You agree that you have to deny the certain verses of the New Testament are untrue. You have understated that considerably since there are a lot more than certain verses which you regard as untrue and you need to do that in order to accept the teachings of Baha'u'llah, since those teaching disagree with the New Testament. And in all this you do not count the multitude of passages and verses which you say that you just interpret a different way, but which in reality you are denying the truth of for the sake of saying that they agree with Baha'u'llah.
I believe that certain verses in the New Testament are untrue because I accept the teachings of Baha'u'llah which disagree with the New Testament, but even if I was never a Bahai, I would not believe that those verses are true; e.g. rising from the dead and meeting Jesus in the clouds. I cannot believe things that are absurd.
There are many verses that I believe are true but I just interpret them in a different way from Christians.
It's true, Baha'u'llah does not discredit the Bible, he just denies the truth of it as you also have admitted that you do.
No, I did not admit to that. Baha'u'llah did not weigh in on the truth of the Bible.
Your quote above from Baha'u'llah says that the gospels in the Bible are true and have not disappeared from Christianity. But Baha'u'llah's teachings contradict what the gospels say and you also deny the truthfulness of much of the gospels. '
IMO this means that Baha'u'llah was not saying what he really believes when he wrote that quote above and you even believing what he wrote when you deny parts of those gospels.
I don't know what Baha'u'llah really believed about the Bible. All I know is what He wrote. He never weighed in on what parts of the Bible are untrue. I made that determination for myself.
There is also a particular context to that passage so you need to read the whole passage to understand what He meant. He was addressing Muslims who claimed that the Bible had been corrupted and saying that the Christians needed the Bible until the rise of the sun of the Muḥammadan Dispensation.
“We have also heard a number of the foolish of the earth assert that the genuine text of the heavenly Gospel doth not exist amongst the Christians, that it hath ascended unto heaven. How grievously they have erred! How oblivious of the fact that such a statement imputeth the gravest injustice and tyranny to a gracious and loving Providence! How could God, when once the Day-star of the beauty of Jesus had disappeared from the sight of His people, and ascended unto the fourth heaven, cause His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures, to disappear also? What would be left to that people to cling to from the setting of the day-star of Jesus until the rise of the sun of the Muḥammadan Dispensation? What law could be their stay and guide? How could such people be made the victims of the avenging wrath of God, the omnipotent Avenger? How could they be afflicted with the scourge of chastisement by the heavenly King? Above all, how could the flow of the grace of the All-Bountiful be stayed? How could the ocean of His tender mercies be stilled? We take refuge with God, from that which His creatures have fancied about Him! Exalted is He above their comprehension!”
(The Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 89-90)
Jesus did not say here whether whether His physical body or spirit would come again to, but He does say that "He" would come again, iow not someone else.
No, Jesus
never said that He would return to this world. He said the exact opposite, which is why He has not returned and never will.
John 14:19 Yet a little while, and
the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
John 16:10 Of righteousness, because
I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.
John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth:
I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
John 17:11
And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
Baha'is can't work out how Jesus come come and collect His disciples to be with Him forever, but Baha'is have a different teaching about death and what a human is than the one in Bible. A living human consists of a body and spirit (Genesis 2:7) and a full living human when Jesus returns, is still going to be body and spirit.
Baha'is believe that a living human consists of a body and spirit (soul) but when the body dies it remains dead and the soul crosses over to the spiritual world and takes on another kind of body, a spiritual body. This is congruent with what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:35-51.
We see this in other parts of the New Testament where the return of Jesus is pictured (eg 1Thessalonians 4:13-18) I suppose that is just part of the New Testament that you reject because it does not agree with Baha'u'llah.
I wish you would stop saying that this is just part of the New Testament that I reject because it does not agree with Baha'u'llah. That is not the reason I reject it. I reject it because it is patently absurd to believe these verses if you interpret them literally.
1Thessalonians 4
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Again, Jesus did not say here whether he could come back bodily or as a spirit BUT He does say that it would be Him, Jesus, and not someone else, and Jesus did say that He would come again to those disciples He was talking to. (who of course would be dead but would be resurrected by Jesus)
Strong's Greek: 1473. ἐγώ (egó) -- I, me
No, Jesus never said that He would return to earth (see above).
You already know that Jesus said the "He" (nobody else) would be coming back.
No, Jesus never said that He would return to earth (see above).
Plenty of other parts of the New Testament also show us that it is Jesus who would actually be coming back and that every eye would see Him (Rev 1:7,8) and that He would judge everybody and raise them from the grave etc.
If those verses are in the New Testament they were written by people who believed and hoped that Jesus would return to earth, but they were wrong, obviously, because Jesus said that He was NO MORE in this world.
John 16:16 Jesus went on to say, “In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.”
You can read the whole passage to see what Jesus was talking about. BUT what I am talking about is the language used by Jesus. Jesus said "In a little while you will see me no more......" and by that He did not mean that they would never see Him again and we know that by His next statement.
John 16:16 Jesus went on to say, “In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.”
That verse does not refer to Jesus returning to this world. His disciples could not see Jesus again in this world since as we know Jesus did not return during their lifetimes.
John 16:22 And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.
Yes, Jesus will see His disciples again in heaven, which fits together perfectly with this verse.
John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
He in the gospels and also the other parts of the New Testament tell us that the world would see Him again.
Other parts of the New Testament say that the world would see Him again but that was only the belief and hope of those writers.
It does not make sense to say that Christianity and Paul teach something and so it is a false belief. That does show where you are coming from however and that you are not really trying to make a logical argument. Your arguments are, Baha'u'llah says it so I believe it and so the Bible and Christianity are wrong when they disagree with Baha'u'llah.
It does not make sense to say that Christianity and Paul teach something and so it is a true belief. That does show where you are coming from however and that you are not really trying to make a logical argument. Your arguments are, the Bible says it so I believe it and so the Bible and Christianity are right.
My argument is not that Baha'u'llah says it so I believe it since Baha'u'llah did not say much about the Bible.