Re: Abu'l-Fadl Defines Investigation

Not only is it important for us to examine carefully 
'Abdu'l-Baha''s praise of Mason Remey as Barbara and 
Jeffrey have emphasized, but also it is time to examine 
the evidence that the claim by organizers and speakers
at ther 1960 Chicago National Baha'i Conference that 
Mason Remey was a "senile old man" were completely false.

We have a tape of Mason Remey speaking after that Conference 
and any sincere man or woman can readily become witness to
his clear thinking and reasoning.

We also have his Encyclycal Letters sent to faithful believers 
after that Conference which any sincere person can examine and 
observe the results of a highly intelligent and clear-thinking 
mind.

The accusation that he was "senile" was utilized as an excuse 
to reject out of hand his legitimate claim to thebGuardianship 
of the Baha'i Faith as second Guardian.

To stand up at that Chicago Conference and accuse, without any 
evidence, any Baha'i believer of senility not to mention one 
who had demonstrated diligence and faithfulness as a Baha'i 
for many, many decades, without that believer having opportunity
to be present and defend himself was backbiting at its worst.

Those who continue to support those unfounded accusations
continue to share in that same backbiting and must expect to be
asked to give an account for violating the Baha'i command 
against backbiting contained in Baha'i Holy Text.

The Guardians of the Baha'i Faith have been designated: the 
"chosen ministers" of "Baha'u'llah's Covenant" (Shoghi
Effendi's words), and to reject those "chosen ministers"
(note Shoghi Effendi's plural word "ministers") at the word 
of other humnans is no different than the circumstance of the 
first century Jews rejecting His Holiness the Christ at the 
word of the leaders of the Pharisees and Priests, and no 
different from the circumstance of those who rejected 
His Holiness Baha'u'llah at the word of Muslim Imans or
Ayatollahs, or at the word of Christian Priests or Pastors.

Writing about the Guardian, 'Abdul-Baha' said:
"...he that turneth away from him, hath turned away from God
and he that denieth him , hath denied the True One." 
(Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Baha')

It is that serious brothers and sisters.

The third Guardian of the Baha'i Faith has continually 
invited all sincere Baha'i men and women to reconcile 
with their Guardian.

The third Guardian's website:

www.bahai-guardian.com

"Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> I hope that Barbara's thoughtful comments are not glossed over and missed.
> Most people generally are sloppy in investigating any claims--and this could
> explain why so few people have adequately investigated Baha'u'llah's claim
> to be the Manifestation of God for this Day.
> 
> The truly amazing thing is how the Baha'is have generally refused to even
> consider Mason Remey's claims.
> 
> From my point of view, the reaction of the Heterodox Baha'is to my
> investigation of Mason Remey's claims spoke volumes about where the truth
> might lie.  Instead of taking the questions seriously, they get all paranoid
> and clam up.  Their own refusal to consider the questions suggests their
> insincerity about their claims.  If what they say about Mason Remey was
> true, why so much fear, secrecy, and name-calling?
> 
> If I had any doubt at all about the heterodox position, it was their
> reaction to questions that cemented it for me.  I knew I was on the right
> track after I saw how crazy they acted.
> 
> Jeffrey
> 
> 
> "Barbara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In The Brilliant Proof by Mirza Abu'l Fadl, (known as the greatest
> > Baha'i scholar ),  the author addresses people who are making
> > accusations against Baha'u'llah in order to dissuade others from
> > investigating His claims.  In particular, the missionary Peter, Z.
> > Easton, who &#8220;relied upon the statements of certain persons who
> > have written against the Most Holy Beauty of Abha&#8221;.  Abu'l Fadl
> > goes on to say  that he is &#8220;truly and verily astounded that a
> > man such as Peter Z. Easton who considers himself among the scholars
> > of the twentieth century and accounts himself a judge competent to
> > differentiate truth from falsehood,--that a man of his calibre should
> > rely upon the testimony of one side only.  He should weigh the
> > statements of at least twenty persons affirmative and negative,
> > friendly and hostile, good and evil; then ponder upon the sayings of
> > the two sides with justice, in order that he may arrive at a truthful
> > conclusion as to the question, and adjudge with fairness and equity.
> > For just as some have written unfavorable regarding the Most Holy
> > Beauty of Abha  (Baha'u'llah), other people of insight and perception,
> > ...have recorded the utmost praise and eulogy in their books
> > concerning the Most  Great Beauty of Abha.  According to what rule
> > shall conclusions be reached?  Is a man to be content with the
> > judgment of the enemy alone and to consider as valid all that the
> > opponent has written?  Is it not true that everyone who has committed
> > this mistake has done so by listening th the statements of one side
> > and paying no attention to the testimony of others?"
> >
> > According to this criteria, I urge all believers to read Abdu'l Baha's
> > Eulogies of Mason Remey posted on Nov. 16.  Should not Abdu'l Baha's
> > opinion be taken into consideration?
> >
> >                                        Barbara