BAHA'I thread III - feel free to ask of Baha'i any questions

[daler]

But it is not God. Jesus was indeed God. Do you understand what we are trying to say here. Can you not see the difference.

And yes absolutely the reality of Christ is different from Moses. Moses isn’t GOD!

Rinnie,
. Let us say, that as is commonly asserted, that “Jesus is God”, rather than a “Messenger” or divine Manifestation of God (in Baha’i terminology)

. We are forced to draw the following conclusions.

1 That God is greater than God.

2 That God is not good

3 That God can do nothing of Himself

4 That God cannot speak on His own.

. The reasons are:

1 “The Father is greater than I” (God is greater than God)

2 “Why callest thou Me good? There is no one good but God.” (Therefore God is not good, because no one is good but God)

3 “The Son can do nothing of Himself” (God can do nothing of Himself)

4 “The words you hear are not Mine, but Him that sent Me” (God’s words are not His own)

If one attempts logic in any other field, such as computer science, and hopes to accomplish anything, it is essential to make sense, for sensible communication of ideas requires it.

. The Baha’i belief is that an analogy can be drawn which makes sense of this.

First, let us use the analogy of the sun for God (just an analogy)
Second, let us use the analogy of a perfect mirror for Jesus (again, an analogy)
Third, let us say that the rays of the sun are the Holy Spirit.

We then can say:

1 The sun is greater than the mirror (Father is greater than the Son)

2 The mirror is not the source of the light (God is the source of the Light)

3 The mirror cannot produce the light by itself (The Son reflects, rather than produces, the Light)

3 The light does not create the light, for it originates from the sun (God sends the Words to Jesus)

. This is logical, and explains the position of God to Jesus without lessening His station as the Messenger without confusing the identities, allowing us to understand logically what that relationship is.
. For to say that God is three Gods, divides and multiplies Him, where as recognizing the use of the analogy satisfies all three conditions and is sensible, and acceptable to the rational mind.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I think the gospel writers and the author of Acts were quite bright enough to see that what they wrote did not entirely fit with a physical resurrection, and also did not entirely match the usual views of spirits can and cannot do. We should not fall into the trap of thinking that critical thinking was discovered with the Enlightenment. So if we suppose that the authors were conscious of what they were doing, what is the lesson they intend us to learn? Something about not imposing our categories, not pretending we can grasp a mystery, perhaps?

In contrast, the story of Lazarus is that of a physical re-animation. There’s nothing spirit-like about the revived Lazarus, no mystery is entailed. And while it’s an impressive story of the power of Christ, it doesn’t make Lazarus particularly significant to us today

Or is it really much simpler than all that?

Maybe Jesus really did rise from the dead. Maybe he had the sort of glorified body which we will all have one day. Maybe Jesus really did let Thomas put his fingers in the nail holes and believe. Maybe Jesus really did eat a piece of fish.

Maybe that is what the disciples knew to be true and were willing to die for. Maybe that was why they didn’t simply deny a myth they knew to be false.

Just sayin’.

And here is what Paul was sayin’ to the Corinthians just a few years after the resurrection:

“Listen, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed - in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet” (1 Co 15:51-52)

 

[eddie_too]

christians do not believe there are three Gods.

if you are going to correct people, at least try to be right.

how can you enter a catholic website to educate when you do not even know the most fundamental teachings of the people you are visiting?

it seems to me that perhaps you bahai are your own worst enemies. you cause yourselves to appear ignorant by protraying others incorrectly.

 

[daler]

no offense, but the bahai teachings and literature quoted on this thread brings to my mind a saying from my youth. "if you can blind them with your brilliance baffle them with you bullsh__.

i read those bahai words and think, so what? what significance do such conglomerations have for me? these words could be interpreted to provide justification for virtually any concept.

if a human being is not a bahai, what effect does that have on them, now and in the future?

i fail to see the significance of disregarding everything the bahai teach?

Eddie,
. I cannot comprehend quantum physics, but I accept it at some level. I comprehend algebra first by learning simple numbers and letters, then come to understand how various symbols can represent ever higher and more complex formulas. There is no contradiction when one seriously studies math. We progress by opening our minds to the constructs given.
. As to whether or not one is a Baha’i, or Christian, or Jew, for that matter, what is perhaps more important is what is blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, which Christ says is not forgivable.
. Rather than copy and paste, the following link explains this in detail (only one page) and I believe answers your question:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-31.html

 

[Randy_Carson]

That Baha’u’llah was a holy man, and wise man, and very well-informed and talented man, is evidence by the man and his writings, the effect he had on the lives of others, and what others have said about him (in declining order of importance). As regards these terms, we think we known more or less what “a holy man” looks like, and we look at Baha’u’llah and his son Abdu’l-Baha, and say, yep, that’s holy.

Baha’u’llah also said that he was “a manifestation of God,” and uses the same word for other founders of religion and some prophets and holy men. It’s a new word (although much used by the Bab as well), whose meaning is not already established. So the question is not, how do we know Baha’u’llah was a manifestation of God, but what does Baha’u’llah mean by “Manifestation of God” and does that fit with what we already understand and does it lead us to new understandings of the mysteries of Faith?

Sounds like a wonderful person.

However, Jesus revealed Himself to BE God, and He backed it up by rising from the dead after willing dying upon a cross as a sacrifice for your sins.

To whom do you owe the greater debt?

 

[daler]

christians do not believe there are three Gods.

if you are going to correct people, at least try to be right.

how can you enter a catholic website to educate when you do not even know the most fundamental teachings of the people you are visiting?

it seems to me that perhaps you bahai are your own worst enemies. you cause yourselves to appear ignorant by protraying others incorrectly.

What I am saying is that Baha’is do not believe Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God and that God is God. We believe that God is God, and that Jesus is a Manifestation of God from Whom the Holy Spirit is reflected to us. God is above all differentiation.

The following is brief, and explains the Baha’i understanding:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/GWB/gwb-84.html

 

[Randy_Carson]

Wow slow down there. Lets say we agree with you and it was not a Physical Resurrection.

John 20:17 Mary M was told to stop HOLDING on to Me! For I have not ascended to Father,

Now Mary was told to STOP holding on to me.

How could Mary hold onto a spirit who did not have a physical body?

Somewhere, a fat lady is warming up…

 

[eddie_too]

is it foolishness to ask a person to exchange something great for something good.

is it foolishness to ask a person who believes that their Creator has become one of them to stop believing that and instead ask them to believe God did not become one of them.

who is most impoverished? the human being whose God encounters them as one of them or the human being whose God keeps sending weak, sinful and fallible men to lead them?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Baha’is believe that the Divine Manifestations have three planes…so Jesus as a Manifestation would be both human and divine in the following way:

We said that the Manifestations have three planes.*

First, the physical reality***, which depends upon the body;

second, the individual reality, that is to say, the rational soul;
**
third, the divine appearance,** which is the divine perfections, the cause of the life of existence, of the education of souls, of the guidance of people, and of the enlightenment of the contingent world.

The physical state is the human state which perishes because it is composed of elements, and all that is composed of elements will necessarily be decomposed and dispersed.

But the individual reality of the Manifestations of God is a holy reality, and for that reason it is sanctified and, in that which concerns its nature and quality, is distinguished from all other things. It is like the sun, which by its essential nature produces light and cannot be compared to the moon, just as the particles that compose the globe of the sun cannot be compared with those which compose the moon. The particles and organization of the former produce rays, but the particles of which the moon is composed do not produce rays but need to borrow light. So other human realities are those souls who, like the moon, take light from the sun; but that Holy Reality is luminous in Himself.

The third plane of that Being [1] is the Divine Bounty, the splendor of the Preexistent Beauty, and the radiance of the light of the Almighty. The individual realities of the Divine Manifestations have no separation from the Bounty of God and the Lordly Splendor. In the same way, the orb of the sun has no separation from the light. Therefore, it may be said that the ascension of the Holy Manifestation is simply the leaving of this elemental form.

For example, if a lamp illumines this niche, and if its light ceases to illuminate it because the niche is destroyed, the bounty of the lamp is not cut off. Briefly, in the Holy Manifestations the Preexistent Bounty is like the light, the individuality is represented by the glass globe, and the human body is like the niche: if the niche is destroyed, the lamp continues to burn.

The Divine Manifestations are so many different mirrors because They have a special individuality, but that which is reflected in the mirrors is one sun. It is clear that the reality of Christ is different from that of Moses.

[1 The Manifestation.]

~ Abdu’l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 153

Yeah, man is a tri-partite being: Spirit, Soul and Body.

1 Thessalonians 5:23
May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Not exactly news, my friend.

 

[Randy_Carson]

no offense, but the bahai teachings and literature quoted on this thread brings to my mind a saying from my youth. "if you can blind them with your brilliance baffle them with you bullsh__.

i read those bahai words and think, so what? what significance do such conglomerations have for me? these words could be interpreted to provide justification for virtually any concept.

if a human being is not a bahai, what effect does that have on them, now and in the future?

i fail to see the significance of disregarding everything the bahai teach?

It’s modern-day Gnosticism. The Baha’i are insiders with knowledge (gnosis) that the rest of us don’t have. That makes someone feel special, you know?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I think most of us Baha’is came to realize the life of Baha’u’llah was exceptional…

I’m kinda curious about something. Baha’u’llah was a “Manifestation of God”…“exceptional”, right?

So, how come no one has heard of this holy man? I mean, be honest, your organization is small and relatively insignificant on the stage of world religions.

Numbers don’t mean everything, of course, but if God is trying to get a message out and Baha’u’llah was His messenger, he wasn’t terribly effective, was he?

 

[PRmerger]

It’s modern-day Gnosticism. The Baha’i are insiders with knowledge (gnosis) that the rest of us don’t have. That makes someone feel special, you know?

Yes. Truly, there is nothing new under the sun. Or, there is nothing new after the Son.

It does appear as if the Baha’i faith is professing the gnostic heresy that the body and the flesh is evil.

Christianity rejects that and proclaims that the body is holy. It is the visible manifestation of the invisible God.

 

[rinnie]

How could Mary hold onto a spirit who did not have a physical body?

Somewhere, a fat lady is warming up…

you are on a roll today Randy I will give you that!

 

[Randy_Carson]

Yes. Truly, there is nothing new under the sun. Or, there is nothing new after the Son.

It does appear as if the Baha’i faith is professing the gnostic heresy that the body and the flesh is evil.

Christianity rejects that and proclaims that the body is holy. It is the visible manifestation of the invisible God.

It’s a heady mix, PR.

Someone gets caught up in a new religion or movement that few people know about…it’s strange, new, intoxicating. And YOU are on the inside…one of the Illuminati with insights that others do not have.

Throw in a holy man or two babbling nonsense about heaven and you have the makings of a first-class cul…er…religion.

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,
I think you may mean 400 years rather than 4000…till the scripture was canonized

Yes, of course. Didn’t catch that.

there were a lot of varieties of what was "Christian " … The Church Councils were meant to standardize them…as it was Arianism and other forms were extremely popular…

The Church councils were formed to officially define doctrine, that which the Church had always believed, in the face of heresy. They were not standardizing different forms of Christianity, they were defending the one deposit of faith given to the Apostles by Jesus and handed down through Sacred Tradition. There were not many forms of Christianity, there was the Church and there were heretics.

You don’t know for sure what were the beliefs of the earliest Christians…

We know very well the beliefs of the earliest Christians. Have you ever read any of the writings of the early Church Fathers? Have you ever heard of the Didache, or Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antoich, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Athanasius, Justin Martyr… to name a few. All of those mentioned above lived in the first and second centuries. We have mountains of evidence of what the early Christians believed.

Translation has a lot to do with it! Aramaic had it’s own idioms and manners of expression … when translated into a language like Greek it was not so easy.

You do not seem to understand that our faith is not based upon writings or translations of writings. The Apostles transmitted orally what they had received, most of them never writing anything. This truth received from the Apostles and held within the Church is protected from error by the Holy Spirit. So no, translation has nothing to do with it. Our religion does not depend upon the Bible for its doctrines, though it certainly supports those doctrines. The books of the Bible were chosen depending upon how well they measured up to the faith already held by the Church. Any translation, therefore, can only be properly made by looking through the lens of Catholic Tradition.

 

[PRmerger]

There were not many forms of Christianity, there was the Church and there were heretics.

Egg-zactly right.

You do not seem to understand that our faith is not based upon writings or translations of writings

Yes. Sometimes I wonder if the non-Catholic folks here have forgotten that they are on a Catholic forum, in dialogue with Catholics. It appears as if they believe that they are in a discussion with Bible Christians, who claim to have all of the beliefs based on the Bible.

It would be beneficial to folks who are not Catholic to try to not argue from “but how can you believe A when it is not in your writings?”

That is an inutile endeavor as Catholics do not glean their doctrines from a distillation of the Sacred Scriptures.

Rather, our Faith was whole and entire, given once for all to the saints, from Christ, to His Apostles. Before a single word of the NT was ever put to writ.

Now, this is not to say that our doctrines did not develop.

But, again, we do not extract our doctrines from the pages of a book, no matter how holy.

Our doctrines come from the kerygma, given by God to the Church.

 

[arthra]

I’m kinda curious about something. Baha’u’llah was a “Manifestation of God”…“exceptional”, right?

So, how come no one has heard of this holy man? I mean, be honest, your organization is small and relatively insignificant on the stage of world religions.

Numbers don’t mean everything, of course, but if God is trying to get a message out and Baha’u’llah was His messenger, he wasn’t terribly effective, was he?

Well we’ll make a modest start here on this forum by mentioning Baha’u’llah…

It’s true we’re “Insignificant” on the stage of world religions…at least for now, so consider your self fortunate to be conversing with so few!

You may like to browse some of the appreciations of the Faith here:

bahaitributes.wordpress.com/page/2/

As to whether Baha’u’llah was ineffective or not for a prisoner in a Turkish penal colony and sometimes on death row in the Siyyah Chal and an exile from His native land He made an impact that is still being felt today and will be around for a long time to come!

For brief thumbnail sketch of His life see:

bahaullah.org/

 

[PRmerger]

As to whether Baha’u’llah was ineffective or not for a prisoner in a Turkish penal colony and sometimes on death row in the Siyyah Chal and an exile from His native land He made an impact that is still being felt today and will be around for a long time to come!

Perhaps you are mistakenly literally interpreting the stories about him, and that he truly was not literally, physically in a Turkish penal colony? Rather, he was only mentally imprisoned because he was not able to profess all that he knew and understood?

 

[SteveVH]

Perhaps you are mistakenly literally interpreting the stories about him, and that he truly was not literally, physically in a Turkish penal colony? Rather, he was only mentally imprisoned because he was not able to profess all that he knew and understood?

Sounds reasonable to me. I mean its all in the past. How can anyone know for sure?

 

[arthra]

Steve was writing above

“There were not many forms of Christianity, there was the Church and there were heretics.”

I came across a site exploring the varieties among early Christians and would like you to check it out!

Here it is:

pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/first/diversity.html

It probably represents what is the current thinking on the subject in academic circles…