Believing in the True Jesus - Christians vs Baha'is

  • Thread starter Thread starter GuyNextDoor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
Thank you dear brother

This thread is about who the true Jesus is.

If you wish to discuss the heresy Baha’u’llah introduced to Islamic teaching please start a thread and we would all happily contribute there 🙂

God bless you 🙂

.
 
"I am the Creator of the heavens and the earth, one in Divinity with the Father and the Holy Spirit. I am the one Who spoke to the patriarchs and the prophets and the one Whom they awaited. For the sake of their longing and in agreement with My promise, I assumed flesh without sin and concupiscence, by entering the womb of the Virgin like the sun shining through the clearest gem. For just as the sun does not damage the glass by entering it, likewise the virginity of the Virgin was not lost when I assumed Manhood. I assumed flesh in such a way that I did not have to forsake My Divinity, and I was no less God - with the Father and the Holy Ghost, governing and upholding all things - although I was in the womb of the Virgin in My human nature. Just as brightness is never separated from fire, so too, My Divinity was never separated from My Humanity, not even in death.

Thereafter I allowed My pure and sinless body to be wounded from the foot to the head, and to be crucified for all the sins of mankind. That same body is now offered each day on the altar so that mankind might love Me more and remember My great deeds more often. But now I am totally forgotten, neglected, despised, and expelled as a king is from his own kingdom and in whose place the most wicked robber has been elected and honored.
 
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.

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.
Honestly, I am fed up with arguments like this that prove nothing and can be equally used by a true prophet and an imposter alike.
You tell me that Baha’is are spread in 100,000 localities. So what? What does that prove? It didn’t happen miraculously. It was the result of a well programmed missionary program by Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi. One only needs to see Shoghi’s map of establishing Baha’i all over the world to understand the extent of this effort:
bahai-library.com/shoghieffendi_goals_crusade

The article here by Baha’i Moojan Momen tells us how the Baha’i population suddenly catapulted from 200,000 thousand in the fifties to 4.5million in the eighties:
bahai-library.com/momen_smith_developments_1957-1988
**“Conversions of large numbers of tribal or peasant peoples in various parts of the Third World had begun”
“Most of the flood of new Baha’is were poorly educated, and many lived in rural and tribal areas with which effective communication was difficult to sustain.”
**
You basically started a campaign of converting a bunch of third world peasants and illiterate masses who had no means of investigating the truth then go about boasting about how Baha’i is so widespread in the world and fast growing.

As for your last argument, that Christianity started with a minority and Baha’i is the same. This argument is flawed and proves nothing. It just shows how the population of any belief -right or wrong- accumulates throughout the years.

(P.S. From where I am posting I can only access CF using a proxy server. The proxy server changes the links I post.)
 
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
Dear friend,
I recently saw a link that you might be interested in:
bahaiforums.com/general-discussion/11159-abdul-baha-babs-schooling.html
 
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.
The Bab claimed to be the Mahdi of Islam (who was an Imam, neither prophet nor manifestation). Baha’u’llah also confirms this in the book of Iqan. His status was later upgraded to a manifestation by Baha’is. The concept of a “manifestation” itself being something made up by Baha’is and unheard of in Islam.

You claim the clerics misrepresented their claims to mislead the Muslims. Your word against mine: No Baha’u’llah misrepresented Islam to mislead the Muslims.
You claim Christians state there is no Prophet after Jesus. So what? If Christians are wrong does it mean that Baha’u’llah is a true Prophet? Or if Muslims are wrong does it mean Bah’u’llah is a true Prophet? Your deductions are flawed.
 
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)
Professor Browne is merely describing the Charismatic figure of a charismatic leader. That doesn’t prove anything except that this person had charisma. You see being charismatic doesn’t mean we have to accept that you are somehow connected to the divine. Many cult leaders and political figures were charismatic too: Hitler, Churchill, Mandella, Fidel Castro, Martin Luther:
people.howstuffworks.com/10-charismatic-leaders.htm#page=2

The two other quotes you cite are Baha’i sources CLAIMING that Baha’i enemies would go about admitting how Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha were such great figures. IF PROVED TRUE, these remarks are only the opinions of the people who have stated such remarks and prove nothing.
 
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?
Like Servant19, I’m confused. Can you quote the relevant passage? Not being facetious;I’m genuinely perplexed.
Abdu’l-Baha believes mineral have a spirit and life. When trying to prove this to August Forel he states the following:

“As to the existence of spirit in the mineral: it is indubitable that minerals are endowed with a spirit and life according to the requirements of that stage. This unknown secret, too, hath become known unto the** materialists who now maintain that all beings are endowed with life**, even as He saith in the Qur’án, ‘All things are living’.” (Tablet to August Forel, p. 9) reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/TAF/taf-1.html

1- He claims materialists hold this belief too. This is totally baseless and unheard of.
2- He claims it is stated in the Quran that ‘All things are living’. No such verse exists in the Quran.
 
Abdu’l-Baha believes mineral have a spirit and life. When trying to prove this to August Forel he states the following:

“As to the existence of spirit in the mineral: it is indubitable that minerals are endowed with a spirit and life according to the requirements of that stage. This unknown secret, too, hath become known unto the** materialists who now maintain that all beings are endowed with life**, even as He saith in the Qur’án, ‘All things are living’.” (Tablet to August Forel, p. 9) reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/TAF/taf-1.html

1- He claims materialists hold this belief too. This is totally baseless and unheard of.
2- He claims it is stated in the Quran that ‘All things are living’. No such verse exists in the Quran.
You have to look at the Spiritual Implications behind this discussion. There is no doubt if one has obtained to Spiritual Understanding, then what has been stated in that Tablet would be obvious “according to the requirements of that stage”.

Most of us are like rocks and minerals when it comes to the Knowledge of Our Lord.

God Bless and Regards Tony
 
You have to look at the Spiritual Implications behind this discussion. There is no doubt if one has obtained to Spiritual Understanding, then what has been stated in that Tablet would be obvious “according to the requirements of that stage”.

Most of us are like rocks and minerals when it comes to the Knowledge of Our Lord.

God Bless and Regards Tony
If we are like rocks, although we may be dense, we are at least solid. (A little levity injected into this uber-serious thread.)
 
Dear peace_at_last - This link is to a thread started by an enemy of the Faith, you will only find what you want in the posted quotes, not the Truth dear friend.

God Bless and Regards Tony
Dear Tony,

This is how we are taught to investigate the truth in Shia Islam:
Imam Ali: “Ponder on the words being spoken, not who is speaking them”
Quran, 39:18: “Those who listen to the Word, and follow the best of in it: those are the ones who God has guided, and those are the ones endued with understanding.”

While you are telling me to investigate the truth by keeping away from a thread because it was started by an enemy of Baha’i. Doesn’t surprise me when you have these kinds of orders from Baha’u’llah:

Shun any man in whom you perceive enmity for this Servant, though he may appear in the garb of piety of the former and later people, or may arise to the worship of the two worlds" Baha’i World Faith—Selected Writings of Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha (Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 431.
“Therefore, it is incumbent upon all the friends of God to shun any person in whom they perceive the emanation of hatred for the Glorious Beauty of Abha, though he may quote all the Heavenly Utterances and cling to all the Books.”
Baha’i World Faith—Selected Writings of Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha (Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 430.

We are told to listen to the words and not look at the person, while you are told to shun solely on the basis of being hostile towards Baha’u’llah, even if that person brings evidence from all books.
 
Dear Tony,

This is how we are taught to investigate the truth in Shia Islam:
Imam Ali: “Ponder on the words being spoken, not who is speaking them”
Quran, 39:18: “Those who listen to the Word, and follow the best of in it: those are the ones who God has guided, and those are the ones endued with understanding.”

While you are telling me to investigate the truth by keeping away from a thread because it was started by an enemy of Baha’i. Doesn’t surprise me when you have these kinds of orders from Baha’u’llah:

Shun any man in whom you perceive enmity for this Servant, though he may appear in the garb of piety of the former and later people, or may arise to the worship of the two worlds" Baha’i World Faith—Selected Writings of Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha (Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 431.
“Therefore, it is incumbent upon all the friends of God to shun any person in whom they perceive the emanation of hatred for the Glorious Beauty of Abha, though he may quote all the Heavenly Utterances and cling to all the Books.”
Baha’i World Faith—Selected Writings of Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha (Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 430.

We are told to listen to the words and not look at the person, while you are told to shun solely on the basis of being hostile towards Baha’u’llah, even if that person brings evidence from all books.
I doubt an avowed enemy of any faith is the best person to consult about said faith. I wouldn’t give two seconds of my life to listen to a Jihadist describe the United States so why should I or anyone else listen to an avowed enemy of the Cause of God?
 
You have to look at the Spiritual Implications behind this discussion. There is no doubt if one has obtained to Spiritual Understanding, then what has been stated in that Tablet would be obvious “according to the requirements of that stage”.

Most of us are like rocks and minerals when it comes to the Knowledge of Our Lord.

God Bless and Regards Tony
Dear Tony,

It is up to you to prove the spiritual implications that minerals/rocks/etc. possess a soul and life. Anyway, don’t bother with it, because that was not the point I was making. The point was this:
Since Abdu’l-Baha couldn’t prove minerals have a life/spirit to August Forel, he uttered two false statements: 1-He claimed materialists hold this belief too, which is very clear that they don’t. 2-He claimed the Quran holds this belief as well and he cited a non-existing verse of the Quran “Everything is living”
 
I doubt an avowed enemy of any faith is the best person to consult about said faith. I wouldn’t give two seconds of my life to listen to a Jihadist describe the United States so why should I or anyone else listen to an avowed enemy of the Cause of God?
Dear ChristIstheWay,

The said ‘avowed enemy of the faith’ as you put it, has provided evidence and scans from Baha’i books from Baha’i authors. Apparently, regardless of the evidence provided, you are obeying Baha’u’llah’s order about shunning his enemies even though they "quote all the Heavenly Utterances and cling to all the Books"
 
If we are like rocks, although we may be dense, we are at least solid. (A little levity injected into this uber-serious thread.)
I just want to acknowledge that this did not get missed

Hahahaha

Thankyou brother, a needed reflection 🙂

G-d bless you

.
 
Dear ChristIstheWay,

The said ‘avowed enemy of the faith’ as you put it, has provided evidence and scans from Baha’i books from Baha’i authors. Apparently, regardless of the evidence provided, you are obeying Baha’u’llah’s order about shunning his enemies even though they "quote all the Heavenly Utterances and cling to all the Books"
I will always obey my lord. I don’t care what the discussion is about or what books and scans are offered. Like I said, I wouldn’t listen to a Jihadist describe America, Richard Dawkins describe God, or anything else like that.

Besides, if they really are Baha’i books by Baha’i authors, we really needn’t fear what they reveal, now should we? I won’t waste my valuable time reading something taken out of context, which is probably what this enemy of the faith is doing. Even if not, oh well. I challenge you to find one religion that doesn’t have some kind of skeleton in its closet.
 
Dear ChristIstheWay,

The said ‘avowed enemy of the faith’ as you put it, has provided evidence and scans from Baha’i books from Baha’i authors. Apparently, regardless of the evidence provided, you are obeying Baha’u’llah’s order about shunning his enemies even though they "quote all the Heavenly Utterances and cling to all the Books"
Okay, I’ve read the first few pages of your link. Nothing impressed me or served to change my mind. An avowed enemy of the faith attacking anything he thinks will debunk the Baha’i Faith. Nothing surprising there. And this fellow is clearly not quoting Heavenly Utterances or clinging to all the Books.
 
"I am the Creator of the heavens and the earth, one in Divinity with the Father and the Holy Spirit. I am the one Who spoke to the patriarchs and the prophets and the one Whom they awaited. For the sake of their longing and in agreement with My promise, I assumed flesh without sin and concupiscence, by entering the womb of the Virgin like the sun shining through the clearest gem. For just as the sun does not damage the glass by entering it, likewise the virginity of the Virgin was not lost when I assumed Manhood. I assumed flesh in such a way that I did not have to forsake My Divinity, and I was no less God - with the Father and the Holy Ghost, governing and upholding all things - although I was in the womb of the Virgin in My human nature. Just as brightness is never separated from fire, so too, My Divinity was never separated from My Humanity, not even in death.

Thereafter I allowed My pure and sinless body to be wounded from the foot to the head, and to be crucified for all the sins of mankind. That same body is now offered each day on the altar so that mankind might love Me more and remember My great deeds more often. But now I am totally forgotten, neglected, despised, and expelled as a king is from his own kingdom and in whose place the most wicked robber has been elected and honored.
Is “Divinity” a physical thing Techno?

What is Divinity according to Catholic teaching?

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top