What if these Christian beliefs are not true?

[Truthseeker]

So, for a Baha'is, will it create a situation where there are those Baha'is that believe the teachings are inerrant and literal and those that take a liberal, non-literal view?

It's a matter if everything Abdu'l-Baha says is always the truth. Some people don't think so. Is what Abdu'l-Baha says an interpretation of what Baha'u'llah said at one time every time? I doubt it. What he said about evolution of humans appears to be one of those times. But Baha'u'llah referred to Abdu'l-Baha in very exalted terms which I won't explicate for you right now, and when Shoghi Effendi says this later about Abdu'l-Baha I believe this to be an interpretation of what Baha'u'llah said about Abdu'l-Baha:

He is, and should for all time be regarded, first and foremost, as the Center and Pivot of Bahá'u'lláh's peerless and all-enfolding Covenant, His most exalted handiwork, the stainless Mirror of His light, the perfect Exemplar of His teachings, the unerring Interpreter of His Word, the embodiment of every Bahá'í ideal, the incarnation of every Bahá'í virtue, the Most Mighty Branch sprung from the Ancient Root, the Limb of the Law of God, the Being "round Whom all names revolve," the Mainspring of the Oneness of Humanity, the Ensign of the Most Great Peace, the Moon of the Central Orb of this most holy Dispensation -- styles and titles that are implicit and find their truest, their highest and fairest expression in the magic name 'Abdu'l-Bahá. He is, above and beyond these appellations, the "Mystery of God" -- an expression by which Bahá'u'lláh Himself has chosen to designate Him, and which, while it does not by any means justify us to assign to Him the station of Prophethood, indicates how in the person of 'Abdu'l-Bahá the incompatible characteristics of a human nature and superhuman knowledge and perfection have been blended and are completely harmonized.
(Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 133)

After all, Shoghi Effendi was also an infallible interpreter. That's how I see it. Others differ. That does not make those people any less of a Baha'i. There is no division in the Baha'i Faith because of this, because every Baha'i has the right to their own opinion. It does not have to start a fight unless Baha'is make it so. Baha'is sometimes do argue about this. I have. Whether that was a fight, or the spark of different opinions clashing to get to the truth, let God decide that.

If a Baha'i decided to try to impose their opinion on everyone else, and start an alternate organization to do so, then they would be expelled as covenant breakers and shunned. Those who joined that alternate organization would also be covenant breakers and shunned. This is necessary, because when this happens every attempt by members of the learned, that is, auxiliary board members, Continental counselors, ot the International Teaching Center would be to show them the error of them doing so. Only if that doesn't work would they be covenant breakers. Those of the learned are selected because they are well versed in the Writings, have a god character, and thus will not be swayed by the potential covenant breakers, but the rank and file may not have those qualities, so they must shun these people, so as to not break up the unity of the Baha'i Faith.

However, if by chance, it was a true story, then it would matter which son it was. But that would mean that either the Jews were lying or that Muhammad and Baha'u'llah were lying.

Not really. It may be a faulty detail of the story passed on over a thousand years. That's what I think. You have no reason to believe Muhammad or Baha'u'llah, so it doesn't matter to me. I don't mean by that that I don't care what you think, just that I know you have no reason at this time to believe.

We find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers that cover all the continents. For example, most of the rock layers in the walls of Grand Canyon (more than a mile above sea level) contain marine fossils. Fossilized shellfish are even found in the Himalayas.We find extensive fossil “graveyards” and exquisitely preserved fossils. For example, billions of nautiloid fossils are found in a layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon. This layer was deposited catastrophically by a massive flow of sediment (mostly lime sand). The chalk and coal beds of Europe and the United States, and the fish, ichthyosaurs, insects, and other fossils all around the world, testify of catastrophic destruction and burial.

That has to do with the tectonic plates moving around the world which has been proven scientifically, and hitting each other and causing the earth to buckle and raise up mountains, so what used to be the seafloor is now on a mountain. There have other changes to the features of the earth over billions of years. But then, sometimes Christians don't believe the Earth is 4.6 Billion years old or thereabouts.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

ʻAbdu'l-Bahá discussed evolution, including making claims that appear to contradict the modern doctrine of common descent for all earthly life. For example, in Some Answered Question he said,


His teachings were widely interpreted as a kind of parallel evolution, in which humans had a separate line of descent to some primitive form, separate from animals.[59][60] But the emphasis on the harmony of science and religion and the success of the modern evolutionary paradigm resulted in at least 19 books and articles from 16 authors over the period of 1990 to 2009 trying to address how Bahá'ís should view evolution in light of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's statements, the majority of which took universal common ancestry as fact and attempted to reconcile with a new interpretation of the statements.[61] Two articles by Keven Brown and Eberhard von Kitzing,[62] jointly published under the title Evolution and Bahá'í Belief (2001), stand out as the only book-length review of the issue by Bahá'ís during the period, and has been well received.[63][64]

The new understanding viewed the apparent meaning of parallel evolution as an unfortunate misunderstanding that should be carefully studied and interpreted in terms that make sense today. Gary Matthews wrote,


This understanding was included in the Foreword to the 2014 printing of Some Answered Questions, stating:


Not all Bahá'ís were convinced of the argument that ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's statements are in complete alignment with modern evolutionary theory. Salman Oskooi wrote his 2009 thesis on the subject and was unconvinced by the various authors trying to reconcile the issue with modern science, writing that ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's statements have an "apparent discord with science", "appear uninterpretable in any sense but their apparent meaning", and the apparent meaning is that "humans have been distinct from other beings since the time of some primitive stage of our evolution."[67] Oskooi concluded that ʻAbdu'l-Bahá was fallible on scientific matters, but that the issue does not contradict the fundamental premise of the faith. Also in 2009, Ian Kluge wrote that, "There is no question that ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's views on human evolution are in conflict with current scientific thought", but he concluded that religion cannot "uncritically agree with science on all its pronouncements at all times" due to the changing nature of science itself.[68]

In 2023, Bryan Donaldson published On the Originality of Species, attempting to address the issue from the point of view of new research in evolutionary biology that could plausibly support the idea of "independent and parallel growth of many categories of plants and animals out of a network of gene-sharing unicellular roots."[69] Donaldson points to a variety of trends in evolutionary thought since the late 1990s, concluding that,



Baháʼí views on science - Wikipedia.

I read Abdu'l-Baha's words on human:

"In like manner, from the beginning of man’s existence on this planet until he assumed his present shape, form, and condition, a long time must have elapsed, and he must have traversed many stages before reaching his present condition. But from the beginning of his existence man has been a distinct species....."


"From beginning of man's existence on this planet"

When did existence of man start on this planet?

See, Abdulbaha is not saying that from the beginning of existence of this planet, when single cells started to grow into different beings, human was there. He is talking about beginning of existence of human on earth, which is like 300,000 years ago or so.

The error, in my opinion is, misunderstanding of even Baha'is. What we have in mind, is evolution theory, which science proves to ve true. And we think Abdulbaha is talking about evolution theory. No. He is not talking about how human beings were evolved from Animals. He is talking about from the time, human beings had already existed in the form of primitives. And that from that time, it was being evolved, specially from spiritual and mind perspectives.

 

[Trailblazer]

And it's not like I believe the story of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, but I do believe that the gospel writers are claiming that Jesus came back to life... that he had a flesh and bone body.

I agree that the gospel writers are claiming that Jesus came back to life and had a flesh and bone body, but why would anyone believe that, unless they were a Christian. A story is no proof that anything in that story ever happened. Atheists know that and so do I.

That contradicts the Baha'i claim that Jesus died and stayed dead, and it was only his spirit that ascended. That leaves them to explain the appearances of Jesus. What I usually hear from them is that it was a vision.

Baha'is do not have to 'explain' all the stories that are written in the Bible because we have no REASON to believe that any of them are true.
But Baha'is can have opinions about the stories. Imo, if Jesus was seen after He died He was seen on a spiritual body, not in a physical body. Physical bodies do not rise from the grave after three days. That is fact. What Christians believe is fiction.

For Christians, the resurrection helps them in coming to the conclusion that Jesus is the Son of God and maybe even part of a Godhead.

For Christians the resurrection makes they believe that their religion is superior. Too bad it is only a fictitious story.

For Baha'is, saying that Jesus died makes him no greater than their prophet, Baha'u'llah. He, along with Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, Buddha, Krishna and some others are all together in the spiritual world of God. Baha'is say they are all manifestations of God, perfectly polished mirrors that reflect God's light... all equal and all took their turn at coming to Earth to guide humans to a higher level.

No, Jesus is no greater than Baha'u'llah, but they were both greater than the other Prophets.

“Know that the attributes of perfection, the splendor of the divine bounties, and the lights of inspiration are visible and evident in all the Holy Manifestations; but the glorious Word of God, Christ, and the Greatest Name, Bahá’u’lláh, are manifestations and evidences which are beyond imagination, for They possess all the perfections of the former Manifestations; and more than that, They possess some perfections which make the other Manifestations dependent upon Them. So all the Prophets of Israel were centers of inspiration; Christ also was a receiver of inspiration, but what a difference between the inspiration of the Word of God and the revelations of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Elijah!”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 146-150

Baha'is concede that Jesus was as great as Baha'u'llah but Christians cannot have any prophet be as great as Jesus.
The arrogance of Christianity is beyond imagination, there is NOTHING in the world more arrogant.

Quite a bit different than what is taught in the NT. Which means they have to explain away more than just the resurrection. And they do. Satan and hell are gone. Casting out demons? Gone. Raising of Lazarus? Gone. But they do believe in the virgin birth. So, they don't reject everything.

Baha'is don't have to 'explain away' anything in the Bible since IT IS NOT OUR HOLY BOOK.
Do Buddhists or Hindus or Muslims have to explain away what is in the Bible?

As far as I am concerned, the Bible stories are fiction. Satan and hell are fiction. People being raised from the dead is fiction.
There are spiritual truths that are conveyed by the fiction, it is as simple as that.

As far as I am concerned, most everything in the NT is a false representation of the real person called Jesus. This is despicable.

But for them, it's not like they are rejecting it. It's they give those things a "spiritual", symbolic interpretation. So, for a Baha'i, Christians have made a huge mistake in taking all these literally and coming to the wrong conclusions and doing things like making Jesus the only way and even a God.

It is a mistake, but it is MORE than a mistake, it is a travesty of astronomical proportions. However, many Christians are waking up and smelling the coffee because many liberal Christians no longer believe the Bible stories literally. This was bound to happen as we are now living in the modern age of science.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why are you here? You're not only saying things about the Baha'i Faith, you are adding in your own interpretations of things. Then leaving it to me to sort out when I call you out on your claims? Come on Tony, they are your claims. Back them up or say that it's your opinion and that you are just generalizing.

Sorry CG, not inspired to do that at this time. Such is life.

Maybe when I retire from work, time to do such things will be available.

Regards Tony

 

[Truthseeker]

See, Abdulbaha is not saying that from the beginning of existence of this planet, when single cells started to grow into different beings, human was there. He is talking about beginning of existence of human on earth, which is like 300,000 years ago or so.

Yes, i agree with that perspective. At some time in the past, there was an animal that evolved to a point where God decided to endow that animal with a soul because the time was ripe. It may have been earlier than Homo Sapiens, no one knows. There's a possibility that Neanderthals had a soul also, but they died out Here's the modern understanding of Neanderthals:

For much of the early 20th century, European researchers depicted Neanderthals as primitive, unintelligent and brutish. Although knowledge and perception of them has markedly changed since then in the scientific community, the image of the unevolved caveman archetype remains prevalent in popular culture.[25][26] In truth, Neanderthal technology was quite sophisticated. It includes the Mousterian stone-tool industry[27][28] as well as the abilities to create fire,[29][30] build cave hearths[31][32] (to cook food, keep warm, defend themselves from animals, placing it at the centre of their homes),[33] make adhesive birch bark tar,[34] craft at least simple clothes similar to blankets and ponchos,[35] weave,[36] go seafaring through the Mediterranean,[37][38] make use of medicinal plants,[39][40][41] treat severe injuries,[42] store food,[43] and use various cooking techniques such as roasting, boiling,[44] and smoking.[45] Neanderthals consumed a wide array of food, mainly hoofed mammals,[46] but also megafauna,[25][47] plants,[48][49][50] small mammals, birds, and aquatic and marine resources.[51] Although they were probably apex predators, they still competed with cave lions, cave hyenas and other large predators.[52] A number of examples of symbolic thought and Palaeolithic art have been inconclusively[53] attributed to Neanderthals, namely possible ornaments made from bird claws and feathers,[54][55] shells,[56] collections of unusual objects including crystals and fossils,[57] engravings,[58] music production (possibly indicated by the Divje Babe flute),[59] and Spanish cave paintings contentiously[60] dated to before 65,000 years ago.[61][62] Some claims of religious beliefs have been made.[63] Neanderthals were likely capable of speech, possibly articulate, although the complexity of their language is not known.[64][65]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

 

[cataway]

In case you've never read Abdul Baha's explanation of the "true" meaning of the resurrection of Jesus, here it is...

We explain, therefore, the meaning of Christ’s resurrection in the following way: After the martyrdom of Christ, the Apostles were perplexed and dismayed. The reality of Christ, which consists in His teachings, His bounties, His perfections, and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and had no outward appearance or manifestation—indeed, it was as though it were entirely lost. For those who truly believed were few in number, and even those few were perplexed and dismayed. The Cause of Christ was thus as a lifeless body. After three days the Apostles became firm and steadfast, arose to aid the Cause of Christ, resolved to promote the divine teachings and practise their Lord’s admonitions, and endeavoured to serve Him. Then did the reality of Christ become resplendent, His grace shine forth, His religion find new life, and His teachings and admonitions become manifest and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ, which was like unto a lifeless body, was quickened to life and surrounded by the grace of the Holy Spirit.​

​

7Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection. But as the clergy did not grasp the meaning of the Gospels and did not comprehend this mystery, it was claimed that religion was opposed to science and science was incompatible with religion, for among other things the ascension of Christ in a physical body to the material heavens is contrary to the mathematical sciences. But when the truth of this matter is clarified and this symbol is explained, it is in no way contradicted by science but rather affirmed by both science and reason.​

​

And it's not like I believe the story of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, but I do believe that the gospel writers are claiming that Jesus came back to life... that he had a flesh and bone body.

That contradicts the Baha'i claim that Jesus died and stayed dead, and it was only his spirit that ascended. That leaves them to explain the appearances of Jesus. What I usually hear from them is that it was a vision.

For Christians, the resurrection helps them in coming to the conclusion that Jesus is the Son of God and maybe even part of a Godhead.

For Baha'is, saying that Jesus died makes him no greater than their prophet, Baha'u'llah. He, along with Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, Buddha, Krishna and some others are all together in the spiritual world of God. Baha'is say they are all manifestations of God, perfectly polished mirrors that reflect God's light... all equal and all took their turn at coming to Earth to guide humans to a higher level.

Quite a bit different than what is taught in the NT. Which means they have to explain away more than just the resurrection. And they do. Satan and hell are gone. Casting out demons? Gone. Raising of Lazarus? Gone. But they do believe in the virgin birth. So, they don't reject everything.

But for them, it's not like they are rejecting it. It's they give those things a "spiritual", symbolic interpretation. So, for a Baha'i, Christians have made a huge mistake in taking all these literally and coming to the wrong conclusions and doing things like making Jesus the only way and even a God.

ah but some did see Jesus go up ''After he had said these things, while they were looking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight. ''Acts 1:9..... so there is a president . if Baha'u'llah was not seen going up ,it did not happen

 

[cataway]

wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrine_of_Bah%C3%A1%CA%BCu%27ll%C3%A1h[/URL]

God Sent Himself To Die On The Cross

When you think about it, God did not send himself because Jesus is not God in the flesh. God cannot be flesh. The Bible confirms that many times over. Oh but he is though. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Truthseeker]

ah but some did see Jesus go up ''After he had said these things, while they were looking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight. ''Acts 1:9..... so there is a president . if Baha'u'llah was not seen going up ,it did not happen

That is not a believable story. It makes it less likely Jesus was resurrected. Where did he go in outer space? That could be believed back then, but with today's science that is not believable. I can understand why that story was passed on and thought to be credible in those times.

 

[cataway]

That is not a believable story. It makes it less likely Jesus was resurrected. Where did he go in outer space? That could be believed back then, but with today's science that is not believable. I can understand why that story was passed on and thought to be credible in those times.

if you could figure it out you would just change it

 

[TransmutingSoul]

ah but some did see Jesus go up ''After he had said these things, while they were looking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight. ''Acts 1:9..... so there is a president . if Baha'u'llah was not seen going up ,it did not happen

There would be absolutely no point in this event to be physical when Jesus said the flesh amounts to nothing.

It is logical it is metephor so all have the same choice to beleive that Jesus as the Christ, still lives with us. Which as a Baha'i, we embrace 100%.

Regards Tony

 

[Truthseeker]

f you could figure it out you would just change it

They couldn't figure that out back then because they didn't have knowledge necessary to figure it out. It wasn't that they were stupid, science hadn't advanced that far.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That is not a believable story. It makes it less likely Jesus was resurrected. Where did he go in outer space? That could be believed back then, but with today's science that is not believable. I can understand why that story was passed on and thought to be credible in those times.

I do not know about you Truthseeker, but I am very weary of the stubbornness of humanity in embracing our oneness, with logic and reason, that is my impatience showing through and God knows and tests that impatience often, my wife just smiles at me, be patient dear the smile says!

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

That's south America, you were generalizing native Americans.

There's a lot of generalizing. First, Tony said "Native" faiths. I don't see where he specified Native Americans. And, since Tony is in Australia I would think he would have been referring to the Aborigines as well as other "Native" peoples, which I would include the people of Africa, Polynesian and other places.

Then about Mexico, it's not in South America. Sometimes Mexico gets tied in with South America when people make it part of "Latin" America. But Native people lived there long before America was even called America... North, South or Latin.

Here's a larger portion of Tony's post.

That is why the Messages of the Bab and Baha'u'llah were given in Perisa and to Islam, as Islam had sunk to the lowest depth of justice, morality and lawfulness in Persia. We are also told that is why America was given the Message early, as its material degradation of Christianity was also rampant.

Now I offer we can see the Native peoples in a different light. God did not deliver the Message directly to them, obviously they had not degraded as much as the Islam Persians and Christian Americans, the Native faiths still had a level of productive spirituality. Christianity and Islam needed the Message and what better place to give it to them, than at the heart of where it was practiced at its lowest levels.

The way I'm understanding what he is saying is that Native people were less materialistic, therefore, more spiritual. But maybe he can clarify that.

Native faiths still had a level of productive spirituality.

And this is the part of his post I called out and commented on.

You mean like the ones that did human sacrificing and worshipped many Gods?

Polynesians sacrificed people...

In addition, a host of gods of varying degrees of importance existed. These ranged from the great gods of the Polynesian pantheon, such as Tangaroa, Tu, and Lono, to strictly local gods who were deified priests or chiefs of great renown. All of these spirit-beings had to be worshipped in their own way. Worship of the gods involved sacrifices (including human)​

​

Here's a Wikipedia article about human sacrificing...

Human sacrifice is the act of killing one or more humans as part of a ritual, which is usually intended to please or appease gods, a human ruler, public or jurisdictional demands for justice by capital punishment, an authoritative/priestly figure or spirits of dead ancestors or as a retainer sacrifice, wherein a monarch's servants are killed in order for them to continue to serve their master in the next life. Closely related practices found in some tribal societies are cannibalism and headhunting.[1] Human sacrifice is also known as ritual murder.​

​

Human sacrifice was practiced in many human societies beginning in prehistoric times. By the Iron Age (1st millennium BCE), with the associated developments in religion (the Axial Age), human sacrifice was becoming less common throughout Africa, Europe, and Asia, and came to be looked down upon as barbaric during classical antiquity.[citation needed] In the Americas, however, human sacrifice continued to be practiced, by some, to varying degrees until the European colonization of the Americas. Today, human sacrifice has become extremely rare.​

​

And here's something about North America Natives...

Captives in American Indian Wars could expect to be treated differently depending on the identity of their captors and the conflict they were involved in. During the American Indian Wars, indigenous peoples and European colonists alike frequently became captives of hostile parties. Depending on the specific instances in which they were captured, they could either be held as prisoners of war, abducted as a means of hostage diplomacy, used as countervalue targets, enslaved, apprehended for purposes of criminal justice, or face death by ritual torture.​

​

Anyway, how ironic that I was complaining about Tony generalizing and you said the same of me. I hope that clears things up enough. Take care.

 

[CG Didymus]

They couldn't figure that out back then because they didn't have knowledge necessary to figure it out. It wasn't that they were stupid, science hadn't advanced that far.

There's a non-canonical story about Peter and a heretic named Simon Magus...

Simon Magus challenged Peter publicly in front of the Emperor Nero and a crowd, saying that he would fly as proof of his doctrines. And amazingly, he did fly!​

​

Of course, it was not by the power of God but of Satan, which Peter quickly proved. Peter knelt down and prayed that God would stop Simon, which God did – right in mid-air. From high above the crowd, Simon suddenly lost his power of flight and fell to the ground, breaking his legs, and died soon after.​

​

People flying, animals talking, a wooden staff turning into a snake, dead people coming out of their graves in Jerusalem, the Sun stopping, Elijah flying into space on a fiery chariot. These were all believed then and some people still believe them.

And they must be believed, because otherwise the miracles of Jesus would be called into question also. So, what can you do? Their faith in the Bible, God and Jesus all depends on those stories being true.

 

[Trailblazer]

ah but some did see Jesus go up ''After he had said these things, while they were looking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight. ''Acts 1:9..... so there is a president . if Baha'u'llah was not seen going up ,it did not happen

How naive are you? Just because 'some people' said they saw Jesus lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight you believe that?

No, Baha'u'llah did not go up to heaven. He came down from heaven, just as Jesus had come down from heaven.

Though the body of Jesus was delivered from the womb of Mary, the soul of Jesus came down from heaven.
The soul of Baha'u'llah came down from heaven in the same way that the soul of Jesus came down from heaven. He was sent by God.

Jesus was a Comforter and Baha'u'llah was another Comforter.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

 

[CG Didymus]

There would be absolutely no point in this event to be physical when Jesus said the flesh amounts to nothing.

It is logical it is metephor so all have the same choice to beleive that Jesus as the Christ, still lives with us. Which as a Baha'i, we embrace 100%.

Regards Tony

Or... it's not a metaphor but just a fictional story. Baha'is, maybe not TB, need the stories to be symbolic. Most Christians need them to be true.

I'm going with fictional, because of the way they were written and believed by the early Church. They were written as if they were actual, historical events. Like when they think he was a ghost, he let's them touch him. When there is the possibility of the disciples stealing the body and claiming he rose from the dead, a guard is sent to watch the tomb.

 

[cataway]

How naive are you? Just because 'some people' said they saw Jesus lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight you believe that?

No, Baha'u'llah did not go up to heaven. He came down from heaven, just as Jesus had come down from heaven.

Though the body of Jesus was delivered from the womb of Mary, the soul of Jesus came down from heaven.
The soul of Baha'u'llah came down from heaven in the same way that the soul of Jesus came down from heaven. He was sent by God.

Jesus was a Comforter and Baha'u'llah was another Comforter.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

not soul ...spirit

 

[Trailblazer]

Or... it's not a metaphor but just a fictional story. Baha'is, maybe not TB, need the stories to be symbolic. Most Christians need them to be true.

I'm going with fictional, because of the way they were written and believed by the early Church. They were written as if they were actual, historical events. Like when they think he was a ghost, he let's them touch him. When there is the possibility of the disciples stealing the body and claiming he rose from the dead, a guard is sent to watch the tomb.

I have been watching videos made by this guy all day. I absolutely love this guy and as soon as I have time, I will be posting some new threads with his videos, probably not till next weekend.

 

[Trailblazer]

not soul ...spirit

It is the same thing. The human spirit is the soul.

“The human spirit which distinguishes man from the animal is the rational soul, and these two names—the human spirit and the rational soul—designate one thing. This spirit, which in the terminology of the philosophers is the rational soul, embraces all beings, and as far as human ability permits discovers the realities of things and becomes cognizant of their peculiarities and effects, and of the qualities and properties of beings.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 208-209

 

[cataway]

It is the same thing. The human spirit is the soul.

“The human spirit which distinguishes man from the animal is the rational soul, and these two names—the human spirit and the rational soul—designate one thing. This spirit, which in the terminology of the philosophers is the rational soul, embraces all beings, and as far as human ability permits discovers the realities of things and becomes cognizant of their peculiarities and effects, and of the qualities and properties of beings.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 208-209

ah but the animals are also soul and spirit