Quote:
Originally Posted by bob x
I am reminded of my discussions with Thomas about the evolution from the disciples of Jesus to the Catholic/Orthodox Church....
|
I respect your observation about the Catholic/Orthodox Church, and I agree fully with you.
Are you rummaging "around the Internet" on Wikipedia? It's a completely controlled and distorted source of information on Baha'i, as are the majority of books published by the Wilmette Baha'i publishing company.
It's possible that the UU "Unitaran Baha'is" are a bogus group. There are people supposedly involved with them who have definitely been false identities in the past. I leave it up to you to assess them at your own risk. I have never seen any corroborating evidence that the "UU Baha'is" are actually accepted or sponsored by the Unitarian Universalists.
The "unenrolled" appear credible, usually. I don't believe, though, that they're very intellectually astute, nor consistent, indeed, in my opinion, naive, for many seem to think they're going to change the Haifan denomination, which is entirely corrupt by its wielding power for decades over its little kingdom of blind followers.
I mentioned earlier here on Interfaith that Abdul-Baha had used the term the "Universal House of Justice" for as long as a decade prior to his death in 1921, as did the early Bahais in the US and Canada. My memory had failed, then, Baha'u'llah himself had used it, too, in his Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Book of Laws, basically Bahai Shariah, from which he has "removed from the Book" all of the negative things about Islam, jihad, burning books, infidels, etc.
In my opinion, Baha'is of other denominations have every right to establish their own Universal House of Justice. While I do not personally find the claims of BUPC persuasive, they are my fellow American citizens and Bahai brothers and sisters. I have exchanged views with a few of them in the past, and all were cordial. The US Federal Courts were right in protecting their and other Bahais' rights. I invite you to consider that the fact that it was necessary for the Federal courts to do so might be worth reflecting on and speaks volumes, as the phrase has it, about the denomination that filed the lawsuit.
Being well known is not proof of anything, nor is having the most Bahai members indicative of anything whatsoever, let alone the truth. Religious history is replete with many examples, many of which apply in the current Bahai context. The argument you advance was the Haifan Baha'i argument that was wisely repudiated by the Federal Courts, *three* times.
You cite a lot of hearsay off the Internet, and speculation, but it's quite probable that much of it is Haifan disinformation. I encourage you to speak directly with members of the Baha'i denominations concerned, if you're genuinely interested and a person of goodwill.
The US Federal Courts have ruled repeatedly upholding the First Amendment against the Shiite fascists and criminals who deceive and brainwash people into believing in their false will and testament and seek to destroy other Bahai denominations and individuals, through the courts, online, and in other ways, like the Scientologists.
List of Documents in case
You've completely misjudged me. I suggest reading the 150 megabytes of documentation on my Bahai Censorship site:
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
After doing that, read the 400 megabytes of books and information on
the Reform Bahai Faith
Reform Bahai Faith