Believing in the True Jesus - Christians vs Baha'is

[SteveVH]

so, the question remains, why believe that the apostles got it all wrong and Bahaullah got it all right?

No, you have it all wrong. The Apostles got it right and so did Baha’u’llah, and Muhammad, and Buddha, and Zoroaster, and Krishna and…

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

.

Hello Gabriel, can you tell me where the conclusions you make here come from please?

Where did you read that the essential attributes of God are viewed as “separate entities” from the essence of God?
.

From your own words; Here is a quote from you Servant 19 from post #97

"If a sun can create sun rays that exist with it, throughout its existence from beginning to end, **then God too, can have its “First Emanation” existing with Him **from beginning to end, thereby having two eternal entities which are not one and the same in essence"

Here is a quote from Bahai, from the source you provided from post #97;

“As the divine entity is eternal,** the divine attributes are coexistent, coeternal’ and `co-equal’ with and to Him.”

For an attribute of God to co-exist with Him, describes “two eternal entities which are not one and the same essence”, this is your quote not mine. I agreed with you here Servant 19.
I admit I have no full understanding of Bahai, not to mention the Christian faith in the blessed Trinity either.

Bahai arrives in history far too late for me, after Jesus and the Apostles, walked, talked, and ate together to include suffered as eyewitnesses of God’s revelation to our humanity.

What you presented here from Bahai, when measured up against the True Jesus, revealed to me, the Bahai writings reveal a different Jesus that never existed in the first century.

The Apostles are eyewitnesses of Jesus life on earth and gave their life in a joyous martyrdom for their eyewitness account without resistance.

When did Bahai receive revelation of Jesus?

Our differences of Jesus reveal Bahai teaches Jesus to be only flesh, but Bahai is never present to Jesus flesh to confirm Jesus flesh.

Christians profess Jesus is fully human/fully divine in the only begotten Son of the Father in heaven. We believe this because the eyewitnesses account of a voice from the Father is heard from heaven at the Jordan River; “this is my beloved Son is whom IAM well pleased”, and again at the Transfiguration; “This is my Son, Listen to Him”. God almighty from heaven revealed His presence in God the Son Jesus Christ incarnate in space and time, as God from God reveals God.

The Apostles of Jesus are only the messengers and witnesses to God reveals who God is in the first century, which the Catholic Church has been given these divine revelations, teachings and practices from God the Son.

Peace be with you**

 

[Servant19]

why should the Christian believe, as the bahai teach, that Bahaullah who lived 1,800 years after the events being discussed knows what occurred better than the apostles who experienced it?

this is the bahai faith. its followers believe that what the apostles experienced and taught the followers of Jesus is wrong and these errors have been taught and believed for the last almost two thousand years by the Roman Catholic Church.

the bahai teach that the true version of events that occurred to the apostles only became known through the person of Bahaullah. a further aspect of the bahai claim is knowing that Bahaullah knew very little about the teachings of the RCC. this is evidenced by the fact that in the tens of thousands of pages he wrote or dictated almost nothing relates to the teachings of the RCC.

I may be mistaken but I do not think Bahaullah claimed to get the hundreds of thousands of words he wrote or dictated directly from an angel, as mohammed claimed. he rejects the teachings of the apostles primarily based on his own person and what he knew and understood.

so, the question remains, why believe that the apostles got it all wrong and Bahaullah got it all right?

Hi eddie,

Baha’is don’t believe that the Apostles got it all wrong, and Baha’u’llah got it all right. The teaching of the Faith is related to the concept of progressive revelation.

God only reveals what He deems sufficient for the capacity of the recipients of His Revelation to understand.

It is for this reason that Baha’is believe that Baha’u’llah’s Revelation fulfils the Revelations of Jesus and Muhammad.

One could easily respond to your question with the query as to why believe that the Jews got it wrong and Jesus got it right? The Messiah was defined by Judaism, why would Jesus come along and tell them what to believe was the Messiah.

Imagine Jesus coming along onto a Jewish version of CAF, telling THEM they got it all wrong about the Messiah…just imagine…

How sad indeed…

.
.

 

[Servant19]

From your own words; Here is a quote from you Servant 19 from post #97

"If a sun can create sun rays that exist with it, throughout its existence from beginning to end, **then God too, can have its “First Emanation” existing with Him **from beginning to end, thereby having two eternal entities which are not one and the same in essence"

Here is a quote from Bahai, from the source you provided from post #97;

“As the divine entity is eternal,** the divine attributes are coexistent**, coeternal’ and `co-equal’ with and to Him.”

Hi Gabriel,

When I stated that they are not one and the same in essence, I was implying that the sun is MORE THAN sun rays in its essence. The sun is everything the rays are, but the rays are not everything the sun is.

God is “more than” the Word in His Essence.

That does not make it polytheism, or anything like that…

God is the one God. The Word shares some essential attributes with God, but is distinct, co-eternal, and emanates from Him.

Its really a very simple concept. Not sure where the philosophical or theological sticking point is.

For an attribute of God to co-exist with Him, describes “two eternal entities which are not one and the same essence”, this is your quote not mine. I agreed with you here Servant 19.
I admit I have no full understanding of Bahai, not to mention the Christian faith in the blessed Trinity either.

 

[Servant19]

And that’s not the first time either Servant, because your next attempt massacred the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas.

I will only address this Guy.

I received this knowledge from my dear friend brother Vouthon, who is a very knowledgeable Catholic contributor in CAF

…you can read his post relating to the essence of God and its presence in Creation, and I quote:

“Nevertheless, the Catholic Church teaches that God is universally present throughout His creation by His “presence, power and essence”. This does not mean that God as He is in Himself is knowable by man, rather it means to say that He is is present in His totality throughout all creation as well as beyond it. The created world exhibits the attributes of God, as in imprints of the artist on His painting, yet we also know from the twin lights of revelation and reason that God is present by His Essence.”

…feel free to read how he also uses Aquinas in a similar “massacre” here (post # 14)

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=871718&highlight=bahai+cosmology

.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

I will only address this Guy.

I received this knowledge from my dear friend brother Vouthon, who is a very knowledgeable Catholic contributor in CAF

…you can read his post relating to the essence of God and its presence in Creation, and I quote:

…feel free to read how he also uses Aquinas in a similar “massacre” here (post # 14)

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=871718&highlight=bahai+cosmology

Thank you for addressing this particular issue. I again disagree and need to be really blunt here. First you quoted St. Basil, then you quoted St. Thomas Aquinas, and now you are desperately trying to cling on something or somebody to back your defense by claiming you received your knowledge from Vouthon… Really? Looks to me like you are putting as many human shields in front of you when they taught no such thing as you said they did.

Allow me to show you the errors of your interpretations here, and why none of them will agree with your interpretation:

God’s Essence does not come down to us. Eternity which points to God’s Essence Existing is not revealed in space and time.

HOWEVER… let me point out some Catholic teaching to you dear friend: (and this is where the dissonance exists, because you, a learned Catholic states that His essence cannot exist in space and time, and Thomas Aquinas states the opposite.)

The above post showed you did a somersault with what Gabriel originally posted and then attempted to prove that St. Thomas Aquinas did teach otherwise. So let’s have a thorough study at the Catholic teaching you were trying to point out here.

You quoted from St. Thomas in the Summa:

God is in all things; not, indeed, as part of their essence, nor as an accident, but as an agent is present to that upon which it works…

Further, others said that, although all things are subject to God’s providence, still all things are not immediately created by God; but that He immediately created the first creatures, and these created the others. Against these it is necessary to say that He is in all things by His essence.

Therefore, God is in all things by His power, inasmuch as all things are subject to His power; He is by His presence in all things, as all things are bare and open to His eyes; He is in all things by His essence, inasmuch as He is present to all as the cause of their being.

Perhaps you missed it again when you were corrected earlier: St. Thomas was saying - By His essence

by
1. identifying the agent performing an action:
2. indicating the means of achieving something.

He emphasized right at the start that God’s essence is not a part of creation, he further stated that God is in all things by His Presence. There is a big difference here. For more corrections, go back to reading Post #126.

Best part is Vouthon made it very clear in the same post you quoted from him:

Dear brother Servant

The created world does not hold the essence of God in an essential manner, in the sense of Him being limited by or “part” of the essences of created things. He is infinitly beyond creation in this respect since He is illimitable, Uncreated and Divine.

Have you realized how many times I have showed you that you deliberately ignored the things within a single post or context which did not fit your view that you yourself quoted?

Did you realize at all why it is so frustrating to us when you quoted our Saints and Bible passages and misinterpreted them continuously? Its not even about us not being able to tolerate your misunderstandings or questionings at all. Its because you knew all along whats written in the entire passage or whole quotations you were trying to make, be it from a Bible, a Saint or another poster in this Forum (whom you called a friend) but deliberately remove all but one line that fits your view. Some of the lines contrasting your view are right there beside what you quoted.

Did you truly think I won’t investigate all the posts or quotes, Servant?

…feel free to read how he also uses Aquinas in a similar “massacre” here (post # 14)

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthrea…ahai+cosmology

Yes. Please show me the exact quotations where did Vouthon massacred St. Thomas’ teachings the way you did.

 

[Servant19]

God is in all things; not, indeed, as part of their essence, nor as an accident, but as an agent is present to that upon which it works…

Further, others said that, although all things are subject to God’s providence, still all things are not immediately created by God; but that He immediately created the first creatures, and these created the others. Against these it is necessary to say that He is in all things by His essence.

Therefore, God is in all things by His power, inasmuch as all things are subject to His power; He is by His presence in all things, as all things are bare and open to His eyes; He is in all things by His essence, inasmuch as He is present to all as the cause of their being.

God essence is not found in “their essence”, however He is found in ALL created things. Aquinas dos not say “not indeed, as part of His essence”…

You are so patronising in your tone Guy, and this comes across very clear. I am able to read, but I do not want to bicker.

It’s clear to me that you are trying very hard to prove me wrong by saying that you are right.

All I was trying to do with Gabriel by quoting Aquinas is that nothing is so absolutely clear cut. So much so that it requires absolutist statements.

This is far from a massacre.

The same with quoting St.Basil. I wasn’t trying to say that he was a non-Trinitarian, he was, but there evidence to say that he was trying his best to explore this mystery more deeply and that quote was part of his earnest search for the truth.

Of course I believe the Bahai theology is the truth which St. Basil touched upon, but finally acknowledged what the Holy Spirit wanted for that age, namely, that Jesus is God.

.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Servant19;12353392]Hi Gabriel,

When I stated that they are not one and the same in essence, I was implying that the sun is MORE THAN sun rays in its essence. The sun is everything the rays are, but the rays are not everything the sun is.

Servant 19 I am having trouble making out your statement here, which appears to reveal a double standard of your faith in Bahai, or your expression of faith is at the tune of a court lawyer twisting words and subjects to confuse the jury of the facts presented.

The sun discussion is a metaphor that related to the Essence God divine. The subject did not change in regards to God’s Essence. What changed was the procession, act or revelation of God possessing God’s Essence.

Now you just stated; “that they are not one and the same essence”, when Bahai states; “As the divine entity is eternal, the divine attributes are coexistent, coeternal’ and `co-equal’ with and to Him.”

Can you clarify for me and truthfully state here that the metaphor applied to the sun ray is an attribute of the Sun? If Bahai has the sun ray (Jesus) as an attribute of the Sun (Father)? I respectfully pray for your faith expression to be answered to my questions? And not a regrettable lawyer’s defense.

God is “more than” the Word in His Essence

.

Those are cute words. But you haven’t professed your faith in the Word of God being a person divine of the same Essence God?

If the Word you profess is an attribute of God’s Essence? then Bahai has two god’s co-existing, different entities with and to the Essence of God, which complicates and causes confusion of two co-equal divinities existing in different degrees of divinity which is polytheism.

To the Christian it is made clear from our faith and the scriptures that The Word is God revealed incarnated in the flesh of Jesus Christ who reveals God’s presence. The Father is greater than the Son in procession, consubstantial with the Father in Essence divine.

God is the one God. The Word shares some essential attributes with God, but is distinct, co-eternal, and emanates from Him.

If your “Word” is not God, but shares some essential attributes with God that are distinct from one another, co-eternal defines two god’s existing

Its really a very simple concept. Not sure where the philosophical or theological sticking point is.

Actually your Bahai faith expression into the mysteries of God have gotten me baffled and confused. Bahai confuses an attribute of God as co-existing- co-eternal- co-equal to God’s Essence? Maybe you can give an example of what an attribute of God is? When God’s Essence is not defined.

An attribute of God is revelation stemming from God’s presence in space and time. An attribute of God does not define God’s Essence, which is not revealed in space and time. Which questions the integrity of Bahai making a false claim of knowing God’s Essence so as to compare it to an Attribute of God?

It’s just that Baha’u’llah has a monumental case to make, and that’s why I am Baha’i. Simple, logical and soul transforming.

I can respect that; but what we are discussing are matters that deal with Truth = Jesus. And Truth does not lie, nor does Truth confuse what God has revealed to our humanity.

cont;

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

cont;

Servant19=

Having said all that, none of this really has anything to do with our salvation, its what we do with the knowledge we gain from Revelation that matters, and whether we reject a Revelation or not without a just and fair-minded appraisal.

Truth has everything to do with salvation. Just and fair-minds appraisal’s is what I am hoping we have been discussing.

Yes, I know that. I can tell you that the true Jesus was not really fully known by the Apostles

.

I disagree with you, Jesus was fully known as fully human and repeating St. Thomas who worshipped Jesus saying; “My Lord, and My God”. Oh, yes Jesus was fully known in life, in death and in the resurrection and ascension into heaven while in the apostles presence.

Jesus did not reveal absolutely everything to them. They would have shrivelled up and died with the splendour!

Correction, Jesus said in John 16:12 “I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit comes, he will guide you into all Truth…for HE will take what is mine and declare to you”… What is hidden in the presence of God is God’s Essence, although the apostles got a glimpse of God’s Glory at the Transfiguration.

Baha’is believe that Revelation is progressive, and that God only reveals so much. And with Jesus’ Revelation that was the case, as it was with Judaism (which you will testify to I am sure).

For a Catholic, Truth revealed by God is not progressive itself. Our faith and understanding of God’s Truth is progressive and develops into greater understanding and knowledge of God that does not change.

We believe Jesus fulfilled God’s will. Jesus Revelation does not progress or change, when we profess Jesus is Truth. Truth is not subject to change or progression in any form.

If Baha’is believe that Revelation = God is progressive, then Bahai’s deity takes on a change. Divine Truth does not progress or change. Either God reveals what God reveals, or God is not God if God= Revelation progresses.

So when I quote St. Basil etc, it is to point out the “attempts” to describe the true Jesus which was prevalent at the time.

I respect your opinion, but St. Basil a professed Catholic does not attempt to describe Jesus. St. Basil professed, preached, defended his faith in Jesus full humanity and full divinity against any and all his contemporaries who Denied Jesus is God incarnate. St. Basil did not move from the first revelations of Jesus of the eyewitness accounts, this has never changed in Catholicism for 2000 years. Our understanding of God has developed more understanding of the same revelations of Jesus Christ unchanged.

To a human being studying the Revelation of Jesus, one cannot conclude any other way than to say “Jesus is God”

Correction, In all Truth no one can confess the True Jesus is Lord, without the Holy Spirit.

If a human being of carnal mind studying the Revelation of Jesus? Is a natural person of the flesh who is unspiritual does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned…Please read 1Cor.2:6-16

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Servant19;12353392]
Not sure I understand this question Gabriel

.

If Bahai is not revealed to be present during the first century when Jesus walked the earth, was crucified, died and buried, after three days raised from the dead and ascended into heaven.

If Bahai was not a witness to these Jesus historical recorded accounts from Jews, pagan Rome, Hebrews and Christians? when did Bahai receive “Revelation of Jesus”?

Please be fair in your judgement Gabriel. Baha’is NEVER EVER say that Jesus is “only flesh”

Very well; Bahai according to your sources and faith expressed here; Jesus is an attribute of God, Jesus is not God, but Jesus has some degree of God’s Essence who co-exists with God in co-eternal reveals two distinct eternal entities co-existing, co-equally distinct from one another as two deities co-eternal.

So Yes, I would agree with you, Bahai does not say Jesus is only flesh, but that Jesus is something other than God. Jesus emanating essence that is an attribute from God co-exists with God’s Essence. Which is more of an outrageous claim than Jesus is just flesh? From a Trinitarian view.

Yes, the Baha’i Faith sees Jesus as the Son of God, not God.
(seems that the Father says the same)

When Christians say Son of God, we mean Jesus is of the same substance of God in presence.

When we say Jesus is the only begotten Son of the Father, we profess the Father sends the Son who proceeds from the Father in revelation in God’s presence God incarnate when the Son is consubstantial with the Father, never divided or separated in Trinity of persons One God.

When Bahai see’s Jesus as the Son of God, not God? reveals to me, Bahai does not know who Jesus is, and never received the revelation from God of who God is in presence to our humanity.

God reveals His presence and revealed Revelation of Jesus unchanged from God the Holy Spirit to those who have the Spirit of God, “When they shall all be taught by God”.

Peace be with you

 

[SteveVH]

The religion is Baha’i. The “prophet” is Baha’u’llah.

 

[eddie_too]

the bahai compare Bahaullah re-inventing the Gospel of Jesus to Jesus fulfilling the prophecies of the old testament jewish prophets.

I am not a student in this area, but I have read that Jesus fulfilled the Jewish prophecies in tens if not hundreds of ways.

on the other hand, Bahaullah fulfills none of the new testament teachings. that means that in this respect Jesus and Bahaullah have nothing in common.

in addition, Jesus was a jew. consequently, it makes perfect sense that a jew would become the prophesied jewish messiah.

on the other hand, Bahaullah was never a Roman Catholic. in fact, all evidence indicates Bahaullah knew very little about roman catholic teaching. that means that in this respect Jesus and Bahaullah have nothing in common.

finally, the very idea that the apostles did not know that the Jesus who ate with them, drank with them, spoke to them, found the tomb empty and allowed them to touch Him, was not a resurrected human body is too farfetched to dignify with an attempt to refute. the refutation is self-evident.

furthermore, the idea that the Bahaullah is revealing something that the apostles did not know, i.e. Jesus’ body was not resurrected is simply unbelievable to most people with a passing acquaintance with human beings. having to jump through a multitude of hoops and deny a multitude of eyewitness testimony to accept Bahaullah as a messenger from God is simply irreconcilable with human existence.

 

[Servant19]

Servant 19 I am having trouble making out your statement here, which appears to reveal a double standard of your faith in Bahai, or your expression of faith is at the tune of a court lawyer twisting words and subjects to confuse the jury of the facts presented.

The sun discussion is a metaphor that related to the Essence God divine. The subject did not change in regards to God’s Essence. What changed was the procession, act or revelation of God possessing God’s Essence.

Now you just stated; “that they are not one and the same essence”, when Bahai states; “As the divine entity is eternal, the divine attributes are coexistent, coeternal’ and `co-equal’ with and to Him.”

Can you clarify for me and truthfully state here that the metaphor applied to the sun ray is an attribute of the Sun? If Bahai has the sun ray (Jesus) as an attribute of the Sun (Father)? I respectfully pray for your faith expression to be answered to my questions? And not a regrettable lawyer’s defense.

Hi Gabriel,

It seems you are stuck on this passage from the linked document I gave you:
**
“As the divine entity is eternal, the divine attributes are coexistent, coeternal’ and `co-equal’ with and to Him.”**

Now this is in reference to the “essential attributes”. I assume you are aware of this yes? By essential attributes we are referring to the attributes of the Sun in relation to Itself.

So we can say that the sun has the essential attributes of heat, light, radiation, destruction, formation, gravity, etc etc…and these attributes are “co-existent, co-eternal, and co-equal” with the sun’s essence.

In relation to creation, then, this passage comes into play (which is in concordance with what you say about the Divine essence not coming down to us):

Abdu'l-Bahá explains: …creatures emanate from God; they do not manifest Him.’ He says moreover that if creatures would appear `through manifestation’, then it would follow that the Essence of Divinity had descended in them, transforming Itself into them; but this is impossible, otherwise God – taking on phenomenal attributes – would reduce Himself to imperfection.

 

[Servant19]

The religion is Baha’i. The “prophet” is Baha’u’llah.

Thankyou Steve…

.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Servant19;12360501]:"As the divine entity is eternal, the divine attributes are coexistent, coeternal’ and `co-equal’ with and to Him."

Now this is in reference to the “essential attributes”. I assume you are aware of this yes? By essential attributes we are referring to the attributes of the Sun in relation to Itself.

Thank you for your response Servant 19; But you have not answered my question? Do you believe that Jesus is an attribute of God? That is a yes or no answer Servant19, I still await your answer.

So we can say that the sun has the essential attributes of heat, light, radiation, destruction, formation, gravity, etc etc…and these attributes are “co-existent, co-eternal, and co-equal” with the sun’s essence.

That is a contradiction of terms Servant 19. What you relate to physical properties of the Sun revealed in space and time and then you compare them to the Sun being present (which does not reveal the Sun’s true essence) in time and space, does not apply to something that is eternally existing or as you quoted “co-eternal”.

The contradiction of terms are the physical properties of the sun revealed, Sun being present with the Sun’s essence are all co-eternal? This is a Pandora’s box in the making, and is off subject.

What we have been discussing in relation to the metaphor of Sun and Sun Ray deals with the substance of Sun that is not seen to the naked eye. You introduced St. Basil, St. Thomas Aquinas, which I included St. Augustine, St. Hilary’s take on the metaphor of Sun, Sun ray and substance.

These great Catholic Saints and great minds, who have all contributed to mankind advancement in thinking and knowledge. Are all in agreement that the Sun and Sun Ray consist of the same substance as Sun. They do not teach that the Sun ray is the Sun. Because the Sun ray proceeds from the Sun distinctly of one another in revelation. They teach the Sun and Sun ray consist of the same substance of what is Sun.

The Saints relate this metaphor of Sun and Sun Ray to the Father and the Son. The Father and the Son are consubstantial of the same substance, Essence divine that is not revealed in space and time. What is revealed is the Father sends the Son and the Son proceeds from the Father.

Which the Saints use the Sun metaphor, to relate the same substance of the Sun that is in the Sun Ray points to the same substance or Essence that the Father has the Son also has. The difference is and why the Father is greater than the Son, is revealed in revelation (space and time), when the Sun does not proceed nor does the Father proceed, but the Sun ray and the only begotten Son proceed in revelation, from one principle through one spiration of Love.

The reason I attempt to clarify this again is to make my point here, that these Saints do not go on to confuse the Trinity by introducing physical properties as attributes to the Divine Essence. The latter subject, Servant 19 is what you introduce reveal that it is foreign and is in direct contradiction to the Saints teachings.

When you introduce those things visible “attributes” as possessing something co-equal, co-eternal to God’s Essence. It is from here we begin a new discussion of your Bahai faith of Jesus is not God. When I asked for clarification from your Bahai faith? Is your Jesus an attribute of God?

We are not talking about how God created creation or how Wisdom from the proverbs is revealed in space and time.

We are talking about the differences between Jesus of Nazareth and a Jesus that Bahai and Islam talk about are not the same Jesus.

When you answer my question? Then we can proceed further into the Bahai writings of how their Jesus is truly portrayed physically, mystically, intelligently and reasonably.

I will attempt to prove to you, from a Trinitarian perspective using your own sources that the Bahai’s view of Jesus possesses a condemned form of an ancient Arian heresy, which denied Jesus is not God. Which Bahai has already professed here, from your posts.

Peace be with you

 

[eddie_too]

what we call God’s attributes, eternal, infinite, all-knowing, all-powerful, omnipresent, etc. are human terms used by humans to explain that Perfect Being cannot be limited. however, the attributes are neither God’s nature nor His essence.

another attribute we attribute to the Lord is that He is also Perfectly Simple. thus what we call His attributes are our way of understanding in our finite and limited way Him as He has revealed Himself through Jesus, the o.t. prophets, Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.

consequently, discussion of whether or not God exists separately from His attributes is for the most part, nonsensical.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

what we call God’s attributes, eternal, infinite, all-knowing, all-powerful, omnipresent, etc. are human terms used by humans to explain that Perfect Being cannot be limited. however, the attributes are neither God’s nature nor His essence.

another attribute we attribute to the Lord is that He is also Perfectly Simple. thus what we call His attributes are our way of understanding in our finite and limited way Him as He has revealed Himself through Jesus, the o.t. prophets, Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.

consequently, discussion of whether or not God exists separately from His attributes is for the most part, nonsensical.

Agreed, although when it comes to the incarnation of Jesus Christ and those condemned ancient heresies that deny Jesus incarnation, that imply a new prophet from Bahai received or teaches a new revelation of Jesus from God, when it is revealed that it is not a new revelation but an ancient heresy in a new age.

The subject of divine Essence confused with attributes revealed from the divine presence becomes essential for those who are not exposed to these ancient heresies that appear as if new? in different ages.

What I am interested in here from the Bahai religion, is how it is able to pretend to take on all theistic and non-theistic religions and justify it’s claims of unifying them all into the Bahai religion? It appears again to fall into another different form condemned heresy of relativism?

I want to be clear here, that I am not attacking the Bahai religion. I am discussing Bahai’s view, that appears to be claiming Bahai’s view of Jesus, is tolerable and acceptable of the Christian view of Jesus, when there tolerances and acceptable Christian views are never Catholic Christianity. With the claim that Catholicism got Jesus all wrong, and Bahai got their new view of Jesus correct, which appears not new to me, but an old ancient form of a condemned heresy, long before Islam, or the Bahai prophet ever appeared in history.

Your thoughts?

 

[SteveVH]

What I am interested in here from the Bahai religion, is how it is able to pretend to take on all theistic and non-theistic religions and justify it’s claims of unifying them all into the Bahai religion? It appears again to fall into another different form condemned heresy of relativism?

Yes, that is the question. Not really sure if it is relativism. What I find interesting is the ability of any person to hold two or more conflicting beliefs simultaneously and claim them all to be “the truth”. It truly boggles the mind.

This is the epitome of approaching sacred texts with a preconceived notion. In the case of the Baha’i everything Baha’u’llah said or claimed is true, period. After that they just have to bend and twist all meaning found in the sacred texts of all other religions to support it. At the same time it requires turning a blind eye to the beliefs of those who actually belong to the particular religion which they have chosen to incorporate into their own. They are the enlightened ones and claim to accept our sacred texts (after injecting their own interpretation) while rejecting the source that produced them.

That is why all discussion with the Baha’i soon becomes fruitless. They are not interested in our faith, they are only interested in how they can turn it in the direction of Baha’u’llah.

 

[Servant19]

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you Gabriel, my time has been short recently

Thank you for your response Servant 19; But you have not answered my question? Do you believe that Jesus is an attribute of God? That is a yes or no answer Servant19, I still await your answer.

I am not sure what you mean by this question Gabriel. There are two aspects to the Manifestation of God, the human and the Divine.

Baha’u’llah states the following:

And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself. To this testifieth the tradition: “Manifold and mysterious is My relationship with God. I am He, Himself, and He is I, Myself, except that I am that I am, and He is that He is.” And in like manner, the words: “Arise, O Muḥammad, for lo, the Lover and the Beloved are joined together and made one in Thee.” He similarly saith: “There is no distinction whatsoever between Thee and Them, except that They are Thy Servants.” The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” These Essences of Detachment, these resplendent Realities are the channels of God’s all-pervasive grace. Led by the light of unfailing guidance, and invested with supreme sovereignty, They are commissioned to use the inspiration of Their words, the effusions of Their infallible grace and the sanctifying breeze of Their Revelation for the cleansing of every longing heart and receptive spirit from the dross and dust of earthly cares and limitations. Then, and only then, will the Trust of God, latent in the reality of man, emerge, as resplendent as the rising Orb of Divine Revelation, from behind the veil of concealment, and implant the ensign of its revealed glory upon the summits of men’s hearts.

From the foregoing passages and allusions it hath been made indubitably clear that in the kingdoms of earth and heaven there must needs be manifested a Being, an Essence Who shall act as a Manifestation and Vehicle for the transmission of the grace of the Divinity Itself, the Sovereign Lord of all. Through the Teachings of this Day Star of Truth every man will advance and develop until he attaineth the station at which he can manifest all the potential forces with which his inmost true self hath been endowed. It is for this very purpose that in every age and dispensation the Prophets of God and His chosen Ones have appeared amongst men, and have evinced such power as is born of God and such might as only the Eternal can reveal.

Can one of sane mind ever seriously imagine that, in view of certain words the meaning of which he cannot comprehend, the portal of God’s infinite guidance can ever be closed in the face of men? Can he ever conceive for these Divine Luminaries, these resplendent Lights either a beginning or an end? What outpouring flood can compare with the stream of His all-embracing grace, and what blessing can excel the evidences of so great and pervasive a mercy? There can be no doubt whatever that if for one moment the tide of His mercy and grace were to be withheld from the world, it would completely perish. For this reason, from the beginning that hath no beginning the portals of Divine mercy have been flung open to the face of all created things, and the clouds of Truth will continue to the end that hath no end to rain on the soil of human capacity, reality and personality their favors and bounties. Such hath been God’s method continued from everlasting to everlasting.

reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/GWB/gwb-27.html

(underline and bold added by myself)

What does this passage say to you dear friend?

Does Catholicism teach that God in His Essence (the Deus a se) is Jesus Christ?

That is a contradiction of terms Servant 19. What you relate to physical properties of the Sun revealed in space and time and then you compare them to the Sun being present (which does not reveal the Sun’s true essence) in time and space, does not apply to something that is eternally existing or as you quoted “co-eternal”.

The contradiction of terms are the physical properties of the sun revealed, Sun being present with the Sun’s essence are all co-eternal? This is a Pandora’s box in the making, and is off subject.

I don’t understand what you are saying here. Maybe you wish to clarify, or if it’s off topic, I’m happy to move on…

(cont…)

.

 

[Servant19]

What we have been discussing in relation to the metaphor of Sun and Sun Ray deals with the substance of Sun that is not seen to the naked eye. You introduced St. Basil, St. Thomas Aquinas, which I included St. Augustine, St. Hilary’s take on the metaphor of Sun, Sun ray and substance.

These great Catholic Saints and great minds, who have all contributed to mankind advancement in thinking and knowledge. Are all in agreement that the Sun and Sun Ray consist of the same substance as Sun.

If they are using this analogy to imply that the sun is equal to the sun ray, then they used the wrong analogy. All human reason and knowledge knows and has known for centuries that the rays of the sun that warm the skin on your arm on a nice summers day, is not “actually the sun”…the sun is still up there aloof and independent…full of rays, but also much much more…

They do not teach that the Sun ray is the Sun. Because the Sun ray proceeds from the Sun distinctly of one another in revelation.

This seems to contradict your previous statement where you said that:
“These great Catholic Saints … all in agreement that the Sun and Sun Ray consist of the same substance as Sun.”

What is the difference between when two things share the same “substance” and when one thing actually “IS” something else?

They teach the Sun and Sun ray consist of the same substance of what is Sun.

If the substance of the sun is A,B,C,D,E, the sun ray is not all of those things, otherwise it will be the sun. The sun ray is just the A and the B, for example.
So, for the Saints to use the analogy of the Sun and the sun ray to demonstrate consubstantiality, then they made an error, for the sun itself is not literally on my arm when I go and sit at the beach.

That’s why during His reflections and meditations, St. Basil uses the phrase: “same…even though it be different”…and “likeness”…never does He say that the Archetype is the same, fully, as the prototype, he “likens” them to one another, not equates them.

" not beholding in the reflection the unbegotten being of the Father (for thus there would be complete identity and no distinction)"

Which the Saints use the Sun metaphor, to relate the same substance of the Sun that is in the Sun Ray points to the same substance or Essence that the Father has the Son also has. The difference is and why the Father is greater than the Son, is revealed in revelation (space and time), when the Sun does not proceed nor does the Father proceed, but the Sun ray and the only begotten Son proceed in revelation, from one principle through one spiration of Love.

This sounds close to the Baha’i concepts, but may I ask, can the Father, in His essence, come down into Creation?

The reason I attempt to clarify this again is to make my point here, that these Saints do not go on to confuse the Trinity by introducing physical properties as attributes to the Divine Essence. The latter subject, Servant 19 is what you introduce reveal that it is foreign and is in direct contradiction to the Saints teachings.

No, Baha’i teaching does not state that the Divine Essence can be manifested in any form of physical entity. The supreme transcendence of the Essence of God is fully emphasised by Baha’u’llah and I believe the concept of the Deus a Se in Catholicism also supports this truth.

Is this correct?

When you introduce those things visible “attributes” as possessing something co-equal, co-eternal to God’s Essence. It is from here we begin a new discussion of your Bahai faith of Jesus is not God. When I asked for clarification from your Bahai faith? Is your Jesus an attribute of God?

We are not talking about how God created creation or how Wisdom from the proverbs is revealed in space and time.

Can you share what you think those few verses from Proverbs mean please. It is indicative of a Person (referred to as a “she”) and it is “from God” and it is outside of time and space, yet still created by the Lord.

What are your thoughts?

We are talking about the differences between Jesus of Nazareth and a Jesus that Bahai and Islam talk about are not the same Jesus.

When you answer my question? Then we can proceed further into the Bahai writings of how their Jesus is truly portrayed physically, mystically, intelligently and reasonably.

I will attempt to prove to you, from a Trinitarian perspective using your own sources that the Bahai’s view of Jesus possesses a condemned form of an ancient Arian heresy, which denied Jesus is not God. Which Bahai has already professed here, from your posts.

Peace be with you

Please do, I would be interested to read your thoughts regarding this

Thanks and God bless

.