The Baha'i Faith Jesus Christ
Trueseeker
By Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon
http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/apologetics/AP1102W3.htm
"The Christology of the Church and the teachings of Baha'u'llah about
Christ's mission are on essential questions
irreconcilable."1—Huschmand Sabet, The Heavens Are Cleft Asunder
In our study of some 40 Baha'i books and periodicals, we discovered a
significant number of denials of the Gospel teachings and the person
and work of Jesus Christ. Yet Udo Schaefer claims, "One thing,
however, must be stressed. The attitude of the Baha'i towards
Christianity is clear: he acknowledges its divine origin and believes
in the Word of God as testified by the Gospels."2 It is odd, then,
that the Baha'i believer entirely leaves out the Gospels in his
"independent investigation of truth." For if the Gospels are
uncorrupted, and this is historic fact, then Jesus taught that He and
His words were eternally authoritative and that He alone, the Person
of Jesus, was the only way to God (Matthew 24:35; John 14:6). "If
anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed
of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and
of the holy angels" (Luke 9:26).
It is a sign of the times—and quite disquieting, if not surprising—to
see how people can sincerely claim to be true followers of Christ and
yet accept such comprehensive denials of the person and work of Christ
as found in Baha'i. Baha'i theology denies the Incarnation, the virgin
birth, the unique deity, the saving death, the miracles, the
resurrection and the ascension of Jesus Christ.3
Despite this comprehensive denial of Jesus Christ, we are told that "a
person cannot be a Baha'i unless he believes in Jesus Christ"!
Obviously, then, Baha'is believe in "another Jesus" (2 Corinthians
11:4 NAS), and not the biblical Jesus.
The Baha'i view of Christ is radically different from the biblical
view. Jesus is called "the Spirit of God" and is equated with the Holy
Spirit; that is, the Spirit of the Baha'i God, who allegedly inspired
the biblical prophets.4 Baha'u'llah is a far superior revelation of
God than that found in Jesus. Baha'u'llah declared: "O Jews! If ye be
intent on crucifying once again Jesus, the Spirit of God, put Me to
death, for He hath once more, in My person, been made manifest unto
you…. Followers of the Gospel! If ye cherish the desire to slay
Muhammad, the Apostle of God, seize Me and put an end to My life, for
I am He, and My Self is His Self."5
Matt Menge
> The Baha'i Faith Jesus Christ
> By Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon
> http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/apologetics/AP1102W3.htm
>
>
> "The Christology of the Church and the teachings of Baha'u'llah about
> Christ's mission are on essential questions
>
> In our study of some 40 Baha'i books and periodicals, we discovered a
> significant number of denials of the Gospel teachings and the person
> and work of Jesus Christ. Yet Udo Schaefer claims, "One thing,
> however, must be stressed. The attitude of the Baha'i towards
> Christianity is clear: he acknowledges its divine origin and believes
> in the Word of God as testified by the Gospels."2 It is odd, then,
> that the Baha'i believer entirely leaves out the Gospels in his
> "independent investigation of truth." For if the Gospels are
> uncorrupted, and this is historic fact, then Jesus taught that He and
> His words were eternally authoritative and that He alone, the Person
> of Jesus, was the only way to God (Matthew 24:35; John 14:6). "If
> anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed
> of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and
> of the holy angels" (Luke 9:26).
This is kind of petty. Udo Schaefer is a single European author. It
is hardly as if all Baha'i books don't quote the Bible. No, this is
very petty.
>
> It is a sign of the times?and quite disquieting, if not surprising?to
> see how people can sincerely claim to be true followers of Christ and
> yet accept such comprehensive denials of the person and work of Christ
> as found in Baha'i. Baha'i theology denies the Incarnation, the virgin
> birth, the unique deity, the saving death, the miracles, the
> resurrection and the ascension of Jesus Christ.3
I would rather suggest we have different views on these subjects than
the author. I suppose we do not see Jesus as having "unique" deity.
On the other hand we believe in the virgin birth in a very traditional
way. The other issues we have are our viewpoints on and I wouldn't
really say we "accept" them or that we "deny" them.
Regards,
Matt
Robert Arvay
mspm...@msn.com (Matt Menge) wrote in message news:<dc19cfc5.04090...@posting.google.com>...
>
> I would rather suggest we have different views on these subjects than
> the author. I suppose we do not see Jesus as having "unique" deity.
> On the other hand we believe in the virgin birth in a very traditional
> way. The other issues we have are our viewpoints on and I wouldn't
> really say we "accept" them or that we "deny" them.
I think that the point is well made that Baha'is regard a truly
different Jesus than the one revealed in the gospels.
I find it incongruent that one would believe in the virgin birth, and
yet disbelieve in all the other long list of prophecies which Jesus
fulfills, including His atoning death on the Cross.
It seems essential among Bahai's to develop a frame of mind which is
revealed in your statement above, "...I wouldn't really say we
"accept" them or that we "deny" them."
This is the "modern art" interpretation of the Bible, and of theology
in general. I call it that because I am reminded of a visit to a
so-called "modern art" museum in the 1960s, when abstract art was in
vogue. A so-called artist would wad up a piece of paper (or sheet
metal), randomly spray paint it, and posit it as art. "Expert"
critics would then pontificate on its "definitive otherness," its
"vague specificity," and its "horizontal verticalness," while those
who listened to such nonsense would nod their heads in awed
appreciation of the profound artistic expression which they were
privileged to be mystified by.
That analogy may be a bit over the top, but it is not terribly far
from what "modern religion" has become in the New Age. Worse yet, the
analogy extends well past the 1960s, into the era when art was deemed
to be exemplified by a nude male with a bullwhip handle in his rectum,
and by photos of crucifixes submerged in urine, and other
intentionally sensational sacreliges. The analogy here being that
falsehood knows no limit.
The only (and the necessary) defense which Baha'i has concerning its
claim to be the "new" Christianity, is to be evasive, never to be
pinned down to a specific claim or revelation, and to always be
flexible enough to change its answers over time. Or else, it must
reject the Bible wholesale, which would alienate prospective Christian
converts.
The Bible, from the Old Testament onward, paints a clear, definitve
picture of how God has revealed Himself to us. No elusive
interpretation is necessary. While some passages are difficult
indeed, but well over 95% are beyond reasonable debate.
Christianity provides man with divine guidance necessary for his
wellbeing. False religions might be compared to a placebo, at best,
which does nothing while the illness grows ever worse.
IMO Baha'i is a false religion, and the world's future under false
religion is prophesied in The Revelation.
Robert Arvay
mspm...@msn.com (Matt Menge) wrote in message news:<dc19cfc5.04090...@posting.google.com>...
>
> I would rather suggest we have different views on these subjects than
> the author. I suppose we do not see Jesus as having "unique" deity.
> On the other hand we believe in the virgin birth in a very traditional
> way. The other issues we have are our viewpoints on and I wouldn't
> really say we "accept" them or that we "deny" them.
I think that the point is well made that Baha'is regard a truly
different Jesus than the one revealed in the gospels.
I find it incongruent that one would believe in the virgin birth, and
yet disbelieve in all the other long list of prophecies which Jesus
fulfills, including His atoning death on the Cross.
It seems essential among Bahai's to develop a frame of mind which is
revealed in your statement above, "...I wouldn't really say we
"accept" them or that we "deny" them."
This is the "modern art" interpretation of the Bible, and of theology
Susan Maneck
>
>
>The Bible, from the Old Testament onward, paints a clear, definitve
>picture of how God has revealed Himself to us. No elusive
>interpretation is necessary.
Dear Robert,
A literal reading of the Old Testament leads to a Five-Star General as a
Messiah, not someone who died on the cross. But we deny neither the
crucifixtion or the doctrine of atonement. The only thing we *do* deny is that
this is something that happened once and never again.
warmest, Susan
http://bahaistudies.net/susanmaneck/
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist/
To subscribe: use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.net
Mr. Bad Judgement
Robert Arvay wrote:
> Greetings, Matt;
>
> mspm...@msn.com (Matt Menge) wrote in message news:<dc19cfc5.04090...@posting.google.com>...
>
>>I would rather suggest we have different views on these subjects than
>>the author. I suppose we do not see Jesus as having "unique" deity.
>>On the other hand we believe in the virgin birth in a very traditional
>>way. The other issues we have are our viewpoints on and I wouldn't
>>really say we "accept" them or that we "deny" them.
>
>
> I think that the point is well made that Baha'is regard a truly
> different Jesus than the one revealed in the gospels.
>
I would think that would be for Baha'is to decide. The fact that
Baha'u'llah validated the Gospels would tend to argue against Baha'is
having some plastic Jesus who bats left, throws right, has a 500
slugging percentage and has lead them to the Father, so, guess again.
> I find it incongruent that one would believe in the virgin birth, and
> yet disbelieve in all the other long list of prophecies which Jesus
> fulfills,
I find it an utter straw man, but I am glad that the nonsense is _on_
topic, praise God.
> including His atoning death on the Cross.
I think the 'prophecy' of the crucifixion was something read after the
fact, rather than somethign written in the OT as a prophecy.
> It seems essential among Bahai's to develop a frame of mind which is
> revealed in your statement above, "...I wouldn't really say we
> "accept" them or that we "deny" them."
>
Yes, we don't put a lot of stock into fleshly miracles.
>
> This is the "modern art" interpretation of the Bible, and of theology
It's a shame that it might take two thousand years to begin to
'spiritualize' a revelation from God, but what can we do about it now?
> in general. I call it that because I am reminded of a visit to a
> so-called "modern art" museum in the 1960s, when abstract art was in
> vogue. A so-called artist would wad up a piece of paper (or sheet
> metal), randomly spray paint it, and posit it as art. "Expert"
> critics would then pontificate on its "definitive otherness," its
> "vague specificity," and its "horizontal verticalness," while those
> who listened to such nonsense would nod their heads in awed
> appreciation of the profound artistic expression which they were
> privileged to be mystified by.
>
Still folks are wadding up bits of used kleenex, posting it here, and
whining when folks tell them it is off-topic. That's people, you know?
>
> That analogy may be a bit over the top, but it is not terribly far
> from what "modern religion" has become in the New Age.
Well, it is just apalling. Blessed Jesus, just dying to tell people
that it is not about folks rising from the dead to be meaningful signs
to a generation that has turned its back on Moses and the prophets, and
someone who claims to be Christian just grinding the story in their heel
as they rush to lecture to these Baha'is about the centrality of the
fleshly resurrection in the cult they have mis-labeled as
"Christianity". It really would be Xtianity, wouldn't it, since no one
could know what is really at the core - we know it is not the Christ of
the Gospels, that is for sure! You call yourself a Christian, you can
pick on the Baha'is and tolerate this Xtianity before you, or, you can
engage false doctrine. As I see it, you will go along with Xtianity,
while you try to accuse us.
> Worse yet, the
> analogy extends well past the 1960s, into the era when art was deemed
> to be exemplified by a nude male with a bullwhip handle in his rectum,
> and by photos of crucifixes submerged in urine, and other
> intentionally sensational sacreliges. The analogy here being that
> falsehood knows no limit.
>
Erm, uh, izzat you Nima?
Robert? This is a religious forum. Why do I feel like we just can't go
out in public with our Christian friends, any more?
- Mr. Bad
Paul Hammond
> Greetings, Matt;
>
> mspm...@msn.com (Matt Menge) wrote in message news:<dc19cfc5.04090...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> > I would rather suggest we have different views on these subjects than
> > the author. I suppose we do not see Jesus as having "unique" deity.
> > On the other hand we believe in the virgin birth in a very traditional
> > way. The other issues we have are our viewpoints on and I wouldn't
> > really say we "accept" them or that we "deny" them.
>
> I think that the point is well made that Baha'is regard a truly
> different Jesus than the one revealed in the gospels.
>
> I find it incongruent that one would believe in the virgin birth, and
> yet disbelieve in all the other long list of prophecies which Jesus
> fulfills, including His atoning death on the Cross.
Ah, Robert!
You may be the very man.
I had just been asking George to show us where, in fact, these
prophecies concerning Jesus dying on the cross actually appear
in the Old Testament, but so far he has not been able to find
them.
Perhaps you could help us out here?
Thanks.
Paul
>