Bahá'í

[PRmerger]

I have responded and made it quite clear that I did not come by my faith through a church or any other institution. I will not attempt to clarify that to you.

Then you will have to offer us a way that you know that Jesus said, “that the commandments of men have no meaning to Him.”

Otherwise, what you are doing is getting mad at me for telling you, “Even though you* say* you don’t want to eat ice cream, what you are actually eating is, well, ice cream.”

You simply respond with, 'No I am not!!"

And I say, “Then, please tell me what it is you are eating.”

You shouldn’t get mad at someone for asking that, right?

 

[daler]

Then you will have to offer us a way that you know that Jesus said, “that the commandments of men have no meaning to Him.”

Otherwise, what you are doing is getting mad at me for telling you, “Even though you* say* you don’t want to eat ice cream, what you are actually eating is, well, ice cream.”

You simply respond with, 'No I am not!!"

And I say, “Then, please tell me what it is you are eating.”

You shouldn’t get mad at someone for asking that, right?

My dear friends, If I may quote Bob Dylan for a minute here:

"You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows…

 

[PRmerger]

My dear friends, If I may quote Bob Dylan for a minute here:

That’s not applicable here, daler.

Unless you are saying that you can just read an ancient text and know that it’s the inspired word of God?

How would you know?

 

[daler]

That’s not applicable here, daler.

Unless you are saying that you can just read an ancient text and know that it’s the inspired word of God?

How would you know?

PR That’s what goosebumps are for…

Anyway, you make a good point. For me, it really is about reading the ancient texts and knowing its the inspired word of God. I think thats what Little Star is trying to say, too.

In the New Testament, you know where that guy says “No one spake like Him!”
Thats kinda where I’m coming from. For me, it has nothing to do with miracles or any of that. Every time the Lord’s Prayer was said in Church I’d get the goose bumps.

Thats how it works for me with the Baha’i texts as well. I read them. I know they are from God. Can’t really explain it. Its kinda like a deer lookin’ into them headlights, don’t cha know. Its obvious those are Lights!! And they’re comin’ right atcha…

Its a “My sheep know My voice” kinda thing, and I don’t need a weatherman (or a priest or minister) to tell which way the wind (of Revelation) blows.

 

[PRmerger]

PR That’s what goosebumps are for…

Heh.

That sounds like the Mormon paradigm of the “burning in the bosom”.

Anyway, you make a good point. For me, it really is about reading the ancient texts and knowing its the inspired word of God. I think thats what Little Star is trying to say, too.

But I want to know: how do you know that the Book of Mormon isn’t the inspired Word of God?

What about an ancient text that talks about Jesus but also says that he made animals come alive that were made out of clay? What if this text said that Jesus actually cursed a woman who had committed adultery?

How do you know which is the inspired Word and which is a fake or false writing?

 

[PRmerger]

In the New Testament, you know where that guy says “No one spake like Him!”

And this is my point, daler: when you speak of the “New Testament”, who is it that compiled the 27 books to tell you that it is the New Testament?

Who is it that told you that the Gospel of Mark is inspired but that the Epistle of Barnabas is not?

The answer…

is…

the Catholic Church.

And for Little Star to say that he has no use for a man-made institution, yet also say things like, “Jesus said that he rejects the commandments of men!”

well…

that is actually taking what this man-made institution has told him to believe.

And he believes it ONLY because of this man-made institution.

 

[PRmerger]

For me, it has nothing to do with miracles or any of that. Every time the Lord’s Prayer was said in Church I’d get the goose bumps.

So do you believe that this is inspired, if the person who reads it gets goosebumps:

“God cursed the Lamanites with black skin so they would not be enticing unto the Nephites.”

Thats how it works for me with the Baha’i texts as well. I read them. I know they are from God. Can’t really explain it. Its kinda like a deer lookin’ into them headlights, don’t cha know. Its obvious those are Lights!! And they’re comin’ right atcha…

Its a “My sheep know My voice” kinda thing, and I don’t need a weatherman (or a priest or minister) to tell which way the wind (of Revelation) blows.

If someone reads the words of the “New Church of the Creator” founder Matthew F. Hale (who claims to be the Pontifex Maximus (high priest), that states that white people are the Creator, and it gives them goosebumps, are Hale’s words the Word of God?

 

[daler]

Heh.

That sounds like the Mormon paradigm of the “burning in the bosom”.

But I want to know: how do you know that the Book of Mormon isn’t the inspired Word of God?

What about an ancient text that talks about Jesus but also says that he made animals come alive that were made out of clay? What if this text said that Jesus actually cursed a woman who had committed adultery?

How do you know which is the inspired Word and which is a fake or false writing?

PR Maybe some of it is purely a subjective experience. I get nothing out of the Book of Mormon. Its like a long story told in the fashion of trying to sound like the Old Testament. I don’t see anything “alive” in it. Not sure if that helps.

About the clay stuff, that to me is still in the category of just a “story”, and there are stories in the Old and New Testament which still across to me as just stories, although when Jesus talks about the Good Samaritan, however, I see the value in it and that it was original at the time, and the moral value and lesson in it.

What I think I am referring to is something else, rather than an “analytical” thing. Lets say it has more of a “feel” to it. That isn’t going to work in the analytical part of your brain. It may not solve the puzzle.

I think some of it is like looking at a counterfeit bill. When you’ve handled a lot of money (I used to work at a gas station, counting out $10,000 a night, etc) and you get a counterfeit, something stands out as garbage. Then if you sort through say, the writings of Sun Myung Moon or L Ron Hubbard, there’s just nothing there.

 

[daler]

And this is my point, daler: when you speak of the “New Testament”, who is it that compiled the 27 books to tell you that it is the New Testament?

Who is it that told you that the Gospel of Mark is inspired but that the Epistle of Barnabas is not?

The answer…

is…

the Catholic Church.

And for Little Star to say that he has no use for a man-made institution, yet also say things like, “Jesus said that he rejects the commandments of men!”

well…

that is actually taking what this man-made institution has told him to believe.

And he believes it ONLY because of this man-made institution.

I realize what you are saying, but then it is also what man-made institution you give credence to and why. What I am attempting to say is that the Writings “speak to me”, and that this is what distinguishes them from mere human words. There is something to them, like when I remember my family first got color TV. It is way more alive than the old black and white.
I never believed in the Bible because the Methodist Church told me it was so. And the New Testament could have one book or a hundred. Its mostly a compilation of letters written and recollections decades later. Its what is in those letters and gospels, something different about the words of Jesus that stand out against the words of men.
Do you not see something different in Jesus’ words? “No man sake like Him.”

So this does seem to get at what it is that causes one person to recognize and another not to. Maybe it is something more than the words alone, like the accompanying spirit or something. But it isn’t because the “Institution told me so”. Its the words themselves, and thats what kind of surprises me when different people read the same words. Some are moved by them, and some sort of gloss over them. I think it has to do with the reader, or observer.

 

[daler]

So do you believe that this is inspired, if the person who reads it gets goosebumps:

“God cursed the Lamanites with black skin so they would not be enticing unto the Nephites.”

If someone reads the words of the “New Church of the Creator” founder Matthew F. Hale (who claims to be the Pontifex Maximus (high priest), that states that white people are the Creator, and it gives them goosebumps, are Hale’s words the Word of God?

I don’t know if the reader got the goosebumps, but I did. Meaning that something about the Lord’s Prayer told me that it was from the Lord.

The God’s curse thing tells me that a racist wrote that. So with that much alone, I can tell you it isn’t from God, cause God made everybody and isn’t a racist. This shows how pathetic the imitators are. They are cheap counterfeits, playing to a white racist audience whom they want to impress. Sorry, Mr Smith, but you just flunked the acid test in my book! ;-(

Well, I guess even a racist can get goosebumps. People probably got goosebumps when Hitler walked by, I don’t know.
Its not really about goosebumps, I realize. Goosebumps are supposed to be a throwback of when we had fur, or were a lot hairier. Maybe the wires or nerves are crossed.

All I’m saying is that when I read the words of the Bab and Baha’u’llah, I recognize them as coming from God.

 

[daler]

So do you believe that this is inspired, if the person who reads it gets goosebumps:

“God cursed the Lamanites with black skin so they would not be enticing unto the Nephites.”

If someone reads the words of the “New Church of the Creator” founder Matthew F. Hale (who claims to be the Pontifex Maximus (high priest), that states that white people are the Creator, and it gives them goosebumps, are Hale’s words the Word of God?

PR We have two (or more) sides to our brain, right? For simplicities sake, lets say two: the Logical side which interprets and weighs symbols, and the other, however you want to qualify it, comprehends without symbols and logic. This does not mean that it is illogical, but “a-logical”, or outside the realm of logic. It is a philosophical term.

We can use the “lens” of either part or both of our mind to view the world. One can actually confirm the other, which ever side recognizes something to be real and valid. Between the two, we can learn to focus on things, like the two lenses of a telescope working in tandem.

If, while in the womb, one side or other of my brain didn’t fully develop, I wouldn’t have the use of that, right? Or say if you get your eye poked out (Hopefully still have the other one)

But lets use the eye analogy. The new born kitten’s eyes are still shut for a couple of weeks. Human vision also is fuzzy for awhile.
Now let us say that we are talking about spiritual vision. This is not a physical organ, like an eye, but rather a latent capacity to discern truth from reality, metaphysically speaking.
When Saul watched the stoning of Stephen, his spiritual eyes were not opened. His vision was probably blinded by hate, and certainty. But something happened on the road to Damascus. “Something like scales fell from his eyes” is one translation, but that says more about the translator than the truth of the matter, as far as I’m concerned. Paul didn’t have physical scales that fell from his eyes. Do you agree with that assessment?

So here’s the deal. The people of that time were very physically bound, in my opinion, unable to do the higher math. They couldn’t understand what Jesus was saying because it was new to them. “Ye must be born again” had no meaning to them. Jesus expanded the vision of those “who had eyes to see” (We’re back to that again…

“Seeing”, in the spiritual sense, involves more than our physical eyes. There is an aspect of comprehension going on. Paul comprehended the reality of Christ in a way that he could not before, as Saul. He was changed. He “saw the Light”. What changed?

He was struck dumb by the experience. Its like having an elephant in your living room all your life and not knowing its there. How can you not know its there? Its and elephant for Christ’s sake!!! No offense intended. But I think its really like that. The reality of Christ is all around us, but “Ye must be born again” to see it.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

PR Maybe some of it is purely a subjective experience. I get nothing out of the Book of Mormon. Its like a long story told in the fashion of trying to sound like the Old Testament. I don’t see anything “alive” in it. Not sure if that helps.

About the clay stuff, that to me is still in the category of just a “story”, and there are stories in the Old and New Testament which still across to me as just stories, although when Jesus talks about the Good Samaritan, however, I see the value in it and that it was original at the time, and the moral value and lesson in it.

The thing is that your bahai writings have that same problem of all being translated into old english to give it that feeling of antiquity as opposed to judging it straight. Theres nothing alive in them in the vague and pointless metaphores. But while there is story to the old and new testament there is historic continuity between the. Bahai like to focus on the moral message but ignore the core and essential message that God works throughout history, that God does perform miracles as they are, he doesn’t just send inhuman, disobediant (Moses and Muhammad), eternal completely detached beings to help us. He makes people themselves an example to us and ultimately himself an example to us through the son.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Nope, you do not know me very well. So, I could see how you would think that I would be assured of His identity merely by what is written in church doctrine. However, that is not who I am. Please also do not think that I bear any ill will towards the Catholic church. I most certainly do not. But, when you hold it up to the standard of actually being the body of Christ, you make great error. It has shown it is a church of man and not the body of Christ over and over. How you can maintain such an ill minded belief makes one wonder.

“Listen to them but do not do what they do.”

This is what Jesus said about the pharisees and while the pharisees came to teach wrong things eventually down the line Jesus still gave the people the admonition to listen to them and do what they say as opposed to what they do. The problem is this applies not only to the pharisees but to all humanity. If you want a perfect church, a perfect assembly with no imperfect people, no corruption, no anything then you will be alone because no such organisation exists because this lesson of Christ goes to apply to all of humanity.

But if the body of Christ is no where to be found over the centuries, if it has been truely broken by what you imply then we see that Hades has prevailed against the words of Jesus himself. His church has been engulfed when he said it would not and I cannot believe Jesus to be the liar, I can only believe you to be mistaken because Jesus is not wrong.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

If free will were to be suspended, we would cease to be human. Not all the followers of Abraham accepted Moses. Not all the followers of Moses accepted Jesus. It is an act of will, a capacity God has put in every one of us, to turn towards, or away from His Manifestation in every age. Thus are differentiated believers from non-believers.

So why mislead and decieve others into thinking the bahai have maintained perfect unity? Why don’t you give the same credence to the people you are talking to and assume that one party is the correct followers of any said prophet? Its deceptive to say “All others have failed whereas we have preserved communion.” Your statement right there is proof of that, though I don’t expect bahai to stop propogating the lie.

 

[daler]

The thing is that your bahai writings have that same problem of all being translated into old english to give it that feeling of antiquity as opposed to judging it straight. Theres nothing alive in them in the vague and pointless metaphores. But while there is story to the old and new testament there is historic continuity between the. Bahai like to focus on the moral message but ignore the core and essential message that God works throughout history, that God does perform miracles as they are, he doesn’t just send inhuman, disobediant (Moses and Muhammad), eternal completely detached beings to help us. He makes people themselves an example to us and ultimately himself an example to us through the son.

Yes, Iggy, and His Son said He would come back, too. He said look to Daniel the Prophet and stand in the Holy Place. I’ve been there, I know. And “He” was there.
But you don’t want to look into the many prophecies I could give you. You’d just twist them up anyway, cause its what you like to do. But others, who do look at them, see the patterns as they line up one by one, by the hundreds in fact. But I think that would require more than you have to give, so I’m not asking you to look into it. Why, as overwhelming as they are, we wouldn’t want you to be overwhelmed now would we Iggy. So you stay right there, down in your little comfort zone with your pile of rocks and I’ll change my name to Stephen and let you just rock on, Bubba. I’ll pray for you, that as hard-hearted and blind as you are, which is where you get your pride and fuel your juice bottle, and one day, when you get to meet Jesus, and He says, “Iggy, I never knew you.” You might just have a few of them rocks left for Him, too. He’ll be hard to miss, for He’ll be standing right there next to His Father, Baha’u’llah. And me? I’ll still be sittin’ here with a few hundred prophecies that I could offer one after another, bing, bing, bing…
So don’t ask, Iggy. And don’t bother to be courteous. We wouldn’t want to see you change. We like you just the way you are, buddy. God bless you, brother. God bless

 

[PRmerger]

PR Maybe some of it is purely a subjective experience. I get nothing out of the Book of Mormon. Its like a long story told in the fashion of trying to sound like the Old Testament. I don’t see anything “alive” in it. Not sure if that helps.

About the clay stuff, that to me is still in the category of just a “story”, and there are stories in the Old and New Testament which still across to me as just stories, although when Jesus talks about the Good Samaritan, however, I see the value in it and that it was original at the time, and the moral value and lesson in it.

What I think I am referring to is something else, rather than an “analytical” thing. Lets say it has more of a “feel” to it. That isn’t going to work in the analytical part of your brain. It may not solve the puzzle.

I think some of it is like looking at a counterfeit bill. When you’ve handled a lot of money (I used to work at a gas station, counting out $10,000 a night, etc) and you get a counterfeit, something stands out as garbage. Then if you sort through say, the writings of Sun Myung Moon or L Ron Hubbard, there’s just nothing there.

So if a Scientologist tells you that the writings of Hubbard gave him goosebumps and truly spoke to him, you would tell him,“Then Hubbards writings are the inspired words of God to you!”

 

[PRmerger]

The God’s curse thing tells me that a racist wrote that.

This is circular reasoning, daler.

You can’t say:

I know something is not inspired because it says things that aren’t inspired.

And

I know something is inspired when it says things that are inspired.

You need to have some basis for truth in order to discern what is true and what is not.

 

[Servant19]

Whuch comes right back to my original question.

What makes Jesus the Son of God? Why is He the Son of God, and Bahaullah is not His Return in the glory of the Father?

 

[Servant19]

The thing is that your bahai writings have that same problem of all being translated into old english to give it that feeling of antiquity as opposed to judging it straight. Theres nothing alive in them in the vague and pointless metaphores. But while there is story to the old and new testament there is historic continuity between the. Bahai like to focus on the moral message but ignore the core and essential message that God works throughout history, that God does perform miracles as they are, he doesn’t just send inhuman, disobediant (Moses and Muhammad), eternal completely detached beings to help us. He makes people themselves an example to us and ultimately himself an example to us through the son.

Actually Ignatian I can attest to have witnessed with my own eyes the transformation of an Arabic speaking Muslim after having read one of the Tablets of Baha’u’llah in its original Arabic.

He had never read this Tablet before and as he read it out aloud tears streamed down his face and he struggled to contain its melodious beauty and penetrating holiness.

Upon finishing the Tablet he attested to the fact that just this ONE Tablet alone had resolved nearly all the mysteries and struggles he had over decades of studying the Quran and Ingil (Bible).

I have very few Arab friends, but my wife is Jordanian, and her brother lives in the Middle East. He has told me that this sort of transformative and deeply moving effect of the Writings of Baha’u’llah are a very regular occurrence when read in their original language.

This so called “antique” English that you call it does not do it ANY justice…

I personally WISH I knew Arabic, those Words of God are my longing and my hearts desire.

 

[arthra]

Some one above wrote:

“The thing is that your bahai writings have that same problem of all being translated into old english to give it that feeling of antiquity as opposed to judging it straight.”

Baha’i Writings cover a wide area… only portions have been translated from Farsi and Arabic…The most signiifcant translation work in the past century was done by Shoghi Effendi “Born in Akká](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre,_Israel) in March 1897, Shoghi Effendi was related to the [Báb](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A1b) through his father, Mírzá Hádí Shírází, and to [Bahá'u'lláh](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%A1%27u%27ll%C3%A1h) through his mother, Ḍíyá'íyyih Khánum, the eldest daughter of [Abdu’l-Bahá.”

Shoghi Effendi was a student at Belliol College Oxford and had a keen interest in English, Social Sciences, etc. When he was appointed Guardian after the passing of Abdul-Baha he was also conferred the interpreter of the Writings and so his translations into English are for authoritative …

The translation process and standard it requires could be briefly stated as follows:

Great care should be exercised in preparing this translation. Mr… should make a supreme effort so that the language will be most exquisite, eloquent and lucid, even if the translated text is to be submitted to, and made dependent upon the opinions of, experts in language.

(From a Tablet to an individual believer - translated from the Persian)

Also in the recent translation the following:

These passages account for approximately one third of the text. The committees and individuals appointed to prepare the translations faced the challenge of rendering the balance of the Text in a manner at once faithful to the meaning of the original and consistent with the exalted English style established by the Guardian for the translation of Bahá’u’lláh’s matchless utterance.

          (From the introduction to The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, p. 240)

So it is not simply “old English”.

Usually the familiar form is used in prayers and meditations as in

Cement Thou, O God, the hearts together.

*O Thou kind Father, God! Gladden our hearts through the fragrance of Thy love. Brighten our eyes through the Light of Thy Guidance. Delight our ears with the melody of Thy Word, and shelter us all in the Stronghold of Thy Providence.

Thou art the Mighty and Powerful, Thou art the Forgiving and Thou art the One Who overlooketh the shortcomings of all mankind.
*

• 'Abdu’l-Bahá 103
  
  (Compilations, Baha’i Prayers, p. 102)

The use of the familar forum (Thou) of address as opposed to the formal form (you) is less used today but still rings… From the wikipedia:

The fact that early English translations of the Bible used the familiar form of the second person in no way indicates “disrespect” and is not surprising. The familiar form is used when speaking to God, at least in French, German, Spanish, Italian, Russian and Scottish Gaelic (all of which maintain the use of an “informal” singular form of the second person in modern speech).