Baha’i Teachings

Prophecies concerning the Second Coming of the Christ

In His address to the angel of the church in Philadelphia Yesu (IÄ“soûs¹) said unto John concerning those who conquer the egoistic-self:

“ … I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from My God out of heaven, and My own new name.” Revelation 3:12

When the Christ returns in a different name will avowed Christians recognize him or will they reject him? If they reject him the question must arise: Why? Did they worship the One God, or did they – as if unbeknownst to their own selves – worship an idol? Yesu warned of those who would idolize his name:

“Not every one that saith unto me ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day: ‘Lord, Lord did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out demons, and by thy name do many mighty works?’ And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:21-23

The verse is clear. Many who ardently believe in the name Jesus are strangers to him. How can this be?: They disobey the will of the Father in heaven because they don’t know Him or want Him. They worship someone other than the One God, He Who said to Moses “I am יהוה thy God” and further: “Thou shalt have no other gods beside Me …”²

Careful investigation reveals that many commonly held beliefs concerning Jesus are actually discordant with Paul’s confession of faith:

“… concerning His Son, the one born from the seed of David according to the flesh, who was appointed ‘Son of God’ in power according to the Holy Spirit at the time of resurrection out of the dead,³ IÄ“soûs, Christ our Lord …” Romans 1:3-4

In his book, Against Heresies, the Ante-Nicene bishop Irenaeus (late 100s C.E.) warned of discordant and strange beliefs which were creeping into the church. In this regard he found it necessary to affirm that:

“ … the Father Himself is alone called God … the Scriptures acknowledge Him alone as God …”⁴

And also that:

“ … neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Lord Christ in his own person, did acknowledge any other Lord or God, but the God and Lord Supreme: the prophets and the apostles confessing the Father and the Son; but naming no other as God, and confessing no other as Lord: and the Lord himself handing down to his disciples, that He, the Father, is the only God and Lord, Who alone is God and Ruler of all; – it is incumbent on us to follow, if we are their disciples indeed, their testimonies to this effect.”⁵

As the people abandoned these testimonies they were increasingly estranged from Yesu’s God, the same God that Moses worshipped, the same God to Whom Paul bore witness as The Invisible One, He Who resides in unapproachable light:

“… the Blessed and Only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, Who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, Whom no man has ever seen or can see.” 1st Timothy 6:15-16

Yesu’s Way leads to the God Whom no man has ever seen or can see. Idolatry treads a different path. Its strange discordant beliefs obstruct the truth of verses in which Yesu distinguished between God and himself.⁶ The belief of the strangers is the divergent path of Trinitarian Christianism⁷ which promotes a Jesus which Paul warned against in 2^nd Corinthians 11:4.

In light of all this, please reconsider a prophecy from the Old Testament which the followers of Christianism believe to be fulfilled in him who was appointed as the Son of God even though not one gospel claimed Yesu fulfilled this:

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder, and His name will be called ‘Messenger of the Great Will’, ‘Astonishing Counselor’, ‘Mighty God’, ‘Most Powerful’, ‘Ruler of Peace’, ‘Father of the Future Age’. Of the increase of His government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over His kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with Justice and with Righteousness from this time forth and for evermore. The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will do this.” Isaiah 9:6-7 (Septuagint Version)

The verse reads “unto us a son” that is, it doesn’t say unto God a son is born but “unto us”. Who is this “us” if not his own people, especially his human parents? This establishes that this prophesied Messenger is different from him who was appointed to be the “Son of God”. While this one holds much in common with Yesu, the first Christ, there are distinguishing features that don’t apply to Yesu.

So for instance this is confirmed by the fact of this man being called The Father – an identity completely unique from that of The Son. Not only that but he is called the ‘Father of the Future Age’ placing his advent at that future time which Yesu called ‘the Age to Come’.⁸ This is to be an age of peace and thus he is called ‘Ruler of Peace’. Yesu did not claim to be this one, no, he disavowed it saying “I come not to bring peace but a sword.”⁹

Furthermore, the verse states that the government will be upon his shoulder, but when they came to make him king Yesu hid¹⁰ and again, in his trial before Pilate, he disavowed claim to this saying “My kingdom is not of this world.”¹¹ Also we find that in the Septuagint Greek of this verse in Isaiah the word βουλῆς may also be translated ‘Parliament’ thus yielding the title: ‘Messenger of the Great Parliament’. Yesu said little of government and said nothing about a future Parliament. Yesu did not come to establish a government, his special task was different having different requirements.

From all of this we know that these verses must apply to the Second Coming of the Christ. Christians expect that this man will be named Jesus, however, Yesu himself indicated that we are not to believe anyone coming in his name claiming to be that Christ.¹² This indicates that the personal name of the second coming of Christ will not be ‘Yesu’ or ‘Jesus’, nor will he come “in the name of Jesus”, ie, as a Christian.

In regard to the manner of the Second Coming the verse “for unto us a child is born” indicates, not a grown man descending from the sky in accord with superstitious interpretations of scripture but a man coming into the world in the natural way of God’s Law, beginning first as an infant born from the womb of his mother.

These verses indicate that the human individuality of the 2^nd Christ will be different from the human individuality of the 1^st Christ. Who then is this second Christ? To understand, it will help to identify ‘Christ’ itself, that is, firstly, what does the word or title signify?

The Gospel of John 1:41 states that the word Messiah means Christ. That is, the Hebrew word מָשִׁיח (Māšîaḥ/Messiah)¹³ has the same meaning as the title “Christ”. Further investigation reveals that in rabbinical Judaism this title designated men whose fathers were descended from David thus giving them a potential right to the throne of David.

David’s throne signified the institution of a hereditary Kingship. That institution was a historical fact – King David’s government. Even though of heaven – it was also on earth. It was a foreshadow of that kingdom earnestly sought in The Lord’s Prayer:

“Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done, on earth as it is in heaven…”.

The religious elite in that day mistakenly rejected Yesu’s claim to Messiah not only because it was plain that He didn’t rule upon an earthly throne of David but also because they failed to see that He had any right to it in a scriptural sense, and so they crucified him. In order to avoid a similar mistake in regard to the Second Coming we must consider the prophecies dispassionately, that is, in order to recognize it the fair seeker may need to detach from previous opinions.

To further identify the 2^nd Christ it is necessary to explore the prophecies concerning that Second Coming. One of these, Isaiah 9:6 has already been presented. Next let’s consider the prophecy in the fourth chapter of Zechariah in which he sees a lampstand with seven lamps. This lampstand was like unto that Menorah constructed for Moses’ tabernacle. In his vision, the prophet Zechariah saw the Menorah with two olive branches to either side. When he asked what those two olive branches were he was told:

“These are the two anointed who stand by the Lord of the whole earth.” Zechariah 4:14

The question – Who are these two anointed ones? – brings us again to the meaning of the words Christ and Messiah.

Our English word “christ” comes from the Greek word xριστός (khristós) which means “the anointed one”. In English translation the Greek title Χριστός is written “Christ”. Similarly our English word “messiah” comes from the Hebrew word משיח (mashiach) which means “the anointed one”.¹⁴

In Old Testament history this title was principally used to designate the kings of Judah. In Old Testament prophecy it signifies not just any descendant of King David but a God-sent Savior descended from King David. Thus John 1:41 states:

“‘We have found the Messiah’ (which is translated as Christ).”

They found him because they were looking for him and they were looking for him because of the prophecies which promised that a Christ would come to save his people.

In prophetic vision Zechariah saw that there would be, not one, but two of these prophesied descendants of King David. That is, two Christs were prophesied to be sent by God. The first one – Yesu the Christ – may be called the Suffering Messiah. The 22^nd Psalm which Yesu referred to when he said “My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?” is a prophecy of his own suffering on the cross. There are many verses which clearly prophesy this event, for instance the sixteenth states “they have pierced my hands and feet”.

The second Christ may be called the Reigning Messiah. This is the one bestowed with the title ‘Father of the Future Age’ in the Septuagint version of Isaiah 9:6-7.

There has been a great deal of confusion concerning these titles of Father and Son. At one time the Hebrews referred to Abraham as “Father Abraham” because they were all descended from him but in prophetic scripture the titles Father and Son have a different meaning. The meaning of these designations is not that one is the son of the other, nor that one is the father of the other. Paul’s confession of faith in his Epistle to the Romans and his explanations in the Epistle to the Hebrews show that these titles are not intended to designate biological ancestry or descent.

Undoubtedly the followers of Christianism will object to this. They prefer to believe in a Jesus who is the biological son of God and also to regard their Jesus as a god, the Creator – equal to his Father.¹⁵ Consider: Whereas the existence of a biological son is necessarily dependent upon the existence of his biological father, the existence of that father is not dependent upon the existence of his son. In this regard they can never be equal for one is dependent and the other independent, one is the creator and the other the created.¹⁶

No, these prophetic titles of Father and Son have nothing to do with ancestry or descent. They are designations of dutiful authority relative to the Kingdom of God on Earth. In this regard the first Messiah is appointed to a role like unto that of a son and the second is appointed to a role like unto that of a father. Personally they are equal, but the “Son” is tasked by God to fulfill a certain purpose and the “Father” to serve another certain purpose. Nevertheless, spiritually, they are of equal rank in the sight of God. Either person could have fulfilled the role of the other but it was a matter of timing. Yesu’s mission as the Son had to come first to prepare the way for the mission of the Father which is another reason¹⁷ why Yesu said,

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.” John 14:6

Each mission was designed to fulfill the needs of its analogous Age, and each Age is a phase in the cycle of human progress. Service as a child must needs precede service as a parent. It is an issue of development towards maturity. During the phase of sonship the workers in the vineyard serve as sons waiting to receive their inheritance. Yesu brought that Age of Sonship. The Second Messiah brings the “Coming of Age”.

This coming of age is when the people are to receive the promised heritage. This is preceded by the Day of Judgement. In Revelation a great white throne of judgement is depicted in the 20th chapter verse 11. Ezekiel received a vision of the Second Messiah seated on this throne. This vision also revealed his name as כבוד יהוה.

“And above the firmament … in appearance like sapphire, there was the likeness of a throne … and upon the likeness of the throne was a figure with the visage of a man upon it. … Such was the vision of the likeness of כבוד יהוה.” Ezekiel 1:26-28

We know that this wasn’t a vision of God Himself for the Gospels testify that no one has ever seen God and they didn’t make an exception for the prophets of the past such as Ezekiel. So we know that this vision of a man on a throne is not a vision of God Himself. No, it is a vision of that Messiah who was to be appointed with the mission ‘Father of the Future Age’. Furthermore, Ezekiel does not give this Messiah’s name as יהוה Himself, but rather as כבוד יהוה. This name was translated into English as ‘The Glory of God’ or ‘The Glory of the Lord’.

In Acts 7:55 it records that Stephen “… full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the Glory of God and IÄ“soû standing at the right hand of God …”

From this depiction we know it would be blasphemous to consider either of these two Messiahs as being a god for there is only one God and He declared:

“I am יהוה – thy God … Thou shalt have no other gods beside Me …”

It is sad that those who idolize the name “Jesus” are unwilling to accept that the Glory of God is the Christ come in his new name. They seem not to have eyes to see or ears to hear. Therefore the Messiah addresses the peoples of Christendom in his Most Holy Tablet, saying:

“O followers of the Son! Have ye shut yourselves out from Me by reason of My Name?”

If one were to translate¹⁸ the name of the Messiah (revealed in the visions of Ezekiel and Stephen) into Arabic it would be spelled بَهَاء اَللّٰه (Glory of God).¹⁹

This name is dependent upon The Name prophesied in the Bible but the casual glance doesn’t discern that a name was being revealed. Nevertheless some translators have discerned it. So for instance, in the Septuagint text we read (τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου ἔνδοξον ἔσται):

“The name of the Lord shall be ‘Glorious’.” Isaiah 24:15 (LXX Version)

Verses such as this are essential to discerning the Name. It is tragic that blind scribes and presumptuous clergy obscure them. Such afflictions test the seekers, separating pure gold from dross!

God is the All-Merciful and He assists our search for Him by sending His prophesied Messenger. Thus the Glory of God (بَهَاء اَللّٰه) explained Biblical prophecies concerning his Advent including this verse from Isaiah 35:

“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose. It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the splendor of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the Glory of the Lord, and the splendor of our God.”²⁰

Mt. Carmel and the Plain of Sharon “saw” the Glory of God (بَهَاء اَللّٰه) because he was physically at that place and on that Mountain. His own statement regarding this verse is that:

“These passages stand in need of no commentary. They are shining and manifest as the sun, and glowing and luminous as light itself. Every fair-minded person is led, by the fragrance of these words, unto the garden of understanding, and attains unto that from which most men are veiled and debarred.”²¹

Those with open spiritual eyes can see the true meaning of these prophecies and they understand the warning given by Yesu when the disciples asked about the Second Coming:

“Take heed that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, `I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.” Matthew 24:4-5

Following this Yesu revealed the prophetic signs of his immanent return in spirit²² and the signs by which they could recognize the second coming of the Christ and the close of the age. Yesu’s intention was not that we should reject everyone who claims to be Christ, but rather that we should reject every claimant except the True One. The Messiah named بَهَاء اَللّٰه doesn’t come in the name of Jesus claiming to be Christ. No! He comes with His own new name in fulfillment of prophecy which proves Him to be the return of the Christ.

Not only was he prophesied by name in the Bible and to be on Mt. Carmel, he was also prophesied to be at a certain town: ‘Akka across the bay from Haifa which is at the base of Mt. Carmel on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. The name ‘Akka is not of Hebrew derivation but Greek, having the variant spellings: Akka, Akko, ‘Acco, Accho, Ake, ÁkÄ“, ‘Akre, ‘Acre. The Greek word Ékhō (ἔχω) meaning “to hold”, is likely the origination of the ancient name of the city of ‘Akre/’Akka because it is the root of the word Ὀχύρω (Okhuró) which means to fortify.²³ ‘Akka was a fortress for thousands of years and in the modern era it was used by the Ottoman Empire as a prison.

The Messiah بَهَاء اَللّٰه was originally from Persia and his forerunner – like unto John the Baptist – had been martyred by the state causing a great uproar in the populace and to avoid more of that they decided rather than kill him they would merely banish him from the country. Thus he was sent to Baghdad under house-arrest as a prisoner of state. However, as towns in the vicinity were major places of pilgrimage, this put him in contact with multitudes of seekers who accepted his teachings. Ten years passed and seeing that this situation did not satisfy their intent to suppress the Message, the authorities decided to banish him again. Thus over the course of another five years he was under a type of house-arrest first in Constantinople, then Adrianople, but each time it was as it had been before.

While in Adrianople he declared in regard to those in authority:

“If the laws and regulations to which you cleave be of your own making, we will, in no wise, follow them. Thus have I been instructed by Him Who is the All-Wise, the All-Informed. Such hath been my way in the past, and such will it remain in the future, through the power of God and His might. This, indeed, is the true and right way. If they be ordained by God, bring forth, then, your proofs, if you be of them that speak the truth.”

Finally, they banished²⁴ him to a prison in what they considered the ugliest most desolate town in the world, ‘Akka in Palestine, hoping that he would die from its pestilential conditions as it was thought to have adverse climate and filthy water.

To reach the fortress-prison of ‘Akka he and his companions were sent by ship across the Aegean Sea, passing islands off the shore of Asia Minor but stopping in Mytilene and Smyrna, from thence going on to Alexandria, Egypt. At that point they embarked to another ship and as it lingered in the port, a Christian convert in Alexandria named Fáris Effendi sent a letter to the Messiah on the ship declaring his acceptance of the Message. In it Faris Effendi wrote of the voyage:

“O, the surging sea! is thy restlessness because of the fear of the glorious Lord?”

This was in acknowledgment of the fulfillment of this prophecy:

“All this shall be in the land in the midst of the nations, just as when someone gleans an olive tree, so shall they glean them, but when the harvest is complete, these will shout aloud with their voice, and they that are left on the land shall rejoice together in the Glory of the Lord. The water of the sea shall be restless²⁵ because the Glory of the Lord will be among the islands of the sea. The name of the Lord shall be: Glorious.” Isaiah 24:13-15 (LXX Version)

The ‘land in the midst of the nations’ may well signify the nation of Turkey as it sits astride two continents and its capitol, the city of Constantinople/Istanbul sits right at that middle point where the continents join hands. Also, in order to banish him to ‘Akka, the Ottoman authorities sent the Glory of the Lord by ship passing among the islands of the Aegean sea.

From Alexandria, Egypt the ship sailed to Jaffa and up the coast along the plain of Sharon to Haifa where they disembarked onto a small boat for the journey across the bay to ‘Akka.

Some years later, the Messiah بَهَاء اَللّٰه declared these words about his presence in ‘Akka :

“Lend an ear unto the song of David. He saith: ‘Who will bring me into the Strong City?’ The Strong City is ‘Akka, which hath been named the Most Great Prison, and which possesses a fortress and mighty ramparts.”²⁶

The cited verse is from the 60^th and 108^th Psalms. In the King James it reads “Who will bring me into the strong city?” and in the Revised Standard, “Who will bring me to the fortified city?”

In the Psalms the name is given through translation of its meaning because the place-name “Akka” signifies a fortress in Greek. Investigating this same verse in the Septuagint we find it translated from the Hebrew back into the Greek with the word περιοχῆς from peri + ékhō, which brings us again to the Greek word Ékhō.

This verse prophetically indicates the city of ‘Akka and thus that the Messiah, descended from David, would be brought into it.

________________________________

1 The spoken language of Yesu and his apostles was Aramaic. In Aramaic his name was YeÅ¡Å«’. However, the gospels weren’t written in this language but in Greek. When we investigate the Greek text we can find that the Aramaic name YeÅ¡Å« was translitered as Ἰησοῦ or Ἰησοῦs. Whether one prefers the Aramaic or the Greek, it is certain that the name Ἰησοῦs/IÄ“soûs (i – ɛː – sôsː) was never pronounced with either the sounds or the letters J or Z (ˈdÊ’iːzÉ™s/jeezuz) by his own disciples, nor by early Christians. It’s pronunciation in Greek is a matter of conjecture but it was perhaps: Ee-É›-sooce. For pronunciation of the -É›- see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Open-mid_front_unrounded_vowel.ogg

2 Exodus 20:3, Septuagint Version “οὐκ ἔσονταί σοι θεοὶ ἕτεροι πλὴν ἐμοῦ.”

3 Concerning “ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν” (ex anastáseos nekrôn) Biblical Greek scholar John D. Harvey writes: “Ἐκ + genitive marks temporal sequence (Schreiner 44; cf. BDAG 297d) and may be translated “at the time of.” Even without the article, ἀναστάσεως (gen. sg. fem. of ἀναστάσις, -εως, ἡ, ‘resurrection’) is definite (cf. Longenecker 76). The genitive νεκρῶν indicates separation – ‘out of, from among dead ones’ – and is comparable to the more common ἐκ νεκρῶν …” (Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament, Vol. Romans) For the timing of the νεκρῶν see Hebrews 5:5 in conjunction with the footnote at Luke 3:22 in the RSV

4 Irenaeus (Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 28, #4)

5 ibid (Book 3, Chapter 9, #1)

6 For instance: Luke 18:18, John 5:37, 5:44, 6:38, 17:3 and Matthew 24:36. Please consider these verses also: John 1:18, 6:63 / Romans 16:27 / 1st Corinthians 8:6 / Galatians 3:20 / Ephesians 4:6 / Colossians 1:15 / 1st Timothy 1:17, 2:5 / Hebrews 8:1 / James 2:19 / 1st John 2:1, 4:12 / Deuteronomy 4:35, 32:39 / 1st Chronicles 17:20 and Isaiah 43:10, 45:5.

7 For evidence concerning the falsehood of the Trinity, consult “The Two Babylons” by Alexander Hislop, a Reverend-Scholar in the native church of President Trump’s mother.

8 Matthew 12:32, Mark 10:30, Luke 18:30

9 Matthew 10:34

10 John 6:15

11 John 18:36

12 Matthew 24:5

13 See also מלך משיח and משיח בן־יוסף.

14 The Hebrew: מָשִׁיחַ (mashiach) from מָשַׁח (mashach) – to anoint, is translated into English: Messiah. The Greek: Xristós (christos) from xríō (chrio) – to anoint, is translated into English: Christ.

15 Yesu said: “… the Father is greater than I.” John 14:28

16 Tertullian said as much in his Against Praxeas (9, ANF 3: 604)

17 Mainly, the meaning is that there is no access to God, the Heavenly Father, except through The Spirit who was speaking at that time through Yesu. This same Spirit had spoken previously through Noah, Abraham, Moses and others.

18 Note that there are several potential translations. Every language has synonyms thus any foreign word may be translated with one of many optional synonyms by a translator while another translator may choose a different synonym. Thus the Hebrewכבוד can be translated glory, splendor, honor, etc. Similarly the Arabic بَهَاء can be translated glory, splendor, brilliance, etc.

19 As with Hebrew, Arabic is read from right-to-left. Those familiar with the Arabic word for God will note its inclusion in this name. When the Arabic word for god is written as اللَّه (Allah) it means not “a god” ( إِلَٰهَ – ʾilāh) but rather al-Lah ie “The God” indicating the Singular One Who Alone is God. In the Qur’an we find both forms in the verse which was adopted as the first part of the Shahada, the Muslim confession of faith: “There is no إِلَٰهَ (ʾilāh – deity) except اللَّهُ (Allāh – The God).” Qur’an 37:35

20 There are various translations but in the Hebrew text the end of the verse reads: הכרמל והשרון המה יראו כבוד יהוה הדר אלהינו

21 The verse from Isaiah was explained near the end of a long epistle to the son of an evil cleric dubbed The Wolf.

22 Yesu promised that “this generation will not pass away” before the fulfillment of the signs. Thus in 70ad Jerusalem was surrounded by armies and the temple completely destroyed. Twenty-six years later while on the island of Patmos, John, the youngest apostle, received the spiritual return when Yesu gave him the visions recorded in the Book of Revelation. See also the 21^st chapter of John’s Gospel, verses 22-23.

23 Ékhō is also the root of ἐχυρός (ekhurós) meaning firm, strong, secure. Ekhurós may also be spelled Ὀχυρός (ochurós). The Greek words ὀχύρωμα (okhuróma, which may be tranlated fortress, fort, stronghold, and fortification – the meaning including that of a prison) and ὀχυρὰν (ochurán, used in Jeremiah 1:18 LXX to indicate a fortress) are both derived from Ekhurós.

24 Sometime after the arrival of the Messiah and his companions in ‘Akka, Jakob Schumacher, the American consular agent for Haifa and ‘Akka clarified that they had been banished to ‘Akka “on account of their beliefs”.

25 tαραχ-θήσεται: caused to be: troubled, turbulent, disturbed, restless, in tumult

26 Also from the Messiah’s epistle to the son of The Wolf.

————————————

Draft of future section:

Upon considering how the “pursuit of happiness” is intrinsically interwoven with justice we find in scripture:

“The practice of Justice is happiness for the righteous, but terror to the workers of iniquity.” Proverbs 21:15

Lord Yesu distilled the principle of Justice into this statement:

“As ye would that men should do unto you, do ye also unto them likewise, for this is the law and the prophets.”

“The Lord our God, the Lord is One ….” Mark 12:29-31

“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments depends the whole law and the prophets.” Matthew 22:37-40

Lord Yesu’s meaning was further clarified by Saint Paul:

“If there be any other commandment, it is summed up in this word, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love works no ill to his neighbor: love therefore is the fulfillment of the law.” Romans 13:9-10

In an Address to the Jewish people Lord Bahá’u’lláh declared:

“The Most Great Law is come, and the Ancient Beauty ruleth upon the throne of David. Thus hath My Pen spoken that which the histories of bygone ages have related. At this time, however, David crieth aloud and saith: ‘O my loving Lord! Do Thou number me with such as have stood steadfast in Thy Cause, O Thou through Whom the faces have been illumined, and the footsteps have slipped!’”

It seems plain from this that Lord Baha’u’llah intended the people to know that He ruled upon the throne of David and that this declaration was connected with “the histories of bygone ages”.

No one sincerely professing belief in Him would be inclined to reject the evident meaning of this verse if not for the interference of others in whom they have placed their trust. Thus, a few have been misled through an interpretation that by the words “throne of David” Baha’u’llah did not actually intend the throne of David’s Kingship but something other than that.

This cannot present any real obstacle to accepting the apparent meaning of Baha’u’llah’s declaration for, in accordance with the principles of the Faith, authoritative interpretation rests with the rightful successors chosen by the Lord of Baha and those other than the rightful successor cannot claim this for themselves. For this reason most Baha’is deem it prudent, in the absence of an authoritative interpretation for a particular verse, that one’s understanding should not conflict with the plainly evident meaning.

On this basis alone there should be no need for further consideration of any unwitting disparagement of this verse. However, even as the dark is made to serve the light, the arguments against its apparent meaning may actually help those who practice justice to affirm that Baha’u’llah was indeed established upon the throne of David.

Furthermore, it also seems necessary to distinguish the nature of David’s throne and of Baha’u’llah’s own throne as a Manifestation, and so an examination of the historical basis of this claim along with some degree of examination of the arguments against it may prove useful to clarify exactly what Baha’u’llah intended.

Thus, concerning His statement:

“Thus hath My Pen spoken that which the histories of bygone ages have related.”

Let us consider the fact that the Jewish histories of past ages are replete with accounts of King David, his successors, their genealogies and prophecies concerning his descendants. For instance, the legends and histories of the Jews includes information of particular interest concerning a renowned descendant of David known as Bostanai, who was descended from the Davidic King Jehoiachin who had been taken captive to Babylon.

For more information on Bostanai please refer to:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12688-resh-galuta

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bostanai#Descendants

The impact of evil, especially in recent decades is not only that many have failed to develop the rational function within themselves resulting in a scarcity of moderation, but also that the people fail to even notice that which is in need of moderation.

When the people do not practice God’s law within themselves how is it possible that they will recognize that law outside of themselves so as to support and encourage its proper application in the public realm?

However, if they were able to discern its true purpose they would discover themselves spiraling ever closer to that central reality the source of life itself.

In the fourth verse of His Aqdas the Lord of Baha declares,

لعمري من شرب رحيق الانصاف من ايادي الالطاف انّه يطوف حول اوامري المشرقة من افق الابداع

Which, in English translation reads:

“By My life! He who hath drunk the choice wine of fairness from the hands of My bountiful favor will circle around My commandments that shine above the Dayspring of My creation.”

The choice wine of fairness and equity is the law of parity, the Middle Way created through a living balance of duties and rights. Its practice serves to foster equilibrium in the psyche.

The purpose of a right is that a duty may be fulfilled. In placing a duty upon us God also brings forth a right which is essential to the fulfillment of that duty.

God gives us duties and rights firstly because He is just toward His own Self and just toward His own Will. That is, because God deserves to have a being to fulfill His intended purpose He is just toward that purpose for which He created humanity.

The requirement of duties and corresponding rights is a reflection of God’s Justice toward His Own Self but all we can possibly comprehend of this “Self” is His Manifestation, a spiritual teacher and lawgiver appearing in human form. There is no possibility of comprehending God’s Essence. So in order to fulfill His desire and intention to be known God sends His Manifestation.

God alone has the Right to be worshiped, all just Law, whether of duties or rights, stems from, and bows to, that Right. In His Magnanimous Mercy He does not absolutely enforce this right upon humanity relative to physical existence. Thus it can be witnessed that while He allows individuals to continue to exist on earth even if they are not particularly striving to know Him, it is also witnessed that their success at that life remains questionable.

This is because even physical creation has been brought into being due to God’s Right to be known and worshiped. Or do the people think He was fulfilling an obligation to something other than His Own Desire within His Creation? Do they imagine He owes them anything? Perhaps they imagine that they should be free to turn away but that He Himself lacks such freedom. The only freedom He lacks is that he could be untrue to Himself. Such a freedom is actually its opposite.

The Qur’an testifies concerning all their wrongful imaginations and imputations “Verily, man is ever ungrateful.” The fact of God’s Enduring Love is a testimony to His Greatness not ours! Any worthiness we may possess is merely a reflection of that Love which originates from Him. Or do they imagine He doesn’t love Himself? Verily they have created a god in their own image!

Such as these wander the earth distracted and unaware of the true goal of life until their days are used up. This is a tragic condition which the people inflict upon themselves in both this world and the next. God did not choose this fate for them. They chose it for themselves.

The certain fate decreed for each human being is that they would have free-will and that after coming of age they would be held responsible for their choices. As far as the question of a good or bad fate – God has already designed us for goodness. The truly Free will reflect this intrinsic design thru obedience to God’s law. Such souls have freely chosen the good and in this way the true purpose of free-will is fulfilled.

While God has been lenient in enforcing His Right right upon humanity relative to our physical existence, the enforcement of His Right relative to the possibility of our spiritual existence is more strict. To the extent that a soul fails to recognize and honor God’s Right they are, naturally, barred access to the spiritual realms.

God loves them, but lacking the love for God in their own heart, God’s love finds no home there. Thus they can’t find a home in the spiritual realm because without love for God they simply don’t belong there. Existence in that realm is through the existence of that love and all its stations are stations of worship.

Reason vs Evil

This then brings us to the subject of evil and that which restrains it.

That which can be said to be evil is that which is the antithesis of Life. The root of evil in the human plane is opposition to God’s life-affirming law. Ultimately, this opposition manifests as the antithesis of Reason. Those who fail to discern the antithesis of Reason are those who have either not been properly educated so as to know how to access Reason or who have forgotten it from lack of use.

To understand Reason we might first consider it from its aspect as a virtue or quality of human character. For instance, when we say that someone is “reasonable” we might mean that they can practice fairness in inter-personal dynamics. By this word we might also mean that they can give fair and equitable evaluations of the veracity of intellectual concepts. Thus when we say that someone is “reasonable” we mean that they have demonstrated some capacity to practice justice. If someone is not reasonable it means that they have not demonstrated this capacity. Perhaps then we might define Reason simply as the capacity or ability to discern justice from injustice and be done with it. However, we perceive upon reflection that humanity cannot seem to agree on what exactly is right and just. So the definition is not yet complete and we must explore this from another angle.

Another name for Reason is rationality. At its most absolutely fundamental level, rationality is the capacity to measure a portion and therefore to judge the relative proportion between differing quantities. However, relative proportion on its own remains meaningless until the dimension of value can be placed upon whatever is being measured. Therefore this power is not absolutely independent but remains in need of a verifiably authentic standard by which to judge value. In terms of human behavior this would mean an authentic standard of Good.*

When supplied with an authentic standard of good the rational force in humanity is that which makes a humane life possible as differentiated from a merely animate life. The rational power is able to perceive the virtues so as to understand not merely that they feel good but that they are – in actual fact, good – and thus to voluntarily pursue their development. The rational self is the one that can come to the conclusion that “I want to acquire a truly good character.”

Reason then is rationality tempered by love for that which is essentially and eternally good.

The operation of Reason needs freedom to negotiate within the realm of ideas (the ideatic realm) in order to conduct the maneuver we refer to as “evaluation” — which is the judgement of proportion, dimension and relative balance — so as to discover value. The humane rights serve to protect Reason from that which is detrimental to it and this is mostly accomplished by protecting this mental freedom of explorative thought.

Without the capacity to evaluate we cannot anticipate the relative value of any concept in terms of the proportion of potentially benevolent or malevolent effects upon our well-being. The danger of malevolent effect is that, if carried far enough, eventually a person cannot discern the real meaning of anything at all and must depend on others for their understanding. They return to a dependent, passive state when once they stood upright and free. Thus it becomes plain that the violation of the humane rights has as its aim the constriction of the ideatic realm so as to subjugate Reason.

In response to that unholy inclination Jefferson wrote:

“… I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” Thomas Jefferson (letter to Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800)

The criminal mentality of tyrants is demonstrated in the fact that they do not want to submit to the restraint exercised by Reason itself, rather they seek to restrain Reason. Initially, the criminal mentality is merely the realm of the immature, that is, their humanity is undeveloped. Some suffer with the delusion that “the ends justify the means” by which they think to give themselves a mandate to violate human rights. Among these are people who think themselves to be good but their endeavors can be seen to consistently trespass against the boundaries set by law. Others think themselves to be pursuing good but their over-reach reveals their disrespect for the boundaries set by God. Whether on a petty or grand scale such as these are playing god. Whether they violate the animate rights of mankind, the humane rights of mankind or the other rights of mankind, their evil means reveal the true nature of their elitist ends.

Those who do not abide by the law of humane life cannot be said to be sane, nor civilized. Their concept of reality is infected with inequity and their insatiable pursuit of power is like unto a voracious beast. However cunning they may be, if a person has clearly abandoned reason they may be regarded as not sane (insane). If they also violate God’s law they can be diagnosed as criminally insane because they have abandoned not only reason but obedience to the eternal standards of Good.

The diagnosis of criminal insanity through the courts demonstrates that the defining quality designating a person as “sane” is not their respective level of human intelligence in the sense of “cunning” but rather their level of morality. To be sane doesn’t mean to be rational merely in the sense of having the capacity for critical thought. True sanity, ie Reason, is virtuous rationality, the moral sanity referred to in scripture as righteousness. Thus it is plain that in order to remain sane human intelligence and knowledge must be balanced by an equal or greater level of righteousness.

Cunning, divorced from Reason can be likened unto a computational machine in that, however vast its computational capacity, it remains a mere machine. It can be programmed with equitable evaluations if these are reduced into equations but it can’t arrive at equitable evaluations on its own independent of the initial limits of its programming. Such a machine cannot reason. It doesn’t have the capacity to understand what is Just because it cannot evaluate Justice.

In their rejection of God’s Law, all the types of evil listed in Saint Paul’s warning are revealed as those who invariably negate Justice for they can have no understanding of it and thus no value for it, because they lack organic, living, authentic Reason. For such as these altruistic love remains an absolute chimera.

Lord Jesus warned,

“The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light; but if your eye is not sound, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness! No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammōnás.**” (Matthew 6:22-24)

All of those who bow down to false gods in various incarnations have been deceived by the deceiver, designated in Baha’i Writ as that “Evil Whisperer” which whispers its evil influence into the human psyche.

When all is said and done the subject of evil in history and psychology*** is only of interest in how it temporarily impacts those who serve God, providing a dark contrast by which God’s light ‘shines out the clearer’ and in how God turns the plans of those who serve evil to ultimately fulfill His own objectives.

______

* for a deeper explanation of this standard read here:

**Mammōnás is just another name of Ashtoreth, Astarte, Isis, Artemis, Diana, Cybele etc. – her concept has many names but was generally regarded as the source of prosperity. Her Babylonian religion dates from the empire of Sargon I. Acts 19:27 records that her worshippers in Ephesus sought to silence Saint Paul because of the effect of Christian truth upon their widespread commerce. Here is one of her images: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Artemis_Efes_Museum.JPG

***An analysis of evil from a psychological perspective may be found in M. Scott Peck’s “The People of the Lie.”

“Thou seest, O my God, how the wrongs committed by such of Thy creatures as have turned their backs to Thee, have come in between Him in Whom Thy Godhead is manifest and Thy servants. Send down upon them, O my Lord, what will cause them to be busied with each others’ concerns. Let, then, their violence be confined to their own selves, that the land and they that dwell therein may find peace.”

قد عفونا عنكم صلوة الآيات

اذا ظهرت اذكروا الله بالعظمة والاقتدار

انّه هو السّميع البصير

قولوا

العظمة لله ربّ ما يرى وما لا يرى ربّ العالمين

Lord of Baha (The Kitab-i-Aqdas)

English Translation:

We have exempted you from the prayer of signs.

Upon the appearance of threatening events

Remember the might and power of your Lord,

Verily He is the Listener, the Watcher!

Then say:

Dominion belongs to God,

the Lord of the visible and the invisible,

and the Lord of the worlds!

(“al-Ê¿aẓama lillah, rabb ma yura wama la yura, rabb al-‘al-amin”)

—–

The prayer of signs is a reference to the Islamic practice of worship on the appearance of fearful natural events.

The Will of God and Natural Law

At the core of natural law is the impulse to live and the need for freedom in order to give that impulse expression. It requires freedom because without the freedom to move away from undesirable circumstances and move toward desirable ones the impulse to live is repressed and as this impulse is increasingly thwarted the creature loses its will to live which is inherently detrimental to its well-being.*

Life has no meaning or purpose divorced from a healthy impulse to live. For instance if a person were to feel that their particular existence wasn’t worth anything then naturally their instinct for self-preservation would be weakened. Thus, all the secular rights are oriented in service to that needful desire with the goal of fostering a worthwhile life.

This is why it is desirable that the secular law be in a condition so as to maximize individual liberty while at the same time fostering collective liberty. Secular laws which do not serve to protect life and also to foster a worthwhile life can have no real value.

In this we can see the wisdom of Blackstone’s statement that “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.” This is confirmed by Lord Baha’u’llah in His statement that:

“The beginning of wisdom and knowledge – and the source thereof – is to confess and acknowledge that which God has made manifest, because through this, order has been firmly established and thus become a coat of armor for the preservation of the body politic. … Everything of which ye debate and discuss relative to order or rule has been derived from each word of the Word revealed by the mighty Voice of the Potent, the Impenetrable.” The Lawḥ-i-Ḥikmat (Baha’i Scriptures, #335, p. 199, modified translation)

Throughout history human law was derived from God’s Law because it was observed that the natural order of God’s Law nurtured life and protected humanity.

In that same Tablet, Lord Baha’u’llah explained several times that the natural order is the representation of the Will of God in nature:

“Nature, with the whole of its being, is nothing but the illustration of My Name, the Maker, the Creator …”

“Nature is the demonstration of the Will of God in the apparent world.”

“Should it be said that nature is the Divine Primal Will, manifested in the created world, no one has the right to object …”

He also revealed that Socrates** was aware of a “ … definite and pervasive nature which regulates the world and which in the natural order bears the same relation as does the spirit to the body of man.” (Baha’i Scriptures, #322, p. 196, modified translation)

This was a reference to statements such as:

“… observe that the primal nous within you directs your body according to its volition; likewise, certainly the Universal Intention*** regulates all things according to Its pleasure …” Socrates (as cited by Xenophon, Memorabilia, Book 1, Chapter 4, section 17)

The identity of this primal “nous” was clarified by Abdu’l-Baha, the son of Baha’u’llah:

“The first thing that emanated from God is that universal reality, which the ancient philosophers termed the ‘Primal Mind’, and which the people of Baha call the ‘Primal Will’.” Abdu’l-Baha (Baha’i World Faith, p. 316, modified translation)

The Primal Will isn’t finished with Creation as it is in any moment, rather this innovative Force of Creation is always advancing creation thru evolutionary and revolutionary**** forces toward goals of which humanity remains mostly unaware.

The Lord of Baha in His Kitab-i-Aqdas reveals:

كذلك يبيّن الله سبل الحقّ والهدى وانّها انتهت إلى سبيل واحد وهو هذا الصّراط المستقيم اشكروا الله بهذا الفضل العظيم احمدوا الله بهذه الموهبة الّتي احاطت السّموات والارضين اذكروا الله بهذه الرّحمة الّتي سبقت العالمين قل قد جعل الله مفتاح الكنز حبّي المكنون لو انتم تعرفون لولا المفتاح لكان مكنوناً في ازل الازال لو انتم توقنو ن قل هذا لمطلع الوحي ومشرق الاشراق الّذي به اشرقت الافاق لو انتم تعلمون انّ هذا لهو القضآء المثبت وبه ثبت كلّ قضآء محتوم

“Thus hath God expounded unto you the paths of truth and guidance which have eventually concluded in one path, and it is this which is the Right Path. Give thanks to God for this great bounty! Praise God for this gift which encompasses the heavens and earth! And commemorate the name of God for this mercy which preceded the worlds! Recite: ‘God hath made My hidden love as a key to the treasure.’ Would that ye might have recognition! If not for the key, the treasure would remain forever hidden. Would that ye might have certitude! Recite: ‘This is indeed the dayspring of revelation and the dawning place of effulgence by which the horizons became enlightened.’ Would that ye might have knowledge! This is verily that Proven Decree through which every obligatory decree has been confirmed.”

One of the reasons the people have not understood this is because they fail to distinguish between the pursuit of animate happiness and the pursuit of humane happiness.

Humane happiness isn’t the negation of animate happiness, it is a further evolution of that same impulse of life. It is a more inclusive happiness. While humane pursuits honor an appropriate level of restraint so that one’s freedom does not impinge upon the freedom of others, the unrestricted pursuit of animate happiness is connected with a desire for an illusory freedom. The pursuit of animate life tends toward selfishness. Humane pursuits tend toward altruism.

From this we can understand that “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” does not indicate merely the pursuit of animate life – survival and reproduction, nor even acquisition – but the pursuit of the humane life. Unalienable Rights includes those rights, or natural laws, which are intrinsic in humanity both in its animate and in its humane nature. Dishonoring those rights is destructive both to the animate nature of life itself and to the humane nature of a truly human life.

____

* In the late 1960s electroshock experiments were conducted by a psychologist (Seligman) upon dogs, and later on, others conducted similar ones with mice. The point was to observe the creatures’ response if it was prevented from escaping a negative situation. What was found was that, as the experiment progressed the creatures became depressed and apathetic. Afterwards, having no hope for a positive outcome, the animals did not help themselves even when it was possible to do so. The psychologists labeled this condition “learned helplessness” but the holistic view is that their spirit was broken. Thus we observe that the intention of atheistic science is not necessarily to promote the well-being of living creatures as has been claimed.

** Socrates was found guilty of the thought crime of “not believing in the gods of the state” and sentenced to death.

*** φρόνησιν (phrónēsis): purpose, intention https://lsj.gr/wiki/%CF%86%CF%81%CF%8C%CE%BD%CE%B7%CF%83%CE%B9%CF%82 “… ὠγαθέ, ἔφη, κατάμαθε ὅτι καὶ ὁ σὸς νοῦς ἐνὼν τὸ σὸν σῶμα ὅπως βούλεται μεταχειρίζεται. οἴεσθαι οὖν χρὴ καὶ τὴν ἐν τῷ παντὶ φρόνησιν τὰ πάντα, ὅπως ἂν αὐτῇ ἡδὺ ᾖ …”

**** The universal constants upon which materialist science bases the security of its belief structure have been demonstrated to be lacking in constancy. Their prideful inconstancy is a house built on sand.

O Son of Spirit!

The best beloved

of all things in My Sight

is Justice

If thou desire Me,

Turn not away therefrom

Neglect it not

that I may confide My Trust to thee.

By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes

and not with the eyes of others,

Shalt know of thy own knowledge

and not through the understanding of thy neighbor.

Ponder in thy heart;

how this requires thee to be.

Verily Justice is My gift to thee

and the sign of My lovingkindness unto thee.

Set it then before thine eyes.

(modified translation from Star of the West, vol.4 #10)

The Pursuit of Happiness and the Impulse of the Law of Life

As mentioned previously, in ancient times God allowed the Kings chief authority within the political realm to exercise the Rights. This was only because the majority of people weren’t qualified to do so because they weren’t educated. Greece and Rome were exceptions to this lack of education and thus were able to rule themselves which is why Paul said they are a law unto themselves.

“When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.” Saint Paul (Epistle to the Romans 2:14)

In writing they “are a law to themselves” Paul did not mean they were free to do whatever they wanted, he was not speaking of anarchy and lawlessness, nor of oligarchy, but of natural law and the legal system of representative government borrowed by the Roman Empire from the Greeks. The principle at the core of their law was that of the right to life and more: a life worth living.

The inspiration for this came from their earliest philosophers who, in their devotion to The Wisdom sought far and wide for all books of Wisdom.

“… The philosophers of ancient times received their knowledge from the Prophets Who were the Wellsprings of the Divine Philosophy and the manifestations of the heavenly mysteries. Some among the people attained unto the pure and clear water of Their utterances, while others imbibed only the dregs; everyone receiving his share in accordance with his own capacity – verily God is the Equitable, the Wise.” Baha’u’llah (The Lawḥ-i-Ḥikmat, translation modified from Baha’i Scriptures #314-15)

Thus the Greek philosophers would certainly have discovered the eighth chapter of The Proverbs in which Wisdom declares:

“I am Wisdom, abiding in the Will, and I call forth inquiry and reflection. The Fear of the Lord hates unrighteousness. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate. Decision is mine, Infallibility is mine, Intention is mine, Power is mine. By me kings reign, and rulers decree what is just; by me princes rule, and nobles govern the earth. I love those who love me, and those who diligently seek me, find me.”

Through the depth of their inquiry the Greek philosophers grasped the implicit meaning and through Reason they applied this knowledge in the secular world.

Thus did Heraclitus declare: “All human laws are fed by the one Divine law.”

The influence of Scripture continued with Socrates, Plato and Aristotle and its efflorescence in their philosophical thought led to the Hellenistic period of Greek cultural influence and power leading to the peak of its rule as Empire. In adopting these structures the Roman Republic rose to prominence afterwards.

Then, during the period of the Eastern and Western Christian Empires the development of Christian thought arrived at the same conclusion and it was gradually established that since at the core of all rights is life itself and that as that life comes from God – the Creator of Life, that therefore all human law and all human rights originally come from God. Finally this was enshrined* as a firm principle of law in the Declaration of Independence.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The reason the founding fathers of America were able to perceive the law so astutely and courageously was firstly because of their firm belief in God and secondly because they received an education vastly superior to that received by the average American citizen today. This was the “classical” educational tradition which taught Latin, Greek etc. and the classical texts of these languages. Thus many of them, perhaps all, had studied Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, etc. and of course, the history of civilizations. They were most certainly critical thinkers. Most of them also, having studied the law, were familiar with Blackstone’s Commentaries.

In “Of the Nature of Laws in General” (the second section of his commentary on the law) Blackstone wrote that man “should pursue his own true and substantial happiness”. A study of his explanation of the concept reasonably establishes that the intended meaning of “the pursuit of happiness” in the Declaration of Independence was that aim which Blackstone described as “being blessed by the laws of eternal justice”.

In his discussion of law Blackstone initially mentioned the scientific laws of motion writing that when God created matter He: “put that matter into motion, he established certain laws of motion, to which all moveable bodies must conform” explaining furthermore that motion, that is – action, in vegetable and animal life is also “governed by laws”.

From this we can understand that the same creative force which set all inanimate creation in motion also moves in living creatures. The Will of God “Be! and it is!”** in living creatures is that they not only exist but that they have a living existence caused by the animating force of life.

Thus, in relation to a living being, the law of motion is the activity of life – the pursuit or quest to live. This quest or pursuit has been called self-preservation but it might better be called the “impulse to live” – a natural force at the core of every living being. Natural law governs success in pursuing that life, that is, whether or not the action will be beneficial to that goal is determined by its degree of harmony with that law.

Blackstone went on to explain that “ … as man depends absolutely upon his maker for every thing, it is necessary that he should in all points conform to his maker’s will.”

This concept rests upon the understanding that life didn’t create itself, for when it was not yet alive it was not invested with any creative power and thus could not have had any power to create and that therefore the force that created it, giving it the impulse of life, was the Creative Force, the power of the Creator.

Furthermore, we understand that since the Will of God to create is what sets creation in motion, therefore creation’s continued state of motion*** is intrinsically connected to its being in harmony with that Will.

Thus, Blackstone stated that “This will of his maker is called the law of nature” and that when God created matter He “ … endued it with a principle of mobility” and “established certain rules for the perpetual direction of that motion …” Using this as an analogy to demonstrate that, “… so, when he created man, and endued him with freewill to conduct himself in all parts of life, he laid down certain immutable laws of human nature, whereby that freewill is in some degree regulated and restrained, and gave him also the faculty of reason to discover the purport of those laws.”

From this we can understand that the Will of God “Be! and it is!” in human creatures is initially that not only would we live but that we would have a human life caused by the humanizing force of reason. Feelings of discontent and lack of fulfillment are mostly due to our lack of harmony with (and even abusive use of) this creative force at the core of our humanity.

Freewill, being the capacity to choose actions which might not be in harmony with the Will of Life, must be guided by the law and by reason so as to avoid that lack of harmony which causes injury both to animate and to humane life.****

The only restriction upon man’s freewill is that it must be in harmony with the law of God. Through reason, we can understand and apply this law and the necessary restrictions it creates at the level of human interactions in the world. The purpose is that we should have not merely the life of an animal but that we should have a humane life.

The Founding Fathers were fully cognizant that freewill is thus the freedom to pursue that inner motion, the motivation at the heart of man as a living being – the impulse to live, and that the purpose of lawful restrictions upon that freedom would only be to the extent that those laws foster a humane life, a life worth living, life as a truly human being.

In Blackstone’s explanation of the law he declares concerning the pursuit of true human happiness that the Creator:

“ … has so intimately connected, so inseparably interwoven the laws of eternal justice with the happiness of each individual, that the latter cannot be attained but by observing the former; and, if the former be punctually obeyed, it cannot but induce the latter. In consequence of which mutual connection of justice and human felicity, he has … graciously reduced the rule of obedience to this one paternal precept, ‘that man should pursue his own true and substantial happiness.’ This is the foundation of what we call ethics, or natural law …” (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, 2nd Section, Of the Nature of Laws in General)*****

From discussion of ideas such as this the founding fathers understood not only that God has endowed us with life, with the impulse to live – that is, the desire to preserve that life, and not only with freewill to pursue that impulse, but also with the ability to Reason and therefore that all true human rights stem from this and are likewise endowed by the Creator.

________________

*John Adams characterized the day of its adoption as: “the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty”.

**Qur’an 2:117

***Creation is constantly in motion from the highest planes of existence right down to the sub-atomic levels. Even at the inanimate level creation did not come into existence via a static state nor does it continue to exist in a static state.

**** As witnessed with atomic technologies, this disharmony has even caused injury at the inanimate level of creation. The fact that its pollution is invisible doesn’t qualify it as “clean energy”.

*****The context of this was Blackstone’s statement that by “law” is meant “the precepts by which man … a creature endowed with both reason and freewill, is commanded to make use of those faculties in the general regulation of his behavior.” [That] “… as man depends absolutely upon his maker for every thing, it is necessary that he should in all points conform to his maker’s will. This will of his maker is called the law of nature. For as God, when he created matter, and endued it with a principle of mobility, established certain rules for the perpetual direction of that motion; so, when he created man, and endued him with freewill to conduct himself in all parts of life, he laid down certain immutable laws of human nature, whereby that freewill is in some degree regulated and restrained, and gave him also the faculty of reason to discover the purport of those laws.” [God] “ … has laid down only such laws as were founded in those relations of justice, that existed in the nature of things antecedent to any positive precept. These are the eternal, immutable laws of good and evil, to which the creator himself in all his dispensations conforms; and which he has enabled human reason to discover, so far as they are necessary for the conduct of human actions. Such among others are these principles: that we should live honestly, should hurt nobody, and should render to every one it’s due; to which three general precepts Justinian has reduced the whole doctrine of law.” [That God] “ … has so intimately connected, so inseparably interwoven the laws of eternal justice with the happiness of each individual, that the latter cannot be attained but by observing the former; and, if the former be punctually obeyed, it cannot but induce the latter. … In consequence of which mutual connection of justice and human felicity, he has … graciously reduced the rule of obedience to this one paternal precept, ‘that man should pursue his own true and substantial happiness.’ This is the foundation of what we call ethics, or natural law … justly concluding that the performance of it is a part of the law of nature; or, on the other hand, that this or that action is destructive of man’s real happiness, and therefore that the law of nature forbids it.” [Also that] “This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original. … Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these.” William Blackstone, 1765 – (Section the Second: Of the Nature of Laws in General, Commentaries on the Laws of England)

The full text can be found at:

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/30802/30802-h/30802-h.htm#Section_the_second

or at:

https://books.google.com/books?id=suIyAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=%22that+existed+in+the+nature+of+things+antecedent+to+any+positive+precept.+These+are+the+eternal,+immutable+laws+of+good+and+evil%22&source=bl&ots=rsb_fOVyct&sig=ACfU3U2f-K54RLj9egKAj6qTgoBB5xJfJg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjNoPX4sevoAhXHr54KHWJOAwsQ6AEwAHoECAkQKA#v=onepage&q=%22that%20existed%20in%20the%20nature%20of%20things%20antecedent%20to%20any%20positive%20precept.%20These%20are%20the%20eternal%2C%20immutable%20laws%20of%20good%20and%20evil%22&f=false

The insurrection, recorded in Josephus’ history, and the resultant destruction of Jerusalem could have been avoided if, rather than listening to false leaders, the people had heeded the gentle but firm warning of Saint Paul.

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority: Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.” Romans 13:1-5

While this was certainly proved true in 70 ad, its intent should never be construed as providing any excuse for injustice and the abuse of power by those in authority. Its interpretation must be tempered by common sense and taken in balance with this statement:

“ … we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians 6:12

If we perceive that one holding governmental office is given over to that darkness it would be foolish, self-deceiving and unjust to honor or respect them.

Thus, Moses’ mother did not honor the false law imposed by the tyrant Pharaoh, but rather placed her boy in an ark upon the river and Moses became the Law-giver.

Jesus’ parents did not honor the false law imposed by the tyrant Herod but rather fled into Egypt and Jesus became the Law-giver.

Muhammad did not honor the false law imposed by the tyrannical Chiefs of Mecca but fled to Medina and Muhammad became the Law-giver.

There have been two more Law-givers since that time.

Ultimately, all true Law comes from God, the One, the All-Wise, the All-Knowing, the All-Powerful – all Right belongs unto Him. The opening-page of this site bears testimony to that True One.

Thus – because God is the Original, the Owner of all Right – all human rights, both secular and spiritual, are bestowed by the grace of God. The proper exercise of these rights leads to enlightenment and liberation while dishonoring them leads to depravity and subjugation.

History reveals that if the peoples who ascend under God’s Law afterwards turn from that law they descend back into oppression and ignorance. This demonstrates that no ruler or people however high-ranking or advanced, whether religious or secular, is permitted to violate the law of justice.

In ancient times God allowed Caesars, Kings, Shah’s, Tzars and Pharaohs chief authority within the political realm to exercise the Rights. This was only because the majority of people weren’t qualified to do so because they weren’t educated.*

Over the course of the Medieval period in Europe an aristocracy arose and it became a mark of prestige among them that their sons should receive a formal education. This aristocracy was eventually able to claim more and more rights from kings, such as in England with the Magna Carta.

Finally in the New World, leaders having Christian faith rose up against the English Monarchy, rejecting it entirely. They declared that the Rights belonged to “We the People” and made provision for the protection of these rights through the democratic election of representative government.

The American Republic was successfully defended with an insurrection in 1776 because the King in England was not just. Men of devout and righteous faith rebelled against his tyranny and they were rewarded by God. These beloved men founded a nation in which all governing authorities take an oath of office before God and all the people to uphold its Constitution which is thus like unto a king** over them all. In this way those in government are held accountable to a standard of justice. Any official who betrays their oath is disloyal to that king and thus to God. God does not require*** Americans to obey the petty decrees of such as these.

God Bless America! It is a beacon of Liberty for the whole world!

~~~~~~~

“... Be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the equipment of the gospel of peace; besides all these, taking the shield of faith, with which you can quench all the flaming darts of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication.” Ephesians 6:11-18

The loins signify the need for tribal belonging which relates initially through families of origin. The covering of Truth protects this need from agents of guileful influence.

The breastplate of righteousness covers the heart signifying that the heart must be purified of attachment to that which is not godly so that it may turn to that which is just and true.

The feet signify one’s daily walk, one’s daily life. Clothing one’s feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace means to read scripture daily and live one’s life in accordance with its guidance and principles.

The shield of faith covers all levels of being physical, emotional, mental and spiritual. This shield protects from fear and negativity.

The helmet of salvation specifically covers the mind signifying the bestowal of true knowledge which frees the mind from the tentacles of the Liar, the Accuser.

As the believers are equipped with these protections making of them a daily practice they develop the strength and wisdom to wield the mighty sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. Thus they become champions of Truth and Justice.

Finally, we are to pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication such that we do not succumb to pride and ambition concerning these powers which have been bestowed upon us by the grace of God for His own purpose.

————–

*There were exceptions to this, one of which will be discussed in Part 4.

**The Constitution is Sovereign and in his capacity of executive the President of the United States is the Chief Representative of that Sovereign therefore the guidance from the Lord of Baha concerning the authority of kings is applicable to that office. Most of these can be shared at another time, for now the most pertinent one is: “Ere long will God raise up from among the kings one who will aid His loved ones …” (Lawḥ-i-Ra’is)

***Physical self-preservation might require it. However, wisdom weighs that value against spiritual self-preservation. Justice may require that we actively disobey those who are disloyal and traitorous toward that which is good and true. Otherwise, as the people succumb to the manipulations of these smirking oppressors and cease to traverse the upward path they begin a downward spiral which if unchecked leads to a maelstrom of violence. An example is that of the French Revolution in which uneducated, easily manipulated people received too many rights too fast. The situation rapidly descended into the “Reign of Terror”. No one was safe, eventually even its leaders such as Robespierre, were rewarded by an appointment with the guillotine. Finally in the vacuum of power a tyrant rose to the fore and the people – who had cried out for freedom just a few years earlier – willingly bowed down to the evil Empire of the Hidden Hand to save them from their own ungodly foolishness. The falsely educated have ever failed to understand true Liberty and how to rightfully acquire it.