Bahá'í

[daler]

From PR -->> I appreciate your recognition that this is indeed a valid question, esp. in light of the comparisons that are being made to Christ.

My question is indeed valid, as you affirm, so it is important that this question be addressed fully, before moving on to the questions you deem to be more important.

Is it true or not true that the Baha’i faith says that the Bab’s death was sacrificial in nature?

1. Extracts from the Writings of the Bab

O THOU Remnant of God! I have sacrificed myself wholly for Thee; I have accepted curses for Thy sake, and have yearned for naught but martyrdom in the path of Thy love. Sufficient witness unto me is God, the Exalted, the Protector, the Ancient of Days.

From the Writings of Baha’u’llah concerning “Sacrifice”

“My God, my God! If none be found to stray from Thy path, how, then, can the ensign of Thy mercy be unfurled, or the banner of Thy bountiful favor be hoisted? And if iniquity be not committed, what is it that can proclaim Thee to be the Concealer of men’s sins, the Ever-Forgiving, the Omniscient, the All-Wise? May my soul be a sacrifice to the trespasses of them that trespass against Thee, for upon such trespasses are wafted the sweet savors of the tender mercies of Thy Name, the Compassionate, the All-Merciful. May my life be laid down for the transgressions of such as transgress against Thee, for through them the breath of Thy grace and the fragrance of Thy loving-kindness are made known and diffused amongst men. May my inmost being be offered up for the sins of them that have sinned against Thee, for it is as a result of such sins that the Day Star of Thy manifold favors revealeth itself above the horizon of Thy bounty, and the clouds of Thy never-failing providence rain down their gifts upon the realities of all created things.”

 

[PRmerger]

From PR -->> I appreciate your recognition that this is indeed a valid question, esp. in light of the comparisons that are being made to Christ.

My question is indeed valid, as you affirm, so it is important that this question be addressed fully, before moving on to the questions you deem to be more important.

Is it true or not true that the Baha’i faith says that the Bab’s death was sacrificial in nature?

1. Extracts from the Writings of the Bab

O THOU Remnant of God! I have sacrificed myself wholly for Thee; I have accepted curses for Thy sake, and have yearned for naught but martyrdom in the path of Thy love. Sufficient witness unto me is God, the Exalted, the Protector, the Ancient of Days.

From the Writings of Baha’u’llah concerning “Sacrifice”

“My God, my God! If none be found to stray from Thy path, how, then, can the ensign of Thy mercy be unfurled, or the banner of Thy bountiful favor be hoisted? And if iniquity be not committed, what is it that can proclaim Thee to be the Concealer of men’s sins, the Ever-Forgiving, the Omniscient, the All-Wise? May my soul be a sacrifice to the trespasses of them that trespass against Thee, for upon such trespasses are wafted the sweet savors of the tender mercies of Thy Name, the Compassionate, the All-Merciful. May my life be laid down for the transgressions of such as transgress against Thee, for through them the breath of Thy grace and the fragrance of Thy loving-kindness are made known and diffused amongst men. May my inmost being be offered up for the sins of them that have sinned against Thee, for it is as a result of such sins that the Day Star of Thy manifold favors revealeth itself above the horizon of Thy bounty, and the clouds of Thy never-failing providence rain down their gifts upon the realities of all created things.”

So I do not see any similarity at all between the tragic death of the Babs and the sacrificial love that Christ made by His crucifixion.

As I said it appears that the Babs’ execution was a tragedy.

But an act of sacrificial love?

I don’t see that.

As such, he still does not fulfill the first criterion that Servant limned initially.

 

[daler]

QUOTE=PRmerger;…
It seems to me that you are saying that since there are myths such as Santa, dragons, elves, leprechauns, that the stories in the Bible are also myths.

If that is what you are saying, then why don’t truths such as 2+2 = 4 make you believe that there are truths in the Bible?

Dear “Sister” PR
Thank you for your thoughts and the opportunity to answer them. Absolutely, there are truths in the Bible. The Bible is full of truths, but there are also many truths hidden within the myths, much deeper truths, than the literal understanding allows for. “Discernment” is a faculty of both the intellect and the heart.
The stories themselves can be a means by which God “sifts” believers and unbelievers.
For example, there is a purpose we tell children that Santa won’t bring them presents if they are naughty, but he will if we are nice. The “purpose” is to get us to behave, not just to make less work for the parents, but for the child’s own “good”, emotional development, even spiritual. The “Spirit” of Christmas is expressed (or used to be) in gift giving to others.
In the story of the loaves and fishes, it begins with Jesus telling his disciples to “give” what they have to the strangers. In the rational understanding of this account, there is a precedent set for human social development. This elevated thousands of disparate family and clan “groups” to extend their own generosity to complete strangers, Jews and Gentiles, “infidels” and the “unclean”, as it were.
That there was food left over was not a physical miracle (which I was taught growing up), but a social/spiritual miracle, that humanity made a great leap forward in the identities people formed with their attachments and bonds with others. This is in keeping with the Good Samaritan story, and
“Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

FROM PR Jesus did indeed make himself subject to the laws of physics and biology. But he also superseded these laws.

God is the Author of the Laws of physics and biology, and is fully capable of superseding those Laws. However, “A wicked and adulterous generation asketh for a sign.” While I totally believe that Jesus healed people, there is also a level of spiritual healing that takes place which does not seem to be appreciated. Rather, people “depreciate” the miraculous nature of Him healing the blind, for example, not understanding the relative importance, much greater, of gaining spiritual “sight”, which is totally in keeping with His many pronouncements of judgement against those who “have eyes, but “see” not”

In my eyes, what was missed in the teachings and interpretations taught to me as a child was the profound importance of this spiritual sight. It is my belief that the eyes of Saul were opened on the road to Damascus, and he became Paul, a “new” person, who “saw” the Light of Truth, for “The Truth shall set you free.”

But it is also my belief that people who do not comprehend how infinitely important that “second sight” is, and how supremely powerful such vision truly is, prefer the literal interpretation, for it challenges their "world"view from head to toe. Its like in that movie with Jack Nicholson when he says, “You can’t Handle the truth!!”

When our spiritual eyes open, we “see” things that we did not see before. We begin to see what Jesus saw, that there was a generation of vipers preying on humanity, exchanging money in His Father’s House, etc, etc

When the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Sanhedrin realized that the people were “seeing” them for what they were, being exposed as the vipers and spiritual predators that they themselves knew that they were, cloaked in pride and authority, they “had” to crucify Christ!!! Yet in His death, He gave life to the world.

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.
We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.”

 

[daler]

FROM PR …> Well, truths are true, no matter if someone views the world differently than you do.

For example, do you think that someone who grew up in Pakistan will think that 2 + 2 = 5?

And that this is ok?

I have an old friend, Dr Klebel, who used to be a Catholic Priest. He is from Austria, and watched Hitler go by when he was a child. He gave up the priesthood and studied psychology, working for many years in a women’s prison. He has been a Baha’i for many years, is a deep scholar, with a great depth and background.
During his expositions, his “German” world view still comes through. "
2 + 2 = 4, you see? It iss zat simple, you know…"

He is a beautiful soul and I love him dearly. He is a joy to be around, uplifts the spirits, and gives spectacular presentations from his theological training and ongoing studies.
Yet for me, being a “white” man raised on a Sioux Indian Reservation in South Dakota, and exposed to ways of looking at the world which seem a universe apart from my English and Swedish stock, I learned to “see” with the eyes of my soul in ways my ancestors apparently did not, for all their incredible work and ingenuity. This does not in any way detract from them, and 2 + 2 still equal 4, but it is kind of like having color television instead of black and white. Savvy?

FROM PR —> Would you proclaim that your Lakota friend is free to say that he can build a bridge that doesn’t follow the laws of science, since he views the world differently?

My friend’s approach to science preceded, in certain ways, the dominant (and dominating) culture’s perceptions and abilities to act on them. For example, the words uttered when both entering and exiting the sacred Sweat Lodge, is Mitakoye Oyasin. Roughly, this translates into “All my relatives”, or “We are all related”. That means that every creature on earth is related, and they “know” this, perceive this, and live this, and have done so for thousands of years. Only recently has western “science” begun to grasp the truth of this as “we” now know that humans share 98% of DNA with chimpanzees, 80% DNA with mice, and 50% DNA with bananas.

Mitakoye Oyasin…

FROM PR —> Would you let your child drive his car over this bridge when an engineer says, “I don’t follow the laws by which I received my degree. I see the world differently, and constructed this bridge using my own laws.”

Would you let Orville and Wilbur fly that contraption? Why, everybody know that if men were meant to fly, they’d have had wings…

It seems that the laws of gravity are not immutable to the laws of aerodynamics. When one understands the higher laws of physics, one does not deny the lower laws, but utilizes the greater understanding to repel the lesser.
Similarly, as spiritual understanding is increased, the previous understanding is viewed in a new light.

“And there shall be a new heaven and a new earth.”

Traditionally, people have viewed this as a literal heaven (or sky?) and a new earth (or planet?) being prophesied. But as a spiritual metaphor is being alluded to in a spiritual Book, we must look for another explanation which is both spiritual and rational.
As the clouds rain down water upon the earth, which receives the rain, essential for physical and biological growth and maturation, so too does God rain down from the Heaven of Revelation that which the earth of men’s understanding has not held before.
Thus, for those who have “eyes to see”, and “ears to hear”, this Heavenly Revelation has once again rained down upon the hearts of men that the earth of understanding may come to embrace that reality which awaits those who are ready to enter the Sacred Hoop of All Nations, the One Fold and One Shepherd has come.

His Name is Baha’u’llah, and it is called the Baha’i Faith.

Allah’u’Abha (God is Most Glorious)

 

[Servant19]

Dear friends,

What we are doing here by creating a list of criteria is to create an objective analysis of what constitutes a True Prophet, and what constitutes a false prophet.

What are some of the objectively observed characteristics that Jesus showed that can be used as a criterion for discerning the truth in the claim of other prophets/Prophets?

What we are striving for is objectivity. Of course, with subjective experiences, Jesus was God for some and Satan to others, as was Bahaullah…

How can we extrapolate the CONCEPT that these characteristics are trying to show forth, rather than focussing on the details of the characteristic?

For example, a human being has a brain, breathes, has skin, and a heartbeat. It would be folly to say that you are only human if you have only blue eyes, black skin and a heartbeat over 130bpm, wouldn’t it? Characteristics that make a human are not so specific as to make them useless. Humans share a similar broad characteristic.

In like manner, what are some of the broader characteristics that allow an objective observer to say that these are the characteristics of a True Prophet?

When we look back in history, we see that the Personage of a True Prophet shares simulate characteristics from age to age.

Jesus was seen as a mere carpenter, Bahaullah was seen as a mere prisoner, the Bab was seen as a mere merchant.

Jesus, when He chose to, caused people to see the Glory of God through His deeds, His miracles, His loving kindness, as did Bahaullah and the Bab.

These characteristics are shared by these Prophets.

 

[Servant19]

FROM PR …> Well, truths are true, no matter if someone views the world differently than you do.

For example, do you think that someone who grew up in Pakistan will think that 2 + 2 = 5?

And that this is ok?

I have an old friend, Dr Klebel, who used to be a Catholic Priest. He is from Austria, and watched Hitler go by when he was a child. He gave up the priesthood and studied psychology, working for many years in a women’s prison. He has been a Baha’i for many years, is a deep scholar, with a great depth and background.
During his expositions, his “German” world view still comes through. "
2 + 2 = 4, you see? It iss zat simple, you know…"

Would you let Orville and Wilbur fly that contraption? Why, everybody know that if men were meant to fly, they’d have had wings…

It seems that the laws of gravity are not immutable to the laws of aerodynamics. When one understands the higher laws of physics, one does not deny the lower laws, but utilizes the greater understanding to repel the lesser.
Similarly, as spiritual understanding is increased, the previous understanding is viewed in a new light.

“And there shall be a new heaven and a new earth.”

Traditionally, people have viewed this as a literal heaven (or sky?) and a new earth (or planet?) being prophesied. But as a spiritual metaphor is being alluded to in a spiritual Book, we must look for another explanation which is both spiritual and rational.
As the clouds rain down water upon the earth, which receives the rain, essential for physical and biological growth and maturation, so too does God rain down from the Heaven of Revelation that which the earth of men’s understanding has not held before.
Thus, for those who have “eyes to see”, and “ears to hear”, this Heavenly Revelation has once again rained down upon the hearts of men that the earth of understanding may come to embrace that reality which awaits those who are ready to enter the Sacred Hoop of All Nations, the One Fold and One Shepherd has come.

His Name is Baha’u’llah, and it is called the Baha’i Faith.

Allah’u’Abha (God is Most Glorious)

This last bit about utilizing established spiritual laws to forge new inroads into spiritual advancement to create a new heaven and a new earth, was simply beautiful daler thank you!!

Your Judeo-Christian mixed with indigenous insights are giving me new eyes on the Revelation of Bahaullah

 

[daler]

Servant, your skillful use of logic and offering a platform for analyzing the criteria for the recognition of the Manifestations of God is hitting the problem head-on, where people usually collide, but somehow, I think you’re driving on the right side of the road here and avoiding the ditch at the same time.

 

[daler]

FROM PR —> If that is what you are saying, then why don’t truths such as 2+2 = 4 make you believe that there are truths in the Bible?

PR Allow me to ask you a question. If 2 + 2 = 4, how do you explain the Resurrection in light of “He entered the room, not using the door” ?

Does not the criteria apply here, for consistency of the science of mathematics and theology as well? Do we allow “magic” in one cultural context, but not another?

Do the beliefs of my Lakota friends appear any less valid than the beliefs of the Jewish and Christians who, on the one hand, denounce as nonsense certain of their tales and, on the other say, "But did you know that my Lord arose and went up into the “physical” heavens (outer space, where there is no oxygen, atmosphere, etc…)

Do we compress logic into a finite cup in one set of cultural storytelling, and release it in another?

Or do we consider that similarities exist in all of God’s creatures, that creation “myths” exist in all cultures, and that while there are reasons for the stories we tell, sometimes they have no literal truth, but rather, have something else to offer the side of the human mind where magic and myth, imagination and vision, dwell for good reason.

Does 2 + 2 = 4 apply to a 6000 year old earth? In light of current science?

Would Galileo be allowed to look through the Hubble Space Telescope today and speak his mind about what his eyes beheld in the physical heavens?

Can one similarly view the New Heavens and the New Earth with rational understanding and spiritual comprehension, realizing that 2 + 2 no longer contains the formula “4” recognizing the Divine Messengers in an age of e = mc2 ?

"Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which you have, that no man take your crown. Him that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God: and I will write on him my new name. He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit sayeth to the churches. "

What spiritual stagnation and intransigence might He be referring to? Tradition? For its own sake? What is the purpose of the traditions if not to remind us of His preceding Words: “Behold, I come quickly!”

And what might that “New Name” be which He refers to?

And is the New Jerusalem made only of bricks and mortar?

Is it a “physical” city coming out of the sky, or a “spiritual” city of the hearts which have turned towards Him from Whom the Revelation comes?

Indeed! The Kingdom of Heaven “is” at hand, though for “them that have eyes, but see not”, shall never enter into it, so long as their gaze is fixed upon the old heaven (of previous times) and the old earth (of understanding).

 

[daler]

PR I found something that I think addresses an aspect of criteria, and why it is so hard to discern for humanity every time a Prophet, or Manifestation of God, appears in our midst. Please tell me what your thoughts are in reaction to reading this quote from the Bab:

“The revelation of the Divine Reality hath everlastingly been identical with its concealment and its concealment identical with its revelation. That which is intended by ‘Revelation of God’ is the Tree of divine Truth that betokeneth none but Him, and it is this divine Tree that hath raised and will raise up Messengers, and hath revealed and will ever reveal Scriptures. From eternity unto eternity this Tree of divine Truth hath served and will ever serve as the throne of the revelation and concealment of God among His creatures, and in every age is made manifest through whomsoever He pleaseth.
… and on the occasion of the revelation of the Bayan He demonstrated His sovereign might through the appearance of the Point of the Bayan, and when He Whom God shall make manifest will shine forth, it will be through Him that He will vindicate the truth of His Faith, as He pleaseth, with whatsoever He pleaseth and for whatsoever He pleaseth. He is with all things, yet nothing is with Him. He is not within a thing nor above it nor beside it. Any reference to His being established upon the throne implieth that the Exponent of His Revelation is established upon the seat of transcendent authority…”

 

[PRmerger]

If 2 + 2 = 4, how do you explain the Resurrection in light of “He entered the room, not using the door” ?

I am not understanding the question. Why couldn’t the God of the universe resurrect Himself, and also enter a room not using the door?

Does not the criteria apply here, for consistency of the science of mathematics and theology as well? Do we allow “magic” in one cultural context, but not another?

Natural beings are bound by natural laws. Supernatural beings are not bound by natural laws.

As such, we must conform to the laws of science, philosophy, reason and logic.

 

[PRmerger]

Do the beliefs of my Lakota friends appear any less valid than the beliefs of the Jewish and Christians who, on the one hand, denounce as nonsense certain of their tales and, on the other say, "But did you know that my Lord arose and went up into the “physical” heavens (outer space, where there is no oxygen, atmosphere, etc…)

Either the beliefs of your Lakota friend are true. Or they are false.

They cannot be true for him but false for everyone else who disbelieves.

So even if a person declares, “I believe that this is a square!”,

http://www.eplastics.com/circle-300_2.jpg

it will never, ever be true for him and false for everyone else.

 

[PRmerger]

It seems that the laws of gravity are not immutable to the laws of aerodynamics.

You are incorrect if you believe that gravity ceases to exist when an aircraft flies.

The law* of gravity is indeed immutable. It is still in effect when an airplane is flying. If you think that this law is suspended each and every time an aircraft flies, I suggest you see what happens if you try to walk off the plane in midair.

*it is actually a theory of gravity, but that is fodder for another thread.

 

[daler]

I am not understanding the question. Why couldn’t the God of the universe resurrect Himself, and also enter a room not using the door?

I am sure that He could if that is what He desired, but for me, there is another meaning. Consider it in light of “what” happens “When two or more gather and make mention of Me, there I am also…” Does He not enter the room, not using the door? Is our understanding being limited by the conception of a physical Presence, instead of a Divine “Presence” ?
My thinking is that the Lord indeed was Resurrected, and was “seen” by those who had eyes to see, i.e., “believers” who “saw” Him enter the room, not using the door, even as those who recognize that He is in their midst when making mention of Him. For I “know” that He is present, but in what language can I communicate that to a very literal minded people who cannot even conceptualize the meaning of “Ye must be born again”, and “Let the dead bury their dead”.
Such a mindset is comparable to that of a child who is yet in a certain stage of development (see Piaget) and comprehends basic math, but yet is unable to see what algebra has to do with computation. Jesus was, in this sense, a Divine Educator, instructing the students of a spiritual classroom, if you will, to gain a higher spiritual understanding of reality, but for those who do not accept Him as the Teacher, they reject His instruction. “Eyes they have, but see not”
In the telling of the story as recorded in the Bible, there is a duality of physical and spiritual experiences recounted by the disciples. For example, Mary at some point realized that Jesus was with her, and the way the story is written, she did not know that it was Him at first. So in my thoughts about this, the manner of the telling of the account reflects that she “saw” that He was with her, spiritually, even as “When two or more gather and make mention of Me, there I am also.”
We are limited both by our words and by our culture, and when the generality of a culture has no comprehension on an “algebraic” level, it is limited to an elementary understanding and must be instructed from where it is at the time, in a language it understands, until it incorporates symbols of communication which encompass new meaning.
So in the “telling” of the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection, by people who could “see” that He was alive and with them, it comes across as He is physically alive, for how else could He be with them, as their literal understanding forbid the comprehension of Him living when His body was killed. This is consistent with “He entered the room, not using the door” and “Whenever two or more gather and make mention of Me, there I am also in their midst.”
That the story of Thomas describes this same Jesus, Who entered the room not using the door, appears to be a contradiction, but not if understood symbolically. For until Thomas saw the “body of Christ”, i.e. His followers, sacrificing themselves, showing him (Thomas) their devotion to lay down their lives for their Faith, he would not “believe” that He (Jesus) yet lived.
Compare the logic of this line of reasoning with the story of the loaves and fishes, people’s “need” to believe in magic, and rational understanding, for which God has equipped us with minds to know, and not merely imaginations to entertain ourselves, which allows us to remain as children and not take responsibility for ourselves, our souls, and each other. For it is “the Truth shall set you free”, not belief in magic. Hence, our salvation depends upon the striving of our soul by means of our God given intellect to “see” reality, as Jesus Himself came to instruct us to do.
The leaves are latent in the seed, but unless the plant extends its leaves to the sun, it will not receive its light. The spiritual Sun shines upon us, but unless we extend the leaves of our spiritual understanding, we will not receive His Light…

It is true that God “doeth what He willeth”, but He is the author of Reality, encompassing the laws of Physics, science, and mathematics, to which we must conform. Thus, our reasoning must be logical, and not merely superstitious.
If we remain superstitious, it is because of fear to be otherwise. The Lord would not have us fear Reality, but embrace it. Thus, when we are challenged by superstition and magic, as the priests of Pharaoh, who threw down their staffs (arguments, false doctrines, etc), becoming crooked and deceptive as a snake, which is the symbol of the devil, Moses threw down the staff of reason and swallowed up their arguments, overcame their intrigues with Truth, setting free all who “believed” in God, and entered the Promised Land of reunion with Him.

 

[PRmerger]

It is true that God “doeth what He willeth”, but He is the author of Reality, encompassing the laws of Physics, science, and mathematics, to which we must conform. Thus, our reasoning must be logical, and not merely superstitious.
If we remain superstitious, it is because of fear to be otherwise. The Lord would not have us fear Reality, but embrace it. Thus, when we are challenged by superstition and magic, as the priests of Pharaoh, who threw down their staffs (arguments, false doctrines, etc), becoming crooked and deceptive as a snake, which is the symbol of the devil, Moses threw down the staff of reason and swallowed up their arguments, overcame their intrigues with Truth, setting free all who “believed” in God, and entered the Promised Land of reunion with Him.

Very Catholic, this!

 

[daler]

You are incorrect if you believe that gravity ceases to exist when an aircraft flies.

The law* of gravity is indeed immutable. It is still in effect when an airplane is flying. If you think that this law is suspended each and every time an aircraft flies, I suggest you see what happens if you try to walk off the plane in midair.

The point is being missed here, it being precisely that the laws of gravity have not been suspended. The Laws of Moses were not suspended by the Laws of Jesus. Rather, higher laws were revealed, allowing men to soar into the atmosphere of reunion with God. They were still required to obey the Commandments of Moses, which in the analogy may be likened unto the laws of gravity, but were being given higher Laws to draw closer to the Sun of Reality.
If one walks of the higher plane of Reality by testing the Lord and His Commandments, he will indeed fall from grace.

 

[PRmerger]

The point is being missed here, it being precisely that the laws of gravity have not been suspended. The Laws of Moses were not suspended by the Laws of Jesus. Rather, higher laws were revealed, allowing men to soar into the atmosphere of reunion with God. They were still required to obey the Commandments of Moses, which in the analogy may be likened unto the laws of gravity, but were being given higher Laws to draw closer to the Sun of Reality.

Nothing heretical here.

Point being, with reference to your Lakota friend: he cannot have his own truth, while you have your own truth, while I have my own truth.

Are we agreed on that?

Either your Lakota friend must believe that gravity exists, or he will be met with a big surprise when he denies this truth.

 

[daler]

Either the beliefs of your Lakota friend are true. Or they are false.

They cannot be true for him but false for everyone else who disbelieves.

So even if a person declares, “I believe that this is a square!”,

http://www.eplastics.com/circle-300_2.jpg

it will never, ever be true for him and false for everyone else.

Exactly. Either the myths of the Bible are literal truths, or metaphorical symbols. It is our understanding which is being tested, whether Christian or Lakota.

What are these “stories” we have been told. Are they merely accounts of “magic”? Are the Prophets magicians? or Divine Physicians, sent to heal an ailing humanity by setting them on the path of Truth…

How, then, shall we interpret our myths? Shall they be consistent with Reality, or superstition…

Are we permitted rational explanations of the stories we have been handed, or are we to dutifully submit to irrational absurdities for the sake of conformity and the dictates of those who would keep us captive to their positions of control over our minds and beliefs…

Am I free to question the literal interpretation of the Resurrection and permit my mind to retain its sanity when a physical journey into outer space (heaven) is completely illogical, particularly in light of Jesus own description of Heaven not being a physical place, i.e,

“And no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”

For we know that Jesus was upon the earth when He said this, and that He was born from the womb of Mary. Hence, Heaven is a spiritual reality, not a physical geography. Thus, when He ascends to Heaven, He returns to the Unseen Realm, and not to some place in outer space, which confines Him to a narrow place for the sake of our own limited understanding of the Reality of Heaven.

So if we are indeed to “meet Him in the air” i.e., “heaven”, it is not a physical place in outer space where the rendezvous takes place, but a spiritual journey of our heart.

“O SON OF BEING!
Thy heart is My home; sanctify it for My descent. Thy spirit is My place of revelation; cleanse it for My manifestation” from the Hidden Words of Baha’u’llah

 

[PRmerger]

Exactly. Either the myths of the Bible are literal truths, or metaphorical symbols.

No, daler. This is an example where it is both/and. Not either/or.

 

[daler]

Nothing heretical here.

Point being, with reference to your Lakota friend: he cannot have his own truth, while you have your own truth, while I have my own truth.

Are we agreed on that?

Either your Lakota friend must believe that gravity exists, or he will be met with a big surprise when he denies this truth.

Yes, but the same applies to you and I, and who is to say who is right, or that both might be wrong in the preservation of particular cultural understandings. The blinders must come off of all of us.

There is indeed one truth for all, but do you remember the line in the movie “Jaws”, when the fellow looked back and saw the shark? He said, “We’re gonna need a bigger boat!”
Well, “We’re gonna need a bigger Bible!” One which does not exclude others when they bring their truths to the table:
"I looked ahead and saw the mountains there with rocks and forests upon them, and from the mountains flashed all colors upwards to the heavens. Then I was standing on the highest mountain of them all, and round about beneath me was the whole hoop of the world. And while I stood there I saw more than I can tell and I understood more than I saw, for I was seeing in a sacred manner the shapes of all things in the spirit and the shape of all shapes as they must live together in one being. And I saw the sacred hoop of my people was one of many sacred hoops that made one circle, wide as daylight and as starlight, and in the center grew one mighty and flowering tree to shelter all the children of one mother and one father. And I saw that it was holy." Black Elk

 

[daler]

No, daler. This is an example where it is both/and. Not either/or.

So for me, in order to retain my sanity, I must accept that Jonah was literally swallowed by a big fish, which spat him out “OK” after three days, having survived with no oxygen, no harmful effects of stomach digestive acids, and trauma from digestive muscle action.
Sorry, but I can’t swallow that… ;-(