Baha'u'llah said Ishmael was the Sacrifice

[eddie_too]

I would like to remind readers again that to accept the bahai faith you must first reject the substance of most of what Jesus taught His twelve apostles.

that is the first point to make and remember when engaging in discussion with non-Catholic faiths.

you do not need to make that point to them, but you need to keep it in the forefront of your mind because some non-Catholic proselytizers are quite confused about RC teaching and many have been trained to focus on apparent contradictions that have been explained by the RCC but may not have necessarily been taught to you.

we catholics have not always been the best at transmitting all of our doctrines and the knowledge and understanding surrounding them to our faithful.

it is probably more of logistics problem than anything else. considering how many highly learned people there are in proportion to the number of faithful and considering the fact that the faithful also must go about with their physical lives, working, eating, etc., we should not find it surprising that all of the details, supports and nuances of the faith are not completely grasped by everyone.

neither the bahai or any other non-Christian sect makes great headway with knowledgeable catholics. the non-Catholic proselytizers recognize pretty quickly whether or not their targets are knowledgeable. they do not waste their time engaging knowledgeable catholics. the less a catholic knows about his or her faith, the more likely the non-Christian is to engage them in a discussion of apparent errors in our faith.

defending our faith even has a branch of theology dedicated to it. that branch is called RC Apologetics. it is worthwhile, when we have the time, to find articles and books about RC apologetics. right here on Catholic Answers their are threads devoted to the subject.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I wanted to thank Techno for quoting Baha’i sources accurately and fairly… The reference to Ishmael and the reference Abdul-Baha made to the trinity.

Because it’s been raised here I’ll post a few more references that I’ve been interested in …particularly referring to Ishmael “God has heard”…

The following is the Baha’i view presented by Shoghi Effendi:

As regards the questions you have asked, as Bahá’u’lláh says categorically that God commanded Abraham to offer up Isma’il, as far as we are concerned, it is Isma’il who was the intended sacrifice.
In view of the great antiquity of Genesis, it is quite possible that at some period the names were changed, and the error was propagated.
Whatever happened, we Bahá’ís must follow the words in our own Scriptures as being the most authentic……

Shoghi Effendi, The Unfolding Destiny of the British Baha’i Community, p. 461-412

Now it is true that for Baha’is Ishmael was the sacrifice…not Isaac. This is not a big doctrinal deal with us… It’s not part of a creed that’s recited…

The Qur’an also refers to the sacrifice of Abraham…and it is a different account from that mentioned in the Bible…It’s found in Surih As-Saffat 37:100-105. In this case after Abraham relates a vision He had to His son they concurrently agree…

*Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: “O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: Now see what is thy view!” (The son) said: “O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills one practising Patience and Constancy!”
37:103

So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),*

The above is a translation by A. Yusuf Ali … a widely read translation.

Now consider the Genesis account…in chapter 22

*Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. 4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5 He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.*

Two things are fairly clear from the above verses… “Take your son your only son whom you love - Isaac-…” Ishmael was the first child of Abraham by several years…beforeIsaac was born. There’s an inconsistency there you’ll note.

The other issue is that in the Genesis account the child is unaware of what is to occur…that is, his being sacrificed… while the Qur’an indicates a concurrence between Abraham and His son.

The only thing we have to know is that the Scriptures, as they have been handed down to us, and whose authenticity has been guaranteed by the Holy Spirit, is true. We do not need to know how or why the Qu’ran is wrong. I suspect Muhammad inherited a mish mash of heretical Christian notions on his trading ventures and doctored those up to put Muslims in a favorable light. But this is easily countered by showing that genuine Catholic Scriptures were in wide circulation before Muhammad’s time. By comparing them to the Qu’ran it is easy to see what has happened.

Bab and Bahá’u’lláh had an ax to grind with Islam but did not want to accept Christianity because they too were either Muslim or descended from Muslims. Further more, they could not have prospered as Christians. So self interest prevailed and they simply repeated many of the errors of Muhammad and the Muslims. Why any Westerner would go for this cult is a total mystery.

Linus2nd

 

[SteveVH]

History is a scientific discipline. Why then are you adamant that the Bible is scientifically true?

I think I just said that it was NOT a scientific journal and should not be read as one. How do you then arrive at the conclusion that I now think that the Bible is scientifically true? It was never meant to have anything whatsoever to do with science other than to place God as the source of all that exists.

You would go to priest to heal you from diabetes, arthritis, dental decay, an ear infection??

Why do you feel the need to do this, Servant?

 

[Servant19]

Bab and Bahá’u’lláh had an ax to grind with Islam but did not want to accept Christianity because they too were either Muslim or descended from Muslims. Further more, they could not have prospered as Christians. So self interest prevailed and they simply repeated many of the errors of Muhammad and the Muslims. Why any Westerner would go for this cult is a total mystery.

Linus2nd

You have a great imagination

Can you show me what is the source of this supposed truth that you posted (I’ve quoted the bit I’m interested in)?

 

[Servant19]

I think I just said that it was NOT a scientific journal and should not be read as one. How do you then arrive at the conclusion that I now think that the Bible is scientifically true? It was never meant to have anything whatsoever to do with science other than to place God as the source of all that exists.

So the Isaac/Ismael conundrum is not a concern for Catholics therefore.

Its a scientific/historic matter when it comes to the “who” of this sacrifice, wouldn’t you agree?

.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

You have a great imagination

Can you show me what is the source of this supposed truth that you posted (I’ve quoted the bit I’m interested in)?

Weren’t they Muslims? At least they were from Persia/Iraq and they certainly had a beef with Islam as practiced in those areas of the world.

Questions for you.

1. Why not answer the questions in my last post?
2. Have you read the Bible?
3. Have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church?
4. Why are you a Ba’hai?

Arthra seems disinclined to respond.

Linus2nd