Bahá'í

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adamski
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just a quick note:

Absolute Infallibility is given to the Manifestation of God ONLY

Inferred infallibility which has been authoritatively given to the Institutions DOES NOT, I repeat DOES NOT mean that an Institution can develop entire belief systems based on an interpretation of the Words of God. Jesus cannot say A and the Catholic Church says ABCDEF… Baha’u’llah cannot say A, and the Universal House of Justice says ABCDEF.

When an Interpreter of the Word of God has been authoritatively appointed by the Manifestation of God, then they can do that. So when Baha’u’llah says A, and then (in written form) appoints Abdul-Baha to be His Interpreter, then Abdul-Baha has the authority to say ABCDEFGHIJKL whatever 🙂

This is unique in religious history…
The authoritative interpreter of the word of God would be the Magisterium, in the Catholic Church. This authority was given to the Catholic Church, not by a manifestation of God, but by God himself.

Again, I fail to see the uniqueness of the Baha’i faith in this regard.
 
From the Catholic view, we believe what Jesus said: “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mark 13:32). We also believe that when He comes the second and final time, that there will be no doubt as to who He is. “Look, he is coming with the clouds,” and “every eye will see him, even those who pierced him”; and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.” So shall it be! Amen. (Rev 1:7) There are a lot of people who love to play with dates and numbers in an effort to accomplish that which Jesus said could never be accomplished; predicting the second coming of Jesus.

So we have no idea when he will come but we do know that we will not have to wonder if it is really Him when He does come. We will not have to worry that we have not recognized him.

I still see nothing in anything you have stated that even implies that Jesus was foretelling another “manifestation”. Can you please point me to this verse?

Thanks.
Yes, Steve, but there is a common interpretation of this verse which allows men to understand it differently.

“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bare it now. Howbeit, when He, the Spirit of Truth is come, He will guide you unto all truth.”

Now the common interpretation I hear from various Christians is that He is referring to Pentecost. But were they really guided into “all” truth? Even they, the apostles, differed amongst themselves, especially Peter and Paul, from what I understand.

The Baha’i belief is that the above verse, and many others regarding the second coming, in both the Old and New Testaments, point to our day.

I do agree with you that people can do this or that with times prophecies, or any of them, to suit their own preconceptions and designs. I don’t think any single set of “proofs” holds water all by itself. We used to use these big old oak barrels on the farm, and if they dried out for too long, they would leak. It was only when every piece of oak swelled up that together, you could hope to have a barrel full of water.

There are very specific interpretations of “coming in the clouds” in the Kitab-i-Iqan, or Book of Certitude, which deals with verses, the meaning of which were “sealed” to Daniel, John the Revelator, also the Quran, and others. Such terms are not limited to the physical world, but are symbolic, holding other meanings, which veil men’s eyes:

. "… By the term “clouds” is meant those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Even as He hath revealed in the verse already quoted: “As oft as an Apostle cometh unto you with that which your souls desire not, ye swell with pride, accusing some of being impostors and slaying others.” [Qur’án 2:87.] These “clouds” signify, in one sense, the annulment of laws, the abrogation of former Dispensations, the repeal of rituals and customs current amongst men, the exalting of the illiterate faithful above the learned opposers of the Faith. In another sense, they mean the appearance of that immortal Beauty in the image of mortal man, with such human limitations as eating and drinking, poverty and riches, glory and abasement, sleeping and waking, and such other things as cast doubt in the minds of men, and cause them to turn away. All such veils are symbolically referred to as “clouds.”

These are the “clouds” that cause the heavens of the knowledge and understanding of all that dwell on earth to be cloven asunder. Even as He hath revealed: “On that day shall the heaven be cloven by the clouds.” [Qur’án 25:25]. Even as the clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, so do these things hinder the souls of men from recognizing the light of the divine Luminary. To this beareth witness that which hath proceeded out of the mouth of the unbelievers as revealed in the sacred Book: “And they have said: ‘What manner of apostle is this? He eateth food, and walketh the streets. Unless an angel be sent down and take part in His warnings, we will not believe.’” [Qur’án 25:7.]
. Other Prophets, similarly, have been subject to poverty and afflictions, to hunger, and to the ills and chances of this world. As these holy Persons were subject to such needs and wants, the people were, consequently, lost in the wilds of misgivings and doubts, and were afflicted with bewilderment and perplexity. How, they wondered, could such a person be sent down from God, assert His ascendancy over all the peoples and kindreds of the earth, and claim Himself to be the goal of all creation,—even as He hath said: “But for Thee, I would have not created all that are in heaven and on earth,”—and yet be subject to such trivial things?
. You must undoubtedly have been informed of the tribulations, the poverty, the ills, and the degradation that have befallen every Prophet of God and His companions. You must have heard how the heads of their followers were sent as presents unto different cities, how grievously they were hindered from that whereunto they were commanded. Each and every one of them fell a prey to the hands of the enemies of His Cause, and had to suffer whatsoever they decreed. …"

If I can ask you to read this page (1 or 2) from which it comes, it may give a clearer and more complete picture.

reference.bahai.org/en/t/o/BNE/bne-180.html
 
The authoritative interpreter of the word of God would be the Magisterium, in the Catholic Church. This authority was given to the Catholic Church, not by a manifestation of God, but by God himself.

Again, I fail to see the uniqueness of the Baha’i faith in this regard.
Hi Steve, thank you for your response

Where did Jesus give this authority?
 
No, you aren’t. There is a thing called faith.
Ok. 🤷

I suggest you read all the Catechism has to say on this “thing called faith”.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm
Also, if you seek God, Christ, only through church attendance, you are limited to basing your beliefs off of what you are told of him in church.
Yes. You are being very Catholic here. No one ought to only seek God through Church attendance.

This is against the pillars of our Catholic Faith.
Just guess I would like to see good conquer evil in all things.
Well, the Catholic position is that we have already won, Little Star. Catholics start already from a position of victory. Good conquered evil 2000 years ago when He rose again on the 3rd day.
 
Jesus cannot say A and the Catholic Church says ABCDEF…
Right.

Everything that the CC says that has been proclaimed dogma is A. Not ABCDEF.

However, A can and must have explications which would look like this:

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

as proclaimed by the CC.
 
What “keys to the Kingdom” means is open to subjective opinion and interpretation isn’t it?

Does this mean interpretive infallibility, or does it give administrative authority, or something else?
 
What “keys to the Kingdom” means is open to subjective opinion and interpretation isn’t it?

Does this mean interpretive infallibility, or does it give administrative authority, or something else?
Well, there are of course multiple meanings to all verses in Scripture.

But there is also one that is clear: this is the authority that has been given to the chief stewards since the beginning of Judaism.

You are aware of the reference in the OT, right?
 
Again, is there some OTHER way that you know what belongs in the New Testament, save for giving tacit submission to the authority of the Catholic Church?
The Dead Sea Scrolls??

What I would admit to is that in its day, the Jewish authorities received from Moses and then Joshua, their Tablets, in the same sense to which you are referring.

What is important to me, however, is discerning why those entrusted with keeping the Law let “the Law” get in the way of recognizing Him Who revealed the Law to them in the first place.

When He from Whom their authority was derived… arrived…
and failed to recognize Him…
that which was conferred was now deferred
and was referred to those who inferred the the true meaning
Meaning… the ball was passed to the next generation of believers
Those who recognized the Lord of the Vineyard

. There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and dig a wine press in it, and built a tower, and let it out to farmers, and went into a far country: 34And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the farmers, that they might receive the fruits of it. 35And the farmers took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. 36Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did to them likewise. 37But last of all he sent to them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. 38But when the farmers saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. 39And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. 40When the lord therefore of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those farmers? 41They say to him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard to other farmers, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. 42Jesus said to them, Did you never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes? 43Therefore say I to you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44And whoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. 45And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spoke of them. 46But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.
Who has the vineyard been taken from in this day?
 
No PR which OT reference are you referring to? 🙂
Jesus’ words in Matthew to Peter are a direct reference to Isaiah 22:22

[BIBLEDRB]Isaiah 22:22[/BIBLEDRB]

Isaiah recognizes Eliakim as the chief steward of the royal House of David. The chief steward was second only to the king of Israel. Giving Eliakim the keys of the kingdom was a way to designate to all of Israel that whatever Eliakim said, the king said.
 
Well, if you have faith (or hope) that the CC got it right in discerning the canon of the NT for you, how is it that you don’t have faith (or hope) that the CC got it right in other things?

How would you respond to a poster, who challenges you when you said this (in another thread): “In the Gospels, Jesus struck a perfect balance between loving people and counseling against sin. Would it maybe help to read how he spoke to the prostitute?”

What if this poster says, “mek42, you can only hope that Jesus really said this”.

How would you respond?
Is this poster using the word you specifically to mean, in this case, me as an individual person, or is the word you being used generally as it so often is in English to mean someone?
 
The authoritative interpreter of the word of God would be the Magisterium, in the Catholic Church. This authority was given to the Catholic Church, not by a manifestation of God, but by God himself.

Again, I fail to see the uniqueness of the Baha’i faith in this regard.
Steve, my friend, there’s something you are not quite understanding about the use of the term “Manifestation” of God. It occurred to me the other day that there is a phrase which is used, similar to what I think is meant by the Trinity. It is called Divine Unity. This is very important, I think, to help our conversation move forward, so indulge me a little if you don’t mind, and read and study the following.
Then, please, let us discuss our understanding of God and His Manifestation, whether applied to Christ or Baha’u’llah. The last paragraph is especially important. Thanks!

. "Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures. This is the true meaning of Divine unity. He Who is the Eternal Truth is the one Power Who exerciseth undisputed sovereignty over the world of being, Whose image is reflected in the mirror of the entire creation. All existence is dependent upon Him, and from Him is derived the source of the sustenance of all things. This is what is meant by Divine unity; this is its fundamental principle.
Some, deluded by their idle fancies, have conceived all created things as associates and partners of God, and imagined themselves to be the exponents of His unity. By Him Who is the one true God! Such men have been, and will continue to remain, the victims of blind imitation, and are to be numbered with them that have restricted and limited the conception of God.

He is a true believer in Divine unity who, far from confusing duality with oneness, refuseth to allow any notion of multiplicity to becloud his conception of the singleness of God, who will regard the Divine Being as One Who, by His very nature, transcendeth the limitations of numbers.

The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same. By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself. This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast in their belief."
 
Is this poster using the word you specifically to mean, in this case, me as an individual person, or is the word you being used generally as it so often is in English to mean someone?
Well, since these are your very own words: “In the Gospels, Jesus struck a perfect balance between loving people and counseling against sin. Would it maybe help to read how he spoke to the prostitute?”

I do mean you specifically, personally, as in: mek42.
 
Jesus’ words in Matthew to Peter are a direct reference to Isaiah 22:22

[BIBLEDRB]Isaiah 22:22[/BIBLEDRB]

Isaiah recognizes Eliakim as the chief steward of the royal House of David. The chief steward was second only to the king of Israel. Giving Eliakim the keys of the kingdom was a way to designate to all of Israel that whatever Eliakim said, the king said.
Well PR, lets try to show precision and clarity here

To “lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder”, is most certainly open to subjective interpretation isn’t it?
 
Hello, everyone!

Let me introduce myself. My name is John, but you can call me jcc if you like. I am a Baha’i, and was invited to join this discussion by daler. That was last week, I spend the past several days reading all 60 pages of discussion on this thread. I feel like I have known you all for years!

I have been a Baha’i since age 18, but was raised a Catholic, attended parochial school for a few years, and had first Communion and Confirmation classes, etc. I have also had the opportunity to work closely with Catholic priests, nuns and laity when I was a Peace Corps volunteer back in the 1980s. I have to tell you, I do have a great respect for the Church, and I would not have left it for another Christian denomination or an older religion, but it is because I feel a profound spiritual connection not only with Jesus, but also with Moses, Krishna, Buddha, Muhammad, and when Iearned about them, with the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

There is a strong tradition in the Church (Latin and Greek) to profess both faith and reason as the means to know God, and I respect and embrace that fully, as it is also a Baha’i teaching. Let us reason together, though belief may come later.
 
Not following you here.

The Dead Sea Scrolls tell us what the 27 books of the NT are?
PR Its been awhile since I read up on them, but what I seem to remember is that they confirmed the accuracy of what has been handed down to us which we have today. That is amazing in itself.

All I meant is that whoever preserved the texts is to be commended, whether they identified themselves as Catholic, in word or meaning. God bless them for doing God’s work.

I also think that I understand that you are saying that it was the work of the early believers, whom you identify as being of the original Catholic Church, whether Roman, Eastern, or otherwise, which is responsible for creating what we call “the Bible”.
Please enlighten me, if you will, as to your understanding of what the Protestants have included or excluded in “their” Bible from what the Catholics include or exclude.

“Can’t we all just get along?” Rodney King James Version
 
Hello, everyone!

Let me introduce myself. My name is John, but you can call me jcc if you like. I am a Baha’i, and was invited to join this discussion by daler. That was last week, I spend the past several days reading all 60 pages of discussion on this thread. I feel like I have known you all for years!

I have been a Baha’i since age 18, but was raised a Catholic, attended parochial school for a few years, and had first Communion and Confirmation classes, etc. I have also had the opportunity to work closely with Catholic priests, nuns and laity when I was a Peace Corps volunteer back in the 1980s. I have to tell you, I do have a great respect for the Church, and I would not have left it for another Christian denomination or an older religion, but it is because I feel a profound spiritual connection not only with Jesus, but also with Moses, Krishna, Buddha, Muhammad, and when Iearned about them, with the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

There is a strong tradition in the Church (Latin and Greek) to profess both faith and reason as the means to know God, and I respect and embrace that fully, as it is also a Baha’i teaching. Let us reason together, though belief may come later.
Welcome! Welcome! So good to see you here… Yayyyy … 😉

Great comments and introduction, by the way. "Reason on, brother. Reason on… 😉
 
Well PR, lets try to show precision and clarity here

To “lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder”, is most certainly open to subjective interpretation isn’t it?
What subjective interpretation can you give to Matthew 16:18 that also applies to Isaiah 22:22?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top