Re: Some UNanswered questions #7 (last one)

"Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> 42. How did the definition of a covenant breaker change from a Bahá'í who
> turns away from way from the Centre of the Cause, 'Abdul-Baha, and the
> Guardian to those who turn away from "the central authority in the Cause
to
> which all must turn."?

They had to do something to maintain their authority against those who would
(correctly) question it.  So the Hands came up with a brilliant strategy.
Change the definition of covenant breaking so that those who are actually
faithful to the Covenant would now be shunned while those who violated it
would have to shun the true believers.  And thus total control over the
Faith was accomplished.

God has the power to return His Cause to the faithful believers, and He will
do so.  There is an appointed time...


>
> 43. Since Shoghi Effendi said one of the qualifications for a believer was
> "loyal and steadfast adherence to every clause of our Beloved's sacred
Will"
> , how could the Bahá'ís who follow the Haifa administration accept the
> wholesale changes made from the outline established in the Will and
> Testament.?

It would seem to me that those who accepted the Haifa administration are not
qualified to be believers.  Many are called but few are chosen.


> 44. How could it be that the Will and Testament is not operative or cannot
> be followed when Shoghi Effendi wrote in "The World Order of Baha'u'llah"
> that the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah's Most Holy
Book
> of Laws, the Kitab-i-Aqdas are "inseparable parts of one complete unit"?

How come nobody ever even tries to answer this question?  Don't you see that
you cannot declare any part of the Will and Testament as inoperative.  It is
blasphemy.



> 45. When Shoghi Effendi stated that the Will was the "inevitable offspring
> resulting from that mystic intercourse between Him Who communicated the
> generating influence of His divine Purpose and the One Who was its vehicle
> and chosen recipient." and when he stated that the Will, "[b]eing the
Child
> of the Covenant--the Heir of both the
> Originator and the Interpreter of the Law of God--the Will and Testament
of
> Abdu'l-Baha can no more be divorced from Him Who supplied the original and
> motivating impulse than from the One Who ultimately conceived it.
> Baha'u'llah's inscrutable purpose, we must ever bear in mind, has been so
> thoroughly infused into the conduct of Abdu'l-Baha, and their motives have
> been so closely wedded together, that the mere attempt to dissociate the
> teachings of the former from any system which the ideal Exemplar of those
> same teachings has established would amount to a repudiation of one of the
> most sacred and basic truths of the Faith," then isn't the current Haifa
> organization, and the manner in which it has strayed from the provi-sions
of
> the Will, itself a repudiation of the sacred and basic truths of the
Faith?

Yes, most definitely!

> 46. How can there be no guardian in the Administrative Order when Shoghi
> Effendi specifically said, of the Guardian and the UHJ, that "[alcting in
> conjunction with each other these two inseparable institutions administer
> its affairs, coordinate its activities,promote its interests, execute its
> laws and defend its subsidiary institutions."

Shoghi Effendi already has said everything that needs to be said.  But did
anybody listen?  Very few.

> 47. How could there be no guardian in the Administrative Order when Shoghi
> Effendi said of the Guardian and the UHJ that "far from being incompatible
> or mutually destructive, they supplement each other's authority and
> functions, and are permanently and fundamentally united in their aims.
> Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of
> Baha'u'llah would be mutilated and permanently
> deprived of that hereditary principle which, as Abdu'l-Baha has written,
has
> been invariably upheld by the Law of God."

Shoghi Effendi decided this issue once and for all.  So how can the UHJ
claim that it was an open question available for them to legislated.
Divorced from Guardianship, the Order would be mutilated!  How much more
clear does he have to be?


> 48.  If the Guardianship represents the "hereditary principle" meaning the
> "idea" of a hereditary office, why is it believed that the Shoghi Effendi
> had to appoint his own son as his successor.

In the World Order of Baha'u'llah Shoghi Effendi says that "...he who
symbolizes the hereditary principle in this Dispensation has been made the
interpreter of the words of its Author, and ceases consequently, by virtue
of the actual authority vested in him, to be the figurehead invariably
associated with the prevailing systems of constitutional monarchies."

Here again, the Guardianship SYMBOLIZES the hereditary principle.  That is,
it represents or resembles it.
In other words it is not necessarily heredity.  It symbolizes the idea of a
hereditary office.  Shoghi Effendi would not have used the word symbolize
unless he meant it.  Baha'u'llah IS the Manifestation of God.  He doesn't
symbolize it.  The Guardianship symbolizes the hereditary idea-- it is NOT a
hereditary office.

In fact, if the Guardianship was a hereditary office, there would be no need
for an APPOINTMENT.  Clearly, it is an appointed office.






> 49.As Shoghi Effendi stated, "the Guardian has been specifically endowed
> with such power as he may need to reveal the purport and disclose the
> implications of the utterances of Baha'u'llah and of Abdu'l-Baha" then how
> could Shoghi Effendi be wrong when goes on to say that that "the integrity
> of this cardinal principle of our
> Faith the words, the deeds of its present and future Guardians must
> abundantly testify"?

Nobody has effectively explained to me how an infallibly guided Guardian
would use the word "Guardian" in plural if in fact there would only be one
Guardian.

>
> 50. Why is it that every Bahá'í who asks these questions and demands some
> answers, is declared to be a covenant-breaker and the other Baha'is are
> urgently warned never again to speak to such person?

Again, this is the brilliance of the Hands violation.  They reversed what it
means to be a covenant breaker in order to institute mind control over the
faithful friends.

>
> OK.  So there are 84,000 adult Baha'is in the heterodox organization, or
> whatever.  Can't any of you give me a rational and reasoned to these
> questions?

I am waiting....