Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Yes, we are all entitled to have our own opinions.So, does each Bahai get to pick and choose what is Truth in Scripture?
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!
Yes, we are all entitled to have our own opinions.So, does each Bahai get to pick and choose what is Truth in Scripture?
This 15 minute video, Why Free Will Doesn’t Exist, was posted to me by an atheist I have been posting to on another forum. I do not agree with him that we do not have free will. Below is the gist of his argument. The first two paragraphs below are a summary of what is in the video and the last paragraph is this atheist’s personal opinion.
What makes free will an illusion is that the choice you make will always be either the choice to do what you most want to do (even when it overrides your wanting to do something else) or the choice you don't want to make but are forced to make.
We like to think that we have free will, that we could make choices other than the ones we make. However, free will -- the ability to have acted differently -- is an illusion. No matter what choice you ever made, you never really had the ability to have chosen differently.
Since free will is an illusion, it's also nothing but a lame excuse for certain problems that theists run into, for example, why a good god would allow evil to exist.
I think he is saying the the Qur'an is more authentic than the Bible.
I do not know if the Qur'an is wholly authentic (of undisputed origin).
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,
So, does each Bahai get to pick and choose what is Truth in Scripture?
So, another comparison to other religions, just pick and choose as you want.Yes, we are all entitled to have our own opinions.
Free will for whoever wants to know if they have free will.Talk of free will cannot reach any conclusion since we do not ask “Free will for whom?” We do not know the “I”.
You omitted the last part of that sentence and without that you do not get the full meaning...Here is what is written...
Trailblazer said: 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,
The clear conclusion is that the Qur'an is wholly authentic. That means that an illiterate man went into the desert, returned. and dictated the Quran to scribes.
How can you interpret it any differently?
That is not what I said.So, another comparison to other religions, just pick and choose as you want.
You omitted the last part of that sentence and without that you do not get the full meaning...
...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)
But, the Guardian said what he said. He did not say what you would have him say.He seems to be saying that the Qur’an is wholly authentic, but when you look at the entire sentence, that leaves room for doubt. If the Guardian wanted to say that BOTH the Qur’an and the writings of Bahá'u'lláh were wholly authentic, he could have written it like this:
...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings in the Qur’an and the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
The bottom line is that unless we know the names of all the scribes who wrote what Muhammad dictated to them, we cannot say the Qur’an is wholly authentic in the sense of being of undisputed origin.
That is not what I said.
I said that we can have our own opinions.
There is much controversy among scholars surrounding the Bible and just how accurate it is, so Baha’i opinions vary. That is why we are allowed to make of it what we will.
I omitted it because it has no bearing on anything. That the Koran may be subordinate to whatever Bahá'u'lláh wrote does not detract from the comment that it is wholly authentic.
Also, this is not something that Bahá'u'lláh said. It is something that Bahai apologists said because they saw an "oops" and had to try to tap dance around it.
But, the Guardian said what he said. He did not say what you would have him say.
Maybe he should have thought of that, IF he meant that the Qur’an is wholly authentic.Maybe whoever said "The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, " should have thought of that, Then others and you would not have to run around making stuff up.
Just because we can and do pick and choose what to believe and what to ignore about the Bible, that does not mean we can and do pick and choose what to believe and what to ignore about the Baha'i Faith.Yeah. That's what I said - all religious people pick and choose what to believe and what to ignore. In this regard, as well as most others, Bahai is just another same-o same-o run of the mill religion.
That's the beauty of religious scripture, everyone gets to pick and choose what to believe and what to dismiss. That may be one reason why religious scripture is so voluminous - to make sure there is something for everyone.He said what he said but people are not all going to interpret what he said in exactly the same way.
See above.Maybe he should have thought of that, IF he meant that the Qur’an is wholly authentic.
Just because we can and do pick and choose what to believe and what to ignore about the Bible, that does not mean we can and do pick and choose what to believe and what to ignore about the Baha'i Faith.
Some Baha'is might pick and choose but that is their choice since we all have free will to choose. That is no reflection on the religion, it is a reflection on the believer.
He said what he said but people are not all going to interpret what he said in exactly the same way.
That could well be true, since it is addressed to everyone.That may be one reason why religious scripture is so voluminous - to make sure there is something for everyone.
No, interpreting is explaining the meaning of words.Are you the Trailblazer who said...
Trailblazer said: He said what he said but people are not all going to interpret what he said in exactly the same way.
"Interpreting" is picking and choosing. Picking and choosing is "Interpreting".
"Interpreting" is picking and choosing. Picking and choosing is "Interpreting".
No, interpreting is explaining the meaning of words.
Interpret : to explain or tell the meaning of : present in understandable terms
Definition of INTERPRET
Interpreting is essential with anything we read because a words have no meaning unless they are interpreted. Everyone interprets everything they read as they read. You are interpreting what I wrote here as you read it.
The primary reason there are so many sects of Christianity is because they all interpret the Bible differently. Just ask several Christians to interpret the same verse and see what they come up with.
That is laughable, there are no Baha’i sects and there never will be. Covenant-breakers who CALL themselves Baha’is are not Baha’is.
It is going just fine and it will continue to go fine, because of the Covenant of Baha'u'llahI guess the concept of unifying all religious believers isn't going too well.