Who is Baháʼu'lláh?

[Dawnofhope]

Nice jump. You jumped right over the part where danieldemol said to me: "If spirits had mass we could weigh them. Do you put on weight when you are visited by the Holy Spirit?"
and I said to him:

I read it just fine.

a) Either a spirit has some property that is commonly associated with matter, be it mass, energy, or both; or it does not.
(b) If it does not, the atheists are correct: physical death puts an end to perishable beings and Paul's "imperishable beings" doctrine is nonsense, physical post-death remains dissolve into "stardust", and the entity that I am ceases to exist. In which case, there is no such thing as the afterlife.
(c) If being ceases to be in the grave, Baha'i teaching isn't even close to accurate, much less relevant, as when it prattles on about the afterlife, ...

The answer to clear from the Christian texts if we go back to St Paul’s earliest New Testament resurrection narrative:

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
1 Corinthians 15:50

So we don’t need to have perishable bodies with crucifixion wounds going to heaven. Nor do we need any physical attributes such as weight the things that are not of this world.

The nature of the soul is incomprehensible to the mind of man. As Jesus explains:

If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
John 3:12

You’re all over the map without providing clear explanation about what you mean by a soul, imperishable body and afterlife.

The measure of agreement between this view, which is founded on careful scientific research, and that of the Bahá’í teachings, is truly remarkable.

I have no idea what scientific research you refer to and what you mean here.

And my opinions are the least of your worries. Baha'i nonsense is your bigger problem.

You’re on shaky ground if you can’t even explain your Christian view let alone produce reasonable explanations to back it up and then label Baha’i beliefs as nonsense.

 

[Dawnofhope]

If Elijah was reincarnated as John the Baptist (which I do not believe happened), then:

1. I am not inclined to believe, in spite of wizanda's claims that he knows who he was before he came to our earth at this time, that John the Baptist knew he was Elijah.

I think he knew he wasn’t literally (or reincarnated) the Return of Elijah. That’s the most likely explanation for his denial. Being a Prophet he probably understood he fulfilled Malachi 4:5-6. However when asked his audience were not ready to make this connection as well as the risk to both himself and Jesus in making such an open declaration.

I don't know of anyone who "recognized" that John the Baptist was the veritable reincarnation of Elijah himself.

It appears that only after Jesus informed them, they accepted John the Baptist was Elijah.

Jesus better not return reincarnated into a different human body, because I, for one, will reject him and may ask questions later.

It is for God to test his servants, not his servants to test God. (Matthew 4:7 and Deuteronomy 6:16). However when Christ returns it is incumbent on His faithful believers to recognise Him. But like you I don’t believe it will be the same physical Jesus reincarnated.

If, as I believe, John the Baptist was deemed, by others, to be an Elijah-like precursor to someone more important, then:

1. The question is: In what way was he Elijah-like?

I agree. Both were faithful Prophets, confronted evil rulers, and led many to repentance.

The question is: What's your basis, i.e. your authority, for believing that a figurative Christ will return?

In regards Elijah and John the Baptist this is the only example of a Returned Prophet in the New Testament so it is reasonable to assume the Return of Christ will be similar.

We know Christ will have a new name.

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Revelation 3:12

A literal interpretation of verses such as Matthew 24:29-31 makes little sense.

There is nothing in Scriptures that refers to the same physical body of Christ returning. Christ has a new imperishable body anyhow. How would we recognise Him? By His wounds?

Christ means Messiah or anointed one. It is Christ or a Messiah that returns, not necessarily Jesus. That is the most plausible as far as I can see.

Having the same physical Jesus returning on literal clouds with stars falling to heaven appears impossible.

When Jesus came He did not fulfill scriptures in the manner expected by the Jews. History is likely to repeat itself here too.

I accept Bahá’u’lláh isn’t a good fit for your expectations but how do you envisage Christ will return and why?

 

[Terry Sampson]

Yet you say to the Baha’is who disbelieve this story literally that what we believe in nonsense!

I believe that a brief trip down "Memory Lane" is appropriate here.

• Suppose, for a moment, that--as I believe--the Cosmos consists of stuff moving through space over time, and that it is boundless and without beginning or end. What are the smallest parts of the stuff that's moving? In such a Cosmos, things that have mass greater than 0 kg. are--in my book--material things. Space, as I use the term, has no mass Folks who talk about the spirit, as if it has no mass, don't, IMO, make any sense. The only things that don't have mass are space, time, and imagination. So, .. if a spirit does not consist completely of space, time, or imagination, AND if it doesn't have mass, what the heck is it?

• If spirits had mass we could weigh them. Do you put on weight when you are visited by the Holy Spirit?

• (a) Either a spirit has some property that is commonly associated with matter, be it mass, energy, or both; or it does not.(b) If it does not, the atheists are correct: physical death puts an end to perishable beings and Paul's "imperishable beings" doctrine is nonsense, physical post-death remains dissolve into "stardust", and the entity that I am ceases to exist. In which case, there is no such thing as the afterlife.(c) If being ceases to be in the grave, Baha'i teaching isn't even close to accurate, much less: relevant, as when it prattles on about the afterlife, to wit:
  

  • Body and Soul Bahá'í Reference Library - Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, Pages 207-209
    The Bahá’í teachings with regard to body and soul, and the life after death, are quite in harmony with the results of psychical research. They teach, as we have seen, that death is but a new birth—the escape from the prison of the body into a larger life, and that progress in the afterlife is limitless.
    A large body of scientific evidence has gradually been accumulating which in the opinion of impartial but highly critical investigators is amply sufficient to establish beyond all question the fact of a life after death—of the continued life and activity of the conscious “soul” after the dissolution of the material body. As F. W. H. Myers says in his Human Personality, a work which summarizes many of the investigations of the Psychical Research Society:—
    Observation, experiment, inference, have led many inquirers, of whom I am one, to a belief in direct or telepathic intercommunication, not between the minds of men still on earth only, but between minds or spirits still on earth and spirits departed. Such a discovery opens the doors also to revelation. …
    We have shown that amid much deception and self-deception, fraud and illusion, veritable manifestations do reach us from beyond the grave. …
    By discovery and by revelation certain theses have been provisionally established with regard to such departed souls as we have been able to encounter. First and chiefly, I, at least, see ground to believe that their state is one of endless evolution in wisdom and in love. Their loves of earth persist, and most of all, those highest loves which find their outlet in adoration and worship. … Evil to them seems less a terrible than a slavish thing. It is embodied in no mighty Potentate; rather it forms as isolating madness from which higher spirits strive to free the distorted soul. There needs no chastisement of fire; self-knowledge is man’s punishment and his reward; self-knowledge and the nearness or the aloofness of companion souls. For in that world love is actually self-preservation; the Communion of Saints not only adorns but constitutes the Life Everlasting. nay, from the laws of telepathy it follows that that communion is valid to us here and now. Even now the love of souls departed makes answer to our invocations. Even now our loving memory—love is itself a prayer—supports and strengthens those delivered spirits upon their upward way.
    The measure of agreement between this view, which is founded on careful scientific research, and that of the Bahá’í teachings, is truly remarkable.

  [*]And my opinions are the least of your worries. Baha'i nonsense is your bigger problem.

Now, I'm not troubled by a person who not only does not believe in an afterlife but who thinks it's rational and reasonable to define "spirit" as 1. "a state of mind or attitude" or 2. "the inner character of a person, thought of as different from the material person we can see and touch". And I'm not troubled by a person who does believe in an afterlife and believes in telepathic communication between minds/spirits of material persons on earth and "spirits departed".

As troublesome as it is to plod through Baha'i writings and have to ascertain the "authoritative ranking" of this and that author, I am not severely and permanently troubled by a religion/organization/faith community that has members of both kinds in it, i.e. some who believe in an afterlife and spirits putzing around in it and those who don't believe in an afterlife.

But when I speak of "Baha'i nonsense", I am referring to Baha'is who don't believe in literal resurrections but do believe that there's "remarkable measure of agreement between scientific research and Baha'i teachings", i.e. there's an afterlife. I fail to see that that is a consistent viewpoint, and so I call it nonsense.

So, either you haven't followed my thinking and have flinched over my calling out Baha'i nonsense, or you have followed my thinking and still object to my calling out Baha'i nonsense. Which is it?

 

[Dawnofhope]

I believe that a brief trip down "Memory Lane" is appropriate here.

Now, I'm not troubled by a person who not only does not believe in an afterlife but who thinks it's rational and reasonable to define "spirit" as 1. "a state of mind or attitude" or 2. "the inner character of a person, thought of as different from the material person we can see and touch". And I'm not troubled by a person who does believe in an afterlife and believes in telepathic communication between minds/spirits of material persons on earth and "spirits departed".

As troublesome as it is to plod through Baha'i writings and have to ascertain the "authoritative ranking" of this and that author, I am not severely and permanently troubled by a religion/organization/faith community that has members of both kinds in it, i.e. some who believe in an afterlife and spirits putzing around in it and those who don't believe in an afterlife.

But when I speak of "Baha'i nonsense", I am referring to Baha'is who don't believe in literal resurrections but do believe that there's "remarkable measure of agreement between scientific research and Baha'i teachings", i.e. there's an afterlife. I fail to see that that is a consistent viewpoint, and so I call it nonsense.

So, either you haven't followed my thinking and have flinched over my calling out Baha'i nonsense, or you have followed my thinking and still object to my calling out Baha'i nonsense. Which is it?

I better see where you are coming from. If I understand and you are objecting to the notion there is scientific evidence to support the Baha’i view of an afterlife. Is that what you are calling ‘Baha’i nonsense’?

For the record I’m not sure if Daniel actually considers himself a Baha’i. He describes himself as a Baha’i inspired liberal which is fine.

There is no hard scientific evidence to my knowledge that supports an afterlife whether Baha’i, Christian or Hindu. There is nothing to my knowledge in the Baha’i writings that support there is scientific evidence to support an afterlife. Notwithstanding Baha’is clearly believe or should believe in an afterlife based on the Baha’i writings that support that there is an afterlife. The basis for this belief isn’t because science has proved it, rather that Bahá’u’lláh has clearly stated we have a soul that continues beyond this physical life. I might address this point in more detail when I respond to you post about the twilight zone.

Does that make sense? Are we better understanding each other? If I’ve contributed to any misunderstanding I apologise.

 

[Dawnofhope]

If John the Baptist was the reincarnated Elijah, how did Peter, John, and James know that it was Elijah who was talking with Jesus? Wouldn't they have thought it was John the Baptist talking with him?

Well here’s another Baha’i curveball to deal with:

Bahá'í Reference Library - Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Page 162

So like the resurrection of Jesus it never literally happened at all, it was (drum roll.....wait for it) a mystical experience! Yes a mystical experience as Paul had with the risen Jesus and Bahá’u’lláh had with the maid of heaven.

There was a lot of this going on at Pentecost if you recall Acts of the apostles 2:14-17 when Peter addresses the crowd:

16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

For that matter, how did the three disciples know that it was Elijah and Moses who spoke with Jesus? The disciples never met Elijah and Moses, so they wouldn't have known who the two men with Jesus were.

That is the nature of mystical experiences with dreams and visions. Have you had dreams and visions? I have. Should you believe me? No. You should remain resolutely sceptical about any and everything a Baha’i says to you.

If we take it literally we need to explain many things. How come Moses and Elijah come back to life after being dead so long. Presuming the had their imperishable as opposed to perishable bodies on display recognition was certainly an issue. But hey, its written in the Bible so it must be literally true, right?

• Notice the presence of "bright light" and a cloud that envelopes them? And the Bat Qol [the Voice from Heaven]?

• Most importantly: Jesus {a Baha'i "Manifestation of God"] and Moses [another "Manifestation of God"] stand next to each other. Neat trick, eh?

Interesting how The Bab is both the Return of Elijah and a Manifestation of God. So metaphorically three Manifestations of God!

And what's with the Bat Qol saying:

• “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!”
• “This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!”
• “This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him.”
• “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

And who was the Bat Qol referring to? and talking to?

Jesus gets the royal treatment. Baha'u'llah? just gets a visit from "the Maid of Heaven" when he's in prison..

Here’s how Bahá’u’lláh describes His Maid of Heaven experience.

"While engulfed in tribulations I heard a most wondrous, a most sweet voice, calling above My head. Turning My face, I beheld a Maiden — the embodiment of the remembrance of the name of My Lord — suspended in the air before Me. So rejoiced was she in her very soul that her countenance shone with the ornament of the good-pleasure of God, and her cheeks glowed with the brightness of the All-Merciful. Betwixt Earth and Heaven she was raising a call which captivated the hearts and minds of men. She was imparting to both My inward and outer being tidings which rejoiced My soul, and the souls of God's honoured servants. Pointing with her finger unto My head, she addressed all who are in Heaven and all who are on Earth saying: "By God! This is the best beloved of the worlds, and yet ye comprehend not. This is the Beauty of God amongst you, and the power of His sovereignty within you, could ye but understand."

Maid of Heaven - Wikipedia

Do you think anyone witnessed this or experienced it apart from Bahá’u’lláh? Not likely. It was a mystical experience just like the Apostles experienced on the mountain experienced only by the three Apostles as described by Abdul-Baha.

 

[Terry Sampson]

The whole story of a man rising from the dead after being entombed for 3 days, suddenly appearing to Disciples within a locked room, various other appearances where the text suggests so much more going on than a literal telling of a story, finally culminating in an ascension through the stratosphere to be with His Father in heaven is strange to the extreme.

That you or anyone would think it strange does not surprise or disturb me. But out of curiosity: do you speak for yourself alone, for yourself and some Baha'i, for yourself and many Baha'i, for yourself and most Baha'i, or for yourself and all Baha'i. [Before you ask me the same question, in terms of my belief and how many Christians I speak for, allow me to invite your attention to the title of this thread. It's "Who is Baháʼu'lláh?" not "Who was Jesus?" or "Who was Jesus Christ?"]

I suspect having a God man resurrect from the dead then rise up to heaven would have resonated well with a Greco-Roman audience as opposed to the Jews.

Aye, but the resurrection may have had a better reception among the Jews who believed that human resurrections and imperishable human spirits are a possibility. Gentiles? Gentiles will believe anything that sounds interesting. I suspect, however, that Jewish openess, such as it may have been, to the resurrection of Jesus, a righteous Jew, dried up quickly in 70 A.D. when Christians, Jew or Gentile, didn't lift a hand to defend Jerusalem or Israel against Titus' army.

If I understand and you are objecting to the notion there is scientific evidence to support the Baha’i view of an afterlife. Is that what you are calling ‘Baha’i nonsense’?

No. Suppose with me, that I say:

• Hi, my name is Terry. I'm a Baha'i. In the on-line Baha'i Reference Library Bahá'í Reference Library - Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, Pages 220-222 you can read the words of Dr. Esslemont, among which he quotes St. Paul, Baha'u'llah, Jesus, and the Kitáb-i-Íqán as follows:
  • The Day of Judgment is also the Day of Resurrection, of the raising of the dead. St. Paul in his First Epistle to the Corinthians says:
    "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."—I Cor. xv, 51–53.
    As to the meaning of these passages about the raising of the dead, Bahá’u’lláh writes in the Book of Íqán:—
    "… By the terms “life” and “death,” spoken of in the scriptures, is intended the life of faith and the death of unbelief. The generality of the people, owing to their failure to grasp the meaning of these words, rejected and despised the person of the Manifestation, deprived themselves of the light of His divine guidance, and refused to follow the example of that immortal Beauty. …"
    
    "… Even as Jesus said: “Ye must be born again” [John iii, 7]. Again He saith: “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” [John iii, 5–6]. The purpose of these words is that whosoever in every dispensation is born of the Spirit and is quickened by the breath of the Manifestation of Holiness, he verily is of those that have attained unto “life” and “resurrection” and have entered into the “paradise” of the love of God. And whosoever is not of them, is condemned to “death” and “deprivation,” to the “fire” of unbelief, and to the “wrath” of God. …"
    
    "In every age and century, the purpose of the Prophets of God and their chosen ones hath been no other but to affirm the spiritual significance of the terms “life,” “resurrection,” and “judgment.” … Wert thou to attain to but a dewdrop of the crystal waters of divine knowledge, thou wouldst readily realize that true life is not the life of the flesh but the life of the spirit. For the life of the flesh is common to both men and animals, whereas the life of the spirit is possessed only by the pure in heart who have quaffed from the ocean of faith and partaken of the fruit of certitude. This life knoweth no death, and this existence is crowned by immortality. Even as it hath been said: “He who is a true believer liveth both in this world and in the world to come.” If by “life” be meant this earthly life, it is evident that death must needs overtake it."—Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 114, 118, 120–21.
  • According to the Bahá’í teaching the Resurrection has nothing to do with the gross physical body. That body, once dead, is done with. It becomes decomposed and its atoms will never be recomposed into the same body.
    Resurrection is the birth of the individual to spiritual life, through the gift of the Holy Spirit bestowed through the Manifestation of God. The grave from which he arises is the grave of ignorance and negligence of God. The sleep from which he awakens is the dormant spiritual condition in which many await the dawn of the Day of God. This dawn illumines all who have lived on the face of the earth, whether they are in the body or out of the body, but those who are spiritually blind cannot perceive it. The Day of Resurrection is not a day of twenty-four hours, but an era which has now begun and will last as long as the present world cycle continues. It will continue when all traces of the present civilization will have been wiped off the surface of the globe.
• Oh, and by the way, Dr. Esslemont also wrote:
  • The Bahá’í teachings with regard to body and soul, and the life after death, are quite in harmony with the results of psychical research. They teach, as we have seen, that death is but a new birth—the escape from the prison of the body into a larger life, and that progress in the afterlife is limitless.
    A large body of scientific evidence has gradually been accumulating which in the opinion of impartial but highly critical investigators is amply sufficient to establish beyond all question the fact of a life after death—of the continued life and activity of the conscious “soul” after the dissolution of the material body. As F. W. H. Myers says in his Human Personality, a work which summarizes many of the investigations of the Psychical Research Society:—
    Observation, experiment, inference, have led many inquirers, of whom I am one, to a belief in direct or telepathic intercommunication, not between the minds of men still on earth only, but between minds or spirits still on earth and spirits departed. Such a discovery opens the doors also to revelation. …
    
    We have shown that amid much deception and self-deception, fraud and illusion, veritable manifestations do reach us from beyond the grave. …
    
    By discovery and by revelation certain theses have been provisionally established with regard to such departed souls as we have been able to encounter. First and chiefly, I, at least, see ground to believe that their state is one of endless evolution in wisdom and in love. Their loves of earth persist, and most of all, those highest loves which find their outlet in adoration and worship. … Evil to them seems less a terrible than a slavish thing. It is embodied in no mighty Potentate; rather it forms as isolating madness from which higher spirits strive to free the distorted soul. There needs no chastisement of fire; self-knowledge is man’s punishment and his reward; self-knowledge and the nearness or the aloofness of companion souls. For in that world love is actually self-preservation; the Communion of Saints not only adorns but constitutes the Life Everlasting. nay, from the laws of telepathy it follows that that communion is valid to us here and now. Even now the love of souls departed makes answer to our invocations. Even now our loving memory—love is itself a prayer—supports and strengthens those delivered spirits upon their upward way.
    The measure of agreement between this view, which is founded on careful scientific research, and that of the Bahá’í teachings, is truly remarkable.
• Neat, huh? Esslemont, a Baha'i who has sufficient authoritative ranking to be cited in the Baha'i Reference Library, affirms:
  • "Death", "graves", and "Resurrections" in the Bible are not to be taken literally;
  • "Spiritual life", "the Holy Spirit bestowed through the Manifestation of God", "spiritual condition" are meaningful terms; and
    
  • "death is but a new birth--the escape from the prison of the body into a larger life, and that progress in the afterlife is limitless. A large body of scientific evidence has gradually been accumulating which in the opinion of impartial but highly critical investigators is amply sufficient to establish beyond all question the fact of a life after death."

That's what I call "Baha'i nonsense." Why don't the Baha'i just say: We don't care what you believe above, beyond, and apart from "Humanity is one and Earth is currently its home. Play nice, share, and help each other"? And why do any Baha'i continue to imagine, much less claim, that they are part of an Abrahamic faith community? IMO, the only reason for doing so is so it/they can use snippets from the Tanakh and John's Book of Revelation to claim that Baha'u'llah has the authority of Jewish and Christian Scripture behind him.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is nothing in Scriptures that refers to the same physical body of Christ returning. Christ has a new imperishable body anyhow. How would we recognise Him? By His wounds?

Then you would face this problem.

Stigmata - Wikipedia

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

allow me to invite your attention to the title of this thread. It's "Who is Baháʼu'lláh?" not "Who was Jesus?" or "Who was Jesus Christ?"]

To a Baha'i, the identity as to who is Baha'u'llah, is also explained when we know who Jesus the Christ was. As in life, so it is in Spirit, the Son becomes the Father.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

That you or anyone would think it strange does not surprise or disturb me. But out of curiosity: do you speak for yourself alone, for yourself and some Baha'i, for yourself and many Baha'i, for yourself and most Baha'i, or for yourself and all Baha'i. [Before you ask me the same question, in terms of my belief and how many Christians I speak for, allow me to invite your attention to the title of this thread. It's "Who is Baháʼu'lláh?" not "Who was Jesus?" or "Who was Jesus Christ?"]

I’ve been a Baha’i for about 30 years. I try my best to accurately portray the Baha’i Teachings but I’m just an ordinary guy. Although its best if Baha’is provide the writings to back up what they say, the moderators on this forum often consider this proselytising so Baha’is on RF need to do the best we can giving views in our own words with occasional links and quotes. There are some very knowledgeable Baha’is here such as @Tony Bristow-Stagg, @loverofhumanity and @InvestigateTruth who I feel so a good job of representing both the spirit and Teachings of the Faith consistently well.

If you want to properly understand the Baha’i Faith one of the most useful things to do is to meet Baha’is face to face. Internet discussions groups have their place and good for discussions of an in-depth nature as we’re having. However there’s no substitute for meeting people in real life and checking out an actual community.

Above all study the Baha’i writings. Its not necessarily an easy thing to study a new religion. However there are plenty of writings and resources in English on the World Wide Web. Obviously there’s an abundance of material from our critics.

You’re right that we’re somewhat off topic but who really cares. The OP author just wanted to confirm his suspicions from a conservative Christian perspective as no doubt you are too.

Aye, but the resurrection may have had a better reception among the Jews who believed that human resurrections and imperishable human spirits are a possibility. Gentiles? Gentiles will believe anything that sounds interesting. I suspect, however, that Jewish openess, such as it may have been, to the resurrection of Jesus, a righteous Jew, dried up quickly in 70 A.D. when Christians, Jew or Gentile, didn't lift a hand to defend Jerusalem or Israel against Titus' army.

Sure.

• Neat, huh? Esslemont, a Baha'i who has sufficient authoritative ranking to be cited in the Baha'i Reference Library, affirms:
  • "Death", "graves", and "Resurrections" in the Bible are not to be taken literally;
  • "Spiritual life", "the Holy Spirit bestowed through the Manifestation of God", "spiritual condition" are meaningful terms; and
    
  • "death is but a new birth--the escape from the prison of the body into a larger life, and that progress in the afterlife is limitless. A large body of scientific evidence has gradually been accumulating which in the opinion of impartial but highly critical investigators is amply sufficient to establish beyond all question the fact of a life after death."

That's what I call "Baha'i nonsense." Why don't the Baha'i just say: We don't care what you believe above, beyond, and apart from "Humanity is one and Earth is currently its home. Play nice, share, and help each other"? And why do any Baha'i continue to imagine, much less claim, that they are part of an Abrahamic faith community? IMO, the only reason for doing so is so it/they can use snippets from the Tanakh and John's Book of Revelation to claim that Baha'u'llah has the authority of Jewish and Christian Scripture behind him.

Well there’s a little bit to unpack there!

Bahá’u’lláh and the new era is nearly 100 years old. Some aspects such as Dr J E Esselmont’s narrative about scientific evidence for life after death is clearly dated. His explanation of the resurrection of Christ from a Baha’i perspective is accurate IMHO.

John Esslemont - Wikipedia

An estimated twenty thousand of the early Baha’is or Babis were put to death as the Persian and Ottoman Empires went to great lengths to suppress and eliminate the Baha’i Faith over a 75 year period. They failed of course. We’re a strong united world wide community now spread to all regions of the globe. We completely expect that as the Baha’i Faith becomes better known amongst the Christian community there will be both support and opposition. If Bahá’u’lláh is who He says He is nothing you or I can do the stop the Baha’i Faith fulfilling its destiny. If not it will slide into obscurity where it belongs.

 

[Trailblazer]

And why do any Baha'i continue to imagine, much less claim, that they are part of an Abrahamic faith community? IMO, the only reason for doing so is so it/they can use snippets from the Tanakh and John's Book of Revelation to claim that Baha'u'llah has the authority of Jewish and Christian Scripture behind him.

And why do Jews and Christians imagine, much less claim, that they are the only Abrahamic Faiths that ever existed?

Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and the Bahai Faith are called Abrahamic religions because they all accept the tradition of the God (known as Yahweh in Hebrew and Allah in Arabic) that revealed himself to Abraham.
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › God_in_Abrahamic_religions

IMO, Baha'u'llah does not need the authority of the Jewish and Christian Scripture behind Him because He stands on His own authority given to Him by God and He has His own scriptures.

 

[Terry Sampson]

So like the resurrection of Jesus [the Transfiguration of Jesus] never literally happened at all,

I'd have been annoyed by the inconsistency of a contrary claim.

Interesting how The Bab is both the Return of Elijah and a Manifestation of God. So metaphorically three Manifestations of God!

Neat. Now Baha'i can sort themselves into Trinitarian Baha'i and Non-Trinitarian Baha'i.

Have you had dreams and visions?

I've had dreams while I was sleeping. The only visions I've had were: (a) a UFO that turned out to be a bright star (probably Sirius); (b) some weird mental hallucinations each of the three times I took LSD back in 1971; and a childhood sighting (age: 3-4) of a scary, but friendly being on my front porch, which was probably evoked by my father who kept telling me, late at night, that if I didn't stop crying he was going to take me outside and give me to the monster. I stopped crying when the being smiled and waved at me.

Have you ever heard of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal?

How come Moses and Elijah come back to life after being dead so long.

Come back to life after being dead so long? What are you talking about? Who said they were dead until just before the Transfiguration?

But hey, its written in the Bible so it must be literally true, right?

LOL! You appear to have this odd notion that everything in the Tanakh and Christian scriptures has to be either 100% literal or 100% figurative/metaphorical/symbolical/"spiritual-but-not-material. No wonder you parted ways with Christianity. I suspect you'd have left Judaism if you had been a Jew, left Zoroastrianism if you had been one, left Hinduism if you had been one, etc.

when Christ returns it is incumbent on His faithful believers to recognise Him. But like you I don’t believe it will be the same physical Jesus reincarnated.

You think you and I are saying the same thing when you say: "like you, I don't believe it will be the same physical Jesus reincarnated." But I'll bet we have two very different ideas about how physical Jesus is now and what he's going to look like when I see Him.

Don’t you think it a little strange the imperishable body has residual crucifixion wounds?

Are you under the impression that I believe that "crucifixion wounds" signifies open wounds bleeding spiritual blood? I hope not. Ever heard of scars? If I should be so fortunate as to see Him after I die, I'm going to want to see the scars or hear an explanation why He doesn't have them. If He tells me they healed up and disappeared shortly after the crucifixion or after His ascension, I'm going to be skeptical, but I figure He'll know how to convince me.

If Bahá’u’lláh is who He says He is nothing you or I can do the stop the Baha’i Faith fulfilling its destiny.

Right, ... but ... don't you mean "If Baha'u'llah was who he said he was?" He's dead and the dead should bury the dead, so Tony told me. On the other hand, if Baha'i confusion about "resurrections" and "afterlives" is wrong, when you and I die, we actually may be able to figure out which of us was wrong and which of us, if either of us, was right.

 

[Trailblazer]

[Before you ask me the same question, in terms of my belief and how many Christians I speak for, allow me to invite your attention to the title of this thread. It's "Who is Baháʼu'lláh?" not "Who was Jesus?" or "Who was Jesus Christ?"]

Good point. This thread was about Baha'u'llah.
Do Christians want to know who Baha'u'llah was? I get a feeling they do not want to know, but I could be wrong.

We can only tell you who He claimed to be. Nobody can prove that anymore than a Christian can prove Jesus was who He claimed to be, so we are on even ground.

 

[Terry Sampson]

So Thomas has this need to not only see the wounds but to physically to thrust his hand into one of the wounds. That is quite morbid if taken literally.

Back to our doubting Thomas not present at the first appearance to the Disciples.

25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

So Thomas has this need to not only see the wounds but to physically to thrust his hand into one of the wounds. That is quite morbid if taken literally.

*sigh* Here's the context verse. The thrust that is grossing you out is the Greek word "βάλω"

Here's a one word English synonym for "βάλω".

Oh, sorry, that's more than one word, isn't it?

 

[Terry Sampson]

We don’t need to have any of these sightings to believe.

To believe what? That "Christ" is a suit of clothes that must be used when hustling Christians, and that Jesus wore it first, then passed it on to Mírzá Ḥusayn-ʻAlí Núrí some 840 years later?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Neat. Now Baha'i can sort themselves into Trinitarian Baha'i and Non-Trinitarian Baha'i.

Sure. If it works for the Christians...

I've had dreams while I was sleeping. The only visions I've had were: (a) a UFO that turned out to be a bright star (probably Sirius); (b) some weird mental hallucinations each of the three times I took LSD back in 1971; and a childhood sighting (age: 3-4) of a scary, but friendly being on my front porch, which was probably evoked by my father who kept telling me, late at night, that if I didn't stop crying he was going to take me outside and give me to the monster. I stopped crying when the being smiled and waved at me.

I’m a father with a couple of sons Terry. I can’t imagine threatening to give them to a monster. I better skip telling you about my drug experiences but I had a vision and a few dreams with Bahá’u’lláh and Abdu’l-Baha not long after becoming a Baha’i.

Have you ever heard of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal?

No. I grew up Protestant.

Come back to life after being dead so long? What are you talking about? Who said they were dead until just before the Transfiguration?

Of course. I was referring to their perishable physical bodies as opposed to imperishable spiritual ones so sure, they could have descended from the sky and then ascended again so quickly that they just seemed to have vanished.

LOL! You appear to have this odd notion that everything in the Tanakh and Christian scriptures has to be either 100% literal or 100% figurative/metaphorical/symbolical/"spiritual-but-not-material. No wonder you parted ways with Christianity. I suspect you'd have left Judaism if you had been a Jew, left Zoroastrianism if you had been one, left Hinduism if you had been one, etc.

Its just my dry humour when I talk about taking it all literally. I know plenty of Christians who I admire and take a moderate approach to their scriptures. That’s the approach I take too. I never left Christianity Terry but I can see why you think I did.

You think you and I are saying the same thing when you say: "like you, I don't believe it will be the same physical Jesus reincarnated." But I'll bet we have two very different ideas about how physical Jesus is now and what he's going to look like when I see Him.

For me Jesus and Bahá’u’lláh are both alive. I can see no reason why an imperishable spiritual body should have any resemblance to our physical bodies. I guess believing in the post resurrection appearances and ascension as literally true it makes sense why you would expect Jesus to resemble His physical body along with the scars.

Are you under the impression that I believe that "crucifixion wounds" signifies open wounds bleeding spiritual blood? I hope not. Ever heard of scars? If I should be so fortunate as to see Him after I die, I'm going to want to see the scars or hear an explanation why He doesn't have them. If He tells me they healed up and disappeared shortly after the crucifixion or after His ascension, I'm going to be skeptical, but I figure He'll know how to convince me.

I guess that open wound on Jesus’s side from the guard’s spear hadn’t quite healed up and that’s why Thomas was able to put his hand in.

Right, ... but ... don't you mean "If Baha'u'llah was who he said he was?" He's dead and the dead should bury the dead, so Tony told me. On the other hand, if Baha'i confusion about "resurrections" and "afterlives" is wrong, when you and I die, we actually may be able to figure out which of us was wrong and which of us, if either of us, was right.

Mate, I’m putting my money on the atheists.

Seriously if you’re right Jesus will decide our fate. If I’m right then God through Bahá’u’lláh will decide our fate.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Oh, sorry, that's more than one word, isn't it?

Terry, go easy.Im just a humble GP. Nothing fancy like a general surgeon. I do some minor surgery but I never thrust my hand into anyone’s abdominal cavities. Its seriously gross and way above my pay scale

 

[Terry Sampson]

No. I grew up Protestant.

So did I, but a very dear friend introduced me to the "Renewal" in 1973. Prophets, singing in tongues, some physical and many spiritual healings, etc. That's when I had my own personal mini-version of Paul's encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus. Some time ago, you asked me why I believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus, and I told you: For three reasons - (1) Because the most important people to me believed it and I would not be who I am if they hadn't; (2) Paul believed it; and (3) Personal experience.

So, out of curiosity, how are you fixed cosmologicaly speaking? i.e. How big and how old do you think the cosmos is? and what's it filled with?

 

[Dawnofhope]

We now enter the realm of the Twilight Zone.
Regarding #__:

1. My simple answer is: "I don't know what will happen to me at death."

So what do you understand the Bible says?

I see why you would think so, but again: Who knows what will happen to me? It's entirely possible that I will have so little imperishable body, if any, when I die that I am nothing more than a very faint imperishable version of former myself.

Why?

We're in the Twilight Zone, since when does the existence or absence of documentation matter?

Obviously if on dying our perishable bodies transformed into an imperishable body as you believe was the case with Jesus then there would be no physical body left. Clearly that doesn’t happen otherwise people’s bodies would vanish a few days after death. They don’t.

I don't put any stock in the Baha'i's version of "heaven" or "reality": (a) because I'm pretty sure that I'd have to sift through hundreds, if not thousands, of pages to accumulate enough quotations from the Bab, Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha, and Shogi Effendi to come to any conclusion; and (b) following the Baha'i maxim, "anybody can say anything, but saying so doesn't make it true".

I can easily provide you with a few writings to get you started.

Do Baha’is Believe in Life After Death?

If Baha'i's think God is omnipresent, why don't they claim that Epimenides was a Manifestation of God and an early Messenger.

I don’t know. Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh are the ones we know about. There are many saints and seers, philosophers and artisans and the like but they didn’t found an independent religion.

 

[Dawnofhope]

So did I, but a very dear friend introduced me to the "Renewal" in 1973. Prophets, singing in tongues, some physical and many spiritual healings, etc. That's when I had my own personal mini-version of Paul's encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus. Some time ago, you asked me why I believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus, and I told you: For three reasons - (1) Because the most important people to me believed it and I would not be who I am if they hadn't; (2) Paul believed it; and (3) Personal experience.

Fair enough. I went through being a born again Christian, full immersion baptism in front of 300 people, speaking in tongues and all that Charismatic Christian phenomena.

So, out of curiosity, how are you fixed cosmologicaly speaking? i.e. How big and how old do you think the cosmos is? and what's it filled with?

The universe is without beginning or end in respect to time and space. There are worlds, universes and dimensions that are incomprehensible to the mind of man. Life exists on other planets.

 

[oldbadger]

I better see where you are coming from. If I understand and you are objecting to the notion there is scientific evidence to support the Baha’i view of an afterlife. Is that what you are calling ‘Baha’i nonsense’?

For the record I’m not sure if Daniel actually considers himself a Baha’i. He describes himself as a Baha’i inspired liberal which is fine.

There is no hard scientific evidence to my knowledge that supports an afterlife whether Baha’i, Christian or Hindu. There is nothing to my knowledge in the Baha’i writings that support there is scientific evidence to support an afterlife. Notwithstanding Baha’is clearly believe or should believe in an afterlife based on the Baha’i writings that support that there is an afterlife. The basis for this belief isn’t because science has proved it, rather that Bahá’u’lláh has clearly stated we have a soul that continues beyond this physical life. I might address this point in more detail when I respond to you post about the twilight zone.

Does that make sense? Are we better understanding each other? If I’ve contributed to any misunderstanding I apologise.

The above sent to another........
Does the above simply mean that Bahai does not believe in Spirits?
Yes/No?