Muslim asked, "If Jesus is God, then why did his Apostle John write in his Gospel, after seeing and spending years with Jesus, that 'No one has ever s

[Reuben_J]

I just want some definitions so that I can understand.

So when referring to Jesus’ “human” aspect, we are just referring to the physical body ONLY?

Is that official Catholic teaching?

Here then it becomes more complicated. We have to accept that Jesus is both divine and human. When we separate what is human and what is divine in Jesus, it would be difficult to to see the separation. How do we separate that? He as the Second Person of the Trinity has dual natures.

Again, if you ask me, Jesus as a human person was when he walked the face of the earth physically. Yet that is not completely true for even then there were hints where he also showed his divine nature as well. The transfiguration was one such example.

So it is difficult to put Jesus in a box.

 

[Reuben_J]

So it is difficult to put Jesus in a box.

Servant19 was saying (in the Bahai’s Thread) that God is undefinable. Similarly I would not try to define Jesus insofar what was revealed and made known to us. Probably there is more to it which is not revealed and therefore always a mystery.

 

[rinnie]

It sure is interesting to explore this together

Can I ask, what do you mean by “human in nature”?

Hi sorry it took me so long. Anyone who knows me know I work at home. Some cusomers I can talk to in between some I must give my UNDIVIDED ATTENTION TO.

But sure Jesus was Human in nature which means human in every single way as us but ONE thing. Sin. That is how he was divine.

That is why we say he was human AND divine.

See it goes back to the first Adam he was born without sin. But then by having the free will given to him by God he CHOSE to sin. That is what we call original sin. That is how death began. Sin means 2 things physical death and death of the soul.

Now Jesus was considered the 2nd Adam in a sense. He died a physical death or human life as we say but you may wonder why and how if he had no sins. But see he died for OUR sins because he had none.

That is why at our BAPTISM original sin it is by Jesus being divine without sin and any kind of sin (him being God of course) came down as human and took away sin and DEATH.

But it was not physical death it was death of the soul. Eternal death he took away.

 

[Reuben_J]

So when referring to Jesus’ “human” aspect, we are just referring to the physical body ONLY?

Is that official Catholic teaching?

Well, let’s put it this way to ascertain the dual nature of Jesus first. As human he was born of a woman and died.

As divine he was conceived by the Holy Spirit without a human father. In history only Adam was created without a human father but then that was because he was the first human. As divine too he did not die but rise again.

So those are the obvious divine and human natures of Jesus that come into play that we can see.

Perhaps with this it is easier to understand the salvific redemption brought forth by Jesus to save us from sin (death) and to give us eternal life.

 

[ronyodish]

So when referring to Jesus’ “human” aspect, we are just referring to the physical body ONLY?

Is that official Catholic teaching?

Servant19,

No, not only the physical body. With regards the human nature of Christ, the Catholic Church confesses the full reality of Christ’s physical human body, as well as, His human soul (with its operations of intellect and will).

God bless,

Rony

 

[rinnie]

Servant19,

No, not only the physical body. With regards the human nature of Christ, the Catholic Church confesses the full reality of Christ’s physical human body, as well as, His human soul (with its operations of intellect and will).

God bless,

Rony

 

[Servant19]

Servant19,

No, not only the physical body. With regards the human nature of Christ, the Catholic Church confesses the full reality of Christ’s physical human body, as well as, His human soul (with its operations of intellect and will).

God bless,

Rony

This makes sense, thankyou.

So is His soul human or divine?
Or is there a third aspect that Christ shares with the Father which is beyond His human SOUL?

 

[Servant19]

Well, let’s put it this way to ascertain the dual nature of Jesus first. As human he was born of a woman and died.

Yes, I agree with this Reuben, but any person who is born of a mother is immediately endowed with a body and a soul, at conception, right?

So those are the obvious divine and human natures of Jesus that come into play that we can see.

So are you saying here that Jesus had a physical (body) aspect, human soul aspect AND a separate DIVINE aspect?

 

[ronyodish]

So is His soul human or divine?
Or is there a third aspect that Christ shares with the Father which is beyond His human SOUL?

His soul is human.

In addition to His human nature (body and soul), Christ also has a divine nature, which is the nature of God. He shares this divine nature with the Father, and with the Holy Spirit. This divine nature is beyond His human soul, and beyond His human body, but not separated or divided from His human body and human soul.

In other words, the divine and human natures of the one Lord Jesus Christ are in a Union, and that this Union is without division, without separation, without confusion, and without change.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Servant19]

His soul is human.

In addition to His human nature (body and soul), Christ also has a divine nature, which is the nature of God. He shares this divine nature with the Father, and with the Holy Spirit. This divine nature is beyond His human soul, and beyond His human body, but not separated or divided from His human body and human soul.

In other words, the divine and human natures of the one Lord Jesus Christ are in a Union, and that this Union is without division, without separation, without confusion, and without change.

God bless,

Rony

Thankyou again Rony,

This very much aligns with Baha’i theology on the nature of the Manifestation of God.

God bless

 

[ronyodish]

This very much aligns with Baha’i theology on the nature of the Manifestation of God.

Does Baha’i theology agree on the Incarnation or Union of Christ, as God and Man?

Does Baha’i theology agree on God the Holy Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

God bless,

Rony

 

[Servant19]

Does Baha’i theology agree on the Incarnation or Union of Christ, as God and Man?

Does Baha’i theology agree on God the Holy Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

God bless,

Rony

Hi Rony,

Baha’i theology indicates that the Manifestations of God (such as Jesus, Muhammad, Baha’u’llah etc) have a human aspect (namely body and soul) and a DIVINE aspect which occupies a station which will never be understood by any human mind.

The Father, in His essence, is beyond all of these aspects however and resides in a plane of existence all on His own, however there is definitely an “unknown” sharing of substance between the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Divine Aspect of the Manifestation of God.

What the nature of that substance which is shared is, is a mystery.

Hope that makes sense

 

[ronyodish]

Baha’i theology indicates that the Manifestations of God (such as Jesus, Muhammad, Baha’u’llah etc) have a human aspect (namely body and soul) and a DIVINE aspect which occupies a station which will never be understood by any human mind.

The Father, in His essence, is beyond all of these aspects however and resides in a plane of existence all on His own, however there is definitely an “unknown” sharing of substance between the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Divine Aspect of the Manifestation of God.

What the nature of that substance which is shared is, is a mystery.

Servant19,

Catholic teaching is that God is the Holy Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, the Holy Spirit is fully God, but all three are one God, not three gods. All three are distinct from each other, but not separated.

Catholic teaching also says that one of the three, the middle one, God the Son, assumed a human nature (body and soul), and became Man, without ceasing to be God. Thus, we have the Union, of Divinity assuming Humanity, the Godhead assuming Manhood, the Son assuming a human body and soul. This Union in known to us as Jesus Christ.

Now, my questions for you:

1. Do you believe that Jesus is the Manifestation of God in the same sense as what I have written in the paragraph above?
2. Do you believe that Muhammad, Baha’u’llah, etc., are the Manifestations of God in the same sense as what we believe about Jesus in the paragraph above?

God bless,

Rony

 

[Servant19]

Servant19,

Catholic teaching is that God is the Holy Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, the Holy Spirit is fully God, but all three are one God, not three gods. All three are distinct from each other, but not separated.

Catholic teaching also says that one of the three, the middle one, God the Son, assumed a human nature (body and soul), and became Man, without ceasing to be God. Thus, we have the Union, of Divinity assuming Humanity, the Godhead assuming Manhood, the Son assuming a human body and soul. This Union in known to us as Jesus Christ.

Now, my questions for you:

1. Do you believe that Jesus is the Manifestation of God in the same sense as what I have written in the paragraph above?
2. Do you believe that Muhammad, Baha’u’llah, etc., are the Manifestations of God in the same sense as what we believe about Jesus in the paragraph above?

God bless,

Rony

Hi Rony,
In order to answer your questions I need to understand FULLY what you wrote above.

When you say they are “distinct but not separate” what do you mean exactly?

 

[ronyodish]

When you say they are “distinct but not separate” what do you mean exactly?

By “distinct”, I mean that the Father is not the Son, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, and the Son is not the Holy Spirit. Therefore, one can communicate to the other. Catholics are Trinitarian, not Sabellian.

By “not separated”, I mean that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. The Holy Trinity is one God, undivided. Catholics are monotheist, not tritheite.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Servant19]

By “distinct”, I mean that the Father is not the Son, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, and the Son is not the Holy Spirit. Therefore, one can communicate to the other. Catholics are Trinitarian, not Sabellian.

By “not separated”, I mean that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. The Holy Trinity is one God, undivided. Catholics are monotheist, not tritheite.

God bless,

Rony

Thanks Rony, this explains a lot and is again very much in alignment with Bahai theology, although different terms are used

So in answer to your questions:

1. Yes, Baha’is believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, very much in line with the thinking you have proposed.
2. Yes, I also believe that Muhammad, Baha’u’llah etc are all Manifestations of God in exactly the same way as you have proposed. Simply manifested in a different human frame at a different age.

“I am the Alpha and the Omega” is an eternal in the past, AND ETERNAL IN THE FUTURE statement…

God bless

 

[ronyodish]

1. Yes, Baha’is believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, very much in line with the thinking you have proposed.

1. Yes, I also believe that Muhammad, Baha’u’llah etc are all Manifestations of God in exactly the same way as you have proposed. Simply manifested in a different human frame at a different age.

Ok then, with regards point #1, if you confess the underlying truth about who and what Jesus Christ is, and confess Him with the same essential meaning as we do, then any outward differences might just be terminological, rather than, essential. However, I do want to point out that confessing Christ with the term Son is an essential matter for Catholics. He is to be confessed as the Son, not just as a Manifestation, but as the only begotten Son of the Father.

I am trying, as much as I can, to give you the benefit of the doubt here. I’m just not completely convinced that you actually believe that One of the Trinity, the Son of God the Father, became Man. I say this, because the wikipedia article on the Baha’i states the following:

==================
“In the Bahá’í religion God is often referred to by titles and attributes (for example, the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity are seen as compromising, if not contradicting, the Bahá’í view that God is single and has no equal.”​

So, with regards the Trinity, if you disagree with the above wiki statement, and if you do actually believe that the Trinity is true, and that the Trinity does not compromise and does not contradict monotheism, then I can accept you as a Trinitarian. Likewise, if you believe that One of this Trinity, the Divine Son, became Man without ceasing to be Divine, then I can accept your belief in the Incarnation as orthodox or correct.

Now, with regards point #2, this is where we really and clearly do essentially differ. We do not believe that Muhammad, Baha’u’llah, etc., were Manifestations of God in a different human frame at a different age. To us, these were mere men, and unlike Jesus Christ (God and Man).

Catholics believe that public revelation culminated in the first coming of Jesus Christ and ended with the death of the last Apostle, St. John. There is no new and further public revelation to be expected before the glorious event of the second coming of Christ, which will occur at the end of time. We can not accept any revelation that claims to surpass, or correct, the revelation given to by Christ. So, for instance, we reject the claims of Muhammad, this mere man, who claimed to be the “seal of the prophets”, and we reject those teachings in his Qur’an which contradict our Christian Faith.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Servant19]

Ok then, with regards point #1, if you confess the underlying truth about who and what Jesus Christ is, and confess Him with the same essential meaning as we do, then any outward differences might just be terminological, rather than, essential. However, I do want to point out that confessing Christ with the term Son is an essential matter for Catholics. He is to be confessed as the Son, not just as a Manifestation, but as the only begotten Son of the Father.

I am trying, as much as I can, to give you the benefit of the doubt here. I’m just not completely convinced that you actually believe that One of the Trinity, the Son of God the Father, became Man. I say this, because the wikipedia article on the Baha’i states the following:

==================
“In the Bahá’í religion God is often referred to by titles and attributes (for example, the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity are seen as compromising, if not contradicting, the Bahá’í view that God is single and has no equal.”​

So, with regards the Trinity, if you disagree with the above wiki statement, and if you do actually believe that the Trinity is true, and that the Trinity does not compromise and does not contradict monotheism, then I can accept you as a Trinitarian. Likewise, if you believe that One of this Trinity, the Divine Son, became Man without ceasing to be Divine, then I can accept your belief in the Incarnation as orthodox or correct.

Now, with regards point #2, this is where we really and clearly do essentially differ. We do not believe that Muhammad, Baha’u’llah, etc., were Manifestations of God in a different human frame at a different age. To us, these were mere men, and unlike Jesus Christ (God and Man).

Catholics believe that public revelation culminated in the first coming of Jesus Christ and ended with the death of the last Apostle, St. John. There is no new and further public revelation to be expected before the glorious event of the second coming of Christ, which will occur at the end of time. We can not accept any revelation that claims to surpass, or correct, the revelation given to by Christ. So, for instance, we reject the claims of Muhammad, this mere man, who claimed to be the “seal of the prophets”, and we reject those teachings in his Qur’an which contradict our Christian Faith.

God bless,

Rony

Hi Rony, in regards to the wikipedia article, if it were addressed to Christians ONLY, it would actually read:

==================
“In the Bahá’í religion THE FATHER is often referred to by titles and attributes (for example, the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity are seen as compromising, if not contradicting, the Bahá’í view that THE FATHER is single and has no equal.”​

In regards to your disagreement that God cannot become flesh in any other Manifestation other than Jesus, the question that arises is “why would you believe that this has happened in Jesus only?”

What is it about Jesus that has convinced you that this is the case?

 

[SteveVH]

Hi Rony, in regards to the wikipedia article, if it were addressed to Christians ONLY, it would actually read:

==================
“In the Bahá’í religion THE FATHER is often referred to by titles and attributes (for example, the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity are seen as compromising, if not contradicting, the Bahá’í view that THE FATHER is single and has no equal.”​

In regards to your disagreement that God cannot become flesh in any other Manifestation other than Jesus, the question that arises is “why would you believe that this has happened in Jesus only?”

What is it about Jesus that has convinced you that this is the case?

Muhammad was not God incarnate and never claimed to be. Moses was not God incarnate and never claimed to be. Abraham was not God incarnate and never claimed to be. Jesus, on the other hand, did claim to be God incarnate; the Son of Man and the Son of God. What Jesus did that none of the others did was to be resurrected from the dead, of his own power. Thus the reason that hose who hold them all as equal manifestations of God must reject the resurrection. That is what makes Jesus different. He made the claim and proved the claim.

 

[ronyodish]

Hi Rony, in regards to the wikipedia article, if it were addressed to Christians ONLY, it would actually read:

==================
“In the Bahá’í religion THE FATHER is often referred to by titles and attributes (for example, the All-Powerful, or the All-Loving), and there is a substantial emphasis on monotheism; such doctrines as the Trinity are seen as compromising, if not contradicting, the Bahá’í view that THE FATHER is single and has no equal.”​

Servant19,

Your revision to the wiki statement brings up some additional problems. Catholics have no problem saying that God (not just the Father, but the whole Trinity) is often addressed by titles and attributes such as All-Powerful and All-Loving. To reduce these titles and attributes to just the Father, would actually lessen the truth, not increase it.

Likewise, to say that God is single (or one) and has no equal, is not a problem to us. We believe that God is one, and there are no other equal gods besides Him. Even saying that the Father is single (or one) is not a problem, since He is only one of the Trinity, but it can become a problem if we were to additionally say that the Father has no equal.

Catholics believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all equal in Divinity. Now, in the order of eternal generation and eternal procession, the Father is 1st, the Son is 2nd, and the Holy Spirit is 3rd, so only in this sense, in the sense of order, can the term inequality be applied, but not in the sense of one being more or less God than the other.

In regards to your disagreement that God cannot become flesh in any other Manifestation other than Jesus, the question that arises is “why would you believe that this has happened in Jesus only?”

What is it about Jesus that has convinced you that this is the case?

In addition to what Steve wrote, here are some further comments:

The basic answer to the first question is that we believe these things about Jesus, and only Jesus, is because this is what has been handed down to us by Jesus, His Apostles and their successors (the Church). Christians have been warned ahead of time not to fall for other “christs”, other “gospels”, other “spirits”, and other “prophets”. There are several passages in Scriptures that point this out:

“Take heed that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, `I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray” (Matt. 24:4-5).

“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8)

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God” (1 John 4:1-3).

So, with regards Islam for example, Muhammad taught that Jesus was not the Son of God Incarnate. To us, this teaching is another “gospel”, another “spirit”, and does not come from the Spirit of God. Muhammad, therefore, can not be a messenger, or prophet, or ultimately a Manifestation of God like how Jesus is a Manifestation of God. A true Manifestation of God can not teach one thing in one era, and then turn around and teach the complete opposite in another era.

As to your second question, I’ll just borrow Steve’s statement above: “He made the claim and proved the claim”. Ultimately, the resurrection of Jesus proved all His claims, and so He is the only Man that can ever be considered to be the one and only Manifestation of God. None of the other men whom you consider as Manifestations of God resurrected from the grave, and that’s because they were simply men and nothing more.

God bless,

Rony