The irony in the Baha'i faith

[Dawnofhope]

Do you mean “here” in this thread, or “here” in these forums? I don’t remember why I started posting in this thread, but I’m not here in these forums to defend my faith. I have tried sometimes to counteract what looks like misinformation to me. That might have been the reason why I started posting in this thread.

As I said to Tony, I have no objection to you promoting and defending your beliefs as long the discussions are genuinely friendly, which I think they mostly are. I do object to people calling those beliefs “the Baha’i Faith,” because that might create confusion and misunderstandings about the worldwide community that is also called “the Baha’i Faith.” I’m not saying that for you to change it. I’m saying it because I’ve decided to try to have some conversations with you about disagreements between us.

My response to reckless slander is to not respond to it at all.

From the article you posted:

In the end, though, if critics are not receptive to clarifications or explanations offered, it is preferable to respectfully leave them to themselves.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/b/bia_responding_criticism_opposition.pdf


The OP reads:

The irony in the Baha'i faith

I responded:

Religion is by its very nature going to be controversial whether its Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity or Islam statements are made about the nature of reality. Every religion will make statements about the world we live that members of other religions will find objectionable. The Baha’i Faith is no exception. While we naturally look for points of agreement we don’t pretend for one moment there are not many points of disagreement. Baha’is don’t believe in reincarnation for example whereas most Hindus will. On the other hand we see the Hindu religion as having Divine origins. You might feel insulted or devalued by those statements or you may not. The Baha’i Faith is what it is.

The OP author responded with post #81:

The irony in the Baha'i faith

I responded:

There is wisdom in avoiding stepping into the arena of comparative religion unless you have a sound grasp of both Faiths you wish to discuss AND your intent is to build bridges across the two religions. As you have little grasp of the Baha’i Faith and your intent is clearly antagonistic there seems little purpose in us talking further for now. All the best.

End of story really.

 

[Jim]

From the article you posted:

In the end, though, if critics are not receptive to clarifications or explanations offered, it is preferable to respectfully leave them to themselves.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/b/bia_responding_criticism_opposition.pdf

The OP reads:

The irony in the Baha'i faith

I responded:

The OP author responded with post #81:

The irony in the Baha'i faith

I responded:

End of story really.

To clarify, I wasn’t thinking of the OP as reckless slander, and I wasn’t sure that you were calling that slander either. I thought you might be thinking of some of the muckraking that we see sometimes.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I believe that is always part of your intent, but it looks to me like there is more to it than that. It looks to me like you’re trying to promote and defend some beliefs that you’re calling “the Baha’i Faith.” I have have no objection to you promoting and defending your beliefs, as long as the discussions are genuinely friendly, which I think they mostly are. I do object to you calling those beliefs “the Baha’i Faith” because it might create some confusion and misunderstandings about the worldwide community that is also called “the Baha’i Faith.”

Lucky there is Unity in our Diversity, which is the one and only Baha'i Faith. I personally see no need to promote any thing other than One Baha'i Faith, which falls under that umbrella, which I see also embraces people that in deeds and actions may be more Baha'i than many Bahai's.

That is life and that is the struggle we have in this age, an age where the old world order is falling apart and we one and all are part of it in some way.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

To clarify, I wasn’t thinking of the OP as reckless slander, and I wasn’t sure that you were calling that slander either. I thought you might be thinking of some of the muckraking that we see sometimes.

I agree and I didn't think it was reckless either. It was simply a calculated and targeted criticism from an RF member here who is a Hindu. That is his right but I couldn't see there was too much more for us to talk about.

My comments about deliberate misrepresentation were in regards to comments being posted on this thread by at least one other critic of the Baha'í Faith. Its not reckless either but calculated.

 

[CG Didymus]

CG, It takes two to tango. It depends what is brought to the table as to how the discussion will unfold.

There is never any intent, but to positively consort. One can not control what may become a motive to pursue a more negative approach.

I am always happy to see that in many things people can agree to disagree. I also see many of our perceptions have been moulded in historical thoughts. I see the challenge is to look outside the box.

Christ says new eyes and new ears are needed.

Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear this now, O foolish people without understanding, Who have eyes and see not, And who have ears and hear not:

Matthew 13:16 But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear"

Regards Tony

So you quote the Hebrew Bible and the Christian NT. Who are the foolish people? Since you are a Baha'is someone might assume that the foolish ones are those that deny Baha'u'llah. The same with the other quote, who are the "blessed" ones that see? Since you are a Baha'i, again, I assume the blessed ones for you are the ones that have recognized the Baha'i Faith as the truth. But, how does a Jew and a Christian take it? How do they feel about a Baha'i cherry-picking their Scriptures in a way to promote the Baha'i Faith?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Consorting is one thing, but once a Baha'i has put an OP out there, then the Baha'i has to defend or prove their position.

This is a religious forum where topics about religion are discussed and debated. Am I missing something?

Like for instance the thread about Progressive Revelation. So there's very little consorting, it's arguing and debating.

As would be expected from a forum where people come together to debate and discuss religion.

And since Baha'is have contradictory interpretations of the traditional beliefs of the other religions, it going to lead to some antagonism between the different religions and the Baha'is. So, how should Baha'is be handling this, because what most of them are doing is not working.

What’s not working? Baha’is are discussing and debating religion as with everyone else here. That’s the point of this site. You’re debating and discussing religion as am I.

Of course Baha’is have contradictory interpretations of traditional beliefs. If I agreed with all the doctrines of Christianity I’d be a Christian not a Baha’i.

Baha’is as far as I can see are not expecting accolades and praise. Nor are we looking for converts.

If I go on a website set up to play chess, I expect to play chess with those who want to play chess. I don’t expect everyone to play chess like I’m playing chess.

 

[Jim]

This is a religious forum where topics about religion are discussed and debated. Am I missing something?

As would be expected from a forum where people come together to debate and discuss religion.

What’s not working? Baha’is are discussing and debating religion as with everyone else here. That’s the point of this site. You’re debating and discussing religion as am I.

Of course Baha’is have contradictory interpretations of traditional beliefs. If I agreed with all the doctrines of Christianity I’d be a Christian not a Baha’i.

Baha’is as far as I can see are not expecting accolades and praise. Nor are we looking for converts.

If I go on a website set up to play chess, I expect to play chess with those who want to play chess. I don’t expect everyone to play chess like I’m playing chess.

I’ve decided for now to try discussing with you some possible disagreements between us, if that’s okay with you.

I thought the point was that sometimes it looks like some people who say that they believe in friendliness and fellowship with people of all religions are more interested in arguing and debating with them, promoting and defending their own beliefs in a context where it can only be understood as discounting the beliefs of others, than in practicing friendship and fellowship with them, no matter how much antagonism that arouses and how much it alienates people from their faith. Are you agreeing with that, and explaining it by saying that some forums here allow that and some other people are doing it?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So you quote the Hebrew Bible and the Christian NT. Who are the foolish people? Since you are a Baha'is someone might assume that the foolish ones are those that deny Baha'u'llah. The same with the other quote, who are the "blessed" ones that see? Since you are a Baha'i, again, I assume the blessed ones for you are the ones that have recognized the Baha'i Faith as the truth. But, how does a Jew and a Christian take it? How do they feel about a Baha'i cherry-picking their Scriptures in a way to promote the Baha'i Faith?

They can choose to look it in any way as they so choose, as you can also do CG. No Scriptures belong to any person or people, they are a gift to all humanity.

I can only share what I have found, which I see finds the common foundation of all Faiths.

It is up to you to choose how to see all those passages.

If you can go back in time, what would you be saying to the people that had just accepted Christ and are starting to give people a vision of a possible future?

Regards Tony

 

[oldbadger]

It was September to December1852.
Regards Tony

OMG! People need to be warned about some aspects of Bahai, Tony. It doesn't seem to matter how many times genuine research corrects the continuous outpourings of Bahai untruths, Bahai just ignores all and goes on, incorrigibly spouting non-history. It appears to me to have no shred of honesty about its history.
Here is the paragraph, just one of many in your quoted source which I already showed to you and asked for a date.

Baha’u’llah, definitely generous in prosperity, soon faced enormous adversity. Unjustly thrown into prison because of his new faith, Baha’u’llah and his family suffered tremendous loss very quickly, going from relative wealth to abject poverty literally overnight.

The above is just a typical misinformation........... one of so many.
Bahauallah was a Babi at that time, a follower of the Bab who promoted apostasy from Persia's religion, violence and rebellion. Bahauallah's father had so much influence and wealth that Bahauallah was one of the very few who were not executed for their crimes, probably because of very strong Russian influence and he was later released and continued on to marry, travel in to exile with his servants etc........ in fact I don't think there is a phrase in the whole piece which isn't a deception.

Bahai history is riddled with this twaddle, and Bahai seems determined to continue on with these unfacts regardless of how many times it gets put right.

At this point Bahai usually request a source.
If you prefer I could start my first ever thread about Bahai and it's historical deceptions? Your choice.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

OMG! People need to be warned about some aspects of Bahai, Tony. It doesn't seem to matter how many times genuine research corrects the continuous outpourings of Bahai untruths, Bahai just ignores all and goes on, incorrigibly spouting non-history. It appears to me to have no shred of honesty about its history.
Here is the paragraph, just one of many in your quoted source which I already showed to you and asked for a date.

Baha’u’llah, definitely generous in prosperity, soon faced enormous adversity. Unjustly thrown into prison because of his new faith, Baha’u’llah and his family suffered tremendous loss very quickly, going from relative wealth to abject poverty literally overnight.

The above is just a typical misinformation........... one of so many.
Bahauallah was a Babi at that time, a follower of the Bab who promoted apostasy from Persia's religion, violence and rebellion. Bahauallah's father had so much influence and wealth that Bahauallah was one of the very few who were not executed for their crimes, probably because of very strong Russian influence and he was later released and continued on to marry, travel in to exile with his servants etc........ in fact I don't think there is a phrase in the whole piece which isn't a deception.

Bahai history is riddled with this twaddle, and Bahai seems determined to continue on with these unfacts regardless of how many times it gets put right.

At this point Bahai usually request a source.
If you prefer I could start my first ever thread about Bahai and it's historical deceptions? Your choice.

There is no misinformation OB, you choose your own agenda driven sources. It is up to you to justly search for the truth in all these matters. I am happy to leave you to do as you please OB.

Regards Tony

 

[oldbadger]

There is no misinformation OB, you choose your own agenda driven sources. It is up to you to justly search for the truth in all these matters. I am happy to leave you to do as you please OB.

Regards Tony

Tony, the sources which challenge Bahai history are not agenda driven if they are true. They are just true.

Bahauallah was no innocent .... wrongfully imprisoned, his wealthy parents stripped of their funds etc etc ..... all twaddle.

The Bab caused upheaval, unrest, disharmony and violence at that time.

And Bahauallah might have handed his Dad's money out here and there, who knows(?) but Bahai has not driven any funding for the poor........ when even Bahais would ask for help from Rutland Gate, London UK they would get one answer .'We don't hand out money!', even they knew what kind of help was requested.

Ironic.... all of it.
The OP's Thread Title looks about right.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So for Baha'is, why did God create evil and suffering? To test fallible, gullible people? Well great, he succeeded in fooling a lot of people. So now he knows who is worthy to praise and worship him, he is going to send them to a spiritual world where everything is perfect? But, Baha'is have no hell, so where do the people that failed the test go?

Do they have to retake the test over and over until they pass? Hmmm? That would be a good idea. The ones that pass the test move on and the ones that fail go back and try again. Hmmm? What should we call such a plan?

The same untenable argument. The fallible and the unfallible both, as Bahais think, were created by the same Allah. Why did he create the fallible in the first place?

That is the Hindu idea, although I do not accept that too. Reincarnation is a desire, a hankering, for those are afraid of death, for those who are not courageous enough to face the reality, it is not a fact.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I’ve decided for now to try discussing with you some possible disagreements between us, if that’s okay with you.

That’s fine.

I thought the point was that sometimes it looks like some people who say that they believe in friendliness and fellowship with people of all religions are more interested in arguing and debating with them, promoting and defending their own beliefs in a context where it can only be understood as discounting the beliefs of others, than in practicing friendship and fellowship with them, no matter how much antagonism that arouses and how much it alienates people from their faith. Are you agreeing with that, and explaining it by saying that some forums here allow that and some other people are doing it?

I’m playing the devil’s advocate somewhat with CG whom I’ve been talking to for the last three years on this forum. CG and I got to know each other reasonably well as far as internet associations goes.

There are two considerations here and both need to be given their due.

1/ We are in the Religious Debates section of this forum. It is a place where we discuss and debate religion. There are of course rules that apply to this forum as with anywhere but that’s what we do. Is it an easy thing we are doing? I don’t believe it is. Not only are we debating and discussing religion, but we’re doing it on an open stage where practically anybody on the planet who speaks English and has access to the internet can drop by.

2/ We are still people and should be respectful and be civil with those whom we discuss religion. That aligns nicely with the forum mission. It aligns reasonably well though with being friendly and having fellowship with others.

In being a Baha’i on this forum we need both. We may be the nicest and friendliest person but if we don’t have skills to debate and discuss some aspects of religion, we won’t last long. If we discuss and debate religion without being civil and respectful then we will antagonise and alienate others.

I hope that explains my comments.

 

[Aupmanyav]

For me the stories of Moses and Muhammad show great deeds and justice in the times they lived.
As for Baha'u'llah, this is only recent history and any reading of His childhood and years prior to 1844, will show that He is worthy of no blame. He be was known as the Father of the poor.
Baha'u'llah's wife Ásíyih Khánum was known as the Mother of Consolation.

Well, these are just the examples about your Allah and the persons whom you call as his manifestations.

"Then they brought the captives to Moses.1 He said it would be better to kill the grown women, and save just ‘the young girls who have not known man by lying with him.’ So 32,000 Midian virgins got Hebrew husbands (Numbers 31: 15–35)."
"God handed Moses two different laws about spoils. One was for wars with close neighbors; the other was for more remote wars. When their enemies lived far away, he said, ‘you shall put all the males to the sword, but the women and the little ones, the cattle, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourselves.’ But when their enemies lived nearby, ‘you shall save alive nothing that breathes, but you shall utterly destroy them.’ Land was the limiting factor (Deuteronomy 20:13–17)."

"Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900.
The spoils of battle, including the enslaved women and children of the tribe, were divided up among the Islamic warriors that had participated in the siege and among the emigrees from Mecca."
Banu Qurayza - Wikipedia

Followers may call their leaders by any name. That is immaterial.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is all about the development of Soul, the growth of attributes.

If your Allah was the creator and giver of soul, why did he create the bad souls and not just the good ones?

Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear this now, O foolish people without understanding, Who have eyes and see not, And who have ears and hear not:

So, just like Jesus you want people to have eyes to see the way you see it and ears to hear the way you hear it? All the others are fools, like Jeremiah said. That is the ultimate trouble with One God \ Abrahamic religions.

That is life and that is the struggle we have in this age, an age where the old world order is falling apart and we one and all are part of it in some way.

What old order is falling apart? Russia and US are still there, add to it China and North Korea. The world is just as it was like before. And we are hardly one. You are a Bahai, I am a Hindu, and so for others too.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Tony, the sources which challenge Bahai history are not agenda driven if they are true. They are just true.

Bahauallah was no innocent .... wrongfully imprisoned, his wealthy parents stripped of their funds etc etc ..... all twaddle.

The Bab caused upheaval, unrest, disharmony and violence at that time.

And Bahauallah might have handed his Dad's money out here and there, who knows(?) but Bahai has not driven any funding for the poor........ when even Bahais would ask for help from Rutland Gate, London UK they would get one answer .'We don't hand out money!', even they knew what kind of help was requested.

Ironic.... all of it.
The OP's Thread Title looks about right.

You are free to quote the charges, the trial and if any verdict was given in all the 40 years of Baha'u'llah's exiles. He was cleared of the charges in 1852/3, but exile was still impose. Further exiles were also given without charge or any basis for charges to be laid.

Baha'u'llah on many occasions appealed to the Authorities to ratify the charges and any evidence that was produced to cause their banishment. They never could as Baha'u'llah broke no Law and also was never proved wrong when using the Quran in defence.

It is you that are on shakey ground OB, because using 'If', is not a foundation in justice, it is but hearsay from very unreliable sources. The corruption of officials in that time was very well known, it all worked on who could be bribed the most.

The Quran was the Law and it does not permit the treatment handed out to the Babi and then Baha'i. It was the Muslims that broke all the Oaths they had given on the Quran, one of the greatest sins in Islam.

I will add no more to this discussion OB. I am happy with all that I have found in my search on the subject.

Stay well, stay happy.

RegardsTony

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well, these are just the examples about your Allah and the persons whom you call as his manifestations.

"Then they brought the captives to Moses.1 He said it would be better to kill the grown women, and save just ‘the young girls who have not known man by lying with him.’ So 32,000 Midian virgins got Hebrew husbands (Numbers 31: 15–35)."
"God handed Moses two different laws about spoils. One was for wars with close neighbors; the other was for more remote wars. When their enemies lived far away, he said, ‘you shall put all the males to the sword, but the women and the little ones, the cattle, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourselves.’ But when their enemies lived nearby, ‘you shall save alive nothing that breathes, but you shall utterly destroy them.’ Land was the limiting factor (Deuteronomy 20:13–17)."

"Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900.
The spoils of battle, including the enslaved women and children of the tribe, were divided up among the Islamic warriors that had participated in the siege and among the emigrees from Mecca."
Banu Qurayza - Wikipedia

Followers may call their leaders by any name. That is immaterial.

For followers of history we can't actually establish with any certainty whether any of this actually happened.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Well, you consider Bible and Quran as your holy books, and there is no other history for Mohammad than the Hadith, the victors account. What I am saying is from those books.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well, you consider Bible and Quran as your holy books, and there is no other history for Mohammad than the Hadith, the victors account. What I am saying is from those books.

If we take Genesis as literally true we have a talking snake tempting Eve in the garden of Eden not to mention a worldwide flood that covered the highest mountains. Genesis in some respects has mythical stories somewhat like those in the Puranas in Hinduism. We believe Moses was a real person and Manifestation of God but did He really part the sea to escape Pharaoh? There's no historical the Israelites were captive of the Egyptians

The story of Muhammad in regards the massacre of Banu Qurayza isn't recorded in the Quran and there are doubts about its historicity.

Banu Qurayza - Wikipedia

 

[oldbadger]

You are free to quote the charges, the trial and if any verdict was given in all the 40 years of Baha'u'llah's exiles. He was cleared of the charges in 1852/3, but exile was still impose. Further exiles were also given without charge or any basis for charges to be laid.
......................................
I will add no more to this discussion OB. I am happy with all that I have found in my search on the subject.

Stay well, stay happy.

RegardsTony

Very well.
I don't believe the Bahai version of events at all.
The following collection of claims make me feel much more trusting in them than the Bahai version.
Let the members decide for themselves.

As follows:-
A principle claim is that around the time of the rise of Babism, Iran and Russia were at a peak of conflict with one another. More specifically, that the rise of Babism was a Russian engineered tactic to help divide and conquer the peoples of Iran (this is also an old British Empire tactic ).

:-At such an opportune moment, Bab with the help of the Russian Ambassador, Kiniyaz Dolgorouki, claimed himself to be the Bab (Gate) of Imam Mahdi (A Travellers Narrative, Abbas Effendi Page 4). Then on reaching Kerbala in May 1844, under the influence of Isa Lankarani, again a Russian Agent, he claimed himself to be Imam Mahdi himself. (A Travellers Narrative Page 14). Due to the strong and deep-rooted enmity between Iran and Russia, we shall see at a later stage, of the role of Russia in promoting the growth, and nurturing Babism and Bahaism.


1. "O my followers! Surely Allah has made fighting obligatory for you. You must conquer the cities and the people for Babism and don’t be at peace with those who reject Babism". (Bayan, Arabic Chapter 1)

2. "Allah has made obligatory on every Babi king that he should not let a single person remain alive in his kingdom who does not accept Babism. (Bayan, Arabic Chapter1 ) 3. "Loot and plunder the properties of those who do not accept Babism. (Bayan, Arabic Chapter 1) 4. "Erase all the books from the face of the earth except those written about Babism" (Bayan, Arabic Chapter 1) 5. "O enemies of Bab!! Even if you bathe 1000 times, you will never become clean", (Bayan, Persian Chapter 2 ) 6. "If a Babi acquires a thing from a non-Babi, then by the transfer of the thing, it becomes lawful for him". (Bayan, Chapter 4)

As expected, the result of such utternaces led to total upheaval in Iran. Babis, the followers of Bab who were totally captivated by Bab and who advocated total submission to his will and commands, set forth to actualise his commandments. Thus, was created a scene of chaos and anarchy. The Babis started looting and plundering the adjoining villages and whatever they could lay thier hands upon. If they met with any resistance, then they would burn the entire village. For details, one can refer to the book of ‘Materials For The Study of Babism’ by Professor E. G. Browne, Page 241. In one such village the Babis saw that some non-Babis had sought protection. Mulla Hussain and some other Babis arrived at the village and killed 130 people in one night.

It can be seen from the above passages that the Babis were incited to violent actions at times. Not only were the Babis committing Apostasy which carried the death penalty, they were becoming involved in Conflict and Riot in places.
Bshauallah was jailed in 1852 with many other Babis (after an attempt by Babis on the Shah's life (?)......, but whereas most Babis could be executed 'day-by-day', Bahauallah had friends:-
Baha'u'llah's brother in-law was the Russian Consul, and after pleading and reasoning failed, he threatened that Persia would have to answer to Russia if the least hair on the blessed head of Baha'u'llah should come to harm! Thus he was able, finally, to secure Baha'u'llah's release on condition that Baha'u'llah be exiled beyond the borders of Persia (parts of which at that time, including the region of Adjerbayjan, were provinces of the Russian empire, and yes, the first Baha'i House of Worship was built in Adjerbayjan -- after the Russian revolution the building was seized by the Soviets and used for government offices for a few years, until it was destroyed by an earthquake).

Baha'u'llah was invited to emigrate to Russia, but He declined, going instead to Baghdad, where in 1863, He announced His own revelation.