Baha'i V

[Randy_Carson]

Please tell me what you think. I am humbly trying to learn from you so that I can express the Baha’i position in a manner that will foster an environment of understanding and love

Servant, don’t patronize me. You’re not here to learn anything; you’re moderating an “Ask a Baha’i” thread. You’re here to teach your doctrine, to proclaim your message and to advance your organization’s cause, and you’re delighted that our moderators have allowed these threads to continue so long, because most Christian boards would have shut you down long ago.

So, let’s be honest about our respective agendas, okay? We’re apologists for our respective faith traditions. Neither of us is an earnest seeker. You’re here to A) get me to think and B) to pick off a convert or two from among the crowd if possible. I’m interacting with you to A) get you to think and B) minimize the damage you may be doing to lurkers who are less sure of their faith. You have been given a soapbox, and I’m willing to listen or heckle as seems appropriate. I suggest you use your time wisely. Fair enough?

You wrote “For the wages of sin is death.” Please clarify this, friend.

Actually, Paul wrote this. Just kidding.

Here is the full context; I think it is pretty self-explanatory.

Romans 6
1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.

8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness. 14 For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.

Slaves to Righteousness

15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! 16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

19 I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. 20 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. 21 What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

 

[Servant19]

You could be looking all these answers up yourself, but I’ll play along for a bit longer.

John 1
35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples; 36 and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” 37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned, and saw them following, and said to them, “What do you seek?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come and see.” They came and saw where he was staying; and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41 He first found his brother Simon, and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ). 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter[f]).

sorry Randy.

I was asked on what authority the Bahai and Babi Founders were allowed to interpret the Bible. I responded that they showed forth their Divinity. Jesus Divinity is evident in the above passage you quoted. So I would like to offer this piece of history:

Before long, news about the young man Who called Himself the Bab --"the Gate” – traveled as far as the court of Persia’s ruler, Muhammad Shah. The fact that so many of his people were drawn to the Cause of the Bab made the shah both curious and concerned. He decided he must find out more about the Bab and His claims. To investigate on his behalf, he called on the one man acknowledged throughout the land as the most brilliant of religious scholars. At whatever gathering he spoke, no matter how learned the participants, all others would choose to sit in respectful silence and listen to him. Knowledgeable and wise beyond all others, he was also a man of integrity, truthful and trustworthy. His name was Siyyid Yahya, but he would become known as Vahid, meaning “the Peerless One.”

The shah commanded Vahid to meet with the Bab in Shiraz and there investigate the truth of His claims, then return to Tehran and report his findings. Vahid was pleased to obey. He, too, had heard of the Bab and His Cause and wished to satisfy his own desire for more information. On the journey from Tehran to Shiraz, he thought of the many questions with which he would test the Bab. Vahid did not plan to make the interview easy, but thorough and demanding. The truth deserved no less. Little did the brilliant Vahid know that nothing in his previous experience had prepared him for what lay ahead.

As it turned out, Vahid did not have one interview with the Bab, but three --each one more remarkable than the one before. At their first meeting Vahid presented each of his questions. He made certain to reveal, as well, something of his own vast range of religious knowledge. The Bab listened patiently to all that he said, then began to address Vahid’s questions briefly but persuasively. As Vahid listened to the Bab’s answers, each one clear and concise, he felt suddenly embarrassed at his own display of self-importance. Though he had more questions, Vahid asked the Bab if he might continue the interview a little later and resolved to himself to return with a more humble attitude.

Vahid’s second interview with the Bab, however, did not go at all as he had intended. As soon as he entered the Bab’s presence, Vahid forgot all of the questions he had planned to ask. They were as thoroughly erased from his memory as though written in sand at the water’s edge and washed away by the tide. Yet to his surprise, as Vahid conversed with the Bab, the Bab answered every question that Vahid had temporarily forgotten. Still Vahid could not quiet the small, doubting voice that whispered within him, “Might not this, after all, have been an accidental coincidence?”

For his third interview with the Bab, Vahid decided on a different strategy. He would keep his next request a secret and hold it silently in his heart. This request, which Vahid would tell no one, was for the Bab to reveal a commentary on the spiritual truths in the Shrih of Kawthar (Paradise), a chapter of the Koran. IF the Bab could, of His own volition, detect Vahid’s secret request and reveal a commentary unlike any other, then Vahid would be convinced that the Bab was of God. If not, Vahid decided, he would refuse to acknowledge the Bab.

This time, when Vahid came before the Bab, he was overcome suddenly with feelings of fear and awe and began to tremble so that he could barely stand. Why should he be so affected in the presence of the Bab? He wondered. How many times had he been in the presence of the shah, whose power gave reason to fear, yet had never felt timid or afraid in his presence? Why now should he stand trembling, unable to take a step or to utter a word?

When the Bab saw Vahid’s predicament, He got up from His seat and took Vahid gently by the hand, leading the scholar to sit next to Him. “Seek from Me whatever is your heart’s desire,” the Bab told Vahid. “I will readily reveal it to you.” But Vahid could say nothing. “Were I to reveal for yon the commentary on the Surih of Kawthar,” said the Bab, “would you acknowledge that My words are born of the Spirit of God? Would you recognize that My utterance can in no wise be associated with sorcery or magic?” Vahid could say nothing except to recite averse of the Koran: “O our Lord, with ourselves have we dealt unjustly: if Thou forgive us not and have not pity on us, we shall surely be of those who perish.”"

 

[Servant19]

With that, the Bab asked for His pen-case and paper and began at once to reveal His commentary. It was early afternoon when the Bab began to write. He continued to write for the rest of the day, rapidly and without pause, intoning the verses as He wrote them. Vahid listened, enraptured not only by the beauty of what he heard, but also by the inexpressible majesty of the Bab. Not until sunset did the Bab lay down His pen and ask for tea. The commentary – two thousand verses-was complete.

Also complete was Vahid’s transformation. Vanished was every trace of his former sense of superiority. In its place was the humble acknowledgement and deep certitude that the Bab was indeed the promised Qa’im. “If all the powers of the earth were to be leagued against me,” declared Vahid, “they would be powerless to shake my confidence in the greatness of His Cause.” So did Persia’s most learned and respected religious scholar declare himself a Babi. It was the Bab Himself who gave to Vahid - known until then as Siyyid Yahya-his new name…

Vahid wrote his report about the Bab and sent it to the shah, telling in detail the truth he had discovered, but he did not return to Tehran. Instead, like Husayn-'Ali [Baha’u’llah] and the Letters of the Living, Vahid set out to share the news of his discovery with people in every town. When the shah received Vahid’s letter and learned that he had become a Babi, he commented, "If this be true, it behoves us to cease belittling the Cause of that Siyyid”[meaning the Bab].
(Druzelle Cederquist, The Story of Baha’u’llah, pp. 43-46)

 

[Servant19]

Servant, don’t patronize me. You’re not here to learn anything; you’re moderating an “Ask a Baha’i” thread. You’re here to teach your doctrine, to proclaim your message and to advance your organization’s cause, and you’re delighted that our moderators have allowed these threads to continue so long, because most Christian boards would have shut you down long ago.

Randy, please, let’s not get scary here

I did say “so I can express the Bahai position”

Please stay calm…no ones fighting, and the words “don’t patronize me” are fighting words

 

[Servant19]

Actually, Paul wrote this. Just kidding

Now that’s the Randy I’ve gotten to know and love .

 

[Randy_Carson]

I think these first few paragraphs are being addressed with our dialogue in the previous posts. What is the consequence of sin etc etc. Do we die if we sin etc etc? What is the meaning when the word “die” is used in this context. Hope we can continue to explore this together

Your’re deflecting. Jesus said, “The bread which I shall give is my flesh” - not “my words” or “my teaching” - “my flesh”.

How can this man give us his flesh to eat, Servant?

As Jesus has rightly pointed out, the flesh is flesh and the spirit is spirit, they do not commingle, so a human body has a soul attached to it, and the connection which you correctly point to being the mind is called the Common Faculty in the Baha’i Writings and is actually much more than just the mind, but suffice it to say that you can search in the human body for millenia for the soul and you wont find it. There will never be a newspaper headline that says “Science has finally found the human soul and is analysing it through a microscope”

Of course they co-mingle. The joining of the Spirit with the Body creates what is called a human soul. I am not two things, I am one person. The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that “then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God. In Sacred Scripture the term “soul” often refers to human life or the entire human person. But “soul” also refers to the innermost.aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him, that by which he is most especially in God’s image: “Soul” signifies the spiritual principle in man. The human body shares in the dignity of “the image of God”: it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit. Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity.

It is the soul or spirit of man that gives “life” to the physical body. No soul, no body, but the other way around, remove the body, the soul continues to exist, and our identity is retained.

This sounds better than what you wrote previously.

As noted above, Jesus reaffirms that the body/flesh is dependent on the soul, not the other way around. So what gives nourishment to the soul? Jesus WORDS.

The Word of God can transform the dark soul into a luminescent soul, the feeble soul into a goliathan soul fortified by the Love of God.

Noted.

So here we have already established that it is the spirit that GIVES life (see above), not the other way around. What nourishes the spirit, the Words of Jesus, the Word of God. If you have “no life in you” then you have not inhaled the Words of God. The spirit of man is revitalised, nurtured, by the Word of God, and this manifests itself in the body through deeds of selflessness.

In verse 63, Jesus goes on to say "The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit[e] and life. 64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”

It is the Word that gives life, my friend, nothing else. We can deduce therefore that the bread and wine must equate to the Word. Sure, we can eat the Word (not sure how you would do that), however we can also in a spirit of reverence and dignity meditate and reflect on the Word of God and attract the divine blessings, grace and confirmations that Jesus promises to nourish our spirits with. This gives eternal life

Sure. The words of Jesus give life in that through them we may be enlightened by the Holy Spirit and learn the way to the Father through His teaching. Contrast this with the idea that in our natural mind, we are unable to receive and understand the things of God.

However, you continue to ignore the fact that Jesus also specifically instructed us to eat His flesh and drink His blood in the Eucharist. The consecrated elements become the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus because Jesus cannot be divided; His body and blood cannot be separated from His soul and His Divinity. Receiving His body, blood, soul and divinity is commanded because:

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”

Where does He say this? I don’t see anything reflecting this in the texts…

That’s because you cannot understand it with your natural mind…your flesh. This is the meaning of John 6:63, and I supported this by referring your to 1 Corinthians 2 & 3 where Paul is distinguishing between fleshly or carnal Christians and those who are discern the things of God with their spirits.

 

[Servant19]

Thanks Randy.

Again you make thought provoking posts.

My turn for bed now. (I’m in Australia) Some things to reflect in there friend.
Let it be known, I would never EVER, knowingly patronize you or anyone in CAF.

 

[Randy_Carson]

So why do you partake in the Eucharist which claims to be the VERY flesh of Jesus, and the VERY blood of Jesus??

1. Jesus commanded that we do this.
2. The Eucharist is not mere flesh and mere blood; the consecrated elements become the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus.
3. This from the Catechism:

1391 Holy Communion augments our union with Christ. The principal fruit of receiving the Eucharist in Holy Communion is an intimate union with Christ Jesus. Indeed, the Lord said: “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.” Life in Christ has its foundation in the Eucharistic banquet: “As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.”

On the feasts of the Lord, when the faithful receive the Body of the Son, they proclaim to one another the Good News that the first fruits of life have been given, as when the angel said to Mary Magdalene, “Christ is risen!” Now too are life and resurrection conferred on whoever receives Christ.

1392 What material food produces in our bodily life, Holy Communion wonderfully achieves in our spiritual life. Communion with the flesh of the risen Christ, a flesh “given life and giving life through the Holy Spirit,” preserves, increases, and renews the life of grace received at Baptism. This growth in Christian life needs the nourishment of Eucharistic Communion, the bread for our pilgrimage until the moment of death, when it will be given to us as viaticum.

1393 Holy Communion separates us from sin. The body of Christ we receive in Holy Communion is “given up for us,” and the blood we drink “shed for the many for the forgiveness of sins.” For this reason the Eucharist cannot unite us to Christ without at the same time cleansing us from past sins and preserving us from future sins:

For as often as we eat this bread and drink the cup, we proclaim the death of the Lord. If we proclaim the Lord’s death, we proclaim the forgiveness of sins. If, as often as his blood is poured out, it is poured for the forgiveness of sins, I should always receive it, so that it may always forgive my sins. Because I always sin, I should always have a remedy.

1394 As bodily nourishment restores lost strength, so the Eucharist strengthens our charity, which tends to be weakened in daily life; and this living charity wipes away venial sins. By giving himself to us Christ revives our love and enables us to break our disordered attachments to creatures and root ourselves in him:

Since Christ died for us out of love, when we celebrate the memorial of his death at the moment of sacrifice we ask that love may be granted to us by the coming of the Holy Spirit. We humbly pray that in the strength of this love by which Christ willed to die for us, we, by receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, may be able to consider the world as crucified for us, and to be ourselves as crucified to the world. . . . Having received the gift of love, let us die to sin and live for God.

1395 By the same charity that it enkindles in us, the Eucharist preserves us from future mortal sins. The more we share the life of Christ and progress in his friendship, the more difficult it is to break away from him by mortal sin. The Eucharist is not ordered to the forgiveness of mortal sins - that is proper to the sacrament of Reconciliation. The Eucharist is properly the sacrament of those who are in full communion with the Church.

1396 The unity of the Mystical Body: the Eucharist makes the Church. Those who receive the Eucharist are united more closely to Christ. Through it Christ unites them to all the faithful in one body - the Church. Communion renews, strengthens, and deepens this incorporation into the Church, already achieved by Baptism. In Baptism we have been called to form but one body. The Eucharist fulfills this call: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread:”

If you are the body and members of Christ, then it is your sacrament that is placed on the table of the Lord; it is your sacrament that you receive. To that which you are you respond “Amen” (“yes, it is true!”) and by responding to it you assent to it. For you hear the words, “the Body of Christ” and respond “Amen.” Be then a member of the Body of Christ that your Amen may be true.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a3.htm#1391
​

 

[Randy_Carson]

You’re such an angel rinnie

Ok, if I may I’ll post the quote here:

21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

Firstly, it says “…I am sending you” .How does this equate to every Catholic priest?

Apostolic Succession Illustrated

Jesus sent the Apostles who, in turn, appointed and sent others. Many verses from scripture are clear on this. Here is one passage:

2 Timothy 2:1-2
You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.

There are five generations of believers contained in this one passage: 1. Those who came before Paul and instructed him, 2. Paul himself, 3. Timothy, who was Paul’s disciple, 4. Those whom Timothy would disciple, and 5. Those to whom Timothy’s disciples would preach.

Bishops, Priests and Deacons

The sacrament of holy orders is conferred in three ranks of clergy: bishops, priests, and deacons.

Bishops (episcopoi) have the care of multiple congregations and appoint, ordain, and discipline priests and deacons. They sometimes appear to be called “evangelists” in the New Testament. Examples of first-century bishops include Timothy and Titus (1 Tim. 5:19–22; 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5).

Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as “presbyters” or “elders.” In fact, the English term “priest” is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14–15).

Deacons (diakonoi) are the assistants of the bishops and are responsible for teaching and administering certain Church tasks, such as the distribution of food (Acts 6:1–6).

In the apostolic age, the terms for these offices were still somewhat fluid. Sometimes a term would be used in a technical sense as the title for an office, sometimes not. This non-technical use of the terms even exists today, as when the term is used in many churches (both Protestant and Catholic) to refer to either ordained ministers (as in “My minister visited him”) or non-ordained individuals. (In a Protestant church one might hear “He is a worship minister,” while in a Catholic church one might hear “He is an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.”)

Thus, in the apostolic age Paul sometimes described himself as a diakonos (“servant” or “minister”; cf. 2 Cor. 3:6, 6:4, 11:23; Eph. 3:7), even though he held an office much higher than that of a deacon, that of apostle.

Similarly, on one occasion Peter described himself as a “fellow elder,” [1 Pet. 5:1] even though he, being an apostle, also had a much higher office than that of an ordinary elder.

The term for bishop, episcopos (“overseer”), was also fluid in meaning. Sometimes it designated the overseer of an individual congregation (the priest), sometimes the person who was the overseer of all the congregations in a city or area (the bishop or evangelist), and sometimes simply the highest-ranking clergyman in the local church—who could be an apostle, if one were staying there at the time.

Although the terms “bishop,” “priest,” and “deacon” were somewhat fluid in the apostolic age, by the beginning of the second century they had achieved the fixed form in which they are used today to designate the three offices whose functions are clearly distinct in the New Testament.

 

[SteveVH]

Actually, Steve, even in this life, this reality exists.

Look at the life of Paul. He was part of the stoning of Stephen one day and the next He was one of the most important protagonists of the Christian Era. Should He be condemned to hell forever for his stoning of Stephen, or would he have ended His life, not as a saint, but an Apostle.

What does this have to do with whether or not eternal damnation exists?

Paul encountered the living God and was converted. He changed his life. This is the call of the Gospel. We are all sinners and called to conversion. Our salvation is dependent upon saying yes to the mercy of God through Jesus Christ.

The message of the Gospel is the incomprehensible truth that our God loved us so much that he gave his own life for us. It is a message of salvation, not condemnation, for those who respond to this incredible gift. But for those who reject Christ’s saving act; for those who choose to live a life apart from God, they get what they wish for; a life apart from God for eternity. He will never interfere with our free will to choose sin.

And if you are wondering whether or not Jesus taught that there is a hell; everlasting damnation, he speaks of hell much more than he speaks of heaven.

Christianity cannot deny the reality that souls have the ability to go from the depths of hell to the heights of Union with God

Why would you deny this?

Yes, I would deny this. Once a soul is in hell, there is no escape. They are there for eternity, not because we have a vengeful God who desires to punish those who do not do his bidding, but because that is what they have chosen; a life without God. If we think it is a terrible thing, imagine what God thinks since he gave his life for that person and they rejected it. He died for every soul that is in hell. It is they who have walked away, not God. He always remains faithful. We have this life and this life only in which to choose or deny Christ and our choice is demonstrated by how we live out the message of the Gospel.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I have another question for the Baha’i concerning the following verse:

Acts 4
10 Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner. 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

God raised Jesus from the dead, and there is no other name by which we must be saved.

Do you agree or disagree with this?

 

[rinnie]

You’re such an angel rinnie

Ok, if I may I’ll post the quote here:

21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

Firstly, it says “…I am sending you” .How does this equate to every Catholic priest?

Thanks for asking. eee the key here is he breadhed on them. Get it. Not on all the People that believed in him at that time. Them.

Okay now after he did that he gave them Human beings permission to forgive sins. Or hold them bound.

Now the Apostles had the power given to them by the Holy Spirit to forgive sins. But thats not all. That also had the power of the Holy Spirit to lay their hand upon a man, and pass on that Power of the Holy Spirit. Thats what we call Holy Orders.

 

[researcher19]

I have another question for the Baha’i concerning the following verse:

Acts 4
10 Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner. 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

God raised Jesus from the dead, and there is no other name by which we must be saved.

Do you agree or disagree with this?

From ** a **Baha’i perspective, Jesus “rose from the dead” to make mention of Baha’u’llah.

Baha’u’llah quotes Jesus saying the following (which is not directly found in the New Testament):

** “The kingdom of God circleth around Him and it is because of His Love that I adorned the cross with my body. Verily, I rose from the dead to complete my mention of His Name [Baha] amongst men. O people of the Gospel! Do not make mention of Me (Jesus) when you have turned away from my Father, the All- Glorious. It is His love that transformed the fire to be a light for Abraham. He that tarrieth after Him is in manifest error… Truly, I [Jesus] did not come but for His cause and I did not appear but to give the glad tidings of the advent of the Kingdom of God.”**

 

[Randy_Carson]

Servant19 is getting some sleep (he’s in Australia), so I decided to spend some time researching the Baha’i religion on the Internet. I think I have learned more than I really want or need to know of the Baha’i, so I’ll be bowing out of this thread now.

For those interested:

The official website is here:

bahai.org/

For a quick overview from wikipedia:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bah%C3%A1’%C3%AD_Faith

For balance, here are a couple testimonies from ex-Baha’i:

fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Ex16.htm

bahai-faith.com/

Finally, if you want a quick, one-sentence grasp of the Baha’i, I found this:

What Unitarian/Universalists are to Christianity, the Baha’i are to Islam.

Caveat emptor.

 

[rinnie]

From ** a **Baha’i perspective, Jesus “rose from the dead” to make mention of Baha’u’llah.

Baha’u’llah quotes Jesus saying the following (which is not directly found in the New Testament):

** “The kingdom of God circleth around Him and it is because of His Love that I adorned the cross with my body. Verily, I rose from the dead** to complete my mention of His Name [Baha] amongst men. O people of the Gospel! Do not make mention of Me (Jesus) when you have turned away from my Father, the All- Glorious. It is His love that transformed the fire to be a light for Abraham. He that tarrieth after Him is in manifest error… Truly, I [Jesus] did not come but for His cause and I did not appear but to give the glad tidings of the advent of the Kingdom of God.”

Thats not going to work though. Because Jesus told us everything we need to know. So we are at a bad place here.

Either Jesus lied or Baha’. There is no other reasonable way to see it. And God don’t lie.

We are told in the bible to stick to what we have been told either word of mouth or written. Now this is not passed on by word of mouth or written so we are told its not the truth.

Now if we are to follow God we have to reject whatever goes against his teaching. If Jesus were to mention Baha’ it would have been written in the bible or in Traditon. Its simply not.

I wish I could say it in a kinder or different way, but sometimes you have to face the truth and either accept the word of God or reject it.

And to accept this is to reject our God.

 

[researcher19]

Now if we are to follow God we have to reject whatever goes against his teaching. If Jesus were to mention Baha’ it would have been written in the bible or in Traditon. Its simply not.

I wish I could say it in a kinder or different way, but sometimes you have to face the truth and either accept the word of God or reject it.

And to accept this is to reject our God.

According to one Baha’i view, all references to “Father” in the New Testament are references to Baha’u’llah. So according to Baha’is, Baha’u’llah is mentioned on almost every page of the New Testament.

It is simply a matter of believing Baha’u’llah’s claim, or rejecting it. “Baha’u’llah” is the title of the person named Mirza Husayn-Ali of Nur in Mazandaran, Iran. Other titles of Baha’u’llah include “Ancient Beauty”, “Pre-eternal Beauty”, “Ancient of Days”, “Blessed Beauty”, “Wronged One of the Worlds”, “Most Great Name”, “Speaker on Sinai”, “Most Great Ocean”, “Hidden Name”, “Lord of Lords”, “Most Great Spirit”

 

[arthra]

I have another question for the Baha’i concerning the following verse:
Acts 4
10 Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner. 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”God raised Jesus from the dead, and there is no other name by which we must be saved.

Do you agree or disagree with this?

I would agree…

The passage is addressed to the people of Israel who crucified Jesus…In the context of that time and place as a Manifestation of God "… there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

“There is none other God but Him, the Creator, the Raiser from the dead, the Quickener, the Slayer.”

~ Baha’u’llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, p. 227

 

[SteveVH]

I would agree…

The passage is addressed to the people of Israel who crucified Jesus…In the context of that time and place as a Manifestation of God "… there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

“There is none other God but Him, the Creator, the Raiser from the dead, the Quickener, the Slayer.”

~ Baha’u’llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, p. 227

How do the words “there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” translate into “but only during this time and place”?

If there is no other name under heaven then there is no other name under heaven, regardless of the time and place. God lives in eternity, not in time and space. He has revealed himself fully in Christ Jesus (who is God, not a “manifestation”), for all people of all times and places.

 

[researcher19]

How do the words "there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" translate into “but only during this time and place”?

If there is no other name under heaven then there is no other name under heaven, regardless of the time and place. God lives in eternity, not in time and space. He has revealed himself fully in Christ Jesus(who is God, not a “manifestation”, for all people of all times and places.

Fantastic question! Please refer back to my previous two posts.

 

[rinnie]

According to one Baha’i view, all references to “Father” in the New Testament are references to Baha’u’llah. So according to Baha’is, Baha’u’llah is mentioned on almost every page of the New Testament.

It is simply a matter of believing Baha’u’llah’s claim, or rejecting it. “Baha’u’llah” is the title of the person named Mirza Husayn-Ali of Nur in Mazandaran, Iran. Other titles of Baha’u’llah include “Ancient Beauty”, “Pre-eternal Beauty”, “Ancient of Days”, “Blessed Beauty”, “Wronged One of the Worlds”, “Most Great Name”, “Speaker on Sinai”, “Most Great Ocean”, “Hidden Name”, “Lord of Lords”, “Most Great Spirit”

Then if you accept the N.T. then why do you deny the Priest the authority of forgiving sin. Jesus gave it to them.

And if you accept the N.T. you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour.