Baha'i V

[eddie_too]

red sox,

your post referrubg to bahaullah’s writing re: bethelem seems to me to be more reflective of a person engaging in creative writing than anything else. i really see nothing in it that would cause me to think the writer is of any significance beyond having a knack for writing elaborately and confusingly.

but, again, what does it matter what you or i think about bahaullah’s writing when there is an elected body of bahai who have authoritative power to tell everyone what the words really mean?

 

[SteveVH]

i understand, obviously you are a Christian and follower of Christ.

Here’s an interesting statement Bahaullah makes, what is your take on this? Bahaullah describes what Bethlehem said when Bahaullah arrived in the world:

**Bethlehem is astir with the Breeze of God. We hear her (Bethlehem) voice saying:

‘O most generous Lord! Where is Thy great glory established? The sweet savours of Thy presence have quickened me, after I had melted in my separation from Thee. Praised be Thou in that Thou hast raised the veils, and come with power in evident glory.’
**
Then Bahaullah responds to Bethlehem:

**We called unto her from behind the Tabernacle of Majesty and Grandeur:

‘O Bethlehem! This Light hath risen in the orient, and travelled towards the occident, until it reached thee in the evening of its life. Tell Me then: Do the sons recognize the Father, and acknowledge Him, or do they deny Him, even as the people aforetime denied Him (Jesus)?’
**

then Bethlehem answers Bahaullah:

**Whereupon she cried out saying: ‘Thou art, in truth, the All-Knowing, the Best-Informed.’ **

Once again, Baha’u’llah demonstrates his abysmal knowledge of Christianity. The Father is not Jesus and Jesus is not the Father, nor are either of them the “Spirit”. So when he fails in this most basic understanding, then why should we believe anything he has to say concerning Christ? Baha’u’llah doesn’t even know who he is.

 

[Red_Sox_1]

Once again, Baha’u’llah demonstrates his abysmal knowledge of Christianity. The Father is not Jesus and Jesus is not the Father, nor are either of them the “Spirit”. So when he fails in this most basic understanding, then why should we believe anything he has to say concerning Christ? Baha’u’llah doesn’t even know who he is.

I know Baha’u’llah’s writing style is difficult at first, but soon I becomes easy to read. By our comments I can tell you didn’t really get to read this selection. You are not unique the writing is unlike other things we read on a daily basis.

 

[SteveVH]

I know Baha’u’llah’s writing style is difficult at first, but soon I becomes easy to read. By our comments I can tell you didn’t really get to read this selection. You are not unique the writing is unlike other things we read on a daily basis.

What does that mean?

Please tell me how I have misinterpreted these words:

“Do the sons recognize the Father, and acknowledge Him, or do they deny Him, even as the people aforetime denied Him (Jesus)?”

 

[Red_Sox_1]

Bahaullah says that Bethlehem speaks to Him when Bahaullah arrived in the area of Israel at the end of his exile. To me, the statement “after I had melted in my separation from Thee” is a reference to the departure of Jesus Christ from Bethlehem 2000 years before the coming of Bahaullah to the area in 1870’s. Bethlehem says it is quickened by his coming after she melted when Jesus had left.

**Bethlehem is astir with the Breeze of God. We hear her (Bethlehem) voice saying:

‘O most generous Lord! Where is Thy great glory established? The sweet savours of Thy presence have quickened me, after I had melted in my separation from Thee. Praised be Thou in that Thou hast raised the veils, and come with power in evident glory.’
**

Then Bahaullah responds to Bethlehem that His Light rose to the East of Bethlehem in Iran/Iraq and that now near the end of His life He has arrived near Bethlehem because of His exile to Akka and Haifa. Then Bahaullah asks Bethlehem if the people (the sons) recognize their Heavenly Father, or if the people are rejecting Him just as they rejected Jesus 2000 years ago?

**We called unto her from behind the Tabernacle of Majesty and Grandeur:

‘O Bethlehem! This Light hath risen in the orient, and travelled towards the occident, until it reached thee in the evening of its life. Tell Me then: Do the sons recognize the Father, and acknowledge Him, or do they deny Him, even as the people aforetime denied Him (Jesus)?’
**

Then Bethlehem answers Bahaullah by confirming that He is Father, in truth, the All-Knowing the Best Beloved.

**Whereupon she cried out saying: ‘Thou art, in truth, the All-Knowing, the Best-Informed.’ **

 

[Red_Sox_1]

What does that mean?

Please tell me how I have misinterpreted these words:

"Do the sons recognize the Father, and acknowledge Him, or do they deny Him, even as the people aforetime denied Him (Jesus)?"

I am not interpreting, it literally says:

Do the sons recognize the Father (Bahaullah), and acknowledge Him (Bahaullah), or do they deny Him (Bahaullah), even as the people aforetime denied Him (Jesus)?

the first 2 pronounces are referencing 1870s, the last pronoun after the word “aforetime” is a reference to 2000 years ago.

 

[SteveVH]

I am not interpreting, it literally says:

Do the sons recognize the Father (Bahaullah), and acknowledge Him (Bahaullah), or do they deny Him (Bahaullah), even as the people aforetime denied Him (Jesus)?

the first 2 pronounces are referencing 1870s, the last pronoun after the word “aforetime” is a reference to 2000 years ago.

No, it “literally” does not have the word (Baha’u’llah) following the word “Father”. That would have been helpful. Nevertheless, he claims to be both the Father and the Son. Interesting, but a confusion of persons in any event.

Now it seems to me that Baha’u’llah is not claiming to be just a “Manifestation” but rather God himself. He calls himself the Father. He calls himself the Son. Is this your view?

 

[Red_Sox_1]

No, it “literally” does not have the word (Baha’u’llah) following the word “Father”. That would have been helpful. Nevertheless, he claims to be both the Father and the Son. Interesting, but a confusion of persons in any event.

Now it seems to me that Baha’u’llah is not claiming to be just a “Manifestation” but rather God himself. He calls himself the Father. He calls himself the Son. Is this your view?

Yes you are correct. Read what is said carefully. I even refer back to the original Arabic it is clearer there. Bahaullah is not confusing persons at all. He makes a very clear claim.

You should read the claims as they relate to the Quran. Truly they are limb quaking from an Islamic view.

 

[daler]

No, it “literally” does not have the word (Baha’u’llah) following the word “Father”. That would have been helpful. Nevertheless, he claims to be both the Father and the Son. Interesting, but a confusion of persons in any event.

Now it seems to me that Baha’u’llah is not claiming to be just a “Manifestation” but rather God himself. He calls himself the Father. He calls himself the Son. Is this your view?

Steve,
. It would be helpful to the discussion if you wouldn’t mind reading just a few paragraphs from the following Tablet:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/TB/tb-3.html

 

[eddie_too]

all of the hims in the quotation refer to the Father the only male noun in the sentence.

bahaullah is saying that Jesus is the Father. that is in direct contradiction to the New Testament from which bahaullah gained knowledge that Jesus even existed.

but, again, why are we even discussing this as though we know the correct bahai interpretation since all authority for the bahai resides in the supreme elected body of the bahai?

still, taking the words literally, bahaullah is saying Jesus is the Father just as bahaullah is the Father.

 

[Red_Sox_1]

all of the hims in the quotation refer to the Father the only male noun in the sentence.

bahaullah is saying that Jesus is the Father. that is in direct contradiction to the New Testament from which bahaullah gained knowledge that Jesus even existed.

but, again, why are we even discussing this as though we know the correct bahai interpretation since all authority for the bahai resides in the supreme elected body of the bahai?

still, taking the words literally, bahaullah is saying Jesus is the Father just as bahaullah is the Father.

Interesting observation about Jesus. Jesus does say the Father is in Him and He is in the Father.

I assure you the Supreme House of Justice doesn’t have a problem with this view.

 

[daler]

all of the hims in the quotation refer to the Father the only male noun in the sentence.

bahaullah is saying that Jesus is the Father. that is in direct contradiction to the New Testament from which bahaullah gained knowledge that Jesus even existed.

but, again, why are we even discussing this as though we know the correct bahai interpretation since all authority for the bahai resides in the supreme elected body of the bahai?

still, taking the words literally, bahaullah is saying Jesus is the Father just as bahaullah is the Father.

Eddie,
. If you would read the link, you will notice that Baha’u’llah identifies Himself in the position of the “Father”

. “The river Jordan is joined to the Most Great Ocean, and the Son, in the holy vale, crieth out: ‘Here am I, here am I O Lord, my God!’, whilst Sinai circleth round the House, and the Burning Bush calleth aloud: ‘He Who is the Desired One is come in His transcendent majesty.’ Say, Lo! The Father is come, and that which ye were promised in the Kingdom is fulfilled! This is the Word which the Son concealed, when to those around Him He said: ‘Ye cannot bear it now.’ And when the appointed time was fulfilled and the Hour had struck, the Word shone forth above the horizon of the Will of God. Beware, O followers of the Son, that ye cast it not behind your backs. Take ye fast hold of it. Better is this for you than all that ye possess. Verily He is nigh unto them that do good. The Hour which We had concealed from the knowledge of the peoples of the earth and of the favoured angels hath come to pass. Say, verily, He hath testified of Me, and I do testify of Him. Indeed, He hath purposed no one other than Me. Unto this beareth witness every fair-minded and understanding soul.”

. Of course it would be best to read in context the entire Lawh-i-Aqdas (Most Holy Tablet), also commonly referred to as the Tablet to the Christians. Again, the link is:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/TB/tb-3.html

.

 

[eddie_too]

what does the supreme house of justice say about the resurrection of Jesus’ physical body from the grave? hmmmm?

 

[SteveVH]

Yes you are correct. Read what is said carefully. I even refer back to the original Arabic it is clearer there. Bahaullah is not confusing persons at all. He makes a very clear claim.

You should read the claims as they relate to the Quran. Truly they are limb quaking from an Islamic view.

But it is a confusion of person from the Catholic perspective. The Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father. They are distinct, divine Persons.

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,
. It would be helpful to the discussion if you wouldn’t mind reading just a few paragraphs from the following Tablet:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/TB/tb-3.html

Okay. I read it. And what would you have me take away from it? That the monks who have hidden themselves in their churches have joined those who have gone astray because they refuse to acknowledge Baha’u’llah?

 

[eddie_too]

bahaullah writes, “The river Jordan is joined to the Most Great Ocean, and the Son, in the holy vale, crieth out: ‘Here am I, here am I O Lord, my God!’, whilst Sinai circleth round the House, and the Burning Bush calleth aloud: ‘He Who is the Desired One is come in His transcendent majesty.’ Say, Lo! The Father is come, and that which ye were promised in the Kingdom is fulfilled! This is the Word which the Son concealed, when to those around Him He said: ‘Ye cannot bear it now.’ And when the appointed time was fulfilled and the Hour had struck, the Word shone forth above the horizon of the Will of God. Beware, O followers of the Son, that ye cast it not behind your backs. Take ye fast hold of it. Better is this for you than all that ye possess. Verily He is nigh unto them that do good. The Hour which We had concealed from the knowledge of the peoples of the earth and of the favoured angels hath come to pass. Say, verily, He hath testified of Me, and I do testify of Him. Indeed, He hath purposed no one other than Me. Unto this beareth witness every fair-minded and understanding soul.”

this can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean because it is all metaphorical.

we all know that the river jordan is NOT joined to the most great ocean. it is joined to the dead sea.
we all know that mount sinai is not moving much less circling a house. and,

we all know the only burning bush ever heard of existed about three thousand years before bahaullah and the voice from the burning bush spoke to moses and said nothing about bahaullah.

we all know that the will of God is not something visible with an horizon.

so, knowing that none of that is literal, people can make up anything they want for its meaning.

bahaullah is the Father, but the Father is not God. too weird a concept to even contemplate.

like i said, bahaullah takes the RC New Testament and persuades the ignorant that the people who wrote the New Testament did not know what they meant when they wrote it.

and, bahaullah found people who thought such a tactic was perfectly reasonable.

talk about easily duped.

the more i hear about bahaullah and read what he wrote the more convinced i become that he is simply a man who became entranced with his own self-referential delusions.

maybe you bahai who are posting here are not doing a very good job of introducing us to bahaullah?

 

[Red_Sox_1]

we all know the only burning bush ever heard of existed about three thousand years before bahaullah and the voice from the burning bush spoke to moses and said nothing about bahaullah.

A frequently recurring statement in Baha’u’llah’s writings is that He spoke to Moses from the Bush. One of Baha’u’llah’s titles is “Speaker on Sinai”.

 

[SteveVH]

Yes you are correct. Read what is said carefully. I even refer back to the original Arabic it is clearer there. Bahaullah is not confusing persons at all. He makes a very clear claim.

So are you telling me that Baha’u’llah is not simply a “Manifestation of God” but actually God himself as Jesus claimed to be?

 

[daler]

So are you telling me that Baha’u’llah is not simply a “Manifestation of God” but actually God himself as Jesus claimed to be?

Steve,
. I will be as frank as I know how to be with you on this subject matter. There is a shift of perspective at times which I see in the Writings of Baha’u’llah which is “more than human”. It is a dialogue between the human “side” of the Manifestation at times addressing God, and God answering Him. It is similar to Jesus, for example, on the cross speaking to God:

. “Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.”

. So at times Baha’u’llah addresses God in similar form, but then God answers Him. A few verses from the Fire Tablet are a good example of this:

. “Coldness hath gripped all mankind: Where is the warmth of Thy love, O Fire of the worlds?
. Calamity hath reached its height: Where are the signs of Thy succor, O Salvation of the worlds?
. Darkness hath enveloped most of the peoples: Where is the brightness of Thy splendor, O Radiance of the worlds?”

Then God answers:

. “O Supreme Pen, We have heard Thy most sweet call in the eternal realm: Give Thou ear unto what the Tongue of Grandeur uttereth, O Wronged One of the worlds!
. Were it not for the cold, how would the heat of Thy words prevail, O Expounder of the worlds?
. Were it not for calamity, how would the sun of Thy patience shine, O Light of the worlds?
. Lament not because of the wicked. Thou wert created to bear and endure, O Patience of the worlds.”

. So there is this conversation taking place between Baha’u’llah as He supplicates God, and then receives an answer to His supplication.

. If you wish to read the Fire Tablet, it is about 7 pages long and you can see this shift:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/c/BP/bp-174.html

.

 

[daler]

this can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean because it is all metaphorical.

we all know that the river jordan is NOT joined to the most great ocean. it is joined to the dead sea.
we all know that mount sinai is not moving much less circling a house. and,

we all know the only burning bush ever heard of existed about three thousand years before bahaullah and the voice from the burning bush spoke to moses and said nothing about bahaullah.

we all know that the will of God is not something visible with an horizon.

so, knowing that none of that is literal, people can make up anything they want for its meaning.

bahaullah is the Father, but the Father is not God. too weird a concept to even contemplate.

maybe you bahai who are posting here are not doing a very good job of introducing us to bahaullah?

Eddie,
. Please consider how the Pharisees made the same arguments you are making when Jesus spoke to them in parables and using metaphors. How easily they were confounded by such statements as:

. “Ye must be born again.”

. “Let the dead bury their dead”

. If you study physics or even algebra, the use of common letters as code elevates the depth and breadth of mathematics far beyond what simple numbers and fractions can communicate. Metaphorical language speaks of spiritual reality way beyond physical reality perceived by the senses. God gave us intellectual capacity to “see around corners”, so to speak.
. In a simple phrase one can communicate to another that “there is pound of gold hidden beneath a square rock by the oak tree near the barn?” If someone understands this and can follow the directions, they become rich with little or no effort, right?
. If the Pharisees only understood the metaphors of Jesus they would be spiritually rich, but they were transfixed on literal earth bound understanding, saying: “What? Must I enter my mother’s womb a second time?”

. How does one explain the following references to the coming of the Promised One:

. " … and in the middle of the lampstands I saw one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across His chest with a golden sash. His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a flame of fire. His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been made to glow in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters.…"

, “And out of his mouth proceedeth a sharp two edged sword; that with it he may strike the nations. And he shall rule them with a rod of iron…”

. Please contemplate these verses a minute or two. I will post a follow up briefly.

. Thank you.

.