Who was Baha'u'llah?

[Trailblazer]

How many great works of art and music were inspired by the Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ? Oh, wait a minute. Baha'is say the Trinity isn't true? Never mind.

Baha'is believe that great works of art were inspired by release of the Holy Spiirt when Jesus Christ when He sacrificed Himself on the cross, but that has nothing to do with the Trinity, which is a man-made doctrine of the church.

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I have never heard you say you are wrong.

To my knowledge, I have only made one mistake with you, and it involved time zones. Once you made a compelling argument, I changed my mind and told you so. I also pointed out that it was significant evidence worth noting, since you and many others frequently complain that critical thinkers can't have their minds changed no matter what evidence the believer presents, and I pointed out that this event falsified that claim. You seem to have forgotten already.

It is just as logical that God doesn't exist

You had written, "If atheists were logical they would be able to understand that if there is only one God." I explained that logic allowed for other possibilities. Now you wrote that.

Why is it decidable without proof?

Because all that is needed is compelling evidence.

it has not been decided that an ordinary person could have written that message, not unless you can prove that Baha'u'llah was only an ordinary person

That is another logical error on your part. I told you how that matter can be decided. You didn't rebut me. You didn't even acknowledge that you had read it. As I've explained to you multiple times, that's where debate ends. One party makes a comment, the other makes a sound falsifying argument, the original party fails to rebut that successfully, and the debate is over and the problem resolved. If you want to go back and find that rebuttal of mine and attempt to rebut it yourself now, that's fine. There's no expiration time on that. But unless you do, we're done there. And that will always be the case. Every time you fail to rebut, that debate becomes resolved. You can learn that and adapt if you have any interest in being more effective or not.

You have a great opportunity to learn about another world here on RF from people more than willing to share their secrets with you, but you'll need to lower your defense shields. You'll need to consider that there might be something of value there, be receptive to it, and consider it dispassionately.

I said: "No I don't think your words are equivalent to my words."
I did not mean that my words have more value than yours or that your words have more value than my words.

Did you think I meant that your words are not equivalent to my words since your words have more value than my words?

Is that what you want to claim that equivalent means to you - equal in value? That's only part of the meaning, and not the part relevant here: "equivalent - equal in value, amount, function, meaning, etc." Look at the last one. That's the present usage. You implied that your words and mine were equal in meaning, and I pointed out that they were not.

 

[Windwalker]

How do you know God is a Spirit?
From the Bible?
Simple question for you

Experience. What the Bible says agrees with my experience.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Experience. What the Bible says agrees with my experience.

So if Bible says Jesus is the Messiah, how can you know this is true, using your own experience?

 

[Trailblazer]

To my knowledge, I have only made one mistake with you, and it involved time zones.

Not according to what you consider to be a mistake, but what is not a mistake to one person might be considered a mistake to another person.

Once you made a compelling argument, I changed my mind and told you so. I also pointed out that it was significant evidence worth noting, since you and many others frequently complain that critical thinkers can't have their minds changed no matter what evidence the believer presents, and I pointed out that this event falsified that claim. You seem to have forgotten already.

Duly noted, but I cannot remember every post that is posted here.

You had written, "If atheists were logical they would be able to understand that if there is only one God." I explained that logic allowed for other possibilities. Now you wrote that.

Logic allows for possibilities other than one God since nobody can prove there is only one God, that is only a belief. Logic also allows for the possibility that there is no God, since nobody can prove that there is a God.

You did not quote what I said in context. I did not say that logic only allows for one possibility, that there is only one God.
I did not say: "If atheists were logical they would be able to understand that there is only one God."

I said: If atheists were logical they would be able to understand that if there is only one God there is only one God, even though believers have different beliefs about that God.

Do you understand the difference between those two statements?
If in reality there is only One God it doesn't matter if some believers believe there is more than one God, since belief does not determine reality.

Because all that is needed is compelling evidence.

I have compelling evidence and that is why I don't need proof. What is compelling to one person is not always compelling to another.

That is another logical error on your part. I told you how that matter can be decided. You didn't rebut me. You didn't even acknowledge that you had read it.

No, you did not say how that matter can be decided.

You said: Proof? Why can't you learn? Why do you perseverate? But the question is decidable, and has been decided. #98

You never said how it can be decided.
If you want to claim that it has been decided you will have to explain how it was decided and by whom.

That is called evidence. If you have no evidence the case is closed.

 

[CG Didymus]

So if Bible says Jesus is the Messiah, how can you know this is true, using your own experience?

I don't know if it matters that much to Jews, but I usually separate the Bible, the Jewish Scriptures, and the NT, which is the Christian Scriptures. It's debatable whether or not the Jewish Scriptures says that Jesus is the Messiah.

 

[exchemist]

^ This. What else could we possibly expect? In my opinion, it is a terribly skewed poll.

And it's not like you or the other Bahais on this forum require this skewed poll or the opinions of others to validate your beliefs.

I'd never even heard of Baha'i or their Victorian era prophet until I joined this forum. I had wondered if it was mostly an American thing, but apparently it is mainly found in sub-Saharan Africa and the Indian subcontinent. Anyway, I'm one of those unable to express an opinion about the founder, as there are virtually no Baha'i in Europe and I haven't spent much time reading up about it. I gather Baha'ullah once wrote to Queen Victoria. I tend to agree that this poll seems unlikely to tell anyone a great deal.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You did not quote what I said in context. I did not say that logic only allows for one possibility, that there is only one God.
I did not say: "If atheists were logical they would be able to understand that there is only one God."

I said: If atheists were logical they would be able to understand that if there is only one God there is only one God, even though believers have different beliefs about that God.

OK. I read that carelessly and misunderstood you.

No, you did not say how that matter can be decided.

You missed it. And it's amazing that you can't suggest a means for deciding the matter yourself. Let me give you a hint. Christians say the same about their scripture - that it is evidence of divine communication, but most can't reliably distinguish the King James Bible from Shakespeare quotes.

If you want to claim that it has been decided you will have to explain how it was decided and by whom. That is called evidence. If you have no evidence the case is closed.

I've already explained to you that that ship has sailed unless you want to rebut my rebuttal. And yes, unless you do, the case is closed. I think you're reluctant to try to find it even though it was most recently written only yesterday, because I suspect that you are concerned that you wouldn't be able to recognize it as a means for deciding the matter.

And let me recommend to you again that you address every claim and argument with which you disagree with rebuttal at the time you see it not just for your own benefit but also as a courtesy to whomever bothered to write it for you. You already know that not doing so is understood as not being able to do so. It's assumed that you read the words and chose to ignore them for a reason.

 

[Windwalker]

So if Bible says Jesus is the Messiah, how can you know this is true, using your own experience?

I can't, as I had an experience of Infinite Spirit, but Jesus was a human being, a man who lived and died 2000 years ago. One could argue that my experience was with that of the risen Christ, which is itself Infinite Spirit. And I wouldn't argue against that. To me, it's just a word we call the Divine. But it's all the same thing. What matters to me is what it is, not what we call it.

But as far the "messiah" goes, that is itself a Jewish concept with roots in Jewish history. All that language is simply cultural ways to talk about the Transcendent, in their religious system. I don't limit the language I would use to speak about God, or the "Christ" to just that system. It can be spoken about in other religious language as well. But it's all the same thing.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I can't, as I had an experience of Infinite Spirit, but Jesus was a human being, a man who lived and died 2000 years ago. One could argue that my experience was with that of the risen Christ, which is itself Infinite Spirit. And I wouldn't argue against that. To me, it's just a word we call the Divine. But it's all the same thing. What matters to me is what it is, not what we call it.

But as far the "messiah" goes, that is itself a Jewish concept with roots in Jewish history. All that language is simply cultural ways to talk about the Transcendent, in their religious system. I don't limit the language I would use to speak about God, or the "Christ" to just that system. It can be spoken about in other religious language as well. But it's all the same thing.

Then you dont consider yourself a Christian, becasue you had no experience with Jesus, and the concept of messiah is a cultural Jewish thing, and not necessarily a divine or son of God. You don't seem to really consider Bible divine revelations either.
You rely completely on your own personal experience. Right?

When you say, you experienced with infinite spirit or divine, do you mean an experience that makes you believe a divine exist, or also, an experience that tells you about divine, and knowing the Divine and receiving messages and knowledge from the divine?

 

[Windwalker]

What does that have to do with anything? It seems your frustration is getting the best of you.

It seems you are projecting your frustrations on others. I have no frustration whatsoever in this discussion. What I said has everything to do with the context which you ignored when you quoted it. She had said to me arguing why Bahaullah went around proclaiming himself the 2nd coming saying, "After He died how would anyone know who He was if He did not write about it?"

So my response that shot that argument down was the Jesus never wrote anything, and yet people very much know who he was because of his followers. To say he wrote about himself because how else would people know, is denied by the fact Jesus never needed to. Do you disagree with this argument to rebut her argument for any reason?

So have I, but it is a delusion to say this is God Himself. In my view, you are experiencing God indirectly. I remember a time when I read a Writing by Baha'u'llah and suddenly out of the blue, I had an intense love for God and Baha'u'llah, and I couldn't tell the difference between the two. I was in ecstasy. Another time I was in the Shrine of Baha'u'llah, and this time my spiritual experience took the form of a deep peace. Before I entered that Shrine, I was agitated. It depends on my receptivity and the grace of God but sometimes when I recite a revealed prayer by Baha'u'llah, I get a spiritual high that is milder than those two experiences.

What you are describing is very familiar to me, as it is something I can experience every time I meditate, and then some. But what I was referencing originally is many orders of magnitude beyond that, as valid and profound as those may be. When I say it was a 'face to face' with the Infinite, I mean just that.

I could share the details of it, but I don't feel to here, since you seem more ready to dismiss than to really wish to know. Anyone having such an experience would know beyond shadow of all doubt that what they touched was the face of the Infinite itself. But it seems your theology doesn't allow that to be so for others, so you wouldn't believe it because you can't and still have faith in your beliefs.

In my view, what is being experienced in the Holy Spirit, not God Himself. He is too exalted to be experienced directly. We would be burnt to cinders.

Ah, but that is the thing. The way I describe it is that you could be crushed under the magnitude of Its power, yet it holds with the Grace of the touch of a butterfly's wing. It could burn you to cinders, but Love holds you in its Infinite Power with incomprensible compassion. Where there is fear in the face of the magnitude of the Divine, there is Love to extinguish all flames of that fear. This I know through a direct encounter.

And to me Holy Spirit is God. These are not two separate things. There is only one Spirit, not two, or three or four. But that one Spirit manifests in infinite ways through infinite worlds. Yet it is all the Selfsame Spirit, and it is within all of us at all times, though we strain to see it, until that veil becomes lifted.

 

[Windwalker]

You should read this:

The Seven Valleys

It is a mystical work which for the life of me I can't really get a good grasp on the material beyond the Valley of Knowledge. My mind is too analytical.

I have a hard time reading things unnecessarily written in a faux King James English for no good reason. But I am familiar with mystical texts. I do understand the things mystical texts point to, as I am at heart a mystic.

And yes, having too analytical a mind can in fact be a great obstacle to realizing the nature of the Divine. So you might not be so fast to call me delusional, when you yourself are too analytical to be able to understand what these things are pointing to.

 

[Windwalker]

Believe it or not, I believe he did know all this, or was connected to the source of all that knowledge, who is God, but it was not his role to reveal all that.

Yeah, believing that way sets you up for some problems when you find that he "should have" known better but clearly didn't. Then you are left trying to force-fit errors into some tortured interpretations that really are only excuses for the the rational mind confronted with a cognitive dissonance. This lead down the path of losing your faith when you can no longer denying your rational mind screaming at you to quit it with all the mental gymnastics and deny the obvious.

I take a much less tightly stretched approach to faith. They are allowed to be wrong, because they were human. That does not diminish spiritual knowledge, to be wrong about matters of science and history.

 

[Windwalker]

Well, never mind, this discussion is a waste of time.

In other words, you don't want to actually discuss anything, because you're just right. Sad, but your choice.

 

[Truthseeker]

So my response that shot that argument down was the Jesus never wrote anything, and yet people very much know who he was because of his followers. To say he wrote about himself because how else would people know, is denied by the fact Jesus never needed to. Do you disagree with this argument to rebut her argument for any reason?

I thought you didn't give any thought to this and reacted in frustration. For that I'm sorry. It seems a nonsensible thing to say. Jesus couldn't write, so what does that have to do with anything? Baha'u'llah wrote because He know how to write. Let me tell you what happened in Baghdad before Baha'u'llah declared who He was in 1863.

With the arrival of Bahá’u’lláh in Baghdád in March 1856, a new day opened for the company of exiles in ‘Iráq. During His absence it had become apparent to friend and foe alike that the Bábí community, left for so long to the leadership of unfaithful persons such as Mírzá Yaḥyá and Siyyid Muḥammad-i-Iṣfahání, had degenerated completely. Most of its members were now dispirited; unlike the early heroes and martyrs who only a decade before had demonstrated with their life-blood the staunchness of their faith, the loftiness of their character, and the depth of their love, they were now devoid of such virtues and were spiritually as dead. And they were divided among themselves. For instance, in the town of Qazvín, the home of Ṭáhirih, that immortal heroine of the Bábí Dispensation, they had created four sects, each bearing a name. Some followed Mírzá Yaḥyá, others identified their faith with Quddús or Ṭáhirih, and some considered themselves the followers of the Bayán, the Mother Book of the Bábí Revelation.

It was during this period also that no less than twenty-five people audaciously announced themselves as 'Him Whom God shall make manifest' -- a designation by which the Báb had referred to Bahá’u’lláh, the Promised One of all ages, Whose Herald He was. To support their claims, some even went so far as to disseminate their own writings among the rank and file of the community. However, a number of them who attained the presence of Bahá’u’lláh in Baghdád, where they had gone with the purpose of converting Him, recognized His station, prostrated themselves at His feet and begged forgiveness for their presumption. Some, indeed, rose to such heights of servitude and faith as to rank foremost among His disciples.
Adib Taherzadeh, "The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh vol. 1"

So without Baha'u'llah writing about who He was His station was also recognized like Jesus.

What you are describing is very familiar to me, as it is something I can experience every time I meditate, and then some. But what I was referencing originally is many orders of magnitude beyond that, as valid and profound as those may be. When I say it was a 'face to face' with the Infinite, I mean just that.

You're accusing Baha'u'llah of essentially having a big ego, and you say something like this? You don't know what I experienced, and I don't know what you experienced, so on what basis can either of us say that what we experienced is many orders of magnitude beyond the other?

 

[Truthseeker]

Yeah, believing that way sets you up for some problems when you find that he "should have" known better but clearly didn't.

You are distorting my words. I said: Believe it or not, I believe he did know all this, or was connected to the source of all that knowledge, who is God, but it was not his role to reveal all that. Where in that do you get he "should have" but didn't.

I take a much less tightly stretched approach to faith. They are allowed to be wrong, because they were human. That does not diminish spiritual knowledge, to be wrong about matters of science and history.

Where in the Gospels did Jesus say anything that was wrong about science and history? If He did do that anywhere, and I don't remember Him doing that, I go by the principle that Baha'u'llah stated in His Hidden Words:

O SON OF BEAUTY!
By My spirit and by My favor! By My mercy and by My beauty! All that I have revealed unto thee with the tongue of power, and have written for thee with the pen of might, hath been in accordance with thy capacity and understanding, not with My state and the melody of My voice.
(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

Jesus spoke according to that understanding of the people of that time, as Jesus and Baha'u'llah have the same divine reality.

I'm not conceding He said anything wrong, but just in case I'm missing something. Another factor to consider that the Writings of Baha'u'llah were not orally remembered decades later.

You may think that I am stretching things in order to believe, but you have no idea how much evidence there is for Baha'u'llah that I have learned for over 50 years that contain no seeming contradictions.

In other words, you don't want to actually discuss anything, because you're just right. Sad, but your choice.

I changed my mind.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'd never even heard of Baha'i or their Victorian era prophet until I joined this forum. I had wondered if it was mostly an American thing, but apparently it is mainly found in sub-Saharan Africa and the Indian subcontinent.

The Baha'i Faith has spread to about 250 countries and territories around the world and is second only to Christianity in its spread around the world. Most of this spread occurred during the first 100 years, from 1844-1944.

"The Bahá'í Faith is the youngest of the world's independent religions originating in Persia (Iran) in the year 1844. Geographically it is world's second-most widely spread religion with about six million believers worldwide who come from virtually every cultural, racial, social and religious background on earth."

Bahá'í Faith - Territory Families
Some general information about the Baha'i Faith can be found on the fact sheet linked to above.

The spread and development of the Baha’i Faith​

After Baha’u’llah’s death, the mass of the Baha’is turned to his eldest son, ‘Abbas Effendi, known as ‘Abdu’l-Baha (1844–1921), and after him to ‘Abdu’l-Baha’s eldest grandson Shoghi Effendi Rabbani (1897–1957). Shoghi Effendi was childless so after a brief ‘inter-regnum’, a nine-man elected body, the Universal House of Justice, was formed in 1963. Referred to repeatedly in the Baha’i writings, the Universal House of Justice remains the Baha’is’ ruling body up to the present-day. It is regarded by Baha’is as divinely-guided.

Beginning in the 1890s, the Baha’i Faith began to attract a much wider following outside of the essentially Islamic ‘world’ of its origin. Baha’i teachers who settled in North America found a receptive audience for the Baha’i message and a number of active Baha’i groups were established. American Baha’is in turn spread the Baha’i teachings to Europe. These developments were greatly welcomed by ‘Abdu’l-Baha, who wrote extensively to the new Western Baha’is addressing their concerns, and himself made lengthy visits to the West in 1911–1913. In turn, Shoghi Effendi organised campaigns of expansion to the rest of the world, and since the 1950s, a massive expansion into many parts of sub-Saharan Africa and Asia has occurred. There are now Baha’i communities in almost every country in the world (North Korea is the exception), and Baha’is are drawn from all religious backgrounds and ethnicities.

British Library

www.bl.uk

Anyway, I'm one of those unable to express an opinion about the founder, as there are virtually no Baha'i in Europe and I haven't spent much time reading up about it. I gather Baha'ullah once wrote to Queen Victoria. I tend to agree that this poll seems unlikely to tell anyone a great deal.

Below is an excerpt from the Tablet to Queen Victoria praising her for how well she had done for the people.

“We have been informed that thou hast forbidden the trading in slaves, both men and women. This, verily, is what God hath enjoined in this wondrous Revelation. God hath, truly, destined a reward for thee, because of this. He, verily, will pay the doer of good his due recompense, wert thou to follow what hath been sent unto thee by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed. As to him who turneth aside, and swelleth with pride, after that the clear tokens have come unto him, from the Revealer of signs, his work shall God bring to naught. He, in truth, hath power over all things.......

We have also heard that thou hast entrusted the reins of counsel into the hands of the representatives of the people. Thou, indeed, hast done well, for thereby the foundations of the edifice of thine affairs will be strengthened, and the hearts of all that are beneath thy shadow, whether high or low, will be tranquillized.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 33-34

You can read the whole Tablet here:

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 33-35

reference.bahai.org

 

[Truthseeker]

I could share the details of it, but I don't feel to here, since you seem more ready to dismiss than to really wish to know. Anyone having such an experience would know beyond shadow of all doubt that what they touched was the face of the Infinite itself. But it seems your theology doesn't allow that to be so for others, so you wouldn't believe it because you can't and still have faith in your beliefs.

Another thing. There's no way to know for a person if what he experienced was "infinite", or touched the face of the infinite I don't think. Have you considered that you yourself may be deluded on this point?

 

[Windwalker]

Then you dont consider yourself a Christian, becasue you had no experience with Jesus, and the concept of messiah is a cultural Jewish thing, and not necessarily a divine or son of God.

I didn't say that. I said I had an experience of the Infinite, or the Absolute Reality, which I will justifiably call "God", and Christians see the Christ as God. But Jesus was the human being who lived 2000 years ago. He was both "man and God". The man part died.

Think about it like the Apostle Paul on the road to Damascus. He was struck down by a white light brighter than the noon day sun. To him, he encountered the Christ. That was not a body of a man. It was Spirit. I had a similar white light experience myself. So, when I said I did not experience the man, a human being, I meant just that. I experienced Spirit.

Paul identified that as the risen Christ for himself. I could say the same thing through that symbolic lens, though at that time it was just what it was, which was nameless to me. When humans experience Transcendence, it is common for them to translate and interpret that through the symbolic lens of their religious systems.

Since I had that experience prior to be a part of a religion, it was just Infinite, with no name. But theologically, that is what the "Christ" symbolizes. So I could call it that, sure.

You don't seem to really consider Bible divine revelations either.

I believe you can find eternal timeless Truth within it. However, I do not understand it in a magical way, that every single word of it was a direct dictation from God with infallible and inerrant facts in all directions. It simply can't be understood like that under the lens of a critical analysis.

And nor does it need to be in order to have value spiritually. God can still "speak" through it Truth, without it needing to fit our flawed expecations of it being "without error".

You rely completely on your own personal experience. Right?

No. I listen to and seek out others for their own experiences and thoughts to help illuminate my own and guide my thinking and practices all the time.

But what I do not do, is just let them tell me what they think the truth is and say my thoughts and experiences are not valid because their "prophet" has the final authority on these matters. I more than find massive flaws in that, and typically recognize all of that as coming from the ego, rather than inspired Truth.

I will take what I hear, and run it through my own experiences to see if it speaks the truth to me, even if it is something I've never been aware of before. Discerning truth from error, is something that can't be told in black and white "authoritative" answers with a capital A. It is something which must be cultivated through practice. It's the difference between dancing, and counting steps.

When you say, you experienced with infinite spirit or divine, do you mean an experience that makes you believe a divine exist, or also, an experience that tells you about divine, and knowing the Divine and receiving messages and knowledge from the divine?

Let me answer this by explain a few things first. It is such that it is literally beyond belief. Belief is something we hold in our minds mentally, in terms of concepts and ideas which we deem to be likely true.

Faith is something of an intuition of our hearts that feels into something that is true, when we don't have any direct confirmation of it. Even if our beliefs fall apart, our faith keeps us searching for better beliefs to support what that intuition pulls or draws us towards.

Experience is beyond beliefs into a direct evidential encounter with a reality. It no long needs to be 'thought' to be true. It is real. Experience replaces faith, it replaces an intuition or sensing of that higher reality, with an actual apprehension of it. And finally...

Adaptation is when when we have integrated that experience into informing all parts of our life and it becomes what guides and informs everything we think, feel, and do. I'm still working on that part of it.

So to answer your question with reference to the above explanation of these terms in order to avoid confusion. My experience does more than allow me to believe it is real. It convinces me of its reality, without needing to believe it. I don't believe I know what an orange tastes like. I know what an orange tastes like because of have a direct experience of tasting oranges. That's not a belief anymore. It's direct experience, or an apprehension of orange tastes.

So it definitely tells me about the Divine. Just like tasting an orange tells me about an orange. But, does it, "knowing the Divine and receiving messages and knowledge from the divine?, as you asked?

Knowing the Divine is a constant exploration and growth, the same as you would have in understanding and growing into anything of great depth. You could think of it in terms of a relationship with a spouse. As you grow, so does the depth of your relationship and knowledge of that "other" to you in your life, and you become more and more apart of each other. That's one way to talk about it.

But the idea of "receiving messages", is something I wince at. It's not hearing voices. It's not communications from the great beyond, like hearing grandmother tell you truths from the grave during a seance, or something. It's not like that. God is within you, and hearing that "voice" is much more an inner truth that is more of a realization than a "message".

The term I use which is much more accurate is an illumination of the mind. Like pulling the blinders back and seeing what was obstructed from view before. It's not "messages", but Truth that is always there, but merely obstructed from view.
It's a process of removing obstacles and seeing Truth, rather than "messages".

I don't believe in those in that way that those who are seeing for Answers to be handed to them hope for. It is much, much, much more of a participatory reality, than a passive householder waiting for the mail to be delivered by the postman.

 

[Windwalker]

I thought you didn't give any thought to this and reacted in frustration. For that I'm sorry. It seems a nonsensible thing to say. Jesus couldn't write, so what does that have to do with anything? Baha'u'llah wrote because He know how to write.

You still missed my point. I was merely responding to her argument that unless Bahahullaha wrote about himself how would other know about him. I simply pointed out that Jesus never wrote about himself, and yet other knew about him. Therefore, her argument doesn't hold up with that line of reasoning she presented.

All the rest of what you say about how others promoted him, and whatnot, that's fine. I wasn't debating that. I was debating her argument that there was no other way for people to know about him unless he wrote about himself. That was her argument. Therefore your argument is with her. Not with me.

You're accusing Baha'u'llah of essentially having a big ego, and you say something like this?

There's nothing egotistical at all about what I said, nor if Baha'u'llah claimed such an experience for himself. I would celebrate that. I believe many people experience these timeless transcendent encounters with Infinite Divine. It is an entirely humbling experience, to say the very least.

What I question as delusional is not someone claiming such an expeirence. I know those are not uncommon, even if generally rare and exceptional in nature. Why would I say that is delusional, when I myself have had such an experience?

What I am saying sounds delusion, is to say that because I had such an experience, I am the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ! That is not something I would claim. That would be delusional. That would be taking a legitimate spiritual experience, and making it about my egoic self. That more than diminishes that Light, when that happens.

You don't know what I experienced, and I don't know what you experienced,

You told me what you experienced, and I related to it with experiences of my own. But I did not tell you what I experienced, and you automatically said I was delusional. Why is that?

so on what basis can either of us say that what we experienced is many orders of magnitude beyond the other?

Based upon your description, I recognized the type of experience as it is entirely familiar to me. That's not minimizing or putting it down in the least. I consider them extremely potent, wonderful, uplifting, and valuable spiritual experiences.

But you had attempt to say my original description of that was nothing more than what you described. Within my own experience, even though it is all of the same in kind, there are in fact "depths of the Divine" one can experience. My original description was "magnitudes of order" beyond these other profound higher states which could relate to in your own experience. This is not a put down or a boast. Just simply explaining there is in fact a difference.

But you seem totally unwilling to accept my claim about my own experience. Why is that? Do you believe it is not possible for anyone other that Baha'u'llah to have such an encounter? Please be truthful about this.