BAHA'I thread III - feel free to ask of Baha'i any questions

[daler]

I think what you will find is that they will claim there are no errors in either the Bible or the Quran, it is, rather, the understanding of the meaning of these texts that is in error.

For example, they deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus (in line with Islam) and claim that he was resurrected, but only spiritually. The assumption is that the two contradictory texts are not contradictory at all, only our understanding is contradictory. Of course one must then ignore the fact that the resurrected Jesus showed his disciples the wounds in his hands and feet and side and ate food. They have never addressed this problem head on.

I have no desire to continue going back and forth on these specific issues. I am just using this as an example.

Steve, I have read several translations of the Quran and was clear that those translating wrote according to “their” own interpretations, at least into English, giving different and competing understandings in the process.

. As to addressing the problem of the wounds and eating food not being addressed head on, I did that very thoroughly in one of the posts on the preceding thread. Briefly, “Who” is the body of Christ, and what Sprit entered into them, that Thomas was addressing which “entered the room, not using the door”? Until Thomas saw the disciples, animated by the Sprit of Christ, sacrificing themselves as Jesus did, showing him (Thomas) their wounds, gathering and eating as one undivided community, loving and caring for each other as Jesus did, he (Thomas) would not believe.

. When the “Spirit” of Christ truly enters the rooms and the hearts of the believers who make up the body of Christ, such sacrifice and communion exists. When I witness a group of believer acting this way, I believe, too. When that loving, sacrificial Spirit is not present and demonstrated, it is clear as well in its absence.

. This is consistent with: “Wherever two or more gather and make mention of Me, there I am also.” and this is His church and His body, the body of Christ, behaving as Christians ought, carrying the burdens, taking up the cross and following Him, sharing the same sacrifices, eating and digesting the meaning of the Word together, and allowing His Spirit to enter their hearts.

 

[happyme]

When you respond to a post by including your comments within the quote to which you are responding you make it very difficult to respond in turn. Everything disappears. This post is a response to Post #28. See what I mean?

Ok Steve, yes I understand what you say here.

 

[happyme]

After reading and participating in 2000 posts on this subject, my conclusion is that the Baha’i religion is a religion of compromise where unity is seen as the supreme good, at the expense, however, of the truth.

A Muslim cannot accept either the crucifixion or the resurrection of Jesus; the very heart of Christianity. A Christian cannot accept any faith tradition that proposes the need for anyone in addition to Christ, especially one like Muhammad who directly rejects Christ’s saving work. Yet we are to come together under Baha’u’llah, somehow setting these foundational doctrinal differences aside for the sake of unity.

Inherent within the Baha’i faith tradition is the assertion that none of the major religions of the world have ever really understood the truth of their own prophets. It is a type of universal Protestantism in which they have borrowed from nearly all religions of the world while simultaneously rejecting the core beliefs of each.

A Christian considering the Baha’i faith would be considering the rejection of the saving power of Christ, the one, true Word of God, in favor of the promise of an earthly utopia. It is a pseudo-messianism, if you will, in which we are saved by human institutions like the United Nations and World Courts, etc…

The Baha’i faith was started in the mid-19th century by a Muslim man with human parents . He had no holes in his hands or his feet, nor any wound in his side. He did not give his life for the world. He is not the Paschal Lamb. And he did not rise from the dead, rather his body has long since decayed in the ground and we can visit his grave site. He will arise, to his own dismay, when the second coming actually occurs, however he will be subject to judgment along with the rest of us.

One who claims to be the second coming of Christ is an impostor, whether through intent or delusion, and we have been warned.

We have many areas in which we can work together for the betterment of this world. But we, as Christians, can never compromise the Truth found in God’s only Word, Jesus Christ. We seek no one else. We wait to meet him face to face in his heavenly kingdom.

Now Steve with all due respect to you, I feel you are having a problem understanding the Baha’i answers that you have been given in as you say over 2000 posts.
Now you say a Muslim can’t accept either the crucifixion or the resurrection of Jesus, now I would humbly say that Muslims are as diverse in understanding certain verses in their writings as Christians are in theirs. Of course the Baha’i understanding of these two things from the Quran’s perspective has been given to you. I do not understand you saying that Muhammad rejects Christ’s saving work? I do not believe this comment. As for unity this is God’s message for this day, and He does as He Wills. Of course you may believe or disbelieve in this new message.

I do not think that it is correct to say that none of the major religions have ever really understood the truth of their own prophets, we only quote the Words of the prophets who have come since, and in reading of the comments of past prophets shows a continuation of this theme of straying from the path of God. So is completely different from Protestantism as you declare, we only quote the Words of the Prophet of God, these are not our ideas.

Again I do not understand how you can say this, that the Baha’i Faith rejects the saving power of Christ in a promise of an earthly utopia. This claim is totally untrue, one only has to read of the very many comments of Baha’u’llah concerning Jesus to out such an idea to rest. Now what do you mean by an earthly utopia? Do you not believe in the Words of Christ when He says in the Lords pray " 6:10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. King James Bible : Matthew And who was to bring God’s government upon His shoulders to the earth?

We have also spoken at length about the birth of Christ, in complete agreement with the Bible. That Baha’u’llah did not have the same birth as Jesus what does this prove, certainly not that He did not come down from heaven as all the other Messengers of God has come. We have also explained that if the birth of Jesus is the only example of God sent messenger then what of Adam who had no earthly mother? He must then be greater than Jesus, but of course even we Baha’is do not believe this argument.And as far as suffering goes the writings of the Baha’i faith are full of the suffering of The Bab, Baha’u’llah and all the thousands of followers who gladly gave their lives for the truth.

Yes you have been warned in the Bible, of false prophets, but you tend to want to throw the real out with the false, Jesus even warned about that by telling you how to choose the true from the false. Now that you do not wish to consider the possibility of further messengers from God, this is OK I will not wish to argue with you, I wish you well, and peace and loving regards to you. As you say it is possible hopefully to work shoulder to shoulder in helping advance the betterment of the world, to help bring about peace and see an end to war, to help and uplift those who suffer and are in need. I pray we can walk hand in hand as friends in such an enterprise.

 

[daler]

We have also spoken at length about the birth of Christ, in complete agreement with the Bible. That Baha’u’llah did not have the same birth as Jesus what does this prove, certainly not that He did not come down from heaven as all the other Messengers of God has come. We have also explained that if the birth of Jesus is the only example of God sent messenger then what of Adam who had no earthly mother? He must then be greater than Jesus, but of course even we Baha’is do not believe this argument.And as far as suffering goes the writings of the Baha’i faith are full of the suffering of The Bab, Baha’u’llah and all the thousands of followers who gladly gave their lives for the truth.

.

The Bible must be understood in the light of at least “some” reason. For example, it is said that Melchisadek was “without father or mother”, having neither beginning nor end.

So, does this make Jesus inferior to Melchisadek?

To become mired in these analysis is to fall into the ditch along the road, preferring mud to pavement. Is Jesus inferior to Adam, who was without father or mother?

Such things are pointless to discuss, but as someone wants to insist that “My Prophet is greater than your Prophet because mine didn’t have a daddy…” etc completely misses the point of proofs which “can” be offered, instead arguing over that which cannot be proven, and is irrelevant to meaningful discussion.

. “Know thou assuredly that the essence of all the Prophets of God is one and the same. Their unity is absolute. God, the Creator, saith: There is no distinction whatsoever among the Bearers of My Message. They all have but one purpose; their secret is the same secret. To prefer one in honor to another, to exalt certain ones above the rest, is in no wise to be permitted. Every true Prophet hath regarded His Message as fundamentally the same as the Revelation of every other Prophet gone before Him. If any man, therefore, should fail to comprehend this truth, and should consequently indulge in vain and unseemly language, no one whose sight is keen and whose understanding is enlightened would ever allow such idle talk to cause him to waver in his belief.”

Baha’u’llah

 

[Jcc1960]

Do you agree with this verse from the Quran?:

“They do blaspheme who say: God is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.” Qur’an, sura 5 (Al-Ma’ida), ayat 73

Do you agree that since I believe in the Blessed Trinity, that a grievous penalty will befall me?

As a Catholic, you do not believe that “God is one of three”, rather you believe in one God, and the three persons of the Trinity are the one God. So, no that is not blasphemy.

 

[Jcc1960]

Steve, I have read several translations of the Quran and was clear that those translating wrote according to “their” own interpretations, at least into English, giving different and competing understandings in the process.

We can note also that it doesn’t say in John 20 [27-28] that Thomas actually touched the wounds even though this was offered. A lot of people miss this, and I had to read it again when someone pointed it out.

People imagine that Thomas did touch the wounds but not only does it not say that, it also says in verse 29 “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” The point being, to believe without seeing, let alone touching. In other words, the object of belief is the spiritual reality, not something that you can see.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

As a Catholic, you do not believe that “God is one of three”, rather you believe in one God, and the three persons of the Trinity are the one God. So, no that is not blasphemy.

Thank you. This response makes sense in that context.

Is it fair to say then that Muslims are misinterpreting their own Scriptures since they do not believe in the Catholic understanding of the Trinity?

 

[SteveVH]

Steve, I have read several translations of the Quran and was clear that those translating wrote according to “their” own interpretations, at least into English, giving different and competing understandings in the process.

Sorry, I definitely missed this because I assure you I would have remembered it. Really? You stretch the meaning of words of the Gospel to the breaking point. Other than that I cannot comment. I truly have no words.

 

[daler]

Thank you. This response makes sense in that context.

Is it fair to say then that Muslims are misinterpreting their own Scriptures since they do not believe in the Catholic understanding of the Trinity?

I think that is missing the point somehow. The emphasis being on God, Who sends Messengers. Even Jesus said, “These are not My words, but Him that sent Me.”

 

[Jcc1960]

Thank you. This response makes sense in that context.

Is it fair to say then that Muslims are misinterpreting their own Scriptures since they do not believe in the Catholic understanding of the Trinity?

Well, the point I was making is that the Quran very specifically denounces polytheism, but the Christian understanding of the Trinity is not polytheism. So, if Muslims think of it as such, they are misinterpreting Christian belief. There may have been heretical Christian beliefs in the past that tended towards polytheism, and those were denounced by Muhammad.

My understanding of Catholic belief is that there is one God in three persons, which is referred to as the Trinity, but it is recognized that its true reality is a mystery that can not really be understood by man. This recognition shows proper humility before God, it is a sincere attempt to understand and explain the divine nature, so it certainly can not be considered blasphemous in any way.

 

[daler]

Sorry, I definitely missed this because I assure you I would have remembered it. Really? You stretch the meaning of words of the Gospel to the breaking point. Other than that I cannot comment. I truly have no words.

Well, my friend, we went round on this before. Whereas some of us do not believe that Jonah was actually swallowed by a literal “big fish” and spit out 3 days later, but that this story intended something else other than the “apparent” meaning, as told.

Hence, “storytelling” in the middle east is proven to have been around for a long time. Part of its purpose is to “throw off” those who do not peer into the deeper meanings, thus separating those who think and consider from those who fail to do so.

. “Bahá’u’lláh has declared that religion must be in accord with science and reason. If it does not correspond with scientific principles and the processes of reason, it is superstition. For God has endowed us with faculties by which we may comprehend the realities of things, contemplate reality itself. If religion is opposed to reason and science, faith is impossible; and when faith and confidence in the divine religion are not manifest in the heart, there can be no spiritual attainment.” . Abdul Baha

 

[Bballer32]

My question for the Bah’hai faith is this:

Do you believe that your religion contains the Absolute Truth?

 

[SteveVH]

We can note also that it doesn’t say in John 20 [27-28] that Thomas actually touched the wounds even though this was offered. A lot of people miss this, and I had to read it again when someone pointed it out.

People imagine that Thomas did touch the wounds but not only does it not say that, it also says in verse 29 “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” The point being, to believe without seeing, let alone touching. In other words, the object of belief is the spiritual reality, not something that you can see.

Who cares whether Thomas touched them or not? Are we suppose to believe that when Jesus said “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side.” that he didn’t really mean it? And further, are we to imagine that Thomas is speaking to all of those gathered there who make up the body of Christ or are we to assume that he is speaking to one Person to whom he proclaims “My Lord and my God!”?

Of course Thomas saw Jesus, wounds and all, or why in the world would Jesus have said “Because you have seen me, you have believed;"?

Read what is there and believe it. Jesus is risen! That is the Good News.

 

[daler]

My question for the Bah’hai faith is this:

Do you believe that your religion contains the Absolute Truth?

“Religious truth is not absolute but relative: and that “Divine Revelation is a continuous and progressive process”

The Baha’i Revelation is not final, but states that another Manifestation will come in a thousand, or thousands of years, and that He shall also be followed by successive Manifestations of God.

 

[SteveVH]

. "Bahá’u’lláh has declared that religion must be in accord with science and reason. If it does not correspond with scientific principles and the processes of reason, it is superstition. Abdul Baha

And does this apply to those things that are above science and beyond reason; above nature (supernatural)? Can the spirit of man or the essence of God be explained by science and understood through human reason? If so, then God is no greater than our minds. Baha’u’llah was wrong.

The Catholic Church has long declared that truth cannot conflict with truth, whether scientific or philosophical. That does not mean that we have the capability of grasping the things of God with the shadow of truth that is the human mind.

 

[Bballer32]

“Religious truth is not absolute but relative: and that “Divine Revelation is a continuous and progressive process”

The Baha’i Revelation is not final, but states that another Manifestation will come in a thousand, or thousands of years, and that He shall also be followed by successive Manifestations of God.

Religious truth is relative? That doesn’t correspond with logic in any way. If God is Truth, then what he actually establishes on earth has the fullness of Truth but lacks some of the graces of being with God fully. There can’t be all sorts of religions that have some truths and claim that all religions are truth. No, that’s relative. There has to be one truth when it comes to religion

 

[daler]

Who cares whether Thomas touched them or not? Are we suppose to believe that when Jesus said “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side.” that he didn’t really mean it? And further, are we to imagine that Thomas is speaking to all of those gathered there who make up the body of Christ or are we to assume that he is speaking to one Person to whom he proclaims “My Lord and my God!”?

Of course Thomas saw Jesus, wounds and all, or why in the world would Jesus have said “Because you have seen me, you have believed;"?

Read what is there and believe it. Jesus is risen! That is the Good News.

Steve, that which is written we are all familiar with. What my mind seeks to resolve is His entering the room, not using the door, and departing again. I resolve this by recognizing that His clear and definite “Presence” entered the room and this Presence was discerned in the faces of the believers. Thomas required further proof.

That the story is told in the first person is understood. That which is contained within the story is that the Presence of the Living Lord was tangible, and very apparent to the believers, and then to Thomas as well. How this story describing the very real presence of Christ was told is the issue at hand. We all know that many take it at face value, which is understandable, but then dismiss His going and coming as some sort of “mystery” which they do not feel obligated to discuss further.

And again, when considered in light of His other statement that “Where two or three gather in My name, there I am also” The two interpretations must be compatible.

 

[pablope]

SteveVH Thank you for you frank discussion. I would like to add a thought re one of your comments.

Have we not also been told how to know the True Prophet? There are many, here are but a few…

Degards Tony

Hmmm…No, this is not the way.

From the example of St. Paul:

Galatians 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days.
Galatians 2:2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.

Paul had a direct revelation from Christ. Yet, from the two passages above, he goes to visit Cephas/Peter and submits himself to Peter.

Gal 2: 2 states another purpose…to present his gospel/message to make sure it is in line with the Apostles and what they were handed down from Christ.

God would not contradict what has been revealed…so as you can see from Gal 2, anyone claiming to come with a new teaching from God…the revelation to that claimant would be to submit himself to an authority…to an apostolic authority.

And further…one must also be sent, and Paul is the example again:

Romans 10:
14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”[g]

Now look at Acts 13:
1 Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. 2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3 So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.
Look at verse 3 and see what the Antioch Church elders do…“they placed their hands on them and sent them off.”

And you can see this further when John says how to know the truth:

from 1John 4… Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world……………6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood

 

[daler]

Religious truth is relative? That doesn’t correspond with logic in any way. If God is Truth, then what he actually establishes on earth has the fullness of Truth but lacks some of the graces of being with God fully. There can’t be all sorts of religions that have some truths and claim that all religions are truth. No, that’s relative. There has to be one truth when it comes to religion

Jesus Himself said that “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 into all truth.”

. “These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.”

Baha’u’llah

 

[daler]

God would not contradict what has been revealed…so as you can see from Gal 2, anyone claiming to come with a new teaching from God…the revelation to that claimant would be to submit himself to an authority…to an apostolic authority.

“Until” the Lord Himself comes again and manifests Himself on earth, at which time, apostolic authority ceases to be the criteria.

Christ did not have to “submit Himself” to the authority of the Jews, their Pharisees, and so on.

Baha’u’llah does not need to submit Himself to any authority. He “is” the authority.