Zoroastrianism

  • Thread starter Thread starter TEPO
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Understand the catechism in light of the entire of Catholic tradition. No not just Roman catholic tradition but Christian tradition in its totality. When we say Christ is God, Equal to the father of the SAME substance as teh father, we mean it. Contrast that to the bahai who would say Jesus is a totally different specimen from God but mirrors how God acts.

The difference is abounding. and the Contradiction is firmly there, only those who refuse to see it don’t want to treat it as a problem. Bahai are especially guilty of this.
 
IgnatianPhilo said:
Understand the catechism in light of the entire of Catholic tradition. No not just Roman catholic tradition but Christian tradition in its totality. When we say Christ is God, Equal to the father of the SAME substance as teh father, we mean it. Contrast that to the bahai who would say Jesus is a totally different specimen from God but mirrors how God acts.

The difference is abounding. and the Contradiction is firmly there, only those who refuse to see it don’t want to treat it as a problem. Bahai are especially guilty of this.
Click to expand...
It seems as though you have only read one passage from the Bahai readings on this subject. There are several, the 3 natures of Manifestation of God (Jesus included) comes to mind which explores this very subject.

There is no contradiction, you just want there to be one…
 
arabic99 said:
God “putting on our nature” is implicative of more than one nature endowed on Christ

Islam and Baha’i theology “elucidates” this reality and conforms with it. There is no contradiction.

I keep repeating myself. Baha’u’llah’s quote I posted before talks about this perfectly. He talks about the “God nature” he is endowed with and the “human nature” he has “put on” (as you say) which is “coarser than clay…”

This quote is the “elucidation” of Islamic theology on this subject…and conforms very well with trinitarian doctrine

I repeat, there is no contradiction 🙂
Click to expand...
Yes of course there is two natures within the person of Christ, if you read the Chalcedonian definition you would agree with that. But you will nto find within the quran any such statement concerning the definition of Allah and he possibly being Christ, in fact the quran goes directly against this saying it is blasphemy.

There is a genuine contradiction between the religions. Mirza Al hussain did not accept the trinitarian definition of Nicea and thus he felt the need to reword it, or perhaps that was his son Abbas Effendi both of whom authority is undisputed within the bahai religion. Only one who wants the world to be united against the reality that we simply don’t agree on things and contradict each other would ignore this obvious difference.

And it has been explained to you waht the bahai position is on the Manifestations whether you accept it or not. They are not totally equal to God. This is the unfortunate use of language in bahai that decieves peopel into thinking it merges with all religions. It does not.
 
arabic99 said:
It seems as though you have only read one passage from the Bahai readings on this subject. There are several, the 3 natures of Manifestation of God (Jesus included) comes to mind which explores this very subject.

There is no contradiction, you just want there to be one…
Click to expand...
Manifestation does not imply total ontological unity with God. The bahai have used since their prophet the mirror analogy to explain this point. I should know it well I have it hammered into me each time I talk to a bahai on the subject.

Ask them and say to them that they have it wrong. That Jesus is on total ontological par with GOd. Go ahead.

Read Mirza Al Hussain (despite his ignorance)

The reality of this question is as follows: Divine Oneness is proven and He revealeth Himself in the Holy Essences. The sun is one sun but manifesteth itself in different mirrors. If thou lookest into the mirror and seest the manifestation of the sun, thou wilt way, the sun is in the mirror and this sun manifest in the mirror is the same sun of the heavens; although two suns, yet in reality they are one. The sun hath not descended from its high and lofty station, it hath not 514 taken up its abode in this mirror, but hath manifested itself therein.

The manifestations are like the rays of the sun not hte sun itself. This theme is present all throught MIrza and Abbas’s writings.
 
IgnatianPhilo said:
Manifestation does not imply total ontological unity with God. The bahai have used since their prophet the mirror analogy to explain this point. I should know it well I have it hammered into me each time I talk to a bahai on the subject.

Ask them and say to them that they have it wrong. That Jesus is on total ontological par with GOd. Go ahead.
Click to expand...
Maybe you are talking to Baha’is less read than me on their own Faith!!

Here is a quote that is more reliable than Joe Blow’s understanding of his own faith 😉

Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For … through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world…. And were any of them to voice the utterance, “I am the Messenger of God,” He, also, speaketh the truth, the indubitable truth…. Viewed in this light, they are all but Messengers of that ideal King, that unchangeable Essence…. And were they to say, “We are the Servants of God,” this also is a manifest and indisputable fact. For they have been made manifest in the uttermost state of servitude, a servitude the like of which no man can possibly attain….

Thus it is that whatsoever be their utterance, whether it pertain to the realm of Divinity, Lordship, Prophethood, Messengership, Guardianship, Apostleship, or Servitude, all is true, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Therefore these sayings … must be attentively considered, that the divergent utterances of the Manifestations of the Unseen and Day Springs of Holiness may cease to agitate the soul and perplex the mind."

(bold and underlining added by myself)

Note , that the term “Manifestation” of God is used in Baha’i scripture to be the same as an Islamic Prophet, or a term that is used to define these Divine Beings, thats all.

Read the quotes properly, and it makes perfect and clear trinitarian sense to me. If you want to cling onto your own insistent self, then lets leave it and move on…God will be the judge of all our actions (and words)
 
IgnatianPhilo said:
Manifestation does not imply total ontological unity with God. The bahai have used since their prophet the mirror analogy to explain this point. I should know it well I have it hammered into me each time I talk to a bahai on the subject.

Ask them and say to them that they have it wrong. That Jesus is on total ontological par with GOd. Go ahead.

Read Mirza Al Hussain (despite his ignorance)

The reality of this question is as follows: Divine Oneness is proven and He revealeth Himself in the Holy Essences. The sun is one sun but manifesteth itself in different mirrors. If thou lookest into the mirror and seest the manifestation of the sun, thou wilt way, the sun is in the mirror and this sun manifest in the mirror is the same sun of the heavens; although two suns, yet in reality they are one. The sun hath not descended from its high and lofty station, it hath not 514 taken up its abode in this mirror, but hath manifested itself therein.

The manifestations are like the rays of the sun not hte sun itself. This theme is present all throught MIrza and Abbas’s writings.
Click to expand...
LOL…this quote, firstly is not by Mirza Al Hussain, btw His name is Baha’ullah. Secondly, it relates to the physical expression of the trinity in Jesus’ human nature, and thirdly, you’re constant disregard for respect for someone who may (or may not) be God is laughable (but He does claim to be God)…good luck, if you’re wrong…

I will pray for you 👍
 
btw. I wouldn’t call my enemies names like “ignorant”…why would you stoop to such a level??

Have you been harmed by Him personally?
 
BListon said:
No, because everyone is too busy arguing about things that are off topic. We are NOT talking about Bahai, we are NOT talking about Mohammed, we are NOT talking about Baha u llah, and we are NOT talking about Islam. We are supposed to be talking about ZOROASTRIANISM!!! Grrr…:takethat:
Click to expand...
Amen. Any Zoroastrians here?
 
My father in law was a Zoroastrian… Beautiful man, speaks Zardushti too, beautiful language
 
arabic99 said:
My father in law was a Zoroastrian… Beautiful man, speaks Zardushti too, beautiful language
Click to expand...
Avestan?

I wonder how many there are living today. If i remember correctly, Freddie Mercury (of Queen; real name Farrokh Bulsara) was a Zoroastrian of Gujarat Parsi ancestry, right?
 
Yes the Avestan language is known as Zardoshti by its speakers, really funny sounding language.

I have a lot of respect for Zoroastrians. Freddy Mercury’s father was actually a Parsi cleric.
A large majority of Parsi Zoroastrians converted to the Bahai Faith in the late 1800s/early 1900s.

My father in law piqued my interest in both religions resultingly.
 
Again Arabic you don’t actually understand the trinity and difference as well as the bahai faith it seems. They are not trinitarians they do not regaurd the manifestations on ontological par with God like Christians have regaurded Jesus to the father and the spirit. This view simply isn’t allowed in bahai. Did you not read the quote I gave which specifies that the manifestations are not the sun itself (obviously in this context being god) but are like the rays of the sun being coming from it.

There is direct trinity here. Especially in the quran which declares that Christ is not Allah. And yes I do believe you have been decieved by Mirza Al hussains vague words on the subject but he did not mean he was on ontological par with God. Go to the bahai forums and ask them and they will quote more references and sources than I would and realise your mistake.

Oh and forgive me forgive me for quoting Abbas Effendi instead of Mirza Al hussain, its not like he isn’t an authority in the bahai faith and the son of Mirza Al hussain. ANd yes his name was Mirza Al Hussain. I refuse to call him by the title he put on himself because he was no such thing that title describes. But read further.

The Christ reality was like unto a pure mirror and the Sun of Reality shone upon it from the Holy Horizon. Therefore, it became evident that the sun is one with regard to reality but manifesting itself in all mirrors.

This does not encourage direct ontological unity with the source of the sun’s rays and to read a Christian understanding into this in your desperate attempt to get the bahai faith and Christianity to not contradict shows something on your behalf.
 
Good luck to you Ignatian. Really, I will pray for you.

Let us compare. The Catechism says this:

"Everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born . . "

Then Baha’u’llah says this, on the other hand:

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto”

And here you are clinging on to your own idle fancies. I don’t care what Baha’is tell you, I read the words of the Heads of each Faith, which is what you should be doing, thats what God judges you by. It’s as clear as daylight.

You can disrespect Baha’u’llah as much as you like, that’s your journey in life, hope it makes you happy. I know I find your words rather funny to read, yet saddening at the same time

Good luck!! 👍
 
“Nay, I find myself to be altogether nothing when face to face with the manifold revelations of Thy names, how much less when confronted with the effulgent splendors of the light of Thine own Self.”

Mirza Al Hussain

Bahá’í Reference Library - Prayers and Meditations by Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 192-196

There is a clear distinction between God and himself. Not even he was foolish enough to suggest he was totally on equal to God. He may have thought of himself foolishly as a god among men but on equal to God.

And the quran certaintly didn’t either. It seems instead of actually listening you want to invent a doctrine.
 
Oh dear oh dear Ignatian 🤷

You know as well as myself and all the other “conveniently invisible” readers of this thread that the quote you provided is a reference to Baha’u’llah’s PHYSICAL aspect.

Don’t get me started on the numerous, uncounted references in the Bible relating to Jesus’ physical aspect. I can’t even be certain that it’s worthwhile reasoning with you.

I’ll leave it St. Basil to do my talking for me:

“When then He says, ‘I have not spoken of myself,’ and again, ‘As the Father said unto me, so I speak,’ and ‘The word which ye hear is not mine, but [the Father’s] which sent me,’ and in another place, ‘As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do,’ it is not because He lacks deliberate purpose or power of initiation, nor yet because He has to wait for the preconcerted key-note, that he employs language of this kind. His object is to make it plain that His own will is connected in indissoluble union with the Father. Do not then let us understand by what is called a ‘commandment’ a peremptory mandate delivered by organs of speech, and giving orders to the Son, as to a subordinate, concerning what He ought to do. Let us rather, in a sense befitting the Godhead, perceive a transmission of will, like the When then He says, ‘I have not spoken of myself,’ and again, ‘As the Father said unto me, so I speak,’ and ‘The word which ye hear is not mine, but [the Father’s] which sent me,’ and in another place, ‘As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do,’ it is not because He lacks deliberate purpose or power of initiation, nor yet because He has to wait for the preconcerted key-note, that he employs language of this kind. His object is to make it plain that His own will is connected in indissoluble union with the Father. Do not then let us understand by what is called a ‘commandment’ a peremptory mandate delivered by organs of speech, and giving orders to the Son, as to a subordinate, concerning what He ought to do. Let us rather, in a sense befitting the Godhead, perceive a transmission of will, like the reflexion of an object in a mirror, passing without note of time from Father to Son…”

(highlights added by myself)

Again there is no contradiction…

The level of “silence” shown by other Catholics on this thread is worrying and saddening at the same time.
 
arabic99 said:
My father in law was a Zoroastrian… Beautiful man, speaks Zardushti too, beautiful language
Click to expand...
Do they still practice the ancient funeral rite of setting the body atop a tower and letting the vultures dispose of the body, or has that since then been abolished? Just curious:)
 
Arabic quoting one of the greatest Trinitarian defenders in an dishonest attempt to make it appear as if he believed in the bahai concept is not only immoral but as I said dishonest. Mirza Al hussain distinguishes himself from God, he is not equal to God. The fathers of the church, the Nicene church (which basil Accepted) know the faith.

Are you that arrogant to think you can rewrite the creed? Anachronise new meaning on to it?
 
Usually donm’t get involved in some of tehse discussions unless there is some point about Bhaa’i Faith that requires maybe some accuracy correction… but above and some days ago maybe five or six days ago Ignacianphilo… a name which also speaks to a perspective wrote:

Classical islamic commentators noted that the fulfillment of this verse, and no doubt it seemed obvious to the author of the quran at the time. It was of course the roman empire, the Byzantiums and the Western half of the Empire. They were the dominant empires at the time and they were by the time Muhammad came firmly Nicean in their theology. 200 years actually of firmly established Nicene-Constantinople theology. This destroys the quran and it destroys Bahai, as the the Nicene position is anti-thetical to the very being of the bahai.

…

I think arabic99 responded to this post also…

but I felt it would be important to comment…

It’s true in my opinion that we Baha’is have little to do with the Nicene creed as it’s literally understood… we don’t claim to be Catholics or Christians and so have little to do with Church credos that have been recited and already fought over centuries ago.

. But the prophecy in the Qur’an in my view also has little to do with the Nicene creed… It had to do with the triumph of Rum or the Byzantines over the Sassanid empire… and yes I think the early Muslims did feel a kinship with the people of the Book as evidenced by taking refuge with the Negus of Aethiopia from the Meccan pagans at the time who wanted to obliterate the new religion.

The Nicene creed or position hasn’t destroyed the Qur’an or the Baha’i Faith… It has to do with Christianity which has seen more divisions than any religion I know of including Islam.

Probably Christians should know however that we do have a belief in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ and accept it as miraculous… We also accept the Holy Spiirt but not necessarily as a “Person” of the Trinity in the sense that most Christians do. Also the resurrection of Christ in our view was spiritual rather than physical. Now from a Christian doctrinal standpoint say what you will it probably herectical in that context… But we’re not in my view going to argue with Christians who are set in their dogmas anyway…

Yes we believe Christ promised to return and so we would say Baha’u’llah is that return so from that standpoint it would definitely challenge the standard Christian view…

but relighion also has common spiritual and moral roots…all the major religions share.

The references to Buddha and Krishna were somewhat incidental by Albul-Baha are not mentioned specifically by Baha’u’llah but Baha’is do accept Them as Manifestations although we feel Their original teachings have been lost for the most part over time. We don’t say there are just nine Manifestations … there could be some that have been lost in time and forgotten… We only know of Those named or mentioned in our Writings among Whom would be Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah… Baha’u’llah being the current Manifestation and not the “last” either.

Central to thei discussion though is Zoroastrianism… and Baha’u’llah did claim a relationship to the last Sassanid ruler Yazdigird III who also claimed descent from Zoroaster. A number of Iranian Zoroastrians became Baha’is as they accept that Baha’u’llah fulfilled prophecies about Shah Bahram and some aspects of our Faith such as recogniuzing Naw-Ruz as our New Year and a solar calendar have appealed to some Zoroastrians. Baha’u’llah’s descent was from the families of Mazandaran which was an old Zoroastrian strong hold.
 
Arabic99… Thanks for sharing the quote from St. Basil:

Let us rather, in a sense befitting the Godhead, perceive a transmission of will, like the reflexion of an object in a mirror, passing without note of time from Father to Son

elpenor.org/basil/holy-spirit.asp?pg=23

I hadn’t seen that one before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top