Interpretation... Or God's View

[Trailblazer]

I am still waiting out the election results, so.....

@Trailblazer

Since you believe "the Bible has no viewpoint, but people read and interpret the Bible and have different viewpoints, and that is why Christianity is divided into so many sects", then to be consistent you must agree that your interpreting anything the Bible says, whether it be about the comforter - the holy spirit, son of man, or lightning, it is your viewpoint, and not the Bible's.
Is that correct?

No, it is not my personal viewpoint, it is the official position of the Baha'i Faith, according to what Baha'u'llah wrote about the son of man and the comforter. My understanding about the holy spirit is derived from what Abdu'l-Baha wrote and my understanding about Matthew 24:27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be is derived from my understanding of what that verse means coupled with what happened when Baha'u'llah appeared, recorded in the history of the 19th century.

AGAIN, I do not believe that the Bible has a viewpoint; only people have viewpoints regarding what the Bible means, according to their interpretations of the verses.

I quoted a scripture to you earlier, you recall...
(John 5:39-44) 39 “You are searching the Scriptures because you think that you will have everlasting life by means of them; and these are the very ones that bear witness about me. 40 And yet you do not want to come to me so that you may have life. 41 I do not accept glory from men, 42 but I well know that you do not have the love of God in you. 43 I have come in the name of my Father, but you do not receive me. If someone else came in his own name, you would receive that one. 44 How can you believe, when you are accepting glory from one another and you are not seeking the glory that is from the only God?

1) Jesus and his followers used the same scriptures - the Hebrew canon, and yet disagreed.
Does that mean that they had their own viewpoint, and no one had the correct understanding of God's word?
What do you think.

I think that could mean more than one thing. It could mean that their viewpoints were all correct, just different ways of looking at the same scriptures; or it could mean that many of them were incorrect about the actual meaning and only one was correct, or it could mean that all of them were incorrect about the intended meaning. The following passage is what Baha'u'llah wrote about interpretations of the Bible:

“Know assuredly that just as thou firmly believest that the Word of God, exalted be His glory, endureth for ever, thou must, likewise, believe with undoubting faith that its meaning can never be exhausted. They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom. Whoso, while reading the Sacred Scriptures, is tempted to choose therefrom whatever may suit him with which to challenge the authority of the Representative of God among men, is, indeed, as one dead, though to outward seeming he may walk and converse with his neighbors, and share with them their food and their drink.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 175-176

I believe that Baha’u’llah was the Representative of God among men and He appointed interpreters through His Covenant, so Baha’is believe we have divine guidance as to the meaning of certain verses in the Bible. However, they did not interpret the bulk of the Bible, so that still leaves us to interpret the remainder of the Bible according to our individual interpretations. .

2) From what I read in that verse, Jesus expected persons to know what the scripture were saying.
Which is why he condemned those who were searching the scriptures. They didn't want to know.
Does Jesus not expect the same today? Why do you think that is not the way it is today?

Do you want to know how I interpret John 5:39-44? This will be my individual interpretation, not an official Baha'i interpretation.

39 “You are searching the Scriptures because you think that you will have everlasting life by means of them; and these are the very ones that bear witness about me. 40 And yet you do not want to come to me so that you may have life. 41 I do not accept glory from men, 42 but I well know that you do not have the love of God in you. 43 I have come in the name of my Father, but you do not receive me. If someone else came in his own name, you would receive that one. 44 How can you believe, when you are accepting glory from one another and you are not seeking the glory that is from the only God?

Please bear in mind that I do not have the context that you have because I do not know the Bible very well, so I am looking at these verses out of context. Given what you said above "Jesus and his followers used the same scriptures - the Hebrew canon, and yet disagreed" I think that Jesus is saying to come to Him in order to attain everlasting life. He is saying that you do not have the love of God in you because you do not come to Him and receive Him; instead, you are busy arguing over the meanings of scriptures for the answers, when the answer is right before you – come to Jesus. In verse 44 I think that Jesus means that you are not seeking glory from the only God, which comes only through Jesus, but rather you are seeking glory from each other, each one of you wanting to be right about the meaning of the scriptures.

 

[nPeace]

I am still waiting out the election results, so.....

No, it is not my personal viewpoint, it is the official position of the Baha'i Faith, according to what Baha'u'llah wrote about the son of man and the comforter. My understanding about the holy spirit is derived from what Abdu'l-Baha wrote and my understanding about Matthew 24:27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be is derived from my understanding of what that verse means coupled with what happened when Baha'u'llah appeared, recorded in the history of the 19th century.

It's Bahaullah's viewpoint then, which you agree with.
So Bahaullah had his viewpoint, and his viewpoint is yours.
It's not the Bible's viewpoint.
Is that correct?

AGAIN, I do not believe that the Bible has a viewpoint; only people have viewpoints regarding what the Bible means, according to their interpretations of the verses.
I think that could mean more than one thing. It could mean that their viewpoints were all correct, just different ways of looking at the same scriptures; or it could mean that many of them were incorrect about the actual meaning and only one was correct, or it could mean that all of them were incorrect about the intended meaning. The following passage is what Baha'u'llah wrote about interpretations of the Bible:

“Know assuredly that just as thou firmly believest that the Word of God, exalted be His glory, endureth for ever, thou must, likewise, believe with undoubting faith that its meaning can never be exhausted. They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom. Whoso, while reading the Sacred Scriptures, is tempted to choose therefrom whatever may suit him with which to challenge the authority of the Representative of God among men, is, indeed, as one dead, though to outward seeming he may walk and converse with his neighbors, and share with them their food and their drink.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 175-176

I believe that Baha’u’llah was the Representative of God among men and He appointed interpreters through His Covenant, so Baha’is believe we have divine guidance as to the meaning of certain verses in the Bible. However, they did not interpret the bulk of the Bible, so that still leaves us to interpret the remainder of the Bible according to our individual interpretations. .

Do you want to know how I interpret John 5:39-44? This will be my individual interpretation, not an official Baha'i interpretation.

39 “You are searching the Scriptures because you think that you will have everlasting life by means of them; and these are the very ones that bear witness about me. 40 And yet you do not want to come to me so that you may have life. 41 I do not accept glory from men, 42 but I well know that you do not have the love of God in you. 43 I have come in the name of my Father, but you do not receive me. If someone else came in his own name, you would receive that one. 44 How can you believe, when you are accepting glory from one another and you are not seeking the glory that is from the only God?

Please bear in mind that I do not have the context that you have because I do not know the Bible very well, so I am looking at these verses out of context. Given what you said above "Jesus and his followers used the same scriptures - the Hebrew canon, and yet disagreed" I think that Jesus is saying to come to Him in order to attain everlasting life. He is saying that you do not have the love of God in you because you do not come to Him and receive Him; instead, you are busy arguing over the meanings of scriptures for the answers, when the answer is right before you – come to Jesus. In verse 44 I think that Jesus means that you are not seeking glory from the only God, which comes only through Jesus, but rather you are seeking glory from each other, each one of you wanting to be right about the meaning of the scriptures.

Jesus said, the scripture were about him.
Doesn't that count? What does that mean to you?

 

[Trailblazer]

It's Bahaullah's viewpoint then, which you agree with.
So Bahaullah had his viewpoint, and his viewpoint is yours.
It's not the Bible's viewpoint.
Is that correct?

No, that is not correct. I agree with Baha’u’llah’s viewpoint regarding the Bible.

The Bible does not have a viewpoint, it is just a book.
Only people have viewpoints. People have different viewpoints about the Bible.

Jesus said, the scripture were about him.
Doesn't that count? What does that mean to you?

I agree that the scripture was about Jesus. Count for what?

 

[nPeace]

No, that is not correct. I agree with Baha’u’llah’s viewpoint regarding the Bible.

That's what I said. It's Bahullah's viewpoint... Not the Bible's. Correct?

The Bible does not have a viewpoint, it is just a book.
Only people have viewpoints. People have different viewpoints about the Bible.

Bahaullah has his own viewpoint... different to other people's. Correct?

I agree that the scripture was about Jesus. Count for what?

Fine. Could those searching the scripture have agreed with that too, and how would they have done so?

Count as evidence persons could see that the scriptures were about Jesus.

 

[Trailblazer]

That's what I said. It's Bahullah's viewpoint... Not the Bible's. Correct?

No, that is not what I said. I said that the Bible does not have a viewpoint, only people have viewpoints about the Bible.

Bahaullah has his own viewpoint... different to other people's. Correct?

Yes, all people have different viewpoints.

Fine. Could those searching the scripture have agreed with that too, and how would they have done so?

Count as evidence persons could see that the scriptures were about Jesus.

Of course the scriptures were about Jesus. What is your point?

 

[nPeace]

No, that is not what I said. I said that the Bible does not have a viewpoint, only people have viewpoints about the Bible.

You said that a million times.
I said Bahaullah has his own viewpoint. His interpretation of the Bible is his viewpoint.
Do you disagree?
If it is not his viewpoint and it's not the Bible's viewpoint, then whose viewpoint is it?

Yes, all people have different viewpoints.

You said that a million times too.
I said Bahaullah's viewpoint is another viewpoint, just like all the other hundreds of different viewpoints.
Do you disagree?

Of course the scriptures were about Jesus. What is your point?

Did you not understand the question?
Just wondering... are you having a hard time reading my posts? Let me know please, so that I can try to simplify them.

 

[Trailblazer]

You said that a million times.
I said Bahaullah has his own viewpoint. His interpretation of the Bible is his viewpoint.
Do you disagree?
If it is not his viewpoint and it's not the Bible's viewpoint, then whose viewpoint is it?

Yes, Baha'u'llah’s interpretation of the Bible is His viewpoint on the Bible.

The Bible does not have a viewpoint, only people have viewpoints about the Bible.

You said that a million times too.
I said Bahaullah's viewpoint is another viewpoint, just like all the other hundreds of different viewpoints.
Do you disagree?

I agree that Baha’u’llah’s viewpoint is just another viewpoint, but I believe it is more than a viewpoint because I believe that Baha’u’llah is infallible. As such His viewpoint about the Bible cannot be wrong.

Did you not understand the question?
Just wondering... are you having a hard time reading my posts? Let me know please, so that I can try to simplify them.

No, I did not understand that particular question, but I understood your other questions.

 

[nPeace]

Yes, Baha'u'llah’s interpretation of the Bible is His viewpoint on the Bible.

The Bible does not have a viewpoint, only people have viewpoints about the Bible.

I agree that Baha’u’llah’s viewpoint is just another viewpoint, but I believe it is more than a viewpoint because I believe that Baha’u’llah is infallible. As such His viewpoint about the Bible cannot be wrong.

Great! We are finally getting somewhere.
So you believe Bahaullah interpreted scriptures like everyone else, and his interpretation is another viewpoint, but his viewpoint is special, because he is from God.

Since his interpretation is his viewpoint, and the scriptures do not have a viewpoint, then the Bible does not say that Bahaullah's viewpoint is right, and should be accepted, so those who believe his viewpoint to be correct, and him infallible... as you declared, are doing so based not on the Bible, but on their sentiments toward Bahaullah.
Do you disagree? Please explain.

No, I did not understand that particular question, but I understood your other questions.

Thank you. I'll see if I can be more simpler.
Jesus said that persons were searching the scriptures for their salvation, but he said, the scriptures are about him.
What I am asking is, could those searching the scripture have seen that the scriptures were about Jesus, and how could they have done so?
I hope you understand.

 

[nPeace]

The Bible does not have a viewpoint, people read and interpret the Bible and have different viewpoints, and that is why Christianity is divided into so many sects. All are reading the same Bible but there are many different viewpoints. So who has the right viewpoint? Why would your viewpoint be any more correct than Brian's viewpoint or a JW viewpoint? They all read the same Bible.

Bahaulluh is reading a special Bible, or the same one all of us use?
Bahaulluh is privileged to a special interpretation, so his viewpoint is different from all the others, but special, so it's correct?
So whose viewpoint is right? Bahaullah's.
What makes his viewpoint more correct than Brian's, or JWs, or any other person?
Why, by George, he is Bahaullah!

I'm sorry Trailblazer, but all you have done here is declare that your interpretation (which is Bahaullah's) is right and everyone else's is wrong, but no one else can claim that but you.

In this process, you contradict a few of your claims.
That claim contradicts your claim that the Bible has no viewpoint.
If the Bible has no viewpoint, then no one can claim that they have a right understanding of it, because in that case, it can mean anything. There is no fixed view... or point.
In fact, everything Jesus would have said is moot - means nothing.

To say that Bahaullah is not a divided sect, based on the same claim that each "sect" is divided because although they read the same Bible, they have different interpretations leading to different viewpoints, is a contradiction.
What makes Bahaullah special? Don't answer that. Read on.

Don't go quoting scriptures now, because whatever you believe about them, is your interpretation... your viewpoint. Means nothing.

Unless... You are willing to agree that the Bible does have a viewpoint, and persons can come to that viewpoint, which is the correct one.
There is no other way you can get yourself out of that hole you dug for yourself.
You could always dig deeper... but that might bury you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Bahaulluh is reading a special Bible, or the same one all of us use?
Bahaulluh is privileged to a special interpretation, so his viewpoint is different from all the others, but special, so it's correct?
So whose viewpoint is right? Bahaullah's.
What makes his viewpoint more correct than Brian's, or JWs, or any other person?
Why, by George, he is Bahaullah!

From a Baha'i viewpoint yes, what makes His viewpoint more correct that anyone else's viewpoint is that He is Baha'u'llah, a Manifestation of God who is infallible.

Infallible: incapable of making mistakes or being wrong. https://www.google.com/search

I'm sorry Trailblazer, but all you have done here is declare that your interpretation (which is Bahaullah's) is right and everyone else's is wrong, but no one else can claim that but you.

Straw man. I never said that. Below is what I actually said: #81 Trailblazer

I think that could mean more than one thing. It could mean that their viewpoints were all correct, just different ways of looking at the same scriptures; or it could mean that many of them were incorrect about the actual meaning and only one was correct, or it could mean that all of them were incorrect about the intended meaning. The following passage is what Baha'u'llah wrote about interpretations of the Bible:

“Know assuredly that just as thou firmly believest that the Word of God, exalted be His glory, endureth for ever, thou must, likewise, believe with undoubting faith that its meaning can never be exhausted. They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom. Whoso, while reading the Sacred Scriptures, is tempted to choose therefrom whatever may suit him with which to challenge the authority of the Representative of God among men, is, indeed, as one dead, though to outward seeming he may walk and converse with his neighbors, and share with them their food and their drink.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 175-176

I believe that Baha’u’llah was the Representative of God among men and He appointed interpreters through His Covenant, so Baha’is believe we have divine guidance as to the meaning of certain verses in the Bible. However, they did not interpret the bulk of the Bible, so that still leaves us to interpret the remainder of the Bible according to our individual interpretations. .

In this process, you contradict a few of your claims.
That claim contradicts your claim that the Bible has no viewpoint.
If the Bible has no viewpoint, then no one can claim that they have a right understanding of it, because in that case, it can mean anything. There is no fixed view... or point.
In fact, everything Jesus would have said is moot - means nothing.

The Bible does not have viewpoints. The Bible is just a book that sits on a shelf, until someone opens it up and reads it and interprets it. When people read the Bible, they have viewpoints regarding what the Bible means according to their individual interpretations.

That does not mean nobody can have a correct understanding of the Bible. However, you are right, the Bible can mean anything that people want it to mean, according to people's understanding of the verses, as @ Left Coast said on a thread he started:

The Bible Tells Me So

Just because the Bible can mean anything, that does not mean that everything Jesus would have said is moot - means nothing. Everything that Jesus said means something, but what people believe it means is not always correct.

To say that Bahaullah is not a divided sect, based on the same claim that each "sect" is divided because although they read the same Bible, they have different interpretations leading to different viewpoints, is a contradiction.
What makes Bahaullah special? Don't answer that. Read on.

Don't go quoting scriptures now, because whatever you believe about them, is your interpretation... your viewpoint. Means nothing.

Unless... You are willing to agree that the Bible does have a viewpoint, and persons can come to that viewpoint, which is the correct one.

I absolutely do not agree that the Bible has a viewpoint, only people have viewpoints about what the Bible means.

Christians cannot come to the same viewpoint and agree on what the Bible means. The evidence of that is all over this forum, because Christians cannot even agree on basics such as what happens when we die. Some Christians believe that we have a soul, others believe we have no soul; some Christians believe they go to heaven when they die, other Christians believe they are resurrected and live forever on earth. Yet they are all reading from the same Bible.

There is no other way you can get yourself out of that hole you dug for yourself.
You could always dig deeper... but that might bury you.

I am not the one who is in a hole. The Christians are in a hole because they cannot even agree among themselves as to what the Bible means, as @ Left Coast pointed out on his thread.

By contrast, the Baha'is pretty much agree what the Bible means because we have the guidance provided by Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Christians have misinterpreted much of the Bible because they did not have the key to unlock the meaning. Because of the way the Bible was written, misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Bible has been a big problem since the very beginning. Christians disagreed as to what the Bible meant and none of them clearly understood much of what it meant, and that is why there are so many different sects of Christianity. That is understandable because it was prophesied by Daniel that the Book would be sealed up until the time of the end, meaning nobody would really understand it:

Daniel Chapter 12: 4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The early Church fathers interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it.
Now Christians continue to interpret the Bible the way it has always been interpreted...

The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand the true meaning of the Bible. By reading the Baha’i Writings that explain the true meaning of the Bible, we can understand what much of the Bible means that could never be understood before.

I am not saying that Christians did not understand anything in the Bible, I am saying that they did not fully understand the Bible... As Daniel said, we will know more in the future, in 2300 years:

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased

 

[nPeace]

From a Baha'i viewpoint yes, what makes His viewpoint more correct that anyone else's viewpoint is that He is Baha'u'llah, a Manifestation of God who is infallible.

Infallible: incapable of making mistakes or being wrong. https://www.google.com/search

The reason Bahais alone believe that and no one else who studies the Bible, is because your sect has taken that viewpoint as your belief.

Straw man. I never said that. Below is what I actually said: #81 Trailblazer

This is not a strawman. You are making an incorrect application of that word.
I haven't said that you said anything. I am saying it ... all you have done is declare that your interpretation (which is Bahaullah's) is right and everyone else's is wrong, but no one else can claim that but you.

I think that could mean more than one thing. It could mean that their viewpoints were all correct, just different ways of looking at the same scriptures; or it could mean that many of them were incorrect about the actual meaning and only one was correct, or it could mean that all of them were incorrect about the intended meaning.

Oh. So the reason people can't even agree on what the Bible says, resulting in their disunity, is because they are all correct? That's out because defies logic.
Many of them were incorrect about the actual meaning and only one was correct,
This makes sense. I can work with this. I suppose it's your claim.
All of them are wrong. No one right.
That would mean Jesus lied, when he said, "I will be with you till the end..."
It's nor reasonable or even truthful to suggest that. You don't think Jesus lied about that, do you?

The following passage is what Baha'u'llah wrote about interpretations of the Bible:
“Know assuredly that just as thou firmly believest that the Word of God, exalted be His glory, endureth for ever, thou must, likewise, believe with undoubting faith that its meaning can never be exhausted. They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom. Whoso, while reading the Sacred Scriptures, is tempted to choose therefrom whatever may suit him with which to challenge the authority of the Representative of God among men, is, indeed, as one dead, though to outward seeming he may walk and converse with his neighbors, and share with them their food and their drink.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 175-176

I go by what Jesus said. He said,
(Matthew 13:11-17) 11 . . .“To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’ 16 “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them.

(Matthew 24:14) . . .this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.
This good news is being preached worldwide.

I believe that Baha’u’llah was the Representative of God among men and He appointed interpreters through His Covenant, so Baha’is believe we have divine guidance as to the meaning of certain verses in the Bible. However, they did not interpret the bulk of the Bible, so that still leaves us to interpret the remainder of the Bible according to our individual interpretations. .

You believe in another interpretation - a viewpoint.

The Bible does not have viewpoints. The Bible is just a book that sits on a shelf, until someone opens it up and reads it and interprets it. When people read the Bible, they have viewpoints regarding what the Bible means according to their individual interpretations.

That does not mean nobody can have a correct understanding of the Bible. However, you are right, the Bible can mean anything that people want it to mean, according to people's understanding of the verses, as @ Left Coast said on a thread he started:

The Bible Tells Me So

Just because the Bible can mean anything, that does not mean that everything Jesus would have said is moot - means nothing. Everything that Jesus said means something, but what people believe it means is not always correct.

I said that based on your argument. It's not my position.

 

[nPeace]

I absolutely do not agree that the Bible has a viewpoint, only people have viewpoints about what the Bible means.

Christians cannot come to the same viewpoint and agree on what the Bible means. The evidence of that is all over this forum, because Christians cannot even agree on basics such as what happens when we die. Some Christians believe that we have a soul, others believe we have no soul; some Christians believe they go to heaven when they die, other Christians believe they are resurrected and live forever on earth. Yet they are all reading from the same Bible.

I find you are not consistent.
You say, that people can get the correct understanding.
If people can get the correct understanding, it means the correct understanding is in the Bible.
If the correct understanding is in the Bible, then we can come to the correct understanding, if we get (A) what the Bible means, (B) what the Bible is saying, (C) the Bible's viewpoint, (D) the understanding or view the Bible supports... Take your pick. It does not matter. They all mean the same. Throwing @Left Coast idea in the gutter... as well as your contradicting claims..
Ask @Left Coast if the Bible supports anything, like a viewpoint or interpretation.
Left, Trailblazer is calling you. She apparently wants your support against the Bible.

Since the problem does not lie with the Bible... Please remember you said it has the correct meaning which we have to understand, in order to be correct... Then the problem lies with men - those who claim that their interpretation of the Bible is correct. Yet they have different conclusions.
If they are all wrong, the fault lies, not with the Bible, but somewhere else.

I refer you to these words again. Matthew 13
10 So the disciples came and said to him: “Why do you speak to them by the use of illustrations?” 11 In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says:
‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

16 “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them.

Did you get the sense of those words?
The Bible says basically, the many many many, what you call Christians, but really are not, are people who are blind, death, or have a heart of stone, either deliberately, or by being misled, but basically because their heart is unresponsive currently.
The true Christian hopes that their heart will become responsive.

I am not the one who is in a hole. The Christians are in a hole because they cannot even agree among themselves as to what the Bible means, as @ Left Coast pointed out on his thread.

No. you are in a hole, and you opted to dig deeper Calling Left, is not going to save you.
You're buried now Trailblazer.

By contrast, the Baha'is pretty much agree what the Bible means because we have the guidance provided by Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.

Wait! You agree with what the Bible means. Oh. the Bible does not say. It means.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Christians have misinterpreted much of the Bible because they did not have the key to unlock the meaning. Because of the way the Bible was written, misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Bible has been a big problem since the very beginning. Christians disagreed as to what the Bible meant and none of them clearly understood much of what it meant, and that is why there are so many different sects of Christianity. That is understandable because it was prophesied by Daniel that the Book would be sealed up until the time of the end, meaning nobody would really understand it:

Contrary to that claim, the Christian understands - as I pointed out to you above.
The "Christian" on the other hand, that is, the imitation Christian - the weeds of Jesus' illustration... and they are plentiful, are listening to false stories. They are accumulating teachers to have their ears tickled, and listening to inspired teachings of demons.
(2 Timothy 4:3, 4) 3 For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled. 4 They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.

(1 Timothy 4:1, 2) 1 However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.

Some deliberately teach lies.
(2 Corinthians 11:13, 14) 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light.

There is no other meaning to these verses, Trailblazer. They don't need interpreting. It's what the Bible says.

Daniel Chapter 12: 4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The early Church fathers interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it.
Now Christians continue to interpret the Bible the way it has always been interpreted...

The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand the true meaning of the Bible. By reading the Baha’i Writings that explain the true meaning of the Bible, we can understand what much of the Bible means that could never be understood before.

I am not saying that Christians did not understand anything in the Bible, I am saying that they did not fully understand the Bible... As Daniel said, we will know more in the future, in 2300 years:

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased

You are interpreting right? This is your viewpoint... or Bahaullah's, right? You believe it is the correct interpretation.
The Bible agrees?

True or false. Place a T, or F next to the corresponding letter to represent true or false, respectively.
A) The Bible agrees with XYZ.
B) The Bible says XYZ.
C) The Bible means XYZ.
D) The Bible supports XYZ.
E) The Bible's viewpoint is XYZ.
F) The Bible does not say, agree, mean, support, or have a viewpoint of anything.

 

[Bird123]

I have often heard it said, when it comes to the Bible, "it's just a matter of interpretation." Is that true though?
I would say, there are some things in the Bible, we cannot be dogmatic about, and just have to leave alone, where arguments are concerned,
However, for the vast majority of scripture, is clear enough that one can get God's view, rather than the idea of interpretation.
In this case, one is really applying the truth as explained by the words of Joseph. “Do not interpretations belong to God? Genesis 40:8
Yes. To me, interpretation belongs to God, when it come to his sayings. In other words, he reveals the truth. How does he do that? In two way, according to scripture.
One is through his written word.

For example, Suppose we asked a question...
We may get a variety of opinions, each claiming that their interpretation is just as valid as another person's interpretation.
I believe by doing this, they leave God out. They do not value his interpretation.
I believe that God's word provides the correct interpretation, so I let the word interpret the scripture I am considering, and adjust my understanding to fit God's interpretation. This is the stance of JWs.

So let's ask a question - "How does God view Religious People and other People of the Nations?"
The Bibles says God chooses those whom will represent him... through whom he would reach others.
Going way back (1513 - 1473 B.C.E... *
Moses and Aaron ... and Joshua

Spoiler: Those Jehovah Chose

Exodus 4:14-16)
Jehovah said to Moses, “What about your brother Aaron the Levite? I know that he can speak very well. So you must speak to him and put the words in his mouth, and I will be with you and him as you speak, and I will teach you men what to do. He will speak for you to the people, and he will be your spokesman, and you will serve as God to him.

(Joshua 1:1-9) After the death of Moses the servant of Jehovah, Jehovah said to Joshua the son of Nun, the minister of Moses: “Moses my servant is dead. Now get up... I will give you every place on which you set your foot, just as I promised Moses. No one will be able to take a stand against you as long as you live. Just as I was with Moses, so I will be with you.

(Joshua 6:27) Jehovah was with Joshua, and his fame spread through all the earth.

Some listened to God's representatives. Some refused to listen.

Spoiler: Pharaoh refused to listen

(Exodus 4:21-23; Exodus 5:1, 2) Afterward, Moses and Aaron went in and said to Pharaoh: “This is what Jehovah the God of Israel says, ‘Send my people away so that they may celebrate a festival to me in the wilderness.’” But Pharaoh said: “Who is Jehovah, that I should obey his voice to send Israel away? I do not know Jehovah at all, and what is more, I will not send Israel away.”

... as well as some others.

However, the people of Israel did listen... at least initially.
(Exodus 4:30, 31) Aaron told them all the words that Jehovah had spoken to Moses, and he performed the signs before the eyes of the people. At this the people believed. When they heard that Jehovah had turned his attention to the Israelites and that he had seen their affliction, they bowed down and prostrated themselves.

Those who acknowledged and listened to God's representatives benefited.
The Gibeonites (Joshua 9:8-11)
Rahab - a harlot, with her entire family. (Joshua 2:1-13)
Rahab demonstrated that she knew whom God's representatives were.

Spoiler: Rahab's words

But the woman took the two men and hid them.
Before the men lay down to sleep, she came up to them on the roof. She said to the men: “I do know that Jehovah will give you the land and that the fear of you has fallen upon us. All the inhabitants of the land are disheartened because of you, for we heard how Jehovah dried up the waters of the Red Sea before you when you left Egypt and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites, Siʹhon and Og, whom you devoted to destruction on the other side of the Jordan. When we heard about it, we lost heart, and no one has any courage because of you, for Jehovah your God is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath. Now, please, swear to me by Jehovah that, because I showed loyal love to you, you will also show loyal love to my father’s household; and you must give me a sign of good faith. You must spare the lives of my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and you must save us from death.”

There were no benefits to those who did not acknowledge God's representatives, They were cursed, rejected, and destroyed.

Spoiler: They all had God's disapproval and perished

(Exodus 14:26-31)
The Egyptians fled, but Jehovah shook the Egyptians off into the midst of the sea.
But the Israelites walked on dry ground in the midst of the seabed, and the waters formed a wall on their right hand and on their left. Thus Jehovah saved Israel on that day from the hand of the Egyptians, and Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the seashore. Israel also saw the great power that Jehovah wielded against the Egyptians, and the people began to fear Jehovah and to put faith in Jehovah and in his servant Moses.

(Joshua 10:20, 21) After Joshua and the Israelites had finished inflicting a very great slaughter on them, to the point of wiping them out except for some survivors who escaped and entered into the fortified cities, all the people returned safely to Joshua at the camp at Makkedah. Not a man dared to utter a word against the Israelites.

Noteworthy, is the fact that those who did not acknowledge God's representative, and listen to them, came to that realization, but it was too late for them.

The era that followed, is especially important because, this is the Cristian congregation, made up of Jesus followers, of whom he made this promise to, before leaving the earth... "Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.” (Matthew 28:19, 20)
Jesus also said, "And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14)

So this is vitally important.
First Century Christian Era - 33 - 70 C.E.
God chose his representatives, and made it plain for all to see. (Acts 2:1-13, 43-47)

The Christian congregation was his means of reaching people in all the world. Notice...
(Acts 8:26-40)
However, Jehovah’s angel spoke to Philip, saying: “Get up and go to the south to the road that runs down from Jerusalem to Gaza.”
With that he got up and went, and look! an Ethiopian eunuch, a man who had authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, and who was in charge of all her treasure. He had gone to Jerusalem to worship, and he was returning and was sitting in his chariot, reading aloud the prophet Isaiah. So the spirit said to Philip: “Go over and approach this chariot.” Philip ran alongside and heard him reading aloud Isaiah the prophet, and he said: “Do you actually know what you are reading?” He said: “Really, how could I ever do so unless someone guided me?” So he urged Philip to get on and sit down with him.
Now as they were going along the road, they came to a body of water, and the eunuch said: “Look! Here is water; what prevents me from getting baptized?” With that he commanded the chariot to halt, and both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Acts 10
Now there was a man in Caesarea named Cornelius, an army officer in what was called the Italian unit. He was a devout man who feared God together with all his household, and he made many gifts of mercy to the people and made supplication to God continually. About the ninth hour of the day, he saw plainly in a vision an angel of God come in to him and say: “Cornelius! ... Your prayers and gifts of mercy have ascended as a remembrance before God. So now send men to Joppa and summon a man named Simon who is called Peter. This man is staying as a guest with Simon, a tanner who has a house by the sea.” As soon as the angel who spoke to him left, he called two of his servants and a devout soldier from among those who were his attendants, and he related everything to them and sent them to Joppa.

*For brevity, I compressed the texts.

When we consider these scriptures, what is the Bible's answer - not our interpretation.
God chooses his representatives, and uses them to reach others.
God directs, even people who believe in him, or have a spiritual inclination, to those representatives, or he sends his representative to those persons.. as we saw in the case of Cornelius, and the Ethiopian.
We notice that even though Cornelius and the Eunuch were both god fearing, they still were directed to the Christian congregation, where they were helped to understand things clearly, and do things in line with God's arrangement. They did not hesitate to act, just as Paul did, when blinded on the road.
We also have the example with the prophets and Jesus, and his apostles.

So God's view then, according to the Bible (Thanks @Tambourine) , is that he has a people, whom he chose, and uses to help others gain blessing and salvation. Those who do not accept those representatives, lose out on those blessings.
Anyone can be saved, by submitting to the way God chooses to do things. to do otherwise, results in no blessings at all.

Do you disagree?
Please say why, let's discuss it together.
Please let me know if the font is easy to read, or if I you would prefer change.

Since all holy books are written by mankind and reflect mankind, not God, does it really matters who interprets it?

God gave everyone a different view to guaranty mankind a larger view than any one person could have. How can one get the entire picture without seeing the views of others?? Are you missing something here??

If God really want everyone to have a holy book, God would have made sure everyone got a copy. On the other hand, God is very very smart. God would implant the knowledge from the beginning.

Let's take a few steps back and see the real action of God. God does not just give knowledge out. Wisdom is acquired on the journey to Discover knowledge. God would never stop that because it would defeat the purpose of acquiring Wisdom.

This is knowledge about all subjects not just religion. God places knowledge all around us. It waits to be Discovered. How long did mankind watch birds fly before they figured out how? The knowledge was around the entire time.

In this time-based causal universe, God's actions can be seen, just like the action that God doesn't hand out knowledge.

One can Discover much by understanding the actions of another. God's actions can not be altered like words in a book.

It just doesn't add up that a Being smart enough to create the universe would be handing out books. So I say read them and interpret them as you will, only consider where they really come from.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[nPeace]

Since all holy books are written by mankind and reflect mankind, not God, does it really matters who interprets it?

God gave everyone a different view to guaranty mankind a larger view than any one person could have. How can one get the entire picture without seeing the views of others?? Are you missing something here??

If God really want everyone to have a holy book, God would have made sure everyone got a copy. On the other hand, God is very very smart. God would implant the knowledge from the beginning.

Let's take a few steps back and see the real action of God. God does not just give knowledge out. Wisdom is acquired on the journey to Discover knowledge. God would never stop that because it would defeat the purpose of acquiring Wisdom.

This is knowledge about all subjects not just religion. God places knowledge all around us. It waits to be Discovered. How long did mankind watch birds fly before they figured out how? The knowledge was around the entire time.

In this time-based causal universe, God's actions can be seen, just like the action that God doesn't hand out knowledge.

One can Discover much by understanding the actions of another. God's actions can not be altered like words in a book.

It just doesn't add up that a Being smart enough to create the universe would be handing out books. So I say read them and interpret them as you will, only consider where they really come from.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

I too am of the view that we learn a great deal about the creator from what is around us.
However, creation does not teach us many things we learn from what God communicated to men.
The Bible is more than just a book. It is written words of men who claimed to have been directed by God?
The question for me then, is not, why would God use a book, but are the writings truly from God.
I have enough proof convincing me, they are.
That's why I live by what the Bible says, rather than man's reasoning and wisdom.
That's clear to me.

 

[Trailblazer]

The reason Bahais alone believe that and no one else who studies the Bible, is because your sect has taken that viewpoint as your belief.

The reason Baha’is alone believe that and no one else who studies the Bible, is because we believe in Baha’u’llah and they don’t.

This is not a strawman. You are making an incorrect application of that word.
I haven't said that you said anything. I am saying it ... all you have done is declare that your interpretation (which is Bahaullah's) is right and everyone else's is wrong, but no one else can claim that but you.

No, that is not what I said. I said many interpretations of the Bible can be correct but I believe that, if Baha’u’llah made an interpretation His interpretation overrides any other interpretation because He was Infallible.

Oh. So the reason people can't even agree on what the Bible says, resulting in their disunity, is because they are all correct? That's out because defies logic.

No, that does not defy logic at all because they could all be correct but just looking at a different meaning, since the same verse can have more than one meaning.

Many of them were incorrect about the actual meaning and only one was correct,
This makes sense. I can work with this. I suppose it's your claim.

No, that is not my claim. It makes no sense to say that only one was correct; even if many were incorrect that does not mean they were incorrect about all the verses in the Bible.

All of them are wrong. No one right.
That would mean Jesus lied, when he said, "I will be with you till the end..."
It's nor reasonable or even truthful to suggest that. You don't think Jesus lied about that, do you?

No, I do not believe that all of them are wrong and nobody was right but even if that was true, that would not mean Jesus lied; it would only mean that nobody understood what Jesus meant in the verses.

I go by what Jesus said. He said,
(Matthew 13:11-17) 11 . . .“To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’ 16 “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them.

I have an idea what those verses mean, what do you think Jesus meant in those verses? Who was he speaking to?

(Matthew 24:14) . . .this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

This good news is being preached worldwide.

The good news has already been preached to all the nations and the end of the age has come.

You believe in another interpretation - a viewpoint.

I believe whatever Baha’u’llah interpreted was accurate. I guess you can call that His viewpoint.

 

[Trailblazer]

I find you are not consistent.
You say, that people can get the correct understanding.
If people can get the correct understanding, it means the correct understanding is in the Bible.

No, the Bible has no understanding, it is just a book. People have an understanding of the Bible, or a lack of understanding.

If the correct understanding is in the Bible, then we can come to the correct understanding, if we get (A) what the Bible means, (B) what the Bible is saying, (C) the Bible's viewpoint, (D) the understanding or view the Bible supports... Take your pick. It does not matter. They all mean the same. Throwing @Left Coast idea in the gutter... as well as your contradicting claims..
Ask @Left Coast if the Bible supports anything, like a viewpoint or interpretation.
Left, Trailblazer is calling you. She apparently wants your support against the Bible.

No, all those things (A-D) do not mean the same thing. The Bible does not say anything because the Bible does not talk (B). The Bible does not have a viewpoint (D), only people have viewpoints about the Bible. The Bible does not support an understanding or view (D), but rather, an understanding or view is supported by what is in the Bible.

I am not against the Bible, I am only saying that it can be interpreted on many different ways, some are correct and others are incorrect.

Of all the options above, (A) is the most correct. If we have a correct understanding of the Bible, then we understand what the Bible means.

Since the problem does not lie with the Bible... Please remember you said it has the correct meaning which we have to understand, in order to be correct... Then the problem lies with men - those who claim that their interpretation of the Bible is correct. Yet they have different conclusions.
If they are all wrong, the fault lies, not with the Bible, but somewhere else.

That’s right. I never said that the problem is with the Bible. The problem lies with men - those who claim that their interpretation of the Bible is correct. Men come to different conclusions and even if they are all wrong, the fault lies, not with the Bible, but with the men who are wrong.

I refer you to these words again. Matthew 13
10 So the disciples came and said to him: “Why do you speak to them by the use of illustrations?” 11 In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says:
‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

16 “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them.

Did you get the sense of those words?
The Bible says basically, the many many many, what you call Christians, but really are not, are people who are blind, death, or have a heart of stone, either deliberately, or by being misled, but basically because their heart is unresponsive currently.
The true Christian hopes that their heart will become responsive.

I understand those words on the verses and I agree with what you just said about them.

No. you are in a hole, and you opted to dig deeper Calling Left, is not going to save you.
You're buried now Trailblazer.

I am not in a hole, the Christians are in a hole because they cannot even agree among themselves what the Bible means. They all believe that know what it means but since they disagree they cannot all be right. So who is right and what is the criterion for deciding that?

Contrary to that claim, the Christian understands - as I pointed out to you above.
The "Christian" on the other hand, that is, the imitation Christian - the weeds of Jesus' illustration... and they are plentiful, are listening to false stories. They are accumulating teachers to have their ears tickled, and listening to inspired teachings of demons.
(2 Timothy 4:3, 4) 3 For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled. 4 They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.

(1 Timothy 4:1, 2) 1However,  the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.

Some deliberately teach lies.
(2 Corinthians 11:13, 14) 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light.

There is no other meaning to these verses, Trailblazer. They don't need interpreting. It's what the Bible says.

The Bible does not SAY anything. People read the Bible and attribute meanings to the words. All words need interpreting; otherwise they are just words on a page and thye mean nothing.

You are interpreting right? This is your viewpoint... or Bahaullah's, right? You believe it is the correct interpretation.
The Bible agrees?

Baha’u’llah or I have a viewpoint or an interpretation. The Bible does not agree because only people agree or disagree; but if we are correct, the Bible supports our viewpoint or an interpretation.

True or false. Place a T, or F next to the corresponding letter to represent true or false, respectively.

A) The Bible agrees with XYZ. F
B) The Bible says XYZ. F
C) The Bible means XYZ. T
D) The Bible supports XYZ. T
E) The Bible's viewpoint is XYZ. F
F) The Bible does not say, agree, mean, support, or have a viewpoint of anything. F

 

[Trailblazer]

Great! We are finally getting somewhere.
So you believe Bahaullah interpreted scriptures like everyone else, and his interpretation is another viewpoint, but his viewpoint is special, because he is from God.

Since his interpretation is his viewpoint, and the scriptures do not have a viewpoint, then the Bible does not say that Bahaullah's viewpoint is right, and should be accepted, so those who believe his viewpoint to be correct, and him infallible... as you declared, are doing so based not on the Bible, but on their sentiments toward Bahaullah.
Do you disagree? Please explain.

I disagree. Here is how I would restate what you said so it accurately represents what I believe.

Baha’u’llah did not interpret the Bible. Baha’u’llah had a viewpoint about the Bible. In the following passage He was addressing Muslims who claimed that the Bible had been corrupted, referring to the Bible as God's greatest testimony to His creatures:

“We have also heard a number of the foolish of the earth assert that the genuine text of the heavenly Gospel doth not exist amongst the Christians, that it hath ascended unto heaven. How grievously they have erred! How oblivious of the fact that such a statement imputeth the gravest injustice and tyranny to a gracious and loving Providence! “How could God, when once the Day-star of the beauty of Jesus had disappeared from the sight of His people, and ascended unto the fourth heaven, cause His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures, to disappear also?” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 89

Baha’u’llah also explained what some words mean (sun, moon, clouds, heaven, etc.), and He explained what Jesus did and who some OT Prophets in the Bible were and what they did, and He claimed to be the fulfillment of certain verses that refer to the Comforter and the Spirit of truth.

The Bible does not SAY anything, so the Bible does not say that Baha’u’llah's viewpoint is right, and should be accepted, so those who believe Baha’u’llah's viewpoint to be correct, and him infallible are not doing so based not on the Bible, but on our belief that Baha’u’llah is infallible.

Thank you. I'll see if I can be more simpler.
Jesus said that persons were searching the scriptures for their salvation, but he said, the scriptures are about him.
What I am asking is, could those searching the scripture have seen that the scriptures were about Jesus, and how could they have done so?
I hope you understand.

How could they have seen that the scriptures were about Jesus? I don’t know how they could fail to see that they were about Jesus. What else would they be about?

 

[Bird123]

I too am of the view that we learn a great deal about the creator from what is around us.
However, creation does not teach us many things we learn from what God communicated to men.
The Bible is more than just a book. It is written words of men who claimed to have been directed by God?
The question for me then, is not, why would God use a book, but are the writings truly from God.
I have enough proof convincing me, they are.
That's why I live by what the Bible says, rather than man's reasoning and wisdom.
That's clear to me.

Why would God create a system where so many of His children would go to Hell? Why would God use the threat of Hell to intimidate the actions of His children? Why would God teach His children to fry or destroy rather than Love enough to fix the problem? Why would God punish without any possibility of redemption for eternity? Why would God create classes of good people and evil people when this just supplies an excuse to hate?? If God is perfect, how could He create such imperfection that He would destroy so many? Etc. The correct answer is Intelligence would never have created such a mess. I bet even you could come up with a better way.

There are a million questions that show the holy book reflects mankind and not God. Everything about God will add up. Isn't that the direction one should search for the Truth??

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[nPeace]

The reason Baha’is alone believe that and no one else who studies the Bible, is because we believe in Baha’u’llah and they don’t.

No, that is not what I said. I said many interpretations of the Bible can be correct but I believe that, if Baha’u’llah made an interpretation His interpretation overrides any other interpretation because He was Infallible.

You earlier said Bahaullah interpreted the Bible though. Have you changed your mind?
Yes, I understand you believe Bahaullah - the infallible.

No, that does not defy logic at all because they could all be correct but just looking at a different meaning, since the same verse can have more than one meaning.

We are not talking about words here. This is about whole texts, and entire writings. For example... either the dead are conscious or they are not. Either Jesus was fully man on earth, or he was not. Either God is one, or he is three. Either Jesus is equal to God, or he is not. Either Jesus (as the word) was created, or he was not....

This is how logic works... Either A is A, or it is not. A cannot be A, and yet not A.
Thus, to claim that A B C D ... Z are all correct, and yet A B C D ... Z all disagree on XYZ, is not logical. It is the opposite.

No, that is not my claim. It makes no sense to say that only one was correct; even if many were incorrect that does not mean they were incorrect about all the verses in the Bible.

See what I mean.
You're not a bit mixed up and confused, are you?
What are you talking about? I am not talking about verses, and you certainly were not ether, when you remarked that they can't even agree about the dead.

No, I do not believe that all of them are wrong and nobody was right but even if that was true, that would not mean Jesus lied; it would only mean that nobody understood what Jesus meant in the verses.

Which I am asking you, do you think Jesus lied about being with his followers to the end of the world?

I have an idea what those verses mean, what do you think Jesus meant in those verses? Who was he speaking to?

I explained, did I not. Look at it again. You might have forgotten you read it.
Regarding whom Jesus was speaking to, that's obvious. Regarding whom his words apply to... the same persons his words apply to in Matthew 7:13-27, ad Matthew 25:31-46

The good news has already been preached to all the nations and the end of the age has come.

Bahaullah, no doubt believes that, and so do you. We'll see.

I believe whatever Baha’u’llah interpreted was accurate. I guess you can call that His viewpoint.

Yes.

No, the Bible has no understanding, it is just a book. People have an understanding of the Bible, or a lack of understanding.

The correct understanding is not found in, or gained from the Bible? How does one come to the correct understanding then.

No, all those things (A-D) do not mean the same thing. The Bible does not say anything because the Bible does not talk (B). The Bible does not have a viewpoint (D), only people have viewpoints about the Bible. The Bible does not support an understanding or view (D), but rather, an understanding or view is supported by what is in the Bible.

You really are going to jump through these semantics hoops...
I suppose you will say, the Bible does not read either, so I am wrong to say, the verse reads this way, or the verse says...
Nevertheless, I'll play along.

I am not against the Bible, I am only saying that it can be interpreted on many different ways, some are correct and others are incorrect.

I think you are against the Bible, even if you don't realize how your expressions show that. That's my viewpoint. How I interpret the evidence.

Of all the options above, (A) is the most correct. If we have a correct understanding of the Bible, then we understand what the Bible means.

I would agree, only, I would say, if we understand what the Bible says, or is saying, or get the correct viewpoint of the Bible, or correct perspective of the texts.
I'm not into the semantics game, so I have a different view to you, regardless of what you say.

That’s right. I never said that the problem is with the Bible. The problem lies with men - those who claim that their interpretation of the Bible is correct. Men come to different conclusions and even if they are all wrong, the fault lies, not with the Bible, but with the men who are wrong.

We agree on that.
To add, their different conclusions are based on wrong understanding, and because they interpret the text, using their own ideas, rather than letting the scripture "do the talking", and guide their understanding to grasp the correct understanding Not necessarily the meaning because every sentence or writing does not require a meaning.
For example,
(Matthew 15:15, 16) 15 Peter responded: “Make the illustration plain to us.” 16 At this he said: “Are you also still without understanding?
An illustration is designed to help a person understand a saying, yet some still don't understand the "meaning" of the illustration.

(John 10:24-26) 24 If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered them: “I told you, and yet you do not believe. The works that I am doing in my Father’s name, these bear witness about me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not my sheep.
A demonstration is designed to show what is said, yet some still don't understand that the demonstration is enough for one to understand what is said.

(John 11:11-14) 11 After he said these things, he added: “Lazarus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.” 12 The disciples then said to him: “Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.” 13 Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. 14 Then Jesus said to them plainly: “Lazarus has died,
A plain statement is just that. It needs no explanation, but is used to make clear an earlier statement.
Hence, since the Bible contains a lot of plain statements, they don't carry a meaning, but explain, yes Trailblazer, explains another passage.
In this way, the Bible speaks for itself, and needs no one to interpret a meaning. Rather, one can use the scriptures themselves, to understand what the Bible itself is saying

I understand those words on the verses and I agree with what you just said about them.

Glad to hear that. It's good to know we agree at least, on some things.
I have a feeling you don't agree though. So question... why do you keep saying Christians disagree on the Bible, rather than people?
I'm saying they are not Christian, but rather, they are people who are blind, death, or have a heart of stone, either deliberately, or by being misled, who call themselves Christian... but are not.
Perhaps you did not get the correct understanding of my words.

 

[nPeace]

I am not in a hole, the Christians are in a hole because they cannot even agree among themselves what the Bible means. They all believe that know what it means but since they disagree they cannot all be right. So who is right and what is the criterion for deciding that?

See what I mean?
No Christian is in a hole. Why would they be, when they have the correct understanding?
I know why you want them to be, because your Bahaullah must be the one who is correct, but sorry. The Christians have the correct understanding.
The masses of divided people calling themselves Christian, don't. This is written all over the pages of the Christian Greek scriptures.
I mentioned a number of them already. Here is another... 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12

The Bible does not SAY anything. People read the Bible and attribute meanings to the words. All words need interpreting; otherwise they are just words on a page and the mean nothing.

Fact check. All words do not need interpreting. Explanations do not need to be interpreted.
Even if you believe that though, the question can be asked, "Whom should the interpreter be, and how do we know that one's interpretation is correct?" More bizarre... Don't the interpreter's words have to be interpreted?
Sounds complicated enough.
I don't see the understanding of scriptural guidance, or scriptural understanding to be that complicated.
Oh, the scriptures don't guide. They are not people.
If I said, "I saw the book fall. It was an old book."
This has no meaning needed to be interpreted. The two sentences are complete, in that they are both self explanatory. One adds to the other. A book fell. It was old.
Do you need to interpret "it", or haven't I done that?

(2 Timothy 3:16, 17) 16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.
Can the scriptures reprove you Trailblazer? Can they correct you... discipline you? Or is that people using the scriptures to do those things?
So when I read the Bible, and it says something that is contrary to my view, the Bible hasn't corrected me, I have... or is that God?

The word of God is not alive. Only living things are alive. The Bible is not living.
(Hebrews 4:12) For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.
What?

(1 Thessalonians 2:13) Indeed, that is why we also thank God unceasingly, because when you received God’s word, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God, which is also at work in you believers.
What?
This speech is shocking! Who can listen to it?
That's not you Trailblazer, is it?

Baha’u’llah or I have a viewpoint or an interpretation. The Bible does not agree because only people agree or disagree; but if we are correct, the Bible supports our viewpoint or an interpretation.

I don't understand how the Bible cannot agree, but can support. Can you explain?

True or false. Place a T, or F next to the corresponding letter to represent true or false, respectively.

A) The Bible agrees with XYZ. F
B) The Bible says XYZ. F
C) The Bible means XYZ. T
D) The Bible supports XYZ. T
E) The Bible's viewpoint is XYZ. F
F) The Bible does not say, agree, mean, support, or have a viewpoint of anything. F

I don't see a difference between agrees with a viewpoint, and supports an viewpoint. Nor do I see a difference between a viewpoint, and a meaning, in a particular context.
We may be speaking in two different contexts.
So since you object to the context I am using, you have a different view.
Millions of people disagree with you, and millions disagree with me.
I can see a difference in says and means, because one is a plain expression, while the other may be an explanation, but apart from that, in context, a viewpoint - that is, a perspective, is a meaning, as well.
Your disagreeing doesn't change that understanding.

I disagree. Here is how I would restate what you said so it accurately represents what I believe.

Baha’u’llah did not interpret the Bible. Baha’u’llah had a viewpoint about the Bible. In the following passage He was addressing Muslims who claimed that the Bible had been corrupted, referring to the Bible as God's greatest testimony to His creatures:

“We have also heard a number of the foolish of the earth assert that the genuine text of the heavenly Gospel doth not exist amongst the Christians, that it hath ascended unto heaven. How grievously they have erred! How oblivious of the fact that such a statement imputeth the gravest injustice and tyranny to a gracious and loving Providence! “How could God, when once the Day-star of the beauty of Jesus had disappeared from the sight of His people, and ascended unto the fourth heaven, cause His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures, to disappear also?” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 89

Okay, so your research caused you to retract your earlier statement. No problem. That understandable.

Baha’u’llah also explained what some words mean (sun, moon, clouds, heaven, etc.), and He explained what Jesus did and who some OT Prophets in the Bible were and what they did, and He claimed to be the fulfillment of certain verses that refer to the Comforter and the Spirit of truth.

Yes, many make similar claims and give various explanations. Christians don't claim to be infallible, but certain explanations are given where the scriptures may not explain. You might call those interpretations.

The Bible does not SAY anything, so the Bible does not say that Baha’u’llah's viewpoint is right, and should be accepted, so those who believe Baha’u’llah's viewpoint to be correct, and him infallible are not doing so based not on the Bible, but on our belief that Baha’u’llah is infallible.

Glad to hear you admit that that belief is not based on the Bible.

How could they have seen that the scriptures were about Jesus? I don’t know how they could fail to see that they were about Jesus. What else would they be about?

They had the scriptures.
All they needed to do was look for the fulfillment of the prophesies, right.
(Acts 3:24-26) 24 And all the prophets from Samuel and those who followed him, as many as have spoken, have also plainly declared these days. 25 You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your forefathers, saying to Abraham: ‘And by means of your offspring all the families of the earth will be blessed.’ 26 God, after raising up his Servant, sent him to you first to bless you by turning each one of you away from your wicked deeds.”
Connecting what they knew the scriptures said with what they were seeing and hearing, would have helped them, wouldn't it?
What would they have needed to interpret?