I would agree that Baha'is believe the world religions have the same Divine Origin. We accept that the spiritual teachings are essentially one but that the laws and ordinances can vary as they appeared in varying cultures and had social challenges that were unique for their times. There are laws we follow that are essentially similar however to the laws of previous dispensations. The following I think illustrates how ordinances can change from dispensation to dispensation:
"In the Torah there are many commands concerning the punishment of a murderer. It would not be allowable or possible to carry out these ordinances today. Human conditions and exigencies are such that even the question of capital punishment, -- the one penalty which most nations have continued to enforce for murder, -- is now under discussion by wise men who are debating its advisability. In fact, laws for the ordinary conditions of life are only valid temporarily. ..... Time changes conditions, and laws change to suit conditions. We must remember that these changing laws are not the essentials; they are the accidentals of religion. The essential ordinances established by a Manifestation of God are spiritual; they concern moralities, the ethical development of man and faith in God."
~ Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith , p. 274
Hi there Arthra,
The difficulty for "literalist" Christians is that they have to believe everything in what they call the "OT" is perfect, inerrant and infallible. So the question is: Are the laws in the OT from God? And, how long did God expect them to keep following His Law? Another question is: Did Jesus abolish the Law? Did he only say to keep the Ten Commandments? For me, when there are laws like the one about not mixing fabrics, then it is hard for me to believe it came from God and not man. But, Christians don't say that. Through Paul, they say changed the rules. They say that things like the dietary laws and getting circumcised essentially don't matter. Since those laws don't get a person saved, why burden new converts with Laws that don't matter?
But Christians do follow some of the Laws from the OT, so who determines which ones are still meant to be obeyed? The apostles? The church fathers? The church? Then, which "church"? The dominant Christian church, the one and only "true" church for 1500 years, the Roman Catholics? The early popes were "inspired" by God weren't they? So what they said was the "New Law" sent from God, right? A protestant would have to say "no" I'd suspect. So how about the early church fathers? They new exactly what God wanted them to do, right? I would hope so, since they helped point the way to which letters and stories about Jesus were "inspired" and which ones weren't. So then with the NT as their guide, a Christian could easily see what they need to do to follow the "Commands" of Jesus.
But, it isn't easy. And now 2000 years later, does Christianity have it all together? No. Christians are still trying to figure out what they should and shouldn't do. It's been an ongoing process. I wonder, do they have it right yet? Obviously not. But when it comes to Laws so basic as the Ten Commandments, I'd say yeah, don't lie, don't mess with other peoples spouses and property, love God and all the others... and about the Sabbath? What would have been the big deal if the early Christians would have gathered on Saturday instead of Sunday? And then, try and come up with excuses why they don't.
