The Bahai interpretation of Jesus, the crucifixion, and him in the Qur'an

[firedragon]

The Bahai's believe that the Quran is Gods revelation. There is no doubt on that. They have different interpretations of some verses, which is of course very well known. This topic is purely a theological discussion based on the text of the Quran and the Bahai "interpretation" of a particular verse in essence.

The verse is 4:157 of the Quran where it says Jesus was not crucified. But the Bahai's claim Jesus was crucified. But they also believe the Quran is Gods word. Thus, it is a strange phenomena where they dont accept one verse in a book they claim is "God's Revelation". If you negate the Quran as a theological book and to not have any historical validity its perfectly fine. But if you claim its Gods revelation, then the verses apply to you. So historicity of the crucifixion is not the question. I am only preemptively saying that to avoid a strawman.

Some of the Bahai's claim that they have a different interpretation of this verse. To be precise, this topic is not about the death of Jesus, whether he was spiritually murdered or physically killed or whatever irrelevant point but precisely how they can interpret "Ma salaboohoo" which means "he was not crucified" as "he was crucified".

Again. The verse says "HE WAS NOT CRUCIFIED.
Bahai's claim "HE WAS CRUCIFIED".

prior to anyone making any side points I will post the verse in question in the Arabic language if anyone wants to translate it to mean the exact opposite.

For anyone's information this verse is available in manuscript form in the Sanaa manuscript folio 18.

How do Bahai's translate the sentence "ma salaboohoo" (right there in this image, 3rd line) to mean exactly the opposite of what it simply says. "He was not crucified".

Peace.

 

[John1.12]

The Bahai's believe that the Quran is Gods revelation. There is no doubt on that. They have different interpretations of some verses, which is of course very well known. This topic is purely a theological discussion based on the text of the Quran and the Bahai "interpretation" of a particular verse in essence.

The verse is 4:157 of the Quran where it says Jesus was not crucified. But the Bahai's claim Jesus was crucified. But they also believe the Quran is Gods word. Thus, it is a strange phenomena where they dont accept one verse in a book they claim is "God's Revelation". If you negate the Quran as a theological book and to not have any historical validity its perfectly fine. But if you claim its Gods revelation, then the verses apply to you. So historicity of the crucifixion is not the question. I am only preemptively saying that to avoid a strawman.

Some of the Bahai's claim that they have a different interpretation of this verse. To be precise, this topic is not about the death of Jesus, whether he was spiritually murdered or physically killed or whatever irrelevant point but precisely how they can interpret "Ma salaboohoo" which means "he was not crucified" as "he was crucified".

Again. The verse says "HE WAS NOT CRUCIFIED.
Bahai's claim "HE WAS CRUCIFIED".

prior to anyone making any side points I will post the verse in question in the Arabic language if anyone wants to translate it to mean the exact opposite.

View attachment 51077

For anyone's information this verse is available in manuscript form in the Sanaa manuscript folio 18.

How do Bahai's translate the sentence "ma salaboohoo" (right there in this image, 3rd line) to mean exactly the opposite of what it simply says. "He was not crucified".

Peace.

I believe that most religions accept other sources as from God ,other than their own. The bible However does not allow for this to be possible . This criteria I believe is one of the reasons people are deceived ( This is one of the reasons on " Easily deceived " Post )

 

[danieldemol]

The Bahai's believe that the Quran is Gods revelation. There is no doubt on that. They have different interpretations of some verses, which is of course very well known. This topic is purely a theological discussion based on the text of the Quran and the Bahai "interpretation" of a particular verse in essence.

The verse is 4:157 of the Quran where it says Jesus was not crucified. But the Bahai's claim Jesus was crucified. But they also believe the Quran is Gods word. Thus, it is a strange phenomena where they dont accept one verse in a book they claim is "God's Revelation". If you negate the Quran as a theological book and to not have any historical validity its perfectly fine. But if you claim its Gods revelation, then the verses apply to you. So historicity of the crucifixion is not the question. I am only preemptively saying that to avoid a strawman.

Some of the Bahai's claim that they have a different interpretation of this verse. To be precise, this topic is not about the death of Jesus, whether he was spiritually murdered or physically killed or whatever irrelevant point but precisely how they can interpret "Ma salaboohoo" which means "he was not crucified" as "he was crucified".

Again. The verse says "HE WAS NOT CRUCIFIED.
Bahai's claim "HE WAS CRUCIFIED".

prior to anyone making any side points I will post the verse in question in the Arabic language if anyone wants to translate it to mean the exact opposite.

View attachment 51077

For anyone's information this verse is available in manuscript form in the Sanaa manuscript folio 18.

How do Bahai's translate the sentence "ma salaboohoo" (right there in this image, 3rd line) to mean exactly the opposite of what it simply says. "He was not crucified".

Peace.

According to my understanding they interpret it as "He was not crucified" but believe that by "He" here the spirit of Jesus is what is being referred to, not the body of Jesus.

You can call that mental gymnastics if you like, but it is a strawman to say they translate the words differently in my opinion.

 

[Pete in Panama]

...The verse is 4:157 of the Quran where it says Jesus was not crucified. But the Bahai's claim Jesus was crucified....

Interesting, alleged quotes w/ no links so we can't even agree on where ur getting ur stuff. That may be all well & good for an ol' fashioned food fight but it's not how we want to explore together the word of God. What I like to do is say, present a passage from the sacred text w/ a link that anyone can review the context. Do let us know when u want to get on board.

 

[firedragon]

Interesting, alleged quotes w/ no links so we can't even agree on where ur getting ur stuff. That may be all well & good for an ol' fashioned food fight but it's not how we want to explore together the word of God. What I like to do is say, present a passage from the sacred text w/ a link that anyone can review the context. Do let us know when u want to get on board.

You want a "link" to a Quran?

 

[firedragon]

Interesting, alleged quotes w/ no links so we can't even agree on where ur getting ur stuff. That may be all well & good for an ol' fashioned food fight but it's not how we want to explore together the word of God. What I like to do is say, present a passage from the sacred text w/ a link that anyone can review the context. Do let us know when u want to get on board.

You know I am curious. Who is this "us" you are speaking of? You and who else?

 

[firedragon]

Rudolf Steiner also did not believe that the real Jesus was crucified.

In gMark you can read that when Jesus is arrested a young man flees the scene, they try to catch him but they only manage to get hold of his white robe and the young man runs away naked.
Then after the crucifixion, inside the tomb there is again that young man but now again dressed in his white robe.

This can be interpreted as that they thought that they had arrested Jesus but actually it was only outwardly him (the white robe). After they crucified his image, he is again united with that "fake" Jesus inside the tomb.

This symbolism in gMark is not copied by the synoptic authors of gMatthew and gLuke.
The word used for young man is 'neoniskos' (young born) which is only used twice in gMark, at the arrest and inside the tomb.

So the idea suggested in gMark (according to Rudolf Steiner) is that Jesus used some type of occult power (magic) to create a double of himself for the crucifixion.

Do you know the difference between Ton Theon and Ton Theos?

 

[Pete in Panama]

You want a "link" to a Quran?

Still no links/references. Enjoy, u can continue by yourself. Just be aware that they say if u play it by yourself too much u can go blind.

 

[firedragon]

Still no links/references.

Not true. Lol. The reference is already given. If you didnt see it though you quoted it in your response, its Quran 4:157.

Thats whats called "reference".

Again. You said "we" referring to people who you think are "yours or your kind" who do not know how to google "Quran 4:157". Can you tell me who this "we" is? How many people in this thread dont know how to google the sentence "Quran 4:157"? Please quote your group and why you think they all belong to your group you call "we"!!

 

[CG Didymus]

You want a "link" to a Quran?

I did two searches. In one, Quran 4:157, this came up...

I cursed them because they proudly, but falsely, said, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah’. They did not kill him as they claimed, nor did they crucify him; but they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus, so they thought the person who was killed was Jesus. Those Jews who claimed to have killed him and those Christians who surrendered him over to them are in doubt and confusion regarding the matter. They have no knowledge, but make guesses that are of no worth against the truth. Truly, they did not kill Jesus nor crucify him.​

In the other, it was a search for what Baha'is believe about the crucifixion...

The crucifixion as recounted in the New Testament is correct. The meaning of the Qur'ánic version is that the spirit of Christ was not Crucified. There is no conflict between the two.

Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 491​

Now I don't know if this is just a weird translation that added in, "they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus", or if that's what the Quran really says. Either way, I'm used to Baha'is finding a "spiritual" solution to the apparent contradiction in the Scriptures of other religions... simply by saying "The true meaning of that is verse is..." In this case the "body" of Jesus was killed, then put in the ground and rotted away, but his spirit was not crucified. Well duh, how do you crucify a spirit? To be honest and clear, why wouldn't the Quran say that even though they killed Jesus physically, worry not, they didn't and could never kill the spirit, which is the true essence of who Jesus was?

As usual, Baha'is need all religions to be one... in spirit. So they make changes where needed to smooth over contradictions between what they believe and what the Scriptures of other religions say. But, to be fair, don't all religions that accept the Scriptures of other religions as being true do that? Because between Judaism and Christianity there are contradictions that Christians have to "smooth" over. Then the same with Islam and Christianity, and now with Baha'is... they have to do it with the Scriptures of all the major religions.

Oh, by the way, it was pretty easy to find Quran 4:157.

 

[firedragon]

I did two searches. In one, Quran 4:157, this came up...
I cursed them because they proudly, but falsely, said, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah’. They did not kill him as they claimed, nor did they crucify him; but they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus, so they thought the person who was killed was Jesus. Those Jews who claimed to have killed him and those Christians who surrendered him over to them are in doubt and confusion regarding the matter. They have no knowledge, but make guesses that are of no worth against the truth. Truly, they did not kill Jesus nor crucify him.

This is not a translation, its an exegesis.

Anyway, in this also, it says "nor did they crucify him".

So in this context, please read the OP.

In the other, it was a search for what Baha'is believe about the crucifixion...
The crucifixion as recounted in the New Testament is correct. The meaning of the Qur'ánic version is that the spirit of Christ was not Crucified. There is no conflict between the two.

There is nothing about a spirit in this verse. So that's false.

Now I don't know if this is just a weird translation that added in, "they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus", or if that's what the Quran really says.

its an exegesis.

Either way, I'm used to Baha'is finding a "spiritual" solution to the apparent contradiction in the Scriptures of other religions... simply by saying "The true meaning of that is verse is..." In this case the "body" of Jesus was killed, then put in the ground and rotted away, but his spirit was not crucified. Well duh, how do you crucify a spirit? To be honest and clear, why wouldn't the Quran say that even though they killed Jesus physically, worry not, they didn't and could never kill the spirit, which is the true essence of who Jesus was?

Thats not in the Quran. Its the Bahai attempt at making Christians fall in love with their universal theology which cannot reconcile with anything but intends to.

The Bahai theology directly contradicts the Quran which they proclaim is Gods word. Or at least Bahaullah says so. Especially Effendi says that explicitly in his introduction in the Kithab al aqdhas.

One Bahai apologist was ready to dump the Quran and put it under the bus by saying "if the Quran says Jesus was not crucified, I won't trust the Quran" though their creator believes the Quran is Gods word. Which only means their existing belief has to go back in time and superimpose upon the Quran and even Bahaullah. That means their faith is more important than the book they claim is Gods word. On top of that several attempts were made. One was to claim "the arabic says his spirit was not crucified and you dont know arabic", which is false because there are millions and millions of people who know arabic but their immediate audience are the Christians, thus they are not used to dealing with those who do know arabic. Thats one of the reasons I have given the Arabic script for anyone who makes this argument. Another attempt was to discredit the verse saying the verse was changed centuries later which is why I have even given the folio of an oldest manuscript from the 7th century. These two absolutely bogus arguments should be addressed before its brought out, so I gave all the information.

You will not find one single decent response to this other than "because we say so".

 

[CG Didymus]

Thats not in the Quran. Its the Bahai attempt at making Christians fall in love with their universal theology which cannot reconcile with anything but intends to.

That's it exactly. For Baha'is the answer is good enough. Then Baha'is have to defend their beliefs. Ultimately, too many times, or all the time, it comes down to, "Because Baha'u'llah, or Abdul Baha, or Shoghi Effendi said so," therefore they can't be wrong. With this the Baha'i answer is simple... his body died but his spirit didn't. For them, problem solved.

For all the things I like about the Baha'i Faith, it is answers like these that makes me question just how real and true are the things they say? The intention is great. Let's get over our differences and find ways to live in peace and harmony. But, like you say, they don't really reconcile anything. Unfortunately, because your questions in these threads go deeper, and are beyond me and maybe some others, they can easily be turned and twisted with responses that never really gets to core of the question and, eventually, the thread fades away. But thanks for asking these kinds of questions.... things I wouldn't even know to ask. I always learn something from your threads.

 

[firedragon]

That's it exactly. For Baha'is the answer is good enough. Then Baha'is have to defend their beliefs. Ultimately, too many times, or all the time, it comes down to, "Because Baha'u'llah, or Abdul Baha, or Shoghi Effendi said so," therefore they can't be wrong. With this the Baha'i answer is simple... his body died but his spirit didn't. For them, problem solved.

Absolutely.

Just that, in this case, they can't do that and escape the dilemma. Because they are supposed to believe the Quran is Gods word, and it says Jesus was not crucified. So what they will do is discredit the translation which is a bogus attempt since this is a straight forward sentence that says "Ma salaboohoo" which means "he was not crucified", and they will try to speak about "spiritual killing and not physical killing" which brings us to the point "this is not about killing, spiritual or not, this is about crucifixion" which is a simple answer to their strawman attempt.

The topic is about Crucifixion, not killing. Of course intelligent people will pretend they dont understand relevance.

 

[Truthseeker]

Some of the Bahai's claim that they have a different interpretation of this verse. To be precise, this topic is not about the death of Jesus, whether he was spiritually murdered or physically killed or whatever irrelevant point but precisely how they can interpret "Ma salaboohoo" which means "he was not crucified" as "he was crucified".

Again. The verse says "HE WAS NOT CRUCIFIED.
Bahai's claim "HE WAS CRUCIFIED".

prior to anyone making any side points I will post the verse in question in the Arabic language if anyone wants to translate it to mean the exact opposite.

View attachment 51077

For anyone's information this verse is available in manuscript form in the Sanaa manuscript folio 18.

How do Bahai's translate the sentence "ma salaboohoo" (right there in this image, 3rd line) to mean exactly the opposite of what it simply says. "He was not crucified".

Peace.

That's not the Baha'i claim. You're twisting reality in order to win an argument. I'm not arguing with you anymore.

 

[firedragon]

That's not the Baha'i claim. You're twisting reality in order to win an argument. I'm not arguing with you anymore.

If anything is not the Bahai claim, you can state it.

But if you say "not arguing with you anymore" its your prerogative.

Have a good day.

 

[Truthseeker]

I already stated my case and what Shoghi Effendi said, which is the only official Baha'i claim.

Have a good day.

 

[rational experiences]

Science of planet earth is via human theories and as a topic is science.

Reason stone did not begin. Science as it's human highest thought proven.
No argument allowed as you would be termed lying. Also a human status. Humans lie for self purpose.

Law stated no lying allowed. Categories by law.

Science therefore states as a scientist if he is being precisely correct no book exists that is a theory written by a human how life was created.

Was an agreed higher status in life than religion. Science itself status science only.

For its human purpose.
By a huge listing of relevant human advice that says because human consciousness tells theories only as a human. In the presence owner of a human life. Living as a life human equal to everyone else.

Science was stated by humans for human life continuance without bias. As intellectual pursuit.

Why it is stated the Jesus theme said elite control was a hypocrite. The elite self said as a human I own everything including the planet body by my say so.

Yet we share as a family human the planet body.

A philosopher discusses what was wrong in theory of expressing the sciences as that human. Book writer. Preaching.

Quantified it as life attacked. Medical science reasoning. Medical status only stated in human bodily presence for humans.

As life exists as a human only as a human. The term human form does not pre exist itself.

The term less of a human form in medical science is less of a human form. Not acceptable as an agreed human group. To thesis it's presence. Whole life human is presence.

A term agreed by men as a scientific status. Medical was the highest.

Observed.
Reasoned.
Stated by humans. Groups by control is the bigger greater human group agreement for and on behalf of humans and not science.

Science in human reference no matter from what book written was proven wrong.

Only medical human science as presence of human observation was given title as highest science status in group control.

Once religious science was the practitioner healer in medical science wisdom.

Built Phi buildings church temples for sound resounding therapies. Structure reasoned for particular sound gained by music song instruments. Applied holistic naturopathy oils balms. Retrained brain mind by ritual prayer and meditation for behaviour controls.

Locked in jail humans with self destructive proven non controllable behaviour for family protection in communities. Knowing human healing in nature no longer existed. As a balanced life.

Lost their ancient medical wisdom and practices. Religious science once healers medical.

It reformed into modern day medical sciences. Owned drug controlled status for monetary benefits. Cannot patent nature. When nature earth as God had supplied human remedies in its nature.

True human history is lived is not a book.

 

[Truthseeker]

I did two searches. In one, Quran 4:157, this came up...
I cursed them because they proudly, but falsely, said, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah’. They did not kill him as they claimed, nor did they crucify him; but they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus, so they thought the person who was killed was Jesus. Those Jews who claimed to have killed him and those Christians who surrendered him over to them are in doubt and confusion regarding the matter. They have no knowledge, but make guesses that are of no worth against the truth. Truly, they did not kill Jesus nor crucify him.In the other, it was a search for what Baha'is believe about the crucifixion...
The crucifixion as recounted in the New Testament is correct. The meaning of the Qur'ánic version is that the spirit of Christ was not Crucified. There is no conflict between the two.

Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 491Now I don't know if this is just a weird translation that added in, "they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus", or if that's what the Quran really says. Either way, I'm used to Baha'is finding a "spiritual" solution to the apparent contradiction in the Scriptures of other religions... simply by saying "The true meaning of that is verse is..." In this case the "body" of Jesus was killed, then put in the ground and rotted away, but his spirit was not crucified. Well duh, how do you crucify a spirit? To be honest and clear, why wouldn't the Quran say that even though they killed Jesus physically, worry not, they didn't and could never kill the spirit, which is the true essence of who Jesus was?

I'll repeat what I said on another thread, where this discussion started:

Here's a short statement by Shoghi Effendi briefly interpreting the Qur'an:

The crucifixion as recounted in the New Testament is correct. The meaning of the Qur'anic version is that the spirit of Christ was not crucified. There is no conflict between the two."
(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, July 14, 1943)

Various, "Lights of Guidance"

Probably not satisfying to you.

I have a number of translations of the verse in question:

And for their saying, "Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God." Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness. And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him: No sure knowledge had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!
Muhammad, "The Qur'an", 4.158

And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Alláh’s messenger—they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdu’lláh, "The Meaning of the Glorious Qur’án", 4:157

But Alláh took him up unto Himself. Alláh was ever Mighty, Wise.
Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdu’lláh, "The Meaning of the Glorious Qur’án", 4:158

But for that they broke their compact, and for their misbelief in God’s signs, and for their killing the prophets undeservedly, and for their saying, ‘Our hearts are uncircumcised,’ — nay, God hath stamped on them their misbelief, so that they cannot believe except a few, — and for their misbelief, and for their saying about Mary a mighty calumny, and for their saying, ‘Verily, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the apostle of God,’ … . but they did not kill him, and they did not crucify him, but a similitude was made for them. And verily, those who differ about him are in doubt concerning him; they have no knowledge concerning him, but only follow an opinion. They did not kill him, for sure! nay, God raised him up unto Himself; for God is mighty and wise!
Muhammad, "The Qur’ân", 4.119

157. That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus The son of Mary, The Apostle of God”; — But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, But so it was made To appear to them, And those who differ Therein are full of doubts, With no (certain) knowledge, But only conjecture to follow, For of a surety They killed him not:—
Muhammad , "The Holy Qur-an", 4.157

158. Nay, God raised him up Unto Himself; and God Is Exalted in Power, Wise; —
Muhammad , "The Holy Qur-an", 4.158

In 1 of 4 the translation says "only his likeness" the other 3 say things like "so it was made to appear to them" or "a similitude was made for them" - close to "only his likeness" - but I don't think it means the same thing - or "it was made to appear so to them". All of this is ambiguous, I grant you. It could mean that a person of the same likeness was substituted for him.

But what about the end where "God raised him up Unto Himself". Doesn't that imply that Jesus' spirit ascended to God, meaning his body was dead?

I think your translation about where it says "but they killed and crucified a man whom Allah made to resemble Jesus" differs from any of my translations of the same section, though is much like it. It helps to have more than one translation. You didn't include in your translation the important ending ""God raised him up to Himself".

You said: Well duh, how do you crucify a spirit? To be honest and clear, why wouldn't the Quran say that even though they killed Jesus physically, worry not, they didn't and could never kill the spirit, which is the true essence of who Jesus was?

As to why the Qur'an wasn't clearer than it was, God tests the believers of a later age, to separate the true from the false. As the Qur'an says:

He it is Who has sent down To thee the Book: In it are verses Basic or fundamental (Of established meaning); They are the foundation Of the Book: others Are allegorical.
Muhammad , "The Holy Qur-an",

Shoghi Effendi is saying that when it says they didn't crucify him, it was allegorical, it didn't mean that they didn't crucify the body. There's a lot of stuff in scripture that is allegorical. But if you are blind spiritually, you don't see that.

 

[rational experiences]

Human his story.

Once science was not discussed.

All forms natural existed.

Men agreed to change God by Phi.

Phi a circle owned a small mass number as I want. I want to equals this answer. Just Phi.

Mass owns a huge number. Men today try to say Phi was a lie. Phi meant total destruction of mass existing to just leave Phi only as a result.

Men wanted only Phi and not mass to exist. Mass Nothing like Phi.

So they invented fallout. The giant on the ground crop circle. Yet it was etched in stone a long time ago when life died. It was not first as it was upon nature that it fell.

Proven occurring to living form crops.

Theme giant existed first was the science teaching relevant.

Evolution cooling shrank the giant into the small. The small overcame the giant. No crop circles should even form.

Phi Goliath theme

Yet the human natural not Phi was not the small.

It was thought by a thought first. The smallest status. It never even existed as nor did the thought.

What you were taught.
What you ignore claiming self was David and self the small Phi signal.

You were only a Bio human life in water oxygenated living by microbiome cells chemistry that pre existed as living food in the state water.

You live and die and die by irradiation causes as the effect reason.

Stop having sex. Human suffering would end our teaching of self relevance. Babies don't ask to be born we are forced born.

Humans preached take control of your sex act.

Then you review all falsified human preachings like oh you chose your human parents to be born to live suffering.

Human excuses not facing the reality why most stories are fake.

Parents choice was to have sex. To claim as a baby who becomes a parent saying consciously as an adult I chose to be born.

Not even self realising first human parents claim that teaching to any babies life.

Hence when a human who chooses to use a circle as a measure. The circle itself is the measure and not the number.

A circle or O or o. Big or small is first just a circle.

Ignored.

 

[firedragon]

That's not the Baha'i claim. You're twisting reality in order to win an argument. I'm not arguing with you anymore.

I apologise. I can't find another of your post in this thread.

If Effendi says something else I will stand corrected. So please enlighten me.