Baha'i Returns Thread: Ask Any of Many Baha'i

[daler]

The Father is in heaven, which does not occupy physical space. Again, it is important to understand what the Jews of that time and culture understood. Acts 1:9 describes the Ascension as follows:

“And when he had said these things, as they were looking, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.”

As I have already explained, the use of “clouds” in describing Jesus ascension as well as his second coming means “the dwelling place of God”. So it could very well be read that “he was taken up and the dwelling place of God received him…” It does not mean that Jesus floated into physical space and we have no idea where he is. It means he ascended into heaven, with his glorified body and soul.

Steve,
. Thank you very much for this succinct statement. It says a lot. You know that many Christians, myself included, were raised on the notion that Jesus just sort of flew away. It was not a very good explanation, but one which was essentially taught and accepted by millions of kids, and adults, for that was what was given as an explanation as to “Where did He go?” It was interpreted literally as “disappearing in a cloud”, a literal cloud like you see everyday.
. It doesn’t take much to see problems with this latter statement, and as you point out, a far more reasonable explanation is available for interpretation. If he had ascended on a clear and cloudy day, for example, we could rule out physical clouds all together, right?

. So where that leaves us is what to do with His physical body “ascending into heaven, even as He came down from Heaven, and “is” in Heaven”, saying these words while standing on earth, and prior to His crucifixion.

. I’ll appreciate it if you will address this set of problems. Also, please understand at all times that I respect your beliefs, and ask only that you respect that there are some of us who sincerely strive to have a faith which is not in conflict with reality and reason.

. "Bahá’u’lláh has declared that religion must be in accord with science and reason. If it does not correspond with scientific principles and the processes of reason, it is superstition. For God has endowed us with faculties by which we may comprehend the realities of things, contemplate reality itself. If religion is opposed to reason and science, faith is impossible; and when faith and confidence in the divine religion are not manifest in the heart, there can be no spiritual attainment.

. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation."

Abdul Baha

 

[daler]

Agreed.

“Thou hast asked Me concerning the nature of the soul. Know, verily, that the soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem whose reality the most learned of men hath failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind, however acute, can ever hope to unravel. It is the first among all created things to declare the excellence of its Creator, the first to recognize His glory, to cleave to His truth, and to bow down in adoration before Him. If it be faithful to God, it will reflect His light, and will, eventually, return unto Him. If it fail, however, in its allegiance to its Creator, it will become a victim to self and passion, and will, in the end, sink in their depths.”

Baha’u’llah

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,
Please allow me, for clarification, to quote the Baha’i views “accurately”. There seems to be some misunderstanding, and as this is a sensitive issue, quite important.

Now let us consider that while we do have different understandings of the death of the body, it might be good to go into our own thoughts a little more, if you wish. I will relate to you a personal experience.
. When my cousin Tom drowned 30 years ago, I was at the funeral standing next to his folks, my aunt and uncle. I remember turning and looking at Tom’s body, some 20 feet away, but distinctly feeling his “presence” right there next to my Aunt and Uncle and myself. What I saw when I looked over was a “suit on top of a suit”, that is, a suit of clothes adorning a suit of flesh, from which he was now free.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

**"The condition of Christ’s risen humanity

645 By means of touch and the sharing of a meal, the risen Jesus establishes direct contact with his disciples. He invites them in this way to recognize that he is not a ghost and above all to verify that the risen body in which he appears to them is the same body that had been tortured and crucified, for it still bears the traces of his Passion.508 Yet at the same time this authentic, real body possesses the new properties of a glorious body: not limited by space and time but able to be present how and when he wills; for Christ’s humanity can no longer be confined to earth, and belongs henceforth only to the Father’s divine realm.509 For this reason too the risen Jesus enjoys the sovereign freedom of appearing as he wishes: in the guise of a gardener or in other forms familiar to his disciples, precisely to awaken their faith.510

646 Christ’s Resurrection was not a return to earthly life, as was the case with the raisings from the dead that he had performed before Easter: Jairus’ daughter, the young man of Naim, Lazarus. These actions were miraculous events, but the persons miraculously raised returned by Jesus’ power to ordinary earthly life. At some particular moment they would die again. Christ’s Resurrection is essentially different. In his risen body he passes from the state of death to another life beyond time and space. At Jesus’ Resurrection his body is filled with the power of the Holy Spirit: he shares the divine life in his glorious state, so that St. Paul can say that Christ is “the man of heaven”.**

We believe our bodies will be like that of Christ.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

The quotes you gave do not repudiate what I accuse bahai of and what bahai ultimately commit in the end of all things. You say resurrection is improper because the body is something inferior to the spirit, it would essentially be downgrading to return to a body even an immortal body because matter is inherently flawed. Your prophet may say the dead body deserves respect but I must ask again why? Is the body our true-self according to the bahai? Very clearly that it is not is demonstrated in everything you say when you deny resurrection in the clear Platonism espoused by bahai on the absolute superiority of the spirit in all things.

I ask logically, not simply from your dogma, if the essence of the persons soul is all that matters why does the body have any actual value? Bahai seemingly do not believe in the sanctification of material objects, there can be nothing holy and physical at the same time without spirit, that is the realm of the spirit alone(correct me if mistaken) so the body cannot be thought of as being holy as such even if holding the body of a manifestation it seems.

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,
. Thank you very much for this succinct statement. It says a lot. You know that many Christians, myself included, were raised on the notion that Jesus just sort of flew away. It was not a very good explanation, but one which was essentially taught and accepted by millions of kids, and adults, for that was what was given as an explanation as to “Where did He go?” It was interpreted literally as “disappearing in a cloud”, a literal cloud like you see everyday.
. It doesn’t take much to see problems with this latter statement, and as you point out, a far more reasonable explanation is available for interpretation. If he had ascended on a clear and cloudy day, for example, we could rule out physical clouds all together, right?

. So where that leaves us is what to do with His physical body “ascending into heaven, even as He came down from Heaven, and “is” in Heaven”, saying these words while standing on earth, and prior to His crucifixion.

. I’ll appreciate it if you will address this set of problems. Also, please understand at all times that I respect your beliefs, and ask only that you respect that there are some of us who sincerely strive to have a faith which is not in conflict with reality and reason.

. "Bahá’u’lláh has declared that religion must be in accord with science and reason. If it does not correspond with scientific principles and the processes of reason, it is superstition. For God has endowed us with faculties by which we may comprehend the realities of things, contemplate reality itself. If religion is opposed to reason and science, faith is impossible; and when faith and confidence in the divine religion are not manifest in the heart, there can be no spiritual attainment.

. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation."

Abdul Baha

I will do my best to address your concerns, but something occurs to me here. Does the Baha’i faith not believe that God is beyond human understanding? Does the Baha’i faith recognize the supernatural as well as the natural? Catholics would agree wholeheartedly that faith cannot conflict with reason. For example, we know for certain that we are just now receiving light from stars that are millions of light years away. This, in and of itself tells us that the Fundamentalist view, that the universe is only 6000 years old, is nothing more than conjecture and a misreading of Scripture. Truth can never conflict with truth.

On the other hand, there are truths which are above and beyond the physical plane; supernatural (above nature) truths of which we cannot penetrate with our finite intellect and which are not and cannot be explained by science for the simple reason that they are above science; above the natural world. Nothing is impossible for God, even if it seems impossible for man.

I will give you an example from a very contemporary Catholic saint; St. Padre Pio. There was a woman who’s daughter was born without pupils and therefore had always been quite blind. She was taking her to see Padre Pio and began praying to him while still on the train. Her daughter was given perfect sight within a moment. They took her to see doctor after doctor and none of them could explain how she could see. She was not cured by suddenly having pupils with which to see. She still had no pupils, but her sight was perfect. This has been documented and is not just a pious story. I believe that this little girl, now a woman, died only within the last twenty years. Can this be explained scientifically? No. That is why it is called a miracle.

Once again, from the Catechism:

650 The Fathers contemplate the Resurrection from the perspective of the divine person of Christ who remained united to his soul and body, even when these were separated from each other by death: "By the unity of the divine nature, which remains present in each of the two components of man, these are reunited. For as death is produced by the separation of the human components, so Resurrection is achieved by the union of the two."

Hope this provides some explanation.

 

[Little_Star_1]

Disrespectful how? By calling mirza Hussain a false prophet? Why yes this is disrespectful insofar as the bahai are concerened but their beliefs are equally disrespectful to Christians. That is apparently Christians have had it all wrong since the begining and no bahai can challange that statement. That this mere material world is unimportant to bahai is an insult on actual inherent value in the material world is an insult to God’s creation. There will always be disrespect and I will not call Mirza Hussain by the name htey call him because it is a false name. He is not the Glory of God, as I said (and I don’t take this back) I would rather call him “Baha’u’shaitan” than “Baha’u’llah.” Assuming that is the correct way to say “the glory of Satan,” for I wouldn’t know cause I don’t speak arabic. Corrections anyone? As far as I’m concerned its no worse than waht the early saints did in pointing out things about marcion or the gnostics, bahais are on their level.

THough that rhetoric is hardly the essence of what I say and I don’t always speak like that.

Okay, Iggy, you have made it clear that you have no respect for their faith. Everyone gets it. Why can’t you move on from it? How many times and how many ways can you speak hatefully to a people before you get your fill?

You don’t come across as a spiritual man in the least bit. You may think of yourself as one, but you sure don’t put that across in your posts. I think this is where the problem lies. You understand the words, but not the thought, the heart, the true meaning, the spirit, of the words. Even the Catholic Catechism recognizes the fact that men of other faiths can, and have, walked with God. It is a mystery to me how anyone of faith, that knows God on any level through personal experience or study, can doubt that God can do what He wants, when He wants, and with whom He wants and will not stop and check to see what the Christian faith says He will or will not do.

Well, Iggy, I wish you well in your pursuits, whatever they may be. God go with you.

 

[arthra]

I think as a Baha’i I would say that we recognize that miracles can occur… A distinction might be is that for us miracles are more for those who receive them personally. They are not used as proof by us … as in who can produce that greatest miracle not did Baha’u’llah stress His miraculous powers…

Here are some ways “miracles” are referred to in our Writings:

*The Holy Manifestations are the sources of miracles and the originators of wonderful signs. For Them, any difficult and impracticable thing is possible and easy. For through a supernatural power wonders appear from Them; and by this power, which is beyond nature, They influence the world of nature. From all the Manifestations marvelous things have appeared.

But in the Holy Books an especial terminology is employed, and for the Manifestations these miracles and wonderful signs have no importance. They do not even wish to mention them. For if we consider miracles a great proof, they are still only proofs and arguments for those who are present when they are performed, and not for those who are absent.*

(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 99)

*But in the day of the Manifestation the people with insight see that all the conditions of the Manifestation are miracles, for They are superior to all others, and this alone is an absolute miracle. Recollect that Christ, solitary and alone, without a helper or protector, without armies and legions, and under the greatest oppression, uplifted the standard of God before all the people of the world, and withstood them, and finally conquered all, although outwardly He was crucified. Now this is a veritable miracle which can never be denied. There is no need of any other proof of the truth of Christ.
*
(Abdu’l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 100)

As to the resurrection of Christ I think the Baha’i view has been pretty well stated…that we do not accept His physical or bodily resurrection nor do we accept the literal views that our bodies will rise out of our graves and join the Lord in the air or that we will have a body like Jesus after we “resurrect”.

We accept the spiritual resurrection of Jesus

“Concerning the resurrection of Christ, he wishes to call your attention to the fact that in this as well as in practically all the so-called miraculous events recorded in the Gospel we should, as Bahá’ís, seek to find a spiritual meaning and to entirely discard the physical interpretation attached to them by many of the Christian sects. The resurrection of Christ was, indeed, not physical but essentially spiritual, and is symbolic of the truth that the reality of man is to be found not in his physical constitution, but in his soul. A careful perusal of the Íqán’ and of the ‘Some Answered Questions’ makes this indubitably clear.”

(From a letter written to an individual believer on behalf of the Guardian, August 14, 1934)
(Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 492)

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,

As I read my last response to this post, it became clear that I did not address some of the points you made. Let me give it another try.
daler;11097963:

The Human Body - The Progress of Human Soul

. “And now concerning thy question regarding the soul of man and its survival after death. Know thou of a truth that the soul, after its separation from the body, will continue to progress until it attaineth the presence of God, in a state and condition which neither the revolution of ages and centuries, nor the changes and chances of this world, can alter.”

. (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, p. 155)

This would actually be in substantial agreement with the Catholic view, if understood in this way: The soul, after separation from the body, would only progress in the sense of becoming purified in a state which we call purgatory. Once purified it would “attaineth the presence of God in a state and condition which neither the revolution of ages and centuries, nor the changes and chances of this world can alter”.

Now let us consider that while we do have different understandings of the death of the body, it might be good to go into our own thoughts a little more, if you wish. I will relate to you a personal experience.
. When my cousin Tom drowned 30 years ago, I was at the funeral standing next to his folks, my aunt and uncle. I remember turning and looking at Tom’s body, some 20 feet away, but distinctly feeling his “presence” right there next to my Aunt and Uncle and myself. What I saw when I looked over was a “suit on top of a suit”, that is, a suit of clothes adorning a suit of flesh, from which he was now free.

I had a similar experience with my younger brother. We held hands as I drove home from where we left his body. His presence was so strong that it was unmistakable. I also had, simultaneously, the distinct feeling that I was holding the hand of my Lord. The message I received was that my brother was with him and it gave me great peace.

And yes, he had left behind the body that was subject to corruption and decay. In that sense, he was free from it. But when he is reunited to his body, and it will be his body, that has been glorified by the Holy Spirit, it will be changed forever into a body like that of the glorified body of Christ. This has nothing at all to do with science, or space and time. It is a reality that is infinitely above this physical plane; Face to face with Truth, with Love, with Mercy, with Beauty, with Goodness, with Knowledge; the face of God himself. And we will be his adopted sons and daughters sharing in the very life of the Trinity. Can you even imagine?

. When we dream, what is the nature of the reality to which we go? Is it physical, like in our daily lives? Or is it another dimension of reality which transcends normal experience.

I don’t know. Dreams are certainly affected by the physical, but they are in the component of our being called the intellect or soul as well. We are human, body and soul and one affects the other.

. I don’t disagree with you that we will have some sort of “body” associated with our souls in heaven. I agree with you there, but I don’t see it as the same physical “body” that we lived in here.

You know, many people like to use the analogy of the butterfly transformed from a caterpillar. They point to the cocoon left behind as an analogy of the body left behind by the soul. But what is not true about this view is that the caterpillar makes a cocoon around itself. It is the actual caterpillar body that is transformed into the butterfly, The cocoon is not the body.

Our bodies will be transformed by the Creator of all things, who has power and authority over all things, who is almighty and able to do that which he wills. None of us can fathom, let alone explain exactly the nature of our glorified bodies.

. What you term as a glorified “body” of Christ to me speaks of this reality of the soul which is not composed of physical elements. That seems to be where the problem is, as well as what to do with the Gospel stories of Jesus appearing and disappearing, taking food and speaking, being seen by “believers”, and yet not being seen by non-believers.

Do you not believe that God is capable of giving us spiritual bodies that are also capable of assuming the physical plane? It is, no doubt, mind blowing, for lack of better words. But this comes down to a more profound point. We do not believe because we understand; we believe because of the one who told us. What we have is the example of Christ’s own body, who purposely ate fish and bread to prove that he was not a ghost, who allowed Thomas to touch him while at the same time walking through walls and disappearing in an instant. Of course it cannot be explained scientifically because it is beyond science. But it is not beyond God.

Continued…

 

[SteveVH]

Continued…

. When you sat that Christ says we will be reunited with our bodies, how do you visualize this or make it acceptable to the rational mind with which we perceive reality?

Why does it have to be acceptable to our rational minds when our rational minds cannot grasp the things of God:

"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD. 9"For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.…" (Isaiah 55:8-9)

Science is the study of the natural world, not the supernatural world in which we enter after death. The fact that a truth can exist that is beyond our ability to measure scientifically or grasp with our limited intellect does not mean that it conflicts with scientific truth. It just means it cannot be measured by scientific truth and is beyond our understanding. We believe because this truth has been revealed to us, not because we discovered it through our intellect or even fully grasp it with our intellect.

. For example, after 9-11 and the total extermination of the physical bodies of 2000 souls (God bless each and every one of them and their beloved families), the atoms and molecules went into the ground and air and were dispersed, eventually absorbed by other living creatures, the same as “ashes to ashes and dust to dust”, whether by cremation or great grandpa buried under the apple tree, which absorbs those atoms into itself, part of which becomes apples, eaten by horses and people, etc.

. Clearly, the “same” physical body will not and cannot be reassembled.

Why? God created us from nothing. Reassembling what he has already created should be no problem. He has a good memory.

. The fellow crucified with Christ was told by Him, “Today thou shalt be with me in paradise.” Yet Jesus’ body remained in the grave for 3 days and was then Resurrected, according to traditional literal interpretations.

Christ was not inactive during the three days his body lay in the tomb. He descended to free all of the souls who had been waiting for the gates of heaven to be opened. If they entered heaven before the resurrection, why not the “good thief”?

. What happened to the “body” of the other fellow, and where was the “paradise” to which they both went “today”?

The other fellow? I imagine that both of the men that hung beside Jesus were buried. The one who went to “Paradise” with Jesus would have to await the resurrection along with the rest of us. But his soul was with God.

. Do you see the difficulties here with simplistic or apparent explanations? I’m not railing on you brother, just trying to understand with my rational mind what happens after death.

This is what the Scriptures tell us in answer to your question: “No eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor mind conceived of what God has planned for those who love him”. So join the club. We cannot know. But we know that it will be wonderful and glorious beyond our comprehension and that is enough.

. Also, putting all of this in context with Enoch, Elijah, and Jesus “ascending” into heaven, John returning in the spirit of Elijah, and Jesus statement that He "came down from heaven, “is” in heaven, and would ascend to heaven.

My explanation, and there may very well be a better one, is this: It is the nature of God in the Trinity that comes into play. Where the Father is, there also is the Son. We must always remember that there is only one God and that God remained in heaven even as he became incarnate through the second Person of the Trinity. A mystery? You bet. But then God’s ways are not our ways.

. . Please, respectfully, follow up on this, if you will. These are not naive considerations to be easily dismissed, but real head-scratchers…

Absolutely, they are!

Peace

 

[SteveVH]

I think as a Baha’i I would say that we recognize that miracles can occur… A distinction might be is that for us miracles are more for those who receive them personally. They are not used as proof by us … as in who can produce that greatest miracle not did Baha’u’llah stress His miraculous powers…

Here are some ways “miracles” are referred to in our Writings:

*The Holy Manifestations are the sources of miracles and the originators of wonderful signs. For Them, any difficult and impracticable thing is possible and easy. For through a supernatural power wonders appear from Them; and by this power, which is beyond nature, They influence the world of nature. From all the Manifestations marvelous things have appeared.

But in the Holy Books an especial terminology is employed, and for the Manifestations these miracles and wonderful signs have no importance. They do not even wish to mention them. For if we consider miracles a great proof, they are still only proofs and arguments for those who are present when they are performed, and not for those who are absent.*

(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 99)

Well, I would disagree wholeheartedly that miracles are unimportant. Christ did not just walk around performing miracles for entertainment. There was always a great sign behind each of them; something even more profound, for instance, then the fact that a man crippled for life could once again walk. Jesus had forgiven his sins and when questioned as to his authority to forgive sins (for only God could forgive sins) he asked them “Which is easier to say, your sins are forgiven or take up your mat and walk?” The miracle was the sign of his authority and the most important thing he did was to forgive the man’s sins.

 

[Servant19]

The quotes you gave do not repudiate what I accuse bahai of and what bahai ultimately commit in the end of all things. You say resurrection is improper because the body is something inferior to the spirit, it would essentially be downgrading to return to a body even an immortal body because matter is inherently flawed. Your prophet may say the dead body deserves respect but I must ask again why? Is the body our true-self according to the bahai? Very clearly that it is not is demonstrated in everything you say when you deny resurrection in the clear Platonism espoused by bahai on the absolute superiority of the spirit in all things.

I ask logically, not simply from your dogma, if the essence of the persons soul is all that matters why does the body have any actual value? Bahai seemingly do not believe in the sanctification of material objects, there can be nothing holy and physical at the same time without spirit, that is the realm of the spirit alone(correct me if mistaken) so the body cannot be thought of as being holy as such even if holding the body of a manifestation it seems.

It seems Christianity also considers physical resurrection proper, since there is a CLEAR distinction between what is a PHYSICAL body and what is a GLORIFIED body.

I’m yet to hear an explanation of why Jesus did not say “the body will be sown a physical body, and it will be raised a PHYSICAL body again”

Did Jesus ever say that?

 

[Servant19]

For example, we know for certain that we are just now receiving light from stars that are millions of light years away. This, in and of itself tells us that the Fundamentalist view, that the universe is only 6000 years old, is nothing more than conjecture and a misreading of Scripture. Truth can never conflict with truth.

Steve, why would God misrepresent the truth in this manner then?

Is God “deceiving” us in the Bible?

Also, I am yet to hear how Jesus fulfilled the criteria of being the Jewish Messiah?
Can any Christian answer this question?

 

[SteveVH]

It seems Christianity also considers physical resurrection proper, since there is a CLEAR distinction between what is a PHYSICAL body and what is a GLORIFIED body.

I’m yet to hear an explanation of why Jesus did not say “the body will be sown a physical body, and it will be raised a PHYSICAL body again”

Did Jesus ever say that?

Our bodies will be spiritual bodies, however spiritual bodies capable of interacting with the physical as well. A body that can eat and drink and walk through walls. We will have a completely different mode of existence so it cannot be compared to anything we experience here on earth.

 

[Servant19]

Our bodies will be spiritual bodies, however spiritual bodies capable of interacting with the physical as well. A body that can eat and drink and walk through walls. We will have a completely different mode of existence so it cannot be compared to anything we experience here on earth.

So if in this new condition, we can walk through walls etc, what is the purpose of having walls then?

And why would this body need to eat and drink?

 

[SteveVH]

Steve, why would God misrepresent the truth in this manner then?

Is God “deceiving” us in the Bible?

No. Men are deceiving themselves by interpreting Scripture apart from the teaching authority that proclaimed it to be the word of God to begin with; without the lens of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church.

Genesis is written in the genre of poetic prose. It was written in a language, culture and time unfamiliar to the modern reader and cannot be read in a linear, literal, scientific manner.
So we have to either believe that the human authors of Genesis really believed that the earth was built upon pillars or that they meant something entirely different. There are other examples, such as light being made on the first day, yet the sun, moon and stars were not made until the fourth day. Were these guys just truly idiots, or is something there which we are missing? As they say “those who can’t hear the music think the dancer is daft”.

The creation account in Genesis is not a scientific account. It is a poem whose purpose is not to explain the planets and stars, but to reveal something about the One who made them. It is a Hebrew storytelling technique with which the modern reader is not familiar.

For example, the description of the earth is a description of the Temple. That is why it is built upon pillars and covered with a dome. And what was the message? We, as God’s creatures, are to do what they do in the temple: worship the God who made us. We learn what our purpose in being is. We were created to worship.

So God is deceiving no one. Men who choose to interpret Scripture according to their own rules, definitions and understanding, apart from the Body who received the authority to interpret directly from Christ, fall into error and even believe something as ridiculous as the world being 6000 years old.

 

[Servant19]

No. Men are deceiving themselves by interpreting Scripture apart from the teaching authority that proclaimed it the word of God to begin with; without the lens of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church.

Genesis is written in the genre of poetic prose. It was written in a language, culture and time unfamiliar to the modern reader. It cannot be read in a linear, literal, scientific manner.
So we have to either believe that the human authors of Genesis really believed that the earth was built upon pillars or that they meant something entirely different. There are other examples, such as light being made on the first day, yet the sun, moon and stars were not made until the fourth day. Were these guys just truly idiots, or is something there which we are missing? As they say “those who can’t hear the music think the dancer is daft”.

The creation account in Genesis is not a scientific account. It is a poem whose purpose is not to explain the planets and stars, but to reveal something about the One who made them. It is a storytelling technique with which the modern reader is not familiar.

For example, the description of the earth is a description of the Temple. That is why it is built upon pillars and covered with a dome. And what was the message? We, as God’s creatures, are to do what they do in the temple: worship the God who made us. We learn what our purpose in being is. We were created to worship.

So God is deceiving no one. Men who choose to interpret Scripture according to their own rules, definitions and understanding, apart from the Body who received the authority to interpret directly from Christ, fall into error and even believe something as ridiculous as the world being 6000 years old.

So what makes you believe that the whole of the Bible is not the same “storytelling” with a hidden deeper, more spiritual message?

Actually, I’m gonna stop asking new questions now. You have enough old questions to answer

Apologies if the many questions are in any way burdensome…

 

[SteveVH]

So if in this new condition, we can walk through walls etc, what is the purpose of having walls then?

And why would this body need to eat and drink?

We will be able to pass through matter (if there is matter). Christ said there will be a new heaven and a new earth. And I don’t think I said we would “need” to eat and drink. Christ was demonstrating that he had a real body and was not a ghost. So I have no idea whether or not there will be walls or that we will desire to eat and drink. I have never had a glorified body. What I know is what Christ has revealed. I hope to experience it personally someday.

 

[PRmerger]

We will be able to pass through matter (if there is matter). Christ said there will be a new heaven and a new earth. And I don’t think I said we would “need” to eat and drink. Christ was demonstrating that he had a real body and was not a ghost. So I have no idea whether or not there will be walls or that we will desire to eat and drink. I have never had a glorified body. What I know is what Christ has revealed. I hope to experience it personally someday.

Indeed. What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him.

 

[SteveVH]

So what makes you believe that the whole of the Bible is not the same “storytelling” with a hidden deeper, more spiritual message?

Because the Bible is not one book written by one author. Each book has its own author and its own style of writing. You have the prophetic books, the Pslams, the books of Wisdom, for instance, each with different authors and styles. And you have eye witness accounts as found in the New Testament.

As to hidden, deeper, more spiritual meaning we are taught to read Scripture from four different view points:

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

**"The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. the profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

1. the allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84
2. the moral sense. the events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85
3. the anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86

118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:

The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;
The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny."87**

 

[Reuben_J]

Servant19:

Hi Steve, my apologies for my oversight…

I would be delighted to answer your questions. If you wouldn’t mind, may I open a dialogue with you on this matter so we can provide some context? If you are uncomfortable with the question I propose (which will provide a good foundation to answer your question) then please tell me and I will just answer your question (if that makes sense??) ( ) ( )

So here’s the question:
How did Jesus fulfil the following criteria required to be entitled the Messiah?

1. have the correct genealogy by being descended from King David and king Solomon
   (I Chonicles 17, 11 and 22, 10 / Jeremiah 33, 17)
2. be anointed King of Israel
   (Deuteronomy 17, 15)
3. return the Jewish people to Israel
   (Isaiah 27, 12)
   (Isaiah 11, 12)
4. rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem
   (Micah 4, 1)
5. bring peace to the world and end all war
   (Micah 4, 3)
   (Isaiah 2, 4)
   (Isaiah 11, 6)
6. bring knowledge of God to the world
7. The criteria pointed out in Ezehiel chapter 37 24-28

24 “My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd; and they will walk in My ordinances and keep My statutes and observe them. 25 They will live on the land that I gave to Jacob My servant, in which your fathers lived; and they will live on it, they, and their sons and their sons’ sons, forever; and David My servant will be their prince forever. 26 I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will [a]place them and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in their midst forever. 27 My dwelling place also will be with them; and I will be their Gd, and they will be My people. 28 And the nations will know that I am the L.rd who sanctifies Israel, when My sanctuary is in their midst forever.”

How did Jesus fulfil some or all of these prophecies?

Hi Servant. It’s interesting to read the criteria you brought up that are required for Jesus to be a Messiah. I am not too sure but how did you come to that premise? Perhaps these are from the Jewish aspect. Right?

If they are from the Jewish aspect, then you would have answers as to why Jesus could not be the Messiah of the Old Testament instead of him be the Messiah and thus why Jews do not believe in Jesus.

I would, if I am to answer your questions, to lead you to look at the prophecies in the Old Testament that were fulfilled by Jesus. There were many such prophecies, thus made him the Messiah that the Scripture foretold.

Here are some 351 examples.

And here too.