New Testament Criticism, Quran Criticism, the Bahai's and their divine inspiration

[InvestigateTruth]

@InvestigateTruth

Also, why do you eternally ignore the question of other books that are not found in the KJV but in the oldest bibles in the world which are more authentic?

Lets see if you do ignore this again.

I did not ignore.

If you are talking about other Gospels or books, that they were first part of some of the NTs, but later were removed, there are only two possibilities.

Either they were legitimate but the Christian church removed them without a good reason, or they were not legitimate and Church removed them appropriately.


In that case, still this does not mean they invented any stories, or altered anything inside a book. They simply removed a book, but did not alter the verses, or stories according to their imaginations.


Either case, we cannot conclude from this, that, therefore the rest of the Bible must be illegitimate.


The Bahai scriptures says, believers do not invent stories, and insert them in the Book, neither they remove or alter a verse of the Book.

 

[firedragon]

if you are discussing regarding the Bible being inspired by God or not, Which one of the following do you assume:

I told you. Because someone claimed, I asked. And its strange you have not addressed questions I asked that are trying but are hellbent in attacking the motives and the person.

1. We must assume that there is no God first, and just see if the Gospels are authentic histories, based on historical evidences.

If your position is #1 , then, in my best knowledge it is not possible based on historical evidences or scholarship to prove the stories in the Gospels or NT are authentic in the sense that those are actual words of Jesus, or the actual events that happened. But at the same time it is not possible to disprove their authenticity either.


2. We start as believers in God.

Both.

A. God sent Jesus as Messiah, but He did not want an authentic and legitimate Book to be written regarding His teachings and histories.


B. God sent Jesus as Messiah, and He wanted a Book be written for the guidance of His followers, but, it did not work out, so, they ended up with an illegitimate book.

Not relevant. Strawman.

The question is on the Bible, not Jesus. I question what the Bible says about him, or anything else it speaks. You are building a strawman since you cannot address the questions.

 

[firedragon]

If the Bab, Baha'u'llah, Abdu'lbaha or Shoghi Effendi have quoted the Bible, this then becomes confirmation that that part of the Bible is Authoritive.

\I am talking about adopting a false verse in the Bible thinking its genuine by them. E.g. Bahaullah and the ascension. And that's only one small point.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I understand this is your faith, but this is not a faith question. This is a question of reason. And this is a question arising from various discussions and statements of Bahai's themselves.

Look at the difference. Even the quote you had given above says "not sure", but the Bahais here seem "so Scott sure".

Thus, this is irrelevant to the discussion.

So let's use sound reasoning.

The argument about the accuracy of the Bible is centuries old, with most likely hundreds of thousands of books written on the topic. Many to support a specific view and then just as many against that specific view.

The ability to determine this issue, now 2000 years old, will never be a sure thing, there will always be the element of doubt.

So how do we unravel all that, if it is not with faith?

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

If you are talking about other Gospels or books, that they were first part of some of the NTs, but later were removed, there are only two possibilities.

Either they were legitimate but the Christian church removed them without a good reason, or they were not legitimate and Church removed them appropriately.

Which one?

 

[firedragon]

So let's use sound reasoning.

The argument about the accuracy of the Bible is centuries old, with most likely hundreds of thousands of books written on the topic. Many to support a specific view and then just as many against that specific view.

The ability to determine this issue, now 2000 years old, will never be a sure thing, there will always be the element of doubt.

So how do we unravel all that, if it is not with faith?

Regards Tony

By reason. Aqal.

 

[firedragon]

Either case, we cannot conclude from this, that, therefore the rest of the Bible must be illegitimate.

Strawman. Not what I said/

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I told you. Because someone claimed, I asked. And its strange you have not addressed questions I asked that are trying but are hellbent in attacking the motives and the person.

My friend i am not attacking you. I am attacking your arguments. Not you!

Both.

I dont think you can have both at the same time. It is ok, that if in One thread, you start to look at this from the position of a believer, and in another thread you discuss this from position of non-believer. But in each thread, you must stay in one position.

Not relevant. Strawman.

The question is on the Bible, not Jesus. I question what the Bible says about him, or anything else it speaks. You are building a strawman since you cannot address the questions.

But if your starting position is, assuming there is a God, and that Jesus was sent by God, then how can you omit Jesus and God from the discussion?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Strawman. Not what I said/

Ok, so, if that is not what you said, what relevant conclusion if any, can you make, regarding removal of some books from NT?

 

[firedragon]

My friend i am not attacking you. I am attacking your arguments. Not you!


I dont think you can have not at the same time. It is ok, that if in One thread, you start to look at this from the position of a believer, and in another thread you discuss this from position of non-believer. But in each thread, you must stay in one position.



But if your starting position is, assuming there is a God, and that Jesus was sent by God, then how can you omit Jesus and God from the discussion?

You keep misrepresenting what I say. I think it is intentional.

Let me cut and paste what I said again.

The question is on the Bible, not Jesus. I question what the Bible says about him, or anything else it speaks. You are building a strawman since you cannot address the questions.

Your misrepresentation of my statement is below.

But if your starting position is, assuming there is a God, and that Jesus was sent by God, then how can you omit Jesus and God from the discussion?

You did not mention that I am speaking of the Bible. Its impossible that you are doing this by mistake.

When I say attacking the person, I dont mean some kind of person attack. It is your attempt to attack the person, not the argument. That is what you have just done. Even in this post.

Try to address the argument.

 

[firedragon]

Ok, so, if that is not what you said, what relevant conclusion if any, can you make, regarding removal of some books from NT?

The question is "which one do you consider the New Testament" which is authentic. Without answering that, turning it around into a question is something you have been doing all the time.

Nevertheless, to answer your question, this removal just means that some people kept making changes to the Bible canon. Thats that. So Bahaullah, and the rest, did not know that originally, in the 4th century there was a different Bible. Which questions their divinity. They should have had divine knowledge.

Also it puts spots in your statement "The Bible". What do you mean by the Bible? If you mean the KJV, then KJV doesnt have some books found in the oldest Bible. If you mean the NIV, it still has some books missing. If you mean the Critical Text, even that has some books missing. So which one is "YOUR BIBLE" that you claim is authentic and Gods word etc etc??

The New Testament, has no authority whatsoever. Thus, the whole point is to address your Tu Quoque fallacy of bringing in the Quran to any question on the Bible.

The Quran never had these problems. There was never a canon of the Quran. Quran was written by one man, one single writing style, no form criticism works on the Quran, and textual criticism of the Quran will provide strength, not doubt. Unlike the Bible. Thats the whole point.

This thread was opened to discuss this. If you can.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The connection between God and man is mystical in nature and cannot be contained in words, by logic, proof or reasoning because both the believer and non believer read the Bible yet why does one believe and the other not? Same with the Quran.

The Christian who succeeds in establishing a spiritual connection with Christ through the Holy Spirit, is the reason he knows and believes Christ to be true, whereas the person who has not established this connection gets lost in arguments, words and disputes because the truth can only be known through the descent/inspiration of the Holy Spirit into a pure heart.

No matter how much intellectual argument is being presented here, people’s unexplainable mystical connection with God is more valid than any verbal proof and for those who believe, these arguments can never come close to disproving the validity of their Holy Book, for it is a mystical knowledge beyond anything, logic, reason or words can contain or describe.

Once the Holy Spirit has visited a person announcing to them the truth, they no longer require proofs.

But for others logic, reason and words may help unlock that mystical connection.

I know the Bible is truth through the Holy Spirit. It is reflected in the Bible. The one the world has access to. We have not been abandoned by God. Whichever translation or Book left in or left out of the Bible, God has not left man without guidance whether it be through Gospels or partial Gospels etc.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Oh I think there is a problem understanding sentences.

This thread was particularly opened because Bahai's including you have a habit of doing the Tu QUOQUE.

So of course, the thread is called such due to the Quran being in the topic.

But lets say you ask me a question about a palaeographic dating of a gospel, I would give you a direct answer. No Hanky Panky. But YOU will always ask about the Quran. Thats called "Tu Quoque fallacy"

So I hope you would at least understand this.

It is not strawman.
It is called proof by contradictions.

Proof by contradiction - Wikipedia

.

Let me cut and paste what I said again.

The question is on the Bible, not Jesus. I question what the Bible says about him, or anything else it speaks.


Try to address the argument.

Ok, so now if I understand you correctly, you are saying let's treat the Bible just as any ordinary history book, and see if the details of it, is authentic.
Yes?

The answer is very clear and easy. You can neither prove or disprove the authenticity of any of the verses of Bible based on historical evidences. The only thing that the scholars agree, is, there was man named Jesus, who claimed to be Messiah, and as per some traditions He was crucified.

Nothing else, in Bible can be proved to be true, if you only rely on Historical evidences. None of the miracles, resurrection, ascension or any of His words.

Is this clear now?

 

[firedragon]

The New Testament was written by many many authors. No one knows who wrote the four canonical gospels. No one knows who wrote Hebrews. No one knows who wrote Titus. No one knows who wrote revelations. The synoptic problem portrays heavy plagiarism. Textual criticism not only shows errors of Parablepsis and homoeoteleuton but also embarrassment and other interpolations. But you guys have faith in it. So you have to explain.

Your criteria being "If our leaders said we blind believe", thus I have shown that at least Abdul Baha directly speaks of a forged verse he never had the chance of knowing was forged. Because the manuscripts were found after him. Thus this criterion posed by the Bahai's "If our guys say it, we believe it" doesnt work because what he said was false.

I understand that you would not wish to accept it. But at least pose some valid answers.

 

[firedragon]

The connection between God and man is mystical in nature and cannot be contained in words, by logic, proof or reasoning because both the believer and non believer read the Bible yet why does one believe and the other not? Same with the Quran.

No its not the same.

Then you have not read both books.

The New Testament was written by many many authors. No one knows who wrote the four canonical gospels. No one knows who wrote Hebrews. No one knows who wrote Titus. No one knows who wrote revelations. The synoptic problem portrays heavy plagiarism. Textual criticism not only shows errors of Parablepsis and homoeoteleuton but also embarrassment and other interpolations. But you guys have faith in it.

The Quran never had these problems. There was never a canon of the Quran. Quran was written by one man, one single writing style, no form criticism works on the Quran, and textual criticism of the Quran will provide strength, not doubt. Unlike the Bible. Thats the whole point.

This shows that none of you are read up on any of these books.

The Christian who succeeds in establishing a spiritual connection with Christ through the Holy Spirit, is the reason he knows and believes Christ to be true, whereas the person who has not established this connection gets lost in arguments, words and disputes because the truth can only be known through the descent/inspiration of the Holy Spirit into a pure heart.

Is that why Bahaullah, Effendi and Abdul Baha criticise the "Christian Divines" vehemently? They also claim to believe in the Christ because of the Holy Spirit.

There is a divide between you and your prophet. Which means you cherry pick what you want from even your own prophet, and the rest you dont adopt.

Once the Holy Spirit has visited a person announcing to them the truth, they no longer require proofs.

But for others logic, reason and words may help unlock that mystical connection.

I know the Bible is truth through the Holy Spirit.

So through the Holy Spirit, can you tell me who wrote the book of Hebrews?

 

[firedragon]

It is not strawman.
It is called proof by contradictions.

Proof by contradiction - Wikipedia



Ok, so now if I understand you correctly, you are saying let's treat the Bible just as any ordinary history book, and see if the details of it, is authentic.
Yes?

The answer is very clear and easy. You can neither prove or disprove the authenticity of any of the verses of Bible based on historical evidences. The only thing that the scholars agree, is, there was man named Jesus, who claimed to be Messiah, and as per some traditions He was crucified.

Nothing else, in Bible can be proved to be true, if you only rely on Historical evidences. None of the miracles, resurrection, ascension or any of His words.

Is this clear now?

It is not about proving what the Bible says was true. No one can ever prove that.

It is about proving it has authenticity.

I will take this example for the 10th time.

Abdul Baha speaks of the ascension verse in Luke. Its a false, forged verse. He didnt know that, because he was reading the KJV, which means he had no divine knowledge. Even you believed this, because you didnt have the knowledge.

Its just one example.

Maybe if I repeat this another 10 times you might understand the point.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Now let us talk about the Holy Quran for those who are Muslim.

In that part of the world, the Arabian Peninsula, Muhammad appeared.

He brought them divine guidance and laws through the Quran which was compiled over a period of 23 years. He united the warring tribes and established a great nation.

Again, I know the Quran to be the Word of God through the Holy Spirit. I need not be shown every prophecy that Muhammad fulfilled, because it’s clear to me God sent Him.

Again, no proof is required because spiritual sight can easily recognise God’s Messengers just as physical eyes, the sun in the sky.

But tyere always will be those who must travel the path of proofs until their spiritual sight is sharpened enough to see the truth clearly.

We all have inborn, the spiritual capacity to know God, but not all in this time of materialism have developed it enough so rely on argument which can help lead to the truth but often ego interferes and nothing is learned.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No its not the same.

Then you have not read both books.

The New Testament was written by many many authors. No one knows who wrote the four canonical gospels. No one knows who wrote Hebrews. No one knows who wrote Titus. No one knows who wrote revelations. The synoptic problem portrays heavy plagiarism. Textual criticism not only shows errors of Parablepsis and homoeoteleuton but also embarrassment and other interpolations. But you guys have faith in it.

The Quran never had these problems. There was never a canon of the Quran. Quran was written by one man, one single writing style, no form criticism works on the Quran, and textual criticism of the Quran will provide strength, not doubt. Unlike the Bible. Thats the whole point.

This shows that none of you are read up on any of these books.



Is that why Bahaullah, Effendi and Abdul Baha criticise the "Christian Divines" vehemently? They also claim to believe in the Christ because of the Holy Spirit.

There is a divide between you and your prophet. Which means you cherry pick what you want from even your own prophet, and the rest you dont adopt.



So through the Holy Spirit, can you tell me who wrote the book of Hebrews?

It is not necessary to read the Quran and Bible from cover to cover to know it is from God or that Christ and Muhammad were true Messengers of God.

History proves this point.

The disciples of Christ many could not read nor write yet recognised Him.

The early followers of Muhammad were not all literate who knew the Bible by heart and the Quran was revealed over 23 years so many believed in Him before the Quran had even been completed.


It was the Holy Spirit which affected these people as they weren’t educated scholars.

 

[firedragon]

Again, I know the Quran to be the Word of God through the Holy Spirit. I need not be shown every prophecy that Muhammad fulfilled, because it’s clear to me God sent Him.

Haha. So your faith on the Quran is based on your personal experience with the Holy Spirit and the same with the Bible right? Thats your criteria. The Holy Spirit.

So through the Holy Spirit, could you find out and let me know who wrote the book of Hebrews? Second time within a few minutes I ask this same question from you.

Again, I know the Quran to be the Word of God through the Holy Spirit. I need not be shown every prophecy that Muhammad fulfilled, because it’s clear to me God sent Him.

Again, no proof is required because spiritual sight can easily recognise God’s Messengers just as physical eyes, the sun in the sky.

But tyere always will be those who must travel the path of proofs until their spiritual sight is sharpened enough to see the truth clearly.

We all have inborn, the spiritual capacity to know God, but not all in this time of materialism have developed it enough so rely on argument which can help lead to the truth but often ego interferes and nothing is learned.

This is a strawman argument. I didnt ask you for proof of why you should believe in anything. you have told me that you even believe in the Buddhist scripture and claimed you have studied them but you have not even read some of them. So you could believe in the Dasathir if you want. Thats not my argument.

Read the OP again maybe.

 

[firedragon]

It is not necessary to read the Quran and Bible from cover to cover to know it is from God or that Christ and Muhammad were true Messengers of God.

History proves this point.

I was not talking about believing. Strawman argument. I was talking about your comparison of the Bible and the Quran.

The disciples of Christ many could not read nor write yet recognised Him.

The early followers of Muhammad were not all literate who knew the Bible by heart and the Quran was revealed over 23 years so many believed in Him before the Quran had even been completed.


It was the Holy Spirit which affected these people as they weren’t educated scholars.

How do you know that "it was the Holy Spirit who affected these people"?

You are a person who seems to speak to this Holy Spirit, but you cannot even provide a simple answer to a question you could clarify from the Holy Spirit. And you claim people during Muhammed time were also affected by the Holy Spirit and that was the basis to their faith. Can you provide evidence to this or are you just gonna keep making statements like in a temple and some priest keeps making preaching like statements. "I speak to the Holy Spirit, so believe what I say".

Amazing.