Believing in the True Jesus - Christians vs Baha'is

[Michael1978]

As for God changing His mind, that is not the case. When Jesus says He is the first and the last, alpha and omega, the only way to God, etc, it is the divine Logos speaking through Christ. This Logos is eternal and without beginning or end. This same divine Logos was present in Baha’u’llah, making Him the return of Christ.

This goes against 2000 years of Church teaching and Sacred Scripture. Obviously you’re at liberty to believe what you want to believe. But to make a statement about Jesus that is completely contradictory to all that is taught in the history of Christendom as though it were fact is disingenuous at best and deceptive at worst.

68 By love, God has revealed himself and given himself to man. He has thus provided the definitive, superabundant answer to the questions that man asks himself about the meaning and purpose of his life.

69 God has revealed himself to man by gradually communicating his own mystery in deeds and in words.

70 Beyond the witness to himself that God gives in created things, he manifested himself to our first parents, spoke to them and, after the fall, promised them salvation (cf. Gen 3:15) and offered them his covenant.

71 God made an everlasting covenant with Noah and with all living beings (cf. Gen 9:16). It will remain in force as long as the world lasts.

72 God chose Abraham and made a covenant with him and his descendants. By the covenant God formed his people and revealed his law to them through Moses. Through the prophets, he prepared them to accept the salvation destined for all humanity.

73 God has revealed himself fully by sending his own Son, in whom he has established his covenant for ever. The Son is his Father’s definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[eddie_too]

Jesus was and is clearly the culmination of God’s revelation to mankind through the Chosen People. unlike Bahaullah or the bab or mohammed, this continuation is a clear difference between the theology of Christians and that of non-Christians.

Jesus grew up an observant Jew. Jesus was intimately familiar with and divinely knowledgeable of His Father’s plan of salvation.

this is clearly not true of mohammed or Bahaullah. neither one was formed by the dispensation they decided to dismiss. this is a huge difference because they taught that they were to supplant Christianity, not to fulfill it, but to replace it.

the bahai may disagree with this characterization but both Bahaullah and mohammed found it necessary to re-interpret what had preceded them. they did not build upon it. they rejected it and replaced it. when the bahai disagree, what they mean is that according to their theology the doctrines given to the apostles and by the apostles to us were only temporarily important or in some cases these doctrines are considered inaccurate. Jesus never rejected the theology of the Chosen People. He enhanced it. He explained it, but He did not preach and act as though it were no longer true or important. Jesus built upon it. this is quite different from Bahaullah and mohammed.

finally, and this is most important. Jesus was not and is not a manifestation of God. He never claimed He was a manifestation. none of His followers claimed He was a manifestation. Jesus is God. He never was and never will be a manifestation of God.

this is probably the most important difference between Christians and non-Christians.

the bahai teach that all of the significant religious or holy people in mankind’s history are manifestations of God sent at the appropriate time to reveal something about God to mankind. they include Jesus in this teaching.

believing Christians reject all attempts to make Jesus one of many. Jesus stands alone as the Incarnation, the man-God. the bahai may reject that Jesus. so may anyone else reject that Jesus, but to know that God has become one of us is the cause of our joy and of our hope. it seems a bit naïve to expect people, a people who have God amongst them and who know there is nothing greater than the Incarnation and its effects on our lives to abandon that belief for lesser belief(s) such as Jesus is truly great and loving but He is not Divine in the RCC sense of the Incarnation.

why would God change the teachings He gave mankind through Jesus? I do not know, but that is what the bahai teach.

Jesus did not change the way the world operates. He changed the way man was capable of interacting with God. it seems clear to everyone but the bahai, that Bahaullah also did not change the way the world operates and there was no reason to further change the way man was capable of interacting with God since Jesus perfected that capability and gave it to us.

bottom line, Jesus is God, the Second Person of the most Holy Trinity. He is not a manifestation in the sense that the bahai claim Krishna and Buddha and moses and mohammed and Bahaullah are manifestation.

for me, the greatness of Jesus lies in His Divinity as defined by the RCC. Bahaullah cannot be defined as Divine in this sense. he could only be defined as Divine in a sense contrary to the RCC teaching.

 

[eddie_too]

the bahai and the muslims and the rest of the non-Christian religions are welcome to keep their merely holy, men leaders like mohammed and bahaullah. it is their lost not to be followers of the on and only True God-man.

I am uncertain why a mere (as compared to the Incarnation) manifestation would command the obedience or respect of other men.

I am quite certain that the God-man is worthy of all obedience and respect.

 

[Servant19]

the bahai and the muslims and the rest of the non-Christian religions are welcome to keep their merely holy, men leaders like mohammed and bahaullah. it is their lost not to be followers of the on and only True God-man.

I am uncertain why a mere (as compared to the Incarnation) manifestation would command the obedience or respect of other men.

I am quite certain that the God-man is worthy of all obedience and respect.

Eddie, you continue to profess this “mere man” upon Baha’u’llah as if you’ve become a scholar in Bahai theology and can make authoritative statements like that

God bless you!

In His Tablet to Jamal-i-Burujirdi, Baha’u’llah clearly states that there is a populace of His Apostles and adherents who believe He is God Incarnate, the Divine Theophany. He goes on to say that this is basically not untrue.

Now please remember these adherents are MUSLIMS, were raised MUSLIMS and were taught that a “God-Man” is a heresy under Muslim teaching.

Look at how Muslims today react to the idea that Jesus is God…HERESY!! BLASPHEMY!! they would clamour. Well, in Baha’u’llah they lost all sight of that blasphemy, and in Him they believed they were ACTUALLY SEEING GOD INCARNATE.

I can only imagine what a Jewish Apostle fisherman living in a Roman environment of “God-men” worship would have thought of Baha’u’llah if He was born 2000 years ago.

Now it is up to you to go and try and find as much as you can as to why so many Muslims gave up all their foundational beliefs when they laid eyes on Baha’u’llah to whom they sacrificed their entire lives for.

I’ll give you a hint, Baha’u’llah was no Ghandi…
(No disrespect to Ghandi admirers out there)



.

 

[Sam]

Jesus was and is clearly the culmination of God’s revelation to mankind through the Chosen People.

I wish it were that simple, Eddie. Then I wouldn’t have to bother trying to explain this. Unfortunately, though, the statements of Jesus Himself emphatically repudiate that position, as follows:

“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. John

unlike Bahaullah or the bab or mohammed, this continuation is a clear difference between the theology of Christians and that of non-Christians.

You’re absolutely right and that is only to be expected. Manifestations of God don’t come because the followers of previous faiths didn’t have a set of different views, but precisely because they did. This was because their beliefs had strayed from reality with the passage of time.

Christianity itself has not been immune to this. It’s only natural that over the centuries many false interpretations of the Bible by all too fallible humans will have crept into the doctrine of the Church. How else can one explain its splintering into the countless sects and denominations of today?

Jesus grew up an observant Jew. Jesus was intimately familiar with and divinely knowledgeable of His Father’s plan of salvation.

Same goes for the Bab and Baha’u’llah, both of Whom were sent home by Their teachers at elementary school because there was nothing They could be taught that They didn’t already know.

this is clearly not true of mohammed or Bahaullah. neither one was formed by the dispensation they decided to dismiss.

This is not correct. Neither dismissed the Dispensation of Christ. Quite the opposite. Again, what you say here is but a statement without any reasoning to back it up. Please state examples of what They said that you feel is a dismissal of the Dispensation of Jesus. .

this is a huge difference because they taught that they were to supplant Christianity, not to fulfill it, but to replace it.

Again, this is incorrect. Both of these Manifestations formed independent faiths, but in the same way that Christianity did not supplant Judaism (although some may believe that to be the case), neither have Islam or the Baha’i Faith supplanted Christianity. Again, you merely make statements but offer no reasoning to back them up. On what assertions of Muhammad or Baha’u’llah, do you base your opinion here?

Let me quote for you the Baha’i position on this:

“The Faith standing identified with the name of Bahá’u’lláh disclaims any intention to belittle any of the Prophets gone before Him, to whittle down any of their teachings, to obscure, however slightly, the radiance of their Revelations, to oust them from the hearts of their followers, to abrogate the fundamentals of their doctrines, to discard any of their revealed Books, or to suppress the legitimate aspirations of their adherents. Repudiating the claim of any religion to be the final revelation of God to man, disclaiming finality for His own Revelation, Bahá’u’lláh inculcates the basic principle of the relativity of religious truth, the continuity of Divine Revelation, the progressiveness of religious experience. His aim is to widen the basis of all revealed religions and to unravel the mysteries of their scriptures. He insists on the unqualified recognition of the unity of their purpose, restates the eternal verities they enshrine, coordinates their functions, distinguishes the essential and the authentic from the nonessential and spurious in their teachings, separates the God-given truths from the priest-prompted superstitions, and on this as a basis proclaims the possibility, and even prophecies the inevitability, of their unification, and the consummation of their highest hopes.” - Shoghi Effendi, The Promised Day is Come, p. 108

 

[Sam]

I’m going to put this in its own post, because I fell it really is that important.

"The Faith standing identified with the name of Bahá’u’lláh disclaims any intention to belittle any of the Prophets gone before Him, to whittle down any of their teachings, to obscure, however slightly, the radiance of their Revelations, to oust them from the hearts of their followers, to abrogate the fundamentals of their doctrines, to discard any of their revealed Books, or to suppress the legitimate aspirations of their adherents. Repudiating the claim of any religion to be the final revelation of God to man, disclaiming finality for His own Revelation, Bahá’u’lláh inculcates the basic principle of the relativity of religious truth, the continuity of Divine Revelation, the progressiveness of religious experience. His aim is to widen the basis of all revealed religions and to unravel the mysteries of their scriptures. He insists on the unqualified recognition of the unity of their purpose, restates the eternal verities they enshrine, coordinates their functions, distinguishes the essential and the authentic from the nonessential and spurious in their teachings, separates the God-given truths from the priest-prompted superstitions, and on this as a basis proclaims the possibility, and even prophecies the inevitability, of their unification, and the consummation of their highest hopes." - Shoghi Effendi, The Promised Day is Come, p. 108

 

[peace_at_last]

In His Tablet to Jamal-i-Burujirdi, Baha’u’llah clearly states that there is a populace of His Apostles and adherents who believe He is God Incarnate, the Divine Theophany. He goes on to say that this is basically not untrue.

Now please remember these adherents are MUSLIMS, were raised MUSLIMS and were taught that a “God-Man” is a heresy under Muslim teaching.

Look at how Muslims today react to the idea that Jesus is God…HERESY!! BLASPHEMY!! they would clamour. Well, in Baha’u’llah they lost all sight of that blasphemy, and in Him they believed they were ACTUALLY SEEING GOD INCARNATE.
…
Now it is up to you to go and try and find as much as you can as to why so many Muslims gave up all their foundational beliefs when they laid eyes on Baha’u’llah to whom they sacrificed their entire lives for.


.

All the other contradictions and inconsistencies with Islam aside, it was for the very reason that you mention that Baha’u’llah was rejected by most Muslims and still is rejected. A very small group of Muslims (for whatever reason) believed the claims of Baha’u’llah. So what? Since when has the actions of a minority group of people become a criterion for the truth?

 

[peace_at_last]

Same goes for the Bab and Baha’u’llah, both of Whom were sent home by Their teachers at elementary school because there was nothing They could be taught that They didn’t already know.

It is well known that Baha’u’llah being a the son of a nobleman was never sent to a public school. Rather he was privately tutored at home. The Bab had also attended school for at least 5 years. I can’t label 5 years of schooling as being “sent home by Their teachers at elementary school because there was nothing They could be taught that They didn’t already know.”

 

[Servant19]

It is well known that Baha’u’llah being a the son of a nobleman was never sent to a public school. Rather he was privately tutored at home. The Bab had also attended school for at least 5 years. I can’t label 5 years of schooling as being “sent home by Their teachers at elementary school because there was nothing They could be taught that They didn’t already know.”

What’s your source for these assertions please?

I haven’t seen one historical record indicating what you wrote here…

.

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

This goes against 2000 years of Church teaching and Sacred Scripture. Obviously you’re at liberty to believe what you want to believe. But to make a statement about Jesus that is completely contradictory to all that is taught in the history of Christendom as though it were fact is disingenuous at best and deceptive at worst.

Hey, it is not my fault you are in error…

 

[Servant19]

All the other contradictions and inconsistencies with Islam aside, it was for the very reason that you mention that Baha’u’llah was rejected by most Muslims and still is rejected. A very small group of Muslims (for whatever reason) believed the claims of Baha’u’llah. So what? Since when has the actions of a minority group of people become a criterion for the truth?

Yes indeed, the Manifestation of God is rejected by the vast majority around them. I believe a few fishermen can’t be deemed to be the majority of Jews.

You’d think that if Jesus was anything special, there’d be no Jews left in the world 2000 years on huh?

Even if the only person who accepted Baha’u’llah was His Son, Abdu’l-Baha, that’s more than enough evidence for me to believe that Baha’u’llah is whoever He claims to be, Divine and worthy of my worship.

I know that if I strive daily to be like Abdu’l-Baha, I’m assured of Gods love and embrace



.

 

[peace_at_last]

What’s your source for these assertions please?

I haven’t seen one historical record indicating what you wrote here…

.

Here we go again …

“Bahá’u’lláh received an elementary education during His childhood in Tihran. The nobility of those days usually employed the services of a teacher at home to tutor their children. The main subjects were calligraphy, the study of the Qur’án and the works of the Persian poets. This type of schooling ended after only a few years when the child was in his early teens. Bahá’u’lláh’s education did not go further than this.” (Adib Taherzadeh, The child of the covenant: A Study Guide to the Will and Testament of 'Abdu’l-Baha, p. 19)

“the Báb was six or seven years of age when He entered the school of Shaykh Abid. The school was known by the name of “Qahviyih-Awliya.” The Báb remained five years at that school where He was taught the rudiments of Persian.” (The Dawn-Breakers, footnote on p. 75)

 

[Servant19]

Here we go again …

“Bahá’u’lláh received an elementary education during His childhood in Tihran. The nobility of those days usually employed the services of a teacher at home to tutor their children. The main subjects were calligraphy, the study of the Qur’án and the works of the Persian poets. This type of schooling ended after only a few years when the child was in his early teens. Bahá’u’lláh’s education did not go further than this.” (Adib Taherzadeh, The child of the covenant: A Study Guide to the Will and Testament of 'Abdu’l-Baha, p. 19)

“the Báb was six or seven years of age when He entered the school of Shaykh Abid. The school was known by the name of “Qahviyih-Awliya.” The Báb remained five years at that school where He was taught the rudiments of Persian.” (The Dawn-Breakers, footnote on p. 75)

My apologies, it’s been a long time since I read those books.

Thanks for your patient understanding

.

 

[peace_at_last]

Yes indeed, the Manifestation of God is rejected by the vast majority around them. I believe a few fishermen can’t be deemed to be the majority of Jews.

You’d think that if Jesus was anything special, there’d be no Jews left in the world 2000 years on huh?

Even if the only person who accepted Baha’u’llah was His Son, Abdu’l-Baha, that’s more than enough evidence for me to believe that Baha’u’llah is whoever He claims to be, Divine and worthy of my worship.

I know that if I strive daily to be like Abdu’l-Baha, I’m assured of Gods love and embrace



.

Your post is basically pointless. I stated that the reason Baha’u’llah was rejected was because of his heretical claims (according to Muslims) of being God incarnate or a manifestation of God which is equated with infidelity in the teachings of Islam. Your response does not address my argument. Instead you are telling me that Prophets are rejected by the vast majority around them. Guess what? Imposters are also rejected by the vast majority around them.

And what is so special about Abdu’l-Baha? He held the belief that materialists believe everything is living!

 

[Servant19]

Your post is basically pointless. I stated that the reason Baha’u’llah was rejected was because of his heretical claims (according to Muslims) of being God incarnate or a manifestation of God which is equated with infidelity in the teachings of Islam. Your response does not address my argument. Instead you are telling me that Prophets are rejected by the vast majority around them. Guess what? Imposters are also rejected by the vast majority around them.

Heretical claims like Jesus was not crucified, and “do not say three”?

Of course it’s heresy. God is Himself heretical to human imagination.

And what is so special about Abdu’l-Baha? He held the belief that materialists believe everything is living!

I have no idea what this means? Maybe you could clarify?



.

 

[Sam]

All the other contradictions and inconsistencies with Islam aside, it was for the very reason that you mention that Baha’u’llah was rejected by most Muslims and still is rejected. A very small group of Muslims (for whatever reason) believed the claims of Baha’u’llah. So what? Since when has the actions of a minority group of people become a criterion for the truth?

Dear Friend, I fully understand your perplexity in your examination of the truth. It is by no means easy to see clearly through “the clouds of heaven.”

May I humbly point out that the Baha’i Faith is spread worldwide in over 100, 000 localities. Most of its adherents don’t live in what used to be Persia anymore. The number in India alone far outstripping the number of Iranian believers.

Keep in mind that Christianity itself was opposed and rejected by the vast majority of the Jews.

Since when has the actions of a minority group of people become a criterion for the truth?

Jesus came and together with just a handful of followers established a faith that has today spread throughout the world. The Baha’i Faith is no different in that respect.

 

[Sam]

It is well known that Baha’u’llah being a the son of a nobleman was never sent to a public school. Rather he was privately tutored at home. The Bab had also attended school for at least 5 years. I can’t label 5 years of schooling as being “sent home by Their teachers at elementary school because there was nothing They could be taught that They didn’t already know.”

In the case of Baha’u’llah, I concur and apologise for my error. You’re exactly right, Baha’u’llah Himself never went to school. Good catch!

May I say, though, that His education was never more than elementary, while His writings are of a profoundly scholarly nature, as noted by the likes of Cambridge Professor and orientalist Edward Granville Browne. How can this be accounted for unless one were to admit that His knowledge was innate?

As for the Bab, He only spent that long in school because His uncle insisted on it, even though His teacher had brought Him home to the uncle and told him that the Bab was in no need of teachers. The point is His education was elementary and this fact alone doesn’t explain His evident erudition. Here’s the story:

"Shaykh Abid, known by his pupils as Shaykhuna, was a man of piety and learning. He had been a disciple of both Shaykh Ahmad and Siyyid Kazim. “One day,” he related, “I asked the Báb to recite the opening words of the Qur’án: ‘Bismi’llahi’r-Rahmani’r-Rahim.’[1] He hesitated, pleading that unless He were told what these words signified, He would in no wise attempt to pronounce them. I pretended not to know their meaning. ‘I know what these words signify,’ observed my pupil; ‘by your leave, I will explain them.’ He spoke with such knowledge and fluency that I was struck with amazement. He expounded the meaning of ‘Allah,’ of ‘Rahman,’ and ‘Rahim,’ in terms such as I had neither read nor heard. The sweetness of His utterance still lingers in my memory. I felt impelled to take Him back to His uncle and to deliver into his hands the Trust he had committed to my care. I determined to tell him how unworthy I felt to teach so remarkable a child. I found His uncle alone in his office. ‘I have brought Him back to you,’ I said, ‘and commit Him to your vigilant protection. He is not to be treated as a mere child, for in Him I can already discern evidences of that mysterious power which the Revelation of the Sáhibu’z-Zamán [2] alone can reveal. It is incumbent upon you to surround Him with your most loving care. Keep Him in your house, for He, verily, stands in no need of teachers such as I.’ Haji Mirza Siyyid Ali sternly rebuked the Báb. ‘Have You forgotten my instructions?’ he said. ‘Have I not already admonished You to follow the example of Your fellow-pupils, to observe silence, and to listen attentively to every word spoken by Your teacher?’ Having obtained His promise to abide faithfully by his instructions, he bade the Báb return to His school. The soul of that child could not, however, be restrained by the stern admonitions of His uncle. No discipline could repress the flow of His intuitive knowledge. Day after day He continued to manifest such remarkable evidences of superhuman wisdom as I am powerless to recount.” At last His uncle was induced to take Him away from the school of Shaykh Abid, and to associate Him with himself in his own profession.[3] There, too, He revealed signs of a power and greatness that few could approach and none could rival.
[1 In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.]
[2 “The Lord of the Age,” one of the titles of the promised Qá’im.]
[3 According to Haji Mu’inu’s-Saltanih’s narrative (p. 37), the Báb assumed, at the age of twenty, the independent direction of His business affairs. “Orphaned at an early age, he was placed under the tutelage of his maternal uncle, Aqa Siyyid Ali, under whose direction he entered the same trade in which his father had been engaged (that is to say, the mercantile business).”
A. L. M. Nicolas’ “Siyyid Ali-Muhammad dit le Báb,” p. 189.)]

• Shoghi Effendi, The Dawn-Breakers, p. 75

 

[Sam]

Your post is basically pointless. I stated that the reason Baha’u’llah was rejected was because of his heretical claims (according to Muslims) of being God incarnate or a manifestation of God which is equated with infidelity in the teachings of Islam. Your response does not address my argument. Instead you are telling me that Prophets are rejected by the vast majority around them. Guess what? Imposters are also rejected by the vast majority around them.

The reason the Muslims opposed the Bab and Baha’u’llah was because of their contention that Muhammad was the “Seal of the Prophets”, which they interpret to mean the ‘Last Prophet’.

To their way of thinking the Bab and Baha’u’llah were heretics because They were claiming to be prophets after Muhammad, which is untrue because they are not prophets as such but Manifestations of God Who began a cycle of fulfillment rather than to prophesy, and the term Seal of the Prophets referred to the last Prophet (Muhammad) in the cycle of prophecy, which Baha’is believe was begun by Adam.

It’s easy enough to show that their charges are false, but as the clerics saw their power base threatened, they misrepresented Their claims so as to mislead ordinary Muslims.

Christians shouldn’t be surprised about this, however, as the same was done to Jesus by the Pharisees, who likewise deliberately misrepresented His claims in an effort to cling on to their power stronghold. Their charge was that “The Hand of God is chained up.” Muslims say “Muhammad is the last prophet,” Christians say that there can be no other prophet after Jesus. Each faith has its own pat statements issued by their leaders to refute the claims of the Successors of the Founders of their faith.

And that’s what happens to every new Dispensation from God. Hence the need for them to establish independent faiths.

And just as the Pharisees had a stranglehold over the minds of their followers, so this has long been true too of the leaders of Islam with respect to ** their f** followers.

 

[Sam]

And what is so special about Abdu’l-Baha? He held the belief that materialists believe everything is living!

Like Servant19, I’m confused. Can you quote the relevant passage? Not being facetious;I’m genuinely perplexed.

For your information, 'Abdu’l-Baha was highly regarded and respected even among the enemies of the Baha’i Faith, and Professor Edward Granville Browne spoke extremely highly of Him:

In a book by historian, Hasan Balyuzi, he notes “Once a redoubtable enemy of Bahá’u’lláh remarked that had He no other proof to substantiate His exceptional powers, it were sufficient that He had reared such a son as 'Abbas Effendi [Abdu’l-Baha].” H.M. Balyuzi, Abdu’l-Baha - The Centre of the Covenant, p. 14

Professor Browne himself observed as follows:

“Seldom have I seen one whose appearance impressed me more. A tall strongly-built man holding himself straight as an arrow, with white turban and raiment, long black locks reaching almost to the shoulder, broad powerful forehead indicating a strong intellect combined with an unswerving will, eyes keen as a hawk’s, and strongly-marked but pleasing features – such was my first impression of Abbas Efendi, ‘the master’ (Aka) as he par excellence is called by the Bábís. Subsequent conversation with him served only to heighten the respect with which his appearance had from the first inspired me. One more eloquent of speech, more ready of argument, more apt of illustration, more intimately acquainted with the sacred books of the Jews, the Christians, and the Muhammadans, could, I should think, scarcely be found even amongst the eloquent, ready, and subtle race to which he belongs. These qualities, combined with a bearing at once majestic and genial, made me cease to wonder at the influence and esteem which he enjoyed even beyond the circle of his father’s followers. About the greatness of this man and his power no one who had seen him could entertain a doubt.”

As for Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha Himself points out that "Even those people who rejected and hated Him bitterly, when they had met Him, would testify to the grandeur of Bahá’u’lláh, saying, “This is a magnificent man, but what a pity that he makes such a claim! Otherwise, all that he says is acceptable.” - Some Answered Questions, p. 36)

 

[peace_at_last]

Heretical claims like Jesus was not crucified, and “do not say three”?

Of course it’s heresy. God is Himself heretical to human imagination.


.

If I wanted to start a discussion on trinity and the crucification and why “I believe” they are wrong and a distortion of true Christianity I would have done that. But that was not my intent. I was discussing the heretical claims of Baha’u’llah with respect to Islamic beliefs. If you have any argument relevant to those matters, I will discuss them with you and if you do not, do not divert the subject.