Baha'i V

[Randy_Carson]

Hi Robyn

The authority is Baha’u’llah Himself, the Supreme Manifestation of God, the Return of Jesus Christ in the glory of the Father, the Promised One of All religions. I think that’s a pretty good authority to hang your hat on, don’t you?

The question now is, how do we know that Baha’u’llah is all of these things?

Well, in order to answer that, we need to ascertain Divinity, and for that we need to ask a specific question regarding Jesus. How did the Apostles recognize the Divinity of Jesus “during His lifetime”? How was Jesus different and worthy of serious attention to the point of shouting “Hosanah!” on the streets, from all the other “Son of God” claimants at the time?

Shouting “Hosanah” merely signified that the Jews hailed Jesus as the Messiah…not quite the same thing as accepting him as the Second Person of the Holy Trinity.

However, during that portion of His lifetime which occurred AFTER His physical death and resurrection, Jesus appeared to His disciples individually as well as in groups, and the number of people who saw him, heard him, touched him numbered in the hundreds.

Not all believed immediately, either. Thomas was one who did not.

24 Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.”

26 Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.”(John 20:24-29)

Dying on the cross would have been sufficient to deal with our sins, but the resurrection of Jesus was obviously critical to the spreading of Christianity.

 

[Servant19]

Hi Randy,

When Jesus said "This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”, what does “life of the world” actually mean to you?

Would the entirety of the world have died had Jesus not given His flesh on the Cross?
Will those who do not partake of His flesh in the Eucharist die?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Hi Randy,

When Jesus said "This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”, what does “life of the world” actually mean to you?

What does “this bread is my flesh” mean to you?

Would the entirety of the world have died had Jesus not given His flesh on the Cross?

Of course. For the wages of sin is death.

Will those who do not partake of His flesh in the Eucharist die?

The second death referenced in Revelation. I want to believe in the mercy of God for those who did not know the truth…but the warning is as plain as can be, and it seems unwise to try to explain it away.

 

[Servant19]

Shouting “Hosanah” merely signified that the Jews hailed Jesus as the Messiah…not quite the same thing as accepting him as the Second Person of the Holy Trinity.

However, during that portion of His lifetime which occurred AFTER His physical death and resurrection, Jesus appeared to His disciples individually as well as in groups, and the number of people who saw him, heard him, touched him numbered in the hundreds.

Not all believed immediately, either. Thomas was one who did not.

24 Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.”

26 Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.”(John 20:24-29)

Dying on the cross would have been sufficient to deal with our sins, but the resurrection of Jesus was obviously critical to the spreading of Christianity.

You miss my point Randy

Let me re-phrase:
What was it that made Peter declare to Jesus that He was the Son of the Living God?

 

[Servant19]

Of course. For the wages of sin is death.

The second death referenced in Revelation. I want to believe in the mercy of God for those who did not know the truth…but the warning is as plain as can be, and it seems unwise to try to explain it away.

So if I sin, I will have a heart attack and die?

 

[Randy_Carson]

You miss my point Randy

Let me re-phrase:
What was it that made Peter declare to Jesus that He was the Son of the Living God?

Matthew 16:15-17
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

 

[Randy_Carson]

So if I sin, I will have a heart attack and die?

Is that what you think I think?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Servant-

It’s almost 2am here on the east coast; you’re in CA if I remember correctly.

Take a look at my post #57 and give me your thoughts. I’ll check back tomorrow.

 

[Servant19]

Matthew 16:15-17
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Yes, so we can establish that the Father enabled Peter to recognize Jesus as the Son of God. So was Jesus just another man that Peter was hanging out with before that moment?

Lets get to the crux of it

Why was Peter abandoning his entire life to be with Jesus? What did Peter recognize in Him?

 

[Servant19]

Is that what you think I think?

Please tell me what you think. I am humbly trying to learn from you so that I can express the Baha’i position in a manner that will foster an environment of understanding and love

You wrote “For the wages of sin is death.” Please clarify this, friend.

 

[Servant19]

Servant-

It’s almost 2am here on the east coast; you’re in CA if I remember correctly.

Take a look at my post #57 and give me your thoughts. I’ll check back tomorrow.

Have a good rest Randy

I’ll re-read your post and reflect upon it before posting my thoughts …

 

[Servant19]

Hi Randy, my time is short, but I will try to address some of the very valid points you raise in your post. I have reflected on it, its a very well reasoned post, and I hope I can convey my thoughts coherently

That is a common interpretation. However, Abdu’l-Baha is wrong for several reasons. First, the verse that he quoted (and I highlighted in red) is incomplete. The full text of John 6:51 reads:

51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

Abdu’l-Baha omits the portion which I have bolded. Here, Jesus clearly tells us that the bread which he shall give is NOT “the heavenly food and divine perfections” as Abdu’l-Baha asserts, but it is really and truly the flesh of Jesus. How do we know this? Because Jesus gave His flesh for the life of the world upon the Cross where He died so that we might have eternal life.

I think these first few paragraphs are being addressed with our dialogue in the previous posts. What is the consequence of sin etc etc. Do we die if we sin etc etc? What is the meaning when the word “die” is used in this context. Hope we can continue to explore this together

Second, Jesus was fully God and fully man. He received his flesh from Mary (though obviously, the male sperm, etc. had to come from somewhere), but it was His body, His flesh to give as He pleased. So, He was both “from Mary” and “from Heaven”.

I think it is important here to point out a truth that is revealed in the Baha’i Writings. That is this: We are human beings first and foremost in the spiritual realm. Conception allows us to have a physical experience. This is MY UNDERSTANDING of Baha’i and Islamic Scripture.
As Jesus has rightly pointed out, the flesh is flesh and the spirit is spirit, they do not commingle, so a human body has a soul attached to it, and the connection which you correctly point to being the mind is called the Common Faculty in the Baha’i Writings and is actually much more than just the mind, but suffice it to say that you can search in the human body for millenia for the soul and you wont find it. There will never be a newspaper headline that says “Science has finally found the human soul and is analysing it through a microscope”

It is the soul or spirit of man that gives “life” to the physical body. No soul, no body, but the other way around, remove the body, the soul continues to exist, and our identity is retained.

Third, Abdu’l-Baha completely misses a crucial element in verse 63, and since much is made of it, I will provide some detail.

“The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken are spirit and they are life.” (John 6:63)

As noted above, Jesus reaffirms that the body/flesh is dependent on the soul, not the other way around. So what gives nourishment to the soul? Jesus WORDS.

The Word of God can transform the dark soul into a luminescent soul, the feeble soul into a goliathan soul fortified by the Love of God.

These words were spoken by Jesus shortly after delivering his teaching on the Eucharist, and some people claim that they indicate that Jesus was speaking figuratively when he commanded us to eat his body and drink his blood. However, this would be a misunderstanding of what Jesus meant when he said, “the flesh counts for nothing.”

First, notice that whenever Jesus referred to his own body and blood, he said “my flesh” or “the flesh of the Son of Man”. Here are the examples:

“This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” (John 6:51)

"Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.” (John 6:53-56)

At this point, the narrative explains that the disciples were on the verge of revolt over this teaching.

So here we have already established that it is the spirit that GIVES life (see above), not the other way around. What nourishes the spirit, the Words of Jesus, the Word of God. If you have “no life in you” then you have not inhaled the Words of God. The spirit of man is revitalised, nurtured, by the Word of God, and this manifests itself in the body through deeds of selflessness.

In verse 63, Jesus goes on to say "The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit[e] and life. 64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”

It is the Word that gives life, my friend, nothing else. We can deduce therefore that the bread and wine must equate to the Word. Sure, we can eat the Word (not sure how you would do that), however we can also in a spirit of reverence and dignity meditate and reflect on the Word of God and attract the divine blessings, grace and confirmations that Jesus promises to nourish our spirits with. This gives eternal life

Jesus tells them that they cannot understand this teaching with their natural minds.

Where does He say this?
I don’t see anything reflecting this in the texts…

I will continue to respond to the rest of your post when I get a few more minutes dear friend

 

[rinnie]

We no more ‘reject’ the Bible than you reject the OT. We recognize the Bible as sacred scripture but follow the laws as revealed by Baha’u’llah for this new day.

The question of interpretations of the Bible, and other scriptures, have been explained by Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha, and Shoghi Effendi. We never deny what the scripture ‘says’, although we may understand what it ‘means’ differently than you do. To each is the duty to investigate.

Good, then why don’t you confess your sin as the bible tells you?

 

[arthra]

Good, then why don’t you confess your sin as the bible tells you?

Reading:

Psalms 32:5

I acknowledge my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.

We would probably write it this way since David is addressing the Almighty:**

I acknowledge my sin unto Thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.

**I don’t think Baha’is would have any problem with that prayer…because we are instructed to confess our sins to God directly…not to a man or priest. So the Biblical way of confessing sin is ours…

**No one has the power to receive confession of sins, or to give absolution.
**
(Abdu’l-Baha, Tablets of Abdu’l-Baha v1, p. vii)

Shoghi Effendi sets the prohibition into context. His
secretary has written on his behalf that we

“…are forbidden to confess to any person, as do the
Catholics to their priests, our sins and shortcomings, or
to do so in public, as some religious sects do. However, if
we spontaneously desire to acknowledge we have been
wrong in something, or that we have some fault of
character, and ask another person’s forgiveness or pardon,
we are quite free to do so.”
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 193)

 

[rinnie]

Reading:

Psalms 32:5

I acknowledge my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.

We would probably write it this way since David is addressing the Almighty:**

I acknowledge my sin unto Thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.

**I don’t think Baha’is would have any problem with that prayer…because we are instructed to confess our sins to God directly…not to a man or priest. So the Biblical way of confessing sin is ours…

**No one has the power to receive confession of sins, or to give absolution.
**
(Abdu’l-Baha, Tablets of Abdu’l-Baha v1, p. vii)

Shoghi Effendi sets the prohibition into context. His
secretary has written on his behalf that we

“…are forbidden to confess to any person, as do the
Catholics to their priests, our sins and shortcomings, or
to do so in public, as some religious sects do. However, if
we spontaneously desire to acknowledge we have been
wrong in something, or that we have some fault of
character, and ask another person’s forgiveness or pardon,
we are quite free to do so.”

(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 193)

Good, now this is where I am confused. REALLY

You give me scripture. O.T. thats good. So then its the N.T. you reject then?

 

[Servant19]

Good, now this is where I am confused. REALLY

You give me scripture. O.T. thats good. So then its the N.T. you reject then?

Maybe if you provide a chapter or verse from the NT that you feel Baha’is are rejecting rinnie, we may be able to assist you with your quest

 

[rinnie]

Maybe if you provide a chapter or verse from the NT that you feel Baha’is are rejecting rinnie, we may be able to assist you with your quest

Sure sweatheart! John 20: 19-23.

Now I don’t need your teaching that you reject it, you already gave it to me. I need you to explain to me why?

 

[Servant19]

Continued from my post above…

In John 6:63, Jesus uses the phrase “the flesh” instead of “my flesh” or “the flesh of the Son of Man” because he is not talking about his own body; he is referring to natural man.

This is where we differ. If Jesus was also a human being, His flesh is made up of the exact same molecules, atoms and compounds as you and I.
Everyone’s flesh counts for something. This is the nature of sacrifice. When the flesh, the self is forsaken, the spirit is fortified. This is why things such as fasting are beneficial for the spirit. This is why sacrifices such as the stoning of Stephen propagates the Faith of Christianity. It is bodily sacrifice in the spirit of propelling the Kingdom which is of note.

Now obviously, With Christ being the Son of God, this is the most stunning of sacrifices.

But, as Jesus has asserted here:

“***The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.’” ***(John 6:60-63)

…in “relative” terms, the body of ANY human being counts for nothing. From my understanding, if, as you say this is referring to the flesh of “natural man” which I’m happy to go with, then this sentence also asserts beyond a shadow of a doubt that the SPIRIT HAS ASCENDANCY OVER THE BODY.

Again, Jesus asserts for “another” time that it is His Words that give life (I’m definitely seeing more about the importance of His Words than the bread here, don’t you??)

Our flesh is that created, corruptible part of us; the spirit is that which is capable of relating to God and receiving his revelation, and the mind/soul is the union of spirit and body. Here are some scriptures that illustrate this:

“Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Thessalonians 5:23)

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [nephesh – soul].” (Genesis 2:7) (dust is the body, breath of life - pneuma - is the spirit, living being is the soul).

Agreed, agreed, agreed

Jesus tells the grumbling Jews (who can’t understand how he would give them his flesh to eat) that they cannot grasp it with their natural minds because it is a mystery beyond the ability of “the flesh” to understand. This is the same manner of speaking used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2 & 3 when he is distinguishing between fleshly or carnal Christians and those who are discern the things of God with their spirits.

Second, it might be worth noting the obvious fact that Jesus cannot be saying that HIS own flesh “counts for nothing” otherwise his death upon the cross would be meaningless. Instead, we know that his own body, his flesh, was broken and pierced for our sake; no Christian would deny that. Therefore, since HIS flesh does count for something, he must have been referring to “flesh” other than his own in v. 63.

Yes, He is talking about a different flesh (Baha’is would say that it is the flesh of His WORDS) than His own flesh. So why do you partake in the Eucharist which claims to be the VERY flesh of Jesus, and the VERY blood of Jesus??

 

[Randy_Carson]

Yes, so we can establish that the Father enabled Peter to recognize Jesus as the Son of God. So was Jesus just another man that Peter was hanging out with before that moment?

Lets get to the crux of it

Why was Peter abandoning his entire life to be with Jesus? What did Peter recognize in Him?

You could be looking all these answers up yourself, but I’ll play along for a bit longer.

John 1
35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples; 36 and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” 37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned, and saw them following, and said to them, “What do you seek?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come and see.” They came and saw where he was staying; and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41 He first found his brother Simon, and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ). 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter[f]).

 

[Servant19]

Sure sweatheart! John 20: 19-23.

Now I don’t need your teaching that you reject it, you already gave it to me. I need you to explain to me why?

You’re such an angel rinnie

Ok, if I may I’ll post the quote here:

21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

Firstly, it says “…I am sending you” .How does this equate to every Catholic priest?