• 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
See what Thomas Paine wrote a hundred years before Abdu'l Baha:

“We have it in our power to begin the world over again…The birthday of a new world is at hand.” (Common Sense, 1797)

He had great vision, Thomas could see the new birth was on its way, he partook of the pregnancy. 1844 saw the Birth of the New World, good on Him.

Globalization: Welcome to the New World Order

Regards Tony
 

siti

Well-Known Member
So - we are perfectly willing to accept at face value an unsourced quotation (if that's what it turns out to be) for which the primary document is said to be "in private hands" and at the same time completely reject the evidence of relatively well-attested eye-witnesses of Baha'u'llah's childhood. Here is part of a letter Abdu'l Baha received from his aunt (Baha'u'llah's older sister):

"He [Baha'u'llah] wouldn’t disengage from learning the rudiments for a moment. After studying the rudiments of Arabic and literature he inclined towards the science of philosophy (hikmat) and mysticism (irfan) so that he might benefit from these. It was such that he would spend most of the day and night socializing with high statured philosophers and the gatherings of mystics and Sufis... he (meaning Bahaullah) was a man who had seen most of the words and phrases of the mystics and philosophers and had heard and understood most of the signs of the appearance (of the Mahdi) . . . after returning from Badasht and after the Shaykh Tabarsi Fort war was over, he was engaged day and night in socializing with great Islamic scholars and followers of mysticism..." (from a letter to Abdu'l Baha included in a document titled Tanbih al-Na’imin)

Lets put that side by side with the claim of the 5-year-old Baha'u'llah to his aunt:

"He is the Well-Beloved! God willing you are abiding restfully beneath the canopy of Divine mercy, and the tabernacle of His bounty. Although to outward seeming, I am little and cannot write, yet because this Illiterate One is clinging to the Divine Lote tree, He can read without knowledge and write without being taught. And this fact is clear and evident in the spiritual realm to those endowed with insight. Those who are outside have been, and still are, unaware of this mystery."

All other considerations being equal, we have to ask which is the most likely explanation for Baha'u'llah's religious knowledge and abilities? Which is the least bizarre account? And yet the first account is rejected (it seems to me) entirely on the grounds that the writer refused to accept the bizarre claim of the second.

So?
 
Last edited:

siti

Well-Known Member
He had great vision, Thomas could see the new birth was on its way, he partook of the pregnancy. 1844 saw the Birth of the New World, good on Him.
Paine foresaw a new world in which 'common sense' and the revelations of science and not 'blind faith' allegiance to clerical authority and preposterous claims of divine revelation would be our guides. That certainly did not happen in 1844 as the great historian Stephen Fry has confirmed...

 

siti

Well-Known Member
the video will not be shown in Australia
Pity - it was really funny! Anyway, the point was that 1844 was the date expected by the followers of William Miller that Christ would return in glory. He didn't of course.

But its easy to see how an insignificant group following an obscure prophet on the other side of the world might pick up on the "Great Disappointment" and turn it to their advantage by declaring someone else who happened to be around in 1844 to be the returned Messiah. Pity there wasn't a new Manifestation in the early 20th century too - he could have saved JWs from the 1914 thing.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Pity - it was really funny! Anyway, the point was that 1844 was the date expected by the followers of William Miller that Christ would return in glory. He didn't of course.

That is your understanding.

I am glad Christ, Moses, Buddha, Abraham, Zoroaster, Krishna, Muhammad all kept their promise and did indeed make all things new in 1844 when the Bab ushered in the New Day of God.

That is my understanding.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Why not? You guys have that much censorship?

The company Fremantle that hold copyright, they do not allow the contents to be shown in my Country, or so the message says after pushing play.

I do not watch Stephen Fry anyway. So it was a benefit it did not play.

Regards Tony
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
The company Fremantle that hold copyright, they do not allow the contents to be shown in my Country, or so the message says after pushing play.

I do not watch Stephen Fry anyway. So it was a benefit it did not play.

First time I'd heard of Stephen Fry, and I found it really enjoyable funny, but then I like British humour, and drama. A lot better than Hollywood, but I like Aussie stuff too, well made stuff. Some of your aboriginal stuff is shown here on our First Nations channel. Occasionally I watch Wentworth. Tough show, but very well made.
 

siti

Well-Known Member
First time I'd heard of Stephen Fry, and I found it really enjoyable funny
Stephen Fry is openly gay and overtly atheist - which is probably why our Baha'i friend from downunder disapproves. I'm sorry I posted it now because it gave him something to take 'righteous' umbrage about instead of answering the more serious question I raised (for the umpteenth time) about the Baha'i propensity for selective acceptance of anecdotal (and highly dubious in some cases) evidence regarding Baha'u'llah's education and childhood.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Stephen Fry is openly gay and overtly atheist - which is probably why our Baha'i friend from downunder disapproves. I'm sorry I posted it now because it gave him something to take 'righteous' umbrage about instead of answering the more serious question I raised (for the umpteenth time) about the Baha'i propensity for selective acceptance of anecdotal (and highly dubious in some cases) evidence regarding Baha'u'llah's education and childhood.

It is good I feel no need to put tabs on people. But I do base what I think about and choose to watch on the principals I am advised to live.

My research found Baha'u'llah could do anything He wished to do. He was a remarkable child and history has recorded that. At the momemt there is one story we are yet to comfirm either way.

I am happy to find the Truth in that matter, I am sure Sen will most likely know a bit more about the quoted source.

Regards Tony
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Pity - it was really funny! Anyway, the point was that 1844 was the date expected by the followers of William Miller that Christ would return in glory. He didn't of course.

But its easy to see how an insignificant group following an obscure prophet on the other side of the world might pick up on the "Great Disappointment" and turn it to their advantage by declaring someone else who happened to be around in 1844 to be the returned Messiah. Pity there wasn't a new Manifestation in the early 20th century too - he could have saved JWs from the 1914 thing.
It is not the way you are thinking.
miller had calculated through some verses of Bible that the Return of Christ would happen in 1844.
Let me demonstrate something to you, so, you may know where this idea came from. (This is not to convince you, but to give you some info that you seem not to be aware of)

There is a prophecy in OT Bible about first coming of Messiah of Jews. It says Messiah shall be cut off in Seventy Weeks.
Now, counting from year 457 BC which is when the third command was issued for building the Temple, seventy weeks, it comes to year 33 AD. Here it is believed seventy weeks is 490 days, and each day is counted as a year as per some verse of Bible. Thus 490 years after 457 BC is a year that the Messiah is cut off. This is believed to match with the year that Jesus was put to death.

Now, there is another Prophecy in OT which is about the time of End or Return of Christ in 2300 days. If you count again from the same origin, year 457 BC, 2300 years, it comes to 1844 AD. This is how miller learned year 1844.

Now, in Persia, some Shia expected in the same year Manifestation of the Qaim, the Mahdi. Their expectation was calculated based on Prophecies in Islamic Traditions, and it was because in their traditions it was alluded that Mahdi comes 1000 years after Guidance of Islam. Thus since in Shia the last imam had passed away in year 260 AH, they believed in year 1260 AH, Mahdi comes. Now 1260 AH happens to be 1844 AD. So, no my friend. People of Persia did not pick up from Miller.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
My research found Baha'u'llah could do anything He wished to do.

And which non-Baha'i sources did you use? From what I've seen, Baha'i's just read Baha'i' stuff and then make conclusions from that. That's not research. The Christians do the same thing, quoting their book as historical evidence.

It also begs the question ... just who are you trying to convince?
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
It is not the way you are thinking.
miller had calculated through some verses of Bible that the Return of Christ would happen in 1844.
Let me demonstrate something to you, so, you may know where this idea came from. (This is not to convince you, but to give you some info that you seem not to be aware of)

There is a prophecy in OT Bible about first coming of Messiah of Jews. It says Messiah shall be cut off in Seventy Weeks.
Now, counting from year 457 BC which is when the third command was issued for building the Temple, seventy weeks, it comes to year 33 AD. Here it is believed seventy weeks is 490 days, and each day is counted as a year as per some verse of Bible. Thus 490 years after 457 BC is a year that the Messiah is cut off. This is believed to match with the year that Jesus was put to death.

Now, there is another Prophecy in OT which is about the time of End or Return of Christ in 2300 days. If you count again from the same origin, year 457 BC, 2300 years, it comes to 1844 AD. This is how miller learned year 1844.

Now, in Persia, some Shia expected in the same year Manifestation of the Qaim, the Mahdi. Their expectation was calculated based on Prophecies in Islamic Traditions, and it was because in their traditions it was alluded that Mahdi comes 1000 years after Guidance of Islam. Thus since in Shia the last imam had passed away in year 260 AH, they believed in year 1260 AH, Mahdi comes. Now 1260 AH happens to be 1844 AD. So, no my friend. People of Persia did not pick up from Miller.

And why doesn't the entire Christian world and the entire Islamic world see this the same way as Bahai's do, if it;s so obvious, and they are all so obviously wrong?
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
AD. So, no my friend. People of Persia did not pick up from Miller

That is important to know. Also important to know wheras Miller had the Date for the Christains, the Muslim Persians had the Event. Thus again binding Christ and Muhammad. Eyes to see and ears to hear, were needed.

Regards Tony
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And which non-Baha'i sources did you use? From what I've seen, Baha'i's just read Baha'i' stuff and then make conclusions from that. That's not research. The Christians do the same thing, quoting their book as historical evidence.

It also begs the question ... just who are you trying to convince?

The problem we have here is that all that witnesed this with a pure heart, became Baha'is even when they may have been originally hostile. They in turn have left honest accounts of these meetings. There are a few that did not accept and left records.

To the remainder they have left records saying beware of Baha'u'llah and the Baha'is, they will cast a spell over you or put a potion in your drink. None could match Baha'u'llah in any way and none could utter a word without Baha'u'llahs permission to do so.

So with that mentality and experience they had, what would you expect them to record?

The Truth will come from those that live in all Trustworthyness and Truefullness, not those that wish to deceive.

Regards Tony
 
Top