• 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?

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Thanks for an amazing thread. It had to happen sooner or later, but it's still sad to see it fade away.

Might have only been the big seasonal ebb in tide as well, might come rushing back in. :D ;)

That is the way of the Great Beings, the World around us reflects the Word they have spoken.

Study nature and its secrets and we also find all the Spiritual Life and Metaphor contained within God's Word.

This is how the ancient cultures have such a strong foundation in Faith in God.

Regards Tony
 

Sha'irullah

رسول الآلهة
We religious folk do not have to answer the questions of the unbelievers and it is offensive to question our claims as they are already true! :mad:

My god is bigger than all of yours!
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
We religious folk do not have to answer the questions of the unbelievers and it is offensive to question our claims as they are already true! :mad:

My god is bigger than all of yours!

To me, just thinking about what is God, is already limiting what God actually is. If we imagine Big, there is always somthing bigger and God is not limited to our thoughts of size.

So when a person suggests they have a very big God, it is a God of ones own imagination and thus very limited.

I promise I will not ask you a question.

:D:)

Stay well and happy, regards Tony
 

Sha'irullah

رسول الآلهة
To me, just thinking about what is God, is already limiting what God actually is. If we imagine Big, there is always somthing bigger and God is not limited to our thoughts of size.

And people ask me, "why a polytheist?" My response can only be that at least I can have an infinite amount of attributes I can provide that will not collectively limit or misappropriate what god is or isn't.

So when a person suggests they have a very big God, it is a God of ones own imagination and thus very limited.

I promise I will not ask you a question.

:D:)

Stay well and happy, regards Tony

I usually claim to have an infinite amount of very small gods :D
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And people ask me, "why a polytheist?" My response can only be that at least I can have an infinite amount of attributes I can provide that will not collectively limit or misappropriate what god is or isn't.

I usually claim to have an infinite amount of very small gods :D

Ha ha, good on you. The attributes are what we can be and can know. Well done to you. :);)

Stay happy, Regards Tony
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I work at a senior/residential home. We watch the property and handle emergencies such as calling 911 if needed. Its good I dont do anything but it gets boring even if no one comes to sign in in the morning.

Sounds like it could be the perfect job for someone who enjoys spending time on the internet. Could be nice working with older people.

In New Zealand the indigeneous peoples, the Maori, avoid using rest homes and will make great sacrifices to look after their elderly rather than pop them in a rest home. Are their cultural differences between African-Americans, Latinos, and Europeans Americans?

Buddhist may be divided; politics. The Dharma is not; religion. What will maitieya teach that is different than his Lord? (Upgraded cell phones?)

I had been thinking about the schism between the Protestants and Catholics and wondered if there was anything similar in Buddhist, say like between Theraveda and Mahayana? Any idea how it plays out in politics. Its interesting that so many Buddhist countries became emeshed with communist regimes like Veitnam, Korea, Cambodia, and China. I wonder what thats all about?

That depends on if you follow Buddhist teachings. Teacher disciple is highly valued like if not more than the suttas themselves. A lot of disciples go to priests, gurus, masters, etc for instruction. Their teacher explains The Dharma through practice. For example, I read the suttas daily. I meditate and pray. Traditions have specific ways you practice and specific instruction, intiation, and precepts that only a monastic can teach and give. The idea is as if you getting taught by The Buddha himself. Since lay are not monastics, like catholic to their priests, monastics is the closest we can get to practicing the dharma as taught by The Buddha himself.

If you have wise people and exemplifying Buddha's Teaching then I see how that could work well.

Nods.

Why the closer the time period the more symbolic and spiritual? Do you stop trusting the literalism of scripture after a certian period of time? Bahaullah late 1800? John Smith? The time difference is a huge indicator of authenticity of faith compared to telephone game.

I don't have the experience of Buddhist to say first hand that Buddhists have become out of touch with the teachings of Buddha. It will be interesting getting involved with interfaith this year, maybe I get to talk to a few more practicing Buddhists.

Evangelical Christainity has certainly lost connection with the Teachings of Christ. There's all sort of reasons for that, but with the passing of time it has become less clear what Christ really taught and there has been man made doctrines that have been empahsised as the original Teachings seem less important eg the doctrine of original sin.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
In New Zealand the indigeneous peoples, the Maori, avoid using rest homes and will make great sacrifices to look after their elderly rather than pop them in a rest home. Are their cultural differences between African-Americans, Latinos, an

Yeah. We have a mixed population and most foreign citizens take care of their family. Its rare that I see anyone other than city American put their loved one in a home. Its very sad listening to their stories.

I had been thinking about the schism between the Protestants and Catholics and wondered if there was anything similar in Buddhist, say like between Theraveda and Mahayana? Any idea how it plays out in politics. Its interesting that so many Buddhist countries became emeshed with communist regimes like Veitnam, Korea, Cambodia, and China. I wonder what thats all about?

The only I know more of is the Nichiren shoshu/SGI since I was directly involved. Online, I noticed theravada separate themselves as the "true" school (literally school of the elders) and somewhat displace Mahayana as non buddhist. Mahayana many depend on the pali canon but have other books based on them such as the Pure Land you reading, a commentary, Lotus Sutra, Diamond Sutra.

Its said many westerners are more pulled to the Mahayana. Probably because many schools have mystics that are misinterpreted as spirit-ual experiences, things from god given christian background converts, and lack of culture involvement.

China and Vietnam has problems. Vietnamese mainly buddhist traditions that practice tantra. The Dali Lama practices from the Golong school. The kadampa tradition which I attend their temple now separated from the Golong because of what the Dali Lama said against it. I have to look it up again. For some reason schools and traditions are going against each other. Some more modern sects are seen as less buddhist than older ones.

If you have wise people and exemplifying Buddha's Teaching then I see how that could work well.
Yes. Similar to Hinduism if not the same (so learned on this thread) given the similar cultures.

I don't have the experience of Buddhist to say first hand that Buddhists have become out of touch with the teachings of Buddha. It will be

Its nice to have a practice-idea of the suttas to see how your belief compares and contrasts to your own. We see it as black and white me especially since I was christian. To each his own. Shrugs.

Evangelical Christainity has certainly lost connection with the Teachings of Christ. There's all sort of reasons for that, but with the passing of time it has become less clear what Christ really taught and there has been man made doctrines that have been

I think this is a huge reason why there are so much division. Everyone says the other doesnt have the "true" teachings of christ. Christians say it. Now I know hat bahai says it. Id say the Othorodox are probably the closest since they are in line with the apostles. I wouldnt right them of as not knowing.

Bahaullah is very recent so Id question his knowledge too. There are different opinions even on this board so I dont see how bahai are an exception to division. What I find is more of a telephone game.

Unless of course you can describe how spiritualism stopped between 1890 and today, Im totally unconvienced.
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
One of your peers said Bahaullah and the others are practically if not are god himself.

One God many Names.

When God talks to us through the Great Beings, we see what we choose to see.

We see but a man like us, or we see all we can know of God.

I choose to see in all the Great Beings the light of God, which is the 'Christ', the Holy Spirit, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End, the Alpha and Omega, the Primal Will.

Regards Tony
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
One God many Names.

When God talks to us through the Great Beings, we see what we choose to see.

We see but a man like us, or we see all we can know of God.

I choose to see in all the Great Beings the light of God, which is the 'Christ', the Holy Spirit, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End, the Alpha and Omega, the Primal Will.

Regards Tony

How does this relate to the trinity question?

I think it was lover or Instigator who said it. If bahaullah is good (as so told) how is that different than the trinity?
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member

How does this relate to the trinity question?

I think it was lover or Instigator who said it. If bahaullah is good (as so told) how is that different than the trinity?

That is the real meaning of the Trinity. It is why we can see the Messenger as God but at the same time we only see a man.

It is why man has so many different ideas of God. We choose to look at one aspect or we choose to look at the whole. We cling to one name or see God in them all.

God
The Holy Spirit
The Messenger.

Above is the 3 Aspects all the Great Beings Share.

They are men born of the Holy Spirt, Christ the first to show this connection.

Hope you are well

Regards Tony
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
That is the real meaning of the Trinity. It is why we can see the Messenger as God but at the same time we only see a man.

It is why man has so many different ideas of God. We choose to look at one aspect or we choose to look at the whole. We cling to one name or see God in them all.

God
The Holy Spirit
The Messenger.

Above is the 3 Aspects all the Great Beings Share.

They are men born of the Holy Spirt, Christ the first to show this connection.

Hope you are well

Regards Tony

That sounds like the trinity. @adrian009 said (remember) thats a false doctrine. I cant tell the difference.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
@adrian009 Something I thought of. Why is the trinity false but manefistations true? One of your peers said Bahaullah and the others are practically if not are god himself.


The Trinity is man made doctrine that came about in the 4th century largely through the councils of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed. It concerns the relationship between God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, where you have essentially three Gods in one. Abdu'l-Baha was asked about it, and provided an explanation concerning the three entities mentioned.

How are these Great Beings explained?

However this understanding is quite different from How Christians understand the Trinity.

One key difference is that Christians belief Jesus is God incarnate and He was literally God and had always existed (John 1:1). Baha'is reject this understanding. However the Divinity of Jesus is based on His perfectly reflecting the Divine virtues as a mirror reflects the light of the sun.

Hope that helps.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
The Trinity is man made doctrine that came about in the 4th century largely through the councils of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed. It concerns the relationship between God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, where you have essentially three Gods in one. Abdu'l-Baha was asked about it, and provided an explanation concerning the three entities mentioned.
How are these Great Beings explained?

However this understanding is quite different from How Christians understand the Trinity.

One key difference is that Christians belief Jesus is God incarnate and He was literally God and had always existed (John 1:1). Baha'is reject this understanding. However the Divinity of Jesus is based on His perfectly reflecting the Divine virtues as a mirror reflects the light of the sun.

Hope that helps.

How does god incarnate differ from bahaullah being a reflection of god by virtues?

The way I experienced the trinity is god's spirit is jesus's spirit hence why he, jesus, is perfect and can do the will of his father. What happens is that god has sent oral messages to his people for years. No one "listened." So, he, instead, incarnated his Message (His Word) as flesh. Since the Word (God's oral dications) became flesh and dwelt among the people, peopleare able to relate to god more and "listen" because they have a physical representation (manifestation?) of an unseen message.

So, now christians experience god through his manifestation-jesus. There is no diffence between jesus and god. They have the same goal. They are One.

Bahaullah and god are inserable too. He is also a manifestation, High Prophet/teacher, and speaks for god. Unless jesus is not one with his father in divinity (holy virtues from god not man), how are they not the same just with different names and time periods?

Also, youd have to give me the post number. I read all the posts when we first started this thread. I know bahai believe that the manifestations are great beings but you also put them on the same level as god. Unless bahallah, christ, etc are below god as jesus and muhammad says they were, I dont see the difference in god being an incarnation jesus and bahaullah being a manifestation.

They both sound the same to me.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
How does god incarnate differ from bahaullah being a reflection of god by virtues?

Lets think of the analogy of the mirror and the sun. For Christians, the mirror is the sun. For Baha'is the mirror isn't the sun but perfectly reflects it.

The way I experienced the trinity is god's spirit is jesus's spirit hence why he, jesus, is perfect and can do the will of his father. What happens is that god has sent oral messages to his people for years. No one "listened." So, he, instead, incarnated his Message (His Word) as flesh. Since the Word (God's oral dications) became flesh and dwelt among the people, peopleare able to relate to god more and "listen" because they have a physical representation (manifestation?) of an unseen message.

The Manifestation of God is different from the OT prophets (with the exception of Moses). The prophets such as Isaiah and Daniel came under the shadow of Moses. Moses established a Covenant or agreement between God and the Hebrew people. The Hebrew people broke that Covenant and God sent prophets to call them back to the Teachings of Moses and remind them of the Covenant they had through Moses. Eventually the Covenant was irreparably damaged so God sent Christ to establish a new Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34). The narrative about God sending His Son helps us understand this story.

So, now christians experience god through his manifestation-jesus. There is no diffence between jesus and god. They have the same goal. They are One.

Its true that Christians see it that way and there is a selected scriptural basis for this perspective. However the Christians have taken it too far by saying Jesus IS God incarnate.

Bahaullah and god are inserable too. He is also a manifestation, High Prophet/teacher, and speaks for god. Unless jesus is not one with his father in divinity (holy virtues from god not man), how are they not the same just with different names and time periods?

The relationship between Christ and God is the same as Baha'u'llah and God (Baha'i belief). It is true the Manifestation of God speaks for God, and that's why Muslims call Muhammad 'Messenger of God'.

Also, youd have to give me the post number. I read all the posts when we first started this thread. I know bahai believe that the manifestations are great beings but you also put them on the same level as god. Unless bahallah, christ, etc are below god as jesus and muhammad says they were, I dont see the difference in god being an incarnation jesus and bahaullah being a manifestation.

It would be very hard for either of us to trawl through 17,000+ posts. Best we discuss it again and see if we clarify what each of us believes and why.

They both sound the same to me.

Manifestations of God may be the same as a spiritual incarnations of God. They are not the same as physical incarnation of God as explained above.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Ya'll are so complicated in knowing god but then we can divide love in sections and intensities and both are abstract. ;) Just sayin'

Lets think of the analogy of the mirror and the sun. For Christians, the mirror is the sun. For Baha'is the mirror isn't the sun but perfectly reflects it.

Good analogy. Id argue that is common christian belief but not defining for all christians.

Manifestations of God may be the same as a spiritual incarnations of God. They are not the same as physical incarnation of God as explained above.
Scripture says god's "words" are incarnated as a person: aka prophet. How is bahai belief different from scripture not the people who wrote it?
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Scripture says god's "words" are incarnated as a person: aka prophet. How is bahai belief different from scripture not the people who wrote it?

I wonder if you are referring to Jesus as 'The Word of God' or 'Logos'? The key verses are in Chapter 1 of the gospel of John. Particularly John 1:1, John 1:3, John 1:14.

Christians cite these verses as proof of the Divinity of Christ. However, the word 'logos' can mean mediator between God and man.

Philo a Hellenized Jew, who was alive in the years leading to the birth of Christ used the word logos in this way.

Philo - Wikipedia

Philo - Wikipedia

So Baha'is believe in the same scripture as the Christians but understand verses such as John 1:1 differently.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I wonder if you are referring to Jesus as 'The Word of God' or 'Logos'? The key verses are in Chapter 1 of the gospel of John. Particularly John 1:1, John 1:3, John 1:14.

Christians cite these verses as proof of the Divinity of Christ. However, the word 'logos' can mean mediator between God and man.

Philo a Hellenized Jew, who was alive in the years leading to the birth of Christ used the word logos in this way.
Philo - Wikipedia

Philo - Wikipedia

So Baha'is believe in the same scripture as the Christians but understand verses such as John 1:1 differently.


Naw. Im not that complicated as christians.

God-creator
Jesus-son
Holy spirit-god's love

God's Word (i.e. thou shall not kill)

OT-No one listened to God's Word (invisible/cant see people talk)

God decides to send a human "son".

He says jesus is his "final" Word.

"If you dont 'get me' my Message in the flesh, you wont get me for eternity."

Those who listen to god's message (aka his Word) will be saved. Those who do not, will not.

Its a play on words (no pun).

words-combination of letters made into sets with distinct meanings.

God's oral dications-Law

When no one listened to the verbal law he made the law represented by a person-jesus. Whatever jesus said was the Word "of god."

Thats what the trinity is. It explains the united relationship between god, son/Word/message, and the method of communicating that word after jesus' death.

I thought the concept is easy to understand. Right?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Its more:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Word/Law/God's Oral Message that has existed without beginning. The Word was "with" god-it's His message and no one else's. Its emphazied that the two are so united they are one.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Thereby, god's law/oral dications i.e. given to moses was ignored in the OT, so he made his law flesh. A person who was the law thereby representing it. They are inserperable.

Its emphasied in hebrews (got to find the verse. I gave away my bibles) it says jesus is the visible "image" (not Is) of an invisible god.

He is only a representation of god's law and god's law and god are inseperable.
 
Top