Bahai's and the Bible. Errant or Inerrant. Holistic or cherry picking?

[TransmutingSoul]

What is your criteria? This is all too vague. What is your standard?

The explanations given in the Baha'i Writings are the standard I use.

I also see they support what Muhammad said about the Bible.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

I consider what the Bible says by the Standard the Quran has given.

Regards Tony

Okay. So that's your standard!

Simple answer. Thanks for that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Thus, I would like to ask the Bahai's, what methodology they use to pick and choose which parts are good for all of their allusions and prophecies etc etc etc, and what parts are errant. Is there a methodology or is it just ad hoc cherry picking.

There is no methodology nor is it ad hoc cherry picking.
Baha'is are no different from anyone else, including Christians. Christians have no methodology, so why should Baha'is?

Not all Christians believe that the Bible is inerrant and not all Christians believe that everything in the Bible is literally true/historically accurate, so why should Baha'is believe that?

Below are some Baha'i viewpoints but keep in mind that Baha'is all have their own viewpoints and they are free to have them.

3. Mírza Abú'l-Fadl

Mírza Abú'l-Fadl was praised and recommended by 'Abdu'l-Bahá and has been justifiably called the most learned and erudite Bahá'í scholar[16]

Regarding the Old Testament, Fadl said that it contained two types of teaching: a) revelation from God, such as the 10 commandments of Moses, the Psalms of David and the books of the Prophets, and b) historical information, such as the books Joshua, Samuel, Kings and Chronicles "...which contain no statement, sign or hint of being divine speech and therefore should not be considered as revelation."[17]

Concerning the Book of Christ, he wrote that "The Holy Gospels alone contain teachings which can be regarded as the true Words of God; and these teachings do not exceed the contents of a few pages."[18]

Mírza Abú'l-Fadl's contributions are original and lucid, and appear to me to be in harmony with the understanding of the Bible which is argued for in the present paper.

16. Cole, J.R., in "editor's note", Mírza Abú'l-Fadl, Letters & Essays 1886-1913, Kalimat Press, Los Angeles, 1985, p.xiv.

17. Mírza Abú'l-Fadl in Miracles and Metaphors, Kalimat Press, Los Angeles, 1981, pp.11,12.

18. Mírza Abú'l-Fadl in The Bahá'í Proofs, Bahá'í Publishing Trust, Wilmette, Illinios, 1983, p.220.

Conclusion

The Bahá'í viewpoint proposed by this essay has been established as follows: The Bible is a reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book. However, as a collection of the writings of independent and human authors, it is not necessarily historically accurate. Nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God' in the way the original words of Moses and Jesus could have been. Instead there is an area of continuing interest for Bahá'í scholars, possibly involving the creation of new categories for defining authoritative religious literature.

A Baháí View of the Bible

 

[firedragon]

The explanations given in the Baha'i Writings are the standard I use.

I also see they support what Muhammad said about the Bible.

Regards Tony

So now you just changed it.

1. Do you judge the Bible by the standard of the Quran?
2. Or do you judge the Bible by the standard of Bahai writings?

Which one is it?

 

[firedragon]

Baha'is are no different from anyone else, including Christians. Christians have no methodology, so why should Baha'is?

Thats the Tu Quoque fallacy. A fallacious argument. Its like "You too mate, so I can do too". The topic is not about Christians, or Christianity. So dont try to shift the burden onto someone else.

3. Mírza Abú'l-Fadl

Mírza Abú'l-Fadl was praised and recommended by 'Abdu'l-Bahá and has been justifiably called the most learned and erudite Bahá'í scholar[16]

Regarding the Old Testament, Fadl said that it contained two types of teaching: a) revelation from God, such as the 10 commandments of Moses, the Psalms of David and the books of the Prophets, and b) historical information, such as the books Joshua, Samuel, Kings and Chronicles "...which contain no statement, sign or hint of being divine speech and therefore should not be considered as revelation."[17]

Concerning the Book of Christ, he wrote that "The Holy Gospels alone contain teachings which can be regarded as the true Words of God; and these teachings do not exceed the contents of a few pages."[18]

Mírza Abú'l-Fadl's contributions are original and lucid, and appear to me to be in harmony with the understanding of the Bible which is argued for in the present paper.

16. Cole, J.R., in "editor's note", Mírza Abú'l-Fadl, Letters & Essays 1886-1913, Kalimat Press, Los Angeles, 1985, p.xiv.

17. Mírza Abú'l-Fadl in Miracles and Metaphors, Kalimat Press, Los Angeles, 1981, pp.11,12.

18. Mírza Abú'l-Fadl in The Bahá'í Proofs, Bahá'í Publishing Trust, Wilmette, Illinios, 1983, p.220.

Conclusion

The Bahá'í viewpoint proposed by this essay has been established as follows: The Bible is a reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book. However, as a collection of the writings of independent and human authors, it is not necessarily historically accurate. Nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God' in the way the original words of Moses and Jesus could have been. Instead there is an area of continuing interest for Bahá'í scholars, possibly involving the creation of new categories for defining authoritative religious literature.

A Baháí View of the Bible

Okay. I respect that answer.

With all due respect, why not answer directly like this every time, consistently without shifting the burden to someone else, gathering cavalry and trying to include Christians into this argument etc etc?

This is a good answer. Please, you guys are good people, I can see that very clearly. But dont be an evangelist. Give your answer directly like this. Even if I dont agree with this standard, at least I will respect your response.

I am not an expert in the Bahai faith. Not at all. So if you present something like this, I will try and analyse your thesis. But also please remember I will come and ask further questions, maybe in another brand new thread.

Anyway, thanks a lot.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So now you just changed it.

1. Do you judge the Bible by the standard of the Quran?
2. Or do you judge the Bible by the standard of Bahai writings?

Which one is it?

Both. The Quran helped explain the Bible. The Baha'i Writings explain the Quran and the Bible.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

But lots of us don't believe the Bible literally. Lot of us don't believe it is inerrant. But then we don't go around saying how great the Bible is at the same time.

Liberal Christians say how great the Bible is while at the same time they do not believe the Bible literally or that the Bible is inerrant. Why the double standard for Baha'is?

 

[firedragon]

Both. The Quran helped explain the Bible. The Baha'i Writings explain the Quran and the Bible.

Regards Tony

Hmm. Okay. So that's your standard. Finally, some answer. By God it was difficult.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hmm. Okay. So that's your standard. Finally, some answer. By God it was difficult.

The Baha'i standards (how we regard the Bible) are according to the central figures of the Baha'i Faith and the Universal House of Justice (UHJ). Some of their statements are on this website:

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So now you just changed it.

1. Do you judge the Bible by the standard of the Quran?
2. Or do you judge the Bible by the standard of Bahai writings?

Which one is it?

Hmm. Okay. So that's your standard. Finally, some answer. By God it was difficult.

It was 2 different questions I answered.

Also I tried to not give more than you asked for.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

This is the only answer I have seen so far at least that could be accepted as your theological standpoint. At least that.

Peace.

We are not permitted to put forward any interpretation and call it authoritative. So whatever was written by them is all we can say is authoritative. No Bahá’í scholar can assert his view as authoritative and we have no priests or clergy.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This is the only answer I have seen so far at least that could be accepted as your theological standpoint. At least that.

Peace.

It is strange that this correct answer was given by a non-bahai in this thread. I think just a few minutes before you, LOH gave the same answer.

Yes, you are right. This is the answer that Bahai's should give, and this is the truth. But the thing is, I have read Bahaullah's main work, not all and it is evident that it was not him predominantly the Bahai's use as this standard, but others. But still this is the only valid answer. Thanks.

Thus the Bible is weighed by itself, the Quran and the Baha'i Writings, they balance each other.

It was offerd earlier that the interpretation of the Bible is by its own standard, the standard given in the Quran and by the standard given in the Baha'i Writings. The Baha'i Writings include the works of the Bab, Baha’u’llah, Abdu'lbaha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice.

I assume you oveooked that comment, as I used 3 quotes from the writings as to why I used that standard.

That was before your other questions.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

It is strange that this correct answer was given by a non-bahai in this thread. I think just a few minutes before you, LOH gave the same answer.

Yes, you are right. This is the answer that Bahai's should give, and this is the truth. But the thing is, I have read Bahaullah's main work, not all and it is evident that it was not him predominantly the Bahai's use as this standard, but others. But still this is the only valid answer. Thanks.

Excerpt of a letter from Universal House of Justice:

The interpretation of biblical prophecies has long been the subject of controversy and speculation among religious scholars. As Bahá'ís, we know that we must turn to the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi for authoritative guidance in these matters. (17 January 1978 to an individual believer)

Our own views and that of scholars do not count. So, often what Baha’is are stating has come from either Baha’u’llah, Abdul-Baha or Shoghi Effendi and can be traced back to one of their Writings. Some cannot and are just personal opinions.

 

[firedragon]

It was 2 different questions I answered.

Also I tried to not give more than you asked for.

Regards Tony

Okay okay I get it. Lol. I like your sarcasm as well. Nothing wrong with catching me with my own standards.

Cheers Tony.

 

[firedragon]

Excerpt of a letter from Universal House of Justice:

The interpretation of biblical prophecies has long been the subject of controversy and speculation among religious scholars. As Bahá'ís, we know that we must turn to the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi for authoritative guidance in these matters. (17 January 1978 to an individual believer)

Our own views and that of scholars do not count. So, often what Baha’is are stating has come from either Baha’u’llah, Abdul-Baha or Shoghi Effendi and can be traced back to one of their Writings. Some cannot and are just personal opinions.

Yep. I agree. Finally, I get some real answers.

it’s not that I agree with the standard and I will discuss that extensively, but I agree that this is the standard. Hope you understand that statement.

This is how people of value speaks specifically, and I respect that.

I’m on the phone so mind me being abrupt. Peace.

 

[Brian2]

There is nothing in the Bible that refutes the Bahai beliefs. Thus, there is nothing in the Bible that a Bahai will say, this is an error in Bible, or making excuses.
Have you ever seen a Bahai tells you, this part of Bible is false?
If the verses of Bible support the Bahai view, therefor it does. It does not mean Bahais are cherry picking, the part that supports and then reject a part that does not support.
Have you ever seen anything in the Bible that you think it refuted or contredicts the Bahai view?

I have seen things in the Bible which refute and contradict the Baha'i view and parts which Baha'is say are false.

 

[Brian2]

If a person believed in the entirety of the bible, wouldn't that, by definition, make him a Christian?

It should but Baha'i teaches that the dispensation of Jesus ended with the coming of a new Messenger. The gospel is done away with in that way.

 

[Brian2]

“Rev. 1:14–16; 2:18; 19:15”

“Meditate then upon the utterance of one of the Prophets as He intimated to the souls of men, through veiled allusions and hidden symbols, the glad-tidings of the One Who was to come after Him,.........................
.

Rev 1:14-16 is seen to be about Jesus because of what is said in this verses:
Rev 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
In Rev 2:18 the verse itself identifies this person as Jesus.
Rev 2:18 And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;
With Rev 19:15 we also see Jesus identified in the surrounding scripture. The New Testament tells us that it is Jesus who is to judge the world and
Rev 19:13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.
Rev 15................................................................
He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
king of kings and lord of lords.

 

[Brian2]

Yes and I see we are, we practice a new law though, just as Christianity reflect the way they interact with the Old Testament

Likewise we follow Krishna and Zoroaster and Muhammad, to name a few.

Regards Tony

I don't think anything can surpass the law of love that Jesus left.
And really how can you think that you are a Christian if Baha'i abolishes the very gospel message that makes someone a Christian?

 

[Brian2]

Sorry that is not relevant to such a discussion. A Baha'i view is all embracing and Bible concepts are found in all Holy Writings and other Holy writings are needed to explain the Bible.

The Quran is needed to correct doctrines made from Bible passages, so must also be used.

Regards Tony

Why is the Quran used to correct the Bible and not the other way around?