Baha'i for Beginners

Livindesert said:

I respect your conclusion. I do not agree but I see how you came to your point and it is a logical one.

Click to expand...

It is not only logical, but true. To me, the true test of whether someone can assert their position as objective as possible is to reverse the situation and see if that person can respond against their former position in the same way, which involves applying the same logic as previously.

Would you allow me to employ the same approach to interpretation to Baha'i scriptures that I do with the Bible? If yes, then you would be consistent. If not, then you would be hypocritical. Not seeking to understand literature in its natural context is to deviate from trying to understand what the author is intending for us to see. I don't think that you would let me deviate from the Baha'i interpretations by imposing my own standard. I know that can see the problem that Christians have with the Baha'i methods of interpretation: they are foreign to Christianity.

peaceful soul said:

Would you allow me to employ the same approach to interpretation to Baha'i scriptures that I do with the Bible? If yes, then you would be consistent.

Click to expand...

I would say you are already. But I value your opinion and uphold your right to post as you please

It has been a fun exchange, but I need to take a break from this thread and focus on more important things for a bit. Good talking with you all

Livindesert said:

I would say you are already. But I value your opinion and uphold your right to post as you please

It has been a fun exchange, but I need to take a break from this thread and focus on more important things for a bit. Good talking with you all

Click to expand...

I have not done such a thing! How can you even say that? When have I took Baha'i scripture and reinterpreted it? Please don't say things that are blatantly untrue.

The Baha'is have failed to look at the Biblical context when we ask them to support their position from the Bible only. The reason that we do that is to try to help the Baha'i to see that their interpretations are not based upon biblical context. But, the Baha'i's will always retort to repeating their scripture and ignoring most things that Christians say about getting the proper interpretations from context. Pawnraider has correctly explained at least two interpretations from the Bible that Baha'is have cited in their defense. He used context and other verses to show the flaws in Baha'i understanding; but, that does not stop the Baha'i and get them thinking beyond requoting their scriptures. We are looking for independent thinking to hopefully get the Baha'i to realize that the Bible does not support their prophet's interpretations. You can believe whatever you like, but at least understand that the Bible does not support your claim if we simply use context determined from the Bible. Since the Bible is the primary source of the quotes that you use; it would be expedient that you seek to understand the original intentions of the primary authors.

Livindesert said:

I would say you are already. But I value your opinion and uphold your right to post as you please

It has been a fun exchange, but I need to take a break from this thread and focus on more important things for a bit. Good talking with you all

Click to expand...

Furthermore, if you assert that I have, then show me where. I would be most interested in seeing you prove your position. If you can't support your position, I will have to surmise that you are not being truthful.

And, before you leave, take the time to answer the questions that we have been waiting for you to answer. Use some critical thinking instead of quoting Baha'i scripture and quote mining from the Bible. That is not sufficient for us.

I think we've gone over some of these points about the Bible already not only on this thread but on other similar threads in the past few years ..

We Baha'is don't argue or contend with Christians about their interpretations of the Bible.. If someone though wishes to investigate our perspectives on the Bible they will find we generally accept a more symbolic view and what we call a "spiritual" interpretation as opposed to say a literal one..or ones as the case may be..

You will most definitely find passages from the Bible and the Qur'an in the Baha'i Writings

One of the more valuable books I've found on the subject is still in print called "Baha'i References to Judaism, Christianity and Islam" published by George Ronald in 1986 can be found at

Bahá'Ã[wash my mouth] References to Judaism, Christianity and Islam

We've mentioned this before but I suppose it bears repeating here that the focus of the Baha'i Faith is more on the revelation of the Bab and Baha'u'llah and the Interpretations of Abdul-Baha .. so our interest as Baha'is is in what was revealed in the process of revelation by the Central Figures of our Faith rather than in the Bible as such which we nonetheless accept was inspired but not as direct a revelation as the Bible was passed down over time verbally and through traditions ..

Arthra said:

I think we've gone over some of these points about the Bible already not only on this thread but on other similar threads in the past few years ..

We Baha'is don't argue or contend with Christians about their interpretations of the Bible.. If someone though wishes to investigate our perspectives on the Bible they will find we generally accept a more symbolic view and what we call a "spiritual" interpretation as opposed to say a literal one..or ones as the case may be..

You will most definitely find passages from the Bible and the Qur'an in the Baha'i Writings

One of the more valuable books I've found on the subject is still in print called "Baha'i References to Judaism, Christianity and Islam" can be found at

Bahá'Ã[wash my mouth] References to Judaism, Christianity and Islam

We've mentioned this before but I suppose it bears repeating here that the focus of the Baha'i Faith is more on the revelation of the Bab and Baha'u'llah and the Interpretations of Abdul-Baha .. so our interest as Baha'is is in what was revealed in the process of revelation by the Central Figures of our Faith rather than in the Bible as such which we nonetheless accept was inspired but not as direct a revelation as it was passed down over time verbally and through traditions ..

Click to expand...

Do you listen at all, Arthra? We know that you have your beliefs, but you and your coreligionists don't use any critical thinking skills when we try to show you that your interpretations do not coincide with those gathered from context of the Bible. Rather than investigate this, all you do is to quote more Baha'i scripture or repeat what you have already said. We want you to take an independent look at the scriptures in the Bible that your prophet quotes and interprets and see why they are unfounded from a Biblical perspective. It seems that in most cases, you (Bahai's) become silent when we expound on those verses and give you the intended meaning. We are just asking you to see that your prophet's interpretations should be equally scrutinized as those that your prophet have reinterpreted for his own agenda.

Giving all things equal, there is no compelling reason for Christians to believe that those followers of Jesus didn't know how to interpret scripture after they had all of this stuff given to them either directly or through contemporaries of Jesus' followers. Just understand that your prophet's interpretations are divorced from context of the original authors. Continue to believe that the differences are a matter of Christian distortions over time and not see the merits of what we tell you. In the end, you only fool yourself. If you are not willing to question your own prophet's interpretations of scriptures of other faiths, you have already conceded that you are not really interested in anything we have to say that attempts to open your eyes. Wake up and smell the coffee.

BruceDLimber said:

Catherineanne, I've already posted passages demonstrating that we do indeed recognize other religions!

Click to expand...

... as mistakes!


Bruce, what made you believe that this particular self-proclaimed prophet was genuine? What about his own claims based on his own claims brought you to the Baha'i faith?

Was it his claims at prophethood based on his readings of scriptures? Or, his claims to interpret scriptures that showed him to be a prophet?

As Christians are want to do I was reading my Bible and came across these verses, “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” (John 8.12)

“I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.” (John 12.46)

And it says of John the Baptist “He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.” (John 1:8)

Now according to Baha’i theology Jesus Christ and John the Baptist were supposedly mirrors to reflect the light, which is God. However, as we read in the above verses the Bible fails to support such a theology. Jesus Christ clearly said that He is the Light and not a reflection or witness of it. And John is a witness of the Light and not a reflection of it. How can one be a reflection of the Light when one is the Light?

BUMP

Montalban said:

Bruce, what made you believe that this particular self-proclaimed prophet was genuine? What about his own claims based on his own claims brought you to the Baha'i faith?

Was it his claims at prophethood based on his readings of scriptures? Or, his claims to interpret scriptures that showed him to be a prophet?

Click to expand...

pawnraider said:

As Christians are want to do I was reading my Bible and came across these verses, “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” (John 8.12)

“I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.” (John 12.46)

And it says of John the Baptist “He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.” (John 1:8)

Now according to Baha’i theology Jesus Christ and John the Baptist were supposedly mirrors to reflect the light, which is God. However, as we read in the above verses the Bible fails to support such a theology. Jesus Christ clearly said that He is the Light and not a reflection or witness of it. And John is a witness of the Light and not a reflection of it. How can one be a reflection of the Light when one is the Light?

Click to expand...

Well this is a misrepresentation of what Baha'is believe.. we do not accept John the Baptist as a Manifestation of God as his mission was primarily to prepare the Way for Jesus and he had no Holy Book or new dispensation that came from him..


The Baha'i view is as follows:

"Bahá'u'lláh asserts that the principal bridge between God and all of creation is the Manifestation of God; individuals in whom all the attributes of God exist not only potentially, but in whom they are all perfectly expressed. Manifestations are the mouthpieces of God; the exemplars of God's qualities; they are God's vice-regents on earth.

An analogy for the Manifestations found in the Bahá'í writings (Kitáb-i-Íqán 79, 142; Gleanings 74; Some Answered Questions 147-48; Promulgation of Universal Peace 114-15) is that they are like perfect mirrors, reflecting the light of the sun so faithfully that the image of the sun, seen in such a mirror, is indistinguishable from the sun in the sky.

Ordinary human beings, no matter how much they polish the mirrors of their own souls, can never become perfect mirrors; and nature also, however much it reflects God's beauty and magnificence, remains an imperfect mirror. To see God truly, we need to turn to the Manifestations. It is interesting to note that the mirror analogy was not unknown to early Christians; the great theologian Origen (185-254 C.E.), citing the Book of Wisdom, called Christ 'the spotless mirror' of God's workings (Origen, On First Principles 26).

Source:

http://bahai-library.com/articles/stockman.jesus.html

You might like to read what Thomas Aquinas wrote:

And these images illumined by the Divine light have more of the nature of a mirror than the Divine essence: since in a mirror images are formed from other things, and this cannot be said of God. Yet the prophet's mind thus enlightened may be called a mirror, in so far as a likeness of the truth of the Divine foreknowledge is formed therein, for which reason it is called the "mirror of eternity," as representing God's foreknowledge, for God in His eternity sees all things as present before Him, as stated above

(Q[172], A[1]).






This is inaccurate or possibly a misrepresentation.. John the Baptist is not a Manifestation of God in our belief. What Jesus represents to Baha'is is a Manifestaion..

A Manifestation of God brings a Holy Book and a new dispensation.. As far as we know John the Baptist was solely to prepare the Way

Arthra said:

This is inaccurate or possibly a misrepresentation.. John the Baptist is not a Manifestation of God in our belief. What Jesus represents to Baha'is is a Manifestaion..

Click to expand...

I yield on the point about John the Baptist being a manifestation. I was clearly in error. Nevertheless the point remains that Jesus Christ Himself stated that He was and is the Light and not some mere reflection of it.

I very much doubt that Origen and Thomas Aquinas would agree that Jesus Christ was a mere "manifestation" according to your theology. Never mind that such a theology did not exist in their time! I would assume that since you're so conversant with their writings you know that they believed as we Christians do about the divinity of Jesus Christ. They are nothing more than commentators and commentators are prone to error.

Remember, Jesus Christ said that He is the Light and not a reflection of it.

Baha'i have a problem distinguishing between what something is, and what is a reflection of that thing

I notive you use the word "theology" a few times as in..

"Now acording to Baha'i theology..."

"I very much doubt that Origen and Thomas Aquinas would agree that Jesus Christ was a mere "manifestation" according to your theology. Never mind that such a theology did not exist in their time!" or


Baha'is don't really have "theologians"... We go by what the Writings tell us and by the Interpretations of them by Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.. so there are no "schools of theology" as you might have say in Christianity..

"...perfect mirrors, reflecting the light of the sun so faithfully that the image of the sun, seen in such a mirror, is indistinguishable from the sun in the sky."

Mirrors are distinguished from what they reflect

Arthra said:

I notive you use the word "theology" a few times as in..

"Now acording to Baha'i theology..."

"I very much doubt that Origen and Thomas Aquinas would agree that Jesus Christ was a mere "manifestation" according to your theology. Never mind that such a theology did not exist in their time!" or


Baha'is don't really have "theologians"... We go by what the Writings tell us and by the Interpretations of them by Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.. so there are no "schools of theology" as you might have say in Christianity..

"...perfect mirrors, reflecting the light of the sun so faithfully that the image of the sun, seen in such a mirror, is indistinguishable from the sun in the sky."

Click to expand...

A reflection of a source cannot be distinguished from its source? Now that defies logic! The only true Baha'i parallel that fits that description is Jesus Himself as seen in the Bible because He is both the deity and the manifestation simultaneously.

No matter how perfect the mirror is, it still is not going to create a reflection that is not distinguishable from the image; so, there must be some characteristic(s) of the image that will be lost in the reflection.

Montalban said:

Mirrors are distinguished from what they reflect

Click to expand...

True. If it weren't true, I could imaginatively conclude that when I hold up a mirror and draw it near to me, that would equate to traveling to the sun.

peaceful soul said:

True. If it weren't true, I could imaginatively conclude that when I hold up a mirror and draw it near to me, that would equate to traveling to the sun.

Click to expand...

Baha'i keep saying they're the same. Not even the 'reflection' IN THE MIRROR is the thing it reflects

Hebrews 1:3 (New International Version)

3The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Ezekiel 1:28
Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. When I saw it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking.
Ezekiel 1:27-28 (in Context) Ezekiel 1 (Whole Chapter)

Ezekiel 10:4
Then the glory of the LORD rose from above the cherubim and moved to the threshold of the temple. The cloud filled the temple, and the court was full of the radiance of the glory of the LORD.

How can one be a reflection of the Light when one is the Light?

Click to expand...

The source of sunlight the sun is so intense and great that if it even got a little closer to earth the earth would be destroyed. Plus reflected light was generated by the sun and is sunlight.

Livindesert said:

<verses out of context>

Click to expand...

the verses you quote have already been dealt with

including the fact that your interpretation is based on the circular logic of the Baha'i prophet

You continue to refuse to address my point to you. I find it highly dishonest. You waited weeks to say "What point?" and I repeated it, and have bumped it a number of times and you won't address it.

Livindesert said:

The source of sunlight the sun is so intense and great that if it even got a little closer to earth the earth would be destroyed.

Click to expand...

This is a problem you have in refuting yourself.

Livindesert said:

Plus reflected light was generated by the sun and is sunlight.

Click to expand...

No. It's reflected sunlight. Whilst it may still be photons originally from the sun, it's not quite the same.

Sunlight has its source in the sun. Reflected sunlight is light begun in the sun and reflected off a mirror. It's already lost some of its intensity which is why, as you note the sun would destroy the earth. A mirror on earth reflecting the sun doesn't destroy the earth - which is so obvious I find it truly amazing I have to remind you here.

"Even when a surface exhibits only specular reflection with no diffuse reflection, not all of the light is necessarily reflected"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specular_reflection

However, Baha'i don't say that the manifestations are akin to the the reflection but to the mirror.

In summary Baha'i argument relys on posting Bible quotes already dealt with and only selectively addressing posts. You're not alone in this Arthra's a master at this. (Sometimes he even manages to use the quote-function)

You continue to confuse a 'thing' with the reflection of that 'thing' and also that which the 'thing' is reflected in.

Arthra said:

Baha'is don't really have "theologians"... We go by what the Writings tell us and by the Interpretations of them by Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.. so there are no "schools of theology" as you might have say in Christianity..

Click to expand...

This is nothing more than an attempt to dodge the issue. Jesus Christ said that He is the Light, not a representation or reflection of it. He was very specific.

Back to the above quote, what would you call your system of beliefs? Wouldn't theology apply?

originally posted by Livindesert

Hebrews 1:3 (New International Version)

3The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Click to expand...

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Heb 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Click to expand...

Your quote mining is noted.

I quoted you the immediate context. Would you additionally concede that Jesus died for our sins and was the begotten son of God? If you are going to quote, please believe the rest of the passage as well.

http://www.christianforums.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+1:28&version=NIV

Ezekiel 1:28
Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. When I saw it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking.

Click to expand...

Ezekiel 1:27-28 (in Context) Ezekiel 1 (Whole Chapter)

Click to expand...

The beginning of the chapter starts out with this: Eze 1:1 Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the river of Chebar, that the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God.

Notice this was a vision--not an account of a manifestation, as you would associate it with. Now let's look at the immediate context of the passage you specifically quoted.

Eze 1:27 And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about.
Eze 1:28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

Exactly how does this portray a manifestation? Where is the connection? BTW, the term 'glory of the Lord' has no reference to Baha'ullah; so, don't try to pull a fast one.

http://www.christianforums.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+10:4&version=NIV

Ezekiel 10:4
Then the glory of the LORD rose from above the cherubim and moved to the threshold of the temple. The cloud filled the temple, and the court was full of the radiance of the glory of the LORD.

Click to expand...

Eze 10:2 And he spake unto the man clothed with linen, and said, Go in between the wheels, even under the cherub, and fill thine hand with coals of fire from between the cherubims, and scatter them over the city. And he went in in my sight.
Eze 10:3 Now the cherubims stood on the right side of the house, when the man went in; and the cloud filled the inner court.
Eze 10:4 Then the glory of the LORD went up from the cherub, and stood over the threshold of the house; and the house was filled with the cloud, and the court was full of the brightness of the LORD'S glory.

How do these verses support a manifestation? Notice what the subject is.

The source of sunlight the sun is so intense and great that if it even got a little closer to earth the earth would be destroyed. Plus reflected light was generated by the sun and is sunlight.

Click to expand...

With enough imagination and perhaps a measure of mysticism, one can come up with some unique and intriguing explanations. What would the intensity of the light have to do with the image itself and the quality of the reflection? Sun and sunlight are two different things. While the sun is the source of the sunlight, the converse isn't true. That is another reason that you can't claim that the reflection is not equal/the same as the image it depends upon.