Post by Steve BlombergPost by Steve BlombergPost by PaulHammondPost by Steve BlombergPost by Robert Durocherhttp://mustagath.angelfire.com/
Please forward this link to other Baha'is.
Here is a sample of Bahai sheer ignorance. This is what is shoved into
“Each of the world's major religions contain Messianic prophecies.
Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, the Zoroastrian
religion and even the Native American religions all foretell the
coming of a Promised One. Each of the Founders of these great
religions either promised to personally return himself, to send
another like himself or in some instances.... the Founder promised to
do both.”
Apparently, the author admits that Husayn-Ali is not the fulfillment
of the prophecies of the Bayan on which solely Husayn-Ali set up his
pretentions, because it is not included "major erligions".
That seems like a very odd thing to conclude, Steve.
Not, if you actually read what I said.
If you troubled yourself to read the page the poster was referring to
and I quoted made no reference to the manifestation of the Point of
Bayan.
So what. The fact that they haven't referred to the Bab doesn't prove
that they don't believe the Bab's important.
Your interpretation was just very odd.
You don't seem to get it.
The comments I made earlier were in relation
Post by Steve Blombergto the paragraph that I quoted. As for formal Bahai position, it is
obscured. every one of them tells it differently.
Well, if every Baha'i sees it differently, I would see that as a good
thing! They ARE after all supposed to believe in the independant
investigation of truth - although Ruhi is tending to make that more
and more a thing of the past.
Ok! Let me make it super-clear. The Bahais don't produce formal Bahai
position.
I ai aiming at the Husayn-ali, his son and Shoghi. These are the ones
who must have specified Bahai position not those who fell for it. I
also pointed you to the links that describes their postion on that
matter. If you look you find that if you put these father-son-grandson
in one room they will not be able to come up with one unified
position. Anything else?
Do see the links I
Post by Steve Blombergprovided, if you really want to know.Ehen Bahais want to hire new
comers, they don't talk to them about Bayan as being a major religion
the package they present is like the one we saw from Robert Durocher.
And seeing as how this is a free country, and I'm not obsessed by
taking offense at every reference to "Bayanis" as "Azalis", excuse me
if I refuse to do any homework that I'm not all that interested in
doing.
This is one good reason why debating with you ends up being always a
waste of time.
We are not talking about Bahais offending Bayanis or freedom of
speech! We are talking about Bahais producing distorted picture of
truth systematically.
Now, if you were unbiased to the slightest you would have agreed that
that paragraph was in error.
But, you are proving over and over that you are intent on simply
resisting to accept a simple fact as that for private reasons.
I did already state that my interest isn't strong enough to want to
read page after page of special pleading for your pov.
But you were interested to hear it from me!
There is information as to why Bayanis believe (based on the
testimonies of none other than heads of the Bahai cult) that these
people are crook.
Still not interested! I understand.
Post by Steve BlombergPost by Steve BlombergPost by PaulHammond"BEcause the Baha'i faith doesn't consider the Babis to be a major
religion, that must be an admission that Baha'u'llah is not the
successor to the Bab"
Am I supposed to have said this?
That's what you were arguing, right? You've just confirmed it - to
you, the omission of the Bab from some Baha'i website appears to prove
that these people never think of the Bab, which offends you.
As always you are confused and try to confuse. I said that would be
the implication given what was quoted in the material.
So, you're agreeing with me that what I put in the quote marks is a
fair paraphrase of your argument?
That wasn't a paraphrase of what I said. What I stated was the
implication of what was quoted in the material. Moreover the
systematic omission points to the fact that Bahais are not comfortable
with being exposed to having to prove the truth in Bahaism on the
basis of prophecies of Bayan and that it would also create doubt as to
why there were two manifestations at the same time, and few other
motivations.
Which I then went on to criticise.
Or else what do you mean by "that would be the implication given what
was quoted in the material"?
The omission would imply that Bahaism succeeded Islam and not Bayan.
Post by Steve BlombergPost by Steve Blombergwww.bayanic.com/notes/stations/stations-1.html
Anyhow, my point concenrned the glaring error in the initial post,
which is a pattern of how Bahais educate themselves.
What glaring error do you refer to here, Steve?
I don't intend to repeat myself.
I'll just assume that I won that part of the argument, then ;-)
Old habits never die!
My argument was the systematic omission of the religion of Bayan by
Bahais and hence their ignorance of the Bayan and attributing the
prophecies explained in Iqan to Husayn-Ali when they were meant for
the Point of Bayan. Try to twist around this one.
Post by Steve BlombergPost by Steve BlombergThe fact that
Bahais know {0} about Bayan speaks for itself.
They know less than you, quite possibly. I think they know more than
most other people.
You make no sense. Most other people need not know.
I assume that their website is directed towards promoting the Baha'i
Faith amongst people who probably haven't already heard of the Bab,
rather than the very small number of people in the world who did hear
about him.
It's a bit odd for a Bayani to express the opinion that it really
doesn't matter whether or not anyone ever hears about the Bayan, isn't
it?
You are twisting around my statements again.
I am not saying that people should not know; you said that Bahais know
more than most others.
Those poeple who SHOULD know are the Bahais. I cannot criticize Mr
Smith for not knowing about Bayan bu I can expect a Bahai to know
enough about Bayan to know what is the background, what Husayn-Ali
based his claim on, what are the teachings and history of Bayan and
what was Husayn-Ali's contribution compared to that of Bayan?
Post by Steve BlombergPost by Steve BlombergPost by PaulHammondSecondly, I reckon that the Baha'is consider the Bab himself to have
been a major figure.
www.bayanic.com/notes/stations/stations-1.html
..
www.bayanic.com/notes/stations/stations-8.html
Well, I reckon that the Baha'is consider the Bab himself to have been
a major figure. My understanding is that it's quite common for
Baha'is to refer to the Bab and Baha'u'llah as "Twin Manifestations"
Someone who the Baha'is put on the same level as the manifestation of
God they particularly revere sounds like they reckon him of some
account to me.
If you want to know what Bayanis think of the the formal Bahai
position concerning the religion of Bayan then read those pages.
I'm not particularly interested in that manifestation of "yeah, but
then he said that Mary said that Bill said, no.
Well! Stick to what you have heard of Bahais, that should be enough
for you.
Post by Steve BlombergPost by Steve BlombergPost by PaulHammondAnd on a slightly different tack - I think that the Baha'is consider
that their belief that all the major religions have a figure
predicting their own return or the coming of some "Promised One" does
NOT mean that the minor religions might not also have Messianic
expectations.
The concept of successive manifestations introduced in Bayan is clear
on who was the fulfilment of Moses, Jesus & Mohammad. What do you mean
by minor religions?
I mean to point out the logical fact that IF you say ALL major
religions say X, you have not said anything about what you believe to
be said in the minor religions.
Again, the material posted referred to major religions which omitted
Bayan.
And, the fact that the Bayan was admitted does not mean that the
writers don't consider it a major religion. Maybe they just figure
You don't even know if he knows. I pointed to a serious error. The
least is that this guy should make the effort to correct it. My
experience is that none of them do.
that most people potentially interested in the Baha'is won't have
heard of the Bab, whereas they will have heard of Christianity and
Islam.
Or, that it is intentional. I listed some of the motivations earlier.
I know you rather stick to your estimates.
That is because that is how it started. You are apologizing for
something that is fundamentally wrong.
Arguing a positive assertion from the fact that one group of Baha'is
have made an admission, which while it sticks in YOUR craw, probably
doesn't mean a damn to most people in this world is hardly a very
strong starting point, is it?
You are now going completely off course.
There were serious errors and distortion of fact. I pointed them out.
You have agreed that I was right pointing out those errors, since I
have not heard from you anything that refutes the errors I pointed
out, being the omission and attributing the prophecies to Husayn-Ali
You are prepared to go all directions in a desperate hope to divert
attention from my main points.
Whether it mean something or not to the rest of the world is not for
you to say.
Post by Steve BlombergThe fact that some bunch of Baha'is pitch a website in a way which
doesn't mention the Bab actually doesn't commit them to believe
anything about the Bab's relation to Baha'u'llah one way or another.
You are twisting around the facts. The fact that some bunch of Baha'is
pitch a website in a way which doesn't mention Bayan as the major
religion preceding the Bahai cult points to the misinformation that is
systematically practiced by Bahais
It's called advertising, Steve! All advertising works by assuming the
knowledge of its target audience!
Nop! It is called omission and distortion of facts.
Even advertisement has rules. You should know that.
Maybe it's just that you're more naive about these things than I am?
and in fact is one of the reasons
Post by Steve Blombergmost Bahais do not know about the religion of Bayan on the basis of
which Bahai claim is based.
Well, I don't see that it's the Baha'is job to educate potential
converts about the claims of rivals who think their founder is a bad,
bad man!
In the same way as second hand car dealer who intentionally tries to
sell a junk car in place of a brand new car and not provide all the
fact to secure teh deal.
I think you have summed up the intention and motivation for omissions
and distortions very well.
Indeed, that is the Bahai education system.
Paul