Bāb was a Twelver Shī’ah through and through

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-bahaullah-a-bahai-please.220052/page-6#post-6086112

danixxxxxxx said: ↑

It might be off-topic to point this out, but are you aware that baptism is a Christian practice, and not a Jewish practice?

#114 paarsurrey

Then what was John the Baptist doing with Jesus in the water. Wasn’t John a Jew, please?

John the Baptizer preaches by the River Jordan

John was a direct male descendant of Aaron, brother of Moses. He was a Kohen (or Cohen) the distinct priestly line of Kohenim that were only permitted to minister in the Old Testament Temple.
Why did John the Baptist baptize with water?

Regards

Komxxx said: ↑

If you study the Bāb’s writings, he never refers to his religion as the “Babi Faith” or anything along those lines but rather articulates all of his claims within an Islamic framework. He is in no way non-Islamic per se, but rather post-Islamic, Islamic in the same sense that post-Keynesian economics is Keynesian, if you would. The term the Bāb adopts is bayān, which, if you study the more esoteric traditions of the Shī’ah Imāms, this is nothing but a higher expression of the eternal essence of Islam. The Bāb was a Twelver Shī’ah through and through, and he and his followers did not see themselves as in opposition to Islam; they saw themselves as the true Muslims.

#117 paarsurrey

Very interesting, please.
Regards

 

shunxxxx said: ↑

He did not renounce Islam just as Christ and Muhammad did not renounce did not renounce Judaism.

#118 paarsurrey

Muhammad was never a Christian or a Jew.
Regards

#119 paarsurrey

Was Bahaullah a “Bahai”, please?

When did Bahaullah cease to pray Salat like he used to do as Shia-Twelver-Muslims do ?

This could decide the issue.

Another will be when Bahaullah got married with his third wife, Gawhar Khanum, who did solemnize this marriage and on what tradition? It sure happened in the post Iqan period. Right, please?

Regards

There was no “first Bahai”!

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-bahaullah-a-bahai-please.220052/page-6#post-6086074

Traixxxxx said: ↑

Baha’i means follower of Baha’u’llah, the Manifestation of God for this present age.
Baha’u’llah was not a follower of Himself, so Baha’u’llah was not a Baha’i.

Perhaps one of the Baha’is on this forum can enlighten me as to who was the first Baha’i. 

#104 paarsurrey

Please don’t split frog hairs, it is not a good deed. Right, please?

“and Baha’u’llah was the first Baha’i” post #5 , please.

Regards

 

Trailblazer said: ↑

I am not splitting anything. Baha’u’llah was not the first Baha’i.
The first Baha’i would have been the first follower of Baha’u’llah, but I do not know who that was.

#107 paarsurrey

I don’t think there was any first Bahai. In the pre-Iqan period Bahaullah was sure a Babi, and if Bab was a (mystic shaykhi twelver) Muslim, then Bahaullah was a Muslim till such time he openly said that he was not a Babi-Muslim. Maybe Bahaullah made others to follow the concepts he published but he had no-religion at all, but it has to . Right, please?

Also please note:

68. BAHÁ’U’LLÁH’S REVERENCE FOR THE QUR’ÁN

” It should come as no surprise that Bahá’u’lláh’s respect for the Qur’an was heartfelt and genuine. Bahá’u’lláh was, after all, a Muslim.”
CHRISTOPHER BUCK
Visiting Assistant Professor, Michigan State University, buckc@msu.eduKALIMÁT PRESSLOS ANGELES
Symbol & Secret: Qur’an Commentary in Baha’u’llah’s Kitab-i Iqan (1995/2004)

Regards

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-bahaullah-a-bahai-please.220052/page-6#post-6086088

shunxxx said: ↑

Well, ah . . . in recent history you have split a lot of frog hairs to choke the frog concerning names versus titles, and details about the type of daily prayer from Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baha’i Faith. From the perspective of your argument using the same argument Judaism and Christianity consider Islam a false religion.

You are also constantly splitting the frog hair over ‘Was Baha’u’llah was the first Baha’i? which is a nonsense issue. The simple answer is that those that believe in the claims of Baha’u’llah are Baha’is. There are different ways to interpret this that have nothing to do with whether the claim of a religion is true. From the perspective of the translation of Baha’i as the follower of Light or Glory of God, all believers since Adam are Baha’is. The question is whether Baha’u’llah is who he claims he is, and it is obvious you do not believe it.

Click to expand…

“and it is obvious you do not believe it”

#109 paarsurrey

Sure, I am not a Bahai. I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim.
I am reading/investigating Kitab-i-Iqan and asking little questions which anybody on the Forum could answer, if they have an answer whether a Bahai or a non-Bahai.

Regards

lovexxxxxxxx said: ↑

He did not reveal His Station until 1963 but later referred to Himself as…

He Who is the Pre-Existent is come.

Bahá’í Reference Library – The Advent of Divine Justice, Pages 72-85

#111 paarsurrey

But he (Bahaullah) did not say/claim that he was a Bahai.
Also please, did Bahaullah ever say that his followers will be named Bahai and their religion will be Bahaism? If not, who named it “Bahaism”.

Anybody, please.

Regards

 

Hell is not permanent, it is like a hospital

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/why-i-could-never-be-a-christian-or-muslim.220091/page-5#post-6085991

Jollyxxxxxr said: ↑

You would hate that which created you? And if this God did torture rebels in hell forever, you think youd know better then him, a mere ant in comparison in mind and size?

Also I THINK christianity is true and I THINK your interpretation of hell being eternal torture is false.

Hows that? 

#91 paarsurrey

Islam/Quran/Muhammad mention that Hell is for the treatments of those who will go into it.
The torture* is the self-doing of the sinner. If one jumps from a multi-story building and gets hurt it is one’s own doing.

Regards

___________
*[9:70]اَلَمۡ یَاۡتِہِمۡ نَبَاُ الَّذِیۡنَ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِمۡ قَوۡمِ نُوۡحٍ وَّ عَادٍ وَّ ثَمُوۡدَ ۬ۙ وَ قَوۡمِ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ وَ اَصۡحٰبِ مَدۡیَنَ وَ الۡمُؤۡتَفِکٰتِ ؕ اَتَتۡہُمۡ رُسُلُہُمۡ بِالۡبَیِّنٰتِ ۚ فَمَا کَانَ اللّٰہُ لِیَظۡلِمَہُمۡ وَ لٰکِنۡ کَانُوۡۤا اَنۡفُسَہُمۡ یَظۡلِمُوۡنَ

Has not the story reached them of those before them — the people of Noah, ‘Ad, and Thamud, and the people of Abraham, and the dwellers of Midian, and the cities which were overthrown? Their Messengers came to them with clear Signs. So Allah would not wrong them, but they wronged themselves.
The Holy Quran – Chapter: 9: At-Taubah
_________
*It is mentioned about 10 or more times in Quran.

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/why-i-could-never-be-a-christian-or-muslim.220091/page-5#post-6086185

Firexxxx said: ↑

God as understood by Islam is nothing like God as understood by Christians, you can’t work under the assumptions that because you’ve argued with Christians about God on this forum that you’ll magically understand Islamic theology and philosophy, they’re completely different fields of ideas there about monotheism. Our God is not a guy, nor an anthropomorphic deity either, so practically all of your criticisms here are by default not applicable.

#94 paarsurrey

A marvelous post.
Regards

Agnosticism/Skepticism/Atheism are totally wrong

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/why-i-could-never-be-a-christian-or-muslim.220091/page-5#post-6085973

#90 paarsurrey

Why I Could Never Be a Christian (or Muslim)?

There is no compulsion in Quran/Islam/Muhammad, so why should one become a Muslim? Please remain with Agnosticism/Skepticism/Atheism till one realizes that Agnosticism/Skepticism/Atheism are totally wrong . Right, please?

Regards

 

Paul’s-Christianity and Bahaullah’ religion are both mythical and made-up

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-jesus-crucified-or-not.217361/page-11#post-6085963

adrixxxx said: ↑

The argument provided is the one some Christian apologetics use. It’s essentially saying the gospel accounts are all literally true or all false. It’s an argument that discards the subtleties and nuances of both the New Testament and the Baha’i writings. Many Christians have abandoned literalism a long time ago as it simply doesn’t work.

#206 paarsurrey, 

It is not a correct approach. It is neither literal nor allegorical. Why not admit openly that Paul’s-Christianity and Bahaullah’ religion are both, supporting one another, mythical because except a sentence* spoken on the Cross by Jesus nothing else is spoken or dictated by Jesus? Right, please?

Regards
____________
“Eli Eli Lama Sabachthani?”

Was Jesus Crucified or Not? No, never

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-jesus-crucified-or-not.217361/page-11#post-6085674

#204 paarsurrey

Was Jesus Crucified or Not?

One may like to read my post #638 in another thread, please.
Regards

Craftiness of Jesus’ death on Cross

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/did-jesus-die-and-rise-from-the-dead.220049/page-32#post-6085666

shmxxxx said: ↑
His heart wasn´t beating, he wasn´t breathing , he had no blood pressure, his body temp, was way below the temp that causes death, his brain had no oxygen for a long period of time.

There is no completely about it, you are either dead or you are alive.

paarsurrey said: ↑
How does one know of all/each of these things. Just guessing, please?

shmxxx said: ↑

I read a long article about this incident a few years ago in a magazine, Time, or Newsweek I think.
I recall a newspaper article as well.
I think this particular incident holds the record for the longest time that someone was “dead´´´´ then brought back to life.

This seems somebody’s craftiness. There were no such instruments and or doctors/physicians to check:

1. His (Jesus’) heart wasn´t beating
2. he wasn´t breathing
3. he had no blood pressure
4. his body temp, was way below the temp that causes death
5. his brain had no oxygen for a long period of time.

So, please make a search as to who wrote such article and which reputed magazine published it and on what basis these point were made. May be it is also from the “Abode of Myth”.

Anybody to research for it.

Regards

The technique of “All is fair in love and sales ” of Bahaullah

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-jesus-crucified-or-not.217361/page-11#post-6085402

CGDixxxxx said: ↑

So, even though none of the writers were there, they know for sure Jesus was born of a Virgin and that there was a star that guided the Magi. They know for a fact Jesus turned water into wine and walked on water. They know for a fact that he healed people of leprosy and blindness of other infirmities. They know, because they could very well have witnessed it, that Jesus was crucified. They know, because many did witness it, that Jesus showed himself to be alive after being crucified.

Or, only the Virgin Birth, which is not a supernatural or extraordinary phenomenon? and the crucifixion are true and consistent with known history. So the writers didn’t make those two events up, but they did make up all the other things about Jesus? But, when they told of people being raised from the dead and the blind receiving sight and that Jesus walked on water and was resurrected from the dead… those stories, although they never happened, the writers made them up to tell a “symbolic” message?

But what is the Christian explanation of why Jesus had to die on the cross? Baha’is want nothing to do with that, because the Christian writers say it was to pay for the sins of all humanity. No one else could do it. It had to be a perfect sacrifice, and only Jesus could be that special person. They go on to say how he conquered death and the devil and all the rest. The rest of the things that Christians believe that the NT writers teach is ignored and has to be ignored by Baha’is, because it makes Jesus the only one who could of paid the price to save humanity from the devil and hell. None of which Baha’is believe is true.

So then, what’s the big deal that Baha’is believe the Virgin Birth and the Crucifixion of Jesus? They reject pretty much everything else about what the NT claims to have happened. If the Baha’i Faith is true, then nothing is really all that important about the story of Jesus… no hell, no devil, no resurrection, he didn’t walk on water and all the rest. It’s just an elaborate, embellished story about a person his followers made into a God/man. Or, it’s all true and we need Jesus to be saved. Although I disagree with some of the Baha’i explanations, I’d rather have them be right than the Christians. But my favorite is still reincarnation. I know I can do better next time. All I need is a few more chances at getting it right.

“So then, what’s the big deal that Baha’is believe the Virgin Birth and the Crucifixion of Jesus? They reject pretty much everything else about what the NT claims to have happened.” Unquote.

#203 paarsurrey
Don’t worry, please.
It is simple the technique of “All is fair in love and sales ” of Bahaullah. At one hand he agrees with the Christianity and on the other he sells his own God-Head, Manifestation of God and Bahaullah’s being Second-Coming of Jesus.
This is my understanding when I am reading Kitab-i-Iqan, the so called “The Book of Certitude” of Bahaullah.

Regards

Whatever the translation, Quran corrects it.

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-jesus-crucified-or-not.217361/page-11#post-6085395

Ellexxxxxxx said: ↑

When I was first converted to Islam, I was told that the Yusuf Ali interpretation was the best. He was a man of Indian descent that lived in the UK, and highly respected. I would be interested to know if this translation is by him? Yes, there are two versions of the story, I’m told. I used to have the names of those who wrote them, but that has been years since.

For me, the things that really tell me who I am to be are not dependent upon the Crucifiction. I think that no one can use the falsifying of the story to have an excuse for doing things that displease God, Allah SWT, or whoever you wish to call him.

#202 paarsurrey

Nobody’s translation is perfect. No translation of Quran is Word of G-d, the Word of G-d is text of Quran in Arabic.
Whatever the translation, Quran corrects it if the reader understands it from the context verses and the verses in other chapters of Quran. Every translation of Quran whether done by a Non-Muslim or Muslim, Shia or Sunni or whatever, if it is checked with the above principle derived from the Quran itself guides the reader perfectly. No doubt remains if a sincere and unbiased search is made and pondered intently. For the test case we can take this very Verse of Quran 4:157-158. Right, please?

Regards

Jesus did not die a cursed death on Cross – Quran Sura 4:157-158 explains

Was Jesus Crucified to death or Not? No, never.

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-jesus-crucified-or-not.217361/page-10#post-6084945

#188 paarsurrey

Was Jesus Crucified or Not?

No, Jesus did not die on the cross.
Bahaullah’s siding with the Pauline-Christianity exposes Bahaullah’s “infallibility” and makes him a fallible human being.

Regards

adrxxxxxxx said: ↑

This is a question that is often debated by Muslims and Christians.

The Christians refer to the four gospel accounts that provide clear accounts of Christ’s crucifixion. Historians, including atheists usually agree Christ was crucified. When they don’t its because they don’t believe Jesus existed at all.

Muslims believe Jesus wasn’t crucified at all based on the following verses in the Quran.

Historicity of Jesus – Wikipedia

And [We cursed them] for their breaking of the covenant and their disbelief in the signs of Allah and their killing of the prophets without right and their saying, “Our hearts are wrapped”. Rather, Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.
And [We cursed them] for their disbelief and their saying against Mary a great slander,
And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah .” And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.
Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

Surah An-Nisa [4:155-158]

These verses are taken literally. Many Muslims believe that the body of Jesus was substituted and another crucified in His place.

Islamic views on Jesus’ death – Wikipedia

So who is right, and why?

For what its worth, Baha’is believe Christ was crucified.

“For what its worth, Baha’is believe Christ was crucified.”

#192 paarsurrey

It is wrong understanding of the Quran verses. Bahaullah was not a well-grounded in knowledge person of Quran, so he understood it wrongly.

Regards

Vinxxxxxx said: ↑

Infallibility of their prophet is a core Baha’i belief, Paar. Because a belief of such a nature is so subjective, there is no way to prove or disprove it. You cna choose to not believe it, of it you’re a baha’i you pretty much have to believe it, 9or call yourself a liberal Baha’i). Non-Baha’i;s, if they’ve heard of the baha’i faith at all, don’t believe it.

I defend the right of anyone to believe anything they want, no matter how illogical it appears to me. It’s just belief, not truth.

#193 paarsurrey

I always also defend Bahaullah’s followers in connection with their right to believe in whatever they want to believe but in relation to Quran, Bahaullah had a shallow knowledge of Quran, that is my point, please.

Regards