T
Techno2000
Guest
Because unlike Baha’u’llah, Jesus warns about Satan, and that says it all.
- Status
S
Servant19
Guest
It would be a wonderful day if informed Catholics would comment on the Baha’i Faith…
There are plenty of warnings from Baha’u’llah…
So I repeat the question for you. Why is Jesus not Satan disguised in a robe of miracles?
.
T
Techno2000
Guest
But none about Hell.
S
Servant19
Guest
This is fun
So let me ask you a third time.
How do you know you are not worshipping Satan clothed in Jesus’ attire?
.
T
Techno2000
Guest
When the Pharisees heard this, they said, “This man can force demons out of people only with the help of Beelzebul, the ruler of demons.”
T
Techno2000
Guest
Wait a minute you said one time you didn’t believe in Hell.This is fun
So let me ask you a third time.
How do you know you are not worshipping Satan clothed in Jesus’ attire?
.
S
Servant19
Guest
S
Servant19
Guest
If you are telling me that Hell is a smoky place 3 km down from where Jesus was entombed in Jerusalem, then no I don’t believe in Hell.
Otherwise, if it is a spiritual state like Heaven, then I do…all Baha’is do…
.
T
Techno2000
Guest
You mean like a Newage Hell where a everybody works out their Karma ?
S
Servant19
Guest
Hi Steve, who do you think Lord Krishna is referring to when He reveals the following:There is no “IT” involved here. We are speaking of a divine Person, a “WHO”: “Before Abraham I AM” He was before any other thing, including his Kingdom.
I have no idea whatsoever what you are trying to express here.Probably due to my infantile understanding as a Catholic and not a Baha’i.
**
**
Who is the “I” in this statement?
.
S
Servant19
Guest
No…
…can you tell me what the Catholic definition of hell is please? Preferably in your own words, so no google cut and pasting ok?
.
E
eddie_too
Guest
how do we know Jesus is not Satan in disguise?
we could look at the fruits of Jesus.
we could look at Jesus casting out devils.
we could look at the words of Jesus and of the New Testament authors.
we could compare the works and words of Jesus to the works of the devil.
I could go on and on, but I really wonder what motivates someone to ask such a question. it would seem such a question is mere bear baiting or is intended to demean Jesus. I can see no knowledgeable reason to ask such a question.
why some one might direct such a question to the person of bahuallah is understandable because Bahaullah does not recognize Jesus as God. Bahaullah does not accept the physical Resurrection of Jesus. bahuallah rejects the mystery of the Divine Trinity. Bahaullah knows nothing of the “Table of the Lord”.
so, yes, someone who reveres Bahaullah might be inclined to disparage Jesus since, despite the volumes Bahaullah wrote, Bahaullah never recognizes, acknowledges or accepts the many Divine Mysteries Jesus reveals to mankind. since Bahaullah disparages Jesus, perhaps not in so many words, by Bahaullah’s ignoring Him and ignoring the truths Jesus brought.
if a person were to give reverence to Bahaullah it would naturally lead to a rejection of Jesus. even though someone might say, “oh no, Bahaullah did not reject Jesus, Bahaullah built on the teachings of Jesus”.
Bahaullah refused to bow to Jesus and refused to recognize the authority Jesus gave to His apostles and to their successors.
so, it makes sense that some of those who reject Jesus would then imply that Jesus was a servant of Lucifer. after all, if their be all and end all prophet paid virtually no attention to Jesus and what He did and taught, it makes sense that the followers of Bahaullah would also follow Bahaullah in diminishing the Person and mission of Jesus.
we could look at the fruits of Jesus.
we could look at Jesus casting out devils.
we could look at the words of Jesus and of the New Testament authors.
we could compare the works and words of Jesus to the works of the devil.
I could go on and on, but I really wonder what motivates someone to ask such a question. it would seem such a question is mere bear baiting or is intended to demean Jesus. I can see no knowledgeable reason to ask such a question.
why some one might direct such a question to the person of bahuallah is understandable because Bahaullah does not recognize Jesus as God. Bahaullah does not accept the physical Resurrection of Jesus. bahuallah rejects the mystery of the Divine Trinity. Bahaullah knows nothing of the “Table of the Lord”.
so, yes, someone who reveres Bahaullah might be inclined to disparage Jesus since, despite the volumes Bahaullah wrote, Bahaullah never recognizes, acknowledges or accepts the many Divine Mysteries Jesus reveals to mankind. since Bahaullah disparages Jesus, perhaps not in so many words, by Bahaullah’s ignoring Him and ignoring the truths Jesus brought.
if a person were to give reverence to Bahaullah it would naturally lead to a rejection of Jesus. even though someone might say, “oh no, Bahaullah did not reject Jesus, Bahaullah built on the teachings of Jesus”.
Bahaullah refused to bow to Jesus and refused to recognize the authority Jesus gave to His apostles and to their successors.
so, it makes sense that some of those who reject Jesus would then imply that Jesus was a servant of Lucifer. after all, if their be all and end all prophet paid virtually no attention to Jesus and what He did and taught, it makes sense that the followers of Bahaullah would also follow Bahaullah in diminishing the Person and mission of Jesus.
S
SteveVH
Guest
First of all Krishna is not my Lord and I would have really no idea to whom he refers; a past version of himself, possibly. I would defer the Hindus to answer that question, that is if I really cared. I also don’t care to hear the Baha’i interpretation of the Hindu religion.
What in the world does this have to do with the subject of this thread, Jesus Christ?
E
eddie_too
Guest
the most important question when evaluating the claims of the bahai is to ask what did Bahaullah provide mankind that mankind could not do without.
if Bahaullah had never existed, what would mankind be missing and what would be the consequences of missing it?
so far as I am aware, there is nothing vital to me in the teachings of Bahaullah.
I would say that the bahai who have posted for months, using thousands and thousands of words, have had ample opportunity to explain what Bahaullah brings that a human being cannot do without.
mostly the bahai who post here say nothing about why a person should believe in Bahaullah. they spend most, virtually all of their time, challenging what Jesus taught us.
since that is what they do, it seems fair to conclude that the bahai are not here to teach what Bahaullah taught. they are here to try and destroy in the minds of Jesus’ followers the teachings and sacrifices of Jesus.
try it with one of the bahai. ask them what did Bahaullah bring that a person cannot live without or had never before been provided to mankind.
ask them what was missing from the life and teachings of Jesus that God needed to add to them through the life of Bahaullah.
a united world would not be one of them since marx and engels, atheists, also came up with that one.
if Bahaullah had never existed, what would mankind be missing and what would be the consequences of missing it?
so far as I am aware, there is nothing vital to me in the teachings of Bahaullah.
I would say that the bahai who have posted for months, using thousands and thousands of words, have had ample opportunity to explain what Bahaullah brings that a human being cannot do without.
mostly the bahai who post here say nothing about why a person should believe in Bahaullah. they spend most, virtually all of their time, challenging what Jesus taught us.
since that is what they do, it seems fair to conclude that the bahai are not here to teach what Bahaullah taught. they are here to try and destroy in the minds of Jesus’ followers the teachings and sacrifices of Jesus.
try it with one of the bahai. ask them what did Bahaullah bring that a person cannot live without or had never before been provided to mankind.
ask them what was missing from the life and teachings of Jesus that God needed to add to them through the life of Bahaullah.
a united world would not be one of them since marx and engels, atheists, also came up with that one.
E
eddie_too
Guest
I just spent 30 whole seconds coming up with this definition from the CCC of hell.
interesting that those asking for the catholic definition did not consider the matter important enough to spend 30 seconds on it.
definition: "This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God
and the blessed is called “hell.”
another interesting fact is that very earlier in my encounter with the bahai who post here I was told that according to Bahaullah life after death is an eternal progression with no destination ever anticipated or arrived at.
I said at that time I considered such a doctrine to be a type of hell in itself. I choose to reject a doctrine of eternal growth as the bahai seem to be interpreting Bahaullah.
interesting that those asking for the catholic definition did not consider the matter important enough to spend 30 seconds on it.
definition: "This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God
and the blessed is called “hell.”
another interesting fact is that very earlier in my encounter with the bahai who post here I was told that according to Bahaullah life after death is an eternal progression with no destination ever anticipated or arrived at.
I said at that time I considered such a doctrine to be a type of hell in itself. I choose to reject a doctrine of eternal growth as the bahai seem to be interpreting Bahaullah.
S
SteveVH
Guest
LOL. Okay, Tony.
Well, believe it or not I did read it, Tony. Once I took a machete to the flowery language there really wasn’t a lot left. I don’t think he mentioned Jesus Christ even once. That being said, your implication is that we Christians have rejected God and will pay the consequences. You are bordering on showing contempt for the Catholic faith.
Sorry, still following Jesus and still rejecting Baha’u’llah.
S
SteveVH
Guest
Then help me understand. One thing that is irrefutable is that the dogmas and doctrines of the Catholic Church have not changed since its inception. What the Church has believed since the beginning is very well documented through the writings of the early Church fathers. Keep in mind that some of these holy men were contemporaries of the Apostles, students and disciples. These men believed and taught what they had received directly from the Apostles. And they believed that Jesus was God; the eternal Son of the Father, who was begotten, not made, one in being with the Father.
Now we have two choices based upon your premise. Either these men completely misunderstood the apostolic teaching and proclamation; the “kerygma”, or the Apostles never understood who Jesus really was to begin with. Actually there is another choice; that because of the presence of Christ and the guidance of the Holy Spirit the kerygma, the heart of the Gospel, the most essential proclamation, was transmitted without error from Jesus to the Apostles to the Church. So which is it?
Your entire position is based upon the false presumption that Christians, including the Apostles, it appears, had an infantile understanding of what Jesus taught them, with the limited capacity to receive only milk, rather than meat. There is a total disregard for the teachings of the oldest living institution in the world who’s founder was Jesus Christ. I have asked before and the question is ignored each time: Is there any Catholic doctrine in which you believe? No. Total disregard, as if we were children who believed that babies come from storks.
Truth is not dependent upon ones capacity to understand. It exists whether or not we understand or believe. The question is, regardless of ones capacity, is the relative understanding based upon truth or falsehood?
No. It makes them wrong. Are you that unsure of the truthfulness of your faith, that someone in the future may prove you wrong?
Catholics believe that the truth we received from Christ, through the Apostles, is eternal and can never change. That is why we vehemently reject someone like Baha’u’llah.
I have no idea who these people are.
This condescending attitude is getting really old, Servant. We are not children. Please do not speak to us as if we were. Thanks.
And the issue was settled, very quickly, by the Church who followed the same conciliar model that the Church still follows. After much discussion, Peter stood and the bishops fell silent. He spoke and the matter was settled; Gentiles were not subject to circumcision. So what does this have to do with anything?
Yes. It was a settled matter. And the Church guarded and protected this truth in the face of many heresies concerning the nature of Christ. Even in the face of a majority of bishops (Arians) the Church maintained what it had always believed without change or modification.
Please don’t ignore this post, Servant. I am very interested in your comments.
Thanks.
Steve
T
Techno2000
Guest
For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
T
tonyfish58
Guest
Dear Techno - Those words are applicable to the stance you are making as well.
It could be that the Sound Doctrine is the Word of Baha’u’llah and that you cling to “what their itching ears want to hear”.
God bless justice in your search - Regards Tony
T
tonyfish58
Guest
Dear SteveVH - That my dear friend in God is 100% Ok with me, it is not to me you answer to
Me I pray that we may all Love Jesus as He should be Loved.
I will leave this with this comment from the Tablet that you have read and that gave you no reason to comment on, I must say I would wonder why it did not spark some questions
It is a little lengthy for a thread, but dear Steve it does say it all!
“… ‘Have the verses been sent down?’ Say ‘Yea, by Him Who is the Lord of the heavens!’ ‘Hath the Hour come?’ ‘Nay, more; it hath passed, by Him Who is the Revealer of clear tokens! Verily, the Inevitable is come, and He, the True One, hath appeared with proof and testimony. The Plain is disclosed, and mankind is sore vexed and fearful. Earthquakes have broken loose, and the tribes have lamented, for fear of God, the Lord of Strength, the All-Compelling.’ Say: ‘The stunning trumpet-blast hath been loudly raised, and the Day is God’s, the One, the Unconstrained.’ And they say: ‘Hath the Catastrophe come to pass?’ Say: ‘Yea, by the Lord of Lords!’ ‘Is the Resurrection come?’ ‘Nay, more; He Who is the Self-Subsisting hath appeared with the Kingdom of His signs.’ ‘Seest thou men laid low?’ ‘Yea, by my Lord, the Most High, the Most Glorious!’ ‘Have the tree-stumps been uprooted?’ ‘Yea, more; the mountains have been scattered in dust; by Him the Lord of attributes!’ They say: ‘Where is Paradise, and where is Hell?’ Say: ‘The one is reunion with Me; the other thine own self, O thou who dost associate a partner with God and doubtest.’ They say: ‘We see not the Balance.’ Say: ‘Surely, by my Lord, the God of Mercy! None can see it except such as are endued with insight.’ They say: ‘Have the stars fallen?’ Say: ‘Yea, when He Who is the Self-Subsisting dwelt in the Land of Mystery. Take heed, ye who are endued with discernment!’ All the signs appeared when We drew forth the Hand of Power from the bosom of majesty and might. Verily, the Crier hath cried out, when the promised time came, and they that have recognized the splendours of Sinai have swooned away in the wilderness of hesitation, before the awful majesty of thy Lord, the Lord of creation. The trumpet asketh: ‘Hath the Bugle been sounded?’ Say: ‘Yea, by the King of Revelation! when He mounted the throne of His Name, the All-Merciful.’ Darkness hath been chased away by the dawning light of the mercy of thy Lord, the Source of all light. The breeze of the All-Merciful hath wafted, and the souls have been quickened in the tombs of their bodies. Thus hath the decree been fulfilled by God, the Mighty, the Beneficent. They who reject the truth have said: ‘When were the heavens cleft asunder?’ Say: ‘While ye lay in the graves of waywardness and error.’ Among the faithless is he who rubbeth his eyes, and looketh to the right and to the left. Say: ‘Blinded art thou. No refuge hast thou to flee to.’ And among them is he who saith: ‘Have men been gathered together?’ Say: ‘Yea, by My Lord! whilst thou didst lie in the cradle of idle fancies.’ And among them is he who saith: ‘Hath the Book been sent down through the power of the true Faith?’ Say: ‘The true Faith itself is astounded. Fear ye, O ye men of understanding heart!’ And among them is he who saith: ‘Have I been assembled with others, blind?’ Say: ‘Yea, by Him that rideth upon the clouds!’ Paradise is decked with mystic roses, and hell hath been made to blaze with the fire of the impious. Say: ‘The light hath shone forth from the horizon of Revelation, and the whole earth hath been illumined at the coming of Him Who is the Lord of the Day of the Covenant!’ The doubters have perished, whilst he that turned, guided by the light of assurance, unto the Dayspring of Certitude hath prospered. Blessed art thou, who hast fixed thy gaze upon Me, for this Tablet which hath been sent down for thee—a Tablet which causeth the souls of men to soar. Commit it to memory, and recite it. By My life! It is a door to the mercy of thy Lord. Well is it with him that reciteth it at eventide and at dawn. We, verily, heard thy praise of this Cause, through which the mountain of knowledge was crushed, and men’s feet have slipped. My glory be upon thee and upon whomsoever hath turned unto the Almighty, the All-Bounteous. The Tablet is ended, but the theme is unexhausted. Be patient, for thy Lord is patient…”
God Bless you Steve and God Bless all, Regards Tony
- Status