Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The bible determines what is compatable with it. Baha i is not in many ways. An assertion to the contary doesn't change what the bible insists on.In your view, no.
But we have no trouble whatever reconciling the "distinctions" that you stress and seeing a unified whole.
Peace,
Bruce
I am seeing exactly what I concluded concerning you from your first post becomeing more clear as time goes by. This is one of the most universally understood concepts in Christianity. If you are born again you have the spirit by which to understand spiritual things without it you cannot understand the things of the spirit. God is Spirit.
I do not know why I expect it should but how does this relate to the scriptures I posted? The verses I selected showing how a spiritual born again Christian can understand a wider range of truth than the superficial Christian. That is an expansion not a contraction of information. You are the one who has attempted to chop out any part of the bible you do not like and so your position is a contraction of information not mine. Yes it is a free country for now even though a little bit more freedom is confiscated by our governement each day. So rock on.
Since I have demonstrated my incapacity to spell anything correctly consistently why is this unexpected. Just kidding, I will try. I would hate for the earth to stop spinning because of an apostrophe.
By biblical standards anyone who denies Christ is HE (the unique son of God that was crucified, died, and resurrected) is an anti Christ and not from God. Since Muhammad did this and is responsible for the whole Quran then there is no (why) that can rectify this and make them compatable. This doesn't prove the bible correct and the Quran wrong but it does prove that they are not compatable.
I have seen nothing at all that would justify spending my limited time researching this particular faith out of the hundreds that people assert. There is nothing I need beyond the bible it stretches from before the begining to the end and even beyond, I have no need of a footnote religion that has demonstrated no reason to take it seriously. By anything goes I meant a tendency to be pluralistic and inclusive. If you will create a Baha'i thread and actually state some suffecient reasons why I should bother with this particular faith I promise to read them and respond.
Quranic verse regarding Jesus cruicification, should be interpreted spiritually, not literally. You are unable to prove that What Quran talks about, is the Spirit and Reality of Christ, who was not cruicified.
This is incorrect, I have read the commentary in the English Quran on these verses and the site below is a muslim site and contains an explenation. It is virtually a universal belief that this is a literal belief. Crucifixion it's self has no seperate spiritual meaning. The verse below even gives an explenation of how he physically got out of it.
You make a claim to knowledge that Baha 'i scripture is irrefuteable so you have the burden of proof. So let's hear it. Since even with a spiritual meaning it is still contradictory then that doesn't help you.
I have repeatedly ask for your best proof. I have yet to recieve a single one. A prophecy made about an event that took place two years before it was made and may or may not mention an event in the near future that could have been predicted by any person living at the time because there was plenty of evidence that existed to suggest it falls far short of proof. I have not quit listening to you, so your statement makes no sence.
That was a verse from the bible. God said it not me and I will go with him over you.
And this is a mere assertion besed on nothing at all.
And this is a mere assertion besed on nothing at all.
I have been the one that said he found hormony throughout all scripture. It is you who have had problems with 60% of the new testament and have tried to dismiss it.
You admit he said it but refuse to accept it.
It only contradicts your interpretation and leaves you with an irreconcileable whole. My and most major commentators interpretation reveals a harmony without contradiction.
See above.
Orthedox Christianity includes all Christians who have been born again and are now part of the body of Christ. It does not include people who sit in Church, perform ceremonial actions, and think they can earn their way to heaven. I will admit that how many of each there are would be impossible to determine.
How would you know youhave not refuted any yet?
There is something very unsettling about a person who claims to be a Christian but consistently attacks orthedox Christianity and has defended every other faith in the posts I have seen. As Muhammad Ali said, Nothing is wrong but something ain't right. I restate my desire at this time to cease debating you, as a courtesy I will read any response you post but do not intend a response. At the very least I think our discussion is damaging to God's purpose and gives all those who point out divisions within Christianity as a reason not to believe further reason to do so. If you wish I would consider a one one private debate but make no promises.
Well, it seems to me, when you are shown the Sun, and told you that is the Sun. You close your eye, and say: "I don't see it, prove it to me it is the sun" Well sorry, I cannot show you, if you want to keep your eyes closed
Nice punt. I could just as easily and far more justifiably suggest you are declareing there is a sun outside the darkened interior of a windowless room but will not let me see it or provide evidence for it. You literally have not produced one claim that has devine inspiration as it's most likely (or only reasonable) source. What you produced as a bunch of statements of oriental philosophy, statements concerning events that are recorded in countless other earlier books, unjustified assertions, and theological claims that are impossible to reconcile with facts. So once again I guess punting is the only optioned left for you. If you need help I will and have actually told you what kind of information can be used for the purpose of substantiating a devine author.Well, it seems to me, when you are shown the Sun, and told you that is the Sun. You close your eye, and say: "I don't see it, prove it to me it is the sun" Well sorry, I cannot show you, if you want to keep your eyes closed
I guess the prophet(saws) and the companions were too literal also?
No it doesn't.
I didn't say he was replaced it was Robin who said that. The verses says he was not killed and crucified why mention two things? Simply because crucifixion doesn't always mean death it simply means hanging someone on a cross or tree. If a verse clearly says he is not crucified how dishonest can you be by saying he is?
Even a spiritual interpretation would be contradictory to the verse.Even if we would say that the verse was spiritually it would still contradict if we would say he was crucified so you got a real problem here.
:help: What has this anything to do with a crucifixion?
No, there are both Quranic verses and Hadithes that, not all Quran verses are literal. There are verses with Hidden meanings and Figurative meaning.
Wrong even during Jesus' time peter said he was the unique son of God. The majority of early Church fathers considered him divine. There was a council to settle the matter decreed by Constantine in 325. He invited 1800 bishops, there were a grand total of two, I believe that voted that he was not divine. Whether he was or not is not the real issue however. The most important concept in Christianity is his death and resurrection and its sufficient provision for salvation. Like the apostles said if he be not raised then we are the most to be pitied and we believe in vain. Without faith in Christ being the conduit to heaven Christianity is useless. Islam believes Christ was a prophet they do not believe we are saved by faith in his death and resurrection. If this was a disagreement about how many years David reined, then no big deal. Since this is the chief cornerstone of Christianity then to claim anything other is to be incompatible with it. I could name endless lists where the Quran and Bible contradict but this one is sufficient.
First of all why in the world would I allow Baha'i to contradict writings found in a much older and much more substantial faith. I conclude the Quran is wrong because the bible's record of these events is much closer to the time in which it happened, some of the accounts were eye witnesses, and there are multiple attestations. The bible has sufficient justification to declare the Quran wrong on this issue, Baha'i does not. You seem to invent a new insufficient reason to claim Baha'i should be believed as fast as the old insufficient one is disproven. It appears to be kind of a schizophrenic philosophy. If there were any actual evidence to suggest Baha'i has a divine author the fact that you have not provided a single example when repeatedly asked suggests either the absence of evidence or your knowledge of it. I will even give you an example of what I am referring to. The bible has 2000 plus detailed prophecies, 100% of the ones that should have been were fulfilled to the letter hundreds or more years after they were made, contains a consistent narrative over 1000 plus years 66 books and 40 authors, has accurate scientific knowledge that wasn't known at the time, and sufficient explanatory power and scope etc..... Give me a list of examples that match these credentials and we can discuss them. If you cannot then how could you expect me to seriously consider Baha'i anything other than just another false religion? Once I again I do appreciate your respectful and friendly style but I have seen nothing that gives Baha'i any validity, and I have however seen many claims that suggest that it is completely man made and seriously flawed.