New Testament Criticism, Quran Criticism, the Bahai's and their divine inspiration

[TransmutingSoul]

\I am talking about adopting a false verse in the Bible thinking its genuine by them. E.g. Bahaullah and the ascension. And that's only one small point.

If it is used in the Baha'i Writings, it is not a false verse. That for us is faith based fact that will be found to be so.

Also, if it is not in the original, it does not matter, as its inclusion was meant to be as what I have found in my search is that Baha'u'llah had innate knowledge.

I am currently reading God Passes By and He has said the 2 years where He lived as a Hermit in Kurdistan are "the mightiest testimony" to, and "the most perfect and conclusive evidence of, the truth of His Revelation. This was because even then souls from far and wide were attracted to the Word.

It is because I have read of the incidents in Baha'u'llah's life, that I can make such irrefutable faith base statements, incidents such as this;

".... Amazed by the profundity of His insight and the compass of His understanding, they were impelled to seek from Him what they considered to be a conclusive and final evidence of the unique power and knowledge which He now appeared in their eyes to possess. “No one among the mystics, the wise, and the learned,” they claimed, while requesting this further favor from Him, “has hitherto proved himself capable of writing a poem in a rhyme and meter identical with that of the longer of the two odes, entitled Qásidiy-i-Ta’íyyih composed by Ibn-i-Faríd. We beg you to write for us a poem in that same meter and rhyme.” This request was complied with, and no less than two thousand verses, in exactly the manner they had specified, were dictated by Him, out of which He selected one hundred and twenty-seven, which He permitted them to keep, deeming the subject matter of the rest premature and unsuitable to the needs of the times. It is these same one hundred and twenty-seven verses that constitute the Qásidiy-i-Varqá’íyyih, so familiar to, and widely circulated amongst, His Arabic speaking followers.... " In a short time over 100,000 people had embraced Baha'u'llah in Kurdistan, and yet He was still some 8 years away from a public declaration.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

By reason. Aqal.

So you have a theory called Aqal, I use Baha'u'llah.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

If it is used in the Baha'i Writings, it is not a false verse. That for us is faith based fact that will be found to be so.

Nope. It is a false verse. So saying its a faith based fact is just ignoring that its false, and you just dont wish to accept that.

Also, if it is not in the original, it does not matter, as its inclusion was meant to be as what I have found in my search is that Baha'u'llah had innate knowledge.

Hmm. So forgeries are meant to be? I think that is worse than any Christian evangelist apologetic I have heard. Nice.

The rest is just preaching brother. Not valid.

So you have a theory called Aqal, I use Baha'u'llah.

Regards Tony

More preaching.

Sorry but you guys are unable to face facts so you dont have a choice but to resort to preaching.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Haha. So your faith on the Quran is based on your personal experience with the Holy Spirit and the same with the Bible right? Thats your criteria. The Holy Spirit.

So through the Holy Spirit, could you find out and let me know who wrote the book of Hebrews? Second time within a few minutes I ask this same question from you.



This is a strawman argument. I didnt ask you for proof of why you should believe in anything. you have told me that you even believe in the Buddhist scripture and claimed you have studied them but you have not even read some of them. So you could believe in the Dasathir if you want. Thats not my argument.

Read the OP again maybe.

I don’t know who wrote it exactly. But we can try to verify it’s authenticity by consulting the Holy Books of other Messengers of God.

The only way to verify the authenticity of any Holy Book we believe, is through a Divine Messenger because He has infallible knowledge, while we are prone to error.

Christ confirmed Moses and Muhammad confirmed the truth of Christ, the Torah and Gospels. Subsequent Messengers usually clear up misconceptions and misinterpretations as well. So, for instance, Muhammad said the trinity was a misconception although it is not mentioned in the Bible specifically but a church doctrine.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Nope. It is a false verse. So saying its a faith based fact is just ignoring that its false, and you just dont wish to accept that.



Hmm. So forgeries are meant to be? I think that is worse than any Christian evangelist apologetic I have heard. Nice.

The rest is just preaching brother. Not valid.



More preaching.

Sorry but you guys are unable to face facts so you dont have a choice but to resort to preaching.

God says ‘Be’ and it ‘is’. Do you believe in God? If not I understand your position. But we believe that God can do whatever He wishes and is not restrained by our views.

Once God has incorporated any Word or letter or phrase into His Messengers teachings or Words it axiomatically becomes the Word of God irrespective of what it was previously.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I was not talking about believing. Strawman argument. I was talking about your comparison of the Bible and the Quran.



How do you know that "it was the Holy Spirit who affected these people"?

You are a person who seems to speak to this Holy Spirit, but you cannot even provide a simple answer to a question you could clarify from the Holy Spirit. And you claim people during Muhammed time were also affected by the Holy Spirit and that was the basis to their faith. Can you provide evidence to this or are you just gonna keep making statements like in a temple and some priest keeps making preaching like statements. "I speak to the Holy Spirit, so believe what I say".

Amazing.

How do I know? Because the Holy Spirit teaches truth. Of course people in Muhammad’s time were spiritually affected. He wasn’t offering money or jobs, they joined Him because they felt the Holy Spirit in Him, in His Words, deeds and life.

His call was one to self sacrifice and martyrdom not endless wealth so unless they had some spiritual connection to Him, why would they offer up their lives for His Cause?

Of course it was obvious that the Holy Spirit inspired His Companions as they were tortured and had to flee from Mecca. What for when they could have remained and become wealthy?

It’s obvious to me that His followers gave up their livelihoods and accepted torture and death because of the effect of the Holy Spirit upon them which flowed through Muhammad and the Quran as it was revealed.

 

[firedragon]

How do I know? Because the Holy Spirit teaches truth. Of course people in Muhammad’s time were spiritually affected. He wasn’t offering money or jobs, they joined Him because they felt the Holy Spirit in Him, in His Words, deeds and life.

How do you know?

Of course it was obvious that the Holy Spirit inspired His Companions as they were tortured and had to flee from Mecca. What for when they could have remained and become wealthy?

How is it obvious? See, just saying "its obvious" does not mean that you are not making pure assumptions. Prove it with some kind of evidence.

It’s obvious to me that His followers gave up their livelihoods and accepted torture and death because of the effect of the Holy Spirit upon them which flowed through Muhammad and the Quran as it was revealed.

Nope. Just assumption.

All of this is absolutely invalid in a discussion. Preaching and making faith statements about your personal beliefs about people who lived 1400 years ago is not valid.

 

[firedragon]

God says ‘Be’ and it ‘is’. Do you believe in God? If not I understand your position. But we believe that God can do whatever He wishes and is not restrained by our views.

So God made it happen that the New Testament initially never had a canon. There was nothing called a New Testament. And in comes Athanasian era in the late 4th century and God made him create a canon, but God did not influence them to create the Trinity doctrine but that was their personal work against God since the Bahai faith rejects the trinity doctrine?

The later on come some interpolations, forgeries etc and that was also Gods work.

You making a lot of assumptions about God mate.

Once God has incorporated any Word or letter or phrase into His Messengers teachings or Words it axiomatically becomes the Word of God irrespective of what it was previously.

Nah. Its not valid, because interpolations and these additional verses that appeared in the received text almost a millennium away from Jesus was not done by prophets. So you are just saying a lot of false things. You are seriously making things up as you go. Severe.

There is a group of people called the KJV absolutists, and they have the same belief as you. Although, they are trinitarians, and they are insistent purely due to the trinitarian verses in the Bible. You are taking the same route and the same kind of preaching strategies. Thats making a mockery of your God.

 

[loverofhumanity]

So God made it happen that the New Testament initially never had a canon. There was nothing called a New Testament. And in comes Athanasian era in the late 4th century and God made him create a canon, but God did not influence them to create the Trinity doctrine but that was their personal work against God since the Bahai faith rejects the trinity doctrine?

The later on come some interpolations, forgeries etc and that was also Gods work.

You making a lot of assumptions about God mate.


Nah. Its not valid, because interpolations and these additional verses that appeared in the received text almost a millennium away from Jesus was not done by prophets. So you are just saying a lot of false things. You are seriously making things up as you go. Severe.

There is a group of people called the KJV absolutists, and they have the same belief as you. Although, they are trinitarians, and they are insistent purely due to the trinitarian verses in the Bible. You are taking the same route and the same kind of preaching strategies. Thats making a mockery of your God.

You should be aware that when you name a thread NT criticism snd Quran criticism, that no Bahá’í is going to support that.

They are both the Word of God to us, so we are not going to be drawn into criticising them.

You’ll just have to be content with that.

 

[firedragon]

You should be aware that when you name a thread NT criticism snd Quran criticism, that no Bahá’í is going to support that.

They are both the Word of God to us, so we are not going to be drawn into criticising them.

You’ll just have to be content with that.

By saying "Both are word of God" you are honestly condemning the Quran to the level of the Bible.

Anyway, criticism is not making a mockery out of things. Do you think a Christian pastor engaging in bible criticism is making a mockery out of the Bible?

Please, at least do some google searches on it. You have misunderstood.

Quran and the Bible are not the same. Even your Bahai elders say the same. So it seems like you and the Bahai elders are at loggerheads in this matter.

And you are no authority to tell me brother that "I have to be content" with anything.

Peace.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

By reason. Aqal.

Aqal, or عقل، is the right way. But be careful not to be biased or fanatical, because that would affect aqal, or the ability to reason.


"But, O my brother, when a true seeker
Determineth to take the step of search in the path leading to the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must, before all else, cleanse and purify his heart, which is the seat of the revelation of the inner mysteries of God, from the obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge, and the allusions of the embodiments of satanic fancy. He must purge his breast, which is the sanctuary of the abiding love of the Beloved, of every defilement, and sanctify his soul from all that pertaineth to water and clay, from all shadowy and ephemeral attachments. He must so cleanse his heart that no remnant of either love or hate may linger therein, lest that love blindly incline him to error, or that hate repel him away from the truth. Even as thou dost witness in this day how most of the people, because of such love and hate, are bereft of the immortal Face, have strayed far from the Embodiments of the divine mysteries, and, shepherdless, are roaming through the wilderness of oblivion and error..."

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 161-200

 

[InvestigateTruth]

By saying "Both are word of God" you are honestly condemning the Quran to the level of the Bible.

Anyway, criticism is not making a mockery out of things. Do you think a Christian pastor engaging in bible criticism is making a mockery out of the Bible?

Please, at least do some google searches on it. You have misunderstood.

Quran and the Bible are not the same. Even your Bahai elders say the same. So it seems like you and the Bahai elders are at loggerheads in this matter.

And you are no authority to tell me brother that "I have to be content" with anything.

Peace.

There are many valid questions regarding authenticity of the Bible, and even the Quran and Hadithes.
But in our view, if you only go with opinions of the scholars and historical evidences, you cannot become sure how authentic they really are. Even the Quran was not signed and sealed by Muhammad, so, in reality we cannot be certain it was all authored by Muhammad.
By looking at historical evidences, you cannot prove a particular verse in the Quran or the Bible was certainly from Muhammad or Jesus.
Do you think otherwise?
Take for example the first verse of the Quran, Surah Hamd. Can you prove that verse word for word is authored by Muhammad? You can see it was in the manuscript dating back to Muhammad time, but how do you know that manuscript is authentic? Dating back to Muhammad's time, is not a proof it was authored word for word by Muhammad. Do you see this?

So, if God was to help you, solve that problem what can He do, except confirm it in a subsequent revelation. But when people do not believe in a God, or they do not believe God can speak to us anytime, and sends down a new Revelation, who is depriving himself?

 

[firedragon]

Aqal, or عقل، is the right way. But be careful not to be biased or fanatical, because the would affect aqal, or the ability to reason.

Thanks for the rhetoric, but blind faith is against Aqal. In fact, the exact opposite.

Take for example the first verse of the Quran, Surah Hamd. Can you prove that verse word for word is authored by Muhammad? You can see it was in the manuscript, but how do you know that manuscript is authentic?

Haha. This thread was opened to show your hypocrisy.

You cannot even provide a single manuscript or even a scholarly dating of the Bible close to Jesus or someone who has even met him, but when it comes to Muhammed, you want something else. Compare apple to apple, not apple to atomic bomb.

Its just hypocrisy. Thanks for showing it.

 

[firedragon]

Aqal, or عقل، is the right way

Ill tell you what brother. I think there is no point cutting and pasting arabic words when you dont even understand the difference between a hamza alif. Its pathetic to do this every time.

Cutting and pasting text dont make good argument. Everyone is not that naive.

Cheers.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Thanks for the rhetoric, but blind faith is against Aqal. In fact, the exact opposite.

Yes.

Haha. This thread was opened to show your hypocrisy.

.

Ok, so, that is you intention?

You cannot even provide a single manuscript or even a scholarly dating of the Bible close to Jesus or someone who has even met him, but when it comes to Muhammed, you want something else. Compare apple to apple, not apple to atomic bomb.


Its just hypocrisy. Thanks for showing it.

Why do you need to compare the Quran with Bible?

It seems all you are trying to show is Quran is better than the Bible. But even, you have a hard time to prove that. I agree, there are some inaccuracies in Bible.

But now lets stick with the Quran. I am requesting if you think Quran is authentic, prove to me, the first verse is word for word authored by Muhammad. Can you, or can you not?
Is my request valid or not? Do you take it on faith?

 

[firedragon]

Why do you need to compare the Quran with Bible?

Its explained in the OP. So please read it. This thread was opened due to your own hypocrisy. Metoo, you too, kind of arguments. Its explained in the OP, so dont ask a question that has already been answered.

But now lets stick with the Quran. I am requesting if you think Quran is authentic, prove to me, the first verse is word for word authored by Muhammad. Can you, or can you not?
Is my request valid or not? Do you take it on faith?

Nope. If you ask me a question, ask the same question from the New Testament. Otherwise you are just asking a hypocritical question.

If you want, I shall repeat that sentence again since you seem to have a problem reading.

Here you again. Read carefully.

If you ask me a question, ask the same question from the New Testament. Otherwise you are just asking a hypocritical question.

Show me a NT document autographed by Jesus himself, and ask me for an autograph of Muhammed on the Quran.

Otherwise you are just being a hypocrite.

 

[firedragon]

I think you should not only pay lip service to believing in the Bible as Gods word but also understand it a tad. Maybe the verse "why do you look at the thimble in my eye while you have a plank in yours" or the gist of it was never read by you.

This is pointing at the hypocrite who does exactly that.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Its explained in the OP. So please read it. This thread was opened due to your own hypocrisy. Metoo, you too, kind of arguments. Its explained in the OP, so dont ask a question that has already been answered.



Nope. If you ask me a question, ask the same question from the New Testament. Otherwise you are just asking a hypocritical question.

If you want, I shall repeat that sentence again since you seem to have a problem reading.

Here you again. Read carefully.

If you ask me a question, ask the same question from the New Testament. Otherwise you are just asking a hypocritical question.

Show me a NT document autographed by Jesus himself, and ask me for an autograph of Muhammed on the Quran.

Otherwise you are just being a hypocrite.

I know your OP. But my question is why do you want to compare Quran and Bible?

So, then you agree there is no proof the verses of Quran are certainly word for word authored by Muhammad.


Bahai position is clear. Bahais rely on their own scriptures that explained Bible and Quran. The Bahai scriptures say the Bible is legitimate and overall truth. There are inaccuracies in the Bible but not to the point it changes anything. There is no corruption in Bible. Quran in Bahai faith is considered fully authentic. But again, this is what Bahai scriptures tells us.

Can you prove what Bahai scriptures says is wrong? You have tried so far. Have you refuted the Bahai claim with all honesty?

Non existence of Bible manuscripts dating back to Jesus, is not a proof that the Book is illegitimate. Hope you understand.

 

[firedragon]

I know your OP. But my question is why do you want to compare Quran and Bible?

That is already explained in the OP. Ill tell you what. Since you will probably ask this question again, I shall cut and paste it once more. \
\
"That is already explained in the OP"

Non existence of Bible manuscripts dating back to Jesus, is not a proof that the Book is illegitimate. Hope you understand.

Is that all you cherry picked from this thread?

 

[firedragon]

For the umpteenth time, this thread was opened to expose the hypocrisy of the Bahai's who keep making the same lame Tu Quoque. When asked about the Bible, they say "Just like the Quran", that's the hypocrisy. Its a logical fallacy called "Tu Quoque".

Ask again.