Baha'i Returns Thread: Ask Any of Many Baha'i

[IgnatianPhilo]

Continued.

But my point still stands as far as your loyalty to Krsihna and the like are concerned, its nothing but lipservice for you are realiant solely on what your prophet said about them, that we are to believe their teachings have become so distorted to the point anything that contradicts bahai cannot be trusted, that’s far too convenient for me.

Lets judge God’s success, what quanitifies as success exactly? Getting people to believe something that is true for one thing or lets judge by the one example of the church. The church Jesus says, he would preserve against the gates of hades but bahai cannot believe that because the historic churches contradict Bahai and there are no alternatives for you to appeal to and say “these have kept the faith.” It would seem to me that hades prevailed against the church because the church believes in evil things like resurrection of the dead (evil because it places material bodies on equal level with our spiritual souls) and that Muhammad and Mirza Hussain are false prophets.

 

[daler]

If Baha’u’llah is the second coming of Christ, then where is he? He is dead and buried. Are you waiting for yet another?

Steve,
Baha’is believe that the physical body of Jesus is also dead and buried. This is a principal difference between interpreting the Scriptures literally, taking them at their “face value”, and trying to comprehend deeper meaning, as will be stated below. We are very much aware of that, and mean no insult to you or anyone who believes in the physical Resurrection of Christ. We just disagree.

We believe that Christ and Baha’u’llah both Live, but have left behind, so to speak, their physical mortal bodies in death, as we all do, but that their Living Reality continues, that this is not an imagination, but a reality which transcends the sense of dependence upon the physical frame for life.

. “Now I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood can’t inherit the Kingdom of God; … The dead in Christ shall not only rise, but shall rise thus gloriously changed.”

. I think that when Paul said this in his letter to the Corinthians it is very similar to what the Baha’is are attempting to say. As it is a difficult thing to describe, the existence of the soul without the physical body which “appears” to be necessary for life, then there is a logical problem which was being addressed, for “when people die, they are dead!” Period!

. People view this with difficulty today. How much more so 2000 years ago. So I think that he was describing something almost beyond description, as a “gloriously changed” body. I don’t think people could very easily conceptualize their continued existence apart from their physical body, which even today, people tend to identify with their own “self”.

. The difficulty then extends to the matter of the Resurrected Identity of Christ Himself, in light of both the understanding of His “gloriously changed” body, which “entered the room, not using the door”, and “ascended into heaven”.

. For then we also have to account for:

. “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.” —KJV

. This is problematic for literal interpretations of “heaven”. Is it not?

. But it is not problematic when heaven is understood to have a reality “beyond” and apart from earthly, physical reality.

. Jesus’ body descended from the womb of Mary. His “Reality” descended from Heaven, just as John the Baptist’s Reality descended fro Heaven as the “Return” of Elijah, while His own body descended from the womb of His mother.

. So, likewise, do Baha’is interpret the ascension not being of the physical body, but the True Reality of Christ returning to God, from whence He came.

. “Even the Son of Man, which “Is” in Heaven” He was on earth when He said this.

Steve, you protest the metaphorical understanding of the Baha’is interpretation of Scripture. What do you do with this?

Please do not become angry. I say this because sometimes people do become angry when confronted with these very important issues which “appear” to be contradictory.
We do not wish for you to become angry, and would prefer to end or change the conversation rather than evoke any discomfort within you which is upsetting.

God bless you, my Christian brother.

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,
. Please begin with reading, or rereading, Arthra’s post 314. This is critical to understanding the Baha’i view of the Resurrection in light of what is revealed in the Quran:

The Qur’an says in 4:158 “Rather, Allah raised him to Himself.”

Clearly, at least to me, this indicates that Jesus “was” definitely Resurrected, according to what has been “revealed” to Muhammad in the Quran.

I find it curious that you immediately defer to the Quran when interpreting Christian Scripture. Why do you consider the Quran superior to the Christian Scriptures on this fundamental question?

It is also true that, according to certain translations into English, the crucifixion “appears” to be denied, but this is interpreted in an important wider context, i.e., that His Eternal Reality was not, indeed “can not” be crucified, “but it “appeared” to them they did.” Then it goes on to say, “Neither did they kill Him”.

This leaves room for the crucifixion of His body, even as someone might steal my clothes and crucify my coat and pants. “I” am not my coat and pants. So when they “kill” my clothing, they have not killed “me”. Although it “appeared” to them they did so.

That Jesus only “appeared” to be crucified is a heresy long ago condemned. If he was not truly crucified then his sacrifice was not real and neither is our salvation. This is one of the many false claims of Islam and ignores the reality of his nature as true man (as well as true God).

Did they kill His body? Yes. Without doubt. Baha’u’llah speaks of this very clearly, so the Baha’i position is clear: Jesus was crucified.

Do all Muslims accept this interpretation in the way that Baha’is do? No. Most definitely not, but I believe that some have the latitude of understanding such things, whether the common view or not.

Again, this is a great example of Baha’i thinking. You accept neither the Christian nor the Muslim explanation yet claim both Jesus and Muhammad as prophets.

 

[SteveVH]

For example. There are many Muslims who are awaiting the coming of Jesus in the literal clouds in essentially the same way that most Christians await His coming.

Not true. I have already explained that the Christian (at least Catholic) understanding of the clouds of heaven is the dwelling place of God, the “shekinah” which will descend upon us. How this will actually appear is not known. What we do know is that it will be a staggering event, quite beyond the capability of mankind to deny it.

Therefore, Steve, what is an “apparent” contradiction between Christian, Muslim, and Baha’i belief is fully resolved and there “is no contradiction” when understood this way.

What do you mean “no contradiction”? You have done nothing but rationalize and throw out various interpretations which the proponents of the actual religions you cite (Christian and Muslim) disagree. Well, the Muslims really didn’t mean this and the Christians really didn’t mean that. They instead meant this. See? No, contradiction. Sorry, but this is not at all a convincing argument.

I might as well take the Hindu belief in reincarnation and say that they really don’t mean that we will die and be reborn, again and again, but that we will die to our sinful ways and be reborn in Jesus Christ, therefore there is no contradiction between Christian and Hindu belief. I could say that, but that would not be an accurate representation of the Hindu belief. The truth is that reincarnation contradicts the resurrection and is therefore not compatible with Christianity.

As you know, the Return of Elijah in John the Baptist was testified to by Christ Himself. Jesus said that John the Baptist is the “Elijah who was to come” in Matthew 11:13 … The phrase “if you are willing to accept it"
. So my question to you, Steve, is whether you accept it? as Jesus stated?

I have already addressed this in another post which you apparently missed.

And if you are willing to accept it, that John came in “the spirit and power of Elijah”, then what would prevent you from accepting that Baha’u’llah came in the spirit and power of Jesus" Or the possibility of that.

Because Jesus is the fullness of the Revelation of God. He has already come and has already accomplished his mission of defeating sin and death and redeeming the world. What can Baha’u’llah do when it has already been done? What can he give us that Christ has not already given us? Christ has given me eternal life? What do I need from Baha’u’llah? so you understand. What more can we hope for than eternal life spent in heaven with our God? In a nutshell, Baha’u’llah has nothing to offer the Christian.

I’m not asking you to accept Baha’u’llah based upon that, but mean only to say that His 2nd coming could also be in the birth of another baby, a person separate in identity from Jesus, son of Mary, even as John was not physically identical to Elijah. For the same principal applies. Please respond.

It could not be the birth of another baby if one believes what I have quoted in Matthew 24. Why would I defer to other religions who reject the Christian Scriptures in order to arrive at the truth of the Christian Scriptures?

 

[SteveVH]

The Baha’i view of the Resurrection of Jesus is that His body did not get up out of the physical grave, walk about, and float off into space. We reject that literalism while fully understanding that it appears to be contradictory to the literal story communicated in the Gospels.

We don’t believe he floated into space either. We believe he ascended to the Father.

Two things are necessary to consider.

1. Either the Baha’i interpretation is considered “fantastic”, that is, that He “was” Resurrected while His body was not, despite the manner in which His Resurrection has been reported, i.e. walking, talking, eating, and appearing in a room suddenly, “He entered the room, not using the doors”

Then you believe that the story of Thomas placing his hands into the wounds of the resurrected Christ, or that he ate and drank with his disciples after the resurrection are false. If this is the case, then how do you discern exactly what is true in the Sacred Scriptures and what is false? On what authority do you make this discernment, or is this just your opinion?

1. Or that the equally “fantastic” reports of His body physically arising, eating, floating through walls, and ascending into outer space is true.

Why do you find it strange that God could raise himself, body, blood, soul and divinity, from the grave? Why do you believe it impossible that God could do something supernatural; eat food and walk through walls and appear and disappear at will?

1. Either that “stories” were told in a certain contextual manner and in a literal way to express “His Presence” to a very “literal minded” people, and that being in the context of what is commonly found in the study of human anthropology in the history of cultures world wide…
2. or that it was a literal occurrence, which requires us to believe He died, walked through walls, and went into outer space, which leaves us wondering “where” physically, He has resided all this time.
   . Steve,
   . Please respond as to which “fantastic” interpretation seems more plausible, in your opinion.
   . Also, whether acceptable or not, do you find the Baha’i position to be “reasonable” at all?

Respectfully, daler

First of all, the “stories” are based upon eye witness accounts. There were 120 people in the upper room when he appeared after his resurrection. He walked and lived among his disciples for forty days after his resurrection. One of the requirements of being an Apostle was that you had walked and lived with him and had seen him after his resurrection. When we read the Gospel accounts, we can determine that these witnesses are credible.

You create a false dilemma with your comparisons. As I have already said, Jesus did not float into space, he ascended to his Father where he lives in majesty and glory. He is also present with us, body, blood, soul and divinity on this earth in the sacrament of the Eucharist. So no, we do not sit around and wonder where Jesus floated off to. Yes it is fantastic, using the definition “apparently impossible but real or true”. The fact that our God loves us so much that he would give his very life that we might spend eternity with him, while we are completely undeserving, is fantastic.

So no, I do not find the Baha’i position reasonable. I find it a contrived religion which ignores the words of the very prophets it professes and changes the meaning of what they have said to fit a preconceived belief system:

“We believe in Jesus, we just don’t believe what his followers believe he said.”

“We believe in Muhammad, we just don’t believe what his followers believe he said.”

“We believe in Krishna, we just don’t believe what his followers believe he said.”

You have changed the teachings of those you call “manifestations of God”. Neither Muslim, nor Christian, nor Buddhist, nor Hindu agree with your assessment of the meaning of the words of their respective “prophets”.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Generally whenever a verse in its literal interpretation contradicts various notions in bahai, it is usually interpreted metaphorically. For instance many of the narratives in the gospels suddenly and without warning become metaphorical expressions which somehow correspond to reality. So while it was literal int eh gospel of Luke Jesus died, every narration after that is apparently a metaphorical expression or spiritual understanding.

 

[Little_Star_1]

Little Star,
I love it when you come in here with your six guns blazing like Annie Oakley…

You really make me laugh, lift my spirits, and bring focus to what its really all about:

“Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

. Oh… by the way… have you seen any good Samaritans around here? I fell down and can’t get up… ;’’-(

You made me smile. Had to comment on that. I admired her greatly when I was a kid. Folks get so lost in theology. It is all really wrapped up in very simple things, love, faith, trust, and love again. So much fighting over such simple principals. Folks actually arguing that some people are not worthy of love as they don’t follow the “right” religion. They may not realize that is what they are saying, but they are. Then, they throw a bunch of theological quotes to back up what they propose. Which is, essentially, believe as I do because my books say you must or you are worthless. Folks, this is God’s province. Your’s is to love, trust, have faith, and love again. Can’t you be happy with just that? Guess not. So you go back to your “on page such and such of such in such it says we are the best and all others are nothing”. Baloney and shame, shame, shame!

See ya!

 

[daler]

We don’t believe he floated into space either. We believe he ascended to the Father.

Then you believe that the story of Thomas placing his hands into the wounds of the resurrected Christ, or that he ate and drank with his disciples after the resurrection are false.
So no, I do not find the Baha’i position reasonable. I find it a contrived religion which ignores the words of the very prophets it professes and changes the meaning of what they have said to fit a preconceived belief system:

You have changed the teachings of those you call “manifestations of God”. Neither Muslim, nor Christian, nor Buddhist, nor Hindu agree with your assessment of the meaning of the words of their respective “prophets”.

Steve,

. I know you don’t seem to like references from the Quran which contradict with literal “face value” where the Resurrection of Christ is concerned, but there is further support, taken from the Quran, regarding martyrs:

“Do not think that those who are killed in the cause of God are dead; they are alive at their Lord, being provided for” 3:169

. Is it ok that this verse be mentioned? It is simply an attempt to illustrate that “souls” live on, despite being physically dead. It carries an application with it to the verse of the Quran about the crucifixion of Jesus: One could say: “Think not that He is dead, for He is alive and being provided for.”

. You ask: "Why do you find it strange that God could raise himself, body, blood, soul and divinity, from the grave? "

. My answer is that it would be no stranger than creating Adam in an instant, or pulling a rib out of His side to create Eve. However, my logical mind doesn’t accept that in light of the scientific evidences and “patterns” consistent in the universe which God created.
. God created the Laws of the Universe. It is not my belief that He sends His Prophets to break those Laws to demonstrate Their validity.
. I don’t think that God works that way. Could He? Yes, I’m sure that if it was His will to show us that the path to reality is pulling fish and bread out of thin air, but I grew up on the farm and we planted wheat in the fall and harvested it the next year. We also caught a lot of catfish in the Missouri River. Bread and fish came from the ground and the water, not the air.

. Can God pull rabbits out of hats? Why not? He pulled the earth and sun out of space, so I don’t argue that point. What I argue is that human history is full to overflowing with fantastic stories and myths in “every single culture on earth”, including Jewish, and that it is necessary to read between the lines “wherever stories are told”.

. Why? Because people make up stories. They pass them on. They are told and retold, and tend to grow over time, salting the truth with stretched additions to the actual events from which the stories sprung.
. Hence, I am suggesting that maybe, just maybe…, Jesus didn’t pull fish and bread out of thin air. Maybe, in the beginning of the story, where “He Himself” told His disciples to “share” what they had with a few of the 5000 people, give or take, they “set the example” of sharing food with complete strangers, broadening the concept of “Who is my brother.” Then, when every one was fed, “Lo and Behold!”, there was plenty of food left over. Why? Because that “spirit of giving” and generosity to share with complete strangers, Jew with Gentile, released the greater potential of community “latent” within the children of men, who were all created by God, and that is a whole lot of why Jesus came, but its the “hard part”, to love thy neighbor as thyself. Its easy to say, “Well, He came to save me” and all, but to actually give up owning slaves, whipping them, stealing land from Indians, and feeding people starving in Africa? Thats the hard part. And for most part people have finally been catching on that its not alright to “own” other people, etc…

. Now you may prefer the magical interpretation of the “miracle”, but I say that what was truly a miracle was that expansion of community and its expression of generosity to do what the Good Samaritan did, that is, to “recognize” your brother and take care of him, whether that be food or medical care, or providing hospitality at the local Inn.

. When my children were little, they essentially demanded that I tell them stories. The more incredible, the better. Have you any experience with kids? If so, then you know what I mean. And this serves a purpose. Our imagination has to be developed in order to become able to conceptualize abstract intellectual modes of thinking, thus extending our creative tool making ability, which includes not only physical tools, but symbolic as well. Our survival as a species depends upon our adaptive abilities.

. Carry this over to “religious” thought and tradition and you find no contradiction. It is a necessary part of growing up, that we scratch our heads and think, tell stories and sort out which ones are true or false, discerning the underlying principal or remaining ignorant of moral truths.

. We are free to believe what we want, brother. Santa may still come down your chimney. I’m not free to judge. But while I still chop wood and have a fireplace, I also use an electric heater in my room and just can’t imagine Santa coming through the wiring.

. If you want to believe that Jesus arose from the physical state of death, walked through walls, and ascended into heaven, thats ok. This is a discussion on Baha’i beliefs and some of those beliefs are presented here. Its all good.

. Now I am going to post again about Thomas, cause this one may be running out of words. Hang onto your hat, cause you’re really gonna wanna crucify me for the answer…

 

[daler]

We don’t believe he floated into space either. We believe he ascended to the Father.

Then you believe that the story of Thomas placing his hands into the wounds of the resurrected Christ, or that he ate and drank with his disciples after the resurrection are false. If this is the case, then how do you discern exactly what is true in the Sacred Scriptures and what is false? On what authority do you make this discernment, or is this just your opinion?

“We believe in Jesus, we just don’t believe what his followers believe he said.”

“We believe in Muhammad, we just don’t believe what his followers believe he said.”

“We believe in Krishna, we just don’t believe what his followers believe he said.”

You have changed the teachings of those you call “manifestations of God”. Neither Muslim, nor Christian, nor Buddhist, nor Hindu agree with your assessment of the meaning of the words of their respective “prophets”.

Steve,
. Load up your shotgun here, OK? Cause you’re really gonna hate me for this one. And I’m sure Ignatian will be right behind you, so you won’t be alone.

. The following is not “thee Baha’i view”, by the way, its “a” Baha’is view that I heard twenty years ago. Its got a lot of symbolism in it again which you may find offensive, so don’t read on unless you are ready.

. In an attempt to interpret cultural “telling” of the Resurrection story, we encounter certain “problems”. What to do with doubting Thomas…

A) Either Jesus came through the wall and materialized, ate fish, and disappeared again, taking the fish with Him, or

B) This is another “telling of the story” by those who recognized that He still lived.

In A, there is something funny going on, which if interpreted at “face value”, means that the Resurrected Jesus “Entered the room, not using the door”, and then reconstructed Himself physically to speak and take nourishment.

In B) there is another one of these Baha’i metaphors being told to comprehend that which is logically incomprehensible and incompatible with normal reality. i.e., trying to retain sanity while still believing in God and Christ while disbelieving in magic. (Kind of like existing while being black in a white neighborhood, or being Indian on a reservation and being told what to believe cause “your stories” are not true)

Now here’s the part where you’re gonna start throwing coconuts at me. This fellow who told this story proposed that what was being communicated had a wider context and a deep spiritual meaning, hidden within the “literal story” which has been told, and that there is a wisdom in this, for people were always getting killed when they started talking about Christ, especially after He was crucified.

The gist of it is this. That Thomas would “not believe” until he saw the “body of Christ”, which means His followers, sacrificing themselves in the path of God. That is, until he could see and touch “their” wounds and see “them” bleeding and dying as Jesus did, he would not believe that Christ was alive in them. He was putting them to the test! The "body of Chris"t had to be fed, as well, meaning that they were their brother’s keepers.

Does this contradict a literal interpretation and “face value” to the Gospel accounts? Yes, of course it does. But thats just the point. We need to resolve the mythical Jesus who “rose from the dead” in the context of: “Where ever two or more gather and make mention of Me, there I am also.” right next to: “He entered the room, not using the door.”

Now you know very well that I, or this other fella, would have been convicted of heresy and put to death a few hundred years ago for even daring to suggest something other than what the party line held to be true. Never mind the need to resolve “His Presence” among us where two or three gather and make mention of Him, even on the Internet.

It is much easier to simply nod our heads and “believe” the “face value” of these stories, including Moses parting the Red Sea, Noah filling up a big boat with a pair of every critter He could fit except the dinosaurs, which explains their disappearance, and Jonah getting swallowed by a big fish and burped up 3 days later, not being affected in the least by stomach acid and lack of oxygen.

We “are” a culture, make that species, of story tellers. And its hard to tell the real ones from the “not so real” ones. And the funny thing is, when people dare to try to make rational sense out of the “big ones”, it spoils the fun of the kids, i.e., the adults who still wanna believe in Santa coming down the chimney because it makes them feel good. And it is the latter who generally get very violent over the matter, or spit and curse those who break with tradition. Why? Because of insecurity.

When somebody appears a little different, add some chrome to the Chevy, tint their hair, put on a sharper suit, that fella “stands out” from the plain (think Amish) crowd and gets the attention of the chicks.

Basic Psychology: “Its elementary, my dear Watson.”

Soooo, factor in that we are fundamentally still wired with animal instincts, wired to survive through mimicry and hiding, but have been given intellectual ability by God, and fiddle with symbols a lot, i.e., tell stories

Are there profound truths and messages “within” these stories? There sure are. They are hidden right there in plain sight.

Amen…

 

[daler]

I find it curious that you immediately defer to the Quran when interpreting Christian Scripture. Why do you consider the Quran superior to the Christian Scriptures on this fundamental question?

Steve,
When you are specifically criticizing the contrasting statements within the Quran regarding the crucifixion of Jesus, “How” are we to address this other than by use of the Quran???

When you are comparing apples to oranges, i.e., the New Testament to the Quran, the one that is orange needs to be honored.

The Baha’is maintain an open mind where various religious Scriptures are concerned. We also do in fact allow ourselves “reason”, as Catholics do, in coming to a logical understanding of reality. This is, I am told, a long standing Catholic tradition, one which deserves merit and praise. When someone else uses “reason”, it also deserves merit and praise, whether that one be a Jew, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, in whatever flavor, or even a Baha’i.

Otherwise, “Come, Let us reason together.” has no meaning.

That is what we are here to do, brother, reason. Let us do it in a spirit of tolerance and Love, befitting all who believe in Christ. And as we all believe in Him, let us find common ground there to begin with.

We also believe in Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the Old Testament Prophets.

We really do have a lot in common…

The difficulty lies in the dissimilarities, such as the Jews who held onto traditional ways of viewing the Old Testament, which Christians then interpreted as pointing to Christ, the Messiah. Baha’is agree with the Christians that Jesus was the Messiah long awaited by the Jews.

What is troubling to many Christians, and Jews, then, is that Baha’is also recognize Muhammad, being the only group outside of Islam to do so. Meanwhile, fanatic Muslims persecute the Baha’is in the Cradle of the Faith, which is Elam, mentioned in the Bible as the land where “The Lord shall set His Throne”.

We, as Baha’is, say: He did!! Even as we say to the Jews, “He did!” come 2000 years ago in the Person of Jesus.

This is what the Christians have been saying to the Jews for 2000 years. “He did come”

Baha’is are in agreement with that which the Christians maintain.

Peace and Love, brother.

 

[Little_Star_1]

Iggy,

You asked, when I stated that you were being spiteful and disrespectful to the Baha’i, what about Paul and Peter? Okay Iggy, let’s get real. Go to the mirror, look yourself straight in the eye and tell us–are you either Peter or Paul? Did it ever occur to any of you that Peter, Paul, and Jesus, had the authority to speak for God in a way that has not been given to you?

God makes it quite clear what is within His province and what is within our’s. I am sure you know all the spots where this is addressed in the Bible. If not, take the time to look for them. They are there. Yes, Peter and Paul were granted special authority. This is what sets them apart from every Tom, Dick, and Harry, you that is.

You come on here and insult the Baha’i and their leader for presuming too much for him. Yet, you are doing the same thing for yourselves. Believe what you believe and trust that God, within His mighty province, is addressing everything regarding that which is in His province. Leave them be Iggy. Love, Trust, Faith, and LOVE again. Get busy with it.

Keep in mind, if He can’t trust you to get what is within the province of man right, what else will He trust you with?

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Their contention centered around the fact that the vague and inconclusive words, addressed by Christ to Peter, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,” could never justify the extreme measures, the elaborate ceremonials, the fettering creeds and dogmas, with which His successors have gradually burdened and obscured His Faith.

(Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 20)

Thank you for the response.

How does Baha’i faith read that Scripture? What is it’s meaning for Baha’i faithful?

 

[arthra]

Thank you for the response.

How does Baha’i faith read that Scripture? What is it’s meaning for Baha’i faithful?

Your reference I understand is to

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

~ Matthew 16:18

As near as I can determine…

I was doing a search on these words in the Baha’i writings and came up with the following:

Jesus Christ, addressing Peter, said, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.” This utterance was indicative of the faith of Peter, signifying: This faith of thine, O Peter, is the very cause and message of unity to the nations; it shall be the bond of union between the hearts of men and the foundation of the oneness of the world of humanity. In brief, the original purpose of temples and houses of worship is simply that of unity – places of meeting where various peoples, different races and souls of every capacity may come together in order that love and agreement should be manifest between them.

~ Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 65

Christ, for instance, did not appoint a center of authority and explanation. He did not say to His followers, “Obey the one whom I have chosen.” Upon one occasion He asked His disciples, “Whom say ye that I am?” Simon Peter answered and said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Christ, wishing to make firm the faith of Peter, said, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church,” meaning that the faith of Peter was the true faith. It was a sanction of Peter’s faith. He did not say that all should turn to Peter. He did not say, “He is the branch extended from my ancient root.” He did not say, "O God! Bless all who serve Peter. O God! Degrade those who are not obedient to him. Shun him who is a violator of the Covenant.

~ Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 385

The following is a partial quote:

*PETER’S CONFESSION OF FAITH

Question. – In the Gospel of St. Matthew it is said: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church.”[1] What is the meaning of this verse?
[1 Matt. 16:18.]

Answer. – This utterance of Christ is a confirmation of the statement of Peter, when Christ asked: Whom do you believe Me to be? and Peter answered: I believe that “Thou art the Son of the living God.” Then Christ said to him: “Thou art Peter”[1] – for Cephas in Aramaic means rock – “and upon this rock I will build My church.” For the others in answer to Christ said that He was Elias, and some said John the Baptist, and some others Jeremias or one of the Prophets.[2]

[1 It is well known that Peter’s real name was Simon, but Christ called him Cephas, which corresponds to the Greek word petras, which means rock.]

[2 Cf. Matt. 16:14-18.]

Christ wished by suggestion, or an allusion, to confirm the words of Peter; so on account of the suitability of his name, Peter, He said: “and upon this rock I will build My church,” meaning, thy belief that Christ is the Son of the living God will be the foundation of the Religion of God, and upon this belief the foundation of the church of God – which is the Law of God – shall be established.

…

Moreover, let us compare the lives of some of the Popes with the religion of Christ. Christ, hungry and without shelter, ate herbs in the wilderness, and was unwilling to 136 hurt the feelings of anyone. The Pope sits in a carriage covered with gold and passes his time in the utmost splendor, amidst such pleasures and luxuries, such riches and adoration, as kings have never had…*

~ Abdu’l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 134

“Now with regard to your questions. First concerning the statement of Jesus Christ ‘Thou art Peter and upon this rock etc.’; this saying of Jesus establishes beyond any doubt the primacy of Peter and also the principle of succession, but is not explicit enough regarding the nature and functioning of the Church itself. The Catholics have read too much into the statement, and derived from it certain conclusions which are quite unjustifiable.”

(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, September 7, 1938)
(Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 492)

 

[neokarny]

I assume none of you Baha’i posters live in Ohio?

Anyway, it’s interesting to see this thread since I’ve been really interested in learning more about the Baha’i Faith lately.

 

[Servant19]

Clear explanations? If one wishes to claim that everything that Jesus spoke was coded in metaphor, I suppose one is free to make that claim. It does not, however, comport with over 2000 years of exegesis by some the greatest intellects in the world. It does not comport with the understanding of the early Church Fathers, some of whom were contemporaries of the Apostles who walked with Jesus, or their students. If Christians have a misguided understanding of Jesus’ words, then they misunderstood from the start, beginning with his appointed Apostles. The consistency of Catholic teaching from the beginning, can be easily demonstrated. It did not become darkened over time.

I find it absolutely incredible that one would attempt to deny the fact that the verses I have given do not clearly convey the message that this will be a staggering event that no one on the face of the earth can escape. All the flowery language and beautiful metaphors in the world cannot change this.

If Baha’u’llah is the second coming of Christ, then where is he? He is dead and buried. Are you waiting for yet another?

Clear explanations? If one wishes to claim that everything that Jesus spoke was coded in metaphor, I suppose one is free to make that claim. It does not, however, comport with over 2000 years of exegesis by some the greatest intellects in the world. It does not comport with the understanding of the early Church Fathers, some of whom were contemporaries of the Apostles who walked with Jesus, or their students. If Christians have a misguided understanding of Jesus’ words, then they misunderstood from the start, beginning with his appointed Apostles. The consistency of Catholic teaching from the beginning, can be easily demonstrated. It did not become darkened over time.

I find it absolutely incredible that one would attempt to deny the fact that the verses I have given do not clearly convey the message that this will be a staggering event that no one on the face of the earth can escape. All the flowery language and beautiful metaphors in the world cannot change this.

If Baha’u’llah is the second coming of Christ, then where is he? He is dead and buried. Are you waiting for yet another?

Steve, of course if someone came along and said to me that they are the Return of Jesus Christ, and I should just follow them blindly and do as they say and do with no noticeable positive effect on anyone, I would struggle very hard to believe them!

The question you should be asking is, what is it that Baha’u’llah has brought to the table through His Revelation that almost forces the hand of Baha’is to totally and unequivocally accept everything that Baha’u’llah explains about these signs.

I assure you, that thing He has brought is stupendous!

I assure no Catholic has ever looked at these explanations first and thought “Wow! That all makes sense, I’m converting from Catholicism to Bahai”…the subject of conversation in this thread is totally a secondary matter for Baha’is. It is the FRUITS of Baha’u’llah that are of primary concern, and they are stupendous

What is it that has caused a poster here named ChristIsTheWay, a prayer warrior of the Catholic forum to convert to Bahai? I assure you, it’s not Baha’u’llahs explanation of sun, moon and star. What is that has caused innumerable Catholic clergy to do the same?

Does that make sense?

 

[Servant19]

I find it curious that you immediately defer to the Quran when interpreting Christian Scripture. Why do you consider the Quran superior to the Christian Scriptures on this fundamental question?

Just to clarify here Steve, daler was interpreting Quranic Scripture by using Quranic Scripture. He was not interpreting Biblical Scripture at all.

It was pointed out that Quran says that Jesus was not crucified. So daler simply pointed out that the “intended” meaning of this proposal in the Quran is actually that He was taken up to Allah in His spiritual reality

Hope that clarifies the intentions

 

[Servant19]

I assume none of you Baha’i posters live in Ohio?

Anyway, it’s interesting to see this thread since I’ve been really interested in learning more about the Baha’i Faith lately.

Dear friend, give them a call. I assure you a smile awaits you on the other end of the line

ohiobahai.org

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Your reference I understand is to

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

~ Matthew 16:18

As near as I can determine…

I appreciate the response. One of the keys to understanding Catholicism is that we are a “both/and” faith and not an “either/or” faith. We believe Christ was referring to Peter’s faith and to his primacy. Some people mistakenly think Catholics believe Christ was only referring to the primacy. But that is not the case.

Something to keep in mind when understanding the context of Peter’s name change is that it was a big deal. The change of the name was something of significance. Jesus changed Simon’s name to Peter. Likewise, Abram’s name was changed to Abraham and Jacob’s name was changed to Israel.

 

[SteveVH]

Just to clarify here Steve, daler was interpreting Quranic Scripture by using Quranic Scripture. He was not interpreting Biblical Scripture at all.

It was pointed out that Quran says that Jesus was not crucified. So daler simply pointed out that the “intended” meaning of this proposal in the Quran is actually that He was taken up to Allah in His spiritual reality

Hope that clarifies the intentions

And we keep coming back to the same issue, again and again. The Baha’i faith embraces Muhammad as a prophet and Manifestation of God, yet rejects his teaching on the crucifixion of Jesus, saying that he actually meant something else. At the same time it embraces Jesus as a prophet and Manifestation of God, yet rejects the most fundamental claim of Christians, based upon eye witness accounts; the resurrection, saying that something else was meant.

The Baha’i pick and choose what appeals to them and conforms to their philosophy and throw away the rest. None of the followers of the various prophets you embrace agree with your interpretation of their own holy books and the words of their prophets.

We have been over and over this issue and so I see no point in re-hashing it. So lets move on to a more basic question.

As you are aware, the Christian position concerning Jesus Christ is that he is the fulfillment of all revelation, for all time; that he became incarnate, and suffered and died for all of mankind, paying the price for our sins and redeeming us. He rose from the dead, ascended into heaven and sent the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth, If we accept this most wonderful of gifts we will live for eternity as adopted sons and daughters of God, being co-heirs with Jesus Christ to all that the Father has.

What does Baha’u’llah offer that Jesus Christ has not already accomplished? Can he offer us more than salvation?

Now, I am speaking of the spiritual destiny of an individual. Yes, I know that you claim that there is this great plan out there that will result in world peace and harmony. But what does Baha’u’llah offer me concerning my eternal life that Christ has not already done?

Thanks.

 

[Reuben_J]

Here is a question that I asked which Servant19 referred me to this thread.

What is Bahai’s definition of God and human respectively?

Thanks.