Our Mission Team in Panama – Witnessing to the Baha’i
Tuesday, July 14th, 2009 : By Dan Miller
The following is an except from an update by Kris King (Coordinator for Missions) and Kevin Maner (Director of Missions) regarding our team in Panama.
This morning we headed to the Baha’i Temple in Panama City. There are only 7 Baha’i Temples in the world! The Baha’i believe that the world’s major religions are part of a single process for God to reveal His will to humanity. That we are all equal and will one day be a unified single race. The Baha’i’ community runs 10 schools in the region where they otherwise would not exist. These schools are only accessible by horseback or on foot. Our team went to the temple today to pray for the people of Panama. The temple has a view of Panama City and it gave us a way to physically see the urban area that we are ministering to.
Our experience ended up being similar to Paul’s experience at Mars Hill (Acts 17:16-34). As we arrived, we were met by an American couple that was intent on describing to us the Baha’i faith. It gave our leaders and our students a great opportunity to share our beliefs in our one God and our one Savior, Jesus Christ. Our beliefs in this one God and Savior are quite different from the Baha’i beliefs where supposedly all religions point to one God.
We had a quite a spirited exchange with the gentleman and his wife and it gave us a great topic of conversation this evening as we debriefed with students. The students had a great opportunity to put into practice the apologetics skills that they have trained for such an opportunity as this!
What an incredible site to see teen students debate with a public defender from the state of Florida! We pray that our conversation with them would sow a seed for them to once again contemplate the truths of Christianity – that Jesus was the truth and the life and that no man comes to the Father but through Him – which they stated was their original faith! We also had a great time of ministering to the children at the public school.
Please continue to be in prayer for our team as they continue to share the message of Jesus in Panama!
About The Author
I have been married to Vicki since 1992 and together we enjoy pouring into our seven kids the greatness and goodness of our God. My favorite food is Italian. I enjoy playing 80’s metal riffs on my guitar. I love to camp, fish, and play all types of sports from football to basketball to softball, etc.
More entries by Dan Miller
54 Comments
-
We have not left Jesus behind. We found Him again.
And I hope you prayed well in the Temple. That’s why it’s there.
-
BTW the analogy is off – it isn’t a matter of preaching the presence of the Savior among us – Baha’is beleive that God is closer than our life’s vein, and in this particular case, it is we who are the new kids on the block.
-
Stevenq, thanks for reading our blog. I am assuming you believe the Baha’i faith is the correct way a person can know God?
-
It appears you are unaware that we Baha’is already believe Jesus Christ to be our personal Savior. You may not know that the couple at the temple were witnessing to you. Jews of Jesus’ time believed Jesus could not be the Messiah because Elijah would precede Him by coming down from heaven bodily as he had ascended. They asked John the Baptist if he was Elijah. He said that he was not. The apostles asked Jesus about Elijah and He told them that Elijah had already come, as John the Baptist. Jews could not accept this. Christians of this time reject Baha’u'llah because they await a literal bodily return from heaven for an event that is spiritual in nature. Baha’u'llah is the return of the reality of the Christ. His proof is His life and teachings. See http://bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/
-
Found Christ, earlhy on Left a “Forwwrding Message” for us.
As it is in the begining world without end..Imagine.
Anna
-
that’s a great story! one day i hope to visit the Baha’i Temple in Panama myself. it’s the closest one next to the one in Wilmette, IL. if you ever get a chance to go there, i highly recommend it. & yes, “try Baha’i.” i did, over 40 years ago, and it’s the best thing i ever did. God bless.
-
Bill, Anna and Julie, thanks for the clarification. Could I ask some questions in order to better understand your system of beliefs? One, do you believe Jesus is divine or a deity? In other words, what would you reply to person stating that “Jesus is God?” Two, what do you believe is necessary for a person to have a relationship or confidence that they have gained favor with God in this life for the life to come?
-
I’m interested in understanding how one is counted “righteous” in Baha’i faith? What must one do/believe to be considered a “good” person?
-
I think Jesus has already answered that!! Jesus was a manifestation of God. Jesus is Jesus and God is God!!
You gain the favor of God by how you treat his creations.
-
By “manifestation” do you mean Jesus the creator and sustainer of the universe or as your text state, “No one else besides Thee hath, at any time, been able to fathom Thy mystery, or befittingly to extol Thy greatness. Unsearchable and high above the praise of men wilt Thou remain for ever. There is none other God but Thee, the Inaccessible, the Omnipotent, the Omniscient, the Holy of Holies.” Or was he a manifestation of God in the same way as any one else?
-
Jay said,
“You gain the favor of God by how you treat his creations.”
Jay, how do you arrive at that conclusion?
-
I’m praying for you all…that God will continue to work through you in Panama. May HE give you strength, discernment , direction and safety. May His message be breathed through the entire group while you are there and that the lost will find Jesus through your example and message.
In HIM
Marianthe Snyder
(Evangelos…aunt) -
We Baha’is teach that all the major religions of the world are divine in origin, sent by God as stages in a single divine plan. (There is only one Faith, the Faith of God.)
A Divine Messenger has a dual station; He is both a man (who was born, died, etc.) and also a Manifestation of the eternal spirit of God. He may be likened to a mirror reflecting the sun. It is correct to point to the mirror and say, “That is the sun.” It is also correct to say “That’s not the sun, only a mirror.” Thus Jesus said, “Why callest thou Me good? There is none good but the Father in Heaven” (Jesus the man speaking), but also said “Before Abraham was, I am” and “No one comes to the Father but by Me” (the eternal spirit speaking, here called “Christ”). This latter “but by Me” quote refers to the fact that only through these Messengers can humankind know God.
In the Baha’i scriptures, it’s expressed like this:
[quote]
{161}[I]t is evident …that the Bearers of the trust of God are made manifest unto the peoples of the earth as the Exponents of a new Cause and the Bearers of a new Message. Inasmuch as these Birds of the Celestial Throne are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God, and as they all arise to proclaim His irresistible Faith, they therefore are regarded as one soul and the same person. For they all drink from the one Cup of the love of God, and all partake of the fruit of the same Tree of Oneness. These Manifestations of God have each a twofold station. One is the station of pure abstraction and essential unity. In this respect, if thou callest them all by one name, and dost ascribe to them the same attribute, thou hast not erred from the truth. Even as He hath revealed: “No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers!” For they one and all summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the Unity of God, and herald unto them the [river] of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of Prophethood, and honoured with the mantle of glory. Thus hath Muhammad, the Point of the Qur’an, revealed: “I am all the Prophets.” Likewise, He saith: “I am the first Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus.”… Sayings such as this, which indicate the essential unity of those Exponents of Oneness, have also emanated from the Channels of God’s immortal utterance, and the Treasuries of the gems of divine knowledge, and have been recorded in the scriptures. These Countenances are the recipients of the Divine Command, and the day-springs of His Revelation. This Revelation is exalted above the veils of plurality and the exigencies of number. Thus He saith: “Our Cause is but one.” Inasmuch as the Cause is one and the same, the Exponents thereof also must needs be one and the same…{162}It is clear and evident … that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God, Who have appeared clothed in divers attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendour. Wherefore, should one of these Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying: “I am the return of all the Prophets,” He verily speaketh the truth. In like manner, in every subsequent Revelation, the return of the former Revelation is a fact…
{191}We have already in the foregoing pages assigned two stations unto each of the Luminaries arising from the Daysprings of eternal holiness. One of these stations, the station of essential unity, We have already explained. “No distinction do We make between any of them.” The other is the station of distinction, and pertaineth to the world of creation and to the limitations thereof. In this respect, each Manifestation of God hath a distinct individuality, a definitely prescribed mission, a predestined Revelation, and specially designated limitations. Each one of them is known by a different name, is characterized by a special attribute, fulfils a definite Mission, and is entrusted with a particular Revelation. Even as He saith: “Some of the Apostles We have caused to excel the others. To some God hath spoken, some He hath raised and exalted. And to Jesus, Son of Mary, We gave manifest signs, and We strengthened Him with the Holy Spirit.”
{192}It is because of this difference in their station and mission that the words and utterances flowing from these Well-springs of divine knowledge appear to diverge and differ. Otherwise, in the eyes of them that are initiated into the mysteries of divine wisdom, all their utterances are in reality but the expressions of one Truth. As most of the people have failed to appreciate those stations to which We have referred, they therefore feel perplexed and dismayed at the varying utterances pronounced by Manifestations that are essentially one and the same.
{193}It hath ever been evident that all these divergences of utterance are attributable to differences of station. Thus, viewed from the standpoint of their oneness and sublime detachment, the attributes of Godhead, Divinity, Supreme Singleness, and Inmost Essence, have been and are applicable to those Essences of being, inasmuch as they all abide on the throne of divine Revelation, and are established upon the seat of divine Concealment. Through their appearance the Revelation of God is made manifest, and by their countenance the Beauty of God is revealed. Thus it is that the accents of God Himself have been heard uttered by these Manifestations of the divine Being.
{194}Viewed in the light of their second station – the station of distinction, differentiation, temporal limitations, characteristics and standards, – they manifest absolute servitude, utter destitution and complete self-effacement. Even as He saith: “I am the servant of God. I am but a man like you.”
{195}From these incontrovertible and fully demonstrated statements strive thou to apprehend the meaning of the questions thou hast asked, that thou mayest become steadfast in the Faith of God, and not be dismayed by the divergences in the utterances of His Prophets and Chosen Ones.
{196}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 it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His name and His attributes, are made manifest in the world. Thus, He hath revealed: “Those shafts were God’s, not Thine!” And also He saith: “In truth, they who plighted fealty unto thee, really plighted that fealty unto God.” And were any of them to voice the utterance: “I am the Messenger of God,” He also speaketh the truth, the indubitable truth… For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation. They are all the manifestation of the “Beginning” and the “End,” the “First” and the “Last,” the “Seen” and “Hidden” – all of which pertain to Him Who is the innermost Spirit of Spirits and eternal Essence of Essences. 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 in moments in which these Essences of being were deeply immersed beneath the oceans of ancient and everlasting holiness, or when they soared to the loftiest summits of divine mysteries, they claimed their utterance to be the Voice of divinity, the Call of God Himself. Were the eye of discernment to be opened, it would recognize that in this very state, they have considered themselves utterly effaced and non-existent in the face of Him Who is the All-Pervading, the Incorruptible. Methinks, they have regarded themselves as utter nothingness, and deemed their mention in that Court an act of blasphemy. For the slightest whispering of self, within such a Court, is an evidence of self-assertion and independent existence. In the eyes of them that have attained unto that Court, such a suggestion is itself a grievous transgression. How much more grievous would it be, were aught else to be mentioned in that Presence, were man’s heart, his tongue, his mind, or his soul, to be busied with anyone but the Well-Beloved, were his eyes to behold any countenance other than His beauty, were his ear to be inclined to any melody but His voice, and were his feet to tread any way but His way.
—(The Book of Certitude, pages 152-154, 176-180)
[end quote]Best regards!
Bruce
-
Hi, Dan; thanks for your reply!
Below, a few answers to your questions; I’ll try not to run on overly long!
D>What if the teaching of Baha’i is wrong? What is your fate?
Given that my decision is the result of my own investigation, prayer, reading, research, and observation (since reinforced by almost 38 years as a Baha’i), I am utterly convinced beyond doubt that my path is correct and that the Baha’i Faith is of God! This is the more so given that the Bible both commands “Test the spirits!” AND assures us both “Seek and ye shall find!” and “God is not a god of confusion!” AND lists the fruits of the Spirit (in Galatians), fruits which the Baha’i Faith clearly exhibits! (Please recall it also states that a good tree cannot bear evil fruit and vice versa.)
So while I gladly review my decision every day–if not, indeed, every moment!–, I have full certitude that I have performed my task properly and as well as I’ve been able, and that God in His Mercy will accept this of me.
D>Do you find it troubling that all the other major religions of the world (that you propose have been “sent by God as stages in a single divine plan of God”) don’t believe that their religion is a “stage” but a closed system? If they were all sent by God wouldn’t [there] be some level of correspondence between them leading to the next stage? As a matter of fact, every major religion of the world actually contradict each other…. How do you explain this given the teaching of Baha’i?
Some religions (such as Judaism) do indeed prophesy more, but of course then state their prophecies aren’t yet fulfilled.
Many do recognize at least some older Faiths, but then claim they’re the “end of the line” and no more religious revelations will be possible (or that they themselves will simply undergo some future alteration).
We Baha’is do indeed see continual progress from one religion to the next! And our scriptures say this about the apparent “contradictions”:
[quote]
“There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you.”—(The Proclamation of Baha’u'llah, p. 114;
also Gleanings, CXI, pp. 217-8)
[end quote]D>(I do not mean to sound “short” or mean-spirited.)
Fear not: you don’t!
D>On what authority or basis should I believe what you say or the material you have cited?
You definitely shouldn’t!
In the Baha’i view, it is the responsibility of EVERY individual to investigate the various religions for him- or herself, decide where the truth lies, and follow that! In undergoing this process, while one may of course listen to others also, one must take care not to be overly influenced by others, be then family, friends, or clergy!
So this applies to the two of us, also! While I’m more than happy to answer any questions you may have and provide you with materials for your search, making a decision is totally up to YOU, as it should be! The key is sincere investigation without prejudice (“pre-judging”).
And I–of course–wish you all the best in your search!
Peace,
Bruce
-
Bruce – Dan’s final question (“On what authority or basis should I believe what you say or the material you have cited?”) is an important one to me and your answer doesn’t quite address my curiosity.
I appreciate that you are not simply offering your opinion and acting like your endorsement commands agreement. Your humility on that point is refreshing. But this is not the crucial issue.
Rather, I am interested in the tests one ought to use in determining whether the Baha’i view corresponds with the way the world really is.
As you say, one should investigate these matters for oneself. But what should one be looking for? If, as Christians contend, Heaven and Hell are on the line, then something as serious as this should not be undertaken flippantly. To do so is akin to handing a child a hand grenade and saying, “here, now go and figure it out.” People get hurt doing that sort of thing.
On a related note, when you say you “have full certitude” regarding these things, to what factors do you attribute your confidence? Is it a subjective confidence, or is it objective?
Thanks for your thoughtful participation.
-
let me first state that grace fellowships dedication to witness with clear apologetics is well known and respected.
i was glad to hear about the fellowship you found with members of the Faith in panama.
the central question in any matter of faith is indeed Authority. i offer that when a Christian reads the New Testament, they hear the Authority of the Divine Voice, and from recognising It can know the Old Testament is Divine Text as well. when mmbers of the Baha’i Faith read the Bible they hear the same Voice (i personally think of Mat 3:16), and also hear It in the Baha’i Writings.
i note that no one can command another to hear the Voice, but all can have fellowship in sharing what they ear, and inviting one another to listen for It themselves. to me, this is the meaning of witness.
i offer to ken, how can anyone be “righteous”?? did not Jesus say no one is good except the Father? does not Isaiah (64:6-onward) state that all man’s righteoness are filthy rags? the Verses go one to ask te Father to forget. my understading of Christian theology is that Jesus’ sacrifice atones for man’s sins, to restore a state of righeousness lost in the fall.
thus, righteousness is nevver acheived, it is granted by surrendering to Christ.
no one can be a member of the Baha’i Faith without that surrender.
each of the Messengers Teaches that it is only this act of surrender to the Message is acceptible; and then each religion that derives from the Teachings sees itself as a closed system.
thank you for the opportunity to share fellowship in the Lord. -
Hugh, hi!
HW>I am interested in the tests one ought to use in determining whether the Baha’i view corresponds with the way the world really is…. [W]hat should one be looking for?
Well, for starters I trust we both stipulate that the list of “fruits” in Galatians is valid; so then coupled with the Biblical statement that a good tree can’t bear bad fruit and vice versa, a religion exhibiting love, peace, gentleness, etc. already stands in good shape!
(We state, as you may know, that the world in general clearly has many problems and itself frequently does not so stand–indeed, quite the opposite!)
I suggest that scripture, properly understood, can give a good picture of the sorts of criteria that will prove valuable to one’s search.
If you’d like my own personal list of criteria in addition to all this, I would say they’d include items such as these (not all items can apply to every religion):
• the life of its founder
• the writings of its founder
• its teachings (of its founder, and as reflected in its scriptures)
• its ability to expand and endure (false religions often fail and disappear in only a few years)
• its attitude toward other religions
• the prophecies of earlier religions that it fulfills
• prophecies made in this religion (say, by its Founder) that have already come true
• its set of values, such as:
o how it handles money; and whether & how it asks for it, both from its members and from others
o its ethical and moral standards
• the extent to which it engenders and encourages joy, love, peace, harmony, and concord both in its members and in others
• its involvement (or not) in partisan politics
• the extent to which it rejects waging war, hatred, and racismHW>If, as Christians contend, Heaven and Hell are on the line, then something as serious as this should not be undertaken flippantly.
Glad we agree!
Fortunately, Christians aren’t the only ones who view things very much this way and therefore share this concern!
HW>On a related note, when you say you “have full certitude” regarding these things, to what factors do you attribute your confidence? Is it a subjective confidence, or is it objective?
I would have to say that it’s ultimately subjective given that most aspects of religious belief can’t be objectively proven.
But moving beyond this point, each of us can still come to a conclusion (hopefully informed and duly considered) about which path is best and what religion to follow. And once we’ve decided this, each of us tends to treat this decision as reflecting objective fact and acting accordingly. (Of course, we should all remain open to new information and any changes to our viewpoint that it may cause. Still, once we’ve already made an informed conclusion, this can provide a relatively stable platform from which we can continue to consider new thoughts and weigh them for possible beneficial effect. So clearly there’s a balance to be attained here.)
In day-to-day life I treat my decision and my faith as objective even though they are of course always subject to alteration. But personally, they’ve needed very little of that over these 38 years that I’ve been Baha’i! (None of which, please note, is to imply that I’m anywhere near perfect or can’t be much better than I’ve been so far! We all have our failings and our challenges.)
Finally, as to literally “what factors” I attribute this certitude, my answer is: having been tremendously blessed by God with discovering the Faith and seeing its exquisite goodness and beauty, and with having been very, very lucky in my life and its outcomes!
I just hope you’re as blessed and lucky as I’ve been.
HW>Thanks for your thoughtful participation.
And thank YOU for your thoughtful questions!
Many regards,
Bruce
-
I think Baha’i has a huge problem. If the bible says what it says, that Jesus is God, and the only way to know God. Baha’i is false because it says there are other ways and Jesus was simply a prophet. If the bible is wrong, Baha’i is false because it teaches the bible was true.
I believe the bible is true. That God, Jesus, created everything, and is sustaining everything by his power. We have all rebelled against him and gone our own way. This rebellion is not only exemplified by immoral living but also by pious living without the Lordship of Jesus. Either way you are saying to God you don’t want him, you don’t need him, and that he is not really good.
The only way to know God, is to repent of your rebellion, accept Jesus as he is, and who he will be. He is not just a marginalized prophet who serves as an example, but God who will judge you for your rebellion based on your righteousness or based on Christ’s righteousness. What you get is God, and that is, and will be, better than anything you can imagine.
-
Greetings!
O>I think Baha’i has a huge problem.
And you are most welcome to your opinion!
Ours differs.
O>If the bible says what it says, that Jesus is God, and the only way to know God. Baha’i is false because it says there are other ways and Jesus was simply a prophet.
Except, of course, that:
1) Baha’is say no such thing!
2) Jesus Himself said “In my Father’s house are MANY mansions!”
O>I believe the bible is true.
So glad we agree!
O>Either way you are saying to God you don’t want him, you don’t need him, and that he is not really good.
Simply wrong. We believe (and say) no such thing, as you’d know if you read any of our scriptures at all!
O>The only way to know God, is to repent of your rebellion, accept Jesus as he is, and who he will be.
Which we very much do!
With the proviso that “Who He will be” has already happened such that we are following the Christ Spirit after His Return!
He is indeed fully as promised!
Best,
Bruce
-
Bruce: I don’t think you will find common ground between Christianity’s view that Jesus was the sinless incarnation of God and the Baha’i view that Jesus was one of many reflections of God. Subtle but BIG difference.
But help me out here. I’m not following the line of thought that gets you from:
“…tremendously blessed by God with discovering the Faith and seeing its exquisite goodness and beauty, and with having been very, very lucky in my life and its outcomes!”
…to the conclusion of:
“…I have full certitude that I have performed my task properly and as well as I’ve been able, and that God in His Mercy will accept this of me.”
While anyone can hypothesize about eternity and claim to be a messenger of God, I’m curious as to what logical and reasonable evidence there is that Baha’u'llah’s message was not only true but divine?
-
Thank you for allowing me my opinions, but we are dealing with facts and the way the world is. If the bible is true, then Baha’i is false; if the bible is false then Baha’i is false. This is not an opinion, it’s the law of non-contradiction. Help me out with this, if the Baha’i scriptures teach Jesus was a reflection of God, like other prophets (above 162), and the bible teaches he is God himself unlike anyone before or since; one of those claims must be false.
<>
O>Either way you are saying to God you don’t want him, you don’t need him, and that he is not really good.Simply wrong. We believe (and say) no such thing, as you’d know if you read any of our scriptures at all!
<>Two points here, first not only does Baha’i differ on the who Jesus is but you illustrate the fact that both sets of truth claims cannot be true as well. I think you know more about the Baha’i scriptures than I ever will, and I accept your authority; I grant the Baha’i scriptures teach what you say they teach however, since you reject Christ as being who is is the bible teaches you are not prusueing God.
Second I did not say you believe (or say) that. That is what the bible says about you. You are continuing in your rebellion by trying to be moral without knowing God.
Speaking of the bible, you handle it like a magic book. You pick and choose verses, pulling them out of context and asserting it teaches what you think it does. The bible is a coherent, consistent story. The history God who created everything, man who rebelled and rejected God and because of this rebellion is unable to have relationship with God. Jesus who is God, came and died by our hand in order to restore that relationship. That is the only basis of our relationship with God.
-
Greetings!
I stipulate that we don’t share your narrow view of the Bible. Which in no way imples our interpretation of it is wrong (whether YOU like it or not), please note!
PLENTY of us understand the Bible differently from you, including plenty of other Christians!
As to where you can find reliable information on the Baha’i Faith, there are many such websites; but since this isn’t a Baha’i forum, I’ll simply mention two and let it at that:
- http://www.bahai.org
- http://www.bahai.usAgain, I neither ask nor expect you to agree with our understanding of the Bible, or what we teach. But we can politely respect each others’ views nonetheless.
Peace,
Bruce
-
Bruce, I think you should be more open minded. I thought we were engaging in a polite conversation seeking to find the truth. Perhaps I was passionate, but I’m sure we agree it is an important subject.
I don’t think you are being fair in saying my view of the bible is narrow, when yours is just as narrow; afterall you think I am wrong.
I conceede that I may be wrong, but to find out I only ask that you are consistent and fair in how you deal with all scriptures. For example, I could claim from 193 above “appearance the Revelation of God is made manifest” shows that Bahá’u'lláh taught us that all other previous religions are utterly false. Except that you and I both know he was not saying that given the historical and grammatical context. In the same way, the writers of the Bible were trying to communicate ideas about God. An open minded and honest reader would engage the those writers in what they were trying to say and not make up his own intrepretation.
In the same way I will honor Bahá’u'lláh and not do violence to what he said. I can not fathom how he could accurately represent God and reality given the contradictions in his grounding principals, but I want engage him in what he says.
If you decide to move on, I don’t have any hard feelings. I’ve enjoyed the conversation and thanks for it. I ask though in the future, you try to be more tolerant for what other scriptures are actually saying.
Thanks again.
-
Hi!
OK; I’ll stipulate that “narrow” was doubtless a regrettable choice of words. Certainly we can both continue to converse! My intent was simply to point out that we tend to interpret Bible rather more liberally (and probably less literally) than do you–which in no way means we ever reject or wish to belittle it, please note!
But we are blessed with fully 200 volumes of our own, Baha’i scriptures in addition to the Bible, and it is on these that we in fact base our beliefs and practices.
I understand that you don’t see Baha’u'llah’s viewpoint, but I can’t stipulate that there are “contradictions” (your term) in His grounding principles. We see them as both eminently consistent and extremely practical and beneficial.
(I will note, BTW, that while I’ll be around for about another week, during the following week we’ll be on vacation, and I may or may not be able to get online then; so you might see a hiatus then.)
Best regards, and I look forward to hearing from you again!
Bruce
-
Bruce: While, I’m still waiting on “what logical and reasonable evidence there is that Baha’u’llah’s message was not only true but divine” … I’ll throw this out for you to think about.
Why do you interpret the Bible and every other world religion’s documents so liberally — not to the degree of a denominational difference but to the point that it would be considered historical and literary abuse — and yet interpret the Baha’i scriptures so literally?
I think this is getting to one of the contradictions, the “oneness of religion”.
The only thing all world religions share in common are a few moral laws. This leaves out laws they don’t share in common, the nature of God, the nature of man, if man is accountable to God and what man’s state is, how man is reconciled to God, and the eternal destiny of man.
That’s quite a bit of doctrine from EVERY world religion that has to be “liberally” re-interpreted at the expense of literary and historical ethics. The Bahai.org site doesn’t just reinterpret doctrines, but goes so far as to say the Founders are fallible (wrong) regarding these issues.
“In this conception, the Founders of the great religions do not reveal God to us, but are rather philosophers or thinkers, human beings who may have progressed farther than others in the discovery of truth. This notion excludes the idea of a basic unity of religion since the various religious systems are seen as representing different opinions and beliefs arrived at by fallible human beings rather than infallible revelations of truth from a single source.”
So while “the oneness of religion” sounds nice, it is in essence saying the vast majority of the content of every world religion is corrupt and only Baha’i teaches the true law of God, the true nature of God, the true nature of man, if man is truly accountable to God and what man’s true state is, how man is truly reconciled to God, and the true eternal destiny of man.
Hardly “oneness” but effectively Baha’i exclusivity.
-
Sorry to appear as if I’m steamrolling but that quote from Bahai.org made me think of another question.
If Baha’u’llah was a man like the Founders, why is his latest claim to be the last installment of revelation any different? Wouldn’t he just be offering up his mere philosophies, thoughts, opinions, and beliefs about God just like them? In light of his own teaching, what makes him the authority?
-
Greetings!
I don’t recognize the quote you posted: please give its exact location (and if possible, how you got to that point) so I can check it. Also, the “in this conception” phrase makes it sound like it’s already been qualified somehow so that it’s not intended as a general statement. It doesn’t sound like an overall truth to me, but I’ll be happy to check into it. (My thanks in advance for the assist!)
Baha’is definitely believe Divine Messengers (Who are the Founders of all the great religions) are _all_ infallible, so you’re quite mistaken in implying we believe otherwise.
As to criteria for proving the legitimacy of Baha’u'llah, Jesus, or any other Messenger, I already posted my list of criteria above.
And we do indeed see all the major religions AS REVEALED forming a single cohesive whole (each building on the earlier ones)! It’s human changes and alterations later that make them eventually appear so different. I also already posted the passage from the Baha’i scriptures that asserts the religions’ oneness and explains the reasons for apparent differences.
Also, NONE of the Divine Messengers is merely “a man!” They all share a special investment of the Holy Spirit that makes them more than ordinary humans.
Nor do we say truth is limited only to the Baha’i Faith: we have never claimed such a monopoly, and never will.
As to why there’s any seeming difference in how we interpret the various scriptures, all I can say is that the Baha’i scriptures were written for THIS Age–not some other millenia ago! They are therefore very clear and tend not to need further interpretation to be understood. Older scriptures unfortunately aren’t always like this, and like it or not, some portions require considerable interpretation in order to be comprehensible.
And one last correction for you: Baha’u'llah is not–and never claimed to be–the “last” such Messenger. (If you’re hearing otherwise, then you’re using some non-Baha’i source that isn’t properly informed about us.) There will always be more of these, in a never-ending succession!
Peace,
Bruce
-
(Your criteria above for proving the legitimacy of Baha’u’llah is a list of things you prefer in a religion, not logical or reasonable evidence that Baha’u’llah’s teachings are true.)
The quote can be found here.
I find it interesting that you would be so concerned about context (a good thing), but then look at only the first sentence of John 14:2 and suggest Jesus was teaching pluralism.
“And we do indeed see all the major religions AS REVEALED forming a single cohesive whole (each building on the earlier ones)! It’s human changes and alterations later that make them eventually appear so different.”
This is quite a claim for EVERY world religion, do you have any way to back up that claim?
Please understand, it’s just really frustrating as you use religious texts to back up your views of “oneness of religion” (and even agreeing you believe the Bible to be true), only to turn around and claim that the texts have been altered from what was originally communicated and you somehow know what the original message was.
While Baha’u’llah’s writing may be “authentic”, that doesn’t say anything regarding their validity as Divine revelation.
Thank you for clarifying the “mere man” thing, I intended to communicate, “a Messenger”. And thank you for clarifying that Baha’u’llah is the next Messenger in a never ending succession – so there are more to come.
So let’s hold Baha’u’llah to the same standard as the other Founders:
“To put the Bahá’í concept of religion more clearly in focus, let us compare it with some other ways in which religion has been regarded. On one hand is the view that the various religious systems result from human striving after truth. In this conception, the Founders of the great religions do not reveal God to us, but are rather philosophers or thinkers, human beings who may have progressed farther than others in the discovery of truth.”
In Gleanings (pg5), Baha’u’llah wrote:
“There is none other God but Thee, the Inaccessible, the Omnipotent, the Omniscient, the Holy of Holies.”
So would you say that Baha’u’llah, as a founder, has stated revelation about the eternal nature of God or just “human thought and philosophy”? Is it possible that the next Founder could claim/teach that God is NOT omniscient? Yes or no, why or why not?
-
Hi again!
As I stated, the list of criteria I posted I find useful as a series of touchstones that can be applied to a given religion when evaluating it. As always I have arrived thereby atmy evaluations and conclusions; YMMV.
Thanks for the citation of the quote!
But you appear to be grossly missing its point given that you appeared to quote it as Baha’i belief. Please note especially what immediately precedes it, where it’s stressed that it’s stating an ALTERNATIVE way of looking at the situation, not the Baha’i way! This is all the more strongly enforced by this, in the second paragraph following the (two) alternative viewpoints:
“The Bahá’í principle of the oneness of religion differs fundamentally from both of these traditional concepts. ”
So please don’t make the msitake of thinking that what you read (and quoted) has anything whatever to do with the Baha’i viewpoint: as the surrounding material makes clear, it doesn’t!
I never said the Bible had been grossly altered or rewritten: it hasn’t been, and the Baha’i scriptures affirm this. Nonetheless, it has indeed been altered somewhat, at least in certain places. A good example is the end of Mark, which even most Christian denominations now reject as spurious, either relegating those verses to a footnote or omitting them entirely!
And as to the differences between the various religions, as everything I’ve posted has said, some of these are due to human tampering and man-made added doctrines (a good example being inheritance of sin, which the Jewish scriptures explicitly reject but many Christian groups believe); and other differences are simply due to the changing needs of humanity over the Ages, which successive religious Revelations have endeavored to meet.
Your final question returns to the misconception that cited the “human thought and philosophy” has to do with Baha’i teachings. No, we don’t expect future Messengers to teach anything fundamentally different about God (such as that He could be fallible)!
Unlike social teachings, which are intentionally temporary and may be changed by a later Messenger, spiritual teachings are eternal and don’t change.
Best regards!
Bruce
-
Thank you for clearing up my misunderstanding and use of that quote. Sorry about that.
Will have to pick up tomorrow.
-
Hi, David!
I look forward to continuing our conversation, but (as I’d mentioned earlier), please be warned that I’m away on vacation as of Friday and may not be online for the duration. . . .
Best regards,
Bruce
-
Right, enjoy your vacation. Just in case you are wondering, I was logged in correcting some typos on a post I later deleted altogether. I then posted 32 still being logged in so David and guiroo are the same person.
While various sections of the manuscripts that are used to arrive at the different books of the Bible have been altered (Mark 16 is not found in the earliest manuscripts), none of those differences affect the distinct/exclusive claims of Christian doctrine. Given the amount of study and scrutiny the manuscripts have been subjected to, the differences between them speak more to their authenticity than they speak against it.
Unlike social teachings, which are intentionally temporary and may be changed by a later Messenger, spiritual teachings are eternal and don’t change.
I’m curious about how you differentiate between eternal spiritual teachings (specifically about God) and teachings about God’s essence? Doesn’t Baha’i teach that the essence of God (a permanent quality of His being) can never be known by man, but man can only know of God by his attributes (an accidental quality of His being)? Isn’t omniscience part of His essence?
How is it that we can know this, if we can’t know of his essence?
-
One other point I don’t want to let go … previously you said,
“Nor do we say truth is limited only to the Baha’i Faith: we have never claimed such a monopoly, and never will.”
While it’s true any religion can teach some amount of truth, wouldn’t you agree with the statement that it is your understanding that Baha’i is the only religion currently teaching 100% truth (both spiritual and “social”)?
-
Hi again, David!
B>Unlike social teachings, which are intentionally temporary and may be changed by a later Messenger, spiritual teachings are eternal and don’t change.
D>I’m curious about how you differentiate between eternal spiritual teachings (specifically about God) and teachings about God’s essence?
Spiritual teachings are what we might call the “eternal truths”–things like:
- There is a God.
- You are here for a purpose.
- Don’t murder.
etc.Social laws, in contrast, are often intended to be temporary and address such things as:
- laws of marriage and divorce,
- dietary laws,
- prayer and fasting,
- slavery,
- administration
etc.It’s worth noting, BTW, that the Baha’i scriptures teach that truth is relative (or at least, what truth we humans can access) and that the only absolute is God Himself!
D>Doesn’t Baha’i teach that the essence of God (a permanent quality of His being) can never be known by man, but man can only know of God by his attributes (an accidental quality of His being)? Isn’t omniscience part of His essence?
Completely correct except that I wouldn’t attach the term “accidental” to anything having to do with God!
C>How is it that we can know this, if we can’t know of his essence?
No one can learn about God through his or her own initiative.
The only way we have to know anything whatever of Him is through what the Divine Messengers that He sends to humanity teach us about Him! It is from them that we understand that God is (among other things) All-loving, All-bountiful, All-merciful, etc., and that He created us out of His love for us and wants each of us both to: 1) develop the spiritual qualities we’ll need both here and in the Next Life and 2) carry forward an ever-advancing civilization. (Further, the purpose of religion is to show us HOW to accomplish these!)
D>One other point I don’t want to let go …
Only one?!
D>previously you said,
“Nor do we say truth is limited only to the Baha’i Faith: we have never claimed such a monopoly, and never will.”
While it’s true any religion can teach some amount of truth, wouldn’t you agree with the statement that it is your understanding that Baha’i is the only religion currently teaching 100% truth (both spiritual and “social”)?
I’m not in any position to say no other religion teaches truth, the more so given that IOV ALL the great religions are legitimate and of God!
What I will say is that while the same spiritual truths can be found in all these, it’s only the Baha’i Faith that has the specific social teachings and laws for this Age–not for some other millenia ago! And that in time, it, too, will be superceded by a yet newer Divine Messenger and the Revelation He brings humanity. (Religions typically tend to come 500-1,000 years apart, and our scriptures state the next one won’t be for at least a thousand years and perhaps longer (now down to a minimum of about 850 years).
I’m on vacation as of tomorrow, so I wish you all the best!
Bruce
-
(I know you’re on vacation.)
“Accidental” in a philosophical sense, meaning He ceases to be God if that quality is not present. If God stopped being merciful He would still be God. Seeing that infallibility is God’s essence (He would no longer be God if He wasn’t infallible) and Baha’i teaches we can only know about the “accidental” attributes of God, how do you claim to know about the essence of God?
D: “While it’s true any religion can teach some amount of truth, wouldn’t you agree with the statement that it is your understanding that Baha’i is the only religion currently teaching 100% truth?”
B:”I’m not in any position to say no other religion teaches truth, the more so given that IOV ALL the great religions are legitimate and of God!”
You still didn’t answer the question I asked. Here, let’s try it this way.
1. Jesus is God. A being of the triune God that came from heaven and was incarnated as 100% human and 100% God.
[ ] True [ ] False2. God currently considers the eating of pork an act of rebellion against Him and His Law requiring punishment.
[ ] True [ ] False3. Mohammad was the last in a series of prophets.
[ ] True [ ] False4. There is no ultimate God but there are many gods.
[ ] True [ ] False5. When a person dies, the soul reincarnates, evolving through many births until all karmas have been resolved.
[ ] True [ ] False -
Greetings, greetings!
To answer your questions:
1. Jesus is God. A being of the triune God that came from heaven and was incarnated as 100% human and 100% God.
[ ] True [X] FalseAlthough Jesus was a Divine Messenger and thus can be referred to as God, He was not God Himself–indeed, official Baha’i sources state that of God were to incarnate Himself, He would immediately cease being God! (Quote upon request.) The reason Messengers can be referred to as God (even though They’re not) is because They represent the Face of God on earth. (I’ve already posted this quote above, I believe; look for the passage beginning “It is evident … that the Bearers” to find it.)
And Divine Messengers, while invested with the Holy Spirit, are part of Creation (of a higher level than us humans) and in no way to be equated with God Himself.
2. God currently considers the eating of pork an act of rebellion against Him and His Law requiring punishment.
[ ] True [X] FalseSocial law changed by a later Messenger.
3. Mohammad was the last in a series of prophets.
[X] True [ ] FalseTrue, but He was NOT the final Divine Messenger! He was the last Messenger in the Age of Prophecy; we are now in the Age of Fulfillment.
4. There is no ultimate God, but there are many gods.
[ ] True [X] FalseMade abundantly clear in the Baha’i scriptures; indeed, this is one of our three most basic teachings!
5. When a person dies, the soul reincarnates, evolving through many births until all karmas have been resolved.
[ ] True [X] FalseOur scriptures explicitly reject reincarnation and explain why. (It’s in Some Answered Questiions; and I can post it here, or you can see it at: http://www.bahai-library.org under Writingss/’Abdu’l-Baha.
Best regards, and the vacation (a week singing at Louhelen Baha’i School in Michigan) was WONDERFUL!
Bruce
-
Thx for answering the quiz.
Except for 3 which now I need to learn the difference in the ages, you have shown that key doctrines taught in the other world religions are untrue and Baha’i exclusively holds all the true answers to the way God is and what He expects of us.In order for “Oneness of Religion” to be viable, Baha’i has to redefine each world religion. Saying “Jesus is God” is a good example, though the same words are used, the meanings are quite different.
Welcome to the world of exclusivity to the truth.
-
Hi again!
>[K]ey doctrines taught in the other world religions are untrue and Baha’i exclusively holds all the true answers….
I completely disagree: we teach (and believe) no such thing!
And as the Baha’i scriptures point out, truth is relative (as indeed is everything in creation)! I quote the Baha’i scriptures:
“Such an existence is a contingent and not an absolute existence, inasmuch as the former is preceded by a cause, whilst the latter is independent thereof.
“Absolute existence is strictly confined to God, exalted be His glory. Well is it with them that apprehend this truth.”
—(_Gleanings_, page 157)
Peace,
Bruce
-
“I completely disagree: we teach (and believe) no such thing!”
Don’t the answers to the quiz show differently?
“Our scriptures explicitly reject reincarnation and explain why.”
I’m not sure how the idea of the afterlife that you stated is “relative”. You have already said that it’s false that peoples’ souls are reincarnated.
Especially after reading Gleanings pages 155-158, either Baha’i is wrong or Hinduism is wrong regarding what happens to the soul upon physical death. In other words, either Baha’i holds the truth or Hinduism holds the truth.
-
Greetings!
>Especially after reading Gleanings pages 155-158, either Baha’i is wrong or Hinduism is wrong regarding what happens to the soul upon physical death. In other words, either Baha’i holds the truth or Hinduism holds the truth.
OR, they both speak truth but for different Ages with different levels of understanding.
As to reincarnation, I’ll let the Baha’i scriptures speak for themselves (below).
Peace,
Bruce
_ _ _ _ _“CHAPTER 81
“Question. – What is the truth of the question of reincarnation, which is believed by some people?
“Answer. – The object of what we are about to say is to explain the reality – not to deride the beliefs of other people; it is only to explain the facts; that is all. We do not oppose anyone’s ideas, nor do we approve of criticism.
“Know, then, that those who believe in reincarnation are of two classes: one class does not believe in the spiritual punishments and rewards of the other world, and they suppose that man by reincarnation and return to this world gains rewards and recompenses; they consider heaven and hell to be restricted to this world and do not speak of the existence of the other world. Among these there are two further divisions. One division thinks that man sometimes returns to this world in the form of an animal in order to undergo severe punishment and that, after enduring this painful torment, he will be released from the animal world and will come again into the human world; this is called transmigration. The other division thinks that from the human world one again returns to the human world, and that by this return rewards and punishments for a former life are obtained; this is called reincarnation. Neither of these classes speak of any other world besides this one.
“The second sort of believers in reincarnation affirm the existence of the other world, and they consider reincarnation the means of becoming perfect – that is, they think that man, by going from and coming again to this world, will gradually acquire perfections, until he reaches the inmost perfection. In other words, that men are composed of matter and force: matter in the beginning – that is to say, in the first cycle – is imperfect, but on coming repeatedly to this world it progresses and acquires refinement and delicacy, until it becomes like a polished mirror; and force, which is no other than spirit, is realized in it with all the perfections.
“This is the presentation of the subject by those who believe in reincarnation and transmigration. We have condensed it; if we entered into the details, it would take much time. This summary is sufficient. No logical arguments and proofs of this question are brought forward; they are only suppositions and inferences from conjectures, and not conclusive arguments. Proofs must be asked for from the believers in reincarnation, and not conjectures, suppositions and imaginations.
“But you have asked for arguments of the impossibility of reincarnation. This is what we must now explain. The first argument for its impossibility is that the outward is the expression of the inward; the earth is the mirror of the Kingdom; the material world corresponds to the spiritual world. Now observe that in the sensible world appearances are not repeated, for no being in any respect is identical with, nor the same as, another being. The sign of singleness is visible and apparent in all things. If all the granaries of the world were full of grain, you would not find two grains absolutely alike, the same and identical without any distinction. It is certain that there will be differences and distinctions between them. As the proof of uniqueness exists in all things, and the Oneness and Unity of God is apparent in the reality of all things, the repetition of the same appearance is absolutely impossible. Therefore, reincarnation, which is the repeated appearance of the same spirit with its former essence and condition in this same world of appearance, is impossible and unrealizable. As the repetition of the same appearance is impossible and interdicted for each of the material beings, so for spiritual beings also, a return to the same condition, whether in the arc of descent or in the arc of ascent, is interdicted and impossible, for the material corresponds to the spiritual.
“Nevertheless, the return of material beings with regard to species is evident; so the trees which during former years brought forth leaves, blossoms and fruits in the coming years will bring forth exactly the same leaves, blossoms and fruits. This is called the repetition of species. If anyone makes an objection saying that the leaf, the blossom and the fruit have been decomposed, and have descended from the vegetable world to the mineral world, and again have come back from the mineral world to the vegetable world, and, therefore, there has been a repetition – the answer is that the blossom, the leaf and the fruit of last year were decomposed, and these combined elements were disintegrated and were dispersed in space, and that the particles of the leaf and fruit of last year, after decomposition, have not again become combined, and have not returned. On the contrary, by the composition of new elements, the species has returned. It is the same with the human body, which after decomposition becomes disintegrated, and the elements which composed it are dispersed. If, in like manner, this body should again return from the mineral or vegetable world, it would not have exactly the same composition of elements as the former man. Those elements have been decomposed and dispersed; they are dissipated in this vast space. Afterward, other particles of elements have been combined, and a second body has been formed; it may be that one of the particles of the former individual has entered into the composition of the succeeding individual, but these particles have not been conserved and kept, exactly and completely, without addition or diminution, so that they may be combined again, and from that composition and mingling another individual may come into existence. So it cannot be proved that this body with all its particles has returned; that the former man has become the latter; and that, consequently, there has been repetition; that the spirit also, like the body, has returned; and that after death its essence has come back to this world.
“If we say that this reincarnation is for acquiring perfections so that matter may become refined and delicate, and that the light of the spirit may be manifest in it with the greatest perfection, this also is mere imagination. For, even supposing we believe in this argument, still change of nature is impossible through renewal and return. The essence of imperfection, by returning, does not become the reality of perfection; complete darkness, by returning, does not become the source of light; the essence of weakness is not transformed into power and might by returning, and an earthly nature does not become a heavenly reality. The tree of Zaqqum,(1) no matter how frequently it may come back, will not bring forth sweet fruit, and the good tree, no matter how often it may return, will not bear a bitter fruit. Therefore, it is evident that returning and coming back to the material world does not become the cause of perfection. This theory has no proofs nor evidences; it is simply an idea. No, in reality the cause of acquiring perfections is the bounty of God.
“The Theosophists believe that man on the arc of ascent(2) will return many times until he reaches the Supreme Center; in that condition matter becomes a clear mirror, the light of the spirit will shine upon it with its full power, and essential perfection will be acquired. Now, this is an established and deep theological proposition, that the material worlds are terminated at the end of the arc of descent, and that the condition of man is at the end of the arc of descent, and at the beginning of the arc of ascent, which is opposite to the Supreme Center. Also, from the beginning to the end of the arc of ascent, there are numerous spiritual degrees. The arc of descent is called beginning,(3) and that of ascent is called progress.(4) The arc of descent ends in materialities, and the arc of ascent ends in spiritualities. The point of the compass in describing a circle makes no retrograde motion, for this would be contrary to the natural movement and the divine order; otherwise, the symmetry of the circle would be spoiled.
“Moreover, this material world has not such value or such excellence that man, after having escaped from this cage, will desire a second time to fall into this snare. No, through the Eternal Bounty the worth and true ability of man becomes apparent and visible by traversing the degrees of existence, and not by returning. When the shell is once opened, it will be apparent and evident whether it contains a pearl or worthless matter. When once the plant has grown it will bring forth either thorns or flowers; there is no need for it to grow up again. Besides, advancing and moving in the worlds in a direct order according to the natural law is the cause of existence, and a movement contrary to the system and law of nature is the cause of nonexistence. The return of the soul after death is contrary to the natural movement, and opposed to the divine system.
“Therefore, by returning, it is absolutely impossible to obtain existence; it is as if man, after being freed from the womb, should return to it a second time. Consider what a puerile imagination this is which is implied by the belief in reincarnation and transmigration. Believers in it consider the body as a vessel in which the spirit is contained, as water is contained in a cup; this water has been taken from one cup and poured into another. This is child’s play. They do not realize that the spirit is an incorporeal being, and does not enter and come forth, but is only connected with the body as the sun is with the mirror. If it were thus, and the spirit by returning to this material world could pass through the degrees and attain to essential perfection, it would be better if God prolonged the life of the spirit in the material world until it had acquired perfections and graces; it then would not be necessary for it to taste of the cup of death, or to acquire a second life.
“The idea that existence is restricted to this perishable world, and the denial of the existence of divine worlds, originally proceeded from the imaginations of certain believers in reincarnation; but the divine worlds are infinite. If the divine worlds culminated in this material world, creation would be futile: nay, existence would be pure child’s play. The result of these endless beings, which is the noble existence of man, would come and go for a few days in this perishable dwelling, and after receiving punishments and rewards, at last all would become perfect. The divine creation and the infinite existing beings would be perfected and completed, and then the Divinity of the Lord, and the names and qualities of God, on behalf of these spiritual beings, would, as regards their effect, result in laziness and inaction! “Glory to thy Lord, the Lord Who is sanctified from all their descriptions.”(5)
“Such were the limited minds of the former philosophers, like Ptolemy and the others who believed and imagined that the world, life and existence were restricted to this terrestrial globe, and that this boundless space was confined within the nine spheres of heaven, and that all were empty and void. Consider how greatly their thoughts were limited and how weak their minds. Those who believe in reincarnation think that the spiritual worlds are restricted to the worlds of human imagination. Moreover, some of them, like the Druzes and the Nusayris, think that existence is restricted to this physical world. What an ignorant supposition! For in this universe of God, which appears in the most complete perfection, beauty and grandeur, the luminous stars of the material universe are innumerable! Then we must reflect how limitless and infinite are the spiritual worlds, which are the essential foundation. “Take heed ye who are endued with discernment.”(6)
“But let us return to our subject. In the Divine Scriptures and Holy Books “return” is spoken of, but the ignorant have not understood the meaning, and those who believed in reincarnation have made conjectures on the subject. For what the divine Prophets meant by “return” is not the return of the essence, but that of the qualities; it is not the return of the Manifestation, but that of the perfections. In the Gospel it says that John, the son of Zacharias, is Elias. These words do not mean the return of the rational soul and personality of Elias in the body of John, but rather that the perfections and qualities of Elias were manifested and appeared in John.
“A lamp shone in this room last night, and when tonight another lamp shines, we say the light of last night is again shining. Water flows from a fountain; then it ceases; and when it begins to flow a second time, we say this water is the same water flowing again; or we say this light is identical with the former light. It is the same with the spring of last year, when blossoms, flowers and sweet-scented herbs bloomed, and delicious fruits were brought forth; next year we say that those delicious fruits have come back, and those blossoms, flowers and blooms have returned and come again. This does not mean that exactly the same particles composing the flowers of last year have, after decomposition, been again combined and have then come back and returned. On the contrary, the meaning is that the delicacy, freshness, delicious perfume and wonderful color of the flowers of last year are visible and apparent in exactly the same manner in the flowers of this year. Briefly, this expression refers only to the resemblance and likeness which exist between the former and latter flowers. The “return” which is mentioned in the Divine Scriptures is this: it is fully explained by the Supreme Pen(7) in the Kitab-i-Iqan ["Book of Certitude"]. Refer to it, so that you may be informed of the truth of the divine mysteries.
“Upon you be greetings and praise.”
[Footnotes:]
1. The infernal tree mentioned in the Qur’án.
2. i.e., of the Circle of Existence.
3. Lit., bringing forth.
4. Lit., producing something new.
5. Cf. Qur’án 37:180.
6. Qur’án 59:2.
7. Bahá’u’lláh [Founder of the Baha’i Faith].—(Some Answered Questions, pp. 282-289)
-
“OR, they both speak truth but for different Ages with different levels of understanding.”
Are you suggesting that the reality of the afterlife is a social law that changes over time? It would seem like we are discussing eternal law. The writing above seems to be addressed as eternal law as well.
“The object of what we are about to say is to explain the reality – not to deride the beliefs of other people; it is only to explain the facts; that is all.”
That is by definition a truth claim — while avoiding the word “truth” and calling it a “fact” of “reality” instead.
In other words it’s saying, “We are not criticizing anyone, but we are just going to tell you the truth about the reality of the afterlife. If you want to redefine reincarnation into a metaphor for something else then sure, we’ll buy it. If you wanna go on believing in the various literal definitions of reincarnation then that’s fine too … but it’s not true.”
Let’s see how it works if I do the same thing.
“The object of what we are about to say is to explain the reality – not to deride the beliefs of other people; it is only to explain the facts; that is all. Joseph Smith was the next Messenger — not Baha’u'llah.”
-
Greetings.
I could point out who did and didn’t fulfill various prophecies, but I’ll refrain as you are of course welcome to your own views!
Peace,
Bruce
-
That’s because both views are true even though I explicitly reject Baha’u'llah being a Messenger — relatively speaking of course.
-
Trying to prove Joseph Smith as a Messenger was not my intent, but I think it is evident from your reply that my example was analyzed as a truth statement which was concluded as false (untrue) and then disregarded as an opinion that I am entitled to.
If my statement was analyzed as a truth claim then Chapter 81 should also be analyzed as a truth claim. You can go on down the list and see how Baha’i claims to hold the facts of reality (the truth) regarding each of the points in the quiz — and with all definitions being equal, in direct contradiction to the doctrines of the other religions.
-
IME the Baha’i scriptures already address these things adequately.
Regards,
Bruce
-
What things? That Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, or anyone else that believes reincarnation is a fact of reality are “weak minded” and “ignorant” — while Baha’i alone holds the facts of reality regarding the eternal truth of the afterlife? (Even Universal Unitarianism is different than Baha’i.)
“IME the Baha’i scriptures already address these things adequately.”
In essence it’s no different than Christians claiming they hold the truth regarding the afterlife because the Bible says so. (The difference being Jesus performed miracles and was killed over a claim to be God Himself while His disciples died over their eye-witness testimony of Jesus’ physical resurrection and ascension. Bahá’u’lláh died in 1892.)
I feel I’ve made my point and the conversation seems to be dwindling so I’ll leave you with those things to think about in your independent search for truth and let you have the last word.
I’ve enjoyed the conversation and learning more about the Baha’i faith. If you’re in the Atlanta area, stop by GF. Ltr!
-
Hi!
Our history contains miracles, too, but our scripture explicitly instruct us not to use them as proofs when teaching the Faith.
I agree we seem to have completed our dialogue, so
My regards!
Bruce
-
Hi, Dan!
D>Question #1.
You refer to “Our history” in the previous entry; would I be right in concluding that you believe you are right and “our” (Evangelical Christianity) belief(s) is wrong?I believe I have found and am following true religion as God as revealed it for this day. I make no statement about your belief or that of others in comparison; and indeed, it’s not my place to do so!
D>Question #2.
Could your system of belief (and your hope in it) be wrong?Given:
1) that the Baha’i Faith manifests the fruits of the Spirit listed in Galatians, and
2) that the Gospels say a good tree can’t bear bad fruit and vice versa, I don’t see how it could be wrong!
And I put it to you that if we believe in the Bible, we have to accept what it says about this!
Peace,
Bruce
-
Greetings, friends!
I must say I find it nothing if not ironic that posting proofs from the Bible seems to have killed this dialogue, which was previously going forward very nicely!
Life is strange, I guess.
Bruce
-
Greetings.
You are more than welcome to your opinion. As it happens, my conclusions differ from yours.
And my Faith does indeed contain clear and specific teachings, on many subjects. We are hardly an “anything goes” organization!”
As to miracles, times change, and this teaching has apparently changed with the passage of time. Religion is, after all, an evolving phenomenon over time–much as some would like to deny this!
Peace,
Bruce
Stevenq : July 14th, 2009 at 7:42 pm