At best, you follow a Baha'i interpretation of the Bible... not a Jewish one, not a Christian one.
Or the one Jesus wanted for all of us.
It is your choice.
Regards Tony
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
At best, you follow a Baha'i interpretation of the Bible... not a Jewish one, not a Christian one.
Like stoning people for breaking the law? Like animal sacrifices?
Which to Baha'is, is the one Baha'u'llah says is true. The NT stories of a dying and rising Jesus, for Baha'is, is not the true story is it. Now, 2000 years later, Baha'is tell us the truth, that story was symbolic, not real. Did God or Jesus really want us to know that? And let the gospel writers make up a story about Jesus coming back to life and ascending into the clouds?Or the one Jesus wanted for all of us.
It is your choice.
Regards Tony
Which to Baha'is, is the one Baha'u'llah says is true. The NT stories of a dying and rising Jesus, for Baha'is, is not the true story is it. Now, 2000 years later, Baha'is tell us the truth, that story was symbolic, not real. Did God or Jesus really want us to know that? And let the gospel writers make up a story about Jesus coming back to life and ascending into the clouds?
Yes, and I see that God thought it best to not have Jesus write things down. That way we could all be in this forum together debating all of this.Consider that the doctrines about Jesus and His relationship to God were formulated as main stream requirements only in the late 300's, prior to that there were many that did not have that mindset.
Also, the incorrect doctrines were then addressed by Muhammad in the Mid 600's, who showed that Jesus was a Messenger from the One God. As history of religions has shown, by that time the corrupted text had become intrinsic mindset and men, far too proud of their own understandings, were not humble enough to consider the Message of Muhammad.
I see It is the Church itself that squashed any open thought as to what the Gospel stories could mean, they directed those stories to suit a narrative of whole scale mind control over the lower classes.
You, of course, can choose to see it how you wish to CG. Regards Tony
Yes, and I see that God thought it best to not have Jesus write things down. That way we could all be in this forum together debating all of this.
I see that just reflects the progression of learning. We live in an ever advancing civilisation, our part is to find, embrace and live to the Covernant given in our short span of life on this earth.
What holds us back, as I see it, is if we think that we have importance in self. This life to me, is ridding ourselves of the worldly self and becoming naught but a reflection of the self of God.
We have a gift in this age. We were given Abdul'baha to be a perfect example as to what a life of service is. What it is to be a true person of faith.
Regards Tony
So no one knew the true teachings of Jesus. All they had was the hearsay story that some of the followers of Jesus wrote. Those don't get formulated until the late 300's. Did anyone have a true version of Christianity prior to that?Consider that the doctrines about Jesus and His relationship to God were formulated as main stream requirements only in the late 300's, prior to that there were many that did not have that mindset.
Also, the incorrect doctrines were then addressed by Muhammad in the Mid 600's, who showed that Jesus was a Messenger from the One God. As history of religions has shown, by that time the corrupted text had become intrinsic mindset and men, far too proud of their own understandings, were not humble enough to consider the Message of Muhammad.
I see It is the Church itself that squashed any open thought as to what the Gospel stories could mean, they directed those stories to suit a narrative of whole scale mind control over the lower classes.
So no one knew the true teachings of Jesus. All they had was the hearsay story that some of the followers of Jesus wrote. Those don't get formulated until the late 300's. Did anyone have a true version of Christianity prior to that?
Then the Church "squashed" what the stories written years after Jesus might mean? So when was there ever anything that could be called "true" Christianity? By 621AD, Christianity had been replaced with a newer message from God? A message that corrected the errors in the beliefs that Christians held? So were Christians supposed to recognize this man from Arabia as the return of Christ and follow him?
In another thread that very thing came up. How many wives do Christians say God allows? If it is not many or at least three, then God changed his mind with what he told Muhammad? There are inconsistencies. People and religious thought are evolving, but they aren't annulling the religions that came before. Even though, some religions have tried to eradicate the religions of other people.Truth is relevant CG. Look at the Bible, it teaches us that. Each Prophet/Messenger fulfilled the Covenant of the Faith before it, annulled the it teachings and made all things new, a new heaven an a new earth.
In another thread that very thing came up. How many wives do Christians say God allows? If it is not many or at least three, then God changed his mind with what he told Muhammad? There are inconsistencies. People and religious thought are evolving, but they aren't annulling the religions that came before. Even though, some religions have tried to eradicate the religions of other people.
Cultural appropriation is generally bad form. Claiming that you know the "true" meaning of the cultural expression that you stole even better than the culture you stole it from brings it to a whole other level of insensitivity.Or the one Jesus wanted for all of us.
It is your choice.
Regards Tony
Cultural appropriation is generally bad form. Claiming that you know the "true" meaning of the cultural expression that you stole even better than the culture you stole it from brings it to a whole other level of insensitivity.
In another thread that very thing came up. How many wives do Christians say God allows? If it is not many or at least three, then God changed his mind with what he told Muhammad?
So what's the Baha'i answer to God changing the amount of wives a man can have? Should all people have accepted Muhammad as the latest prophet from God and obeyed everything that was written in the Quran? So multiple wives would have been okay until God changed the rule with Baha'u'llah?That has been explained in full by Baha'u'llah, but these quotes say it all
So what's the Baha'i answer to God changing the amount of wives a man can have? Should all people have accepted Muhammad as the latest prophet from God and obeyed everything that was written in the Quran? So multiple wives would have been okay until God changed the rule with Baha'u'llah?
No, I'm talking about you.Firstly, it is not my Message, thus I assume that you accuse Baha'u'llah, as you have posted above.
Sure. Appropriation is not a new thing.Likewise you accuse all the Messengers as it can be seen that accusation would have been used against Jesus, we know it has been used against Muhammad.
Not really relevant, but I appreciate the effort.The Messages given by ALL of the Messengers have challenged the cultural norm of the day and It is Prophecy it would be so in this age;
Truth is relevant or relative? Only in the Baha'i "progression" does one messenger fulfill and annul the religion that came before. What religions came before the Buddha? Did his teaching fulfill and annul those others? Then Zoroaster... which religions came before him? Did it fulfill and annul any of them? Then Christianity... other than saying it fulfilled and annul Judaism, what other religions did it fulfill and annul? And if you really think it did, how did it fulfill and annul them?Truth is relevant CG. Look at the Bible, it teaches us that. Each Prophet/Messenger fulfilled the Covenant of the Faith before it, annulled the it teachings and made all things new, a new heaven an a new earth.
Truth is relevant or relative? Only in the Baha'i "progression" does one messenger fulfill and annul the religion that came before. What religions came before the Buddha? Did his teaching fulfill and annul those others? Then Zoroaster... which religions came before him? Did it fulfill and annul any of them? Then Christianity... other than saying it fulfilled and annul Judaism, what other religions did it fulfill and annul? And if you really think it did, how did it fulfill and annul them?
Truth is relevant CG. Look at the Bible, it teaches us that. Each Prophet/Messenger fulfilled the Covenant of the Faith before it, annulled the it teachings and made all things new, a new heaven an a new earth.
You didn't answer this. If you don't know the answer, it's okay to say you don't know rather than going off into some list of quotes from the Baha'i writings and out of context Bible quotes and other things you want to throw in there.So what's the Baha'i answer to God changing the amount of wives a man can have? Should all people have accepted Muhammad as the latest prophet from God and obeyed everything that was written in the Quran? So multiple wives would have been okay until God changed the rule with Baha'u'llah?
Can you give examples of how Baha'is believe each of the major religions fulfilled and annulled the material/social teachings of the previous religion?Truth is relevant or relative? Only in the Baha'i "progression" does one messenger fulfill and annul the religion that came before. What religions came before the Buddha? Did his teachings fulfill and annul those others? Then Zoroaster... which religions came before him? Did it fulfill and annul any of them? Then Christianity... other than saying it fulfilled and annulled Judaism, what other religions did it fulfill and annul? And if you really think it did, how did it fulfill and annul them?
So "Truth" is relative and only relevant until a new official messenger God comes and changes the "Truth"? So it is never really "The Truth"? Only a temporary, changeable truth... like the things that got people stoned to death in one religion only get a slap on the wrist in a later religion?It is Relative CG.
So the Bible has been fulfilled and annulled according to your Baha'i beliefs, so using the Bible as a "sure" spiritual guide is going to create some problems for you. Some of the things are no longer relevant.