{"id":1187,"date":"2013-07-19T08:00:56","date_gmt":"2013-07-19T12:00:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ancientfaith.com\/orthodoxyandheterodoxy\/?p=1187"},"modified":"2018-02-22T15:40:07","modified_gmt":"2018-02-22T20:40:07","slug":"believing-thomas-how-i-left-the-bahai-faith","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ancientfaith.com\/orthodoxyandheterodoxy\/2013\/07\/19\/believing-thomas-how-i-left-the-bahai-faith\/","title":{"rendered":"Believing Thomas: How I Left the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith"},"content":{"rendered":"

This post, by author Anjali Sivan, a convert to Orthodox Christianity, was originally featured on her personal weblog<\/a> on the occasion of St. Thomas Sunday.
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

I<\/span>n honor of St. Thomas Sunday, I would like to share my own special appreciation for him. There is the fact that he was the apostle who brought the Gospel to India. But even more than that, it was his doubting of the bodily resurrection of Christ that enabled me to leave the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith and become a Christian.<\/p>\n

\"981415_225413080939976_1962256276_o\"First, I think it should be pointed out that all of the remaining 11 apostles seem to have doubted the bodily resurrection until they encountered Christ themselves. St. Thomas was not alone in doubting\u2026but the way in which he framed his doubts, expressing the need to place his hands into Christ\u2019s wounds before believing in His bodily resurrection, laid one more brick of evidence that the Gospels truly do tell the story of Christ\u2019s bodily resurrection.<\/p>\n

You might ask how anyone could question this \u2013 isn\u2019t it obvious that the Gospels tell the story of Christ\u2019s resurrection, whether we choose to believe in it or not? In fact, we usually can refer to Christ\u2019s resurrection without having to spell out that it refers to a bodily resurrection, and not some other form of resurrection. Even when I was a Hindu growing up, with very little knowledge of the Christian faith, I knew that Christ was said to have risen from the dead \u2013 in His body. I really had no idea why that was relevant, so I didn\u2019t consider it further – but that\u2019s a topic for a different post.<\/p>\n

The first time my attention was really focused on the resurrection was when I was Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed. (I was born and raised Hindu, then was Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed for 5 years before coming to Christ \u2013 yes, it has been an eye-opening journey!) The Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith teaches that the resurrection of Christ was spiritual. The founder of the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith, Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h (born M\u00edrz\u00e1 \u1e24usayn-`Al\u00ed N\u00far\u00ed) is referred to as a Manifestation of God \u2013 somewhat different from the concept of a prophet. He taught that while Christ\u2019s body was crucified, His spirit could not be. And as Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h\u2019s son `Abdu’l-Bah\u00e1 (who has authority to interpret Baha\u2019u\u2019llah\u2019s writings) further expounds, the resurrection of Christ was one of the spirit, not of matter. The following is from a compilation of `Abdu’l-Bah\u00e1’s writings called Some Answered Questions<\/em> (pp. 103-105):<\/p>\n

Question<\/strong>: What is the meaning of Christ\u2019s resurrection after three days?<\/p>\n

Answer<\/strong>: The resurrections of the Divine Manifestations are not of the body. All Their states, Their conditions, Their acts, the things They have established, Their teachings, Their expressions, Their parables and Their instructions have a spiritual and divine signification, and have no connection with material things. For example, there is the subject of Christ\u2019s coming from heaven: it is clearly stated in many places in the Gospel that the Son of man came from heaven, He is in heaven, and He will go to heaven. So in chapter 6, verse 38, of the Gospel of John it is written: \u201cFor I came down from heaven\u201d; and also in verse 42 we find: \u201cAnd they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?\u201d Also in John, chapter 3, verse 13: \u201cAnd no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.\u201d<\/p>\n

Observe that it is said, \u201cThe Son of man is in heaven,\u201d while at that time Christ was on earth. Notice also that it is said that Christ came from heaven, though He came from the womb of Mary, and His body was born of Mary. It is clear, then, that when it is said that the Son of man is come from heaven, this has not an outward but an inward signification; it is a spiritual, not a material, fact. The meaning is that though, apparently, Christ was born from 104 the womb of Mary, in reality He came from heaven, from the center of the Sun of Reality, from the Divine World, and the Spiritual Kingdom. And as it has become evident that Christ came from the spiritual heaven of the Divine Kingdom, therefore, His disappearance under the earth for three days has an inner signification and is not an outward fact. In the same way, His resurrection from the interior of the earth is also symbolical; it is a spiritual and divine fact, and not material; and likewise His ascension to heaven is a spiritual and not material ascension.<\/p>\n

Beside these explanations, it has been established and proved by science that the visible heaven is a limitless area, void and empty, where innumerable stars and planets revolve.<\/p>\n

Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ\u2019s resurrection is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. No, rather it was lost, for the believers were few in number and were troubled and agitated. The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.<\/p>\n

Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection. But as the clergy have neither understood the meaning of the Gospels nor comprehended 105 the symbols, therefore, it has been said that religion is in contradiction to science, and science in opposition to religion, as, for example, this subject of the ascension of Christ with an elemental body to the visible heaven is contrary to the science of mathematics. But when the truth of this subject becomes clear, and the symbol is explained, science in no way contradicts it; but, on the contrary, science and the intelligence affirm it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thus, the resurrection of Christ here refers to the spiritual resurrection of the Cause of Christ among His flagging followers. Moreover, the actual strengthening of the disciples’ spirits is attributed not to the risen Christ, but to Mary Magdalene:<\/p>\n

After the Lord Christ suffered, the disciples wept, and gave way to their grief. They thought that their hopes were shattered, and that the Cause was utterly lost, till Mary Magdalene came to them and strengthened them saying: ‘Do you mourn the body of Our Lord or His Spirit? If you mourn His Spirit, you are mistaken, for Jesus lives! His Spirit will never leave us!’ Thus through her wisdom and encouragement the Cause of Christ was upheld for all the days to come. Her intuition enabled her to grasp the spiritual fact.<\/p>\n

`Abdu’l-Bah\u00e1 (`Abdu’l-Bah\u00e1 in London<\/em>, p. 104) *This quote attributed to Mary Magdalene is not found anywhere in the Bible.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As I had never really understood the point of the bodily resurrection anyway, this was fairly easy for me to accept. Furthermore, as a Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed, I believed that Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h was the return of Christ Himself, so of course I would believe the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed interpretation of this event and of any other scriptural concept. I have heard some Baha\u2019is indicate vaguely that one doesn\u2019t necessarily have to give up a belief in the bodily resurrection of Christ in order to be Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed \u2013 but that simply indicates an unfamiliarity with the actual significance of the resurrection as well as with the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed writings themselves.<\/p>\n

It is interesting to note that the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith not only differs from Christianity on this subject matter, but also from Islam. The prophet Mohammed taught that Christ was not actually crucified, and therefore it would follow, was not resurrected. Rather, He was taken up into heaven before suffering an earthly death. Baha\u2019u\u2019ll\u00e1h attempts to partially reconcile this apparent difference in belief by explaining that Mohammed was talking about Christ\u2019s spirit \u2013 that Christ\u2019s body may have been crucified, but His spirit could not be.<\/p>\n

Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds basically believe that the different world religions are actually one \u2013 that they are just different chapters in one book of God\u2019s revelation to man. There are basically only two reasons that religions appear to differ on these types of spiritual topics: a) fullness of truth is revealed progressively, depending on the abilities of each society to understand and accept it; and b) as time goes by, the actual truths taught in these religions can slowly deteriorate, being warped and corrupted by inaccurate transmission, destruction of authentic texts, etc. Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds believe that the only things that can truly change between religious revelations are those laws that govern social or practical customs and outward matters. These are meted out by God through His Manifestations depending on the social and outward circumstances and needs of humanity at that particular time.<\/p>\n

Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds believe that spiritual truth itself is unchanging, but it is revealed in varying amounts of fullness depending on the time, circumstances, and spiritual preparedness of the people to whom it is being revealed. Humanity is thought to be spiritually evolving over time. Therefore, the reason that God sends down a new Manifestation bearing the next chapter in His progressive revelation is to a) as a wise Divine Physician, address the new issues and circumstances facing mankind so that they can be approach life in a healthy and beneficial way; and b) to give a greater measure of the fullness of spiritual truth that they can appropriately understand and handle at that stage. All of the Manifestations of God are believed to be one in essence. Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h, therefore, is believed to be one in essence with Christ and to fulfill the Return of Christ, restoring truth and revealing a greater measure of it. In such a light, the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed teachings on the resurrection would be considered to be a restoration of the truth.<\/p>\n

Based on these beliefs, it was quite natural for me to assume that Christians had simply either received a warped version of Biblical events and their meanings as time went by, or that they had not been spiritually ready to understand the spiritual nature of what the resurrection truly was. By mistaking symbol for reality, they had been led into superstition concerning this matter, but it was more or less a harmless mistake \u2013 what was important was that Christians had understood the virtues that Christ had preached. The true Gospel message was in those virtues. The Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith was here to correct the errors and expand upon the truths, to reveal a fuller measure of truth that was free of these imperfections.<\/p>\n

One of the greatest and most important spiritual works that a Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed can engage in is teaching the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith to others. What has been explained above about correcting errors and expanding truths in Christianity also applied to the other major world religions. The Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith was a benevolent force for not only leading everyone to the fullness of truth, but in that truth, uniting them into one, harmonious whole: \u201cOne God, One Religion, One Human Race\u201d. This was God\u2019s will and purpose and would be a great benefit to humanity, which was currently suffering under so much needless division and strife!<\/p>\n

Becoming an effective Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed teacher required not only a solid understanding the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith, but also an understanding of other religions and their scriptures, so as to point out the similarities and reconcile the differences through the corrective lens of Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed beliefs and interpretations. As mentioned before, Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds believe that scripture and interpretation can be corrupted gradually over time. However, we can sometimes discern truths remaining within world scriptures when we read them through a Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed lens. The Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed claim was that, in fact, if you understood the world\u2019s religions and scriptures properly (i.e. through a Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed lens), you would see within them the proof that they are all one and point towards Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h as a long-awaited prophet\/savior type figure \u2013 that Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h was the fulfillment of this promise to all the world\u2019s different religions and that the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith was the fullness of the truth that everyone else had been grasping at! All of the various religions had always been pointing towards the figure of Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h.<\/p>\n

\"Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed
Y\u00e1 Bah\u00e1’u’l-Abh\u00e1 (Glory of the Most Glorious). “Bah\u00e1” means “glory” and is a reference to “Bah\u00e1’u’ll\u00e1h”, which means “Glory of God”. This was the self- proclaimed title of the Persian nobleman M\u00edrz\u00e1 \u1e24usayn-`Al\u00ed N\u00far\u00ed, founder of the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

While I was growing up as a Hindu, I had always been interested in learning about other world religions, and I enjoyed searching for similarities between them in their teachings, writings, and mythologies \u2013 celebrating these shared elements as evidence of humanity\u2019s glimpses of God, regardless of religion. (Curiously though, I had no interest whatsoever in studying Christianity or Judaism. But that, again, is for a different post.) I wasn\u2019t bothered about the differences I saw in these religions, easily dismissing them based on the analogy that when searching for God, we are all like blind men who felt an elephant in the dark, and came away with differing opinions about what God was like, based on their own limited experiences and perspectives. The Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds, however, proposed something that I had never previously considered possible \u2013 the ability to actually reveal the entire elephant itself! The idea that I could engage in a serious study of world religions, through the lens of Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed understanding and interpretation, to uncover how exactly the religions related to one another and could be logically reconciled despite their apparent differences was very, very exciting!<\/p>\n

Motivated by my natural interest as well as a sincere and burning desire to become the best Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed teacher that I could be, I set out to begin studying the world religions more closely through a Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed lens. This was what brought my attention to Christianity and the Bible in a more serious way. Whereas in the case of certain religions nearly all of the true writings are said to have been lost or warped (e.g. Buddhism), in the case of Christianity Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds believe that there is enough truth in the Bible for its words to be searched for evidence of God\u2019s revelation \u2013 it is the interpretation that has been corrupted more so than the scripture. Therefore, Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds do read and rely upon the Bible when seeking to understand and find common ground with Christians so as to explain how the Bible itself actually supports Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed beliefs. The Bible offers fertile ground for Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed interpretation, as there is a mix of the symbolic and the literal, in addition to many parables.<\/p>\n

I was once listening to a Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed speak about how to reach and teach Christians. He explained that one of the common stumbling blocks for Christians when looking into the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith was the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed teaching on a spiritual resurrection rather than a bodily resurrection. Baha\u2019is often point to various verses that indicate that some parts of the New Testament were literal, but some were symbolic, and some consisted of parables \u2013 and that Christ spoke in symbolic parables to the masses but only explained the underlying spiritual messages to His chosen disciples who were able to truly understand. From this it could be understood that the spiritual meaning was deemed higher and more important. Verses were chosen to show that Christ rebuked some people for seeking miracles \u2013 and this was used to explain that Christ felt that joy, love, and belief in His teachings were what was important to those who are truly spiritually oriented, and the seeking of miracles was spiritually inferior, even worthy of rebuke. Words of St. Paul were used to explain that the resurrection was of a spiritual body, not physical \u2013 and that those who believed in a physical resurrection were greatly mistaken and spiritually inferior in their understanding. Christ conveyed His most important teachings in parables, and the story of the resurrection was similar to a parable \u2013 it was symbolic, and the true meaning was spiritual rather than literal. If we wanted to seek after real spiritual truth like the chosen disciples and not seek after miracles like the spiritually blind masses, then we would do best to understand the story spiritually rather than literally.<\/p>\n

Thus the Bible itself was used by Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds to dispute the resurrection, and thereby the Christian Gospel message itself \u2013 our salvation through faith in Christ, God incarnate who died and rose from the dead. I did not really know or understand the Christian Gospel, the point of the resurrection, or its significance to me, my life, or my afterlife, so I didn\u2019t know that this was the Gospel that was being denied. The Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed version of the Gospel, the version I had grown familiar with, had nothing to do with the incarnation of God or His resurrection \u2013 their understanding of what Christ was, as a Manifestation of God, was lesser than the Christian Gospel of Christ as very God incarnate, and their version of the resurrection as being only spiritual was lesser than the idea of a bodily resurrection.<\/p>\n

However, the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds truly believed their own interpretations were spiritually superior to the Christian version \u2013 because the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds themselves did not understand the significance of the Christian Gospel and what it truly meant. Their version of the Gospel was not about God\u2019s incarnation, death, and resurrection, but was rather limited to developing the spiritual virtues taught by Christ. Without understanding the true meaning of the Christian Gospel, it was quite natural and easy to simply adopt the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed version of the Gospel instead.<\/p>\n

Besides, it all seemed like good stuff, logical interpretations! Whereas in the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith `Abdu’l-Bah\u00e1 had sole authority to give official interpretations of Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed scripture, I was not aware of an equivalent Christian authority. So while I was very careful about seeking out the official interpretations of Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed scripture, when it came to Christian scripture, I assumed it was perfectly fair to look at any interpretations that could be made and believe what made the most sense to me and was in keeping with the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed Faith. After all, this was why the Christians themselves seemed so divided and confused about scriptural interpretation \u2013 they lacked such an authority! Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00eds were blessed that `Abdu’l-Bah\u00e1 had written interpretations for various Christian topics that they could trust and explain to the Christians.<\/p>\n

Then this Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed speaker said something that played a very important role in my later conversion to Christianity. He pointed to the story of St. Thomas, \u201cDoubting Thomas\u201d, and the true nature of his doubt. The reason that he focused on this story was because it seemed like one of the most concrete examples of a physical resurrection. He refuted it by pointing out that after Christ said to St. Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving but believing,\u201d the Bible doesn’t actually state that Thomas then put his hands in His wounds! Instead, Thomas simply says, “My Lord and my God!” I do not remember the speaker saying anything further, but the lesson was implicit \u2013 as the Bible didn’t state that Thomas actually touched Christ, we couldn’t know that Christ was actually present in bodily form from this story.<\/p>\n

Never mind that after the resurrection Christ broke bread and ate fish with His disciples\u2013 He also appeared and disappeared, and was unrecognizable at times, so the physical body must have been an illusion, it was just His spirit. Never mind that He specifically claimed to not be a ghost \u2013 of course, He wasn\u2019t a ghost or a ghoul haunting the earth \u2013 He was a spiritually risen soul, which could be different, right? That\u2019s what that meant! Basically, never mind all of those varied illustrations seeming to plainly convey a bodily resurrection in the Bible. After all, they may have just been corrupted sections of the Bible, right? And even if they weren\u2019t corrupted, the Bible is full of parables and symbolic stories, isn\u2019t it? Never mind that the parables in the Gospels are clearly stated as such, then given plain spiritual explanations afterwards \u2013 whereas the resurrection accounts are written as plain historical fact, in the same literal style as the non-parable portions of the Gospels. Ah \u2013 but how can we know what is really parable and what is not? Who are we to claim we are wise enough to tell?<\/p>\n

Therefore, let us never mind the fact that this interpretation of what went on between St. Thomas and Jesus Christ leads to two possible conclusions that no logical person would ever draw from looking at the story as a whole: a) that Christ appeared life-like and solid to St. Thomas because that\u2019s what he required in order to believe, but that if Thomas had really tried to touch Him, he would have found that Christ has just been tricking him with an illusion; or b) that Christ’s words to St. Thomas were sarcastic, and that St. Thomas was exclaiming not out of amazement at the reality of Christ\u2019s bodily resurrection, and not out of contrition for his prior unbelief in it \u2013 but rather in realizing how wrong he had been to demand proof of a bodily resurrection, and out of contrition that he had not expected and accepted the idea of a spiritual one instead. And somehow the earliest Christians had completely mistaken the words “Do not be unbelieving but believing,” for the opposite, incorrect meaning.<\/p>\n

At the time, I accepted this explanation \u2013 it seemed like a remarkably clever response to give Christians about this difficult verse, bravo! And because it was clever, I thought, it must be true. And it supported the Bah\u00e1\u2019\u00ed teachings on the resurrection. And explained the little tiny places that Christians seem to have failed to read between the lines to see what was really going on. It showed how the Christians had gotten off to the wrong direction in terms of their beliefs about the nature of Christ\u2019s resurrection.<\/p>\n

However, it failed to explain away what the resurrection accounts as a whole seemed to be trying to convey \u2013 an actual bodily resurrection. The story of St. Thomas doubting was just the most blatantly clear example of this that caught my attention, and the slyness of the attempt to explain it away made me uneasy \u2013 there was something slippery and in its approach. And after all, it wasn\u2019t just one esoteric verse that was being explained away \u2013 it was an important concept that seemed to be the most obvious one being expressed \u2013 very intentionally, and plainly, in multiple places and in multiple ways.<\/p>\n

Examples of further confusions:<\/p>\n