Bahai Faith compared to the Moonies
george.fleming2
Dennis MacEoin is arguing that the BF should be properly described as a "new religious movement" (NRM) rather than a "world religion". He compares BF with Unification Church (the Moonies!!)
http://bahai-library.org/essays/nrm.html
Here's a short extract:
"the Baha'is have done a great PR job in convincing people that they are a world religion. But in what way does Baha'i fit with Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, and Judaism? Numbers? There are at most 5 million Baha'is in the world (and probably a very great deal fewer). That puts them on a par with Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons, and way out of the league of the rest. Time around? 153 years at most, if you include Babism. Again, not in that league. Influence on civilization? About as insignificant as it gets. Nation states adhering to that belief? Zero. To include Baha'ism as one of the world's 6 world religions is nonsense and very special pleading. There are no objective grounds for it. Baha'is would like to be members of a world religion, but that doesn't make it so".
*********************************************************************
In any case, if we compare Baha'i with some of the movements that are now regularly classed as NRMs, the resemblances are often striking. The Unification Church and Baha'i have some extraordinary similarities, down to the style of their pamphlets and books, and the themes they express (world brotherhood, oneness of religions, etc.).
**********************************************************************
"To my knowledge, the only NRM with a self-perception similar to that of Baha'i is the Unification Church. Its followers see Moon's mission as that of establishing the Kingdom of God on earth, they think in terms of the fulfillment of earlier revelations, and so on. In practical terms, they are way behind the Baha'is in respect of numbers and influence (except in certain areas), although they are much better known by reason of their controversial reputation. Jehovah's Witnesses are, as is well known, wedded to a millenarian vision, with Jesus coming to transform the world into an earthly paradise which members will inhabit. This inhibits the idea of growth to become a universal faith (nor would the idea appeal in itself".
Randy Burns
--
george.fleming2 <george....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:BA447B80.BD49%george....@ntlworld.com...
Paul Hammond
> Bahai Faith compared to the MooniesIt should also be noted that Moon
> the Moonies have infiltrated the Baha'i hierarchy in an attempt to
> hijack the faith to their ends.
>
> Cheers, Randy
>
Ooh! Is that a bit like me being a closet Jesuit?
I *am* a big James Joyce fan - does that count??
Paul
Randy Burns
Portrait?
Randy
--
Paul Hammond <paha...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:c977f97b.03011...@posting.google.com...
Mark A. Foster
are NRMs (new religious movements) ***and*** world religions.
Beyond that, the nature of both religions is relative.
For instance, the Unification movement would be a (Christian) sect in
the U.S. and in all countries with a predominantly Christian
population. It would be a cult in countries where Christianity is not
one of the dominant religions in that society. A cult, in this
instance, refers to a religious organization which is not a branch of
one of the dominant religious traditions in a particular society.
Since the Baha'i Faith does not ***claim*** to be a branch of any
other religion (irrespective of any connections which may exist), it
would be a cult in all societies. Note that in sociology, the word
"cult" is purely descriptive, not pejorative.
Mark A. Foster
george.fleming2
at ow...@sociologist.com wrote on 12/1/03 11:28 pm:
Welcome to TRB Mark,
Thanks for the post, Here is one example of the worlds 5th largest religion
with 4 times the members of the Baha'i Faith and it does not **claim** to be
a branch of any other other religion yet the Baha'i Faith refuses to accept
its divine status as a World Religion or even accept its station within the
concept of "progressive Revelation".....................GF
Sikhism
A progressive religion well ahead of its time when it was founded over 500
years ago, The Sikh religion today has a following of over 20 million people
worldwide and is ranked as the worlds 5th largest religion. Sikhism preaches
a message of devotion and remembrance of God at all times, truthful living,
equality of mankind and denounces superstitions and blind rituals. Sikhism
is open to all through the teachings of its 10 Gurus enshrined in the Sikh
Holy Book and Living Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib.
Pat Kohli
Good to see you back.
Hopefully, when you get a chance, would you respond to a comment made a
few weeks ago?
Thanks!
"Mark Foster has admitted in the past that the presence of various
individuals on the internet contains a financial dividend of up to
$10,000.00 + per annum by the satanic AO cult to its various online
agents."
Nima, 19 Dec 02
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl2342319397d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=de9e05b.0212191904.64f84796%40posting.google.com
"Mark A. Foster" wrote:
(snip)
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
> in article 41403b79.03011...@posting.google.com, Mark A. Foster
> at ow...@sociologist.com wrote on 12/1/03 11:28 pm:
> (snip)
>
> Thanks for the post, Here is one example of the worlds 5th largest religion
> with 4 times the members of the Baha'i Faith and it does not **claim** to be
> a branch of any other other religion yet the Baha'i Faith refuses to accept
> its divine status as a World Religion or even accept its station within the
> concept of "progressive Revelation".....................GF
>
> Sikhism
> A progressive religion well ahead of its time when it was founded over 500
> years ago, The Sikh religion today has a following of over 20 million people
> worldwide and is ranked as the worlds 5th largest religion. Sikhism preaches
> a message of devotion and remembrance of God at all times, truthful living,
> equality of mankind and denounces superstitions and blind rituals. Sikhism
> is open to all through the teachings of its 10 Gurus enshrined in the Sikh
> Holy Book and Living Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib.
It is interesting that Baha'is around the world invite Sikhs to ecumenical
prayers, just like Hindus and Muslims. My guess is that 160 years ago the Sikhs
were predominately in the Punjab, much like the way the followers of Shinto are
predominatly in Japan. What was a national religion, has become an
international one, and as far as I can see, in 2000 CE, Baha'is trusted their
spiritual discernment to tell them that Sikhs pray to the same God everyone else
does. Truth is one; and your mileage, George Fleming, may vary.
-- In Ireland, representatives of several of the world’s major faiths gathered
at the Baha'i Centre in Dublin, Ireland, on 28 August to participate in a
devotional program of extracts from Baha'i, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish,
Islamic, Zoroastrian and Sikh sacred texts. Each guest was presented with a
flower blossom on arrival. After devotions and music, tea was served and the
representatives of the various religions learned about each other's faiths and
traditions in an atmosphere of goodwill. Irish Baha'is sponsored similar events
in Cavan, Fingal (a suburb of Dublin), Co. Sligo, Shannon and Waterford.
-- In the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Baha'is held a devotional gathering
at the Baha'i community center in Port Blair, and invited representatives of the
Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh communities to chant and recite
prayers for world peace. About 60 people attended, and the event was covered by
local newspapers and announced on the local bulletin of All India Radio.
-- In India, the State Baha'i Council of Sikkim organised a prayer gathering at
the Hotel Rendezvous in Gangtok on August 28. Although they had only four days
to organise the event, the Baha'is sent out more than 100 invitations to
dignitaries and religious leaders. Nearly everyone agreed to participate. The
Governor of Sikkim, Choudhary Randhir Singh, attended along with representatives
of the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Sikh, and Jain communities. News of the
gathering was carried on the Sikkim cable television and several local and
regional newspapers.
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 13/1/03 12:48 am:
The truth is that both Baha'i Manifestations forgot all about 20 million
Sikhs where any part of Gods "Progressive Revelation". Never mind all the
smokescreens Agent SOV009, has thrown up below, lets see some Baha'i
writings were to prove the Sikhs, the 5th largest World religion is part of
Gods Plan?. Readers would agree the Baha'i Faith has one cheek asking for
World religion status when it itself has refused Sikhs that same status? In
fact the Sikhs are airbrushed out of religious history in all Bahai sacred
literature. I wonder why that is?.....................Gf
STATEMENT DB035
BAHA'I-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE: Some Key Issues Considered by Francis J. Beckwith
http://www.equip.org/free/DB035.htm
The Doctrine of God Taught by the Alleged Manifestations5
MANIFESTATION IMPORTANT ELEMENTS IN HIS DOCTRINE OF GOD
Moses One personal God. The universe is not eternal, but was created by
God (Gen. 1-3; Deut. 6:4; etc.).
Krishna Mix of polytheism and impersonal pantheism. The universe is
eternal.
Zoroaster One good god and one evil god (religious dualism).
Buddha God not relevant; essentially agnostic.
Confucius Polytheistic.
Muhammad One personal God who cannot have a Son.
Jesus Christ One personal God who does have a Son (Mark 12:29; John 4:24;
5:18-19;etc.)
Baha'u'llah God and the universe, which is an emanation of God, are
co-eternal.6
Dermod Ryder
"Mark A. Foster" <ow...@sociologist.com> wrote in message
news:41403b79.03011...@posting.google.com...
Mark,
Long time, no see in these hallowed precincts.
> Since the Baha'i Faith does not ***claim*** to be a branch of any
> other religion (irrespective of any connections which may exist), it
> would be a cult in all societies. Note that in sociology, the word
> "cult" is purely descriptive, not pejorative.
In Northern Ireland, the BF is most assuredly a "cult" in the
sociological determination - as of Census Day 2001, some 254 persons
in a total population of 1,685,267 described themselves as Bahai.
They were outnumbered by Jews (365), Buddhists (533), Quakers (749),
and Mormons(1414) among others but outnumbered the Sikhs (219) and
Pagans (148) (Sorry, Michael!). There is hope however - they also
outnumbered the Atheists at 106 a Satanists at 12.
From memory (I would need to check this) their numbers have decreased
since the 1991 Census when, if I recollect correctly, over 300 persons
signed themselves as Bahai.
In the broader and pejorative sense of the word the BF's behaviour can
best be described as "cultic". It qualifies on all counts therefore
to be dismissed as a cult and a decreasing one at that - in terms of
numbers at least.
Dermod.
>
> Mark A. Foster
Paul Hammond
> I thought Joyce was lapsed?
Yeah, but he wouldn't have been who he was without
them Jesuits.
What have you read besides Dubliners and
> Portrait?
>
Ulysses and Finnegans Wake, of course! What else?
Paul
Mark A. Foster
You wrote:
>>...yet the Baha'i Faith refuses to accept its divine status as a
World Religion or even accept its station within the concept of
"progressive Revelation"<<
I am not sure what you mean by that.
Mark A. Foster
http://markfoster.net
Mark A. Foster
Okay, I just reread your post. You are referring to the place of
Sikhism in the Baha'i texts.
For what it's worth, I have a great deal of respect for Sikhism. As
you may or may not know, I was briefly a Sikh before coming into the
Baha'i Faith. These days, I practice a form of meditation (surat shabd
yoga) which is rooted in the Sikh tradition.
Like Islam and Judaism, Sikhism has always been distinguished by its
recognition of Tawhid, the Unity of God. I would not place mainline
Christianity, with its trinitarianism, in the same category.
Personally, I think that too much is made of "religions" and whether a
particular faith tradition was referred to by Baha'i sources as a
world religion. I would rather focus on truth and reality. As
Baha'u'llah says (repeating the traditional saying), "Knowledge is but
a single point. The foolish have multiplied it."
Perhaps Sikhism should be regarded as an Islamic reform movement or as
a synthesis of Islam (Sufism in particular) and the Indian Sant
tradition. Regardless, if all truth comes, ultimately, from God, then
Sikhism must be an expression of the Will of God.
Adelard Rubangura
> The truth is that both Baha'i Manifestations forgot all about 20 million
> Sikhs where any part of Gods "Progressive Revelation". Never mind all the
> smokescreens Agent SOV009, has thrown up below, lets see some Baha'i
> writings were to prove the Sikhs, the 5th largest World religion is part
of
> Gods Plan?.
Baha'u'llah reveals:
"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever
race or religion, drive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are
the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which
they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies
of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are
the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are reflections
of His Will and Purpose."
-Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah p. 217
God Bless.
Adelard
<snip>
george.fleming2
> Hi, George,
>
> You wrote:
>
>>> ...yet the Baha'i Faith refuses to accept its divine status as a
> World Religion or even accept its station within the concept of
> "progressive Revelation"<<
>
> I am not sure what you mean by that.
Hi Mark,
I am actually laying a challenge here to the ambiguous Baha'i belief of
"Progressive Revelation"
Because Sikhism (founded 1500 AD) falls inbetween the beginning of the
Muhammaden Revelation (circa 622) and the Babi/Baha'i revelation 1844 this
Worlds 5th largest religion representing 20 million world citizens is just
not classed as a revelation. The three central figures of the BF respect
the 12 Imans in Shi'ite Islam. Shi'ite's claim to be a sect (10% of
Muslims) of mainstream Islam and their 12 Imans are given high status and
even considered Manifestations of a (lesser prophet) variety, but the 10
Gurus of Sikhism are dismissed as of no importance, yet Sihkism does not lay
claim to be a sect or branch of either Islam or Hinduism its two mother
religions which it evolved from.
For instance on the US NSA website a female Baha'i states I was a Christian
before I became a Baha'i but as the Baha'i Faith accepts the Christian
revelation I believe I have just moved on from one revelation to another, to
the Revelation of Baha'u'llah" namely 'Progressive Revelation"
But a Sikh who shall we say becomes a Bahai cannot say the same as the
Christian/Bahai woman said above because the Baha'i Faith does not believe
Sikhism was a revelation at all.
So where does these 20 million (very religious world citizens and their
religion) fit into the historical story of ongoing world religions (and
their Manifestations and revelations) since the time of Adam, when Baha'is
are puting up an argument to prove the concept of "Progressive Revelation"?
Finally I lay a kind request to youself or any other Baha'i to find me a
writing from any one of the three central figures of the Baha'i Faith on the
5th largest world religion. called Sikhism. Surely they must have been aware
of its existance?........................George
george.fleming2
Adelard_...@yahoo.com wrote on 13/1/03 8:05 am:
Yes but this is an overall very bland statement. (6 billion world citizens
all should worship Allah as Allah loves them all) Big deal, Previous
revelations rejected each other, until the Muhammaden revelation tried to
incorporate all religions of the book (even Sabaenism but excluding
Zoroastraianism) under the banner of the Seal of the Prophets. The Baha'i
Faith on the other hand has extended its range of world religion acceptance
in its 'Progressive Revelation' prophesy to include Hinduism and Buddhism.
Yet it rejects Jainism and Sikhism, two very well known recognised and
accepted **World Religions**.
Neither of these two religions (Jainism and Sikhism) lay claim to be
attached to any other main world religion, and it is therefore hypocritical
of the Baha'i faith (membership of only 5 million) to seek world religion
**acceptance** for themselves and try and reject Sikhism (membership 20
million) into a lesser station than themselves.
Agent SOV009 posted the following( below)as an example of the
acknowledgement towards Sikhism. But this is superficial hypocrisy. No
where in the Baha'i writings is the Sikh religion's 10 Gurus accepted as
lesser prophets compared to the adulation of the 12 Imans of the Shi'ite
Islam. I know about all this hypocritical twaddle which went on especially
in Ireland. I spent two years doing a series of paintings (30 canvases in
all) on World religions (including Sikhism and Jainism)
http://www.warble.com/BahaiArtGallery/HTML/GeorgeFleming/Artist.html
There was imagery of all including Sikhism and Jainism in the catalogue but
they were not installed on the "Bahai Art gallery" because they might be
offensive to some Baha'is. I even had a few Baha'is turned their noses up at
my exhibition because I had included Sikhism and Jainism. "Not mentioned in
the writings" I was quietly told by a few older Persian Baha'is.
Quite frankly it was my love of inter-faith which attracted me to the BF but
after this exhibition I realised the BF dont give two farts about other
religions. If they came upon some tribe whose promised one was Mr Mumbo
Jumbo, the Baha'is would try and con them to beleve Mr Mumbo Jumbo was
really Baha'u'llah and they didn't know about it to we came along...GF
George
---------------------------------------
From Agent SOV009's post
In Ireland, representatives of several of the world’s major faiths gathered
at the Baha'i Centre in Dublin, Ireland, on 28 August to participate in a
devotional program of extracts from Baha'i, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist,
Jewish, Islamic, Zoroastrian and Sikh sacred texts. Each guest was presented
with a flower blossom on arrival. After devotions and music, tea was served
and the representatives of the various religions learned about each other's
faiths and traditions in an atmosphere of goodwill. Irish Baha'is sponsored
similar events in Cavan, Fingal (a suburb of Dublin), Co. Sligo, Shannon and
Waterford.
-- In the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Baha'is held a devotional
gathering at the Baha'i community center in Port Blair, and invited
representatives of the Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh
communities to chant and recite prayers for world peace. About 60 people
attended, and the event was covered by local newspapers and announced on the
local bulletin of All India Radio.
-- In India, the State Baha'i Council of Sikkim organised a prayer gathering
at the Hotel Rendezvous in Gangtok on August 28. Although they had only four
days to organise the event, the Baha'is sent out more than 100 invitations
todignitaries and religious leaders. Nearly everyone agreed to participate.
The
Governor of Sikkim, Choudhary Randhir Singh, attended along with
representatives
of the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Sikh, and Jain communities. News of the
gathering was carried on the Sikkim cable television and several local and
regional newspapers.
----------------------------------------------------------
Paul Hammond
Have you found another stick with which to beat your former
religion? Well done!
So, does that mean that you're going to drop the AA tack,
and the anti-Catholic tack now, or will my saying this
ressurect those issues for you?
Shame this one is just as naff as all the others - you know,
there *are* serious criticisms of the Baha'i Faith - but
for you to stumble across one of these, and make a good fist
of presenting your argument is about as likely as a bunch
of monkeys typing the complete works of Shakespeare.
All of your arguments so far have been easily refuted. This
one is just the same.
Paul
"george.fleming2" <george....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<BA47C613.C51E%george....@ntlworld.com>...
Mark A. Foster
individuals on the internet contains a financial dividend of up to
$10,000.00 + per annum by the satanic AO cult to its various online
agents."<<
No, I never said that. However, if there is such a dividend, someone
must have stolen my check. ;-)
Mark A. Foster
sociological determination - as of Census Day 2001, some 254 persons
in a total population of 1,685,267 described themselves as Bahai.<<
Using one of the more common sociological definitions (Roy
Wallis, etc.), the Baha'i Faith is a cult everywhere, not
only in Northern Ireland.
Although some Muslims (and others) still regard the Baha'i
Faith as an Islamic sect, as a sociologist of religion, I
generally define a religious organization phenomenologically,
i.e., focusing on how members of that organization define
themselves (their "intentionality").
Since Baha'is consider themselves to be members of an
independent religion, not a branch of any other faith, it
it is a cult by definition
>>They were outnumbered by Jews (365), Buddhists (533),
Quakers (749), and Mormons(1414) among others but outnumbered
the Sikhs (219) and Pagans (148) (Sorry, Michael!). There
is hope however - they also outnumbered the Atheists at 106
a Satanists at 12.<<
Yes, obviously the Baha'is Faith is a relatively small
religion in most countries. However, size is not a principal
factor.
>>From memory (I would need to check this) their numbers
have decreased since the 1991 Census when, if I recollect
correctly, over 300 persons signed themselves as Bahai.<<
I would not be surprised if that were true in most
Western societies.
>>In the broader and pejorative sense of the word the BF's
behaviour can best be described as "cultic". It qualifies
on all counts therefore to be dismissed as a cult and a
decreasing one at that - in terms of numbers at least.<<
There are two major pejorative definitions of "cult":
1. a religion which deviates from the teachings of
fundamentalist and neo-evangelical Protestantism
(Walter Martin et al.)
2. a religion, headed by a living charismatic leader,
who abuses its members
Using the first definition, any and all faiths whose
tenets do not conform to Christian fundamentalism and
neo=evangelicalism would be cults.
Using the second definition, the Baha'i Faith would not
be a cult using the first criteria (living charismatic
leader). However, the issue of abuse is largely
subjective (which, in part, is why sociologists rarely
utilize this definition of "cult") and provides a vehicle
for attacking a religious organization.
These sorts of issues are rarely resolved.
I developed what I regard as a more useful religious
organizational typology:
http://markfoster.org/typ.html
Mark A. Foster
Progressive revelation is, IMO, a different issue from religions.
Because God progressively reveals His Will, perhaps a bit like Don
Beck and Ken Wilber's approach to spiral dynamics, does not
necessarily mean that one "religion" is superior to another.
Sorry for the brief response. I need to get ready to head off to
campus.
Michael McKenny
You shared with us:
>Mark A. Foster (ow...@sociologist.com) writes:
> There are two major pejorative definitions of "cult":
>
> 1. a religion which deviates from the teachings of
> fundamentalist and neo-evangelical Protestantism
> (Walter Martin et al.)
>
> 2. a religion, headed by a living charismatic leader,
> who abuses its members
>
This is not my understanding at all. You may be speaking according to
the narrow ivy tower minority viewpoint. As I understand the common
consensus, as the media phrases it, what one would expect to find in
public opinion polls, cults are largely imagined to be smaller groupings
of the mainstream (Christian in the West) religion, but of an extreme
fundamentalist bent. Cults expect Jesus to return soon, and cult members
are believed capable of wandering off to the local or distant hill or
mountaintop to await him.
I also don't think the common consensus makes the firm distinction
Baha'is do between one abusive individual in positions of absolute power
and nine abusers ruling with absolute collective power.
To a better future, Michael
> Using the first definition, any and all faiths whose
> tenets do not conform to Christian fundamentalism and
> neo=evangelicalism would be cults.
>
> Using the second definition, the Baha'i Faith would not
> be a cult using the first criteria (living charismatic
> leader). However, the issue of abuse is largely
> subjective (which, in part, is why sociologists rarely
> utilize this definition of "cult") and provides a vehicle
> for attacking a religious organization.
>
> These sorts of issues are rarely resolved.
>
> I developed what I regard as a more useful religious
> organizational typology:
>
> http://markfoster.org/typ.html
>
> Mark A. Foster
> http://markfoster.net
--
"My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard."
(Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2)
Michael McKenny
Great to see you posting under your own name, or at least the first one
I encountered you using, as far as I know, in cyberspace.
Mark A. Foster (ow...@sociologist.com) writes:
>>>"Mark Foster has admitted in the past that the presence of various
> individuals on the internet contains a financial dividend of up to
> $10,000.00 + per annum by the satanic AO cult to its various online
> agents."<<
>
> No, I never said that. However, if there is such a dividend, someone
> must have stolen my check. ;-)
The denial means nothing at all. Whoever accused you can post your
alleged words on this, and we'll see whether you actually said it.
My point continues to be that Baha'i ought to have its Counsellors,
etc. diffusing the divine fragrances here, and, if it's something they're
paid for, I've no problem with that. Diffusing the divine fragrances is
part of their job description. However, exactly as agreed by the
principles of Baha'i consulation and by the rules of formal logic, ad
hominems are irrelevant. Whether or not one posting is a paid agent (even
a Counsellor or UHJ member) means nothing when it comes to assessing the
worth of any idea submitted here.
Baha'u'llah designed his fundamental spiritual principles to ever more
increasingly appeal to an ever advancing civilization. This indeed has
been happening in the non-Baha'i world, and decade by decade, generation
by generation such essential principles of human maturity as freedom of
thought and expression, the equality of women and men, the harmony of
faith and reason have been more and more widely embraced by humans.
Whoever posts here, or speaks elsewhere on behalf of Baha'i, will find an
ever more receptive audience, when the fundamental principles of
Baha'u'llah are mentioned, shared and advanced. Whoever opposes such
spiritual principles, even paid agents of the UHJ, even guys calling
themselves UHJ, will find less and less receptivity. You admit that
contrary to the expectation (prophesy) of entry by troops Baha'i has seen
significant decline. This is the fundamental cause of reality differing so
widely from that anticipation. The fact that Baha'i leadership and voices
speaking for Baha'i leadership have so strongly opposed, instead of
supporting, the spiritual principles designed to characterize mature human
society.
To a Better Future,
Michael
> Mark A. Foster
Michael McKenny
Greetings, Sov009.
Pat Kohli (kohliCUT...@ameritel.net) writes:
> Allahu Abha!
>
> Good to see you back.
>
> Hopefully, when you get a chance, would you respond to a comment made a
> few weeks ago?
<translation: "Agent Sov009, this is Agent Sov009; lets dupe the rubes
into thinking there's two of us :)" >
> Thanks!
>
> "Mark Foster has admitted in the past that the presence of various
> individuals on the internet contains a financial dividend of up to
> $10,000.00 + per annum by the satanic AO cult to its various online
> agents."
> Nima, 19 Dec 02
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl2342319397d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=de9e05b.0212191904.64f84796%40posting.google.com
>
>
>
> "Mark A. Foster" wrote:
> (snip)
>
Michael McKenny
Hi, Sov009.
You claim:
Pat Kohli (kohliCUT...@ameritel.net) writes:
>
> -- In Ireland, representatives of several of the world’s major faiths gathered
> at the Baha'i Centre in Dublin, Ireland, on 28 August to participate in a
> devotional program of extracts from Baha'i, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish,
> Islamic, Zoroastrian and Sikh sacred texts.
How many, if any, Sikhs were present? How many Zoroastrians? How many
Buddhists? How many Muslims? How many non-Baha'is attended and how many of
them were young?
> Each guest was presented with a
> flower blossom on arrival. After devotions and music, tea was served and the
> representatives of the various religions learned about each other's faiths and
> traditions in an atmosphere of goodwill. Irish Baha'is sponsored similar events
> in Cavan, Fingal (a suburb of Dublin), Co. Sligo, Shannon and Waterford.
What's your source for this?
Oh, and were any non-Baha'i guests told up front that Baha'is
discriminate against women?
> -- In the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Baha'is held a devotional gathering
> at the Baha'i community center in Port Blair, and invited representatives of the
> Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh communities to chant and recite
> prayers for world peace. About 60 people attended, and the event was covered by
> local newspapers and announced on the local bulletin of All India Radio.
Same questions, including source, but also, did this really happen also
on August 28th?
> -- In India, the State Baha'i Council of Sikkim organised a prayer gathering at
> the Hotel Rendezvous in Gangtok on August 28. Although they had only four days
> to organise the event,
Gees, 009, fill us in, like spill the beans, man, what's the big deal
with August 28th and if so, how in the world was there only a four day
notice. Did the Irish only have a four day notice, too, or is there
different treatment of Indians and Europeans?
> the Baha'is sent out more than 100 invitations to
> dignitaries and religious leaders. Nearly everyone agreed to participate. The
> Governor of Sikkim, Choudhary Randhir Singh, attended along with representatives
> of the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Sikh, and Jain communities. News of the
> gathering was carried on the Sikkim cable television and several local and
> regional newspapers.
>
How many Muslims were there? That would seem a significant question in
this case, right? Were there readings at this event from the Koran?
And was August 28th significant elsewhere besides India, it's islands,
and Ireland?
To the Equality of Women and Men, Nur Allah
george.fleming2
Mark,
Agreed, but surely you would also agree, without there having been the eight
or nine major world religions and their revelations, which their prophets or
manifestations announced to humankind, the Baha'i faith would have no
historical evidence to prove their religious belief in "Progressive
revelation"
If we agree no one religion is superior to another, why then was Sikhism
(the 5th largest world religion with 20 million members) left out of the
Baha'u'llah's belief in "Progressive Revelation" when all these others were
included. I personally believe this had something to do with Shi'ite
Islamic non acceptance of Sikhism as a reconised Faith which was carried
over into Baha'i Belief, and was never memtioned in the writings.
George
Michael McKenny
You asked:
"george.fleming2" (george....@ntlworld.com) writes:
>
> Finally I lay a kind request to youself or any other Baha'i to find me a
> writing from any one of the three central figures of the Baha'i Faith on the
> 5th largest world religion. called Sikhism. Surely they must have been aware
> of its existance?........................George
>
There's a collection of works by Abdu'l Baha that includes a reference
to Sikhs. If I recall correctly it goes something like, "And there are
these great guys that don't do drugs and are clean and healthy and any one
of them can take on any three of another kind; these are a great example
of how Baha'is ought to treat the drug scene."
I'm sure agent SOV009 can provide the exact words.
Thrice Three Blessings, Michael
george.fleming2
bn...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA wrote on 13/1/03 4:31 pm:
> Hi, George.
> You asked:
>
> "george.fleming2" (george....@ntlworld.com) writes:
>>
>> Finally I lay a kind request to youself or any other Baha'i to find me a
>> writing from any one of the three central figures of the Baha'i Faith on the
>> 5th largest world religion. called Sikhism. Surely they must have been aware
>> of its existance?........................George
>>
> There's a collection of works by Abdu'l Baha that includes a reference
> to Sikhs. If I recall correctly it goes something like, "And there are
> these great guys that don't do drugs and are clean and healthy and any one
> of them can take on any three of another kind; these are a great example
> of how Baha'is ought to treat the drug scene."
> I'm sure agent SOV009 can provide the exact words.
Hi Michael,
To convince me Agent SOV009 will have to come up with a writing of Abdu'l
Baha' relating to the religious belief of these Sikh guys, rather than just
how good their fighting skills are and staying away from Drugs.
AB may have been symbolically advertising "Narcotic Anonymous" for young
Baha'is who dabbled in Bob Hope and Judo classes for Baha'is like Agent
SOV009 to prepare them for the lesser peace.................GF
Sekhmet
> The denial means nothing at all. Whoever accused you can post your
>alleged words on this, and we'll see whether you actually said it.
I am guessing that it will be a cold day in Dante's ninth circle before that
happens.
--Sekhmet
Mark A. Foster
>> The denial means nothing at all. Whoever accused you can post your
alleged words on this, and we'll see whether you actually said it.<<
Well, on the face of it, the attribution seems rather strange. I don't
think that anyone who is familiar with my posts would believe I would
have written such a thing. (Not that I would mind the money <grin>.)
>>My point continues to be that Baha'i ought to have its Counsellors,
etc. diffusing the divine fragrances here, and, if it's something
they're
paid for, I've no problem with that.<<
Actually, it would bother me, and if I were aware of anything like
payola, I would immediately expose it. However, I suspect that it
hasn't happened.
>>Diffusing the divine fragrances is part of their job description.<<
One diffuses the divine fragrances for the sake of love, not because
one is receiving a supposedly secret payoff
>>However, exactly as agreed by the principles of Baha'i consulation
and by the rules of formal logic, ad hominems are irrelevant. Whether
or not one posting is a paid agent (even a Counsellor or UHJ member)
means nothing when it comes to assessing the worth of any idea
submitted here.<<
Michael, it would matter to me. I would not trust someone if I knew
they were receiving payola.
Mark A. Foster
to
the narrow ivy tower minority viewpoint.<<
There are two major academic definitions of "cult," the one I gave and
the theological definition. Theologians commonly define cult (Latin,
cultus) as worship or devotion, which is, of course, what the word
actually means in Latin. Therefore, one can speak of the cult of the
Eucharist and the cult of the Virgin Mary. Again, no pejorative is
intended.
The more common Western definitions are basically insults and have no
usefulness in academia (at least in the sociology of religions).
>>As I understand the common consensus, as the media phrases it, what
one would expect to find in public opinion polls, cults are largely
imagined to be smaller groupings of the mainstream (Christian in the
West) religion, but of an extreme fundamentalist bent.<<
That is the precise sociological definition of "sect."
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
Where have you read 'Abdu'l Baha, Baha'u'llah, or the Bab, saying that the Sikh
Faith was not a valid religion?
Instead, Adelard has provided the quote that the vast majority of religions are from
God, and only the perverse ones are not.
> In
> fact the Sikhs are airbrushed out of religious history in all Bahai sacred
> literature. I wonder why that is?.
Pehaps you've been looking where the sun never shines, again?
>
>
>
> STATEMENT DB035
> BAHA'I-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE: Some Key Issues Considered by Francis J. Beckwith
>
> http://www.equip.org/free/DB035.htm
>
> The Doctrine of God Taught by the Alleged Manifestations5
> MANIFESTATION IMPORTANT ELEMENTS IN HIS DOCTRINE OF GOD
>
(snip)
Dr. Beckwith is not qualified to write the Baha'i position on tying his shoes.
some have suspected taht 'Abdu'l Baha refers to the Sikh community in this passage
published in "Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l Baha.
"O ye, God's loved ones! Experience hath shown how greatly the renouncing of
smoking, of intoxicating drink, and of opium, conduceth to health and vigour, to the
expansion and keenness of the mind and to bodily strength. There is today a people1
who strictly avoid tobacco, intoxicating liquor and opium. This people is far and
away superior to the others, for strength and physical courage, for health, beauty
and comeliness. A single one of their men can stand up to ten men of another tribe.
This hath proved true of the entire people: that is, member for member, each
individual of this community is in every respect superior to the individuals of
other communities."
http://bahai-library.org/writings/abdulbaha/swab/129.html
Yet, the basic premise is in the quotation provdided by Adelard, that Baha'u'llah
sees religions as coming from God, and barring evidence to the otherwise, this is
the presumption of Baha'is.
Guru Nanak was a saint, and barring any evidence from you that Baha'is ought to
believe anything to the contrary, I think you simply speak for yourself, again.
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 14/1/03 3:40 am:
>> The truth is that both Baha'i Manifestations forgot all about 20 million
>> Sikhs where any part of Gods "Progressive Revelation". Never mind all the
>> smokescreens Agent SOV009, has thrown up below, lets see some Baha'i
>> writings were to prove the Sikhs, the 5th largest World religion is part of
>> Gods Plan?. Readers would agree the Baha'i Faith has one cheek asking for
>> World religion status when it itself has refused Sikhs that same status?
>
> Where have you read 'Abdu'l Baha, Baha'u'llah, or the Bab, saying that the
> Sikh Faith was not a valid religion?
Agent SOV009,
I said **FORGOT** to mention the existance of their religion the 5th largest
in the world. It is obvious 'Abdu'l Baha, Baha'u'llah, or the Bab never
believed Sikhism had any dispensation or revelation from God otherwise they
would have mentioned it in their writings. By excluding Sikhism (unlike
other world religions) it is obvious the 3 Central Figures did not agree
Sikhism was a valid religion.
>
> Instead, Adelard has provided the quote that the vast majority of religions
> are from God, and only the perverse ones are not.
That is only a bland overall statement. Did Baha'u'llah include the Mormon
religion in this statement?
>
>> In fact the Sikhs are airbrushed out of religious history in all Bahai sacred
>> literature. I wonder why that is?.
>
> Pehaps you've been looking where the sun never shines, again?
>
>> STATEMENT DB035
>> BAHA'I-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE: Some Key Issues Considered by Francis J. Beckwith
>>
>> http://www.equip.org/free/DB035.htm
>>
>> The Doctrine of God Taught by the Alleged Manifestations5
>> MANIFESTATION IMPORTANT ELEMENTS IN HIS DOCTRINE OF GOD
>>
> (snip)
> Dr. Beckwith is not qualified to write the Baha'i position on tying his shoes.
Pray tell me, who is qualified to write the Baha'i position on tying his
shoes. Would it by any chance happen to be Agent SOV009?
> some have suspected taht 'Abdu'l Baha refers to the Sikh community in
> this passage published in "Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l Baha.
>
> "O ye, God's loved ones! Experience hath shown how greatly the renouncing of
> smoking, of intoxicating drink, and of opium, conduceth to health and vigour,
> to the expansion and keenness of the mind and to bodily strength. There is
> today a people1 who strictly avoid tobacco, intoxicating liquor and opium.
> This people is far and away superior to the others, for strength and physical
> courage, for health, beauty and comeliness. A single one of their men can
> stand up to ten men of another tribe. This hath proved true of the entire
> people: that is, member for member, each individual of this community is in
> every respect superior to the individuals of other communities."
> http://bahai-library.org/writings/abdulbaha/swab/129.html
Were may I ask is there any reference here to this anonymous group of
people's religious belief? The word **Sikh** is not even mentioned.
>
> Yet, the basic premise is in the quotation provdided by Adelard, that
> Baha'u'llah sees religions as coming from God, and barring evidence to the
> otherwise, this is the presumption of Baha'is.
Its was a bland overriding statement, being used here as an excuse to make
it seem Three Central figures of the Baha'i Faith embraced Sikhism within
"Progressive Revelation" when in fact they left the religion out instead.
>
> Guru Nanak was a saint, and barring any evidence from you that Baha'is ought
> to believe anything to the contrary, I think you simply speak for yourself,
> again.
I am not saying what individual Baha'is should or should not believe. I was
only requesting documented evidence (within the Baha'is teachings) to prove
that Sikhism had been accepted by the Bahai Faith as recognised world
religion. No writing, tablet or piece of documented evidence has been
provided or brought forward to prove otherwise.
Finally were is there documented evidence to prove that the Baha'i Faith
( not Agent SOV009, or myself) accepts Guru Nanak was a saint?...GF
Susan Maneck
>etc. diffusing the divine fragrances here, and, if it's something
>they're
>paid for, I've no problem with that.<<
Counsellors aren't paid either. Their expenses are covered and they get a paid
secretary. But they get no salary for themselves.
Susan Maneck
Associate Professor of History
Jackson State University
NEMO418
as Tahirih Qurrat'ul-`Ayn (The Pure Solace of the Eyes)!
You've been away for a while, Mark. Is money that tight
ow...@sociologist.com (Mark A. Foster) wrote in message news:<41403b79.03011...@posting.google.com>...
> The more common Western definitions are basically insults and have no
> usefulness in academia (at least in the sociology of religions).
Says you, but not according to the ever growing body of literature on
cults even within the sociology of religion. But, of course, you are
specifically wheeled out here to say "useless in academia" to earn
your keep. By virtue of your involvement in a bona fide cult and your
admission to me that you have been paid by the Baha'i AO for your
internet presence, it stands to reason that snakes like you are
useless *to* academia tout court and not valid typologies such as
"cult."
A book I highly recommend:
Collins, John J.
1991 The Cult Experience. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas,
Publisher.
So what happened to your involvement with Thelema there, Mark? Don't
you know I am the One whom the Master Therion and his celestial guides
from the Aethyrs prophesied would come, which makes me the true
Magister Templi and the one and only Thelemic Prophet in this day. You
should see my commentary on LiberAI 2 76 (the Book of the Law). I have
cracked what it means. Tell that to your contacts in the OTO, that the
NEMO has come, if you are still in touch with them. Crowley's mission
was to be the darkness (thus his self proclamation as the Beast and
his involvement with some unsavoury characters). Mine is to be the
Light while weilding the sword of Justice, since I am also the
manifestation of the god Horus ;-) La ilaha/No god = Crowley illa
Allah/but God = Nima ;-) Everything else shall change, including the
parts of the Book of the LAw and the Qabbalah.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the Law, Love
under Will - The Book of the Law
Magister Templi NEMO 418
Wahdat Ali Sayf'ullah Quddusiyyah (Nima Saoshyant)
p.s. I have added 9 more Sephira to the Sephirotic Tree of Life and
the Kether/Tajj is no longer a He but a She. What sayest thou,
brother?
george.fleming2
sma...@aol.com wrote on 14/1/03 6:30 am:
>>>> My point continues to be that Baha'i ought to have its Counsellors,
>> etc. diffusing the divine fragrances here, and, if it's something
>> they're
>> paid for, I've no problem with that.<<
>
> Counsellors aren't paid either. Their expenses are covered and they get a paid
> secretary. But they get no salary for themselves.
So all Counsellors must have another occupation in which to support
him/herself and their families. Their makes their position a non fulltime
one, with the exception of the Councellors based at Haifa?......GF
Mark A. Foster
lol. Yeah, that's it. ;-) How've you been, Nima? In spite of
more recent events, I still love you like a brother.
Actually, I don't want to discuss my absence on Usenet, but
I can tell you about it you privately sometime, if you like.
>>Says you, but not according to the ever growing body of
literature on cults even within the sociology of religion.<<
Can you cite some sources? The term "cult" is actually rarely
used by sociologists. The preferred NRM has all but replaced
it.
See, for instance (on Jeff Hadden's site):
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/cultsect/concult.htm
He makes the same point as I did.
>>But, of course, you are specifically wheeled out here to say
"useless in academia" to earn your keep. By virtue of your
involvement in a bona fide cult and your admission to me that
you have been paid by the Baha'i AO for your internet presence,
it stands to reason that snakes like you arr useless *to* academia
tout court and not valid typologies such as "cult."<<
Nima, I never said such a thing. The only times I ever received
any money from Baha'i funds were:
1. 1979-1980: When I was deputized to serve as a Baha'i teacher,
working with a project, in Westchester County, New York; We
raised an assembly in that county
2. 1980: When I was given money to travel to Zaire
I never said that "cult" was not used in academia. What I said
is that, in the sociology of religion, the term has generally
been used in a neutral sense, and that "NRM" is now preferred
by most researchers over "cult." Of course, technically, an
NRM can be either a sect of a cult.
>>Collins, John J.
1991 The Cult Experience. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas,
Publisher.<<
Thanks. I just ordered it from Amazon. (It is not available
from bn.com or from buy.com.)
>>So what happened to your involvement with Thelema there,
Mark?<<
That was a long, long time ago. However, I enjoyed it a great
deal. The Sufi/Baha'i and Thelemite symbol systems have many
points of convergence.
>>Don't you know I am the One whom the Master Therion and
his celestial guides from the Aethyrs prophesied would come,
which makes me the true Magister Templi and the one and only
Thelemic Prophet in this day.<<
Nima, you are one of the most intelligent people I know, and
I respect your right to believe and say what you want. I
read most, if not all, your Usenet postings (did a Google
Groups search) yesterday, and I find your ideas
fascinating, even where I may not entirely agree with them.
>>You should see my commentary on LiberAI 2 76 (the Book of
the Law). I have cracked what it means.<<
I would like to read it.
>>Tell that to your contacts in the OTO, that the NEMO has
come, if you are still in touch with them.<<
I still do have a couple of friends/acquaintances from my
time in the OTO.
Have you seen this site?
>>Crowley's mission was to be the darkness (thus his self
proclamation as the Beast and his involvement with some
unsavoury characters).<<
Of course is the joke is that he was just bragging about
being the beast. Crowley, I think, tried to experience
as many different things (and substances), from as many
perspectives, as he possibly could.
>>Mine is to be the Light while weilding the sword of
Justice, since I am also the manifestation of the god
Horus ;-) La ilaha/No god = Crowley illa Allah/but
God = Nima ;-) Everything else shall change, including
the parts of the Book of the LAw and the Qabbalah.<<
Including, love is the law, love under will (thelema)?
>>p.s. I have added 9 more Sephira to the Sephirotic
Tree of Life and the Kether/Tajj is no longer a He but a
She. What sayest thou, brother?<<
I would like to read it. Like I said, if I were looking
for another Prophet, I would consider you first. I
admired your intellect and insights from the first time
I read your postings on the original Talisman list.
Warmly,
Mark
NEMO418
ow...@sociologist.com (Mark A. Foster) wrote in message news:<41403b79.03011...@posting.google.com>...
> >>You've been away for a while, Mark. Is money that tight<<
>
> lol. Yeah, that's it. ;-)
It would stand to reason, since you've been in occultation from
cyberspace since before 9-11 after the well deserved schallacking you
received over the RD affair, you haven't posted here since pretty much
that time, and it is highly suspicious that now that voices are being
raised from every direction against the Haifan Baha'i cult
(identifying it as the bona cult that it is), you suddenly appear
magically out of nowhere throwing around vacuous pseudo-academic
platitudes couched in the discourses of sociology, a discipline which
you haven't even made much of a major professional in road, in any
case. The rank and file don't know any better, but I do, ergo why I am
here.
If one didn't know any better one would say they probably just raised
your salary to bring you out of retirement. How much are you getting
paid now? And don't give me a sob story. I have asked to be shown an
independent accountant's as well as an IRS/Tax office audit report of
all the accounts of the online baha'i agents (Maniac, Kholi, Sick Mut
and yourself) as well as all those of the AO before your protestations
of non-payment have any credibility whatsoever. If you people are not
taking money, then prove it. Here's your chance to clear your names.
Have the IRS and independent corporate accountanting firms as well as
your Federal Tax offices audit all the accounts of the BAO and those
of your own and then publish all the findings to the dot and letter. A
full audit of the BAO is long overdue, in any case.
>How've you been, Nima? In spite of
> more recent events, I still love you like a brother.
Would that be brothers like Cain and Abel? ;-)
> Actually, I don't want to discuss my absence on Usenet,
No, please do. We should be told!
> Can you cite some sources?
I did. The one you just ordered is a good start. Unfortunately since
the baha'i cult is currently bent on trying every manner of sleaze and
duplicity to prevent me from exposing them further online (fat chance,
since with what they have pulled, they have now made me now even more
determined than ever to fight and expose them to the bitter end --
whatever it takes!) I currently don't have access to numerous Journal
articles and other sources, since I am posting from the Library not
from home.
>The term "cult" is actually rarely
> used by sociologists.
Yeah, primarily by sociologists like you who get paid to say that
sociologists rarely use the term "cult." It is a well known fact that
Scientology has numerous "sociologists" on its payroll, and it seems
that the Haifan Baha'i cult has been employing the same tactic for
quite a while. If there is one thing I have learnt is that baha'i
cultists have a price and can be bought.
> The preferred NRM has all but replaced
> it.
Not amongst ALL sociologists.
> He makes the same point as I did.
And his views are discursively subjective, tempered by his own biases
and skewed methodological approaches, and thus easily open to
rebuttal, as are yours.
> Nima, I never said such a thing. The only times I ever received
> any money from Baha'i funds were:
You indeed did. Not once, but twice. Once privately, and once openly
on RD.
yada yada yada <snip>
> >>So what happened to your involvement with Thelema there,
> Mark?<<
>
> That was a long, long time ago. However, I enjoyed it a great
> deal. The Sufi/Baha'i and Thelemite symbol systems have many
> points of convergence.
>
> >>Don't you know I am the One whom the Master Therion and
> his celestial guides from the Aethyrs prophesied would come,
> which makes me the true Magister Templi and the one and only
> Thelemic Prophet in this day.<<
>
> Nima, you are one of the most intelligent people I know, and
> I respect your right to believe and say what you want.
Arguably the ones who are writing your pay check for your current
sound bites on their behalf, don't share your "ostensible" views and
the rights of others to express them. They are out and out fascists
who have no respect for anyone's right to believe in anything other
than the puerille cult orthodoxies that they insist on shoving down
people's throat by force.
> I
> read most, if not all, your Usenet postings (did a Google
> Groups search) yesterday, and I find your ideas
> fascinating, even where I may not entirely agree with them.
Of course you don't agree with them. You are specifically paid not to
agree. I understand your plight and how academic salaries are not
worth the the hardship people put themselves through in university to
obtain a Ph.D. But to sell your soul and consciense to an evil,
corrupt organization such as the Haifan Baha'i cult speaks volumes
about human nature: that for money, even the cream of the crop are
willing to sell themselves to Satan (i.e. materialism), as you have!
If I where you, I'd give up both the Academy and the Haifan Baha'i
cult and go find a career in Wall Street and thereby make real money.
You are wasting your life, and in any case you can effectively utilize
the sleaze and duplicity you have learnt while working as an online
baha'i cult agent to great advantage and enrich yourself immensely
thereby.
> >>You should see my commentary on LiberAI 2 76 (the Book of
> the Law). I have cracked what it means.<<
>
> I would like to read it.
On one condition: you must completely renounce the evil organization
on whose behalf you are currently acting on in public and announce
that the so called covenant of this religion is nothing more than a
fear mechanism to control people and take their money. That is the
price for me sharing my writings and insights with the likes of you.
Otherwise wait until the Book _(Liber MMI) TEMPLES OF THE PURE
RELIGION OF GNOSIS (Hayakil-e Din-e Khalis-e Ma'arefat): An
Introduction to the Path of the Bayaniyyah_ is published. It is my
current policy not to cast any more pearls before swine. I'm sure you
can understand ;-)
The two eternal laws is and always will be: Do what thou wilt! Love is
the Law, Love under Will!
Magister Templi NEMO418
Mark A. Foster
>>a discipline which you haven't even made much of a major
professional in road, in any case. The rank and file don't
know any better, but I do, ergo why I am here.<<
I had a sociology text, co-written and co-edited with two
of my colleagues, published back in August. It is a
combination text and reader.
I have placed the publisher's page announcing the book in
a frame:
http://markfoster.org/soc125text.html
I am now working on another project, based on my "terrorism"
paper.
>>If one didn't know any better one would say they probably
just raised your salary to bring you out of retirement.
How much are you getting paid now?<<
Nima, I have never received a "salary" from any Baha'i
source. The closest was when I was deputized to serve
as a teacher in Westchester County, New York, back in
the late 1970s. That lasted for about 8 months.
I think if you knew the reasons for my hiatus, you might
reconsider your statement.
>>I have asked to be shown an independent accountant's as
well as an IRS/Tax office audit report of all the accounts
of the online baha'i agents (Maniac, Kholi, Sick Mut
and yourself) ....<<
There is no smoking gun, Nima. I have a high sense of
personal ethics and would never accept anything like
payola, even it were offered to me (which it never has
been).
>>If you people are not taking money, then prove it.<<
How can I prove it?
>>Here's your chance to clear your names. Have the IRS
and independent corporate accountanting firms as well as
your Federal Tax offices audit all the accounts of the
BAO and those of your own and then publish all the
findings to the dot and letter.<<
In terms of the Baha'i administration, I obviously don't
have the authority. For myself, well, I would hope that
my word was sufficient. I am not a liar.
>>Would that be brothers like Cain and Abel? ;-)<<
You never used to think so.
>>No, please do. We should be told!<<
It is not a secret, but I don't think it is appropriate
for me to discuss it here.
>>>The term "cult" is actually rarely used by
sociologists.<<
>>It is a well known fact that Scientology has numerous
"sociologists" on its payroll ....<<
That is true, especially since CAN was taken over by
the Church of Scientology.
>>... and it seems that the Haifan Baha'i cult has been
employing the same tactic for quite a while. If there is
one thing I have learnt is that baha'i cultists have a
price and can be bought.<<
Well, Nima, you have made claims, but you have provided
no substantive evidence. I can only assure you that I
have not received these alleged monies. I hope that is
good enough. I still respect you, and I hope it will be
returned.
>>Not amongst ALL sociologists.<<
Not all, but most. Do you read the Sociology of Religion
journal (formerly, Sociological Analysis)?
> He makes the same point as I did.
>>And his views are discursively subjective, tempered by
his own biases and skewed methodological approaches, and
thus easily open to rebuttal, as are yours.<<
His views are mainstream sociology of religon.
>>You indeed did. Not once, but twice. Once privately,
and once openly on RD.<<
Please quote me. Do you have the message? If you got
that impression from anything I have said, I would
like to be able to respond to it.
>>Arguably the ones who are writing your pay check
for your current sound bites on their behalf, don't
share your "ostensible" views and the rights of others
to express them.<<
Well, I wish you would take me at my word. I respect
your and your recent experiences, and I only wish you
good will.
>>Of course you don't agree with them. You are
specifically paid not to agree.<<
I don't understand that. Obviously, most people here
do not agree with you. That is not to diminish you
or your experiences. However, we are all different.
We have, as `Abdu'l-Baha said, "different types of
minds."
>>I understand your plight and how academic salaries
are not worth the the hardship people put themselves
through in university to obtain a Ph.D.<<
I am quite content with an academic salary. I am a
single guy. I chose my field because I love it, not
for any other reason. Plus, I also make a fair living
from my online business (though not quite as much as
in the past).
>>On one condition: you must completely renounce the
evil organization on whose behalf you are currently
acting on in public and announce that the so called
covenant of this religion is nothing more than a
fear mechanism to control people and take their money.<<
Well, Nima, I would never do that. I love Baha'u'llah,
and the Bab.
Also, I am sure that, if the Baha'i administration
were looking for a "spokesman," they could find someone
better than this lowly one.
>>The two eternal laws is and always will be: Do what
thou wilt! Love is the Law, Love under Will!<<
Did you look at the web site? The site owner is trying
to combine Thelema with the Baha'i teachings.
Mark
NEMO418
ow...@sociologist.com (Mark A. Foster) wrote in message
> I had a sociology text, co-written and co-edited with two
> of my colleagues, published back in August. It is a
> combination text and reader.
Big deal! You still aren't in the same league as most reputable and
recognized sociologists of religion. Any tom and dick can write
chapters for a textbook.
> I have placed the publisher's page announcing the book in
> a frame:
>
> http://markfoster.org/soc125text.html
LOL
> Nima, I have never received a "salary" from any Baha'i
> source. The closest was when I was deputized to serve
> as a teacher in Westchester County, New York, back in
> the late 1970s. That lasted for about 8 months.
Prove it = IRS audit
> There is no smoking gun, Nima. I have a high sense of
> personal ethics and would never accept anything like
> payola, even it were offered to me (which it never has
> been).
Prove it = IRS audit
> >>If you people are not taking money, then prove it.<<
>
> How can I prove it?
IRS audit of all your own and that of the BAO's accounts and finances.
> In terms of the Baha'i administration, I obviously don't
> have the authority.
No, you follow one.
> For myself, well, I would hope that
> my word was sufficient. I am not a liar.
Prove it = IRS audit.
> >>Would that be brothers like Cain and Abel? ;-)<<
>
> You never used to think so.
After the stunt you pulled on RD and the fact that the content of all
our private telephone conversations miracously happened to be known to
the BAO, convinced me.
> That is true, especially since CAN was taken over by
> the Church of Scientology.
Ditto, the BAO does the same!
> Well, Nima, you have made claims, but you have provided
> no substantive evidence.
Then prove otherwise with a full IRS audit.
>I can only assure you that I
> have not received these alleged monies. I hope that is
> good enough.
Nope, it isn't.
>I still respect you, and I hope it will be
> returned.
Words are cheap.
> His views are mainstream sociology of religon.
So were Karl Marx's until some time ago. Your point being....????
> Please quote me. Do you have the message?
It's on the RD archives you guys had deleted.
>If you got
> that impression from anything I have said, I would
> like to be able to respond to it.
From what you yourself told me!
> Well, I wish you would take me at my word.
I will take the word of an IRS audit report of the BAO and yourself!
>I respect
> your and your recent experiences, and I only wish you
> good will.
Sure <grin>!
> >>Of course you don't agree with them. You are
> specifically paid not to agree.<<
>
> I don't understand that. Obviously, most people here
> do not agree with you. That is not to diminish you
> or your experiences. However, we are all different.
> We have, as `Abdu'l-Baha said, "different types of
> minds."
Really? The BAO doesn't seem to follow that dictum very much.
> Well, Nima, I would never do that. I love Baha'u'llah,
> and the Bab.
Enough to take money to squeel and rat on people apparently.
> Also, I am sure that, if the Baha'i administration
> were looking for a "spokesman," they could find someone
> better than this lowly one.
Tell that to them about your mediatrix: S&M.
> Did you look at the web site? The site owner is trying
> to combine Thelema with the Baha'i teachings.
The site owner is a complete imbecile who has neither understood
Thelema or baha'i. No real Thelemite (especially after the Book of the
Law) could take any shari'a in any other manner other than by riviling
it completely and everything such a shari'a stands for. "Do what thou
wilt" does not leave room for stupid covenants and blind obedience
thereunto or the paradigm of the "herd" (= unity in baha'ispeak) which
the Book of the Law condemns in no uncertain and absolute terms! "Do
what thou wilt" makes the basis of all shari'as totally baseless, so
in order to combine Thelema with baha'i is to make a mockery of both.
Of course, baha'is have made a mockery of many things going all the
way back to the days of Husayn Ali Nuri, so there is nothing new
there.
Magister NEMO418
Mark A. Foster
recognized sociologists of religion. Any tom and dick can write
chapters for a textbook.<<
Nima, I don't claim to be in the same league with anyone
except myself. I am content to do things my own way, on
my own time.
>>Prove it = IRS audit<<
Sorry, Nima.
>>After the stunt you pulled on RD and the fact that the content of all
our private telephone conversations miracously happened to be known to
the BAO, convinced me.<<
How would our phone conversations be known to an
administrative body unless they were reported to
them, which I never did?
Nima, for some reason, you seem to think that I have
something against you. I do not. I still have a great
deal of respect for you, and I will ***always*** wish
you only the best.
On the other hand, you seem to have turned against me.
That is your privilege, but your anger, if that is what
it is, is not reciprocated.
>>So were Karl Marx's until some time ago.
Your point being....????<<
That was my point, that his views are mainstream
sociology of religion. I thought you had argued
against that? The issue is only terminology, not
research methodologies.
>>It's on the RD archives you guys had deleted.<<
I never had anything deleted. I did ask Yahoo! to
delete the libel you and others made against me
on that forum - not the archive itself. However, I
let go of it after that. I did not know that the
archives themselves were deleted.
>>From what you yourself told me!<<
Nima, I never told you that I had received
$10,000, a portion of that amount, or any other
amount from the Baha'i Administration. It is
simply not true. However, believe what you want.
>>! "Do what thou wilt" makes the basis of all
shari'as totally baseless, so in order to combine
Thelema with baha'i is to make a mockery of both.<<
I agree with that. However, I still found the site
interesting.
Mark
NEMO418
> Nima, I don't claim to be in the same league with anyone
> except myself. I am content to do things my own way, on
> my own time.
It would seem, therefore, that this indeed is the evident double
standard the BAO employs: one standard for its agents, where they are
allowed to do whatever they like, and one for everyone else.
> How would our phone conversations be known to an
> administrative body unless they were reported to
> them, which I never did?
You tell me. Everything I ever confided in you suddenly happened to be
known to Susan Maneck. I wonder how that would be, seeing how Maneck
is neither psychic nor has she knowledge of the unseen.
> Nima, for some reason, you seem to think that I have
> something against you.
You have had something against everyone who sees the truth about the
BAO going all the way back to tali...@indiana.edu, and prior.
> I do not. I still have a great
> deal of respect for you, and I will ***always*** wish
> you only the best.
Enough respect, apparently, to disclose private conversations.
> On the other hand, you seem to have turned against me.
RD 2001 proved to me you have an agenda.
> That is your privilege, but your anger, if that is what
> it is, is not reciprocated.
Not anger. RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION!
> >>So were Karl Marx's until some time ago.
> Your point being....????<<
>
> That was my point, that his views are mainstream
> sociology of religion. I thought you had argued
> against that? The issue is only terminology, not
> research methodologies.
You seem to have missed the point I was making. "Mainstream" does not
mean that a view is either methodologically sound or discursively
fool-proof. Usually it is not and often the opposite is the case.
> Nima, I never told you that I had received
> $10,000, a portion of that amount, or any other
> amount from the Baha'i Administration.
Prove it with an IRS audit!
And as far as libel goes: it was you who was libelling everyone on the
original Zuhur19 list by claiming that people were encouraging a
schism. While the liberals I now consider to be largely twits whose
heads are screwed on wrong: that is not what they were claiming nor
was the post you obtained under false pretenses and tried to make it
say what it wasn't, was stating. Therefore, the libel was all yours!
Not anyone elses.
And while we're on the subject of schisms, let's make one thing
straight: that is precisely what *I* (not the liberals) am advocating
now. Schisms are good, they are historically necessary, they are part
of the process of the onward, progressive march of history, and it can
be likened to the pruning of a flower garden. This silly doctrine of
"unity" uber alles will multimately prove the baha'i faith's undoing
because it goes against every law of the universe. There is one
eternal law about life, and that is: Solve et coagula and Coagula et
solve.
Magister Templi NEMO
Dermod Ryder
"Michael McKenny" <bn...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:avuoq9$34c$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
A curious tale came my way of one of these "proclamation" events held
somewhere in Northern Ireland at a most prestigious location.
(Actually it was a private party for the BIGs but to get it funded by
the community they invited a whole load of so called dignitaries). My
informant, who is, incidentally, as, if not more cynical than myself
related to me how certain local dignitaries turned up, were fawned
over, yet instantly disappeared when they found there was nothing more
refreshing than orange squash available to quench the thirst.
I have long held an opinion that strong drink is a necessary adjunct
to attendance at Bahai events - one needs something to numb the senses
to allow of one's enduring the cloying saccharine and interminable
boredom of loving Bahai meetings. This might explain why the meetings
in the Dublin and elsewhere enjoyed low attendance. Had it been other
than that, the figures would have been published.
And with that, back to "Music from the Four Corners of Hell!"
Dermod.
Mark A. Foster
standard the BAO employs: one standard for its agents, where they are
allowed to do whatever they like, and one for everyone else.<<
Nima, you seem to me to be just making this stuff up. I am
not an agent of anybody. I would never *consent* to being
an agent of anyone. I am too independent, too much of a
loner. I thought you knew that about me.
>>You tell me. Everything I ever confided in you suddenly
happened to be known to Susan Maneck. I wonder how that
would be, seeing how Maneck is neither psychic nor has she
knowledge of the unseen.<<
Oh, that's different. Yes, after you started attacking me
on that young lady's Yahoo! Group, I got pissed, and I
did tell her some things we talked about. Sorry, I am
human, but I didn't know anything I said was confidential.
Nima, did you read the archives of what happened before
your joined the list? I was having somewhat rational
conversations with people, and all of a sudden I found
that I was really in never-never land.
You must have seen what people had said about me.
Accusing me of being gay (not that I have anything against
those who really *are* gay), for one thing. (I am not.)
And that was not the half of it. Accusing me of being
a spy - for no reason - and of hating women. (I am a
radical feminist/ecofeminist.)
Did you read those archives? Not only accusing me of
these things, but repeating them over and over again.
In retrospect, I should have left the list, but I got
embroiled in it; and I wanted to be there to defend
myself. That was probably a bad decision (and perhaps
self-centered), but I was tired and frustrated.
Then, you showed up. I was steaming by this point.
And you just joined in the bashing. Why, Nima? Over
the past year, among other things, I worked on
getting myself centered. I prayed and meditated a
great deal, and tried to get my heart in the right
place. I also dealt with some other issues related
to my reactions to the views on a certain subject of
a Baha'i institution.
>>RD 2001 proved to me you have an agenda.<<
Prove it to you, huh? Sorry, Nima. I have no
agenda, in the sense you are using it. What
happened, Nima? You never used to think that way
about me. I am, I think, a very open-minded
person, but I am not open-minded enough to be
used by any one else - Baha'is or otherwise.
You seem to have missed the point I was making.
"Mainstream" does not mean that a view is either
methodologically sound or discursively fool-proof.
Usually it is not and often the opposite is the case.<<
The terminology has changed because of what those
on the right call political correctness, not
because of directly methodological issues. Personally,
I believe in political correctness. I wish it would
go further than it does! Words have power. The
word "cult" has acquired a negative connotation,
irrespective of how sociologists and other religious
studies scholars have used it. Therefore, it makes
good sense not to find alternatives.
>>And while we're on the subject of schisms, let's make
one thing straight: that is precisely what *I* (not the
liberals) am advocating now. Schisms are good, they
are historically necessary, they are part of the process
of the onward, progressive march of history, and it can
be likened to the pruning of a flower garden.<<
Nima, you need to follow your conscience. I agree. It is
important to be intellectually honest. Although, as a
Baha'i, I don't fully agree with your neo-Babism (if
that is the right term), I respect your right to believe
what you want. I am a *very* tolerant person (which I
thought you knew).
>>This silly doctrine of "unity" uber alles will
multimately prove the baha'i faith's undoing because
it goes against every law of the universe.<<
Well, unity has to be genuine. If it is imposed ("no
compulsion in religion"), it won't last.
By the way, your last comment made me thought of
chaos magic. Alot of chaos magicians, as you probably
know, base their views on Crowley.
Also, how do you feel about Crowley's claim to be the
prophet of the age?
Mark
Mark A. Foster
>>Therefore, it makes good sense not to find
alternatives [to the use of the word "cult"].<<
I meant to say:
>>Therefore, it makes good sense to find
alternatives [to the use of the word "cult"]<<.
Mark Foster
NEMO418
> Nima, you seem to me to be just making this stuff up. I am
> not an agent of anybody. I would never *consent* to being
> an agent of anyone. I am too independent, too much of a
> loner. I thought you knew that about me.
Then why are you still in the Haifan baha'i cult? See, this is what
makes no sense. You plead your independence but absolutely refuse to
acknowledge the evident fact that the organization you claim to follow
is a fascist organization masquerading as a religion. You can love the
Lord Most High and Husayn Ali Baha outside of it just as well. Love is
never dependent on belonging to a group or organization. No, you seem
to have an agenda which you have never come clean about.
> Oh, that's different. Yes, after you started attacking me
> on that young lady's Yahoo! Group, I got pissed, and I
> did tell her some things we talked about.
I rest my case :)
>Sorry, I am
> human, but I didn't know anything I said was confidential.
Of course you didn't, as ratting, breaking confidences and dishonesty
is a baha'i vocation and article of faith.
> Nima, did you read the archives of what happened before
> your joined the list? I was having somewhat rational
> conversations with people, and all of a sudden I found
> that I was really in never-never land.
>
> You must have seen what people had said about me.
> Accusing me of being gay (not that I have anything against
> those who really *are* gay), for one thing. (I am not.)
> And that was not the half of it. Accusing me of being
> a spy - for no reason - and of hating women. (I am a
> radical feminist/ecofeminist.)
I saw the archives and it all started when you and Bill Hyman (the man
who claimed that he would drop bombs on his own family if the uhj told
him to) began questioning people's loyalty to the false covenant of
baha'ism.
> Did you read those archives? Not only accusing me of
> these things, but repeating them over and over again.
> In retrospect, I should have left the list, but I got
> embroiled in it; and I wanted to be there to defend
> myself. That was probably a bad decision (and perhaps
> self-centered), but I was tired and frustrated.
>
> Then, you showed up. I was steaming by this point.
> And you just joined in the bashing. Why, Nima?
For the abovementioned reasons. Explain, how did you obtain the Zuhur
post where you claimed people were claiming a schism when no such
claim was being made. Who sent you the Zuhur19 posts?
>Over
> the past year, among other things, I worked on
> getting myself centered. I prayed and meditated a
> great deal, and tried to get my heart in the right
> place. I also dealt with some other issues related
> to my reactions to the views on a certain subject of
> a Baha'i institution.
Peter Con? If that is the case, then why in the name of....are you
still persisting in belonging to this malicious cult? Anyone rational
person would have walked away permanently long ago.
> The terminology has changed because of what those
> on the right call political correctness, not
> because of directly methodological issues. Personally,
> I believe in political correctness. I wish it would
> go further than it does! Words have power. The
> word "cult" has acquired a negative connotation,
> irrespective of how sociologists and other religious
> studies scholars have used it. Therefore, it makes
> good sense not to find alternatives.
Your last sentence makes no sense.
> Nima, you need to follow your conscience. I agree. It is
> important to be intellectually honest.
Something baha'is by and large to do not possess because they lack the
second prerequisite: honesty.
>Although, as a
> Baha'i, I don't fully agree with your neo-Babism (if
> that is the right term), I respect your right to believe
> what you want. I am a *very* tolerant person (which I
> thought you knew).
Tolerant enough to break confidences, it would seem. Also anyone who
pleads tolerance would have walked away from baha'i long ago. Only
authoritarian types, glazed eyed cultists and sheep continue in
following this intolerant creed.
> Well, unity has to be genuine. If it is imposed ("no
> compulsion in religion"), it won't last.
Ergo, why the Haifan baha'i cult is currently fully in the process of
crumbling.
> By the way, your last comment made me thought of
> chaos magic. Alot of chaos magicians, as you probably
> know, base their views on Crowley.
>
> Also, how do you feel about Crowley's claim to be the
> prophet of the age?
He was and I am the one he prophesied. Read Liber 418 (which
interestingly enough is the numerical value of the first part of my
Sufi name I was initiated with: Wahdat Ali/the Unity of the All High).
Nima
Mark A. Foster
makes no sense. You plead your independence but absolutely refuse to
acknowledge the evident fact that the organization you claim to follow
is a fascist organization masquerading as a religion. You can love the
Lord Most High and Husayn Ali Baha outside of it just as well. Love is
never dependent on belonging to a group or organization. No, you seem
to have an agenda which you have never come clean about.<<
When I first met you, you did not believe that the Baha'i Faith was
a fascist organization. In fact, you were fairly conservative on
most issues (though not as idiotically conservative as I was at that
time). Yet, I always saw you as a very independent person.
>>I rest my case :)<<
What case? You asked me a question, and I answered it.
>>I saw the archives and it all started when you and Bill
Hyman (the man who claimed that he would drop bombs on his
own family if the uhj told him to) began questioning people's
loyalty to the false covenant of baha'ism.<<
You have that backwards, Nima. It was other people, actually
one person in particular, who was questioning *my* loyalty
to the Baha'i Faith, based on what she saw as my sexist
or patriarchal view of the Baha'i Faith. I *never* questioned
her loyalty to the Baha'i Faith.
>>For the abovementioned reasons. Explain, how did you obtain
the Zuhur post where you claimed people were claiming a schism
when no such claim was being made. Who sent you the Zuhur19 posts?<<
Someone told me about it, and sent it to me. I will not
say who it was. Sorry.
>>Peter Con? If that is the case, then why in the name
of....are you still persisting in belonging to this
malicious cult? Anyone rational person would have walked
away permanently long ago.<<
I am still in the process of trying to figure it out.
I suspect it may have been a miscommunication. However,
I will wait it out and try to avoid prejudging the
issue. I am a fairly patient person - at least more
patient than I used to be.
>>Your last sentence makes no sense.<<
I corrected that last sentence yesterday in a follow-up
posting. The word "not" should be taken out.
>>Only authoritarian types, glazed eyed cultists and
sheep continue in following this intolerant creed.<<
Were you an authoritarian type when you were a
Baha'i? You didn't seem so to me. Your views, on
Talisman 1, were novel and creative.
At this stage of my life, I have faith with my eyes
wide open.
He was and I am the one he prophesied. Read Liber 418 (which
interestingly enough is the numerical value of the first part
of my Sufi name I was initiated with: Wahdat Ali/the Unity of
the All High).<<
The part that seems most relevant is:
---------
"And a voice comes: "Who is he that hath the key to the gate of the
evening star?"
And now an Angel cometh and seeketh to open the door by trying many
keys. And they are none of any avail. And the same voice saith: "The
five and the six are balanced in the word Abrahadabra, and therein is
the mystery disclosed. But the key unto this gate is the balance of
the seven and the four; and of this thou hast not even the first
letter. Now there is a word of four letters that containeth in itself
all the mystery of the Tetragrammaton2, and there is a word of seven
letters which it concealeth3, and that again concealeth the holy word
that is the key of the abyss4. And this thou shalt find, revolving it
in thy mind.
Hide therefore thine eyes. And I will set my key in the lock, and open
it. Yet still let thine eyes be hidden, for thou canst not bear the
glory that is within.
---------
Is that what you meant?
Mark
Dermod Ryder
"Mark A. Foster" <ow...@sociologist.com> wrote in message
news:41403b79.03011...@posting.google.com...
> >>For the abovementioned reasons. Explain, how did you obtain
> the Zuhur post where you claimed people were claiming a schism
> when no such claim was being made. Who sent you the Zuhur19 posts?<<
>
> Someone told me about it, and sent it to me. I will not
> say who it was. Sorry.
But did you actually see the messages before you wrote about them or
were you just given a version of them?
I ask because you do strike me as being sufficiently intelligent as to
be able to have read them and understood they were not promoting
schism but suggesting that it might happen.
Having seen them posted to RD you perhaps realised you had been misled
and had the grace and good sense to attempt to drop the subject.
Since then, of course, that hoary old topic of members of Zuhur egging
on CBs has been raised by the Queen of Harpies, little old Suzie
Mayhem or the DST as she is more commonly referred to. It really does
make us wonder as to who could have been so stupid as to misinterpret
those messages.
I would quite enjoy being declared a CB by the Grumpies ... but only
on my terms, for what I have done rather than what I haven't.
NEMO418
> When I first met you, you did not believe that the Baha'i Faith was
> a fascist organization.
Then I woke up and saw it for what it is.
>In fact, you were fairly conservative on
> most issues (though not as idiotically conservative as I was at that
> time). Yet, I always saw you as a very independent person.
Which is why people like me will *never* remain long under false
creeds and dogmas catered to strip people of their independence and
turn them into slaves.
> What case? You asked me a question, and I answered it.
That you were giving personal information in telephone conversations
to S&M.
> You have that backwards, Nima. It was other people, actually
> one person in particular, who was questioning *my* loyalty
> to the Baha'i Faith, based on what she saw as my sexist
> or patriarchal view of the Baha'i Faith.
Well, this person has now been convinced by moi that the baha'i creed
itself is a patriarchal religion and that its doctrine a smokescreen
for mysogyny by other means.
> Someone told me about it, and sent it to me. I will not
> say who it was. Sorry.
Hence, my case remains stronger than before.
> I am still in the process of trying to figure it out.
Well, figure this out: THEY ARE USING *YOU*, MARK, AND WHEN YOU BECOME
EXPENDABLE TO THEM THEY WILL DROP YOU LIKE A LEAD BALLOON. YOU ARE
PLAYING WITH YOUR LIFE AND THEY ARE PLAYING WITH YOUR VULNERABILITIES
AND SELF-CONFESSED LONELINESS (SINGLENESS) AND YOU ARE TOO DUMB TO SEE
IT. The Baha'i faith is a cult <period> and you as an on again, off
again agent of theirs have braced your self for a big personal fall
one day. Today they are trying to pull me down -- and they will fail
(mark my words)! Tomorrow it could be you. WAKE UP!
> I suspect it may have been a miscommunication. However,
> I will wait it out and try to avoid prejudging the
> issue. I am a fairly patient person - at least more
> patient than I used to be.
You need to open your eyes, is what you need to do.
> Were you an authoritarian type when you were a
> Baha'i?
No, Einstein, I specifically left it because I despise authoritarian
types, straitjacketed doctrines and everything such things represent.
> At this stage of my life, I have faith with my eyes
> wide open.
I beg to differ. Seems that you hold your faith with your EYES WIDE
SHUT (pun intended). And there is more truth to a single facet of that
movie vis-a-vis the baha'i cult than you would imagine (you figure out
what I am talking about or go out and rent the movie and find out for
yourself).
Nima
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
> (snip) The Baha'i
> Faith on the other hand has extended its range of world religion acceptance
> in its 'Progressive Revelation' prophesy to include Hinduism and Buddhism.
> Yet it rejects Jainism and Sikhism, two very well known recognised and
> accepted **World Religions**.
>
Please substantiate your assertion that the BF rejects Jainism and/or Sikhism.
The paragraph which Adealrd quoted sould seem to suggest the opposite of what you
say.
>
> Neither of these two religions (Jainism and Sikhism) lay claim to be
> attached to any other main world religion, and it is therefore hypocritical
> of the Baha'i faith (membership of only 5 million) to seek world religion
> **acceptance** for themselves and try and reject Sikhism (membership 20
> million) into a lesser station than themselves.
>
You have offered _no_ evidence to indicate that the BF rejects Sikhism.
>
> Agent SOV009 posted the following( below)as an example of the
> acknowledgement towards Sikhism. But this is superficial hypocrisy.
Where is your evidence that the BF rejects Sikhism?
> No
> where in the Baha'i writings is the Sikh religion's 10 Gurus accepted as
> lesser prophets compared to the adulation of the 12 Imans of the Shi'ite
> Islam.
I don't see that Baha'u'llah not only needs to name every prophet, and that
Shoghi Effendi needs to translate, or comment on it in English. The basic
principle was enunciated, and, as I've shown you, Baha'is do reach out to Sikhs,
just like everyone else!
> I know about all this hypocritical twaddle which went on especially
> in Ireland.
You know lint.
> I spent two years doing a series of paintings (30 canvases in
> all) on World religions (including Sikhism and Jainism)
> http://www.warble.com/BahaiArtGallery/HTML/GeorgeFleming/Artist.html
> There was imagery of all including Sikhism and Jainism in the catalogue but
> they were not installed on the "Bahai Art gallery" because they might be
> offensive to some Baha'is. I even had a few Baha'is turned their noses up at
> my exhibition because I had included Sikhism and Jainism. "Not mentioned in
> the writings" I was quietly told by a few older Persian Baha'is.
>
So what - you ran into a few opinionated Baha'is? Have you any idea how many
Baha'is have run into you??
>
> Quite frankly it was my love of inter-faith which attracted me to the BF but
> after this exhibition I realised the BF dont give two farts about other
> religions. If they came upon some tribe whose promised one was Mr Mumbo
> Jumbo, the Baha'is would try and con them to beleve Mr Mumbo Jumbo was
> really Baha'u'llah and they didn't know about it to we came along...GF
>
(Sometimes I get the impression that you'd pass gas out both sides of your anus,
if you could find a way.)
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
> From Agent SOV009's post
That was my post.
>
> In Ireland, representatives of several of the world’s major faiths gathered
> at the Baha'i Centre in Dublin, Ireland, on 28 August to participate in a
> devotional program of extracts from Baha'i, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist,
> Jewish, Islamic, Zoroastrian and Sikh sacred texts. Each guest was presented
> with a flower blossom on arrival. After devotions and music, tea was served
> and the representatives of the various religions learned about each other's
> faiths and traditions in an atmosphere of goodwill. Irish Baha'is sponsored
> similar events in Cavan, Fingal (a suburb of Dublin), Co. Sligo, Shannon and
> Waterford.
>
> -- In the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Baha'is held a devotional
> gathering at the Baha'i community center in Port Blair, and invited
> representatives of the Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh
> communities to chant and recite prayers for world peace. About 60 people
> attended, and the event was covered by local newspapers and announced on the
> local bulletin of All India Radio.
>
> -- In India, the State Baha'i Council of Sikkim organised a prayer gathering
> at the Hotel Rendezvous in Gangtok on August 28. Although they had only four
> days to organise the event, the Baha'is sent out more than 100 invitations
> todignitaries and religious leaders. Nearly everyone agreed to participate.
> The
> Governor of Sikkim, Choudhary Randhir Singh, attended along with
> representatives
> of the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Sikh, and Jain communities. News of the
> gathering was carried on the Sikkim cable television and several local and
> regional newspapers.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 19/1/03 10:17 pm:
> "george.fleming2" wrote:
>
>> (snip) The Baha'i
>> Faith on the other hand has extended its range of world religion acceptance
>> in its 'Progressive Revelation' prophesy to include Hinduism and Buddhism.
>> Yet it rejects Jainism and Sikhism, two very well known recognised and
>> accepted **World Religions**.
>>
> Please substantiate your assertion that the BF rejects Jainism and/or Sikhism.
> The paragraph which Adealrd quoted sould seem to suggest the opposite of what
> you say.
I am not the one propagating "Progressive Revelation". The Bahai faith is.
The paragraph which Adealrd quoted only related to the good moral standards
of these very physical strong gentlemen from the country of India. There was
no mention of their religious belief or even their name **Sikh**.
>
>> Neither of these two religions (Jainism and Sikhism) lay claim to be
>> attached to any other main world religion, and it is therefore hypocritical
>> of the Baha'i faith (membership of only 5 million) to seek world religion
>> **acceptance** for themselves and try and reject Sikhism (membership 20
>> million) into a lesser station than themselves.
>>
> You have offered _no_ evidence to indicate that the BF rejects Sikhism.
The Bahai Faith has offered no evidence to indicate this religion (the 5th
largest in the world) is part of "Progressive Revelation"
>
>>
>> Agent SOV009 posted the following( below)as an example of the
>> acknowledgement towards Sikhism. But this is superficial hypocrisy.
>
> Where is your evidence that the BF rejects Sikhism?
The Bahai Faith's way to reject thei religion is to ignore its existence.
>
>> No
>> where in the Baha'i writings is the Sikh religion's 10 Gurus accepted as
>> lesser prophets compared to the adulation of the 12 Imans of the Shi'ite
>> Islam.
>
> I don't see that Baha'u'llah not only needs to name every prophet, and that
> Shoghi Effendi needs to translate, or comment on it in English. The basic
> principle was enunciated, and, as I've shown you, Baha'is do reach out to
> Sikhs, just like everyone else!
What some Baha'is may do is irrevelant. Within the Bahai teachings Sikhism
(20 million followers) is not mentioned yet Sabeanism is mentioned with
(100,000 followers).
>
>> I know about all this hypocritical twaddle which went on especially
>> in Ireland.
>
> You know lint.
>
>> I spent two years doing a series of paintings (30 canvases in
>> all) on World religions (including Sikhism and Jainism)
>> http://www.warble.com/BahaiArtGallery/HTML/GeorgeFleming/Artist.html
>> There was imagery of all including Sikhism and Jainism in the catalogue but
>> they were not installed on the "Bahai Art gallery" because they might be
>> offensive to some Baha'is. I even had a few Baha'is turned their noses up at
>> my exhibition because I had included Sikhism and Jainism. "Not mentioned in
>> the writings" I was quietly told by a few older Persian Baha'is.
>>
> So what - you ran into a few opinionated Baha'is? Have you any idea how many
> Baha'is have run into you??
Only You, Dr Walker and Dr Maneck. Care to name any more you happen to know.
>
>> Quite frankly it was my love of inter-faith which attracted me to the BF but
>> after this exhibition I realised the BF dont give two farts about other
>> religions. If they came upon some tribe whose promised one was Mr Mumbo
>> Jumbo, the Baha'is would try and con them to beleve Mr Mumbo Jumbo was
>> really Baha'u'llah and they didn't know about it to we came along...GF
>>
>
> (Sometimes I get the impression that you'd pass gas out both sides of your
> anus, if you could find a way.)
Baha'u'llah did not teach that way to speak. I am sure you wouldn't make a
statement like that at a prayer meeting, a Baha'i feast or in company with
members of the Administrative Order?................GF
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
> in article 3E2B23FD...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 19/1/03 10:17 pm:
>
> > "george.fleming2" wrote:
> >
> >> (snip) The Baha'i
> >> Faith on the other hand has extended its range of world religion acceptance
> >> in its 'Progressive Revelation' prophesy to include Hinduism and Buddhism.
> >> Yet it rejects Jainism and Sikhism, two very well known recognised and
> >> accepted **World Religions**.
> >>
> > Please substantiate your assertion that the BF rejects Jainism and/or Sikhism.
> > The paragraph which Adealrd quoted sould seem to suggest the opposite of what
> > you say.
>
> I am not the one propagating "Progressive Revelation". The Bahai faith is.
> The paragraph which Adealrd quoted only related to the good moral standards
> of these very physical strong gentlemen from the country of India. There was
> no mention of their religious belief or even their name **Sikh**.
> >
> >> Neither of these two religions (Jainism and Sikhism) lay claim to be
> >> attached to any other main world religion, and it is therefore hypocritical
> >> of the Baha'i faith (membership of only 5 million) to seek world religion
> >> **acceptance** for themselves and try and reject Sikhism (membership 20
> >> million) into a lesser station than themselves.
> >>
> > You have offered _no_ evidence to indicate that the BF rejects Sikhism.
>
> The Bahai Faith has offered no evidence to indicate this religion (the 5th
> largest in the world) is part of "Progressive Revelation"
The rule was brought out, that in general, religions are from God. You asserted in
your message prior to my request for evidence of rejection, that the BF does reject
Sikhism. You have the option. Substantiate your assertion, or retract it.
> >>
> >> Agent SOV009 posted the following( below)as an example of the
> >> acknowledgement towards Sikhism. But this is superficial hypocrisy.
> >
> > Where is your evidence that the BF rejects Sikhism?
>
> The Bahai Faith's way to reject thei religion is to ignore its existence.
Wrong. Baha'u'llah wrote:
"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever
race or religion, drive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are
the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which
they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies
of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are
the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are reflections
of His Will and Purpose."
-Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah p. 217
Note, "All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were
ordained of God". Since the generalization is that religions are all of God, then
some basis must be presented for arguing that something is an exeption to that
rule. Please offer evidence to show that Sikhism is an exception to that rule, or
withdraw your assertion that the BF rejects Sikhsim.
>
> >
> >> No
> >> where in the Baha'i writings is the Sikh religion's 10 Gurus accepted as
> >> lesser prophets compared to the adulation of the 12 Imans of the Shi'ite
> >> Islam.
> >
> > I don't see that Baha'u'llah not only needs to name every prophet, and that
> > Shoghi Effendi needs to translate, or comment on it in English. The basic
> > principle was enunciated, and, as I've shown you, Baha'is do reach out to
> > Sikhs, just like everyone else!
>
> What some Baha'is may do is irrevelant. Within the Bahai teachings Sikhism
> (20 million followers) is not mentioned yet Sabeanism is mentioned with
> (100,000 followers).
So? Sabaeanism is mentioned in the Holy Qor'an and Sikh is not. 150 years ago Sikh
was a national religion, like Shinto. Since then Sikhs have moved to Canada, the
US, and many other places.
> >
> >> I know about all this hypocritical twaddle which went on especially
> >> in Ireland.
> >
> > You know lint.
> >
> >> I spent two years doing a series of paintings (30 canvases in
> >> all) on World religions (including Sikhism and Jainism)
> >> http://www.warble.com/BahaiArtGallery/HTML/GeorgeFleming/Artist.html
> >> There was imagery of all including Sikhism and Jainism in the catalogue but
> >> they were not installed on the "Bahai Art gallery" because they might be
> >> offensive to some Baha'is. I even had a few Baha'is turned their noses up at
> >> my exhibition because I had included Sikhism and Jainism. "Not mentioned in
> >> the writings" I was quietly told by a few older Persian Baha'is.
> >>
> > So what - you ran into a few opinionated Baha'is? Have you any idea how many
> > Baha'is have run into you??
>
> Only You, Dr Walker and Dr Maneck. Care to name any more you happen to know.
Paula Ryder.
> >
> >> Quite frankly it was my love of inter-faith which attracted me to the BF but
> >> after this exhibition I realised the BF dont give two farts about other
> >> religions. If they came upon some tribe whose promised one was Mr Mumbo
> >> Jumbo, the Baha'is would try and con them to beleve Mr Mumbo Jumbo was
> >> really Baha'u'llah and they didn't know about it to we came along...GF
> >>
> >
> > (Sometimes I get the impression that you'd pass gas out both sides of your
> > anus, if you could find a way.)
>
> Baha'u'llah did not teach that way to speak.
I was not aware that Baha'u'llah was a grammarian or a pedagog.
> I am sure you wouldn't make a
> statement like that at a prayer meeting, a Baha'i feast or in company with
> members of the Administrative Order?
1) If I went to a prayer meeting, I'd wonder if the wind would whistle both ways
across my backside.
2) Of course I would not say that at a feast; a feast is a time for no small talk.
3) Of course I would talk like that w/ members of the AO, such as an LSA meeting,
meetings with assistants, etc.
Clearly, you can dish out earthy language, and you've got a glass jaw for it.
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 20/1/03 6:43 am:
> Clearly, you can dish out earthy language, and you've got a glass jaw for it.
Yeah, but did you not report me to the the UK NSA because of my **earthy
language** when I was a Baha'i.
You are nothing but one big **mother-fecking** hypocritical snitch Kohli.
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 19/1/03 10:17 pm:
>
> You have offered _no_ evidence to indicate that the BF rejects Sikhism.
This is one very important reason why the Bahai faith rejects Sikhism,
Because within Sikhism are many beliefs similar to The Bahai Faith namely
the Oneness of God and acceptances of all other world religions.
For the Baha'i Faith to openly accept Sikhism would in turn contradict its
former Sh'ite Islamic background who looked down upon Sikhism as a heresy
for like the Baha'i Faith it to evolved from Islam:
proof is as follows:
...Islam has spawned two other religions: Sikhism in India and an eclectic
religion called Baha'i that boasts a prophet, Baha'u'llah, who supersedes
Muhammad and has temples scattered around the world.
Norman L. Geisler & Abdul Saleeb, Answering Islam - the Crescent in the
Light of the Cross (Baker Books, 1993), p.291
george.fleming2
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall to listen to all the Mumbo Jumbo GobblyGook crap Baha'i pioneers used to get the 2.5 million Indians to become Baha'is. It must have been funnier than watching the "Life of Brian".
None of the Baha'i Three central figures ever wrote a tablet or mentioned outright Guru Nanack was a Saint anymore that they did Saint Patrick or the hundreds of other Saints well known within traditional Christianity.
So Pat Kohli hows about you coming up with a Baha'i writing from any one of the three central Figures defining Guru Nanack and the other nine Gurus of Sikhism by name.
George Fleming
Chapter Twelve:
Guru Nanak and Miracles
Guru Nanak according to the Supreme Bahá’í body, the Universal House of Justice, was endowed with a "saintly character"1 and "was inspired to reconcile the religions of Hinduism and Islam, the followers of which religions had been in violent conflict."2 The Bahá’ís thus view Guru Nanak as a ‘saint of the highest order’.3 A saint in the words of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá is "one who leads a life of purity, one who has freed himself from all human weaknesses and imperfections."4 He continues, "Saints are men who have freed themselves from the world of matter and who have overcome sin. They live in the world but are not of it, their thoughts being continually in the world of the spirit. Their lives are spent in holiness, and their deeds show forth love, justice and godliness. They are illumined from on high; they are as bright and shining lamps in the dark places of the earth. These are the saints of God."5
Guru Nanak and the other Sikh Gurus raised a voice against miracle making in the name of religion. Ironically historians have spiced their lives with various miracles for the consumption of the lay man. They might have done so partly because of their love and devotion for these saintly figures and partly because they wanted to impress the masses about the divinity of the mission of their masters.
Guru Nanak attached no value to the trickeries or incantations, charms and mantras. He deprecates going to graves and crematoria, wandering in doubt from place to place, living in woods, visiting many places of pilgrimages, donning many garbs or living without clothes, torturing the body, walking barefoot, putting ashes on the head, living in the wilderness wearing rosaries, reading scriptures to argue or to show off, etc.
The Guru gave the verdict, "The supra-physical powers are quite irrelevant for a man of God."6 He completely disagreed with the yogis’ measurement of spirituality with miracles. For him, the spiritual power was the true index of one’s greatness and this should come through the love of the Lord. The seeker’s attention should never be diverted from his real objective—the union of the soul with the Universal Soul or attaining nearness to God.
Talking of the pundits, priests or so called godmen, he says, "He (pundit) has in his home (the images) of Narayan with all his courtiers. He worships it and keeps it washed. He offers saffron sandal and flowers to it and falls at its feet again and again to propitiate it. But he begs his food and raiment from men. The blind man is being punished for his blind deeds. The idol neither gives food to the hungry nor can protect them from death. The blind crowd is engaged in a blind contention."7
Idol worshippers are completely mistaken and have taken the wrong path. Nanak says of them, "They worship stones, which neither see nor speak. They are ignorant…and are in total darkness. The stone itself sinks, how can it take one across."8
A change of heart is very important. If inner transformation has not occurred, indulging in any outward means of purification will not help. "False inside with a show of piety outwards are hypocrites in this world. They may bathe at sixty eight places of pilgrimage, their dirt will not be removed."9 "Nanak impurity will not be removed this-wise, true knowledge will wash it away."10
Guru Nanak taught not to engage in useless rituals. According to him, pure are those, "…in whose hearts God is enshrined."11 For him, "Thy (God’s) praise is my Ganges and Banaras, in which my soul bathes."12
Guru Gobind Singh, in Akal Ustat, speaks similarly and gracefully thus: "The evil propensities cannot be dispelled through the power of tantras, mantras or magic. It can be dispelled by possessing the Lord alone."13
Guru Amar Dass has declared, "To hanker after occult powers or worldly treasures, is a false attachment, it shuts out the love of the name, a symbol of the love of God."14
Truly indeed one who loves spirituality loses any taste for supra-physical powers.
********
NOTES AND REFERENCES1. Universal House of Justice. Letter dated 27 October, 1985 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of India.
2. ibid.
3. The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of India. Letter dated 7 July 1986 to the State Bahá’í Council of Punjab.
4. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris Talks, p. 60.
5. ibid., pp. 60-61.
6. Narain Singh, Guru Nanak Dev’s View of Life, Amplified, Published by Bhagat Puran Singh, All India Pingalwara Society, Amritsar. p. 386. Guru Nanak, Japuji. ["ridhi sidhi awra sadu"].
7. Bhai Jodh Singh, Gospel of Guru Nanak (In His Own Words), Languages Department, Punjab, 1988, p. 151. [Var Sarang S.1.P.9]
8. ibid., p. 150. [Var Bihagra S.2.P.20]
9. ibid., p. 153. [Var Asa S.1.P.19].
10. ibid. [Var Asa S.2.P.20].
11. ibid., p. 152. [Var Asa S.1.2.P.17].
12. ibid. [Asa 4.2.32].
13. Narain Singh, Guru Nanak Dev’s View of Life, Amplified, p. 592-3. Guru Gobind Singh, Akal Ustat. ["na jantr mai na tantra mai na mritu basi awai"].
14. ibid., p. 594. Guru Amar Das. ["ridhi sidhi sabhu mohu hai namu na vaseh mani aai"].
http://bahai.htmlplanet.com/Miracles/Miraclesbk.htm
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
You may have proved that someone sees some similarities between the BF and
Sikhism. There are also differences. The Sikhs ruled a country, Punjab; the
Baha'is ruled nowhere. The Sikhs were concentrated in the Punjab until the
partition; the though Baha'is were concentrated in Iran, they dispersed more,
and are among the most dispersed religions. The Sikh Faith is militaristic
(not violent, though) and the BF is pacifist.
Please provide evidence that the BF rejects Sikhism, or retract your
assertion.
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
> in article 3E2B23FD...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 19/1/03 10:17 pm:
>
> > Where is your evidence that the BF rejects Sikhism?
>
> Here is the evidence, they are taking a quote below (with regards
> saints in
> general ) from Abdu'l Baha' to try on another typical Mumbo Jumbo
> GobblyGook
> trick to latch on to anything that gets recruits into the Baha'i Faith
> in
> India.
>
Are you illiterate?
The quote below says that the Baha'is see Guru Nanak as a saint! Guru
Nanak was the first of the Gurus of the Sikh Faith. His teachings and
those of Kabir, are the eachings from the first generation of Sikhs
which are included in the Guru Granth Sahib. You were supposed to find
evidence that the BF _rejects_ Sikhism, as you've asserted. What you
provided is additional evidence that Baha'is, even at the highest
levels, see the Sikh Faith as divinely inspired. Barring such evidence,
I'll infer that you have effectively retracted your assertion, and, once
again, simply lack the spine to say so directly.
>
> (snip)
> Guru Nanak and Miracles
> Guru Nanak according to the Supreme Bahá’í body, the Universal House
> of
> Justice, was endowed with a "saintly character"1 and "was inspired to
> reconcile the religions of Hinduism and Islam, the followers of which
> religions had been in violent conflict."2 The Bahá’ís thus view Guru
> Nanak
> as a ‘saint of the highest order’.3 A saint in the words of
> ‘Abdu’l-Bahá is
> "one who leads a life of purity, one who has freed himself from all
> human
> weaknesses and imperfections."4 He continues, "Saints are men who have
> freed
> themselves from the world of matter and who have overcome sin. They
> live in
> the world but are not of it, their thoughts being continually in the
> world
> of the spirit. Their lives are spent in holiness, and their deeds show
> forth
> love, justice and godliness. They are illumined from on high; they are
> as
> bright and shining lamps in the dark places of the earth. These are
> the
> saints of God."5
(snip)
Susan Maneck
>> ...Islam has spawned two other religions: Sikhism in India and an eclectic
>> religion called Baha'i
I'm afraid these people don't know what they are talking about. Islam did not
'spawn' Sikhism. Sikhism was an out come of North Indian Sant movements which
included Muslims and Hindus. But virtually all of those who became Sikhs were
either of Hindu background or they were Jats, nomadic groups becoming
sedentary, who had not yet embraced either Islam or Hinduism.
george.fleming2
kilfiled George is another one of her lies she rolls ot the top of her
tounge when it suits her. I dint even think she knows when she is lying.
George
in article 20030120230900...@mb-mo.aol.com, Susan Maneck at
sma...@aol.com wrote on 21/1/03 4:09 am:
Paul Hammond
> And another one of my posts Susan Maneck read today. Telling karen she has
> kilfiled George is another one of her lies she rolls ot the top of her
> tounge when it suits her. I dint even think she knows when she is lying.
>
> George
>
This one was a reply to Pat Kholi, numbnuts.
Paul
Paul Hammond
> "george.fleming2" wrote:
>
> > in article 3E2B23FD...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> > kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 19/1/03 10:17 pm:
> >
> > > Where is your evidence that the BF rejects Sikhism?
> >
> > Here is the evidence, they are taking a quote below (with regards
> > saints in
> > general ) from Abdu'l Baha' to try on another typical Mumbo Jumbo
> > GobblyGook
> > trick to latch on to anything that gets recruits into the Baha'i Faith
> > in
> > India.
> >
>
> Are you illiterate?
>
> The quote below says that the Baha'is see Guru Nanak as a saint! Guru
> Nanak was the first of the Gurus of the Sikh Faith. His teachings and
> those of Kabir, are the eachings from the first generation of Sikhs
> which are included in the Guru Granth Sahib. You were supposed to find
> evidence that the BF _rejects_ Sikhism, as you've asserted. What you
> provided is additional evidence that Baha'is, even at the highest
> levels, see the Sikh Faith as divinely inspired. Barring such evidence,
> I'll infer that you have effectively retracted your assertion, and, once
> again, simply lack the spine to say so directly.
>
That sounds like the sensible option to me, Pat.
Far as I know, practically everyone loves the Sikhs.
In fact, I used to think of the Sikh faith as a kind
of local version of what the Baha'i Faith was 200
years later - Sikhism seeks to create unity in diversity
between the, on the face of it, totally incompatible
religions of Islam and Hinduism - and succeeds in spades!
The Baha'i Faith attempts to do the same think on the
global, rather than the Indian scale - I think the
success of the enterprise is as yet in the balance.
But, I sure have a whole lot more respect for the
Sikhs than I do for the Mormons. However, Shoghi
had more respect for Mormons than I do, so I'll
keep quiet about that.
Anyhow, to my mind, there is a great deal of inspiration
to be derived from the Sikh scriptures and beliefs
- and considering the current conflict between
radical Hindu and radical Islam in India, and between
India and Pakistan, I think we still have a lot to
learn from the Sikhs even today.
One of our friends at Keele University, a lovely
fellow, and a Sikh, used to consider himself
an honorary Baha'i - to the extent that he'd wear
Baha'i badges (buttons), and have us all round to
his flat for Indian tea after Baha'i Society
meetings. So, if he felt so at home with the
Baha'i teachings, George must just be totally
wrong.
So, stick that in your pipe and smoke it, George.
Paul
NEMO418
> believe anything to the contrary, I think you simply speak for yourself, again.
No. George is quite correct on this score and you are totally wrong,
as usual. The Sikhs do not see Guru Nanak as a mere saint. That
baha'is do so is beside the point and completely unimportant. The
world, thankfully, does not revolve around the baha'i religion or its
unsophisticated, triumphalistic, acinine and exclusivistic mythos and
imaginings of the Other religions. It seems that once again baha'is
are presumptously seeking to "define" the core teachings and the
station of the central figure of another religion just as they define
the Buddha as a manifestation of a deity he did not believe in and the
Bab as a mere "harbinger" of a figure which most Bayanis do not
believe has appeared, ad nauseum. No wonder you people haven't gotten
anywhere, and won't go anywhere, and consistently fail to attract
anyone of any real substance to your silly creed. It is because of
such ignorant views as those articulated by patricia kholi above.
To the end of one-dimensional self-righteous and brainwashed religious
air heads with IQs of a lobotomized down syndromed goat like patricia
kholi.
Pat Kohli
NEMO418 wrote:
> Pat Kohli <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message >
> > Guru Nanak was a saint, and barring any evidence from you that Baha'is ought to
> > believe anything to the contrary, I think you simply speak for yourself, again.
>
> No. George is quite correct on this score and you are totally wrong,
> as usual.
You are totally wrong, as usual. George asserts, "the Baha'i Faith refuses to accept
its divine status as a World Religion", and "The Baha'i ... rejects Jainism and
Sikhism". The facts are that Baha'is accept Sikhs in various ecumenical fora, and
even the UHJ has expressed an opinion on the saintliness of one of the founding
Gurus.
> The Sikhs do not see Guru Nanak as a mere saint.
Of course not; that is why they are Sikhs. Muslims don't see Muhammad as a
Manifestation of God; that doesn't mean that Baha'is don't see God as the Source of
their faith, though. Sheeeeeeeeshshshsh!
> That
> baha'is do so is beside the point and completely unimportant.
It certainly is relevant to George's assertion that the BF rejects Sikhism. True
that we are not Sikhs, we are Baha'is, and, in general, Baha'is see the Sikh faith as
another religion from God.
> The
> world, thankfully, does not revolve around the (nemayada snipped)
>
> To the end of one-dimensional self-righteous and brainwashed religious
> air heads with IQs of a lobotomized down syndromed goat like patricia
> kholi.
Whatever makes your sox go up and down.
Dermod Ryder
> Whatever makes your sox go up and down.
We'll have none of that here! Please keep it clean!
george.fleming2
>
>> Pat Kohli <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message >
>>> Guru Nanak was a saint, and barring any evidence from you that Baha'is ought
>>> to
>>> believe anything to the contrary, I think you simply speak for yourself,
>>> again.
>>
>> No. George is quite correct on this score and you are totally wrong,
>> as usual.
>
> You are totally wrong, as usual. George asserts, "the Baha'i Faith refuses to
> accept its divine status as a World Religion", and "The Baha'i ... rejects
> Jainism and Sikhism". The facts are that Baha'is accept Sikhs in various
> ecumenical fora, and even the UHJ has expressed an opinion on the saintliness
> of one of the founding Gurus.
http://bahai-library.org/books/rg/rg.biblio15.html
"Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, was quite adamant that he was neither a prophet nor an avatár, but rather simply a spiritual teacher. Later gurus, especially the second through the fifth, made the religion somewhat intentionally syncretistic. Partly for these reasons, Bahá'ís do not consider Sikhism to be a "revealed" religion".
The one and only mention of Sikhism in any of the Bahá'í writings is a passing reference in God Passes By, 302, though a footnote to Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, page 150, makes a reference. No scholarship has been done on it thus far."No comparative work has been done on Sikhism and the Bahá'í Faith. R. Raj Singh summarized Nanak's life and teachings in "Nanak, The Founder of Sikhism," in World Order 26.2 (Winter 1994-95), but made no mention of the Faith in the essay. Two sources that mention Sikhism, if only in passing, are biographies of Pritam Singh, the first Sikh Bahá'í and a distinguished Bahá'í teacher. These appear in the Bahá'í World vol. 15, pp. 874-6, and in Dipchand Khianra's Imortals, a series of biographical sketches of some Bahá'ís of India who contributed to the development of the community there".
>
Paul Hammond
> > NEMO418 wrote:
> >
> >> Pat Kohli <kohliCUT THE CA...@ameritel.net> wrote in message >
This sounds like Guru nanak himself didn't think he was a "prophet"
or a "manifestation" but simply an inspired teacher.
If that is what he says about himself, what is you beef with
the Baha'is that they believe him?
> The one and only mention of Sikhism in any of the Bahá'í writings is a
> passing reference in God Passes By, 302, though a footnote to Selections
> from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, page 150, makes a reference. No
> scholarship has been done on it thus far.
>
> "No comparative work has been done on Sikhism and the Bahá'í Faith. R. Raj
> Singh summarized Nanak's life and teachings in "Nanak, The Founder of
> Sikhism," in World Order 26.2 (Winter 1994-95), but made no mention of the
> Faith in the essay. Two sources that mention Sikhism, if only in passing,
> are biographies of Pritam Singh, the first Sikh Bahá'í and a distinguished
> Bahá'í teacher. These appear in the Bahá'í World vol. 15, pp. 874-6, and in
> Dipchand Khianra's Imortals, a series of biographical sketches of some
> Bahá'ís of India who contributed to the development of the community there".
>
It seems like the Baha'i Faith has, and always has had a very
high regard for the Sikhs collectively, and for some individuals
in particular.
This is contrary to the view that you present, and yet you
have provided nothing that supports your view so far apart
from your own bluster.
Paul
Pat Kohli
"george.fleming2" wrote:
> in article 3E321A57...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 25/1/03 5:02 am:
> > NEMO418 wrote:
> >
> >> Pat Kohli <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message >
> >>> Guru Nanak was a saint, and barring any evidence from you that
> Baha'is ought
> >>> to
> >>> believe anything to the contrary, I think you simply speak for
> yourself,
> >>> again.
> >>
> >> No. George is quite correct on this score and you are totally
> wrong,
> >> as usual.
> >
> > You are totally wrong, as usual. George asserts, "the Baha'i Faith
> refuses to
> > accept its divine status as a World Religion", and "The Baha'i ...
> rejects
> > Jainism and Sikhism". The facts are that Baha'is accept Sikhs in
> various
> > ecumenical fora, and even the UHJ has expressed an opinion on the
> saintliness
> > of one of the founding Gurus.
>
> No Pat, Nima and I are 100% correct you are wrong.
Hmm, so, I'm wrong because both you and some guy who a) says he wants me
dead and in hell, and b) claims to be the current manifestion of God,
both agree that I am wrong? I think you were doing better with the
simply "Yes" "no" "yes" "no" argument.
> You are certainly allowed
> to believe in whatever you wish to yourself but, here is the proof I
> have
Thanks!
>
> been looking for all along. The UHJ has not got the qualification to
> overule
> the belief's of the three central figures of the Baha'i Faith.
Right!
> "Bahá'ís do
> not consider Sikhism to be a "revealed" religion".
Okay. Lot's of religions are not "revealed." I personally thought the
Guru Granth Sahib was a revelation, but if Baha'u'llah says it wasn't,
He'd know.
> So here is as I said
> before the 5th largest religion in the world is not accepted as one
> of the
> world's major religions by the Baha'i Faith. So much for all this
> syncretistic acceptance of all religions as one.......GF
>
The Bahá'í Faith, the most recent of the major religious traditions,
acknowledges the divine inspiration behind most of the previous
religions and has teachings about their founding, history, philosophy,
and destiny. It views all the world's major religious traditions as
parts of an ongoing, developing religion that Bahá'ís sometimes call the
Religion of God. Its approach thus bears some similarities to "Perennial
Philosophy," popularized by Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Aldous Huxley, and
Frithjof Schuon; "Phenomenology of Religion," indirectly fathered by C.
G. Jung and famously expounded by Joseph Campbell and Mircea Eliade; and
"Religious Pluralism," chiefly associated with John Hick.
>
> http://bahai-library.org/books/rg/rg.biblio15.html
>
This is the sort of blanket acceptance I expect to see.
Silly me, I had imagined you had found a statement from one of the Three
Central Figures suggesting that Sikhism was not divinely inspired. Keep
looking, George, we would not want you to say, "whoops, I may have been
a wee bit premature in asserting that the BF rejects Sikhism."
- Pat
kohli at ameritel.net
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 28/1/03 3:07 am:
> Okay. Lot's of religions are not "revealed." I personally thought the
> Guru Granth Sahib was a revelation, but if Baha'u'llah says it wasn't,
> He'd know.
You mean you didnt know the Baha'i Faith never accepted Sikhism as a
revealed religion, how long have you been a Baha'i?
george.fleming2
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 28/1/03 3:07 am:
> The Bahá'í Faith, the most recent of the major religious traditions,
> acknowledges the divine inspiration behind most of the previous
> religions and has teachings about their founding, history, philosophy,
> and destiny. It views all the world's major religious traditions as
> parts of an ongoing, developing religion that Bahá'ís sometimes call the
> Religion of God. Its approach thus bears some similarities to "Perennial
> Philosophy," popularized by Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Aldous Huxley, and
> Frithjof Schuon; "Phenomenology of Religion," indirectly fathered by C.
> G. Jung and famously expounded by Joseph Campbell and Mircea Eliade; and
> "Religious Pluralism," chiefly associated with John Hick.
>> http://bahai-library.org/books/rg/rg.biblio15.html
>>
> This is the sort of blanket acceptance I expect to see.
I know Baha'is see a syncretism of all these religions and cultures in an
overall belief in One God, One Humankind, and One Religion all under a plan
of God and the Universal House of justice. Unfortunately all dont see things
the Baha'i way. They view the Baha'i Faith as a totaltarian reform movement
trying to impose a similar type of Islamic Sharia law system hiding under
the cloak of this new religion. Rather than herd all into one field like
the Baha'is want (under Baha'i AO control ofcourse) these non Baha'is
believe we should all live in peace and harmony with our different cultures
and "Religious Pluralistic" belief's. Personally, having been a Baha'i for
13 years I now believe they have a much stronger case, and the Baha'is will
have one hell of a job convincing them differently. Those who are not
Baha'is view "Religious Pluralism in a much different way. Here is a few
examples: ........GF
http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/apologetics/comparisons/replural.htm
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/
http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/p14.html
http://www.faithnet.freeserve.co.uk/religiouspluralism.htm
mattiai...@gmail.com
NUR
> You're an idiot
George Fleming hasn't graced these boards in years. Someone asserted elsewhere that he had also passed away. It seems you are the idiot!