Baha'i Returns Thread: Ask Any of Many Baha'i

  • Thread starter Thread starter flameburns623
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you trying to refute me or prove what I’m saying? Lets grant that the manifestations are beyond comprehension, on a divine plane and substance, that the bahai worship of God is in no way different to the worship of Mirza Hussain. Yet clearly as bahai ahve made clear to me, the manifestations are not all the same individual, they are distinct entities and obviously distinct from God the father. So whats the picture? We have a bunch of eternal, uncreated, all powerful, ineffeble entities whom are worshipped on the same level as God.

What was that called in the old days? Polytheism?
They are all distinct HUMAN entities Ignatian (read that again)
They are distinct HUMAN entities. (please read this one more time, because my human limitations are getting tired, but I will continue to pray to Baha’u’llah to give me the resolve to guide you through this)
Human beings have a body and a spirit.

YET, they share the same DIVINE substance. They are completely ONE in their DIVINE substance. This is distinguished from their body and spirit (which is totally human).

So, no we do not worship their human aspect (which would make this polytheism)

We worship their ETERNAL DIVINE aspect.

Yet still, this ETERNAL DIVINE ASPECT is NOT the totality of God the Father, He is eternal in another completely unfathomable realm altogether, beyond human descriptive words such as “divine” and “aspect”
 
If sentences could be merely read and their intent and meaning understood immediately then i suppose there should be no trouble of us understanding each other, but there is. By the way saint Basil was a priest you know, a Bishop, who liked Monasticism (Shock), but since you found one quote out of his massive corpus you must understand him completely. Truely Basil was the first bahai and he would worship with you if he were alive huh?

All sarcasm aside, if you think to understand an author without reading all of his works (if he has a large corpus), if you think you understand him better than two thousand years of people directly in the church that which he was apart of, Better than his own brother gregory of Nyssa, you being removed from the man 1600 or so years and speaking a totally different language than the text which you quote from was originally written in, then you sir are a genius.
Every sentence of the Word of God has irrefutable meaning, and while some sentences may seem to contradict each other, there is VALIDITY in the seeming contradiction.

My question to you is what is the VALIDITY to the paragraph of St. Basil that I quoted?

If it has no context to what he believed to be true, empowered by the Holy Spirit to the intensity that Catholics believe he was, then WHY would he write such a paragraph.

Word for word it mimics the passage describing the Trinity by Abdu’l-Baha, so why would St. Basil write such a paragraph if He actually meant that Jesus and the Father are indistinguishably ONE.

If they are indistinguishably one and the same, why would St. Basil categorize one of the entities as the Archetype, and the other as the Prototype?

You are fooling yourselves if you do not ask yourselves these questions and are so “closed-minded” to even entertain the Baha’i concept of the relationship between God and His Manifestations. I know for a fact that St.Basil was not closed-minded and stooped in these doctrines. Its in black and white for all of you to see 🙂

God judges those who reject irrefutable evidence laid before their eyes.

As some have said in the past, even when Jesus performed the most irrefutable evidence of His Divinity to the lay people, they still rejected Him. Why? Because they were stooped so deeply in their own hole of prejudice and “tradition” that they could not get out to see what was in reality a new heaven just waiting for them outside that hole…
 
Hi Daler, how do you come to believe that the Glory of The Lord refers to Baha’u’llah?

Are you believing “He” is Baha’u’llah?

Same? “Him” is Baha’u’llah??
Pork,
For some time I wrestled with this matter of which you ask. That is, how does one take these references to “Glory”, or God’s Glory, etc, and apply them to the person of Baha’u’llah, or to any “person”. For to me, “Glory”, or even “Glory of God”, naturally seemed like any other set of adjectives describing God.
While the English translation of the phrase: “Baha ‘u’ llah” is “Glory of God” (also “Light” or Splendor of God in its broader sense) , that did not, of course, automatically translate into being a “reference” to a Prophet named “Glory of God”, or “Baha’u’llah” in Arabic.
After the study of many prophecies it began to fall into place (for me) that some of these references were really pointing to the coming of a “Prophet” who would be called the “Glory of God”. As that concept gradually soaked into my head, it began making more and more sense, as I looked at this phrase in various context. Not just within the context of the usage of that phrase, “Glory of God”, but in the context of these many other prophecies, of which only a few have been shared with you so far.

What you are referring to as quoted by Micah is indeed (for Baha’is) prophecies specifically about and fulfilled by the coming of Baha’u’llah. That is what we believe. That is part of what all the excitement is about among the Baha’is.

Let me point out that it is also our understanding that in these many prophecies God has purposely “veiled” the meaning so that it would become apparent only to those “who have eyes to see”, a recurrent theme in the Bible. So there is a kind of testing, or sifting, going on. It requires spiritual discernment to “recognize” a Manifestation of God, for when He appears, some recognize Him at once, like Peter, while others, such as the Pharisees are veiled by their learning and pride.
What baffles me is the words of Jesus just before His crucifixion when He turns to His captors and says, “Beholdest thou not the Son of Man seated upon the right hand of power and glory?”
No… they did not!! To me, that is incredible. It says something about the power of “spiritual vision”, and the necessity to “Watch!” as Jesus often said.
It is the same with the coming of Baha’u’llah. His captors who tortured and imprisoned Him “beheld” only a man. Hence they carried on their cruelties. A few, whose hearts were pure, beheld once again the face of their Lord.

Please forgive me, for it is nearly midnight, and I must get some sleep. I will try to give a more adequate reply tomorrow, and introduce a few more of the many prophecies which Baha’is believe to be fulfilled in the coming of Baha’u’llah.

Thank you for your patience. God bless, Dale
 
They are all distinct HUMAN entities Ignatian (read that again)
They are distinct HUMAN entities. (please read this one more time, because my human limitations are getting tired, but I will continue to pray to Baha’u’llah to give me the resolve to guide you through this)
Human beings have a body and a spirit.

YET, they share the same DIVINE substance. They are completely ONE in their DIVINE substance. This is distinguished from their body and spirit (which is totally human).

So, no we do not worship their human aspect (which would make this polytheism)

We worship their ETERNAL DIVINE aspect.

Yet still, this ETERNAL DIVINE ASPECT is NOT the totality of God the Father, He is eternal in another completely unfathomable realm altogether, beyond human descriptive words such as “divine” and “aspect”
Clearly they might have the same sort of substance, in a view that we all have bodes that humanity might be considered a substance, but we do not share the exact same substance or personal entity of everyone else, we are individuals. But are you suggesting that God is complex in his being? That the manifestations are most definietely God but not of that part of God that which is supreme? THis is a very disturbing view if that is the case.
 
Every sentence of the Word of God has irrefutable meaning, and while some sentences may seem to contradict each other, there is VALIDITY in the seeming contradiction.

My question to you is what is the VALIDITY to the paragraph of St. Basil that I quoted?

If it has no context to what he believed to be true, empowered by the Holy Spirit to the intensity that Catholics believe he was, then WHY would he write such a paragraph.

Word for word it mimics the passage describing the Trinity by Abdu’l-Baha, so why would St. Basil write such a paragraph if He actually meant that Jesus and the Father are indistinguishably ONE.

If they are indistinguishably one and the same, why would St. Basil categorize one of the entities as the Archetype, and the other as the Prototype?

You are fooling yourselves if you do not ask yourselves these questions and are so “closed-minded” to even entertain the Baha’i concept of the relationship between God and His Manifestations. I know for a fact that St.Basil was not closed-minded and stooped in these doctrines. Its in black and white for all of you to see 🙂

God judges those who reject irrefutable evidence laid before their eyes.

As some have said in the past, even when Jesus performed the most irrefutable evidence of His Divinity to the lay people, they still rejected Him. Why? Because they were stooped so deeply in their own hole of prejudice and “tradition” that they could not get out to see what was in reality a new heaven just waiting for them outside that hole…
Have you been trying to ignore all the points I have made concerning saint basiL? That there is a context to him? That he was part of the church which was Catholic, orthodox, that he had a brother whom would defend Basil against persecutors and attackers after Basil’s death? That basil has given us alot of writings concerning God. That the church has read him since his inception in his entirety? Do you really think Saint Basil is contradicting trinitarian theology? Have you read his against Eunomius? I certaintly have tried and alot what he speaks about is beyond me and if its beyond me a Christian who at least has some familiarity with that time how much more beyond should it be for a bahai who knows nothing of the time or context by which he lived? Which is why I reccomended the CUA introduction in Basil’s against Eunomius, it will cost you, but you will learn more about Basil from a scholar who has actually read all that concerns Basil, his life and his teaching.

You realise that Basil became one of the leading defenders of the Nicene creed and the word “homoousious” Right? You cannot expect to read a singe paragraph of an author and fully grasp the intent of that author, have you ever read Paul’s letter to the romans on the Nature of justification and sanctification? Theres a reason why theres so much debate concerning what it means, because it isn’t clear and this is true of all ancient works. Bottomline, whom should I trust more? Your interpretation of Basil which makes you Picture this wonderful saint and defender of Orthodoxy as a bahai? Or the church and the scholars who say otherwise? Why are you an uneducated Layman who I am sure has read little if but only this one paragraph of Basil’s, to be trusted?

And I must correct you, there is a distinguishing between the father and the son in their persons, for they are not each other. There however is no distinguishing between their essence which is the one divine nature of God, simple, ineffeble.
 
Clearly they might have the same sort of substance, in a view that we all have bodes that humanity might be considered a substance, but we do not share the exact same substance or personal entity of everyone else, we are individuals. But are you suggesting that God is complex in his being? That the manifestations are most definietely God but not of that part of God that which is supreme? THis is a very disturbing view if that is the case.
NO Ignatian, read my post again and again. :confused:

I said they are DISTINCT in their human substance, what part of that do you not understand?
My hair color is not the same as yours, and neither is Jesus’ to Baha’u’llahs
You may think that you are clever by implying that they share the same atomic elements, but go small enough and you will realize that all atoms are unique, even an oxygen atom in me is distinct from an oxygen atom in you…

God, complex? A being? I have no idea…you? If God was describable, then it makes Him contained. Can God be contained by you?

God has several planes of creation which you have no idea about. Baha’u’llah has revealed the plane of existence that The Divine aspect of the Manifestations of God reside in, and it is again beyond human comprehension, but it is a distinct plane of existence than where God the Father resides.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahá’%C3%AD_cosmology

Please note that all Maifestations of God reside in the realm of lahut which is not shared by ANY part of creation, it is a plane of existence all of its own.

Welcome to the truth that Jesus withheld from you during His First Coming 🙂
(And this is just the tip of the iceberg of the ocean of Baha’u’llahs Revelation, a revealed theology so awe-inspiring yet so rationally strong that humans will freeze at its sight and comprehension)
 
Have you been trying to ignore all the points I have made concerning saint basiL? That there is a context to him? …
I ask you again, maybe if I word it differently, maybe you can answer my question for once.

How is the paragraph I quoted from St.Basil explained within the CONTEXT you think he presented? Explain it to me within the context…
 
NO Ignatian, read my post again and again. :confused:

I said they are DISTINCT in their human substance, what part of that do you not understand?
My hair color is not the same as yours, and neither is Jesus’ to Baha’u’llahs
You may think that you are clever by implying that they share the same atomic elements, but go small enough and you will realize that all atoms are unique, even an oxygen atom in me is distinct from an oxygen atom in you…

God, complex? A being? I have no idea…you? If God was describable, then it makes Him contained. Can God be contained by you?

God has several planes of creation which you have no idea about. Baha’u’llah has revealed the plane of existence that The Divine aspect of the Manifestations of God reside in, and it is again beyond human comprehension, but it is a distinct plane of existence than where God the Father resides.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahá’%C3%AD_cosmology

Please note that all Maifestations of God reside in the realm of lahut which is not shared by ANY part of creation, it is a plane of existence all of its own.

Welcome to the truth that Jesus withheld from you during His First Coming 🙂
(And this is just the tip of the iceberg of the ocean of Baha’u’llahs Revelation, a revealed theology so awe-inspiring yet so rationally strong that humans will freeze at its sight and comprehension)
its things like this that undermine other bahai attempts to clarify that even when not in bodily form, the manifestations are individuals. You would seem to contradict that by maintaining now a different view from your fellow bahais and say all manifestations are indistinct when it comes to their substance and person. I thought I had phrased my words quite carefully as to only say that the manifestations are different in their persons and imply nothing else by it.

That being said, you are taking negative theology to a level which is wholly impractical. That is you have a being who is immense, whom is so great, you cannot possibly conceive of him in anyway. Your God is not describable in any fashion you suggest. Therefore we cannot call him loving, wrathful, all powerful, all knowing, omnipresent, simple and etc. Basically yours is a God so beyond me I question any ability I have to know him at all, and you may keep to that God you worship but do not know, the unknowable God. I prefer my God when makes himself known to me, ie when I can attribute qualities to him and yet still maintain he is ineffable and wholly inconceivable. For God in his essence is inconceivable but he is not unknowable, for he created mankind in his image, that we should know him and of him.

But how interesting that your manifestations have an eternal plane of existence, is this plane God? Sincere question.
 
I ask you again, maybe if I word it differently, maybe you can answer my question for once.

How is the paragraph I quoted from St.Basil explained within the CONTEXT you think he presented? Explain it to me within the context…
I told you I cannot, but what I did reccomend is not to read an ancient author and expect to know him from one paragraph. Go read Basil’s works, Against Eunomius, On the Holy spirit and then read the works of his brother Gregory of Nyssa and tell me if he is also a bahai.
 
Hi Steve,

If I may take a leaf from our friend arthra’s book 🙂

Here is a discourse on sin and atonement for you to study when you get time:

bahai-library.com/woodlock_dying_our_sins
Thanks for this, Servant. As I started to read it my first thought was that it seemed well thought out and very fair. And then I came across this quote:

“The Christian belief in the innate superiority of Jesus over any other religious figure is argued by two claims33. Firstly that Jesus, by virtue of the fact of his miraculous birth, is free from the stain of original sin, and secondly that Jesus never committed any voluntary sin.”

It then goes on to argue against and disprove this position by concluding that according to the Catholic position Adam would be even greater than Jesus because he had neither father nor mother. Which is fine, except that it is not our position. The innate superiority of Jesus over any other religious figure happens to be that Jesus is GOD and not just a prophet or another messenger from God whether human or angelic. He is “God with us”. That is why He is superior. The virgin birth and his sinless life are only evidence in support of the fact that he is God.

In other words, the author of this piece created a straw man and then proceeded to tear it down. Not a good first impression, but I will continue reading.
 
PS Steve,

Baha’u’llah also suffered. Either of two hundred pound chains held Him during 4 months of imprisonment in the Black Pit of Tehran, a subterranean dungeon, during which time He experienced His first Revelations. These scars cut Him to the bone and remained all of His life. He was also tortured, bastinadoed, and twice poisoned. He was exiled and further imprisoned for 40 years.

The following may be compared to the descent of the Dove upon Jesus:

. “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 honored 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. This is the Mystery of God and His Treasure, the Cause of God and His glory unto all who are in the kingdoms of Revelation and of creation, if ye be of them that perceive.’”

This occurred in the year 1280 AH (which was 1863 AD) as Daniel prophesied, in Elam, in fulfillment of Jeremiah 49:38

. “And I will set my throne in Elam, and will destroy from thence the king and the princes, saith the LORD”

. His Letters to the Kings are found in Summons of the Lord of Hosts, in which He admonished them and foretold their downfall, fulfilling this prophecy from His prison cell.

Beginning in September 1867, Bahá’u’lláh wrote a series of letters to the world leaders of His time, addressing, among others, Emperor Napoleon III, Queen Victoria, Kaiser Wilhelm I, Tsar Alexander II of Russia, Emperor Franz Joseph, Pope Pius IX, Sultan Abdul-Aziz, and the Persian ruler, Nasiri’d-Din Shah.

History records what happened.
I mean no disrespect at all. But consider the harsh conditions of the Persian prison, which Baha’u’llah was held in by the authorities. Consider:

(1.) His body was put through extreme conditions.
(2.) Thirst, dehydration, and hunger are common in such prisons.
(3.) There’s not much light coming from outside sources.
(4.) He is held down with two hundred pound chains. The body becomes too weak to do anything about it.
(5.) It’s very likely he isn’t getting adequate sleep.

I have always thought that, these forms of criteria could easily cause hallucinations no matter who you are. I’m sure if I was put through such an extreme environment, I myself would start to hallucinate as well and see things that might or might not have been actually there. What do you think about that possibility?

Again I mean these questions only in the most charitable manner. It’s something that I also have been considering when evaluating how I feel about the Baha’i Faith – yet I understand some things have no explanation and cannot be answered. I understand that too.
 
Very valid question Ave, and I admit to having the same question in the past 🙂

Baha’u’llah said the following:

“During the days I lay in the prison of Tehran, though the galling weight of the chains and the stench-filled air allowed Me but little sleep, still in those infrequent moments of slumber I felt as if something flowed from the crown of My head over My breast, even as a mighty torrent that precipitateth itself upon the earth from the summit of a lofty mountain. Every limb of My body would, as a result, be set afire. At such moments My tongue recited what no man could bear to hear.”

The point is that this was not a “one-off” incident. Baha’u’llahs tongue recited “what no man could bear to hear” and every limb of His body would be set afire for all of 40 years thereafter, long long after He left that prison, into much more accommodating prisons, and as an exile

So rapid was the speed of the Revelation that He would at some stages have up to 8-10 amanuenses recording what was being recited.

These things are not hallucinatory…the Words of His reciting are testament to that.

“O Friend! In the garden of thy heart plant naught but the rose of love, and from the nightingale of affection and desire loosen not thy hold…”

A hallucination? Impossible…
 
Thanks for this, Servant. As I started to read it my first thought was that it seemed well thought out and very fair. And then I came across this quote:

“The Christian belief in the innate superiority of Jesus over any other religious figure is argued by two claims33. Firstly that Jesus, by virtue of the fact of his miraculous birth, is free from the stain of original sin, and secondly that Jesus never committed any voluntary sin.”

It then goes on to argue against and disprove this position by concluding that according to the Catholic position Adam would be even greater than Jesus because he had neither father nor mother. Which is fine, except that it is not our position. The innate superiority of Jesus over any other religious figure happens to be that Jesus is GOD and not just a prophet or another messenger from God whether human or angelic. He is “God with us”. That is why He is superior. The virgin birth and his sinless life are only evidence in support of the fact that he is God.

In other words, the author of this piece created a straw man and then proceeded to tear it down. Not a good first impression, but I will continue reading.
I honor your willingness and courage to read these materials Steve 🙂

I’m not sure if the author was implying that those were the ONLY claims of Jesus’ superiority or not, but I feel it is clear that there are other claims to explore, yet maybe the author wished to focus on these areas since they specifically pertained to sin.

The Baha’is acknowledge this belief of Jesus BEING God. In many respects Baha’is do believe the same of Baha’u’llah and Jesus.

Why would you believe that it is beyond God to make Himself flesh on several instances throughout history?
 
I honor your willingness and courage to read these materials Steve 🙂

I’m not sure if the author was implying that those were the ONLY claims of Jesus’ superiority or not, but I feel it is clear that there are other claims to explore, yet maybe the author wished to focus on these areas since they specifically pertained to sin.

The Baha’is acknowledge this belief of Jesus BEING God. In many respects Baha’is do believe the same of Baha’u’llah and Jesus.

Why would you believe that it is beyond God to make Himself flesh on several instances throughout history?
Agreed, Servant, and if I may note, the specific characteristic according to Christian belief is that according to scripture and Church teachings Jesus is the ONLY instance of God making Himself flesh.

How to resolve that apparent contradiction? By noting that according to Baha’i belief Baha’u’llah is the Return of Christ, so if someone were to say there is only one, Christ, it is true. As Baha’u’llah points out in the Book of Certitude, there is a oneness that all of the Manifestations of God share with one another, so each can say “I am the only way” and it is true. At the same time, each is distinct, and brought a religion that was most needed at that point in history. The return of Elijah as John the Baptist is an example of this mentioned in the Gospels.

No contradiction.
 
Agreed, Servant, and if I may note, the specific characteristic according to Christian belief is that according to scripture and Church teachings Jesus is the ONLY instance of God making Himself flesh.

How to resolve that apparent contradiction? … The return of Elijah as John the Baptist is an example of this mentioned in the Gospels.

No contradiction.
As this is indeed a mysterious aspect to Their reality, please consider the following:

, "If, however, thou art sailing upon the sea of creation, know thou that the First Remembrance, which is the Primal Will of God, may be likened unto the sun. God hath created Him through the potency of His might, and He hath, from the beginning that hath no beginning, caused Him to be manifested in every Dispensation through the compelling power of His behest, and God will, to the end that knoweth no end, continue to manifest Him according to the good-pleasure of His invincible Purpose. (125:4)

And know thou that He indeed resembleth the sun. Were the risings of the sun to continue till the end that hath no end, yet there hath not been nor ever will be more than one sun; and were its settings to endure for evermore, still there hath not been nor ever will be more than one sun. It is this Primal Will which appeareth resplendent in every Prophet and speaketh forth in every revealed Book. It knoweth no beginning, inasmuch as the First deriveth its firstness from It; and knoweth no end, for the Last oweth its lastness unto It. (126:1)

In the time of the First Manifestation the Primal Will appeared in Adam; in the day of Noah It became known in Noah; in the day of Abraham in Him; and so in the day of Moses; the day of Jesus; the day of Muhammad, the Apostle of God; the day of the ‘Point of the Bayan’; the day of Him Whom God shall make manifest; and the day of the One Who will appear after Him Whom God shall make manifest. Hence the inner meaning of the words uttered by the Apostle of God, ‘I am all the Prophets’, inasmuch as what shineth resplendent in each one of Them hath been and will ever remain the one and the same sun. (126:2)

From the Writings of the Bab
 


That the manifestations are most definietely God but not of that part of God that which is supreme? THis is a very disturbing view if that is the case.
Ignatian: Were I to say: “That the sunlight which reaches the earth is not part of the sun? This is a very disturbing view…”

. Or that the Primal Will is an “effect” of God, not a “part” of God, for God is above partition. Carefully consider this verse:

"In the time of the First Manifestation the Primal Will appeared in Adam; in the day of Noah It became known in Noah; in the day of Abraham in Him; and so in the day of Moses; the day of Jesus; the day of Muhammad, the Apostle of God; the day of the ‘Point of the Bayan’; the day of Him Whom God shall make manifest; and the day of the One Who will appear after Him Whom God shall make manifest. Hence the inner meaning of the words uttered by the Apostle of God, ‘I am all the Prophets’, inasmuch as what shineth resplendent in each one of Them hath been and will ever remain the one and the same sun. (126:2)
 
Every sentence of the Word of God has irrefutable meaning, and while some sentences may seem to contradict each other, there is VALIDITY in the seeming contradiction.

I used to love playing pool while growing up. Especially the game of “snooker”. One must apply both physics and geometry to be good at pool. Also, it must be “applied”, not just an intellectual construct.

The point being made is that if my mind is absorbed in quantum mechanics to the extent that I perceive the object ball to be in two places at once on the table, I can’t play in a practical manner. Newtonian physics is most valid for the game of pool.

If, however, I look through the lens of quantum physics, different rules apply. It is like that with the verses of God. They come to us in different modes, from the practical to the mystical. Each is valid within its own sphere, and they are not contradictory.

Absolutely nobody can grasp “God”, no mind can know Him. That is why He “manifests” Himself to men in a way which is approachable to us, as “one of us” - the perfect disguise of Him Who is the most Hidden of the Hidden and the most Manifest of the Manifest

. “Ye shall be hindered from loving Me and souls shall be perturbed as they make mention of Me. For minds cannot grasp Me nor hearts contain Me.”

Baha’u’llah
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top