The Baha'i Faith

[zanOTK]

*sigh* Is this how this is going to be? Very well. Shall we take this to a private discussion? There is no need to bicker in public.

I wouldn't call it bickering, you're discussing a facet of your faith that's important to both of you..that's kinda what forums are for. Also, it's pretty educational for observers (especially dumb ones like me!).

I said bickering because I'm afraid that is what it will devolve in to. Not because of logicalreason, but because of my own weaknesses. I'm afraid I can be a rather argumentative individual at times. However, if you wish to see this discussion I will consent to continuing it here. But! If it does devolve into bickering, I insist that logicalreason and I continue in private.

---

zanOTK,

You seem to be trying to muscle your opinion on me. I already stated that you are a Theistic Baha'i. That's fine with me. Most Baha'is are theistic.

But some like me are non-theistic. Non-theistic Baha'is even existed during the time of Baha'u'llah and He wrote a Tablet about it called "The Tablet of Jamal-i-Burujirdi" and the Universal House of Justice even wrote a letter to a European Auxiliary Board Member about it, found on Bahai-library.

You seem to have a problem with my non-theism, even though I don't have a problem with your theism.

Dear sir, I have no issue with your atheism. I have simply stated that the official position of the Faith is theism, while adding that there is no reason you can't disagree with that position.

If you would please provide a link to the letter written by the UHJ I would appreciate it (since I don't know which letter to search for in the library. There are so many!).

My sincerest apologies if you felt I was attempting to "muscle" my beliefs upon you.

[logicalreason]

zanOTK, I already admitted to being rude in bahaiforums, but I doubt the other members who were rude to me will never admit to being rude. I have two people in mind especially, I think you know who F... and K...

---

zan,

Here is an excerpt from the 3 letter:

"The House of Justice is very sorry to learn in some parts of Europe the friends have been arguing about the station of Bahá'u'lláh. In the time of Bahá'u'lláh Himself such difference of opinion arose among the friends and there is a Tablet in which He referred to this. He explains that there are differences in the levels of understanding of individuals. Some see the reflection of the Essence of God Himself in the temple of His Manifestation; others see the Manifestation as the Revealer of God and regard His commands and prohibitions to be identical with the ordinances of God. Both views, Bahá'u'lláh says, are acceptable, but if believers in expounding their points of view engage in contention and disputation, they would be rejected by God, inasmuch as the purpose of the Manifestation of God and the aim of His Teaching are to attract souls, create fellowship among men and promulgate the Cause of God. Argument and conflict about such matters can lead to nothing but the ruin of the Cause and thus those who engage in it would fall into perdition even though they may claim to be expounding the highest level of true understanding." http://bahai-library.com/uhj_station_bahaullah

[zanOTK]

zanOTK, I already admitted to being rude in bahaiforums, but I doubt the other members who were rude to me will never admit to being rude. I have two people in mind especially, I think you know who F... and K...

I thank you for admitting the behavior on the Baha'i Forums, and for agreeing not to repeat it. However, I must disagree with you on whether F... and K... would be willing to apologize for behaving in a way you found hurtful. The members of those forums are good people, and if asked I assure you they would be willing to apologize. If you like, I will gladly speak to them for you. Please, however, send whatever you wish to say in a private message and do not post it publicly. For the sake of their reputations.

---

Here is an excerpt from the 3 letter:

"The House of Justice is very sorry to learn in some parts of Europe the friends have been arguing about the station of Bahá'u'lláh. In the time of Bahá'u'lláh Himself such difference of opinion arose among the friends and there is a Tablet in which He referred to this. He explains that there are differences in the levels of understanding of individuals. Some see the reflection of the Essence of God Himself in the temple of His Manifestation; others see the Manifestation as the Revealer of God and regard His commands and prohibitions to be identical with the ordinances of God. Both views, Bahá'u'lláh says, are acceptable, but if believers in expounding their points of view engage in contention and disputation, they would be rejected by God, inasmuch as the purpose of the Manifestation of God and the aim of His Teaching are to attract souls, create fellowship among men and promulgate the Cause of God. Argument and conflict about such matters can lead to nothing but the ruin of the Cause and thus those who engage in it would fall into perdition even though they may claim to be expounding the highest level of true understanding." http://bahai-library.com/uhj_station_bahaullah

My friend, I'm afraid I do not see the support for atheist belief, or official acceptance of atheist belief, in this excerpt. I will, however, peruse the entire letter in search for it. My thanks.

[logicalreason]

Zan, yes speak to them, and show them this letter. "Some see the reflection of the Essence of God Himself in the temple of His Manifestation; others see the Manifestation as the Revealer of God and regard His commands and prohibitions to be identical with the ordinances of God."

This paragraph itself supports my position. Read the Tablet of Jamal-i-Burujirdi at http://bahai-library.com/bahaullah_lawh_jamal_burujirdi to which this letter refers.

[zanOTK]

Zan, yes speak to them, and show them this letter. "Some see the reflection of the Essence of God Himself in the temple of His Manifestation; others see the Manifestation as the Revealer of God and regard His commands and prohibitions to be identical with the ordinances of God."

This paragraph itself supports my position. Read the Tablet of Jamal-i-Burujirdi at http://bahai-library.com/bahaullah_lawh_jamal_burujirdi to which this letter refers.

Dir sir, I have stated that I will speak to them for you. However, I will not allow myself to be a conduit through which you can continue the atheism/theism debate on the Baha'i Forums. If you have a message for the members of the Baha'i Forums, perhaps explaining that you found their behavior offensive and hurtful, I will convey it. But I will not debate them for you.

Beyond that, I, again, do not see how this paragraph supports your position. It appears to be totally theistic, and is about two theistic beliefs. Perhaps I am missing something important. Would you please explain?

[logicalreason]

Really? The first position that the Essence of God Himself is in the temple (lower case t) is a theistic position?

[zanOTK]

Really? The first position that the Essence of God Himself is in the temple (lower case t) is a theistic position?

Dear sir, it is as theistic as the Christian belief that Jesus is God.

[logicalreason]

The Christian belief that Jesus is God is different. That belief is that God the Father fathered the Son, so the Father is in the Son.

So who impregnated the mother of Baha'u'llah?

This is not a theistic position, I am sorry to tell you.

[FatAndFaithless]

Hey guys, question from an ignorant observer. In that paragraph you guys are discussing, when it says that people shouldn't "engage in contention and disputation"...does really mean people can't argue about their faith?

[zanOTK]

The Christian belief that Jesus is God is different. That belief is that God the Father fathered the Son, so the Father is in the Son.

So who impregnated the mother of Baha'u'llah?

This is not a theistic position, I am sorry to tell you.

Dear sir, I'm confused. How exactly is stating that the Manifestation of God is the Essence of God non-theistic? It is a position I personally have trouble with, but I can understand why some people would prefer it. Nonetheless, it appears to be clearly theistic to me.

---

Hey guys, question from an ignorant observer. In that paragraph you guys are discussing, when it says that people shouldn't "engage in contention and disputation"...does really mean people can't argue about their faith?

"Contention and dispution" refers to antagonistic argument, attempting to force your religious opinions upon another. However, polite discussion is encouraged.