ONE GOD – MANY NAMES? Apologetic to Baha’i

INTRODUCTION

The Baha’i faith has become the great “unifier” of the world’s major religions. Founded during the nineteenth century by Ali Muhammad (the Bab), it began as an offshoot of Shiite Islam, and did not become a major force until late in the nineteenth century when a new “prophet” appeared, Baha’u’llah.[1] Under his guidance and through his “sacred” writings the movement gained steam. He wrote The Most Holy Book (Kitab-i-Aqdas), The Book of Certitudes and The Hidden Great Manifestation. Through the teachings of Baha’u’llah, Baha’i attempts to unite the world under the belief that there is One Creator, One God, who has manifested himself through the world’s great religions.

GOD HAS MANY NAMES

According to Baha’u’llah there have been nine Babs, or manifestations of God. These include Abraham, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab (Ali Muhammad) and Baha’u’llah.[2] Each manifestation carried God’s message to the culture and people in which they appeared. However, the Bab’s message takes precedence over that of the previous manifestations. Further still, Baha’u’llah is today’s manifestation and his message reigns supreme for today. According to him, the ultimate revelation has come through him.[3]

In Gleanings, a book based upon Baha’u’llah’s writings, these manifestations are described as follows;

These sanctified Mirrors, these Day Springs of ancient glory, are, one and all, the Exponents on earth of Him Who is the central Orb of the universe, its Essence and ultimate Purpose. From Him proceed their knowledge and power; from Him is derived their sovereignty…. By the revelation of these Gems of Divine virtue all the names and attributes of God, such as knowledge and power, sovereignty and dominion, mercy and wisdom, glory, bounty, and grace, are made manifest. These attributes of God are not, and have never been, vouchsafed specially unto certain Prophets, and withheld from others…. That a certain attribute of God hath not been outwardly manifested by these Essences of Detachment doth in no wise imply that they who are the Day Springs of God’s attributes and the Treasuries of His holy names did not actually possess it.[4]

According to this passage each manifestation represents an attribute of God’s transcendent essence. Each of these manifestations is described as a “sanctified mirror” of the Divine. Also, the message of this “God” has not been reserved or revealed through the ministry of one prophet. Instead, a type of pluralism is espoused. Though nearly all of the manifestations contradict one another we are told that this is only superficial. Just because one prophetic message does not entail the same details as a previous one does not mean that they are different, but rather that the latest message contains different material than the previous. This would seem to be a convenient “out” for the inherent contradictions of the manifestations individual messages.

Further, Baha’u’llah states that distinctions in the messages of these manifestations should not be made or else it would appear to compromise this inclusive God;

Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed their Revelation….Be ye assured, moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these Manifestations of God … are all ordained by God, and are a reflection of His will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possible difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God… and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers.[5]

This passage concisely describes the essence of the Baha’i teaching regarding revelation and abrogation. In spite of the differences in message the adherent is told that this actually reflects the “purpose” and “will” of God. To focus on these contradictions is tantamount to rejecting God.

In a world that has fully embraced the concept of politically correct tolerance; the Baha’i faith appears to be the solution to the age old “religion wars.” However, logic alone seems to disqualify the claims of Baha’u’llah. What response could a Christian give to the assertions of those within Baha’i?

THE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE

Prior to examining the Scriptural reasons for rejecting the manifestations proposition, it would be beneficial to discuss the inherent logical contradictions taught in Baha’i. First, it should be noted that Baha’i requires its adherents to suspend logic and to adopt in its place a form of relativism. This method is used to overcome the inherent contradictions that each of the nine manifestations has brought through their individual messages. However, the assertion that one must not concentrate on the contradictions of each of the manifestations defies its own premise. In asserting that one position is wrong and another is correct Baha’u’llah is making a judgment on the legitimacy of various epistemological methods. In other words, to condemn those who point out contradictions and embrace absolutes, Baha’u’llah also embrace an absolute position. If holding to an exclusive position is wrong, then pluralism is exclusively correct. He does this despite the fact that this does not fit within the necessary form of relativism that must be adopted in order for Baha’i to be true.

A second extra-biblical reason for rejecting Baha’i centers on one of the supposed nine manifestations of God, Gautama Buddha. According to Baha’u’llah, the Buddha is a manifestation of God. However, such an assertion seems to be incorrect, this is because the Buddha did not profess that there was a God at all. Instead, his system was primarily agnostic; some would even go so far as to call it atheistic. How then could he be a manifestation of the Divine? How can a God be ignorant, or depending upon the interpretation, be in denial over his own existence? Baha’u’llah claims that each of the manifestation’s messages represent the Divine “Purpose” and “Will.” However, the Buddha’s theology is not only different from the other manifestations; it denies the very existence of the God who is being manifested. This issue cannot simply be ignored.

In examining the Gospel accounts, can the message of Jesus Christ really be considered as just one of many “revelations?” To claim as much would require a great deal of hermeneutical acrobatics. For instance, Christ claimed to be the sole path to God. In John 14:6 He declared to that he alone is the way to God the Father. Christ states “…I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”[6] If He is just one of nine manifestations then how does one explain His exclusive claims? To suggest His statements to be merely overturning His own Hebrew culture fails to recognize the nature of His claims. What Christ proposed about Himself was a trans-cultural proposal that stood in direct opposition to the prevailing theology of not just the Hebrews but also the entire Hellenized world. It is also significant that Christ did not claim to know a way to God or to have special insight to reaching a specific spiritual path, but He is personally the avenue to salvation.

Continuing further, Christ also made other exclusive statements. For instance, in John 10:9 He states, “I am the door; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture.” If Jesus Christ is the single door by which man reaches the Father, then no other path that ignores the exclusive message of Jesus Christ can be true. Either Christ is wrong or else every other path is wrong. There can be no middle ground.

Not only did Jesus Christ claim to be God, the only Savior for mankind, but His own disciples echoed this fact. In Acts 4:12 Peter stood before the Sanhedrin defending his presentation of the Gospel. In verse eight of the narrative, the text states that Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit, the third member of the Godhead. Therefore, Peter’s statements, following this filling, were guided by God Himself. This means Peter’s declaration in verse twelve that Jesus alone is Savior came from God directly, Peter states; “…there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” This statement is not ambiguous; Peter, when pressed by religious authorities, made it very clear that Christ alone is the incarnate God.

CONCLUSION

The challenge presented by the Baha’i faith must be taken seriously. In this age of pluralism Christianity must maintain its insistence upon the exclusivity of salvation through Jesus Christ alone. This must be done in a spirit of love, yet without relenting.

Reviewing a few facets of Baha’u’llah’s claims: First, according to Baha’i Jesus Christ is but one of nine manifestations of the Divine. This, however, is entirely incompatible with Christ’s own understanding of Himself. He, along with His disciples, repeatedly claimed that salvation and access to the Father came exclusively through Christ. Second, Baha’i teaches that these nine manifestations each bring messages that represent an attribute of this transcendent Divine. In order to make this position plausible Baha’u’llah retreated to a state of relativism. However, such a position defies its own premise by stating that its position is exclusively correct. Last, the nine manifestations not only contradict one another but one of the manifestations, Buddha, did not even acknowledge the existence of a God of any kind. How can one who denies or ignores the existence of God be a manifestation of said God? Would this not render this deity as than self aware? Then if this is the case how could this same deity manifest itself?

A further problem exists in Baha’i theology, the problem of uncertainty. There is no safeguard in-place to assure one that no new revelation has been given. Baha’u’llah claimed that there was yet another manifestation to come, yet the criteria for establishing who this is remains so vague that there is virtually no way to falsify any claims one could make to being that manifestation. In summary, any person, who so desired, could claim to be a manifestation and could then completely rewrite the doctrines of Baha’i.

As this movement grows the church must respond with a legitimate apologetic that sensitively handles the teaching of Baha’u’llah. In a world that values pluralism and politically correct tolerance, the church must be sure that her objections to Baha’i are clearly stated and entirely accurate. If we engage in dialogue with the Baha’i and fail to treat them fairly we run the risk of appearing hateful and bigoted before the watching world. We must defend truth and logic, but with love and reverence.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The New American Standard, Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2001.

Baha’u’llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah Wilmette: Baha’i Publishing Trust, 1976.

Corduan, Winfried. Neighboring Faiths. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1998.

---

[1] Winfried Corduan, Neighboring Faiths (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 270.

[2] Ibid, 272.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Baha’u’llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah (Wilmette: Baha’i Publishing Trust, 1976), pp. 47-48.

[5] Ibid, 59-60.

[6] All references to Scripture come from The New American Standard (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2001).