Reload this Page BAHA'I thread IV - feel free to ask of Baha'i any questions

[rinnie]

That’s how I understand the Bahai quotes I gave too.

The difference is not in the theology of creation, but rather that Christians generally think that the Word only became flesh once, Bahais believe that this is God’s way from the beginning and will continue to be God’s way into the future.

But see again here is a beautiful example. Jesus said he will come again in glory. He is not going to become man again. He is forever the word made flesh once and forever.

Now we believe that Jesus is God, God is saying to us not to accept your teaching. Do you see what we are saying.

We either go by the teachings and word of God or we deny him. We cannot do that. We would rather die then to deny the truth of God with a clear understanding of him.

Jesus said it would be HIM that would return. HIM as I stated the SON OF MAN which is Jesus is comming in his Father’s Glory.

He is seated at the right hand of the Father. As we speak!

So what you teach is in direct conflict with what God teaches. Do you see what we are saying?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

That would be a reference to the three-tier model of God - the Word/Primal Will - creation that we find in the Bahai scriptures. Since the Word/Primal Will precedes (or better, underlies) creation, and time is part of creation, the Word exists before and after and during all things.

See your not being clear. Are the manifestations eternal or not? By manifestations I mean personal entities whom you view as sinless and perfect beings with God. Was there a time when Mirza Hussain did not exist? Before the creation of the universe did he exist? These are basic things to answer but bahai avoid answering them.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

That’s how I understand the Bahai quotes I gave too.

The difference is not in the theology of creation, but rather that Christians generally think that the Word only became flesh once, Bahais believe that this is God’s way from the beginning and will continue to be God’s way into the future.

See heres the thing, John says the word became flesh with Christ, rather he should have stated the word became flesh with Moses and Abraham. There is no hint of this theology in the new testament or even the old testament. Moses and Abraham sinned, how can they be the word of God? Moses Sinned by not doing what God had said to him (in not performing the miracle the way it was supposed to, and Abraham sinned in having relations with a servant woman). What is the word to bahai exactly? Is it an abstract concept? Is it an actual existing substance different from God? Is the word God himself as John declares?

 

[rinnie]

See heres the thing, John says the word became flesh with Christ, rather he should have stated the word became flesh with Moses and Abraham. There is no hint of this theology in the new testament or even the old testament. Moses and Abraham sinned, how can they be the word of God? Moses Sinned by not doing what God had said to him (in not performing the miracle the way it was supposed to, and Abraham sinned in having relations with a servant woman). What is the word to bahai exactly? Is it an abstract concept? Is it an actual existing substance different from God? Is the word God himself as John declares?

I asked this exact question in a different thread and never got a response. I am anxiously awaiting to see if you get an answer.

 

[tonyfish58]

Tony, how do you go about finding the “mouthpiece of God”?

That is a good question and worthy of Meditation.

I guess it is by looking at the claim without a lot of preconceived ideas? Just in case Knowledge or Love keeps one from their goal?

The bible says we must be like a child in our search, I guess this is what it is saying.

Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

Nick, with all due respect, there are 257 pages here. Why don’t you just quote me those parts that are pertinent to our discussion. I have neither the time nor the desire to scour this book to find the portion that applies here. That would be your job since you are the one trying to make a point.

SteveVH - I have posted the link to this book about 3 times now , it answers all the questions ask, right from the source!

It only took 2 days and 2 nights to compose!

Well worth the read

Regards Tony

 

[Servant19]

That doesn’t answer my question. Did he create the universe or not?

As far as I am aware, there is nothing on the Bahai Writings that equates a Manifestation of God, whether it be Jesus or Baha’u’llah, with the true Creator, God the Father, Supreme Lord of every created thing, visible and invisible

 

[Sen_McGlinn]

They still can’t see or rather accept Jesus was human and Divine, if he was not he could never teach what he taught and not contradict himself as their prophet does. …

I’m sorry if nobody gave you positive feedback when you said this. Bahais do believe in the human and divine nature of Christ. For us, its scriptural, and clear, and we know that Christians have the same understanding, so a comment on it hardly seems to be required.

Baha’u’llah writes:

Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. (Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, p. 66)

In that passage, Baha’u’llah demonstrates the point by reference to Islamic sources, which is significant because classical Islamic theology had not worked out the dual nature doctrine at all clearly. Baha’u’llah could equally have cited New Testament texts: “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30) and “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.” (Matt 19: 17). Those words illustrate a general principle of interpretation: the appearance of a contradiction may be deceptive. Sometimes the contradiction disappears when we get the bigger picture.

"Like John the Bapt. they finally understood that he was Elijah in the Spirit but that does not mean the same person. Again they did after awhile accept Catholic teaching.

This is also Bahai teaching, and too clear to require a commentary. Abdu’l-Baha writes:

In chapter 17, verse 13, of Matthew, it is said: “Then *the disciples understood that He spake unto them of John the Baptist.” They asked John the Baptist, “Are you Elias?” He answered, “No, I am not,” although it is said in the Gospel that John was the promised Elias, and Christ also said so clearly.[1] Then if John was Elias, why did he say, “I am not”? And if he was not Elias, why did Christ say that he was?

The explanation is this: not the personality, but the reality of the perfections, is meant – that is to say, the same perfections that were in Elias existed in John the Baptist and were exactly realized in him. Therefore, John the Baptist was the promised Elias. In this case not the essence, but the qualities, are regarded. For example, there was a flower last year, and this year there is also a flower; I say the flower of last year has returned. Now, I do not mean that same flower in its exact individuality has come back; but as this flower has the same qualities as that of last year – as it has the same perfume, delicacy, color and form – I say the flower of last year has returned, …
(Abdu’l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 132)

That’s just what you are saying, is it not? Abdu’l-Baha gives more examples of the meaning of “return” in that chapter of Some Answered Questions.

 

[Servant19]

So if I provided even one Islamic scholar who says that Jesus never died on the Christ would that refute your claim that you made that “any Islamic scholar will testify to the fact that the historical Jesus was physically crucified”?

PR, I refer you to Sens post number #362 for some insights on this.

Most of the time, a scholar is not someone who is giving a lecture on the internet who calls himself or herself a “scholar”

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

As far as I am aware, there is nothing on the Bahai Writings that equates a Manifestation of God, whether it be Jesus or Baha’u’llah, with the true Creator, God the Father, Supreme Lord of every created thing, visible and invisible

Okay, so what is the word exactly? An abstract concept? A distinct entity from God? Or something which is God himself?

“I’m sorry if nobody gave you positive feedback when you said this. Bahais do believe in the human and divine nature of Christ. For us, its scriptural, and clear, and we know that Christians have the same understanding, so a comment on it hardly seems to be required.”

Sen you know Christians do not have the same understanding as Bahai. When you say Jesus is divine you make him out to be some sort of Arrianistic divinity in which he might very well be the greatest creature (along with the other manifestations) but he is still far below God.

 

[tonyfish58]

it does not surprise me that the man bahaullah thought he could reinterpret the koran.

afterall, he believed he was qualified to tell billions of christians that their sacred book did not mean what the people who wrote it thought it meant.

bahaullah was not short of audacious self-aggrandizement.

imagine the audacity or arrogance or simple mental illness, if you prefer, of a human being telling the people who wrote a book that they do not know what they meant when they wrote it.

i can already read in my mind the words of the bahai who will justify this arrogance or mental illness or whatever prompted bahaullah to proclaim to the writers of the new testament that they do not know the meaning of what they wrote by saying, “but that is exactly what Jesus did to the ancient jewish scriptures”. exclaiming this while ignoring Jesus’ own words about the jewish laws and traditions. perhaps they are not deliberately ignoring Jesus’ own words because they do not have knowledge of all that Jesus said and did.

but seriously, Jesus, Himself, said He would raise Himself from the dead. yet bahaullah proclaims that Jesus did not know what He was saying or was lying.

Eddie - Your accusations are the same made against Christ by the Jews, so good observation

Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

one bahai wrote a comment on here saying that the bahai religion teaches that the universe is eternal, thus uncreated.

Eddie - That is an incorrect statement

It is God’s creation - Here is a Provisional rending of The Tablet of the Universe - bahai-library.com/abdulbaha_lawh_aflakiyyih

Regards Tony

 

[504Katrin]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

so here’re all our Baha’i
26 pages to read, ugh.

 

[PRmerger]

PR, I refer you to Sens post number #362 for some insights on this.

Most of the time, a scholar is not someone who is giving a lecture on the internet who calls himself or herself a “scholar”

Ah, so it’s the “no true Scotsman” argument you’re presenting.

And a rather circular one.

Someone is an Islamic scholar who professes that Jesus died on the cross. And if a Muslim says that Jesus did not die on the cross then he is not an Islamic scholar.

 

[PRmerger]

Eddie - Your accusations are the same made against Christ by the Jews, so good observation

Regards Tony

The accusations against Christ were wrong. That does not translate to: “Therefore, any time anyone makes these accusations he is also wrong.”

That would make it impossible for you to say that Mr. de Jesus is not divine.

Are you willing to say that Mr. de Jesus is also a manifestation of God, or will you also offer the same accusations as the Jews did to Mr. de Jesus?

 

[Servant19]

Ah, so it’s the “no true Scotsman” argument you’re presenting.

And a rather circular one.

Someone is an Islamic scholar who professes that Jesus died on the cross. And if a Muslim says that Jesus did not die on the cross then he is not an Islamic scholar.

PR, let’s get this straight once and for all.

The definition of a scholar is one who takes a scientific approach to history. Jesus crucifixion is an EVENT, not a theologically debatable morality or principle, it’s an EVENT.

Now, as I said, I am pretty convinced from several sources that there is GOOD historical evidence, from NON-CHRISTIAN sources that Jesus was crucified by the Romans, since the Romans were pretty darn good at keeping good records.

If a scholar wants to discard this obvious evidence for their own interpretation of the Quran, then by very definition of scholarly work, they are not approaching it scientifically, and by definition cease to become a scholar.

The verse you present from the Quran is not a historical verse, it is not recounting any event since the event in question occurred some 600 years beforehand, so one must consider the possibility that it has spiritual meaning, and most university islamologists do.

Hope you are able to move on from this dear sister, it seems to be a large log of wood that is hindering the free flow of the stream waters of your heart

 

[Servant19]

The accusations against Christ were wrong. That does not translate to: “Therefore, any time anyone makes these accusations he is also wrong.”

That would make it impossible for you to say that Mr. de Jesus is not divine.

Are you willing to say that Mr. de Jesus is also a manifestation of God, or will you also offer the same accusations as the Jews did to Mr. de Jesus?

Why were the accusations wrong PR?
None of the events that were to herald the arrival of the Messiah actually occurred.

 

[PRmerger]

PR, let’s get this straight once and for all.

The definition of a scholar is one who takes a scientific approach to history.

No. Servant. The definition of a scholar is anyone who has studied a particular subject and has an expertise in the material.

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scholar

And you cannot deny that the individuals who I cited indeed had an expertise in the particular subject matter.

Jesus crucifixion is an EVENT, not a theologically debatable morality or principle, it’s an EVENT.

You are correct.

Now, as I said, I am pretty convinced from several sources that there is GOOD historical evidence, from NON-CHRISTIAN sources that Jesus was crucified by the Romans, since the Romans were pretty darn good at keeping good records.

We are agreed.

If a scholar wants to discard this obvious evidence for their own interpretation of the Quran, then by very definition of scholarly work, they are not approaching it scientifically, and by definition cease to become a scholar.

Irrelevant.

Islamic scholars do indeed proclaim that Jesus was never crucified.

That is all that is necessary to prove your assertion wrong. You have said that any Islamic scholar will profess that Jesus was crucified.

It appears this is not the case.

The verse you present from the Quran is not a historical verse, it is not recounting any event since the event in question occurred some 600 years beforehand, so one must consider the possibility that it has spiritual meaning, and most university islamologists do.

No, Servant. Islamic scholars profess that Jesus was never crucified. I have already demonstrated this and given references.

Hope you are able to move on from this dear sister, it seems to be a large log of wood that is hindering the free flow of the stream waters of your heart

Truth matters, Servant. You have already been duped into believing that your holy prophet survived being shot at by 750 soldiers. I wish that you could turn your eyes towards reality.

 

[PRmerger]

Why were the accusations wrong PR?
None of the events that were to herald the arrival of the Messiah actually occurred.

They were wrong because Jesus actually was their Messiah, Servant.

And, again, the fact that someone makes accusations similar to what the Jews made ought not be interpreted as, “Therefore you are wrong about Bahaullah”…for that would mean that you would have to accept Mr. de Jesus as Christ reincarnated as well.

 

[Servant19]

They were wrong because Jesus actually was their Messiah, Servant.

And, again, the fact that someone makes accusations similar to what the Jews made ought not be interpreted as, “Therefore you are wrong about Bahaullah”…for that would mean that you would have to accept Mr. de Jesus as Christ reincarnated as well.

Except that almost every single proof that Bahaullah is Christ Returned has been laid out on these 3-4000 posts on the Bahai Faith.

Where’s Jose Luis’s proof and evidence? Is he from Elam? How is the number 1260 related to him? What about Daniel’s prophecy? How does he provide an “increase in government”? The list of questions go on and on and on…NOTHING from Jose!!

Ask these questions of Baha’u’llah and you have books and books of evidence and explanations and rational clarifications. Mr. Luis?

But you stick with argumentation PR.

Baha’is are not here to argue, and to be honest I’ve argued with you far too much, and to the detriment of my soul. Clinging onto a figure of speech where I say “every scholar” to mean literally “every single scholar” and defining scholar for me when it was evidently clarified that I meant university scholars, is clear evidence that you are trying to find every single fine hair that might deviate even a microscopic measure away from what you call truth…

Baha’is call this “trying to advance oneself over your brother” and “disputing idly”
I keep falling for this trap with you and I won’t any more simply because I can’t live my life ensuring that every single word of my posts are according to dictionary definitions and are undeniably the truth. That’s not a discussion.