Christian and Baha'i concepts of eternal life, the immortal soul and life after death

[Vouthon]

So long story short, Paul is accorded a high station in the Baha'i writings. If we are to consider Paul's view on life after death, or any of the Apostolic letters we have an excellent starting point.

Agreed, unlike our Muslim friends, Baha'is commendably recognise the importance and authority of St. Paul within the Christian revelation.

Since you had a Christian, indeed Protestant, upbringing - you will no doubt already be aware of the importance of Paul's writings to Christian theology and worship.

In terms of references from Baha'i scripture about Paul, I think it's significant that Baha'u'llah quotes him authoritatively in the Epistle to the Son of Wolf as illustrative of the Baha'i understanding of government, as part of a section referencing: "the words of the Prophets of God and His chosen ones".

He first cites Jesus's statement in the gospels about rendering to Caesar what is Caesar's, then Muhammad in the Qur'an and then writes:


Search – Authoritative Writings and Guidance | Bahá’í Reference Library

that from him may be manifested that which will everlastingly endure in Thy Books, and Thy Scriptures, and Thy Tablets....​

In the Epistle to the Romans Saint Paul hath written: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.” And further: “For he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” He saith that the appearance of the kings, and their majesty and power are of God.​

I think that to reference St. Paul - calling him Saint Paul as well, note, not just Paul but addressing him by his appropriate Christian honorific - as his third prophetic reference from the scriptures of preceding dispensations after Jesus and Muhammad, is surely a signifier of the esteem in which Baha'u'llah apparently held the Pauline epistles.

ʻAbdu'l-Bahá furthers this trend and is even more explicit about Paul's authority within early Christianity, in his Some Answered Questions:


Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

For example, in the days of Moses, that which was required by and consonant with the conditions prevailing at that time was the Mosaic Law. However, in the days of Christ, those conditions had so changed as to render the Mosaic Law unsuited and ill-adapted to the needs of mankind, and it was therefore abrogated. Thus Christ broke the Sabbath and forbade divorce.

After Him four disciples, Peter and Paul among them, permitted the eating of such animal foods as had been forbidden in the Torah, excepting the consumption of the meat of animals that had been strangled, of sacrifices made to idols, and of blood. They also forbade fornication.79 Thus they maintained these four commandments.

Later Paul permitted the eating of strangled animals, of those sacrificed to idols, and of blood, but maintained the prohibition of fornication. Thus in Romans 14:14 he writes: “I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” Moreover, in Titus 1:15 it is written: “Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.”

3Now, this change, alteration, and abrogation was due to the fact that the age of Christ could not be compared to that of Moses. The conditions and requirements had entirely changed, and the former commandments were therefore abrogated.​

As you can see, Paul is recognised as one of "four disciples" - by this, he's referring to the Council of Jerusalem and Peter, James (Jesus's brother), Paul and Barnabus - who had the legitimate authority to further abrogate the Torah for Gentiles.

Paul is then listed as having done this again but this time by himself, on his own authority.

And Abdu'l-Baha recognises this Pauline abrogation as a legitimate pursuance, development, of the standard already set by Christ.

Since Paul's authentic letters are the earliest Christian scriptural texts, I thus agree that his statements on the afterlife are a good place to start if we want to ascertain what the understanding of the earliest Christian generation might have been.

 

[Vouthon]

@adrian009 There's an interesting study by Juan Cole, published in Journal of the American Academy of Religion Vol. 65, No. 1 (Spring, 1997), which analyses Baha'u'llah's teachings on Jesus and Christianity.

He was likewise struck by Baha'u'llah's respect for Saint Paul in an Islamic milieu:


Behold the Man: Baha'u'llah on the Life of Jesus on JSTOR

The Book of Certitude was addressed to a Shi'ite Muslim. Still, the New Testament was potentially important for the new religion in a number of ways. Its eschatological emphasis on Christ's return and the clearly symbolic nature of Jesus' parables and prophecies resonated powerfully with Shi'ite esotericism and expectations about the rise of a divinely-guided Mahdi and the return of Jesus at the End-Time. In constituting a largely spiritual document that was held by Christians to have abrogated a law-oriented Torah, the New Testament offered Baha'u'llah a model for moving away from the emphasis on Islamic law (shari'ah) that pervaded urban, literate Shi'ite culture, as well as a precedent for abrogating such an elaborated legal code....​

Late in his life Baha'u'llah argued that the sort of sovereignty Jesus possessed did not conflict with civil authority. Jesus' position on the relationship of his followers to the Roman empire, as reported in the Syn- optics and generally interpreted by nineteenth-century Christians, was increasingly appealing for Baha'u'llah as he founded a new religion in the Middle East....

In this regard, he pledged to Nasiru'd-Din Shah that Baha'is would recognize the legitimacy of his government (though he did not offer to give way on matters of principle, such as the Baha'i belief in the need for constitutional and parliamentary rule), and he cited in support of this position Mk. 12:17, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." He supports this verse with Qur'an (4:59), "Obey God and obey the Apostle, and those among you invested with authority," which he says refers first of all to the Imams and then to secular rulers. On this theme Baha'u'llah also quotes the Apostle Paul's (hhdat-i Bulus-i Qiddis) Epistle to the Romans (13:1-2), "Let every soul be subject to the higher powers ..." (Baha'u'llah 1971a:89-91; 1982:60-61). Later Christian exegetes often interpreted Jesus' saying about Caesar and Paul's epistle as urging quiteism....

It should also be noted here that Baha'u'llah's willingness to cite the Epistle to the Romans as authoritative is even more remarkable than his acceptance of the four Gospels, since Muslims most often saw Paul as a corruptor of Christianity and importer into it of Hellenistic ideas...

Baha'u'llah's Jesus is primarily a teacher of Wisdom rather than a miracle-worker, and his teachings about the kingdom of God force him to be constantly on the move because they provoke the ire of the Establishment...."​

It's actually quite extraordinary, from both a Baha'i and Islamic theological perspective, that Baha'u'llah references first Jesus in the synoptic gospels, then Muhammad in the Qur'an (two Manifestations of God in the Baha'i schema) and then St. Paul to a Muslim scholar Ḥájí Mírzá Ḥasan-'Alí in the Iqan.

Given the amount of opprobrium Muslim scholars have heaped upon St. Paul down the centuries, as a'corrupter' of the gospel, this was a notably daring stance to take.

And as Cole notes, Baha'u'llah was not engaged in missionary outreach to the Christian world at this stage. So he had no apologetic reason to reference Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans as an authoritative scriptural linchpin in his argument, other than the fact that he really did recognise him as a (small "p") inspired prophet and legitimate apostle of Christ (you know, the Manifestation - Lesser prophet hierarchy in the Baha'i Faith, Saint Paul like Saint Peter and Imam Ali thus have a 'lesser prophetic' station).

 

[Dawnofhope]

@adrian009 There's an interesting study by Juan Cole, published in Journal of the American Academy of Religion Vol. 65, No. 1 (Spring, 1997), which analyses Baha'u'llah's teachings on Jesus and Christianity.

He was likewise struck by Baha'u'llah's respect for Saint Paul in an Islamic milieu:


Behold the Man: Baha'u'llah on the Life of Jesus on JSTOR

It's actually quite extraordinary, from both a Baha'i and Islamic theological perspective, that Baha'u'llah references first Jesus in the synoptic gospels, then Muhammad in the Qur'an (two Manifestations of God in the Baha'i schema) and then St. Paul to a Muslim scholar Ḥájí Mírzá Ḥasan-'Alí in the Iqan.

Given the amount of opprobrium Muslim scholars have heaped upon St. Paul down the centuries, as a'corrupter' of the gospel, this was a notably daring stance to take.

And as Cole notes, Baha'u'llah was not engaged in missionary outreach to the Christian world at this stage. So he had no apologetic reason to reference Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans as an authoritative scriptural linchpin in his argument, other than the fact that he really did recognise him as a (small "p") inspired prophet and legitimate apostle of Christ (you know, the Manifestation - Lesser prophet hierarchy in the Baha'i Faith, Saint Paul like Saint Peter and Imam Ali thus have a 'lesser prophetic' station).

Baha'u'llah's work the Kitab-i-Iqan written is considered the second most important of His works, the most important being the Kitab-i-Aqdas. It was written to one of the Uncles of the Bab, Ḥájí Mírzá Siyyid Muḥammad, who had been perplexed to hear that the promised one of Islam was his own nephew. When he was told that this was the same objection voiced by the uncle of the prophet of Islam, he was shaken and decided to investigate the matter. In 1861 he travelled to Karbala, Iraq, to visit his brother, Ḥájí Mírzá Ḥasan-'Alí, and then went to Baghdad to meet Bahá'u'lláh. There he posed four questions about the signs of the appearance of the promised one in writing to Bahá'u'lláh. The 200 pages (in original languages) of the Kitáb-i-Íqán were written in the course of at most two days and two nights in reply about January 15, 1861

Kitáb-i-Íqán - Wikipedia

At this stage Baha'u'llah had not even declared that He was 'Him Whom God shall make Manifest'. The sole focus of the Bab's mission had been to prepare His followers to recognise for the Advent of another Prophet of God whose mission would excel His Own.

Shoghi Effendi has offered the following lengthy description of the book's content:

Within a compass of two hundred pages it proclaims unequivocally the existence and oneness of a personal God, unknowable, inaccessible, the source of all Revelation, eternal, omniscient, omnipresent and almighty; asserts the relativity of religious truth and the continuity of Divine Revelation; affirms the unity of the Prophets, the universality of their Message, the identity of their fundamental teachings, the sanctity of their scriptures, and the twofold character of their stations; denounces the blindness and perversity of the divines and doctors of every age; cites and elucidates the allegorical passages of the New Testament, the abstruse verses of the Quran, and the cryptic Muhammadan traditions which have bred those age-long misunderstandings, doubts and animosities that have sundered and kept apart the followers of the world's leading religious systems; enumerates the essential prerequisites for the attainment by every true seeker of the object of his quest; demonstrates the validity, the sublimity and significance of the Báb's Revelation; acclaims the heroism and detachment of His disciples; foreshadows, and prophesies the world-wide triumph of the Revelation promised to the people of the Bayán; upholds the purity and innocence of the Virgin Mary; glorifies the Imams of the Faith of Muhammad; celebrates the martyrdom, and lauds the spiritual sovereignty, of the Imam Husayn; unfolds the meaning of such symbolic terms as "Return," "Resurrection," "Seal of the Prophets" and "Day of Judgment"; adumbrates and distinguishes between the three stages of Divine Revelation; and expatiates, in glowing terms, upon the glories and wonders of the "City of God," renewed, at fixed intervals, by the dispensation of Providence, for the guidance, the benefit and salvation of all mankind. Well may it be claimed that of all the books revealed by the Author of the Bahá'í Revelation, this Book alone, by sweeping away the age-long barriers that have so insurmountably separated the great religions of the world, has laid down a broad and unassailable foundation for the complete and permanent reconciliation of their followers.

Although the emergence of the Babi and Baha'i religions took place almost exclusively within an Islamic setting this work makes numerous references to the Christian Bible. One of Baha'u'llah's criticisms of the Islam Clerics is their rejection of the Christian Bible and more specifically the Gospels. He essentially calls them vain and foolish for imagining the Gospels to be corrupted. He emphasises the contradiction of God's Gracious Providence being manifest through Christ and then the absurdity of the Christians being deprived of any meaningful record of His Revelation until the Islamic Dispensation. Baha'u'llah provides commentary on some key verses from the Olivet discourse.

So regardless of Who Baha'u'llah is, His Teachings emphasise the essential authenticity of the Christian Bible including the station of Paul as an Apostle and as you mention a minor prophet of God. The implications of this particular break from Islam are monumental. Pragmatically it readily allowed the Baha'i Faith to establish in the Christian West. In fact it would be predominantly the Baha'is of North America who would spread the Baha'i faith throughout the planet during the twentieth century, as persecution of Baha'is in the Islamic world prevented Baha'is from a Muslim background being the main champions of spreading Baha'u'llah's Message. Perhaps a parallel can be noted between the Gentiles instead of the Jews spreading the Gospel of Christ.

Abdu'l-Baha in his later years travelled to the West once he was free to do so. He had spent most of his life being a prisoner of the Ottoman Empire along with His Father and was subject to further restrictions in the early part of twentieth century preventing him from travelling. He finally made it to North America in 1912 and was offered a ticket on the state of the art Ship, the Titanic. Abdu'l-Baha intuitively declined the generous offer preferring to travel by more modest means. So Abdu'l-Baha during his nine month journey to America, empowered the Western Baha'i community and spoke at length about the mysteries of the Christian bible, encouraging Baha'is to unravel them all. This work was continued by His eldest grandson, Shoghi Effendi who married a Canadian woman, Mary Maxwell, titled Ruhhiyah Khanum.

Rúhíyyih Khánum - Wikipedia

The upshot of all these developments for a Baha'i convert from a Christian background such as myself, is the Baha'i Faith has been a very natural and comfortable transition from Christianity. So I feel very much at home amongst Christians, ironically even more than I did as a Christian. The conversations between Baha'is and Christians appear much easier than those between Muslims and Christians. Instead of proving how the Christian Bible is corrupt as it contradicts with needlessly literal interpretations of the Quran, the conversation is directed towards understanding what the Bible authors meant based not only on what Christian and Jewish thinkers have to say but giving due consideration to the Quran and Baha'i Writings.

 

[Muffled]

In this thread I'm wanting to explore how concepts of an afterlife are understood in both Christianity and the Baha'i Faith. How are they similar and where do they differ? How do they relate to our purpose in this life? What are the key sacred writings from the Christian Bible or Baha'i writings that would define Christian and Baha'i beliefs. How about some of the scholars from your faiths? What do they have to say?

I'm also interested in how the after life is viewed in Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism too and how they would compare to either Christianity and the Baha'i Faith. I'm focusing on Christianity and the Baha'i Faith to keep this thread relatively focused and clear. I acknowledge other faiths or the position of no faith may or may not have greater truth than either of these two religion.

I'll get the ball rolling by starting with some very basic Baha'i concepts.

The life of the individual begins at conception, when the soul associates itself with the embryo. When death occurs, the body returns to the world of dust, while the soul continues to progress in the spiritual worlds of God.


“To consider that after the death of the body the spirit perishes,” ‘Abdu’l-Bahá has said “is like imagining that a bird in a cage will be destroyed if the cage is broken, though the bird has nothing to fear from the destruction of the cage. Our body is like the cage, and the spirit is like the bird…if the cage becomes broken, the bird will continue and exist. Its feelings will be even more powerful, its perceptions greater, and its happiness increased…”


The world beyond, writes Bahá’u’lláh, “is as different from this world as this world is different from that of the child while still in the womb of its mother.” Just as the womb provides the environment for a person’s initial physical development, the phenomenal world is the arena within which we develop the spiritual characteristics and capacities that we need for our onward journey. Both here and in the next life, we advance with the assistance of God’s bounty and grace. Also important to the progress of our souls in the next world are the good deeds carried out in our names here on earth, and the sincere prayers of our families and friends.

Life and Death | What Bahá’ís Believe

There's more that could be said but the Baha'i writings and our official website seem like a logical starting point when discussing the Baha'i Faith. How about Christianity? Where should we begin in analysing what the Bible has to say?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts. I'm really wanting to better understand the different streams of Christian thought and how it differs from my own beliefs as a Baha'i.

I believe it would be nice if a soul progressed but I don't believe it always happens. I have no idea of what is meant by "the spiritual worlds of God."

No doubt the spirit has a new freedom but I have my doubts about feeling, perceptions and happiness.

 

[coconut theology]

The life of the individual begins at conception, when the soul associates itself with the embryo.

The first is Roman Catholic theology, called 'ensoulment'.

Scripture teaches that the whole person which is breathing is a "living soul", not that the person 'has' a "soul".

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.​

When death occurs, the body returns to the world of dust, while the soul continues to progress in the spiritual worlds of God.

The second premise is of the serpent theology from the Garden of Eden, and is spiritualism, and also Roman Catholic paganistically 'baptized' theology (which they admit is not gotten from scripture, but teleology, etc). Such teaching destroys the Everlasting Gospel (immortalizing the old man of sin), and it also attacks the character of God through its subsequent teachings about hell/hellfire, for it would teach that God would ultimately torture persons eternally (which is blasphemy against God's perfect Character of Love, see the Ten Commandments, which are a transcript of that Character, and see Calvary for true Justice against sin)

Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:​

Yet, scripture teaches that a person who dies, returns to dust, and sleeps in the grave, until their respective resurrection:

The Truth About Death

Sincerely Dead (more details, and a lot more scripture)

The Truth About Hellfire

 

[Muffled]

I believe Jesus was speaking of reincarnation when He said John the Baptist was Elijah.
Matt 11:14 and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come.
When a person dies God decides the person's future:
Heb 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
One may prepare for a future in a spiritual life.
Matt 6:20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.

 

[Muffled]

The first is Roman Catholic theology, called 'ensoulment'.

Scripture teaches that the whole person which is breathing is a "living soul", not that the person 'has' a "soul".

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.​

The second premise is of the serpent theology from the Garden of Eden, and is spiritualism, and also Roman Catholic paganistically 'baptized' theology (which they admit is not gotten from scripture, but teleology, etc). Such teaching destroys the Everlasting Gospel (immortalizing the old man of sin), and it also attacks the character of God through its subsequent teachings about hell/hellfire, for it would teach that God would ultimately torture persons eternally (which is blasphemy against God's perfect Character of Love, see the Ten Commandments, which are a transcript of that Character, and see Calvary for true Justice against sin)

Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:​

Yet, scripture teaches that a person who dies, returns to dust, and sleeps in the grave, until their respective resurrection:

The Truth About Death

Sincerely Dead (more details, and a lot more scripture)

The Truth About Hellfire

I believe that is OT scripture before Jesus mentioned Heaven or reincarnation.

 

[Muffled]

Why the spirits cannot live on, and be judged? Why the physical body is required to be resurrected when the Spirit can live on? Did Jesus have a physical body before He was born from the womb of Mary? Does the Father have a physical body?

I believe He did not. Before incarnation He is the Spirit of God only.

I don't believe he said that.

I believe God prefers to have his creation inhabit bodies.