Baha'i Faith - Its origin and its role

Secret correspondence regarding "Orthodox Baha'is" reveals Baha'i strategies for combating the guardianist sects.

The file can be accessed here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uwduc5xr7jyjonm/Orthodox%20Bahais.pdf?dl=0

Here are the comments of Nima Wahid Azal (Former Baha'i, now Azali-Bayani) about this document.

Baha'i population in Nepal falls from 0.01% (in 2001) to 0.0% (in 2011)

Source : http://www.dataforall.org/dashboard/nepalcensus

Baha'is inflating their population numbers is now exposed to everyone and a wise person knows very well that he should never trust the Baha'is in anything.

Baha'is always like to produce the most unreputed data source when it comes to quoting their population. On Wikipedia and other places Baha'is quote the Association of Religion Data Archives OR World Christian Encyclopedia that has extremely bad reputation especially when it comes to reporting Baha'i data. These sources estimated some 4,366 Baha'is in Nepal in 2010.

Now, here are the facts:

There were 1211 Baha'is (0.01% of total Nepali population) in 2001 according to Nepali census. This included 496 children below 14 years of age. So in reality, there were 716 adult Baha'is in 2001.

Source : SOCIAL COMPOSITION OF THE POPULATION: CASTE/ETHNICITY AND RELIGION IN NEPAL, Page 104, by Dr.Dilli Ram Dahal.

The 2011 census reported their population as 0.0%, it went down from 0.01% to 0.0%. It seems Baha'i gimmicks are not working in Nepal. May be those 716 Baha'is (in 2001) were 'spiritual tourists' who left the Baha'i faith after understanding all the hypocrisies and double-standards of this fake NWO religion.

Further study : Check this link on Baha'i Statistics

Baha'i Faith is not a cult!??

Scott Hakala AKA DavidBinOwen on Reddit

First of all, "cult" is not really a valid sociological term; it's mainly a psychological term. Sociologists use the term "new religious movement" out of neutrality, even for movements which we all know to be cults, i.e. Heaven's Gate. So, DavidbinOwen's appeals to sociology here fall flat. There is no single authorized definition or criteria for determining what is and is not a cult, but there are certain psychological models we can make use of in evaluating the destructive character of organizations. As far as I am concerned, Steven Hassan's BITE model (Behavior control, information control, thought control, and emotional control) fits the Baha'i Faith perfectly. Steven Hassan simply uses the term cult to mean an organization which exerts undue influence through these four means, and although this is obviously not an exhaustive definition, it is a useful one.

Behavior control is a part of every religious movement, but the Baha'i Faith is quite different from most religions in that religious authority is centralized in a single administrative structure. It is the Baha'i Administration and its members who enforce the rules. They personally dictate your behavior when it comes to sex, marriage, finances, etc., whereas with most other religions, a person regulates their own behavior out of an independent desire to conform to religious precepts. It is the same with information control, thought control, and emotional control. All ideologies somewhat facilitate these things, but the key point is that, with the Baha'i Faith, these forms of control and influence are directly exerted by a repressive organization.

Where DavidbinOwen (A BIA volunteer) appeals to the Baha'i principles to exonerate it from the cult accusation, he of course looks at things from the standpoint of a true believer for whom the Baha'i Faith's outward principles actually represent its practical reality. As we all know, this is not the case. Whereas the Baha'i Faith ostensibly promotes the independent investigation of truth, it only does this insofar as the investigation of truth leads one to faith in Baha'ism and its institutions. Baha'is will proclaim the value of free and independent investigation in order to tear down every other religion, but when it comes to Baha'ism, "To none is given the right to put forth his own opinion."

https://reference.bahai.org/en/t/se/BA/ba-9.html

I don't know why DavidbinOwen is suddenly broaching this subject again. As far as I am concerned, it's a rather unproductive conversation. True believers will always deny that they belong to a cult, and the worst of them won't even care. One would do better to simply state the truth about Baha'ism and allow a listener to decide if he would like this organization to be a part of his life. When someone sees Baha'ism's pretty exterior and they receive the typical love-bombing that Baha'is give to "seekers," the religion can seem to be the farthest thing from a cult, but with a little independent investigation, it becomes pretty obvious that, whatever it is, it's not good for anyone.

Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeechBahai/comments/iw3klc/bahai_faith_is_not_a_cult_by_any_accepted/

Shrine of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá: Foundations completed......Money wasted!!!!

By Dale Husband

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKjglgjKHug

Why are they building a shrine to Abdu'l-Baha??? When he died, he was laid to rest in the Shrine of the Bab and it should be enough to keep his body there. Don't most Baha'i homes have pictures of Abdu'-Baha in them? So he is being glorified enough!

Somebody tell me how this shrine, when completed, will do ANY good for the world!

Based on how HUGE this foundation seems to be, it appears that it will be larger than the Shrines of both Baha'u'llah and the Bab, who were supposed to be Prophets of God, and Abdu'l-Baha was merely his Father's servant. So wouldn't a simple grave marker similar to that of Shoghi Effendi in London be more logical?

Confidential Letter declares Enayatollah Yazdani and his wife a covenant-breaker.

"Baha'i teachings are inferior to the teachings of Christ." - Edward Browne

Edward G. Browne

E.G. Browne had positive things to say about the Baha'i Faith, but he remained a Christian his whole life:

These [Baha'i] teachings are in themselves admirable, though inferior, in my opinion, both in beauty and simplicity to the teachings of Christ.
— Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion, p. xxi.

He did praise Baha'u'llah, but he also had positive things to say about Subh-i-Azal, noting his "perfectly blameless character" (New History, p. xiv). He had good things to say about both sides and did not uncritically accept information from either.

Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/j2pkjh/e_g_browne/

Babism and the Baha'i Faith are cults.

By Dale Husband

As a Baha'i I was never told about the Bab leaving a Will. It is probably not even common knowledge at all among the rank and file believers.

I said it before and I will say it again.....when the Bab was executed in 1850, that should have ended the Babi movement. The only reason that didn't happen was because after Baha'u'llah was exiled to Baghdad, he slowly revived the movement. The Babis clung to the hope that "He Who God Will Make Manifest", the future leader foretold by the Bab, would come and lead them to victory.

Why couldn't Subh-i Azal (real name: Mirza Yahya) have revived Babism? He clearly lacked the leadership ability to do so. The simple fact that Baha'u'llah outmanuvered Subh-i Azal and gained a much larger following means that the Bab made a colossal mistake in appointing Subh-i Azal to begin with. He should have foreseen such a thing had he been a true Prophet of God.

Official Baha'i propaganda says about this matter:

Mírzá Yaḥyá was nominated by the Báb to serve as a figurehead for the Bábí community pending the imminent manifestation of the Promised One. At the instigation of Siyyid Muḥammad-i-Iṣfahání (see note 192), Mírzá Yaḥyá betrayed the trust of the Báb, claimed to be His successor, and intrigued against Bahá’u’lláh, even attempting to have Him murdered. When Bahá’u’lláh formally declared His Mission to him in Adrianople, Mírzá Yaḥyá responded by going to the length of putting forward his own claim to be the recipient of an independent Revelation. His pretensions were eventually rejected by all but a few, who became known as Azalís (see note 177). He is described by Shoghi Effendi as the “Arch-Breaker of the Covenant of the Báb” (see God Passes By, chapter X).

That's historical revisionism. Joshua was not merely a figurehead appointed by Moses, but the actual leader of the Jews. Peter was not a figurehead for Jesus, but the actual leader of the early Christians. Ali was not merely a figurehead, but the actual leader of the Muslims after the Prophet Muhammad.

Personally, I think both Babism and the Baha'i Faith are cults we don't need, but of course, they persist......because consistent logic doesn't exist in cults.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/iz4diw/the_will_of_the_bab/

The Will and Testament of the Bab

In the battle of succession between Baha'u'llah and Subh-i Azal, one key document exists that proves Subh-i Azal is the Successor to the Bab. That document is the Will of the Bab.

A translation of this document exists on the academic website h-net here

Baha'is know well the importance of this document and deliberately ignore it altogether.

The first two statements of this will are enough to show that Both the Bab and Baha'u'llah were fraudulent:

"Name of Azal, testify that there is no God but I, the dearest beloved."

"Then testify that there is no God but you, the victorious and permanent."

According to these two statements, both the Bab and Subh-i Azal are God. Such a claim does not conform with the beliefs of Abrahamic religions that the Babis claim they are a continuation of (except for those that believe in the trinity).

If we accept at face value that Subh-i Azal is a God appointed by another God, the Bab, then Baha'ism is automatically made invalid because they outright reject Subh-i Azal.

In my opinion, the will of the Bab should be given more attention.

Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/iz4diw/the_will_of_the_bab/