• 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!

Thoughts on the Baha'i Faith

Sirona

Hindu Wannabe
I tried to read an introduction on the Baha‘i faith but it went like : … As it is evident that there is just one God ..., so I did something I rarely do and gave up reading on page 4.

However, I think I can now can understand better the marketing potential of Baha‘i to sensitive Christians who can‘t get along with the commandment to “love everybody” and yet to disregard/hate religion X because it’s not Christian.

I also read (probably on this forum?) that some Christians will believe the strangest things in order to reinforce the belief that there’s a daddy in heaven instead of facing the opposite option.

With the Baha’is, I think it’s a similar thing, there always seems to be yet another explanation on why a Big God desperately needs us tiny specks on the surface of Earth so that he authorizes some of those specks to explain Him to the others.

So, if you want to be “tolerant” yet don’t dare to live without the security of One God, One Faith, One Doctrine, you’re probably best advised to join the Baha’is. They sound progressive and they are one of the rare cases who successfully dodged the “anti-cult movement”, so, in the perception of the public, "No, they are not a cult”.
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I tried to read an introduction on the Baha‘i faith but it went like : … As it is evident that there is just one God ..., so I did something I rarely do and gave up reading on page 4.

However, I think I can now can understand better the marketing potential of Baha‘i to sensitive Christians who can‘t get along with the commandment to “love everybody” and yet to disregard/hate religion X because it’s not Christian.

I also read (probably on this forum?) that some Christians will believe the strangest things in order to reinforce the belief that there’s a daddy in heaven instead of facing the opposite option.

With the Baha’is, I think it’s a similar thing, there always seems to be yet another explanation on why a Big God desperately needs us tiny specks on the surface of Earth so that he authorizes some of those specks to explain Him to the others.

So, if you want to be “tolerant” yet don’t dare to live without the security of One God, One Faith, One Doctrine, you’re probably best advised to join the Baha’is. They sound progressive and they are one of the rare cases who succesfully dodged the “anti-cult movement”, so, in the perception of the public, "No, they are not a cult”.

Depends who you talk to on the 'cult' bit. But that's really true for a lot of groups, and that rather subjective word.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
I tried to read an introduction on the Baha‘i faith but it went like : … As it is evident that there is just one God ..., so I did something I rarely do and gave up reading on page 4.

I'm curious why this caused you to stop reading. Were you unaware Bahai is monotheistic?

"God" for Abrahamics is essentially Brahman.
 

King Phenomenon

Well-Known Member
I tried to read an introduction on the Baha‘i faith but it went like : … As it is evident that there is just one God ..., so I did something I rarely do and gave up reading on page 4.

However, I think I can now can understand better the marketing potential of Baha‘i to sensitive Christians who can‘t get along with the commandment to “love everybody” and yet to disregard/hate religion X because it’s not Christian.

I also read (probably on this forum?) that some Christians will believe the strangest things in order to reinforce the belief that there’s a daddy in heaven instead of facing the opposite option.

With the Baha’is, I think it’s a similar thing, there always seems to be yet another explanation on why a Big God desperately needs us tiny specks on the surface of Earth so that he authorizes some of those specks to explain Him to the others.

So, if you want to be “tolerant” yet don’t dare to live without the security of One God, One Faith, One Doctrine, you’re probably best advised to join the Baha’is. They sound progressive and they are one of the rare cases who succesfully dodged the “anti-cult movement”, so, in the perception of the public, "No, they are not a cult”.
I'd rather just pick and choose the things I believe in Christianity
 

Sirona

Hindu Wannabe
I'm curious why this caused you to stop reading. Were you unaware Bahai is monotheistic?

I am aware of that. They developed on the background of Shi'ite Islam.

"God" for Abrahamics is essentially Brahman.

IMHO, I'd be careful with such a comparison, but this would lead off-topic.

On the reasons, why I stopped reading is that I found some Baha'i members on this forum continuously arguing like this:.

"It is evident that" ... "Obviously", "It is perfectly clear that " (God doesn't speak to everyone/wants us to worship him, so that's why God ...). Maybe arguing like this is some members' pelicularity, but if justifying the reason of the existence of one's religion already starts out with "It is evident that" ..., I expect the course of argumentation not to get any better. It is not at all evident that there is just one God. There can be many for example , or none.

I also can't accept the fact that God according to the Baha'i faith is unknowable but speaks to messengers who attribute qualities to him. Either, God is knowable or he is unknowable. If he is unknowable, nobody should be able to attribute qualities to him.
 

Sirona

Hindu Wannabe
Depends who you talk to on the 'cult' bit. But that's really true for a lot of groups, and that rather subjective word.

Yes, cult is a much-used and much-abused word. I use cult in the everyday and probably pejorative sense. I read a lot about Jehovah's Witnesses. They are not allowed to interpret their religion on their own, but must parrot the version their leadership gives to them. They also practice shunning, which is a formal decision by a denomination or a congregation to cease interaction with apostates. From what I learned here, Baha'is may only quote their religious texts verbatim and are not allowed to interpret them themselves. They also practice shunning of "covenant breakers". I'm not saying that the Baha'is are a cult, but these two practices are a bit strange for a religion that often calls itself progressive.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
On the reasons, why I stopped reading is that I found some Baha'i members on this forum continuously arguing like this:.

"It is evident that" ... "Obviously", "It is perfectly clear that " (God doesn't speak to everyone/wants us to worship him, so that's why God ...). Maybe arguing like this is some members' pelicularity, but if justifying the reason of the existence of one's religion already starts out with "It is evident that" ..., I expect the course of argumentation not to get any better. It is not at all evident that there is just one God. There can be many for example , or none.

I also can't accept the fact that God according to the Baha'i faith is unknowable but speaks to messengers who attribute qualities to him. Either, God is knowable or he is unknowable. If he is unknowable, nobody should be able to attribute qualities to him.

Ah I see. It wasn't the monotheism, it was the matter-of-factness. I agree with the trend you've noticed, but I don't think it's limited to Bahai's.

I may start a thread about God-Brahman similarities.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Nor may it hold for all Abrahamics. However, the trend is there.

Having experience with both the God of Abraham through Catholicism, and with Brahman through Hinduism, I can assure you there is no trend. Even Saguna Brahman (Brahman with qualities) is a far cry different than the Abrahamic God. Two different paradigms entirely.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Having experience with both the God of Abraham through Catholicism, and with Brahman through Hinduism, I can assure you there is no trend. Even Saguna Brahman (Brahman with qualities) is a far cry different than the Abrahamic God. Two different paradigms entirely.

I don't want to derail the thread further, but not a few theologians would disagree with you. See David Bentley Hart's text, "The Experience of God," for example.

They are certainly different paradigms, as they originate from two completely different cultures, languages, and so on. But the similarities between the concepts are quite striking, IMHO. YMMV.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Yes, cult is a much-used and much-abused word. I use cult in the everyday and probably pejorative sense. I read a lot about Jehovah's Witnesses. They are not allowed to interpret their religion on their own, but must parrot the version their leadership gives to them. They also practice shunning, which is a formal decision by a denomination or a congregation to cease interaction with apostates. From what I learned here, Baha'is may only quote their religious texts verbatim and are not allowed to interpret them themselves. They also practice shunning of "covenant breakers". I'm not saying that the Baha'is are a cult, but these two practices are a bit strange for a religion that often calls itself progressive.

Yes, indeed. But if you look at lists of 'characteristics of a cult' you will find most religions have some of those characteristics. And then there is looking at the individuals. Some might practice shunning or parroting, while others might not. Humanity is just so diverse. Heck, I 'shunned' a person, former member of my sampradaya, but that was because they were just so angry, uncivil, and fault finding, They were extremely difficult to be around.
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I don't have time to start a thread on the topic today, but plan to start one soon.
One common 'argument' is that Abraham and Brahman are similar words, and they come from the same root. I don't know if you've heard of that one. It is easily refuted.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I am aware of that. They developed on the background of Shi'ite Islam.



IMHO, I'd be careful with such a comparison, but this would lead off-topic.

On the reasons, why I stopped reading is that I found some Baha'i members on this forum continuously arguing like this:.

"It is evident that" ... "Obviously", "It is perfectly clear that " (God doesn't speak to everyone/wants us to worship him, so that's why God ...). Maybe arguing like this is some members' pelicularity, but if justifying the reason of the existence of one's religion already starts out with "It is evident that" ..., I expect the course of argumentation not to get any better. It is not at all evident that there is just one God. There can be many for example , or none.

I also can't accept the fact that God according to the Baha'i faith is unknowable but speaks to messengers who attribute qualities to him. Either, God is knowable or he is unknowable. If he is unknowable, nobody should be able to attribute qualities to him.
And, if just be a little tweak this God can make some people "know" him, but would rather leave the other people in the dark and dependent on what those few have said about that God. But, it's worse than that. This God allowed the messages of all but the last three to have ordinary people write them down. So, supposedly, those writings aren't totally accurate. Which means we can only trust what Muhammad said. What The Bab said. And, best of all, because he's the latest one, what Baha'u'llah said, Oh, and what did The Bab say? No one ever says much about him.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I also can't accept the fact that God according to the Baha'i faith is unknowable but speaks to messengers who attribute qualities to him. Either, God is knowable or he is unknowable. If he is unknowable, nobody should be able to attribute qualities to him.
The question boils down to proof. If you claim something, give proof that others can't refute. As simple as that. No religion ever has done it, although some have remained non-committal about it.
What The Bab said. And, best of all, because he's the latest one, what Baha'u'llah said, Oh, and what did The Bab say? No one ever says much about him.
No, they are not the latest. The latest was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Ahmadiyya Muslims. He was the mahdi, the redeemer, the returning Jesus.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I also can't accept the fact that God according to the Baha'i faith is unknowable but speaks to messengers who attribute qualities to him. Either, God is knowable or he is unknowable. If he is unknowable, nobody should be able to attribute qualities to him.

Good observation and Baha'u'llah answered that for you.

Regards Tony
 
Top