Re: What Kent means by "Cause of God"



Hi Tom,

"Lo, the Nightingale of Paradise singeth upon the twigs of the Tree of
Eternity..."

Let's talk about the meaning of words. Perhaps this birdie is named "Lo"
and lives on Paradise Beach in Jamaica. Hey, maybe the "s" on singeth was
supposed to be an "sw" in this story.

As the story begins, we got this little bird named Lo who is swinging or
singing, it isn't clear, on the Eternity tree in a bar in Jamaica. Shall we
go on?

Obviously the story Baha'u'llah was telling in the opening phrases of the
Tablet of Ahmad is not about a bird on a beach. He uses poetry and
challenging allegories to raise us to a spiritual level. That is how
Baha'u'llah uses language.

Can I get an "Amen"?

If so, then you know that the birdie "Lo" is a metaphor, but to what or Who
is "Lo" really? Is it Baha'u'llah? Is it the Baha'i Faith? Or what people
around here seem to be saying is that it doesn't make any difference.
Sometimes it is the Cause of God, right? Or the Faith of God, all of those
are mostly interchangeable, sometimes not but let's not talk about that,
right? There is no difference between them, right?

Anyway, let's not get bogged down in the details of what He meant when He
wrote it, right?

Actually, that is my point. Let's not lose track of why He wrote it. Why
is the Cause of God not the Baha'i Faith? Because the Cause of God is
timeless and the Baha'i Faith is not. So when He tells us to teach the
Cause of God He is saying teach from the twigs of the Tree of Eternity with
holy and sweet melodies.

He is telling us that the Cause of God, hopefully the Baha'i Faith (if we
did but know it), you and I are and everyone reading this is "singing with
holy and sweet melodies, proclaiming to the sincere ones the glad tidings of
the nearness of God, calling the believers in the Divine Unity to the court
of the Presence of the Generous One, informing the severed ones of the
message which hath been revealed by God, the King, the Glorious, the
Peerless, guiding the lovers to the seat of sanctity and to this resplendent
Beauty."

And what I want to talk about is "this resplendent Beauty", but I fear this
might be enough for one day. Let's see how this one goes.

Those are the meanings of the words, we should grasp the hem of that Robe,
but that is another metaphor. Am I being clear? Am I using words as
Baha'u'llah uses them? Do I take His words and turn them into a vehicle to
count ballots and collect cards?

Several people have presented substantial evidence that
"The Baha'i Faith" and "The Cause of God" are largely interchangeable
in the writings of the Baha'i Faith. As to consensus - one could
do a survey I suppose. :-)

The "largely interchangeable" part of that statement is the debatable part.
You say maybe 99% interchangeable? Okay, if I give you that, can we talk
about the 1% that is not interchangeable, and why that would be?

What is the 1% difference?

But the survey wouldn't help. It would probably only depress me. How many
Baha'is are sheep that vote with the majority without independent
investigation?

If one is talking and no one else is understanding, then the most
likely cause is that one is using words in an unexpected way
without defining one's terms.

If I respond "bhahhh" like a sheep will you get the simile? Shall we put it
to a vote?

As I said, this generates confusion
rather than communication. But if that is what someone wants to
do then OK.

I say it is challenging. It is my FAITH. Don't you get that? How can I be
clearer? I would love to be clearer. Was Baha'u'llah clearer? Should I
just give up because Tom doesn't get it?

--Kent








<thdg190@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:QLadnYhkvrcPPPnanZ2dnUVZ_qKgnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The point of language is to communicate. If one talks in a secret
code then communication is impaired. So I am pointing out to the
group and to Kent that his method of communicating may be flawed
in a certain way.

The meaning of words is primarily due to how people use them to
communicate. Words are arbitrary symbols that by consensus are
understood to carry certain meanings. If one uses them in a way
that is significantly different from the consensus then one will
fail to communicate (unless one says I am using this word(s) in
this unusual way).

Several people have presented substantial evidence that
"The Baha'i Faith" and "The Cause of God" are largely interchangeable
in the writings of the Baha'i Faith. As to consensus - one could
do a survey I suppose. :-)

If one is talking and no one else is understanding, then the most
likely cause is that one is using words in an unexpected way
without defining one's terms. As I said, this generates confusion
rather than communication. But if that is what someone wants to
do then OK.

Tom



.