I'm sorry to say it, but anyone, whether Christian or not, who has put a bit of effort and study into actually reading the Bible will soon come to the conclusion that the way Baha'i try to use the Bible simply as a prop to justify Baha'u'llah is laboured and artificial
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Thy Kingdom Come, Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.
- Thread starter TransmutingSoul
- Start date
Well what is more important than being close to God and what worse thing than abandoning Him?
How do you interpret the fruit of knowledge of good and evil that caused Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness with fig leaves and try to hide from God?
Is it the loss of innocence?
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, I think that @Sumadji was referring to the fall of Adam and Eve.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I wish Christians would not insist that they alone know the meaning of the Bible. Who gave them any authority to interpret the Bible? Nobody.
Completely different meaning from WHAT? From the correct meaning you think you know?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Which Baha'is are using the Bible as a prop to justify Baha'u'llah? Certainly not me.
Baha'is do not need an ancient book written by men for another age in history in order to justify Baha'u'llah.
No Baha'is ever talk about the Bible in Baha'i communities. The only reason we talk about it on this forum is because Christians don't recognize any other book from God.
It is Christians who disparage Baha'u'llah who are trying to use the Bible to support their beliefs against Baha'u'llah.
They have to perform all kinds of acrobatics in that effort and still end up falling flat on their faces.
Genesis is from the Tanakh, the Jewish Bible. Do Jews accept the Baha'i interpretation of the Tanakh?
The meaning in context
Oh really? That's a good one!
To the best of my knowledge Bahá'ís cherry-pick the Bible in virtually every post they make on this forum? Certainly a majority percentage of the posts they make.
If Bahai's just left the Bible alone, acknowledging they don't really know anything much about it, especially the New Testament, nobody actually familiar with the Bible would need to be responding to Baha'i posts on this website -- to point out their continual errors.
To me the only interest the Baha'i have in the Bible is to try to manipulate it to somehow foretell Baha'u'llah. They're not interested in anything else about it
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Why do you think that there is a Baha'i interpretation of the Tanakh?
Do you think that all Jews interpret the Tanakh the same way?
I know Jews who interpret the story of Adam and Eve the same way that Baha'is do, as figurative, not literal.
Well, you are really just wrong about that. Bahá'ís do not cherry-pick the Bible in virtually every post they make on this forum. We discuss many other things without any reference to the Bible.
Why do you think that Baha'is don't know much about the Bible, especially the New Testament? How do you know what they know?
What errors?
Most Baha'is on this forum were formerly Christians so they know the Bible. I am an exception, but that doesn't mean I cannot read and interpret Bible verses.
That's probably true, but why should we be interested in the Bible given we have the Baha'i Writings?
Do we expect Christians to be interested in the Baha'i Writings?
Yes. Of course it's figurative. But it's necessary to include the whole thing, not cherry-pick, to suit your own Baha'i agenda.
Then why do you keep referencing?
If there were Christians cherry-picking the Baha'i writings, the least expected would be that they should have properly read them and put in a bit of effort -- I don't mean skimmed them for quote mining.
@Trailblazer
I guarantee you and other Baha'i here 100% that if you refrained from cherry-picking and quote mining the Bible and more especially the New Testament that I wouldn't be responding but would just be reading and considering your Baha'i views on this website.
Would you like to give it a try?
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Anyone can hurl accusations but they are meaningless without evidence.
What verses do you think Baha'is are cherry picking to suit our agenda? Give me one example.
That is like the pot calling the kettle black. Christians are famous for cherry-picking verses to suit their own agendas.
I can give you numerous examples of verses that Christians cherry-pick out of context.
Do you want to be fair, or do you just want to disparage Baha'is?
I already explained that.
Baha'is don't talk about the Bible in Baha'i communities.
The only reason we talk about it on this forum is because Christians don't recognize any other book from God.
You are making accusations with absolutely no proof. "skimmed them for quote mining?' How can you know that anyone did that?
You do not know what Baha'is do, not anymore than I know what you or any other Christians do.
I don't need to read the entire Bible to know what certain verses mean within the context of the chapters, not anymore than a Christian would need to read everything that is in the Baha'i Writings in order to understand what certain passages mean in context of the passage.
Posting certain verses and discussing them is not equivalent to 'cherry picking out-of-context.'
Christians do the same thing constantly. Why are you picking on the Baha'is? That is unjust.
I haven't got hours and pages to itemize your quote mining of John, Daniel, Revelations etc -- you name it
Christians discuss and dissect the New Testament? Muslims discuss the Quran? Shakespeare buffs discuss Shakespeare? Golly gee wow --
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I haven't got hours and pages to itemize Christian quote mining of John, Daniel, Revelations etc -- you name it.
I don't expect you to understand the point I am trying to make because you would need to be just in order to see it.
People can discuss whatever they want to discuss. Nobody owns those books.
Of course not. But people who discuss a book are at minimum expected to have read the book?
@Trailblazer
You keep contradicting yourself. You admit you don't know much about the Bible, but you keep punching on about it every day, year after year. It's tiresome and does nothing to convince Christians or anybody else. You keep tripping yourself over.
Anyway ...
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
The Bible is a collection of many books. People who discuss the Bible don't have to read every book in order to discuss some books.
That just doesn't work. I never do discuss any parts of the Bible that I am unfamiliar with.
Funny thing is there are plenty of Christians on this forum and none of them have a problem with me discussing the parts of the Bible that I have read. You are the only Christian who has a problem with that. Other Christians appreciate that I took the time to read any part of the Bible, even though it is not the scripture that I follow.
Do you really think 'reading the Bible' is a guarantee that a person will understand what it means?
If that was a guarantee, Christians -- who have all read the same Bible -- would not be constantly arguing about what the Bible means.
If that was a guarantee, Christians -- who have all read the same Bible -- would not be split into more than 45,000 Christian denominations.
A little bit of logic goes a long way.
This is a direct answer from the Baha’i writings accept it or reject it as you wish but to me it makes a whole lot of sense.
“By “the tree of good and evil” is meant the material world, for the heavenly realm of the
spirit is pure goodness and absolute radiance, but in the material world light
and darkness, good and evil, and all manner of opposing realities are to be
found.”
Some Answered Questions
‘Abdu’l‑Bahá
Good point ^above^ because man's fall came 'after' he was created
Eve did Not even try to 'sneak' or disguise the forbidden fruit into a pie or something but Adam knowingly accepted the fruit from Eve
The Bible's three (3) heavens and earth at 2nd Peter 3:5,7,9 is Not biblically meaning God's Word and Law
2nd Peter 3:5 is about the heavens and earth of Noah's day ( the corrupted heavens and earth ) of OLD
2nd Peter 3:7 is about the heavens and earth since Noah's day to our day the ones of NOW
2nd Peter 3:13 is about the heavens and earth to come ( uncorrupted heavenly government and earth ) of NEW
I'd like to add to the ^above^ ...... or worse than being abandoned by God ____________ - Matthew 23:38
I'd like to add to the ^above^ the words found at 2nd Thess. 2:11-12 because God allows a person to believe errors or lies
So, we are speaking about both the genuine Christians as opposed to so-called Christians in name only - Matthew 7:21-23
ALL authoritative power is given to Christ - Matthew 28:18-20
Jesus' genuine 'sheep' are the ones who know his voice