Believing in the True Jesus - Christians vs Baha'is

[Servant19]

:tsktsk: Take care to speak in charity.

God bless you Faxero

.

 

[peace_at_last]

Baha’i attitude reminds me of a chameleon that changes color every time the audience changes. For instance, they tell Christians:

As to the position of Christianity, let it be stated without any hesitation or equivocation that its divine origin is unconditionally acknowledged, that the Sonship and Divinity of Jesus Christ are fearlessly asserted, that the divine inspiration of the Gospel is fully recognized, that the reality of the mystery of the Immaculacy of the Virgin Mary is confessed, and the primacy of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, is upheld and defended…

(“The Promised Day is Come”, rev. ed. (Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1980); p. 109)

Then we have this:

Every discerning observer will recognize that in the Dispensation of the Qur’án both the Book and the Cause of Jesus were confirmed. As to the matter of names, Muḥammad, Himself, declared: “I am Jesus.” He recognized the truth of the signs, prophecies, and words of Jesus, and testified that they were all of God. In this sense, neither the person of Jesus nor His writings hath differed from that of Muḥammad and of His holy Book, inasmuch as both have championed the Cause of God, uttered His praise, and revealed His commandments.
reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/GWB/gwb-13.html

When Baha’is preach to Christians, they are told that Jesus is the son of God. When speaking about Islam it is stated that Muhammad has testified to all the beliefs of Jesus. EVERYONE knows that Islam under no condition accepts that Jesus is the son of God or part of the trinity.

As a fellow member already stated, there seems to be a great amount of deception in this attitude, just like the Chameleon changing color depending on the situation.

 

[Servant19]

Baha’i attitude reminds me of a chameleon that changes color every time the audience changes. For instance, they tell Christians:

Then we have this:

When Baha’is preach to Christians, they are told that Jesus is the son of God. When speaking about Islam it is stated that Muhammad has testified to all the beliefs of Jesus. EVERYONE knows that Islam under no condition accepts that Jesus is the son of God or part of the trinity.

As a fellow member already stated, there seems to be a great amount of deception in this attitude, just like the Chameleon changing color depending on the situation.

Your research is wonderful

Your conclusions, not so much

Can you please go ahead and post what is the Bahai understanding of what “Son of God” actually means?

Thankyou.

.

 

[Servant19]

Baha’i attitude reminds me of a chameleon that changes color every time the audience changes. For instance, they tell Christians:

Then we have this:

When Baha’is preach to Christians, they are told that Jesus is the son of God. When speaking about Islam it is stated that Muhammad has testified to all the beliefs of Jesus. EVERYONE knows that Islam under no condition accepts that Jesus is the son of God or part of the trinity.

As a fellow member already stated, there seems to be a great amount of deception in this attitude, just like the Chameleon changing color depending on the situation.

Can you show me also where Jesus says that He is part of a Trinity?

Yes He was the Son of God, but that is a title of His spiritual station.
Abraham was the Friend of God.
What was Muhammad’s title? Apostle of God.
These are titles, not an admission by Jesus that He is part of a Trinity…

.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

I am happy with the verses you put forward, and indeed it is a strong argument for Jesus being God.

Would you mind now explaining these verses (so that we be not accused of placing them into Invisibilia) please?

"If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. " John 14:28

“But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only." Matt 24:36

I fail to see what is abnormal here in John 14:28. Allow me to put your question on the right track in that verse which will be the answer to you. The better question to ask for that verse is: Can any father honor his son & be lesser than his son on earth, much less in heaven? I hope that clarify your question on that verse, it just means simply what it is supposed to mean.

The second verse Matt 24:36 provided to me tells that only the Father knows the day & time of the Second Coming of Christ, and no one else knows.

In light of what you are thinking in response here, I would like you to know that I take an interest in reading about early Christianity. Can you explain the following passage from Justin Martyr please?

"And when we say also that the Word,
who is the first-born of God

As do I, Servant. I cannot claim to be knowledgeable about Catholicism but I do try to research when needed.

The passage you posted above belongs to the First Apology of an Apostolic Father; Justin Martyr and addressed to Emperor Titus (whatever his name was behind)…sadly many people use it to describe some pagan version of Jesus because it was so misunderstood. I am glad that I am given the chance to explain to you what you have underlined for me.

When we say that the Word is the first-born of God, we know we are saying that the Word is the first-born of all creation.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him,
and without him not one thing came into being. - John 1:1-3

Lets look at this passage in Colossians:

“And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.” - Colossians 1:15-21

The word used in Colossians “first-born” speaks of Christ’s pre-existence. The word “first-born” in Greek “prototokos” signifies priority, not first-created & surely not attributed to any birth order. I hope that clarifies the question.

To be con’t (Please let me finish so that I may adequately address each question posted, thanks.)

GuyNextDoor

 

[GuyNextDoor]

1. Since then, as says the Lord in the Gospels, John 14:9 he that has seen the Son sees the Father also; on this account he says that the Only-begotten is the express image of His Father’s person. That this may be made still plainer I will quote also other passages of the apostle in which he calls the Son “the image of the invisible God,” Colossians 1:15 and again “image of His goodness;” not because the image differs from the Archetype according to the definition of indivisibility and goodness, but that it may be shown that it is the same as the prototype, even though it be different. For the idea of the image would be lost were it not to preserve throughout the plain and invariable likeness. He therefore that has perception of the beauty of the image is made perceptive of the Archetype. So he, who has, as it were mental apprehension of the form of the Son, prints the express image of the Father’s hypostasis, beholding the latter in the former, not beholding in the reflection the unbegotten being of the Father (for thus there would be complete identity and no distinction), but gazing at the unbegotten beauty in the Begotten. Just as he who in a polished mirror beholds the reflection of the form as plain knowledge of the represented face, so he, who has knowledge of the Son, through his knowledge of the Son receives in his heart the express image of the Father’s Person. For all things that are the Father’s are beheld in the Son, and all things that are the Son’s are the Father’s; because the whole Son is in the Father and has all the Father in Himself. Thus the hypostasis of the Son becomes as it were form and face of the knowledge of the Father, and the hypostasis of the Father is known in the form of the Son, while the proper quality which is contemplated therein remains for the plain distinction of the hypostases.

Please grant my request to paste the texts from the links that you wish to emphasize next time. I don’t usually click on links in forums or emails unless really necessary. Thanks Servant.

I can see where you are trying to connect the dots here with Baha’u’llah’s writings on the Sun of Reality, the mirror theory with St Basil’s writings of Jesus, Servant. I do not disagree all of it altogether. After all we all know we will all die if we see God in His full Glory. Thus Jesus, God the Son came in the flesh, telling us several times that no one goes to the Father (God in all His Glory) except through Him and anyone who sees Jesus (God the Son) is in fact seeing the Father (God in all His Glory). But where we differ is Jesus being God. If Jesus is God as I have shown earlier, the two writings we are comparing leads in different places. Lets assume that I concede with the Baha’s that Jesus is not God in this post, then the writings in the link you gave me can be claimed by anyone, myself included using the same standard and using Paul whom Baha’i like so much:

And all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit. - 2 Corinthians 3:18

I have to be honest here in why I am unable to connect the dots here because the Bible says there is no other apart from Jesus. Again, knowing Bahai finds Paul to be more reliable, I will use Paul’s passage again below so you may understand why I am unable to connect:

"But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted– you may well put up with it. - 2 Cor. 11:3-4

I am not trying to accuse or offend you here but just reasoning from where I stand. It seems there is going to be alot of work between us to prove that Jesus is God & for Baha’i to prove Jesus is not God before I or anyone can open their mind to Baha’u’llah texts without any judgement or fear. And for that, we will have to start with the Physical Resurrection of Jesus, won’t you agree?

With the resurrection, I would ask you to remove from Invisibilia (I like this place lol) the entirety of the works of Paul, which talks a vast amount of times about resurrection, but not once does he refer to it as a physical bodily resurrection. It is ALWAYS a spiritual resurrection. There are too many quotes to list here.

May I ask you. Do you believe that Jesus ascended to a physical heaven upon Ascension?

Yes I do and I can prove it using the same Paul’s texts. Why do you not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, Servant? Do help me out here to understand where you stand, so we can cover as much as possible & advance in the right direction without having to look back.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

Correction. Not a physical heaven but resurrected & ascended into heaven bodily.

 

[Servant19]

I fail to see what is abnormal here in John 14:28. Allow me to put your question on the right track in that verse which will be the answer to you. The better question to ask for that verse is: Can any father honor his son & be lesser than his son on earth, much less in heaven? I hope that clarify your question on that verse, it just means simply what it is supposed to mean.

I don’t really understand…if God is the Ultimate Reality beyond which there is no possible existence, then why would that God state that there is something greater?

Can you clarify please?

The second verse Matt 24:36 provided to me tells that only the Father knows the day & time of the Second Coming of Christ, and no one else knows.

The point is how can God, the Knower of all things visible and invisible not “know” something?

As do I, Servant. I cannot claim to be knowledgeable about Catholicism but I do try to research when needed.

as am I…I hope you see in me a humble posture of learning, as I see in you with this statement. Very Catholic of you

The passage you posted above belongs to the First Apology of an Apostolic Father; Justin Martyr and addressed to Emperor Titus (whatever his name was behind)…sadly many people use it to describe some pagan version of Jesus because it was so misunderstood. I am glad that I am given the chance to explain to you what you have underlined for me.

When we say that the Word is the first-born of God, we know we are saying that the Word is the first-born of all creation.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him,
and without him not one thing came into being. - John 1:1-3

Lets look at this passage in Colossians:

“And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.” - Colossians 1:15-21

The word used in Colossians “first-born” speaks of Christ’s pre-existence. The word “first-born” in Greek “prototokos” signifies priority, not first-created & surely not attributed to any birth order. I hope that clarifies the question.

To be con’t (Please let me finish so that I may adequately address each question posted, thanks.)

GuyNextDoor

Yes, I see where you are coming from, however please may I humbly submit a perspective. (and please bear in mind that what you say here is very very close to the Baha’i understanding of the relationship between God (deus a se) and the Word.)

An “image” or “first-born” OF something is not actually that “Something”…even “pre-existence” is precursored by an Absolute Pre-existence.

In the Baha’i Writings, the theology reflects this by using the example of the Sun. Imagine an eternally shining sun. That “first ray of light” is also eternal. The rays of the sun are co-existent with the sun. Without the rays of light, the sun is no longer the sun. However the precursor to the eternal ray by implication is the sun itself. An eternal sun will have eternal rays of light. One cannot exist without the other.

Similarly, God’s “First Emanation” or “Primal Will” was the Word, “through” which all of creation visible and invisible was made manifest.

Does that read ok to you?



.

 

[Servant19]

"But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted– you may well put up with it. - 2 Cor. 11:3-4

I am not trying to accuse or offend you here but just reasoning from where I stand. It seems there is going to be alot of work between us to prove that Jesus is God & for Baha’i to prove Jesus is not God before I or anyone can open their mind to Baha’u’llah texts without any judgement or fear. And for that, we will have to start with the Physical Resurrection of Jesus, won’t you agree?

Not sure why we have to start with a physical resurrection? Not sure how you came to that conclusion given that Paul not once talks about a physical resurrection.

Can you please clarify.

Yes I do and I can prove it using the same Paul’s texts. Why do you not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, Servant? Do help me out here to understand where you stand, so we can cover as much as possible & advance in the right direction without having to look back.

Might I advise you that Catholicism has never believed in Jesus ascending into a physical heaven. (and I thank pure Catholic brother vouthon on CAF who taught me this truth)

Indeed when Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa wrote a commentary on the Qur’an in Latin during the fifteenth century, primarily for the pope to read and understand Islam in light of the Turkish conquest of Byzantium, he interpreted the ayats about paradise as metaphors and found it impossible to understand why so many Muslims believed in a “physical” heaven. Cusa argues that Muhammad was simply trying to teach the Arabs, through earthly imagery, that every desire would be satisfied in Paradise - yet not literally:

"…All temporal things die away, only the intellectual do not. Eating, drinking, luxuriating and more of the same, if they please at one time, displease at another and are unstable. However, to know and to understand and to see the truth with the eyes of the mind are always pleasant. And the older the man becomes, the more this pleases him and the more he obtains of it, the stronger becomes his appetite to possess it… If therefore the desire shall be perpetual and the nourishment perpetual, the nourishment will be neither temporal nor sensible, but rather only intellectual life. Hence, although the promise of a paradise, where there are streams of wine and honey and a multitude of virgins, is found in the law of the Koran, there are nonetheless many men in this world who [oppose] this. How will the latter then be happy, if they attain that there, which they do not wish to have here? It’s said in the Koran, that one will find wonderfully beautiful, dark-skinned maidens, with eyes which have large, bright white eyeballs. No German would desire such a maiden in this world, even if he had surrendered to the lusts of the flesh. One must therefore understand those promises as similitudes.

At another point the Koran prohibits copulation and all other pleasures of the flesh in churches or synagogues or mosques. However, one cannot believe that the mosques are holier than paradise. How shall that be prohibited in the mosque, which is promised yonder in paradise?

In other locations the Koran says that everything is found there that we desire here, since the fulfillment of all must take place there. Thereby it reveals sufficiently what it wants to say, when it says that such things are found there. For since these things are so much desired in this world, presupposing that an equal desire exists in the other world, then they will be found exquisitely and abundantly there. For it could not express that that life is the completion of all desires other than by this similitude. Nor did it wish to express to uneducated people other, more hidden things, but rather only that which appears felicitous according to the senses, so that the people, who do not have an appetite for things of the spirit, would not despise the promises.

The whole concern of him who wrote that law [Muhammad], therefore, appears to have been primarily to avert the people from idolatry. And to this end he made these kinds of promises and wrote down everything. However, he did not condemn the Gospel, but rather praised it, and thereby intimated that the felicity which is promised in the Gospel would not be less than that corporeal felicity. And the intelligent and the wise men among them know, that this is true. Avicenna prefers the intellectual felicity of the vision or fruition of God and the truth incomparably to the felicity described in the law of the Arabs. Nevertheless he adhered to that law. Likewise did the other wise men…"

• Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1453), De Pace Fidei

So may I ask what is your understanding of heaven? A physical or a spiritual reality?

.

 

[Servant19]

Correction. Not a physical heaven but resurrected & ascended into heaven bodily.

So we don’t descend into Invisiblia, can you give me a reference as to where it is stated that the Kingdom of heaven contains physical bodies please?

Thankyou

.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

I don’t really understand…if God is the Ultimate Reality beyond which there is no possible existence, then why would that God state that there is something greater?

The point is how can God, the Knower of all things visible and invisible not “know” something?

The answer to the above questions lie in the Nature of the Incarnation and thus I will do my best.

But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. - Hebrews 2:9

He did not lose His Divine nature after He took on human nature. God cannot stop being God.

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. - Philippians 2:5-11

The very moment Christ was incarnated, He has emptied Himself from freely exercising His divine attributes when He took on human form and subjected Himself to the will of God the Father while He was on earth. There is no difference between God the Father & God the Son in their essence, they stand as equals. The “greatness” in this verse relates to role, not to essence.

Yes, I see where you are coming from, however please may I humbly submit a perspective. (and please bear in mind that what you say here is very very close to the Baha’i understanding of the relationship between God (deus a se) and the Word.)

An “image” or “first-born” OF something is not actually that “Something”…even “pre-existence” is precursored by an Absolute Pre-existence.

In the Baha’i Writings, the theology reflects this by using the example of the Sun. Imagine an eternally shining sun. That “first ray of light” is also eternal. The rays of the sun are co-existent with the sun. Without the rays of light, the sun is no longer the sun. However the precursor to the eternal ray by implication is the sun itself. An eternal sun will have eternal rays of light. One cannot exist without the other.

Similarly, God’s “First Emanation” or “Primal Will” was the Word, “through” which all of creation visible and invisible was made manifest.

Does that read ok to you?

At first glance, yes it does look alright from here. But upon closer inspection, it is still lacking. The easiest way to put it without having to find examples in life is that Jesus exists since the beginning, and He was with God and He was God. Saying anything else is simply lacking when using our own human language or understanding.

Its sort of like trying to prove the existence of God using scientific equipments or weighing a chicken using a yardstick. The invisible cannot be understood by simply using the visible. Only God can reveal all these if He so wishes which He already had through Jesus, to which we both stand on different grounds on all that He said.

Might I advise you that Catholicism has never believed in Jesus ascending into a physical heaven. (and I thank pure Catholic brother vouthon on CAF who taught me this truth)

Never disagreed with it before and never will. The correction was made after spotting the mistake in my previous post, thinking that you were asking if I believed Jesus ascended physically into heaven. It’s one question that has caused many Christians to blunder into which usually a quick follow-up with those questions of yours. And in which I have committed the same mistake again by replying too soon. I used to do that alot to other Christians and fell for it myself now.

So may I ask what is your understanding of heaven? A physical or a spiritual reality?

Heaven is spiritual, there’s no doubt about it. However the common misconception is that only the soul (which many people assumed it is the spiritual body) can enter heaven (spiritual reality). Sensing that the discussion of this misconception will take some time to which I cannot afford at the moment regretfully, I ask for your patience until I am able to return soon to address this specific point.

GuyNextDoor

 

[GuyNextDoor]

With the resurrection, I would ask you to remove from Invisibilia (I like this place lol) the entirety of the works of Paul, which talks a vast amount of times about resurrection, but not once does he refer to it as a physical bodily resurrection. It is ALWAYS a spiritual resurrection. There are too many quotes to list here.

You sounded confident.

To the best of my knowledge, Baha’is believe firmly that the Resurrection is just the spirit leaving the body before ascending to heaven and claiming that the spirit is the “spiritual body”. Please correct me if I am wrong here. If so, please point out the biblical sources that made you think that the Resurrection is merely the resurrection of the spirit, so that I may verify its sources when I return and correct them from there. Even a few quotes will be helpful.

Thank you.

GuyNextDoor

 

[hasantas]

Can you show me also where Jesus says that He is part of a Trinity?

Yes He was the Son of God, but that is a title of His spiritual station.
Abraham was the Friend of God.
What was Muhammad’s title? Apostle of God.
These are titles, not an admission by Jesus that He is part of a Trinity…

.

Muhammad also is Love of God(Habibullah). Abraham is Friend of God(Halillulah). True. Can you exsplain what that mean “Son of God”. I assume you do not mean a real divine son but what?

 

[hasantas]

Correction. Not a physical heaven but resurrected & ascended into heaven bodily.

If there is no physical Heaven then how Jesus can ascend there with a body?

 

[hasantas]

I

I want to interpret verses conformably to Islam.

The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ). When He comes, He will tell us all things.” Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am He.”

 

[Vouthon]

If there is no physical Heaven then how Jesus can ascend there with a body?

Because heaven, according to Catholic doctrine, is not a “place” as conventional Islamic belief would hold (ie a literal Paradise) but rather a state of being in which a person beholds the Beatific Vision and sees God as He is in Himself. Heaven consists for Catholics in beatitude and direct apprehension of the Essence of God unmediated by any creature, including one’s own thoughts and ideas.

Secondly, Jesus did not ‘ascend’ with his ordinary human body. He ascended with His glorified resurrection body, which was His own human body stripped of its mortality and freed from the constraints of time and place. According to Catholic understanding, there are different kinds of bodies, just as there are different kinds of stars. Just as star differs from star in glory, there is a difference in glory between ordinary fleshly bodies and glorified bodies.

Think of Jesus’ glorified flesh and blood in the Eucharist. According to Catholic doctrine, He is there, His entire glorified body but not bound to our form like we are, not restricted by space or time. The human soul, which formed with the body, is the pattern for the body. The soul will form the body around “its” self.

In Catholic theology, therefore, to be a glorified “body”, to have fullness of glorified matter and spirit, does not need to take a form, or occupy space or time to exist as such.

If you consider Jesus’ resurrection appearances to his disciples according to the canonical gospels - his body appeared in a locked room with no doors and in various forms. This suggests a whole new level of reality that we as yet cannot fully understand.

What the resurrection of the dead means is that we arise as fully human persons. We are not fully human if we lack a body. The resurrection body is more a part of you than your human body is now; because the body (pneumatikon soma) will never again be separable from your psyche or mind. You will be fully spiritual, and fully body. You will think with your body, and move and breathe with your spirit.

So to say that Jesus ‘ascended’ to heaven takes on a very different character from someone floating up into the clouds with an ordinary body, once you factor in the placeless, spiritual state of heaven and the glorified resurrection body.

So the resurrection body is a real, physical body but not one that is restricted by time and place - just consider the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharistic bread and wine - and it can exist as such in heaven because heaven isn’t a place.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

.

Can you also tell me please what does:

“God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,”

mean?

.

That is a great mystery, from which only God can reveal to humanity in space and time.

God from God, Light from Light professes only God can give testimony of who God is.

God does not receive testimony from man, only God can give testimony of God from God.

God from God reveals the revelation of God that eternally proceeds God from God, and only Light can proceed from Light.

Jesus is the light of the world, and Light proceeds from Light.

Something other can never proceed from what it is not. Thus the Son proceeds from the Father in space and time existing, while the Father eternally begets the Son (Love Acts) in what is consubstantial in Essence divine eternally Existing in the eternal present.

Jesus is the Only begotten Son of the Father, thus God proceeds from God in revelation.

Note we do not profess that Jesus is the Only begotten Son of God, but begotten of the Father. Meaning that Jesus is God, because Jesus is consubstantial with the Father because Jesus comes from the Father who proceeds from the Father who send’s Him.

When the Son is Only Begotten of the Father, this procession of God from God is revealed in time and space. While the Father eternally begets the Son which is an eternal procession of God from God, Light from Light, begotten not made.

If man pretends to give testimony of who God is, when man is never God, man deceives himself terribly.

Jesus who is God incarnate is the only one who can give testimony of who God is, because Jesus is God who reveals the Father, and the Father reveals the Son and the Holy Spirit makes this divine revelation known, when God from God reveals who God is and Light from Light makes it known to our darkened minds.

In summary, I have not even touched on the mystery of God from God, Light from Light, but an introduction of faith from that which is professed of God is the only one who can reveal who God is, in Light from Light.

The subjects introduced here are very lengthy, I hope to only contribute small insights of what my Catholic faith believes in the hopes that others may grasp at our mystical Catholic faith that is not subject to the change and new ideologies and doctrines from men or the world. When God’s revelations to our humanity of God from God is an eternal revelation made present to creation.

Peace be with you

 

[GuyNextDoor]

Jesus mentioned that " God is the first, and the last, besides God there is no God". We know Gospels were written by Saints after Jesus a long time later.

I do hope you understand what you are saying here hasantas, because using your standards… the Qur’an itself does not trace back historically right down to Muhammed, and those few centuries in between, there has been no information of what happened to the Qu’ran except that we know it was copied and recopied. Anything can be added or taken out. Do you have any historical evidences authenticated by scholars outside of Islam to prove that the modern day Qur’an dates back to the original Qur’an without any errors?

GuyNextDoor

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

tonyfish58;12324699]
Romans 12:4
Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function,

tony, Paul writes to the mystical body of Christ who are baptized members in the Roman Church of His day which is the same Catholic Church in Rome today. Same holds true with the Corinthian Christian believers. These are never Muslim or Bahai"s because the latter never existed yet as members of these Christian communities.

**

Romans 6:5
If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection

.**

Paul writes to the Roman and Corinthian Christians believers while in prison. Learning of his coming martyrdom, sends out love letters of his hope in Jesus Christ.
Paul reveals his Catholic hope from baptism, when the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is made known in the baptismal waters of new resurrected life in the present and the coming divine promise in the eternal body resurrection from death.

1 Corinthians 1:10
I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

The Corinthian Church all agree that Jesus suffered, died and resurrected from the dead bodily, because many of those living saw Jesus resurrected. Paul is correcting the Corinthian Christians in matters of discipline in practicing what all Corinthians already believe as one body in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

What you introduce is a denial of Jesus bodily resurrection, the Corinthian believers do not have a problem with Jesus resurrected bodily from the dead.

Colossians 3:13-14
Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.

These scriptures do not reflect a teaching of different types of believer’s believing something different from one another to come to some type of agreement. No, The Colossians are already Christian believers in the Gospel of Jesus death and resurrection.

Although Paul does write else where, giving warning to the Christian Church to stay away from those who preach another gospel of Jesus.

These scriptures you introduce do not apply to our differing faith communities.

Psalm 133:1
How good and pleasant it is when brothers live together in unity!

You tony and I are united as brothers by our humanity, which we can certainly live together in unity here. The Christian communities listed in the scriptures above are united as brothers in the faith of Christ, who eye witnessed and believe Jesus died a horrible death and resurrected bodily and ascended into heaven in His resurrected body, which is an eternal body, not a limited body limited to space and time.

Your scripture undertaking contradicts Paul’s letter’s to baptized Christian believers. Again there are scriptures that Paul writes about those who teach a different Jesus and who reject Paul’s gospel which is Christ Crucified. It is to these letters, that apply to our differing views of who Jesus is.

Although in closing, I share your sentiment of unity and community as brothers. Faith is another subject Christians are called to share and give witness with those who do not believe as we Christians have believed since Apostolic times, that Jesus suffered, died and was buried, and on the third day presents a real time event Jesus resurrected from the dead, just as Jesus possessed the power to raise Lazarus from dead bodily after four days.

Peace be with you

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I
Please now compare this passage from St. Basil with this extract from the Baha’i Writings explaining the deeper meanings of the Trinity:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-27.html

cont. below)

.

Hi Servant19, I read your Bahai commentary on the Trinity and compared it with St. Basil’s and Basil’s other works on the Trinity and divinity of Jesus Christ which you did not post.

First of all St. Basil is a Catholic Saint who writes to give a witness and clarify to what we Catholics already believe from what Jesus revealed and the Apostles handed down to us unchanged.

Your commentary has Jesus as mirror or reflection of the metaphor used in the Sun ray, which is a contradiction to St. Basil’s teaching who also uses the Sun Ray metaphor.

St. Basil has the Sun Ray possessing the same substance as the Sun. When St. Basil confesses that Jesus is God from God, true light from true light. The metaphor of sun ray is God the Son who proceeds from the Father (metaphor) the Sun, the Sun Ray and the Sun are one in being they are never two or divided.

Your commentary divides the Sun Ray from the Sun. As if the Sun Ray = Jesus is just a reflection or a mirror to the Sun Ray… According to St. Basil, Jesus is the Sun Ray (never a reflection of the sun) that extends or proceeds without division eternally from the Sun meaning the sun ray and the Sun are eternally of the same substance Sun or God that is never divided from a reflection or mirror from the Sun.

St. Basil confirms my Catholic faith because he teaches that Jesus is of the same substance which we profess in consubstantiality as the Father, Just as the sun ray is the same Sun.

The Sun never proceeds, but the sun ray is eternally sent or eternally begotten from the Sun, though distinct in revelation from one another, never the less the Sun Ray is the Sun without division or separation.

St. Basil’s works never agrees with Bahai’s Trinity, they are in direct contradiction of one another.

Your Trinity commentary quoted here; “God is pure perfection, and creatures are but imperfections. For God to descend into the conditions of existence would be the greatest of imperfections; on the contrary, His manifestation, His appearance, His rising are like the reflection of the sun in a clear, pure, polished mirror”… reveals a heresy which the Church labeled Arianism, which denied the divinity Jesus who is God incarnate.

God does descend to our humanity, just as the Sun descends to our humanity in the Sun ray which is the true substance of the Sun undivided.

Your Trinity never descends or proceeds God from God, (sun =sun ray) therefore your trinity is never a revelation of God, but a commentary of what God is not. God is never a reflection from a polished mirror, that makes an “appearance like a reflection of the sun” God is God.

When scripture speaks of Jesus being “the image of the invisible God”, scripture reveals Jesus full humanity who is the Word of God personified, meaning Jesus is fully human and fully divine in simple terms Jesus is the PRESENCE of God =Emmanuel who dwelt among us.

We believe that the Essence of God (“SUN”) did not and does not come down to us just as St. Basil and Justin Martyr teach but the Ray or the Son did and does come down to us which is the revelation of God’s PRESENCE revealed in the Trinity of persons.

The real biblical Trinity professed by Catholics is One God undivided reveals God’s Presence in one name; Father, Son, Holy Spirit distinct in living eternal person’s being. Trinity gives name to the act who is God from God, Light from Light. In Essence the Trinity is never divided One God.

Your trinity has never revealed itself, because it is created when it reflects or images the reflection of the sun that comes from the Sun. Your trinity has an Arian approach to God’s Essence and denies the real substantial presence of God =Emmanuel.

Peace be with you