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

[Trailblazer]

Bahais believe the whole Bible is legitimate. There is no corruptions. But there could be inaccuracies in words. Though there is no error in the sense that, there is any false teachings or untrue theology.

That depends upon what you mean by legitimate. One definition of legitimate is "being exactly as intended or presented : neither spurious nor false." Baha'is believe that the resurrection stories are not literally true, thus they are false. Saying that they were written to symbolize something about Jesus and His Cause does not cut it for me because the stories do not say they are symbolic, they read as if they are literally true.

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.

If the Bible stands as God's Word for this age, that would refute Baha'i beliefs, about the equality of man and woman, for example, and that's just for starters.

Moreover, there are plenty of things in the Bible that Baha'is believe are no longer valid in this new age, such as slavery and putting homosexuals and adulterers to death. Was that ever valid? Maybe it was valid 4000 years ago, or maybe not, but Baha'is do not believe it is valid in this new age.

Many things in the Bible are not congruent with Baha'i beliefs. For example, Baha'is do not believe that God lives inside if Jesus Christ or that Holy Spirit lives inside of Christians.

Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

What Does the Bible Say About Holy Spirit Indwelling?

Baha'is do not believe Adam and Eve or that a Garden of Eden ever really existed.

These verses about a woman being subjugated by a man run completely counter to Baha'i beliefs about the equality of man and woman. Baha'is also do not believe that Adam was the first man who was formed before Eve.

1 Timothy 2 KJV

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Have you ever seen a Bahai tells you, this part of Bible is false?

I am a Baha'i and I will tell you I believe that part of the Bible is false. Notwithstanding customs and laws that change over many thousands of years, I believe that the resurrection stories, as written, are 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.

Some verses in the Bible -- the spiritual teachings of Jesus -- are the same as the Baha'i teachings, because these teachings are eternal spiritual truths, so they support each other, but there are other teachings that do not support the Baha'i view.

Have you ever seen anything in the Bible that you think it refuted or contradicts the Baha'i view?

Those verses above about a woman being subjugated by a man are one example, and I am sure there are many more like them. You cannot make a newer religion such as the Baha'i Faith FIT with the Bible because new wine cannot be put into old wine sacs.

Luke 5:37-38 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.

Matthew 9:17 Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Many things in the Bible are not congruent with Baha'i beliefs. For example, Baha'is do not believe that God lives inside if Jesus Christ or that Holy Spirit lives inside of Christians.

Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

I see all these conflicts are just the way we look at them Susan. Baha'u'llah says the Messengers are the 'Self of God'. This aspect is all we can know of God, the Word, the Holy Spirit.

So it is just the way we choose to look at those verses, one can see that "Deity lives in bodily form", is much the same as 'Self of God'. But we know they are not 'GOD'.

We can try all the ones you see are inaccurate and do the same with them. The Law is a different Matter, as you are aware. If we use the law, one would have to offer the New Testament has little to do with the Old Testament, as it is founded in Law.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

That depends upon what you mean by legitimate. One definition of legitimate is "being exactly as intended or presented : neither spurious nor false." Baha'is believe that the resurrection stories are not literally true, thus they are false. Saying that they were written to symbolize something about Jesus and His Cause does not cut it for me because the stories do not say they are symbolic, they read as if they are literally true.

If the Bible stands as God's Word for this age, that would refute Baha'i beliefs, about the equality of man and woman, for example, and that's just for starters.

Moreover, there are plenty of things in the Bible that Baha'is believe are no longer valid in this new age, such as slavery and putting homosexuals and adulterers to death. Was that ever valid? Maybe it was valid 4000 years ago, or maybe not, but Baha'is do not believe it is valid in this new age.

Many things in the Bible are not congruent with Baha'i beliefs. For example, Baha'is do not believe that God lives inside if Jesus Christ or that Holy Spirit lives inside of Christians.

Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

What Does the Bible Say About Holy Spirit Indwelling?

Baha'is do not believe Adam and Eve or that a Garden of Eden ever really existed.

These verses about a woman being subjugated by a man run completely counter to Baha'i beliefs about the equality of man and woman. Baha'is also do not believe that Adam was the first man who was formed before Eve.

1 Timothy 2 KJV

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

I am a Baha'i and I will tell you I believe that part of the Bible is false. Notwithstanding customs and laws that change over many thousands of years, I believe that the resurrection stories, as written, are false.

Some verses in the Bible -- the spiritual teachings of Jesus -- are the same as the Baha'i teachings, because these teachings are eternal spiritual truths, so they support each other, but there are other teachings that do not support the Baha'i view.

Those verses above about a woman being subjugated by a man are one example, and I am sure there are many more like them. You cannot make a newer religion such as the Baha'i Faith FIT with the Bible because new wine cannot be put into old wine sacs.

Luke 5:37-38 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.

Matthew 9:17 Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.

These two quotes make it clear to me:


Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith, wrote through his secretary:


"We do not believe that there was a bodily resurrection after the crucifiction of Christ, but that there was a time after His ascension when His disciples perceived spiritually his true greatness and realized He was eternal in being. This is what has been reported symbolically in the New Testament and been misunderstood. His eating with disciples after resurrection is the same thing.

- High Endeavors: Messages to Alaska, pp.69-70

Resurrection


"Know verily that the purpose underlying all these symbolic terms and abstruse allusions, which emanate from the Revealers of God’s holy Cause, hath been to test and prove the peoples of the world; that thereby the earth of the pure and illuminated hearts may be known from the perishable and barren soil. From time immemorial such hath been the way of God amidst His creatures, and to this testify the records of the sacred books."
- Bahaullah

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 41-80


So, in my understanding it was a test. They were told Jesus was resurrected and goes to heaven and come back. Now, they must be able to pass from this barrier so they can recognize Baha'u'llah. Similarly, the Muslims were told Muhammad is the seal of Prophets. They thought it means no revelation after Muhammad. It is a test. They have to pass from this barrier.

 

[Trailblazer]

The older the records are, the more we should look for the light in what is offered. We tend to dwell more on the darkness.

Why do we need to look at the light in old records when we now have the light of a new Revelation? I will remind you what Baha'u'llah wrote about relating old stories and looking in old records. Make of it what you will. We all interpret the Writings differently.

“…… To this testify the records of the sacred books. Were the details to be mentioned, this epistle would swell into a book. Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past. God is Our witness that what We even now mention is due solely to Our tender affection for thee, that haply the poor of the earth may attain the shores of the sea of wealth, the ignorant be led unto the ocean of divine knowledge, and they that thirst for understanding partake of the Salsabíl of divine wisdom. Otherwise, this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.”
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63

 

[Trailblazer]

I see all these conflicts are just the way we look at them Susan. Baha'u'llah says the Messengers are the 'Self of God'. This aspect is all we can know of God, the Word, the Holy Spirit.

One can always try to twist meanings to try to make the Bible fit with the Baha'i Writings, in an attempt to make Christians believe that we believe exactly what they believe, but I consider that dishonest... Take what Abdu'l-Baha said about the indwelt Holy Spirit, for example. That cannot me made to fit with what Paul said from which is derived the Christian belief that the Holy Spirit literally dwells inside their bodies.

Question.—What is the Holy Spirit?

Answer.—The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God and the luminous rays which emanate from the Manifestations; for the focus of the rays of the Sun of Reality was Christ, and from this glorious focus, which is the Reality of Christ, the Bounty of God reflected upon the other mirrors which were the reality of the Apostles. The descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles signifies that the glorious divine bounties reflected and appeared in their reality. Moreover, entrance and exit, descent and ascent, are characteristics of bodies and not of spirits—that is to say, sensible realities enter and come forth, but intellectual subtleties and mental realities, such as intelligence, love, knowledge, imagination and thought, do not enter, nor come forth, nor descend, but rather they have direct connection.

For example, knowledge, which is a state attained to by the intelligence, is an intellectual condition; and entering and coming out of the mind are imaginary conditions; but the mind is connected with the acquisition of knowledge, like images reflected in a mirror.

Therefore, as it is evident and clear that the intellectual realities do not enter and descend, and it is absolutely impossible that the Holy Spirit should ascend and descend, enter, come out or penetrate,it can only be that the Holy Spirit appears in splendor, as the sun appears in the mirror. Some Answered Questions, p. 108

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

I note an optimistic rating , We know the Messengers are not God, but consider we are being raised to a new level of understanding. I am yet to grasp what it is saying, but it is saying more then we currently give credit to.

"Believe in the Messengers of God and His sovereign might, and in the Self of God and His majesty." "For the Day of God is none other but His own Self, Who hath appeared with the power of truth.."

This is really saying what the Bible has offered in Colossians 2:9 "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form".

Remember it is written in the writings that all we can know of God is the Messengers, no praise we give to God is praise of God, it all reverts back to what we know of the Messengers, who tell us of God. Thus the wisdom as to why Jews do not Mention the name of G_D, as God is above all names and attributes and the 'Greatest Name' has become the 'Glory of God', Baha'u'llah.

Big topic Susan, I have pondered over this for many years, there are many Persians that give even deeper thoughts, my guess is that @InvestigateTruth has many thoughts on this topic as well.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why do we need to look at the light in old records when we now have the light of a new Revelation? I will remind you what Baha'u'llah wrote about relating old stories and looking in old records. Make of it what you will. We all interpret the Writings differently.

“…… To this testify the records of the sacred books. Were the details to be mentioned, this epistle would swell into a book. Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past. God is Our witness that what We even now mention is due solely to Our tender affection for thee, that haply the poor of the earth may attain the shores of the sea of wealth, the ignorant be led unto the ocean of divine knowledge, and they that thirst for understanding partake of the Salsabíl of divine wisdom. Otherwise, this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.”
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63

I see it is Unity in our Diversity Susan. There are many people now and in the future that will not embrace Baha'u'llah. All those scriptures offer the Light of God, to which we will embrace that light with them.

With the passage you quoted, it needs to be in its context, Baha'u'llah was talking about the signs that heralded all the Messengers and that if He was to quote all those signs the book would be too large, impossible dimensions. He was not saying we do away with the religious Truths given in the past. We build upon our learning, we do not do away with it. If for some the scriptures they use are all they want, than who are we to not join them in the light they have chosen?

In doing this we hold to the light, we would not participate in what we see is not the Light of God. As such we do not take communion or confession, but we can go to Church and prayer with all Christians, we can read the Bible with them.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

One can always try to twist meanings to try to make the Bible fit with the Baha'i Writings, in an attempt to make Christians believe that we believe exactly what they believe, but I consider that dishonest... Take what Abdu'l-Baha said about the indwelt Holy Spirit, for example. That cannot me made to fit with what Paul said from which is derived the Christian belief that the Holy Spirit literally dwells inside their bodies.

Question.—What is the Holy Spirit?

Answer.—The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God and the luminous rays which emanate from the Manifestations; for the focus of the rays of the Sun of Reality was Christ, and from this glorious focus, which is the Reality of Christ, the Bounty of God reflected upon the other mirrors which were the reality of the Apostles. The descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles signifies that the glorious divine bounties reflected and appeared in their reality. Moreover, entrance and exit, descent and ascent, are characteristics of bodies and not of spirits—that is to say, sensible realities enter and come forth, but intellectual subtleties and mental realities, such as intelligence, love, knowledge, imagination and thought, do not enter, nor come forth, nor descend, but rather they have direct connection.

For example, knowledge, which is a state attained to by the intelligence, is an intellectual condition; and entering and coming out of the mind are imaginary conditions; but the mind is connected with the acquisition of knowledge, like images reflected in a mirror.

Therefore, as it is evident and clear that the intellectual realities do not enter and descend, and it is absolutely impossible that the Holy Spirit should ascend and descend, enter, come out or penetrate,it can only be that the Holy Spirit appears in splendor, as the sun appears in the mirror. Some Answered Questions, p. 108

I see It is not twisting, it is reconciling what God has offered in all the scriptures. Baha'u'llah has explained this in detail, note what is in bold.

"...It is because of this difference in their station and mission that the words and utterances flowing from these Well Springs of Divine knowledge appear to diverge and differ. Otherwise, in the eyes of them that are initiated into the mysteries of Divine wisdom, all their utterances are, in reality, but the expressions of one Truth. As most of the people have failed to appreciate those stations to which We have referred, they, therefore, feel perplexed and dismayed at the varying utterances pronounced by Manifestations that are essentially one and the same..." Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 50-56

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

So, in my understanding it was a test. They were told Jesus was resurrected and goes to heaven and come back. Now, they must be able to pass from this barrier so they can recognize Baha'u'llah. Similarly, the Muslims were told Muhammad is the seal of Prophets. They thought it means no revelation after Muhammad. It is a test. They have to pass from this barrier.

I do not believe that the resurrection stories as written in the Bible were intended BY GOD to be a test for Christians. Rather, I believe they were written by men who either (a) did not realize what the belief that those stories were literally true would lead to in the future, or (b) men who knew and had an agenda. Of course that is just my personal opinion. Nobody can ever know why they were written that way.

The Qur'an is different from the Bible because it is more authentic, so maybe Seal of the Prophets is a test.......
because as @ adrian009, wrote in a post a while back:

“Of course there is not a single English translation that says Muhammad is the final Prophet for all time. In plain English 'Seal of the Prophets' does not mean Muhammad is the final Prophet for all time. So it comes down to the Arabic and meanings of words that are not captured well with translation into another language.” #2adrian009

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I do not believe that the resurrection stories as written in the Bible were intended BY GOD to be a test for Christians. Rather, I believe they were written by men who either (a) did not realize what the belief that those stories were literally true would lead to in the future, or (b) men who knew and had an agenda. Of course that is just my personal opinion. Nobody can ever know why they were written that way.

We could consider that in offering a stance as you suggest above, that we would also be saying God did not allow the Bible to be a sure Spiritual Guide in support of what @InvestigateTruth offered, we have this;

"...Know verily that the purpose underlying all these symbolic terms and abstruse allusions, which emanate from the Revealers of God’s holy Cause, hath been to test and prove the peoples of the world; that thereby the earth of the pure and illuminated hearts may be known from the perishable and barren soil. From time immemorial such hath been the way of God amidst His creatures, and to this testify the records of the sacred books...."

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

"Believe in the Messengers of God and His sovereign might, and in the Self of God and His majesty." "For the Day of God is none other but His own Self, Who hath appeared with the power of truth.."

This is really saying what the Bible has offered in Colossians 2:9 "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form".

Sorry I am so cantankerous today but I do not see a correlation between what you said and what Paul said.
Paul said that all of God (fullness of the Deity) lives in Jesus in bodily form, but Baha'u'llah wrote that God cannot incarnate His Essence and reveal it to man, so that means the Essence of God (which is part of God) can never be revealed to man.

“Know thou of a certainty that the Unseen can in no wise incarnate His Essence and reveal it unto men. He is, and hath ever been, immensely exalted beyond all that can either be recounted or perceived. From His retreat of glory His voice is ever proclaiming: “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.” He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 49

And what can be known about God?

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world.” Gleanings, p. 54

 

[loverofhumanity]

I dont know about Gleanings page 25, but this is from chapter 35. Its alright. Everyone makes mistakes.

Anyway, which tablet did Effendi get this from? Please let me know.

I do not have any official list but this is what has been listed online unofficially.

Leiden List

Unnamed (Noah and Canaan).
Majmu`ih-yi Alvah-e Mubarakih 236-38.
Gleanings XXXV. The passage regarding Jesus has a parallel in Iqan 132, and in the Tablet to the Shah, page 137 of Browne's translation of the citation in Traveller's Narrative. The passage regarding Abdu'llah Ubayy has a parallel in Browne op cit 135.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Sorry I am so cantankerous today but I do not see a correlation between what you said and what Paul said.
Paul said that all of God (fullness of the Deity) lives in Jesus in bodily form, but Baha'u'llah wrote that God cannot incarnate His Essence and reveal it to man, so that means the Essence of God (which is part of God) can never be revealed to man.

“Know thou of a certainty that the Unseen can in no wise incarnate His Essence and reveal it unto men. He is, and hath ever been, immensely exalted beyond all that can either be recounted or perceived. From His retreat of glory His voice is ever proclaiming: “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.” He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 49

And what can be known about God?

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world.” Gleanings, p. 54

What I see we are to do is see what Paul is saying. What is the fullness of the Diety? That is the Attributes, as no One, not even the Messengers knows the Essence.

It is not God, it is the Manifestation of God, the Holy Spirit. So in reality they are talking of the full potential of the Station of Christ, which was manifested as Baha'u'llah, this is why it is called the Day of God.

Would I, or should I consider Paul did not know this? I see no conflict in what Paul's says, only how we choose to see it. I do not yet think we fully understand what Baha'u'llah has offered.

So the Fullness of the Diety, is the Message given by Baha'u'llah, it is not God.

Again, God can not be known in any way and if we remember, Baha'u'llah also says the attributes and names do not describe God, the attributes are the Essence of the Word, the Manifestation, which is all we can know of God.

Again, big discussion, needing lots of discussion, another subject entirely.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

With the passage you quoted, it needs to be in its context, Baha'u'llah was talking about the signs that heralded all the Messengers and that if He was to quote all those signs the book would be too large, impossible dimensions.

Let's look at the passage again and what Baha'u'llah says and concludes:

“…… To this testify the records of the sacred books. Were the details to be mentioned, this epistle would swell into a book. Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past. God is Our witness that what We even now mention is due solely to Our tender affection for thee, that haply the poor of the earth may attain the shores of the sea of wealth, the ignorant be led unto the ocean of divine knowledge, and they that thirst for understanding partake of the Salsabíl of divine wisdom. Otherwise, this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63

It was AFTER Baha'u'llah talked about Abraham and Moses in the text that He said what He said in the paragraph above.

Clearly, Baha'u'llah was saying it is a grievous transgression to dwell on the past, and I agree with Him because obviously if we dwell on the past, we cannot live in the present or look towards the future.

I see it is Unity in our Diversity Susan. There are many people now and in the future that will not embrace Baha'u'llah. All those scriptures offer the Light of God, to which we will embrace that light with them.

Nobody except God knows what will happen in the future. There are many people that will not embrace Baha'u'llah and that might continue into the future, but we do know that eventually everyone will know about Baha'u'llah, because that is what He said, and it will be their choice to believe in Him or not.

“Warn and acquaint the people, O Servant, with the things We have sent down unto Thee, and let the fear of no one dismay Thee, and be Thou not of them that waver. The day is approaching when God will have exalted His Cause and magnified His testimony in the eyes of all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 248

He was not saying we do away with the religious Truths given in the past. We build upon our learning, we do not do away with it. If for some the scriptures they use are all they want, than who are we to not join them in the light they have chosen?

In doing this we hold to the light, we would not participate in what we see is not the Light of God. As such we do not take communion or confession, but we can go to Church and prayer with all Christians, we can read the Bible with them.

My only issue is that by pretending we believe exactly what Christians believe, we are being dishonest and we are misrepresenting what we believe, and by acting as if it does not matter if they embrace Baha'u'llah, we are not being totally honest. If it does not matter, why did Baha'u'llah write that our first duty is to recognize Baha'u'llah, or do you believe that only the Baha'is are God's servants?

John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

Is really no different than recognizing Baha’u’llah in this day, since Baha’u’llah was the Day Spring of God’s Revelation….

“The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition of Him Who is the Day Spring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof, hath gone astray, though he be the author of every righteous deed.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 330-331

And if that passage is not good enough, we also have this one:

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth.” Gleanings, p. 171

 

[Trailblazer]

Again, big discussion, needing lots of discussion, another subject entirely.

I do not want to argue but I just want to point out something I find very amusing... Baha'is are really no different from Christians or any other religion because we are all different in how we think, so we interpret the same texts differently; but even if the Writings are clear and we can agree on what they mean, we can always find other Writings that say something else to support our views.

 

[Trailblazer]

I see It is not twisting, it is reconciling what God has offered in all the scriptures. Baha'u'llah has explained this in detail, note what is in bold.

"...It is because of this difference in their station and mission that the words and utterances flowing from these Well Springs of Divine knowledge appear to diverge and differ. Otherwise, in the eyes of them that are initiated into the mysteries of Divine wisdom, all their utterances are, in reality, but the expressions of one Truth. As most of the people have failed to appreciate those stations to which We have referred, they, therefore, feel perplexed and dismayed at the varying utterances pronounced by Manifestations that are essentially one and the same..." Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 50-56

Regards Tony

I can agree that the varying utterances pronounced by Manifestations are essentially one and the same because all their utterances are, in reality, but the expressions of one Truth, but Paul was not a Manifestation of God. Not only that, but everything in the New Testament is not an utterance of Jesus, and therein lies the problem.

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]

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]

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

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

A Baháí View of the Bible

 

[Trailblazer]

We could consider that in offering a stance as you suggest above, that we would also be saying God did not allow the Bible to be a sure Spiritual Guide in support of what @InvestigateTruth offered, we have this;

"...Know verily that the purpose underlying all these symbolic terms and abstruse allusions, which emanate from the Revealers of God’s holy Cause, hath been to test and prove the peoples of the world; that thereby the earth of the pure and illuminated hearts may be known from the perishable and barren soil. From time immemorial such hath been the way of God amidst His creatures, and to this testify the records of the sacred books...."

Regards Tony

Who are the Revealers of God’s holy Cause, that is the hundred-dollar question.

The Bible is a sure Spiritual Guide but that does not mean that everything written is literally true or that the Bible is inerrant, nor can we ever know what the authors of the resurrection stories had in mind.

From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:

...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh
. (28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

...we cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá'ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá'u'lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic. As many times passages in the Gospel of St. John are quoted we may assume that it is his Gospel and much of it accurate.
(23 January 1944 to an individual believer)

When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)

We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

 

[CG Didymus]

That depends upon what you mean by legitimate. One definition of legitimate is "being exactly as intended or presented : neither spurious nor false." Baha'is believe that the resurrection stories are not literally true, thus they are false. Saying that they were written to symbolize something about Jesus and His Cause does not cut it for me because the stories do not say they are symbolic, they read as if they are literally true.

God bless you. I think I love you. Yes, so many of us don't believe it really happened. But early Christians and Fundy Christians today do believe it... plus Creation, the flood and all that other stuff. My argument has always been that it was meant to be taken literally. But, if it's not true, and suspect that it isn't, then it is nothing more than religious, man-made myth. I haven't read ahead yet, so I can imagine some of the other Baha'is might not agree. So thanks for being true to yourself and being honest. I might be wrong and you might be wrong, but I think that it is very possible that it's true... that the writers embellished the hell out of the story to make Jesus bigger than life.

 

[loverofhumanity]

God bless you. I think I love you. Yes, so many of us don't believe it really happened. But early Christians and Fundy Christians today do believe it... plus Creation, the flood and all that other stuff. My argument has always been that it was meant to be taken literally. But, if it's not true, and suspect that it isn't, then it is nothing more than religious, man-made myth. I haven't read ahead yet, so I can imagine some of the other Baha'is might not agree. So thanks for being true to yourself and being honest. I might be wrong and you might be wrong, but I think that it is very possible that it's true... that the writers embellished the hell out of the story to make Jesus bigger than life.

If you look at the days of creation in a Dispensation context, where each day represents the dawn of a new Day as in Manifestation arising, it makes a whole lot more sense.

This is from Abdul-Baha and He says just that.

What is intended by the creation of heaven and earth in six days is a spiritual creation and a divine day, as prior to the creation of this heaven and earth there were no days and nights.
(From a previously untranslated Tablet)

 

[Trailblazer]

God bless you. I think I love you. Yes, so many of us don't believe it really happened. But early Christians and Fundy Christians today do believe it... plus Creation, the flood and all that other stuff. My argument has always been that it was meant to be taken literally. But, if it's not true, and suspect that it isn't, then it is nothing more than religious, man-made myth. I haven't read ahead yet, so I can imagine some of the other Baha'is might not agree. So thanks for being true to yourself and being honest. I might be wrong and you might be wrong, but I think that it is very possible that it's true... that the writers embellished the hell out of the story to make Jesus bigger than life.

Glad you showed up, I love you too. Read on and you will see that I disagree with some Baha'is about the Bible, but I can only be who I am, honest to the core.

I do not think anyone will ever know why the resurrection stories were written to sound like true stories, but it makes absolutely no sense to me that they were intended to be symbolic, If Abdu'l-Baha can say what he believes the stories symbolize but that is just his personal opinion. We certainly cannot assume that the gospel writers were trying to convey what Abdu'l-Baha wrote in Some Answered Questions.