Nine Religions of Divine Origin

[16Masail]

When did your family emigrate? I guess after the revolution? Is she still there? Other relatives?

I appreciate your curiosity but I would rather not talk about my family here.

 

[wil]

I appreciate your curiosity but I would rather not talk about my family here.

Sorry... It is one of the reasons I play here...to obtain as close to first hand knowledge as to what it is like in other countries. With what we hear about persecution of Baha'i in Iran of the limitations that women and others have experienced since the revolution.. I would have assumed getting out was an issue.

Oh well.

 

[Ahanu]

Your conclusion is unwarranted.

With regard to whether the excerpt from the Tablet of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá cited above enunciates a general principle that permits the conclusion that God sent His Messengers to indigenous peoples, specifically to the Americas, we wish to note, that, to date, the Research Department has not been able to locate any authoritative interpretation of the Master’s Tablet in the Bahá’í Teachings, nor have we found a text which clearly indicates that Manifestations of God have appeared in the Americas.

It is not clear from the context of the Tablet that the reference to raising the “Call of God” presupposes the presence of a Manifestation of God in the Americas.

The Master’s Tablet appears to be a response to a question about the fate of people who live in “places” which have not been penetrated by the call of the Prophets. If this be so, then ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s statement about the raising of the “Call of God” could simply imply that “the people of America” were “informed about the appearance of Prophets” as a result of the contact and “other signs which indicate communication” that occurred “in ancient times” between the peoples of America and Asia. In this regard, the following extract from a letter dated 25 November 1950, written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer is of interest:

It is possible the Indians of the Americas were influenced in the remote past by Prophets in Asia. But again, as there is nothing in our teachings about it we cannot do more than speculate.

(Research Department)

The Research Department memorandum is purely advisory in nature, not authoritative. You failed to mention this distinction.

 

[16Masail]

The Research Department memorandum is purely advisory in nature, not authoritative. You failed to mention this distinction.

I didn't quote it as authoritative but to me, the opinions expressed by the Research Department carry more weight than those of you and I.

 

[Ahanu]

I didn't quote it as authoritative

But our readers are unaware of that distinction, 口蜜腹剑人. The only reason you know about what the Research Department said is because Christopher Buck, one of the Baha'is you criticized as hiding something, published it in the first place.

 

[16Masail]

But our readers are unaware of that distinction, 口蜜腹剑人.

Then thank you for pointing it out, 朋友.

 

[16Masail]

But our readers are unaware of that distinction, 口蜜腹剑人. The only reason you know about what the Research Department said is because Christopher Buck, one of the Baha'is you criticized as hiding something, published it in the first place.

Okay, 我的朋友. I think that I should clarify my position for a moment. I didn't accuse Buck of hiding anything and I never pointed the finger at any individual. All that I'm arguing against are the statements of some Bahá'is (you're the one who mentioned name(s), not me) who claim that so-and-so (ex. White Buffalo Calf Woman) is a Prophet when those particular persons are not mentioned in the Bible, Qur'án, nor our Scriptures.

"Regarding your questions: we cannot possibly add names of people we (or anyone else) think might be Lesser Prophets to those found in the Quran, the Bible and our own Scriptures. For only these can we consider authentic Books. Therefore, Joseph Smith is not in our eyes a Prophet."

(Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to individual, 13 March 1950)

Even though this quote is about Joseph Smith, the rationale behind him being dismissed as a Prophet also applies to other individuals. Of course, whether the Native Americans had their own Prophets is not the issue. Instead, it's the "add names of people we (or anyone else) think might be Lesser Prophets to those found in the Quran, the Bible and our own Scriptures." [sic]

At the end of the day, this is my understanding of the Scriptures to which I am open to elaborate and correct as time goes on.

 

[Ahanu]

Ahanu,

Thank you for pointing this out. I, regrettably, admit that I chose not to quote this excerpt nor follow the Guardian's directive about avoiding this controversial question. It is my lack of judgement and tact is leads me to quote Lights of Guidance, #1373, which infuriates some Bahá'is who are adamant that Guru Nanak must be a Manifestation of God because of their love for him. Brutal honesty - it has always been a problem of mine. I find it hard to hide certain aspects of the Faith because of it's controversiality and potentiality to lead seekers away.

Here you said you don't hide aspects of the Faith (obviously implying that others do). Keep that in mind.

It's my observation that some Bahá'is suck up to Native Americans. For example, they'll claim that the White Buffalo Calf Woman was a prophetess (see article in BahaiTeachings) when this notion conflicts with our teachings.

So aside from the Qur'án, Bible, and the Bahá'i Writings, we cannot add names of people we THINK might be Lesser Prophets, let alone Greater Prophets.

Here you refer to Christopher Buck's article. It is obvious you think he's "hiding" something controversial just because he didn't cite Shoghi Effendi there.

I didn't accuse Buck of hiding anything and I never pointed the finger at any individual.

Yes, you did.

All that I'm arguing against are the statements of some Bahá'is

But you mentioned "some Baha'is suck up to Native Americans". Then you provided an example, saying "they'll claim that the White Buffalo Calf Woman was a prohetess". And which article did you refer to? Christopher Buck's article here.

you're the one who mentioned name(s), not me) who claim that so-and-so (ex. White Buffalo Calf Woman)

So now let's unpack this remark about hiding in one paragraph. When you said "some Baha'is suck up to Native Americans", you were obviously lumping the author of the article in with a group of "some Baha'is". Then in another post (which is cited above), you wrote you "find it hard to hide certain aspects of the faith." You're the one that cited Buck's work, not me. Don't get angry if you can't connect the dots. One need not say "Christopher Buck is hiding something" to mean "Christopher Buck is hiding something". Does your hyper-literal mind grasp that?

is a Prophet when those particular persons are not mentioned in the Bible, Qur'án, nor our Scriptures.

Again, you need to be clear: they are not mentioned by name. Baha'u'llah clearly said "unto . . . all nations God hath sent his messengers".

Even though this quote is about Joseph Smith, the rationale behind him being dismissed as a Prophet also applies to other individuals. Of course, whether the Native Americans had their own Prophets is not the issue. Instead, it's the "add names of people we (or anyone else) think might be Lesser Prophets to those found in the Quran, the Bible and our own Scriptures."

Your point about adding "names" misses the point. Baha'u'llah regularly criticized those attached to names but oblivious to the reality. But I don't want to slap you with verses as you did with other Baha'is here. We're recognizing the reality. That's primary. The names are a secondary issue. Since you're impersonating a Baha'i, you must note the principle of harmony between science and religion. What was once "forgotten" has been brought to light through historical and cultural research. We can't overlook the fact that indigenous groups had names for their cultural heroes. The reason why the Baha'i Faith is growing so fast among indigenous groups is because Baha'i pioneers respect their cultural heroes and recognize truth in them.

 

[16Masail]

Ahanu,

My friend, let's just agree to disagree. It was a pleasure conversing with you.

 

[arthra]

This is my answer to the question of who are the Sabaeans. They are more commonly called, "Mandaeans". Bábism (the Báb) is distinct from the Báhai Faith (Bahá'u'lláh) just as Mandaeism (John the Baptist) is distinct from Christianity (Christ).
Have you seen a Christian read the Book of John? Similarly, you would hardly see a Bahá'i read the Bayán (holy book of the Báb).

Baha'is do read the Bayan and accept it as a sacred scripture... of course we don't observe all the ordinances of the Bab as some have been abrogated by "Him Whom God would make manifest"- Baha'u'llah.
Portions of the Bayan and references to it are quite numerous among them being:
http://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/the-bab/selections-writings-bab/#r=swb_en-3

and of course numerous references:
http://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/search#page=10&query=Bayan

A summary of the Bayan can be found at
http://bahai-library.com/pdf/m/momen_summary_persian_bayan_shorter.pdf

In the days of Moses it was the Pentateuch; in the days of Jesus, the Gospel; in the days of Muhammad, the Messenger of God, the Qur'án; in this day, the Bayan; and in the Dispensation of Him Whom God will make manifest, His own Book -- the Book unto which all the Books of former Dispensations must needs be referred, the Book that standeth amongst them all transcendent and supreme.

~ Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 269