WonderingWorrier
Active Member
Fireballs from the meteor storm were photographed above his birthplace (California).
This is one:
The exact day, the location, It all fits.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Bahai's and the Bible. Errant or Inerrant. Holistic or cherry picking?
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Fireballs from the meteor storm were photographed above his birthplace (California).
This is one:
The exact day, the location, It all fits.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
In the preceding verse, it also says when they will mourn or when they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
The Dark Day, 1780. New England's Dark Day
The Falling Stars, 1833. The Falling of the Stars
That ship has already left the port and sailed into the sunset.
They who saw it were the Baha'is, everyone else is still standing on the dock, waiting for another ship that will never arrive..
Brian2
Veteran Member
Hmm. Since anyway this thread since the beginning has been meticulously derailed, why not.
I'm sure the derailing has provided you with what you wanted through examples of interpretation etc given by Baha'is.
I cannot say why God did not want a man with a genital mutilation or one who was illegitimate to be in the assembly of the Lord. I imagine it has something to do with wholeness and holiness of God and of His people. There are laws of uncleanness which seem to be for the same thing and discriminate against people for a short time and stops them from participating in some rituals etc.
These things certainly are discrimination against people who may not have done anything wrong, but it was probably a teaching thing so that people knew God was holy and particular and if He was about these things, how much more would He be about things that really mattered.
Nevertheless these things do not take away the equality of these people with all other people in God's sight and in the end and do not mean they should be considered any lesser in any way to the people who could enter the assembly.
Same answer as above for the genital mutilation. Malakoi put with the drunkards, thieves and other sinners may shows God's attitude to practising homosexuals or may mean something quite different, as proposed here: ‘Man-Lyers’ and Other Strange Phrases - mccsouthlondon
Whatever the case it is not discrimination against people but is teaching about certain practices.
In the OT God is the King over the nation of Israel and acts to defend and protect them. Considering what God wanted of His people and the Covenant rules and penalties for going after other Gods, it seems He was protecting them from the results of their conduct. It was not a discrimination against those in the other cultures with different religions, it was ultimately preparing a people to be holy and to bring forth the Messiah, the saviour of all peoples.
Of course, many people, including Christians, do not understand the violence of God in the OT to protect His people and give them a land etc.
It really is not that God has changed in the New Testament. The wrath of God against the world is pictures as a bit of a blood bath in both the OT and NT.
But that judgement is not imo the final judgement which we all will face and be treated equally even if we have only had one testicle in this life.
Also it should be realised that the teachings about how we are to see and treat others are not the same as how God has authority to discriminate for His good reasons in various parts of the scriptures.
Brian2
Veteran Member
You did not answer what I said and what the Bible tells us. If you cannot answer why the Bible contradicts the Baha'i faith in those verses (John 14:15, John 14:26 and John 15:26) and show the Spirit of Truth to be the Holy Spirit that was given to each disciple at Pentecost and to all those who became Christian or become Christian, that is OK. I understand that you believe Baha'u'llah and are willing to deny what the Bible tells us for his sake and the sake of your faith.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Since you believe the Holy Spirit was sent at Pentecost then I guess that should mean that you believe that the Spirit of Truth was sent at Pentecost since the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth.
In the Bible the Advocate and the Spirit of Truth is not the title of a man, that is a Baha'i addition so that Baha'is (those who believe Baha'u'llah) might think that they see Baha'u'llah in Jesus promise.
The logical reason is that in John 14,15 and 16 we see that the Holy Spirit is promised by Jesus to His disciples of 2000 years ago and it came at Pentecost to them. Sounds reasonable to see Jesus promise to them as having been fulfilled at Pentecost. And of course since the Advocate and the Spirit of Truth which can be seen to be the Holy Spirit, are also promised by Jesus to His disciples, that would mean that the Advocate and Spirit of Truth came at Pentecost also.
Actually there is no logical reason to see John 14,15 and 16 as referring to Baha'u'llah for a Christian who does not believe what Baha'u'llah said. It only works logically if you add stuff to the verses and assume the Advocate and Spirit of Truth are also the title of a man who brings the Holy Spirit. But that is not the case Biblically and is confusing and still does not mean that John 14,15 and 16 were not referring to Pentecost for the disciples 2000 years ago, since they are the one to whom the Advocate and Spirit of Truth were promised.
The problem with this suggestion of yours is that the verses below show that the Day of Pentecost was what the prophecy of Joel was referring to. iows it was not speaking of some other comforter coming later.
Acts 2:14 Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15 These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! 16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
And of course Pentecost was not the last time the Spirit of Truth came to Jesus disciples. He comes to all of Jesus disciples according to the Bible and stays with them forever and is in them and reminds them of Jesus words and glorifies Jesus and proceeds from the Father and testifies of Jesus and came when Jesus departed. (necessary for Jesus to go first before the Spirit came because Jesus and the Father are in the Spirit which comes and resides with those who love Him.
John 14:23 Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.
The verses you supply actually contradict that Baha'u'llah is the Son of Man unless you ignore and deny what is written in them.
As I have said to you before, if someone comes along and says "I am the return of Christ, trust me and believe me when I tell you that the Bible does not mean what is written when it speaks about me and my return." that should just throw up a big warning to anyone as it does to most Christians.
But I know that you believe what Baha'u'llah tells you about the Bible and not what is written there. But I come from the other way and believe the Bible and use parts of it as the warnings we have been given about false Christs.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Malakoi. Not arsenokoitus. What did they do wrong?
We believe Baha’u’llah is the Spirit of Truth Christ spoke of so we have a different understanding.
firedragon
Veteran Member
In order to believe that, just like some of the Muslims, you have to prove that these verses are God given prophecy.
Now is the question that would put you and Christians in the same position in order to provide evidence that the Gospel of John is Gods word. How would you do that?
It’s more than sufficient that God’s latest Manifestation confirms it to be so as His Word is the Voice of God on earth.
Sorry to be late to the party. There is a very good paper by Colin Dibdin discussing various approaches to studying the Bible and how Baha’is could approach this important endeavour.
A Bahá'í View of the Bible
In the Gospel of John, Jesus speaks the words “ I am the way, the truth, the light. Nobody goes to the Father except through me” John 14:6. This is often interpreted by evangelical Christians as meaning that one can not come to God except through Jesus.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
And you cannot ever prove that the Spirit of Truth in the verses refers to the Holy Spirit that was given to each disciple at Pentecost and to all those who became Christian or become Christian
What you believe is simply one interpretation of those verses, the commonly accepted Christian interpretation, but that in no way proves that your interpretation is right and the Baha'i interpretation is wrong.
The Bible does not tell you anything because it does not talk. You read it and interpret it according to your own understanding.
It would be a start if you could at least understand that there are various interpretations of the Bible and they are made by people, and that is why all Christians do not have the same beliefs.
Instead of just making the claim over and over again, go ahead and try to assemble some verses and try to prove that the Spirit of Truth is the Holy Spirit that was given to each disciple at Pentecost and to all those who became Christian or become Christian.
If you cannot prove that, it is just a belief, no different from the Baha'i belief.
You believe in your interpretation for the sake of your Christian faith, because you conceded to Baha'u'llah being the Spirit of Truth that would mean that the same man Jesus is not going to return. Moreover, if you believe in the Gospel of John then you have to believe all if it, not only the part that you believe supports your beliefs, and what Jesus clearly says is that He is not going to return to this world.
John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
Given what Jesus said in those verses, there cannot be a second coming if the same man Jesus unless (a) Jesus lied, or (b) the Bible is in error.
But let's look at John 14:19 in the context of John 14. Jesus is saying that the world would see Him no more, but before that Jesus said that He would not leave you comfortless, which is congruent with all the other verses in John 14, 15 and 16 wherein Jesus said that He would send the Comforter from the Father. Jesus never said that the Holy Spirit would come again unto you, He said the I go away, and come again unto you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
“Thou didst ask as to chapter 14, verse 30 of the Gospel of John, where the Lord Christ saith, ‘Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.’ The Prince of this world is the Blessed Beauty; and ‘hath nothing in Me’ signifieth: after Me all will draw grace from Me, but He is independent of Me, and will draw no grace from Me. That is, He is rich beyond any grace of Mine.” Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 170
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Better late than never. Welcome to the party.
Thanks. It's understandable that that's how they would interpret it, as that's what it says.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
If dad said to Johnny when he was 3 years old that he could only ride a tricycle, that a tricycle was the only way, would that mean that Johnny could never ride a 10 speed when he got older?
No, what normally happens is that the tricycle is discarded when he gets old enough to ride a 10 speed ane he rides a 10 speed.
It is the verse most commonly quoted to me by Christians to support their claims of exclusive truth. As with all scriptures, the textural, cultural and historical context needs to be considered.
The statement is made by Jesus just after He informed His disciples of His imminent martyrdom, His disciples were understandably extremely distressed. He comforted them, informing them that in His Father's House there were many mansions and after His departure He would prepare a place for each of them. He then spoke the words:
"I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the father, but by me." (John 14:6)
Was He telling His disciples not to follow Buddhism and Hinduism? That of course would make no sense as Buddhism and Hinduism were largely unknown to His disciples and there are no other specific references in the New Testament that refer to these religions. Perhaps He was criticising Islam? Clearly not, as Islam wasn't to emerge for nearly six hundred years later on the Arabian peninsula.
A much more likely explanation is He was reiterating that He was the Promised Jewish Messiah. We know from history many of the Jews were expecting the Messiah to come at that time and free them from Roman rule. Christ's audience was almost exclusively Jewish.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, because I believe the Spirit of Truth is a specific reference to Baha’u’llah, who brought the Holy Spirit.
As I said in my previous post, you interpret the Bible and assign a meaning to it and it is according to what you already believe from other verses and Christian teachings. The Bible does not say that the Spirit of Truth in John 14 and John 16 is the Holy Spirit that was sent at Pentecost as per Acts 2, you just assume that because of what you already believe. That is a Christian addition so that Christians don’t have to see Baha'u'llah because if they did they could no longer believe that the same man Jesus is going to return.
However there is no reason to see the Advocate and the Spirit of Truth as the Holy Spirit that was sent at Pentecost, because the Bible does not say that.
Acts 2:1-4 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
However there is no reason to believe the Advocate and the Spirit of Truth were the Holy Spirit that was sent at Pentecost, because the Bible does not say that. There is nothing in the Bible that says that the Advocate and Spirit of Truth were sent to the disciples 2000 years ago.
Actually there is no logical reason to see John 14,15 and 16 as referring to the Holy Spirit that was sent at Pentecost for a Baha’i who does not believe Christian teachings. It only works logically if you add Christian teachings to the verses and assume the Advocate and Spirit of Truth are referring to the Holy Spirit that was sent at Pentecost. But that still does not mean that John 14,15 and 16 were not referring to Baha’u’llah as the Comforter and the Spirit of Truth.
Acts 2:14-15 do not show that the Day of Pentecost was what the prophecy of Joel was referring to. Clearly, Acts 2:16-22 are referring to what will happen in the last days, which is when Christ was slated to return.
Joel was speaking of the last days when God would pour His Spirit upon all flesh, not only the Christians:
Acts 2
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Spirit of Truth came to Jesus’ disciples and did all of what you said. Baha’u’llah who was the Spirit of Truth did all those things -- reminds us of Jesus’ words and glorified Jesus and proceeded from the Father and testified of Jesus.
I know that the Holy Spirit came to the disciples after Jesus died because that is what Abdu’l-Baha wrote.
Question.—What is the manner, and what is the meaning, of the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles, as described in the Gospel?
Answer.—The descent of the Holy Spirit is not like the entrance of air into man; it is an expression and a simile, rather than an exact or a literal image. No, rather it is like the entrance of the image of the sun into the mirror—that is to say, its splendor becomes apparent in it.
After the death of Christ the disciples were troubled, and their ideas and thoughts were discordant and contradictory; later they became firm and united, and at the feast of Pentecost they gathered together and detached themselves from the things of this world. Disregarding themselves, they renounced their comfort and worldly happiness, sacrificing their body and soul to the Beloved, abandoning their houses, and becoming wanderers and homeless, even forgetting their own existence. Then they received the help of God, and the power of the Holy Spirit became manifested; the spirituality of Christ triumphed, and the love of God reigned. They were given help at that time and dispersed in different directions, teaching the Cause of God, and giving forth proofs and evidences.
So the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles means their attraction by the Christ Spirit, whereby they acquired stability and firmness. Through the spirit of the love of God they gained a new life, and they saw Christ living, helping and protecting them. They were like drops, and they became seas; they were like feeble insects, and they became majestic eagles; they were weak and became powerful. They were like mirrors facing the sun; verily, some of the light became manifest in them.”
Some Answered Questions, pp. 106-107
You can read the whole chapter here: 24: THE DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT UPON THE APOSTLES
No, they do not deny that Jesus was the Son of Man. Jesus was the Son of Man and Baha’u’llah was the return of the Son of Man in another human frame.
As I have said to you before, what is written in the Bible is that Jesus is never going to return to earth:
John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
So if someone comes along and says "I am the return of Christ, trust me and believe me when I tell you that the Bible does not mean what is written when it speaks about me and my return." that should just throw up a big warning to anyone.
Matthew 24:4-5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
That's right, warning flags should go up if anyone showed up and claimed to be Jesus Christ since Jesus never planned to return in the same body with the same name.
But I know that you believe what Christianity teaches you about the Bible and not what is written there. But I come from the other way and believe what the Bible actually says:
John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Last edited:
You keep quoting Pentecost and how that is when the promises were fulfilled.
Why was it none of the signs of the end of ages were also witnessed?
How do you explain the verses that promise the Jews will return to the Holy land and their Messiah will reign?
Regards Tony
Last edited:
You make some excellent points. I especially like that we must look at what the Bible says, not follow the commonly held interpretations, for they may be wrong.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Well, all the Bahai's who have participated so far in my opinion is against this Dibdin person. He obviously does not have any choice but admit the most blatant, kindergarten level scholarship that says no one knows who in the world were the authors of the canonical Gospels. There is nothing more blatant than that in any kind of NT scholarship. But the Bahai's have been saying otherwise.
Nevertheless, I thank you for a nice read. Though I think this paper by Dibdin is one of the most unscholarly works I have ever read, it was good to know the perspective they have taken. I dont know why they have given scholars like FF Bruce, one of the most respected and revered Bible scholars, when they have not taken anything substantive from his work. This is full of assumptions. Though the Gospels were utterly anonymous, lets just assume "they were uplifted and inspired". Think about it, how in the world is that a valid thesis? For the sake of our faith, lets just assume this. Thats great???
I dont know what to say brother.
Peace.