J
JimmyDFG
Guest
That sounds eerie familiarThere are youtube videos with so called clerics who take verses from a point in time of their choosing and exegete (or more accurately lack of exegesis) the same way.
MJ
- Status
S
Servant19
Guest
This is a repeated line of opposition from you Martin.
No interpreter, no theologian, no scholar or saint, or Church Father has ever given an exposition on a theological concept by quoting an entirety of what Jesus said.
Each word, each sentence has manifold meanings, and Bahais are entitled to interpret, just as all the Christians are, in any sentence one wishes. If you wish to counter that interpretation with another passage feel free to do so.
But for now, please remain as charitable to Bahais as you would be to a saint when using the Bible to explore God and Truth
.
W
worldcitizen
Guest
The Father is reflected in Christ but Christ and the Father are only one in purpose not essence.
Christ is not the essence of God Himself but a Manifestation of God, a reflection the Father like a mirror.
jn.17.21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Being at one is not sameness. Christ being at one with God doesn’t mean He is God or according to the above passage the disciples would also be God which is clearly not what was meant.
J
JimmyDFG
Guest
How do you not see the charity in the words of God when we give you verses from the Holy Bible?This is a repeated line of opposition from you Martin.
No interpreter, no theologian, no scholar or saint, or Church Father has ever given an exposition on a theological concept by quoting an entirety of what Jesus said.
Each word, each sentence has manifold meanings, and Bahais are entitled to interpret, just as all the Christians are, in any sentence one wishes. If you wish to counter that interpretation with another passage feel free to do so.
But for now, please remain as charitable to Bahais as you would be to a saint when using the Bible to explore God and Truth
.
A
arthra
Guest
Actually the title “Baha” began at the Conference of Badasht…around 1848…Four years after the declaration of the Bab… and the title was confirmed by the Bab.
“…during the conference took on the title of Bahāʾ and in later years became better known as Bahāʾ-Allah”
bahai-library.com/momen_iranica_badash
*Husayn Ali, a leading disciple of the Bab known to history as Baha’u’llah, assumed the title of “Baha” (“glory” or “splendour”) at a gathering of the Bab’s followers in 1848, a title that was later confirmed by the Bab himself.
*
also see:
bahaichronicles.org/bab/
*First, a new name indicated a new spiritual identity. Thus, when Bahaullah gave the participants in the conference at Badasht new names, it symbolized their membership in a new and independent religion. Second, the titles given to Babi and Bahá’í leaders indicated their rank. Thus, Mulla Husayn Bushru’i was given the titles “Bab al-Bab” (“gate of the gate”) and “Qa’im of the People of Khurasan,” a messianic title. `Abd al-Baha was entitled “Most Great Branch,” hinting at his station as his father’s successor. Third, religious names were used for security, to protect the identity of individual believers. Thus, letters were commonly addressed with names, letters, and numbers that were both religious symbols and codes.
The names and titles conferred by the Bab and Bahaullah were most commonly names and attributes of God numerically equivalent according to the Abjad reckoning to the individual’s given name.
bahai-library.com/walbridge_personal_names
J
JimmyDFG
Guest
"In John 14:28, Jesus says, “The Father is greater than I.” For many, this statement seems obvious: Jesus is not God. But is this really what our Lord was saying?
In Catholic theology, this text can be understood in two ways. First, being “greater” than another does not have to mean one is essentially different from the other, as when we say a man is essentially distinct from an animal. Greatness can refer to one person functioning in a greater way quantitatively, qualitatively, or even relationally in comparison to another without there being an essential distinction. For example, Matthew 11:11 tells us there has never “risen among [men] a greater than John the Baptist: yet he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.” John is not something other than human because he is said to be greater than certain other people. All human beings share the same nature; therefore, they are absolutely equal in dignity.
Similarly, the Father can be said to be greater than the Son pertaining to their relation within the inner life of God, but not with respect to their shared nature as being fully and equally God. The Father alone is the first principle of life in the Godhead; thus, the Catechism of the Catholic Church can say, in paragraph 246: “Everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born . . .” (emphasis added). In this sense, the Father can be said to be greater than the Son relationally, while they are absolutely equal with regard to their essence as God.
Another—and perhaps simpler—way one can legitimately interpret this text is to point out that John 14:28 seems to be emphasizing the humanity of Christ. Thus, because Jesus is fully man, it would be appropriate to say the Father would be greater than the Son. The entire verse reads: “You heard me say to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.”
Jesus was emphasizing here and in previous verses his impending death, resurrection, and departure from the apostles. This would apply to his humanity most particularly. Thus, the same Jesus who can say, “I and the Father are one” in John 10:30—as God—can say, “The Father is greater than I” in John 14:28—as man."
A
arthra
Guest
The best response I’ve found to that question can be found here:
*Terminology for describing the different levels of the Bahá’í authoritative writings—here defined as the works of the Báb, Bahá’u’lláh, `Abdu’l-Bahá, Shoghi Effendi, and the Universal House of Justice—is incompletely developed. The Báb and Bahá’u’lláh are viewed by Bahá’ís as Manifestations of God, and therefore as being channels of God’s revelation to humanity. As a result their works occupy the highest level within the hierarchy of Bahá’í authoritative writings. Their works may be termed holy writ or word of God. The Universal House of Justice has also used the term creative word to describe the writings of Bahá’u’lláh. Bahá’u’lláh makes it clear that the Word of God possesses a creative potency that nothing else can match: “every single letter proceeding out of the mouth of God is indeed a mother letter, and every word uttered by Him Who is the Well Spring of Divine Revelation [the Manifestation] is a mother word, and His Tablet a Mother Tablet” (Gleanings, 142). Reciting the Word of God has profound effects on the believer and the world around him: “Whoso reciteth, in the privacy of his chamber, the verses revealed by God, the scattering angels shall scatter abroad the fragrance of the words uttered by his mouth, and shall cause the heart of every righteous man to throb” (Bahá’í Prayers, v).
Code:
Because Bahá’u'lláh succeeded the Báb as a Manifestation, Bahá’u'lláh often modified or discontinued laws of the Báb; consequently the Báb’s teachings are not binding on Bahá’ís. But they remain holy writ, and the Báb’s devotional writings are read by Bahá’ís at their meetings and in private prayer.
S
Servant19
Guest
S
Servant19
Guest
And how do you see it as uncharitable when, like the saints, and Church Fathers, quote a single sentence from the Holy Bible?
.
T
TonyBS
Guest
Ist the Messenger, Then His Words
The Messenger is the First to stand by Gods Revelation.
Then one would look at the Fruit produced from those words.
How one determines to do this has a key.
Regards Tony
W
worldcitizen
Guest
We are told no-one can know the essence of God including Christ and Baha’u’llah.
“From time immemorial, Baha’u’llah speaking of God, explains, “He, the Divine Being, hath been veiled in the ineffable sanctity of His exalted Self, and will everlasting continue to be wrapt in the impenetrable mystery of His unknowable Essence… Ten thousand Prophets, each a Moses, are thunderstruck upon the Sinai of their search at God’s forbidding voice, ‘Thou shalt never behold Me!’; whilst a myriad Messengers, each as great as Jesus, stand dismayed upon their heavenly thrones by the interdiction ‘Mine Essence thou shalt never apprehend!’” “How bewildering to me, insignificant as I am,” Bahá’u’lláh in His communion with God affirms, “is the attempt to fathom the sacred depths of Thy knowledge! How futile my efforts to visualize the magnitude of the power inherent in Thine handiwork—the revelation of Thy creative power!” “When I contemplate, O my God, the relationship that bindeth me to Thee,” He, in yet another prayer revealed in His own handwriting, testifies, “I am moved to proclaim to all created things ‘verily I am God!’; and when I consider my own self, lo, I find it coarser than clay!” (Dispensation of Baha’u’llah)
M
MartinJordan
Guest
M
MartinJordan
Guest
J
JimmyDFG
Guest
But didn’t Baha’u’llah claim that he is the manifestation of God and that no one can recognize God except through Him? (the Tajalliyat circa 1855)
S
Servant19
Guest
S
Servant19
Guest
3 uncreated essences equals polytheism…
…and yet, Baha’is should be comfortable with Jesus being God…please be aware of a two-fold nature of a Divine Being like Jesus or Baha’u’llah…
.
T
Techno2000
Guest
One is the begetter, and one is the begotten… that is the difference, but they are the same substance.
J
JimmyDFG
Guest
Wasn’t Krishna a mix of polytheism? And yet you implied he is/was God
W
worldcitizen
Guest
Thank you. I can always use more prayers. I really don’t feel worthy of anyone’s prayers but if you do pray I’ll be very much grateful.
W
worldcitizen
Guest
Krishna was a Manifestation of God.
- Status