baha'is, men and women are chief concern is to serve humanity and that is the highest honour and rank.

Marriage is essentially an intimate relationship between two equals:

O ye two believers in God! The Lord, peerless is He, hath made woman and man to abide with each other in the closest companionship, and to be even as a single soul. They are two helpmates, two intimate friends, who should be concerned about the welfare of each other.

If they live thus, they will pass through this world with perfect contentment, bliss, and peace of heart, and become the object of divine grace and favor in the Kingdom of heaven. But if they do other than this, they will live out their lives in great bitterness, longing at every moment for death, and will be shamefaced in the heavenly realm.

Strive, then, to abide, heart and soul, with each other as two doves in the nest, for this is to be blessed in both worlds.
Abdu'l-Baha

The true marriage of Bahá’ís is this, that husband and wife should be united both physically and spiritually, that they may ever improve the spiritual life of each other, and may enjoy everlasting unity throughout all the worlds of God. This is Bahá’í marriage.
Abdu'l-Baha


Consultation between husbands and wives is central to decision making. Neither husband or wife should dominate:

Wives, in some cases, have a tendency to exert an unjust degree of domination over their husbands which, of course, is not right, anymore than that the husband should unjustly dominate the wife. (Universal House of Justice, Lights of Guidance, p. 225)

There are, therefore, times when a wife should defer to her husband, and times when a husband should defer to his wife, but neither should ever unjustly dominate the other. In short, the relationship between husband and wife should be as held forth in the prayer revealed by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá which is often read at Bahá’í weddings: ‘Verily they are married in obedience to Thy command. Cause them to become the signs of harmony and unity until the end of time. (Universal House of Justice, Lights of Guidance, p. 225)

AGAIN - only until the HUSBAND says differently. And you know this is a FACT in your religion.

"As to thy respected husband: it is incumbent upon thee to treat him with great kindness, to consider his wishes and be conciliatory with him at all times, till he seeth that because thou hast directed thyself toward the Kingdom of God, thy tenderness for him and thy love for God have but increased, as well as thy concern for his wishes under all conditions."
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá: Selected Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 122)

There is only monogamy, and polygamy is not permitted in the Baha'i faith. You have provided no context to the above verse. I hope this helps.

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Pages 205-206

You have suggested that Baha'i men can commit adultery. Adultery is not permissible whether it be men or women.

The Bahá’í teaching on sexual intercourse is very clear. It is permissible only between a man and the woman who is his wife. (Universal House of Justice, Lights of Guidance, p. 344)

Chastity implies both before and after marriage an unsullied, chaste sex life. Before marriage absolutely chaste, after marriage absolutely faithful to one’s chosen companion. Faithful in all sexual acts, faithful in word and in deed. (Universal House of Justice, Messages 1963 to 1986, p. 233)

Did you miss that the verse said two wives?

God hath prescribed matrimony unto you. Beware that ye take not unto yourselves more wives than two. Whoso contenteth himself with a single partner from among the maidservants of God, both he and she shall live in tranquillity. And he who would take into his service a maid may do so with propriety [He who takes a virgin to serve him it would be permissible for him]1142
Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitābi Aqdas, p. 41.

This is thought to come from this Quran verse -

"And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.

By the way "what your right hand possesses" is a term for slaves = sex slaves.

Concerning bigamy, this has been promulgated, and no one must abrogate it.Abdu’l-Baha has not abrogated this law. These are false accusations and lies (spread by) the friends. What I have said is that He has made bigamy bound on a precondition. As long as someone does not attain certitude regarding the capability to practice justice and his heart is not at rest that he can practice justice, he should not be intent upon a second marriage. But if he should be sure and attain certitude that he would practice justice on all levels (and conditions), then a second marriage is lawful. ... [ibid. Volume 4, p. 174]

Apparently Baha'i wives aren't even spiritually awakened - unlike their husbands.

"As to thy question concerning the husband and wife, the tie between them and the children given to them by God: Know thou, verily, the husband is one who hath sincerely turned unto God, is awakened by the call of the Beauty of El-Bahá and chanteth the verses of Oneness in the great assemblies; the wife is a being who wisheth to be overflowing with and seeketh after the attributes of God and His names; and the tie between them is none other than the Word of God. Verily, it [the Word of God] causeth the multitudes to assemble together and the remote ones to be united. Thus the husband and wife are brought into affinity, are united and harmonized, even as though they were one person. Through their mutual union, companionship and love great results are produced in the world, both material and spiritual. ...
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá v3, p. 605-606)

Bahá'u'lláh's father apparently had four wives, three concubines (sex slaves), and at least fifteen children.

Bahá'u'lláh had three wives.

So we obviously have polygamy.
*
And then there is the old Patriarchal way of keeping women down. Inheritance laws.

Women are told God wants them to raise children, and God wants men to take care of the family.

Thus - they come up with - inheritance by the male heir, - since he takes care of the family, (a false dichotomy set up by patriarchy to retain power for the male.)

According to Baha'i - If a family has a husband, wife, and two children - a son and a daughter, and the husband dies, the wife is scr**ed. She does not get the house. It doesn't get split between the children either. It goes to the MALE child. Thus patriarchy, for thousands of years, has made it hard for women to climb out of housewifery, and male control.

Hold the power and the money.

No Patriarchal religions for me.

*
 
Last edited:

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
"I do not think they will be discovered but the general Location of the remains of Christ have been given by Abdul'baha and Shoghi Effendi."

General location? Oh, you mean a wild guess. Well, if archaeologists were to take this claim seriously they would have dug up half of Israel by now. Obviously, nobody takes them seriously. I wonder why? Wait a minute, no I don't.
I've only gotten to this post now, so I'm a few pages behind. But this is worth commenting on now. I wonder who was able to take the body and bury it in a secret place? Since the Jews and the Romans didn't know where it is, how did Abdul'baha and Shoghi Effendi know it general location? How did they even know it happened? Why would all the Christian spread the story that Christ had risen? Why wouldn't the Baha'is call the resurrection a hoax instead of saying it's true, but only in a symbolic way?
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
I don't think he was thrown out but he had to go out to get food or something. I think Abraham meant Isaac was his only son left. I honestly don't understand Bahaullah view of sacrificing a son that wasn't there.

That is what I said. :) He was the only one left with Abraham.

However, Abraham did throw Hagar and Ishmael into the desert.

Gen 21:14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.

Gen 21:15 And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs.

Gen 21:16 And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child. And she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept.

Gen 21:17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is.

Gen 21:18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation.

Gen 21:19 And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink.

Gen 21:20 And God was with the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer.

Gen 21:21 And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.

So according to the story Ishmael was long gone, and only Isaac was there to be sacrificed by Abraham.

*
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
No, Genesis is not wrong but Baha'u'llah has corrected a mistake in the recording and stated that it was Ishmael not Isaac that was offered up as a sacrifice.

Jesus's mission was only a few years so it's unlikely He had time to spend on these things. But He did refer to Moses and said that if they believed in Moses they would have accepted Him as Moses spoke of Him.
You didn't mention the quotes from Genesis 21. How do you explain them? That is not a mistake in recording. Ishmael and his mother are sent away and then the episode about the sacrifice happens and it says it is Isaac. So are you saying Jewish scribes, at some point in time, rewrote the story and switched Isaac for Ishmael?
 
Top