Continuing Revelation

[smaneck]

So how do you account for the contradiction?

It maybe that the story was never that literal to begin with, but it seems to me that in a very real sense Ishmael was sacrificed. He was Abraham's beloved first-born yet Abraham felt compelled to send him away into the wilderness where he nearly died.

 

[smaneck]

Interesting. And what exactly is it about Jesus that you believe in? Do you believe the only through Jesus Christ can on be saved?

I think people who are obsessed with their own personal salvation should remain Christian. Baha'is are out to save the world, not themselves.

Do you believe that He is the Messiah?

Absolutely, as do all Muslims.

 

[smaneck]

Indeed. While the terminology is not to be found in the Bible the reasons or using the terminology are.

And I would argue that the concept of Manifestation much more closely resembles Jesus' own understanding of His station as expressed in the Bible than does the Trinity.

 

[Albion]

Not feeling particularly oppressed.

I'm sure that's so. However, I'm less impressed by the Baha'i idea that to have a world of harmony, as they preach it, it will be necessary to force the rest of us to follow the Baha'i lead. Must be an idea that's been carried over from the Islamic past.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

And I would argue that the concept of Manifestation much more closely resembles Jesus' own understanding of His station as expressed in the Bible than does the Trinity.

Within its proper historical context?
Since a text's meaning is so strongly influenced by what we, as readers, bring to the table, I somehow doubt that any of us could ever hope to read 2,000 year-old texts the way they were originally intended. Even if we study the era and its idea(l)s, we cannot fully ignore the inervening millennia and the concepts we've been familiarized with.

 

[smaneck]

I'm sure that's so. However, I'm less impressed by the Baha'i idea that to have a world of harmony, as they preach it, it will be necessary to force the rest of us to follow the Baha'i lead. Must be an idea that's been carried over from the Islamic past.

The Baha'i Teachings don't allow us to use force to achieve any of our ends.

 

[pawnraider]

Absolutely, as do all Muslims.

Actually, they don't. They consider Him a prophet and not a or the Messiah. If they believe that He is the Messiah then what need is there for any more prophets?

 

[Albion]

The Baha'i Teachings don't allow us to use force to achieve any of our ends.

What I said in that post was told to me by a Baha'i representative (not just an ordinary adherent), and so I believe it, even though it did startle me, considering that what you said above is what I had expected to hear.

 

[pawnraider]

And I would argue that the concept of Manifestation much more closely resembles Jesus' own understanding of His station as expressed in the Bible than does the Trinity.

Pray tell what was Jesus' "understanding of His station"?

 

[pawnraider]

Baha'is are out to save the world

The same could be said of Christians.

 

[Albion]

Pray tell what was Jesus' "understanding of His station"?

Translation: they "believe" in him but not as the being that he was and claimed to be.

 

[pawnraider]

It maybe that the story was never that literal to begin with, but it seems to me that in a very real sense Ishmael was sacrificed. He was Abraham's beloved first-born yet Abraham felt compelled to send him away into the wilderness where he nearly died.

Merely because it's the official position of the Baha'i faith? Problem is Ishmael was born to an Egyptian slave or servant if you will and therefore had no part in any inheritance that would normally be due to a first-born. When Isaac was born this changed everything and all would go to him because his parents are Sarah and Abraham.

 

[LoAmmi]

Merely because it's the official position of the Baha'i faith? Problem is Ishmael was born to an Egyptian slave or servant if you will and therefore had no part in any inheritance that would normally be due to a first-born. When Isaac was born this changed everything and all would go to him because his parents are Sarah and Abraham.

No, that is incorrect. The entire reason the arrangement was setup in the first place was that Sarah didn't believe she could have children so she had her servant stand in for her. It was a common practice in that area of the world at the time to ensure a family line would continue. The child produced would have been seen as Sarah's and Abraham's but then Sarah had Isaac and she became jealous that her flesh and blood would not receive the inheritance and insisted that Abraham cut them off basically.

You will note that the Bible does state that Ishmael received part of Abraham's blessing as he would become a great nation.

 

[pawnraider]

No, that is incorrect. The entire reason the arrangement was setup in the first place was that Sarah didn't believe she could have children so she had her servant stand in for her. It was a common practice in that area of the world at the time to ensure a family line would continue. The child produced would have been seen as Sarah's and Abraham's but then Sarah had Isaac and she became jealous that her flesh and blood would not receive the inheritance and insisted that Abraham cut them off basically.

You will note that the Bible does state that Ishmael received part of Abraham's blessing as he would become a great nation.

Well I was almost right? Anyway the point being discussed is who was almost sacrificed.

 

[fatboys]

Within its proper historical context?
Since a text's meaning is so strongly influenced by what we, as readers, bring to the table, I somehow doubt that any of us could ever hope to read 2,000 year-old texts the way they were originally intended. Even if we study the era and its idea(l)s, we cannot fully ignore the inervening millennia and the concepts we've been familiarized with.

I agree

 

[LoAmmi]

Well I was almost right? Anyway the point being discussed is who was almost sacrificed.

Almost is fine. Yeah, I don't know why it was made Ishmael later but I certainly think it was Isaac. There is a tradition in Judaism that after this event Isaac and Abraham didn't speak for many, many years and Isaac was traumatized by it.

 

[Arthra]

Actually, they don't. They consider Him a prophet and not a or the Messiah. If they believe that He is the Messiah then what need is there for any more prophets?

The Qur'an does refer to Jesus as Messiah...

See

"...The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him..."

(The Qur'an (Pickthall tr), Sura 4 - Women:171)

http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=171

The view as I understand it is He fulfilled the prophesies of the expected Messiah.

 

[Arthra]

Because it's been raised here I'll post a few references that I've been interested in ..particularly referring to Ishmael "God has heard"...

The following is the Baha'i view presented by Shoghi Effendi:

As regards the questions you have asked, as Bahá'u'lláh says categorically that God commanded Abraham to offer up Isma'il, as far as we are concerned, it is Isma'il who was the intended sacrifice.
In view of the great antiquity of Genesis, it is quite possible that at some period the names were changed, and the error was propagated.
Whatever happened, we Bahá'ís must follow the words in our own Scriptures as being the most authentic....

Shoghi Effendi, The Unfolding Destiny of the British Baha'i Community, p. 461-412

Now it is true that for Baha'is Ishmael was the sacrifice...not Isaac. This is not a big doctrinal deal with us... It's not part of a creed that's recited...

The Qur'an also refers to the sacrifice of Abraham..and it is a different account from that mentioned in the Bible..It's found in Surih As-Saffat 37:100-105. In this case after Abraham relates a vision He had to His son they concurrently agree...

Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: Now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills one practising Patience and Constancy!"
37:103

So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),

The above is a translation by A. Yusuf Ali ... a widely read translation.

Now consider the Genesis account...in chapter 22

Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. 4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5 He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.

Two things are fairly clear from the above verses.. "Take your son your only son whom you love - Isaac-.." Ishmael was the first child of Abraham by several years...beforeIsaac was born. There's an inconsistency there you'll note.

The other issue is that in the Genesis account the child is unaware of what is to occur..that is, his being sacrificed... while the Qur'an indicates a concurrence between Abraham and His son.

 

[jackcv]

Who Blesses Whom?

The Hebrew word "barukh" is ...an adjective describing G-d as the source of all blessings. When we recite a berakhah, we are not blessing G-d; we are expressing wonder at how blessed G-d is.
From http://www.jewfaq.org/prayer.htm

This Hebrew word, Barukh appears to be derived from an ancient cognate of bhle- (bhlo-), to shine brightly, swell, the root as the English word bless. Sister derivatives are flash, blaze, bold, bloom, bulk, blossum, phallus, blood, flower, flourish, blond, blush, and many more.

One can immediately see the benefit, therefore, of being blessed. Quite similar to holy: whole, hale, hail, healthy, hallow, hello, etc.

But, just as in the case of the plural "Elohim" supposedly meaning that God is a singlular, this Jewfaq explanation about barukh seems to turn the word on its head. While we feel fine about "Hail to the King!", we should balk at blessing God? If we do not bless God, then what does "Holiness to the Lord" mean?

It is not about wonder (although wonder is definitely part of what motivates one to bless God and his holy name.) It is a blessing, an endorsement of the cosmos blessing, honoring, and reverencing God. In the mouths of 2 or 3 shall every word be established - then what in the mouths of billions?

Of course we bless God. In fact, His honor is His power.

Numerous prophets have recorded seeing God on his throne surrounded by his servants blessing the name of God. (Again I ask this forum, "What does in the name of God/Jesus Christ mean? It is a very important and fruitful question.)

Christ taught us this when he began his exemplary prayer with the words, "Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven" I ask you, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is: was He not thereby praying in the name of God? What does name mean?

 

[jackcv]

Insult noted! So are "junior sunday school children" the only ones allowed to quote from the Bible? Be that as it may I tend to think that some "junior sunday school children" are more knowledgeable about the Bible than some of their adult counterparts. Here's a little something else about false prophets from the book of Deuteronomy: "If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him." This bit can be found in Deuteronomy 13:1-4.

I note, Pawnraider, that you still have not thought about, or made the slightest real effort to answer my simple question. Beware that you do not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain in your prayers - for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.