Is rebirth good or a bad thing ?

[Saint Frankenstein]

Believing in the existence of rebirth after death, is rebirth good, or a bad thing ? what is your viewpoint on rebirth ?

Kindly: please do refrain replying to the question if you don't want to believe in the existence of rebirth after death.

Neutral. I don't think it's good or bad in of itself, that would be a matter of perspective. In my belief, you can be reborn somewhere down the family line. The Norse would name babies after deceased relatives, believing they were them reborn. So it's a possibility. Also, parts of your soul are inherented from your family, as the Germanic idea of the soul consists of multiple parts.

 

[InChrist]

All in all I agree with you here. But instead of a tunnel, I'd use the analogy of a GPS preference: some choose the shortest route, some the fastest, and some the scenic. All headed to the same final destination, but on different roads for at least part of the way.

I personally think it’s best to rely on the words and advice of Jesus…


Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate anddifficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Matthew 7:13-14

 

[YoursTrue]

All in all I agree with you here. But instead of a tunnel, I'd use the analogy of a GPS preference: some choose the shortest route, some the fastest, and some the scenic. All headed to the same final destination, but on different roads for at least part of the way.

I expect and hope to see what God decides about the outcome. Proverbs 4:18 - "The path of the righteous is like the morning sun, shining ever brighter till the full light of day." Now of course it all depends on what a person may consider as a righteous one.

 

[YoursTrue]

Oh, ok, I see someone maybe the OP? said we should refrain from comments unless it's about rebirth after death. Hmm, well I believe in a resurrection, not sure if that qualifies for rebirth.

 

[Spice]

I personally think it’s best to rely on the words and advice of Jesus…


Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate anddifficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Matthew 7:13-14

I agree -- the wide gate being one of oh, 70 or 80 years, somewhere along the way accepting that a man suffered and died so that you can straighten up you act and get to heaven without any more spirit building. Please don't take offense, but that's like living on probation instead of striving for perfection.

The narrow gate is rinse and repeat until perfectly cleaned by doing all the spirit building yourself, by believing that first Son of God paved The Way for any who choose to carry his yoke (Matt 11:30) and follow -- enduring until the end. Definitely not an easy way and I can envision the filtering of souls that are given final judgment and welcome, compared to those that are sent back "down" to earth and continue working.

I also believe God will not give up a single soul. He'll keep the gate open for the last one, though all of the other 99 are home.

 

[YoursTrue]

I agree -- the wide gate being one of oh, 70 or 80 years, somewhere along the way accepting that a man suffered and died so that you can straighten up you act and get to heaven without any more spirit building. Please don't take offense, but that's like living on probation instead of striving for perfection.

The narrow gate is rinse and repeat until perfectly cleaned by doing all the spirit building yourself, by believing that first Son of God paved The Way for any who choose to carry his yoke (Matt 11:30) and follow -- enduring until the end. Definitely not an easy way and I can envision the filtering of souls that are given final judgment and welcome, compared to those that are sent back "down" to earth and continue working.

I also believe God will not give up a single soul. He'll keep the gate open for the last one, though all of the other 99 are home.

The Bible does bring out that there will be those living on earth in happiness forever.
2 Peter 3 mentions this in his letter: "Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness as you anticipate and hasten the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with God’s promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells."
Of course, the fire, etc. is symbolic possibly to be discussed another time, but there are to be new heaven and new earth where righteousness dwells.

 

[Trailblazer]

Lots of verses in the Bible and the NT are claimed to be prophecies by the Baha'is. I think a more accurate claim for Baha'is to say is that all of them have been fulfilled except the ones that haven't.

That is exactly what I say. Only the prophecies for the 'return of Christ' have been fulfilled.
Most of the prophecies for the messianic age have not yet been fulfilled, since we are only about 160 years into that age.

 

[Trailblazer]

In my opinion, prophecies are not proof, or even good evidence. I've soured on prophecies as evidence. Prophecies can and are interpreted in many ways. As you like to quote:

Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth.
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 105)

Prophecies are in 4th place after those three. I know you know better than what you just said.

No, I do not know better. His self, His Revelation, and the words He has revealed are all subject to interpretation and how we each view those three is highly subjective. By contrast, the prophecies, especially when take as a whole, are incontrovertible, as Sears determined.

Thief in the Night by William Sears would be more convincing to me if I was a Christian.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/s/sears_thief_night.pdf

 

[Trailblazer]

It can be understood to apply to Christ, also, and to Muhammad.

Did either one of them claim to be the Spirit of Truth?

“O kings of Christendom! Heard ye not the saying of Jesus, the Spirit of God, “I go away, and come again unto you”? Wherefore, then, did ye fail, when He did come again unto you in the clouds of heaven, to draw nigh unto Him, that ye might behold His face, and be of them that attained His Presence? In another passage He saith: “When He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth.” And yet, behold how, when He did bring the truth, ye refused to turn your faces towards Him, and persisted in disporting yourselves with your pastimes and fancies. Ye welcomed Him not, neither did ye seek His Presence, that ye might hear the verses of God from His own mouth, and partake of the manifold wisdom of the Almighty, the All-Glorious, the All-Wise.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 246-249

 

[Trailblazer]

Hahaha! Good one.

There is nothing funny about it. That is how we know who was the return of Christ. Your fantasy Christ cannot re-fulfill prophecies that have already been fulfilled.

The Problem.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, there was world-wide and fervent expectation that during the 1840’s the return of Christ would take place. The story made the headlines and even reached the Congress of the United States. From China and the Middle East to Europe and America, men of conflicting ideas shared in the expectancy. Scoffers were many but the enthusiasm was tremendous, and all agreed on the time. Why? And what became of the story? Did anything happen or was it all a dream?

The Solution.
Patiently, and with exemplary thoroughness, William Sears set out to solve this mystery. In Thief in the Night he presents his fully detailed
“conduct of the case” in an easy style which enthuses the reader with the excitement of the chase. The solution to which all the clues lead comes as a tremendous challenge. This is a mystery story with a difference: the mystery is a real one, and of vital importance to every human being. The author presents the evidence in The case of the missing millennium in such a way that you can solve it for yourself.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/s/sears_thief_night.pdf

 

[Truthseeker]

No, I do not know better. His self, His Revelation and the words He has revealed are all subject to interpretation as to what they mean, and how we each view those three is highly subjective. By contrast, the prophecies, especially when take as a whole, are incontrovertible, as Sears determined.

Thief in the Night by William Sears would be more convincing to me if I was a Christian.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/s/sears_thief_night.pdf

You would have to agree to read all those prophecy interpretations, of course. I do know that Dale Lehman read that book first, and then he investigated further, because it made sense to him, those interpretations all together. His wife had precipitously become a Baha'i, and so he looked into it. He didn't feel himself tightly into the Methodist church he was in. His wife became a Baha'i too fast really, because later she had doubts, and went back to being a Catholic.

His Self can be difficult to determine for some people, because some have muddied what that history actually is, as you know, so that was more true then than now. I came in initially by way of feeling that what I was reading the Word of God. There was something inspired about them, I felt. I didn't realize that others can also write inspiring words and so that is not a sufficient investigation. I needed to look into His life also and also whether what he taught made logical sense. All of these together would have been best. Later I read Thief in the Night and that strengthened my Faith. Reading Thief in the Night can be a good start but more work has be done on the other evidences like what Dale did.

My sense that be his Revelation Baha'u'llah was saying "do these words seem inspired", by His words means to me "are they self-consistent, logical, and compatible with other truths such as science and history. I would throw in there also are they consistent with the religions recognized by the Baha'i Faith insofar as we can validate the actual words of the Prophet, and the history surrounding such Prophet.

Another problem that has to be surmounted is there some evidence that disproves the validity of those other Prophets.

I'm not sure what I am saying here, except to say that Prophecies have their place, but alone they are not enough, though that is also true of other evidences.

 

[Trailblazer]

My sense that be his Revelation Baha'u'llah was saying "do these words seem inspired",

I think what He meant by His Revelation is the history of His cause, what He accomplished on His 40-year mission on earth.

by His words means to me "are they self-consistent, logical, and compatible with other truths such as science and history.

I think His words means all His Writings taken together as whole.

I would throw in there also are they consistent with the religions recognized by the Baha'i Faith insofar as we can validate the actual words of the Prophet, and the history surrounding such Prophet.

I do not see that as necessary evidence for the Baha'i Faith. The Baha'i Faith is a separate religion so that is what we have to be looking at.
Do Christians look at other religions in order to validate Christianity?

Another problem that has to be surmounted is there some evidence that disproves the validity of those other Prophets.

Who are those other Prophets and why would that be a problem for the Baha'i Faith?

I'm not sure what I am saying here, except to say that Prophecies have their place, but alone they are not enough, though that is also true of other evidences.

I agree. The prophecies alone are not enough evidence.

 

[Truthseeker]

Who are those other Prophets and why would that be a problem for the Baha'i Faith?

I remember when I had some problems with the history concerning Muhammad and what is in the Qur'an.

I do not see that as necessary evidence for the Baha'i Faith. The Baha'i Faith is a separate religion so that is what we have to be looking at.
Do Christians look at other religions in order to validate Christianity?

No they don't usually. But in Buddhism and Hinduism (at least concerning Krishna in Hinduism) reincarnation, for instance, is in the scriptures, and if that is proven to be true, that is inconsistent with what Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha says, and since Krishna and and Buddha are considered Manifestations in our faith, then either they are not Manifestations, and thus our faith is wrong about that, or our faith is wrong about reincarnation. That is hard for them to prove however since centuries passed until what they said was written down. Also the fact that at one place the Qur'an seems to deny the crucifixion of Christ can be a problem for some Baha'is. Ditto the "seal of the Prophets" passage.

As to what His Revelation and words mean, we shouldn't sweat about that. It is best not to argue about that. It's not that important what we believe about that. We could both be right, also, in different senses.

 

[soulsurvivor]

There is nothing funny about it. That is how we know who was the return of Christ. Your fantasy Christ cannot re-fulfill prophecies that have already been fulfilled.

The Problem.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, there was world-wide and fervent expectation that during the 1840’s the return of Christ would take place. The story made the headlines and even reached the Congress of the United States. From China and the Middle East to Europe and America, men of conflicting ideas shared in the expectancy. Scoffers were many but the enthusiasm was tremendous, and all agreed on the time. Why? And what became of the story? Did anything happen or was it all a dream?

The Solution.
Patiently, and with exemplary thoroughness, William Sears set out to solve this mystery. In Thief in the Night he presents his fully detailed
“conduct of the case” in an easy style which enthuses the reader with the excitement of the chase. The solution to which all the clues lead comes as a tremendous challenge. This is a mystery story with a difference: the mystery is a real one, and of vital importance to every human being. The author presents the evidence in The case of the missing millennium in such a way that you can solve it for yourself.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/s/sears_thief_night.pdf

When the real Christ returns you will hide your face and pretend you knew it all the time. I will remind you when it happens. Eating crow will not be enough, at that time you should burn every evidence of every lie you have spread. I will talk to you in a year's time or maybe less. Don't forget.

 

[Whateverist]

I question why our limited and ill-equipped ego would be preferred over many lifetimes of ongoing evolutionary development as living souls. I have far too much mental and psychological baggage to wish to preserve these (memories) over a better equipped and better developed operational mechanical structure developed through life experiences.

I didn't burrow into this at first because I was busy chasing down my missed attempt to share the correct episode of that podcast. But you raise a more important point. Life is inherently miraculous, turning back the second law of thermodynamics. Why shouldn't we embrace both ends of that deal, life for a while as we also contribute to what is timeless.

 

[CG Didymus]

No they don't usually. But in Buddhism and Hinduism (at least concerning Krishna in Hinduism) reincarnation, for instance, is in the scriptures, and if that is proven to be true, that is inconsistent with what Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha says, and since Krishna and and Buddha are considered Manifestations in our faith, then either they are not Manifestations, and thus our faith is wrong about that, or our faith is wrong about reincarnation.

That's very much how I'm looking at it. The resurrection in Christianity and reincarnation in Hinduism are the two I talk about the most with Baha'is. I'll start with the resurrection first.

To me, it sure sounds like the gospels say Jesus came back to life. They touched him, talked to him and he said he is not a ghost but has flesh and bone. Great. He's real and alive.

But then people don't recognize him. He walks through doors and walls, appearing and disappearing, then ascends into the clouds?

The Born-Again Christians... It all happened. Jesus is alive and at the right hand of God and is coming back.... soon.

Baha'is... Can't be literal. People can't come back to life after being dead that long. Besides that, a physical body can't go through walls and float off into space. Using science and reason, we know that's not possible. Therefore, there must be another explanation. These verses must be symbolic.

For me, I make it even simpler. The legends and traditions of his resurrection were passed on. The gospel writers put them into writing. I don't see them writing about it as if it were some "symbolic" thing. They wrote their stories in a way that proves... Jesus was alive.

Of course, if it's not true, that's a terrible hoax to pull on the people. But did Jesus walk on water? Did he cast out demons? Did he raise Lazarus from the dead? Did people come out of their graves in Jerusalem? Then if we go back to the Hebrew Bible... Did Elijah call down fire from the heavens? Did he fly off in a fiery chariot? Did Mose's staff turn into a snake? Did the waters part?

I don't know? These things sure sound like made-up legends and myths to me. Why not the resurrection story too?

So, I agree with the Baha'is that it didn't literally happen. But I disagree with them that the writer's meant for it to be taken symbolically.

Same kind of thing with Reincarnation. I don't know all the details about Hindu beliefs, but I'd imagine that all their beliefs lead up to reincarnation being what happens. We can't just pull reincarnation out without making changes in the other things they believe in.

Again, I don't see how a "symbolic" explanation fits. Hindu Scriptures are talking about a soul coming back into a different body. While in that body, it learns, grows, makes mistakes and then that body dies. Wherever they say that soul goes, it waits and gets put into another body and learns some more. Bad and good karma are involved. And eventually the soul has grown spiritually to where it doesn't accumulate any more bad karma and has dealt with its past bad karma. Their beliefs describe that whole process.

But... what if reincarnation isn't true? What if that whole process was just something that Holy people of that culture came up with as an explanation of how things were?

Then it's not something that some God/man, or incarnation, brought them. But that's what the Baha'is are up against. They look at it as if Krishna supposedly taught this... but really didn't. That Krishna taught something that was misinterpreted to be about reincarnation. For me, that's way too complicated and unlikely.

So, the resurrection literally true? Maybe... but for me, unlikely. Symbolically true? I don't think so. It just wasn't written in a symbol-style. They wrote it as if those things really happened. Made up hoax? Maybe. But how did they pull it off? So, after all that... I don't know.

Reincarnation? Hey, I don't know. But I like the idea. But if the Baha'is have people learning and growing spiritually in some other spiritual worlds of God, then to me, that's better than the Born-Again Christian belief of heaven for believers and hell for everybody else.

So, for Christians and Baha'is... I'm not saying that what you believe isn't true, I'm just saying I doubt that it's true.

 

[Trailblazer]

When the real Christ returns

Dream on.

 

[Truthseeker]

Baha'is... Can't be literal. People can't come back to life after being dead that long. Besides that, a physical body can't go through walls and float off into space. Using science and reason, we know that's not possible. Therefore, there must be another explanation. These verses must be symbolic.

For me, I make it even simpler. The legends and traditions of his resurrection were passed on. The gospel writers put them into writing. I don't see them writing about it as if it were some "symbolic" thing. They wrote their stories in a way that proves... Jesus was alive.

I don't know what the reality is in the resurrection myself. It may be a combination of symbolic and just plain being wrong by the writers of these Gospels. In Luke it is presented like He is physical, with Christ saying He is flesh, and eating a fish. As the Gospels vary in their detail of this, I doubt the presentation that Christ was in the flesh. It does seem literal in that case, but is history being presented accurately? Then puzzlingly the same author who wrote Luke according to scholars, in Acts Christ floats up to heaven. That is symbolic to me. It is really confusing.

 

[Truthseeker]

Of course, if it's not true, that's a terrible hoax to pull on the people. But did Jesus walk on water? Did he cast out demons? Did he raise Lazarus from the dead? Did people come out of their graves in Jerusalem? Then if we go back to the Hebrew Bible... Did Elijah call down fire from the heavens? Did he fly off in a fiery chariot? Did Mose's staff turn into a snake? Did the waters part?

I don't worry about that stuff. Baha'is don't believe in literal demons, as you know, and if people came out of their graves, why did it not reach the history books besides being reported in the Bible? It would certainly make big headlines today, that's for sure. Miracles are possible, so I don't know in the other cases if there were miracles for the other cases you mention, except for that flying off in a fiery chariot. It is in the same class as Christ floating up to heaven.

Again, I don't see how a "symbolic" explanation fits. Hindu Scriptures are talking about a soul coming back into a different body. While in that body, it learns, grows, makes mistakes and then that body dies. Wherever they say that soul goes, it waits and gets put into another body and learns some more. Bad and good karma are involved. And eventually the soul has grown spiritually to where it doesn't accumulate any more bad karma and has dealt with its past bad karma. Their beliefs describe that whole process.

In the Bhagavad Gita it does appear to me in some places that Krishna is describing dying and coming back in another body but oddly The Bhagavad Gita is in the middle of a mythological story that has no validity in history, so that throws the discourse of being from Krishna Himself being accurate very much in doubt. At the same time, it definitely is a discourse that appears to have a lot of truths in it, so it has value for me.

 

[Truthseeker]

I think what He meant by His Revelation is the history of His cause, what He accomplished on His 40-year mission on earth.

I think I will discourse on this after all why I believe it is the inspirational content of His words. His Self is part of the history of His cause, etc., as well as His character. I know that I have "felt" the inspirational content of His words, and I think you have also. What is your rationale of believing that His Revelation is the history of His cause, what He accomplished on His 40-year mission on earth? Maybe we can learn from each other or maybe not. If not, nothing is lost.

How did these kind of subjects I'm seeing here in a thread called "Is rebirth a good or bad thing?"?