Baha`i:Islam::Christianity:Judaism

[iBrian]

Hi again, Brian!



Basically, no.

Or at least, not for many centuries to come!

This is because the Baha'i scriptures explicitly state 1) that no new Divine Messenger will appear for at least a millenium (now down to about 840 years) and 2) that this statement is literal. Here’s the passage:

37​

"Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor. We pray God that He may graciously assist him to retract and repudiate such claim. Should he repent, God will, no doubt, forgive him. If, however, he persisteth in his error, God will, assuredly, send down one who will deal mercilessly with him. Terrible, indeed, is God in punishing! Whosoever interpreteth this verse otherwise than its obvious meaning is deprived of the Spirit of God and of His mercy which encompasseth all created things. Fear God, and follow not your idle fancies. Nay, rather, follow the bidding of your Lord, the Almighty, the All-Wise."

-- The Book of Laws, p. 32



So we are definintely not expecting anyone new at least until that time (which fits the general pattern for how often new Messengers / new religious dispensations appear).

Now, we clearly can't state absolutely that Baha'is definitely won't miss the boat the next time around (which you and I obviously don't have to worry about), but there is also a passage that states that this is a Day that won't be followed by night, which at least gives hope that maybe next time, humanity will finally get it right and not repeat the same old pattern of rejection we've so often seen in the past....

Best regards,

Bruce

Thanks for the reply Bruce - much appreciated.

I think herein lays the conundrum - Judaism, Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism, all make quite specific statements as to what constitutes their own equivalence of "Messiash" as well - often literal.

Also - does the process of Progressive Revelation ever imply that the Baha'i faith can be subject to the same flaws of "literal interpretation" that the other faiths are subjected to from a Baha'i point of view?

 

[wil]

well, this is the position of much christian supercessionist apologetics:

law = bad
love = good

letter = bad
spirit = good

observance = bad
essence = good

this is of course nothing but a way to do what i have already complained about originally: discredit judaism as legalistic, mechanical and lacking an inner dimension - compared to other solutions which go right to the so-called "essence of the law". i question your right to define what the "essence of the law" is when you are talking about jewish sacred texts. surely we are in a better position to define this than you are? or are you informing us of the inferiority of our tradition compared to those self-declaredly based on the "essence", "spirit" and "love"?

Namaste BB,

While pointing your finger at Christians here, what do you think of actions within your own theology? This is the same discussions that are being had on the Christian Board or the Islam board, there are many sects, many denominations, many flavors of each religion...and each sees/interprets a little differently.

I don't know enough about Judaism to claim to hardly know anything, but I do know that they don't all follow all the laws, and your scale of what Christians act like fits what 90% of those that are Jewish?

Another contemplation that came up...but first and foremost I think everyone one this thread has had thier moments, moments of patience, moments of frustration, and moments of compassion and understanding. To me it is exactly this dialogue and all of us living through these moments that will get us to a level of understanding which will allow us...to take this whole comparative/interfaith experience outside of the net and into the street and I thank you all.

Now back to our regular programming....

My contemplation....Jews don't go out and recruit, they reproduce and try to maintain their faith. The numbers are diminishing as you indicated people move on, to other faiths, or just drop out of faith, or are nonpracticing and show up on High Holy Days...

But my thought, since that is happening and the world with Jewish heritage, Jewish blood is probably 10, 20, 100, 1000 times the current Jewish population? And as you indicated everyone seems to be co-opting select Judaic texts, philosophy and prophecy. My observation is that imitation is a compliment, but my question is if you (Jews) haven't fullfilled this prophecy yet, when do you think you will, and what would be so surprising that it may be fulfilled outside of the confines of your religion?

I mean we all do believe in one G-d eh?

 

[bananabrain]

wil -

i'm not pointing my finger at christians in general. i'm referring to a particular point of view, often expressed by *some* but not all christians, which is both unhelpful and unsophisticated in my point of view. i was pointing out the similarities between that point of view and the points that popeyesays just made about "the Law" - without of course labelling him as either unhelpful or unsophisticated, because a) he is clearly neither and b) i think this thread is actually going somewhere quite interesting now.

what do you think of actions within your own theology?

you'll have to be a bit more specific about what you mean by this.

This is the same discussions that are being had on the Christian Board or the Islam board, there are many sects, many denominations, many flavors of each religion...and each sees/interprets a little differently.

fair enough, but we are not telling christians, or muslims or baha'is for that matter, that we can define them better than they are entitled to define themselves.

I do know that they don't all follow all the laws, and your scale of what Christians act like fits what 90% of those that are Jewish?

if you're saying that there are a lot of arrogant, ignorant chauvinist jews, i agree with you. and they're just as wrong as the arrogant, ignorant, chauvinist christians, muslims and baha'is (and everyone else) - the difference being that judaism does *not* maintain that it is superior to other religions and that jews who act like it does - even educated ones - are doing so on the basis of incorrect interpretation of our tradition. that's my position. unfortunately, it is harder to argue that religious chauvinism is an incorrect interpretation of *other* faiths - or, at least, certain versions of other faiths.

The numbers are diminishing as you indicated people move on, to other faiths, or just drop out of faith, or are nonpracticing and show up on High Holy Days...

that is, sadly, the case.

My observation is that imitation is a compliment

hehehe. imitation may very well be a compliment and, complimentary as that may have intended to be, saying the imitation has superseded the original is like saying that elvis impersonators are better than elvis and that the original elvis shouldn't bother to perform any more. of course elvis can't actually perform any more but this metaphor would have been excellent in early 1975 before he kicked the bucket, or the bog if you prefer.

but my question is if you (Jews) haven't fullfilled this prophecy yet, when do you think you will

that's the thing. we don't know and we're not allowed to find out. nonetheless, some people think they know and aren't saying and some people think they know and are saying so very loudly and unpleasantly. it doesn't make them right or authoritative.

and what would be so surprising that it may be fulfilled outside of the confines of your religion?

well, that's the point. if it's fulfilled outside the confines of our religion, it's not who we've described. if the person said to be the messiah is not a jewish figure who brings literal - not theological - salvation to the jews and literal - not theological or metaphorical - peace to the world, he's not the messiah; he's a very naughty boy.

I mean we all do believe in one G-d eh?

well, of course we do. but what we *do* about it is a different matter, particularly if we are seeking to convert others to our point of view.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Popeyesays]

Thanks for the reply Bruce - much appreciated.

I think herein lays the conundrum - Judaism, Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism, all make quite specific statements as to what constitutes their own equivalence of "Messiash" as well - often literal.

Also - does the process of Progressive Revelation ever imply that the Baha'i faith can be subject to the same flaws of "literal interpretation" that the other faiths are subjected to from a Baha'i point of view?

I guess, I'll tackles this one. The revelation of Baha`u'llah will suffer the same cycle any other revelationdealt with; but as to interpretation, there is no living authoritative interpreter to make ANY interpretation.

Other faiths have face a 'winter' stage in the past, the Baha`i Faith will undergo that same test in the future. Will the intent of the Prophet be subborned in that day? Well, it has less chance of being side-tracked than other revelations that have forged ahead without the express authority of the faith being made clear in its writings.

When the day finally comes that a new advent occurs, mankind in general and Baha`i as part of mankind will have to face the same individual choice men faced when they beheld Jesus Christ or Moses, accept or reject.

That is, after all, what 'free will' is for.

Regards,
Scott

 

[BuzzLY]

judaism does *not* maintain that it is superior to other religions

Jews do seperate themselves from the rest of humanity by claiming to be God' chosen people. It's hard not to interpret that as Jews regarding themselves as superior.

Other faiths have face a 'winter' stage in the past, the Baha`i Faith will undergo that same test in the future. ...

When the day finally comes that a new advent occurs, mankind in general and Baha`i as part of mankind will have to face the same individual choice men faced when they beheld Jesus Christ or Moses, accept or reject.

That's a fine thing to say but in reality Baha'is treat new revelations as poorly as their predecessors do. Popeye's comments about Matrixism are a good example of this.

Why should people be so offended and shocked that new revelations claim to transcend old ones? It seems that part of the nature of being in revelation is the transcendence of space, time, self and all boundaries. It only makes sense that a revelation should transcend that which came before it wether that be a person's life or the history of religion.

 

[BuzzLY]

...

 

[Mick]

That's a fine thing to say but in reality Baha'is treat new revelations as poorly as their predecessors do. Popeye's comments about Matrixism are a good example of this.

Why should people be so offended and shocked that new revelations claim to transcend old ones? It seems that part of the nature of being in revelation is the transcendence of space, time, self and all boundaries. It only makes sense that a revelation should transcend that which came before it wether that be a person's life or the history of religion.

The English language is rich and in spite of having such a large choice of words to choose from, we still sometimes confuse ourselves by using the same word for different meanings.

For instance, the word revelation. When the Baha'is speak of Revelation, if you noticed it was capitalized, meaning it has come from God and when they speak of the new Revelation, they are saying that this message is the most recent message of God.

On the other hand, when the word revelation is used while referring to Matrixism for example, then the meaning is that new information is being revealed. I agree with you when you suggested that the word revelation means give new information that is built on old information. Notice, though, the word here is not capitalized. We surely would not suggest that simply because this information exists, that it is information from God. In fact, in this example, being a Matrix the movie fan, I am pretty sure the information evolved from a movie writers/producers/directors/actors efforts, it would seem, and not really any sign that it came from God.

And then again, maybe I'm wrong...but I don't think so.

Mick

 

[Postmaster]

Microsoft brings out a new internet explorer. Some people will prefer the old one and some people will prefer the new one. Sooner or later the people using the old explorer will be left behind while the ones using the newer one advance.​

 

[BuzzLY]

The English language is rich and in spite of having such a large choice of words to choose from, we still sometimes confuse ourselves by using the same word for different meanings.

For instance, the word revelation. When the Baha'is speak of Revelation, if you noticed it was capitalized, meaning it has come from God and when they speak of the new Revelation, they are saying that this message is the most recent message of God.

On the other hand, when the word revelation is used while referring to Matrixism for example, then the meaning is that new information is being revealed. I agree with you when you suggested that the word revelation means give new information that is built on old information. Notice, though, the word here is not capitalized. We surely would not suggest that simply because this information exists, that it is information from God. In fact, in this example, being a Matrix the movie fan, I am pretty sure the information evolved from a movie writers/producers/directors/actors efforts, it would seem, and not really any sign that it came from God.

And then again, maybe I'm wrong...

Semantics aside, Matrixism is a new religion that grew out of the Baha'i Faith just like the Baha'i Faith is a new religion that grew out of Islam which grew out of Christianity, etc.

 

[BuzzLY]

Semantics aside ...

Call me a bigot but I'm very anti-semantic.

 

[IMSassafras]

Semantics aside, Matrixism is a new religion that grew out of the Baha'i Faith just like the Baha'i Faith is a new religion that grew out of Islam which grew out of Christianity, etc.

Buzzly,

I have just got a chance to read your posts. I welcome you to CR.

I can see your logic, but at the same time I have to disagree. I kind of feel like I am listening to a theory and weighing out all the if/then, pro/con, logical/illogical yada-yada-yada and saying, "Ahh...umm...iee...ahhiee... I don't think so!"

The Matrix Trilogy was created by very creative people with one heck of an imagination, and Matrixism is a produce of these three movies. Baha'is have a saying, "If it is logical, then it is of God, if it is illogical, then it is of man." This religion (and I say that loosely) is a produce of man, not God. I suspect, someone, maybe in the movie industry, either read some of the Baha'i Writings and said, "Wow!", and then created a movie OR read a script and said, "Wow! this reminds me of a religion", and then created a movie.

It was stated on the Matrixism website that the word "matrix" appears in the Baha'i Writings, but it also appears in the Bible. I did a search on "The One" and it appears in both the Baha'i Writings and the Bible too. So? It is just like Mick said, "The English language is rich and in spite of having such a large choice of words to choose from, we still sometimes confuse ourselves by using the same word for different meanings."

Something else that lets me know that Matrixism is not a religion, is Baha'u'llah said there would not be another Manifestation until 1000 years has past. This clock starting ticking in 1844/1863. Thus Matrixism is not a religion of God, it is man-made.

I hope my post gives you encouragement in your search.

Warmly,
Sassafras

 

[BuzzLY]

IMSassafras,

I'm sure that many Muslims would say that the Baha'i religion has nothing to do with God just the same as you say about Matrixism.

I'm suprised that you don't see the obvious hypocracy of what you posted.

 

[Postmaster]

Lets see how far matrixism actually goes. If it’s of God or the divine it will flourish if not it will decay and your argument will be proven wrong.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. - Matthew 7:15-20

Damn now I'm using Baha'i tactics.

 

[Mick]

Lets see how far matrixism actually goes. If it’s of God or the divine it will flourish if not it will decay and your argument will be proven wrong.



Damn now I'm using Baha'i tactics.

And doing quite well, I may say. Kudos, Postmaster.

 

[Postmaster]

See how the argument of the tree that bares good fruits was used by Christians too. Now they have the figures to prove this. But at first when they used the tree that bares good fruits argument they didn’t have the largest religion in the world it was just a small obscure religion of diversity. The success of Christianity was probably due to the high numbers of mystical religious experience within the faith. A bridge to God through Christ.

 

[bananabrain]

Jews do seperate themselves from the rest of humanity by claiming to be G!D's chosen people. It's hard not to interpret that as Jews regarding themselves as superior.

oh, yes, of course, we know that. and a lot of us have a problem avoiding interpreting it that way. it doesn't make this viewpoint correct or authoritative and i myself strongly refute it. however, i think you should consider my viewpoint on this issue, which is that this is primarily a language problem. the phrase "chosen people" is from the king james english (via translation from latin, translated from greek, translated from hebrew) bible and is not a reliable translation of the phrase 'AM SeGuLaH, "'am" meaning a people and "segulah" being from the word "segol" meaning a jewel, so, maybe precious, treasured? nobody really knows. either way the *hebrew* implies neither superiority nor reward. there are sources which speak of us being literally "chosen", using the word "BaHaR" but these are in the context of our being chosen by G!D *to receive the Torah*, not because we were better than anyone else. we were chosen without our consent - only at sinai did we exercise our consent and it was a one-time-only offer. the *english* connotations of the phrase "chosen people" do not exist in the original - so you can hardly expect me to feel responsible for it.

Why should people be so offended and shocked that new revelations claim to transcend old ones?

probably because of the tendency of the former to enforce their claims about the latter with swords, red-hot pokers, stakes, kindling, conversion, holy wars and a smorgasbord of delightful propaganda.

Microsoft brings out a new internet explorer. Some people will prefer the old one and some people will prefer the new one. Sooner or later the people using the old explorer will be left behind while the ones using the newer one advance.

what a well-chosen metaphor. has anyone noticed that microsoft's upgrades overwhelm you with their plethora of overdesigned features whilst failing to deliver any really convincing benefits? that's without even mentioning the new bugs they've created in the process? yet we still surf pretty much the way we always did without using any technology that was the exclusive revelation, sorry, invention of microsoft. i look forward to your reaction, postmaster, when "matrixism" attempts to evangelise in the heartland of greek orthodoxy.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[BuzzLY]

probably because of the tendency of the former to enforce their claims about the latter with swords, red-hot pokers, stakes, kindling, conversion, holy wars and a smorgasbord of delightful propaganda.

Please spare us. The only reason the latter does not war more against the former is that they are smaller in numbers. Judaism is responsible for more than its share of religious wars against others and even against themselves. In terms of a propensity for inculcating war Jewish scripture is second only that of Islam.

People can be so amazingly hypocritical when it comes to religion.

 

[BuzzLY]

Is it just me or does Postmaster seem like a Baha'i's sock puppet dressed up to look like a Christian?

 

[Postmaster]

I'd rather be a baha'i then a cynic. But I'am a Christian. I regard Baha'i as complimentary philosophy. .

 

[Mick]

Is it just me or does Postmaster seem like a Baha'i's sock puppet dressed up to look like a Christian?

I think it is just you. I haven't noticed anybody coming to support your thoughts up to this point.