One correct religion with the Truth (part 2)?

[eddie_too]

spirit19

you write this: “Do you consider word of mouth an accurate method to maintain the precise nature of Truth over the centuries?”

you set up straw figures to knock down as though you were making an astute and incisive point. you do this repeatedly.

to answer your question, no one who is catholic ever said to you that the Church’s teachings are solely dependent upon “word of mouth”. in fact, you have been told repeatedly that catholic teachings are founded upon sacred scripture and sacred tradition. yet you persist in attempting to twist words that are perfectly clear to people of good will. this “word of mouth” insinuation is ONLY THE LATEST in your attempts to change the meanings of words catholics have written.

accordingly, I ask you this, in light of your persistent efforts to create straw dogs, to twist the clear meaning of other’s words and to ignore a multitude of informational posts about what the RCC really teaches, why should anyone here see your posts as being made from a place of good will?

before you answer, let me assure you that to any intelligent person, the multitude of your posts far outweigh any protestations you might make about being misunderstood or how really, your mind is clear, your heart is pure and your intentions are true. your protestations may rightly be rejected because of your persistent use of these false techniques to try and persuade the simple, the foolish and the ignorant to make Bahaullah an equivalent of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ offered His Life for the salvation of souls. Bahuallah did not. this distinction alone places an infinite gulf between the reality that is Jesus Christ and the reality of Bahaullah.

 

[Servant19]

spirit19

you write this: “Do you consider word of mouth an accurate method to maintain the precise nature of Truth over the centuries?”

you set up straw figures to knock down as though you were making an astute and incisive point. you do this repeatedly.

to answer your question, no one who is catholic ever said to you that the Church’s teachings are solely dependent upon “word of mouth”. in fact, you have been told repeatedly that catholic teachings are founded upon sacred scripture and sacred tradition. yet you persist in attempting to twist words that are perfectly clear to people of good will. this “word of mouth” insinuation is ONLY THE LATEST in your attempts to change the meanings of words catholics have written.

accordingly, I ask you this, in light of your persistent efforts to create straw dogs, to twist the clear meaning of other’s words and to ignore a multitude of informational posts about what the RCC really teaches, why should anyone here see your posts as being made from a place of good will?

before you answer, let me assure you that to any intelligent person, the multitude of your posts far outweigh any protestations you might make about being misunderstood or how really, your mind is clear, your heart is pure and your intentions are true. your protestations may rightly be rejected because of your persistent use of these false techniques to try and persuade the simple, the foolish and the ignorant to make Bahaullah an equivalent of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ offered His Life for the salvation of souls. Bahuallah did not. this distinction alone places an infinite gulf between the reality that is Jesus Christ and the reality of Bahaullah.

Dear eddie, brother, I seem to keep asking you to relax

You jump to conclusions, 2+2= 500, no need brother.

If you read the thread properly, you will realise that the “word of mouth” statement was used in SteveVH’s post when quoting 1 Thessalonians

Hope that clears things up.

I am NOT twisting words for my own agenda. Thankyou brother.

I would appreciate it if in the future you first seek to understand before accusing me of basically trolling dear friend

.

 

[SteveVH]

Hello there Steve

Do you consider word of mouth an accurate method to maintain the precise nature of Truth over the centuries?

Yes. This is not a matter of one person trying to recall something accurately so that it may be passed down to another, and to another… This is not the telephone game.

It is called “collective memory” and is preserved within a group of people through repetition. It is embedded in the life of this group of people through rituals, common prayers, chants, songs and teachings repeated again and again over centuries. It is not at all dependent upon individual recollection. It is embedded in the life of this group or culture. This was very common among the nomadic tribes of the middle east.

Add to this the fact that Jesus is the Head of his body, the Church. He sent the Holy Spirit to guide it into “all truth”. That Catholic doctrine has not changed since the beginning, 2000 years ago, is evidence that the collective memory of the Catholic Church is intact. Christ did not leave us orphans.

If you wish to make the point that somehow we do not have the truth once given to the Apostles, you will have to provide some evidence of this other than your unqualified errant interpretation of our Scriptures.

Also, what is the explanation of St.Paul’s assertion that he had a resurrected body living in the new earth with Jesus as the Adam of the new earth?.

Would you mind giving me the verses you have in mind?

Steve

 

[eddie_too]

servant19,

“word of mouth” is an absolutely necessary and accurate method for sustaining truth through centuries. however, you wrote as though catholics believed that “word of mouth” alone (since you said nothing about sacred scripture and sacred tradition which are essential Roman Catholic elements of discerning Truth) was sufficient.

I am certain, unless you never read another’s post, that you have been repeatedly informed of how the Roman Catholic Church teaches the faith, the Truth; and, never has a Roman Catholic ever told you that the truth is passed on solely through word of mouth.

so, yes word of mouth is an accurate way of passing the truth on through succeeding generations, but no one but you has implied that RCs believe it to be the sole or complete method of sustaining the truth through the ages.

what was the point of your phrasing your question as it was if you really intended to ask whether steven really believed that apostolic succession, sacred tradition and sacred scripture were accurate ways of passing on the truth? are you now saying that you were grossly mistaken in the way that you asked that question? perhaps if that is what you mean, you should say so in so many words instead of acting as though it was I who took you out of context or did something else to make you defensive. I used your words and your past record of posts (in which you repeatedly use this techniques of setting up straw dogs (incomplete or false concepts)) to make inquiries that can easily be interpreted as attempts to replace Jesus with Bahaullah. I seriously doubt that these feeble efforts to distort RC teaching could be successful with any but the ignorant and misinformed.

 

[Sam]

Hi All, mind if I weigh in?

First of all let me say that as far as I know there is no dichotomy in the minds of Baha’is between the aims of Christ and Baha’u’llah. We love both in exactly the same way, necessarily because it’s an article of our faith that though appearing in different bodies at different times, They have in reality one common animating purpose, which is to foster love and fellowship among the peoples of the world. In that regard, Baha’u’llah came to help to fulfill the Mission of Christ and should be welcomed by all for that reason. He spoke of Christ in glowing terms and referred to Him as the Son of God.

Another thing I want to say is that I am duly impressed by the sincerity I see here on this thread from my fellow Christians as much as from my fellow Baha’i, Servant19, who has to be congratulated for his tenacity in his effort to put forward his ideas.

Jesus said (in Matthew): “…where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

And I have no doubt that His spirit will continue to guide and confirm those of us who sincerely seek the truth. And as someone rightly said here (I think it was Steve), the truth is one - it cannot be multiple, which is what the Baha’i believe as well.

For my part, I’ve been a dormant member for some 10 years, amazingly. But I guess your loving spirit here has helped bring me to life. That to me is a true resurrection, and what it really means. .

 

[Servant19]

Hi All, mind if I weigh in?

First of all let me say that as far as I know there is no dichotomy in the minds of Baha’is between the aims of Christ and Baha’u’llah. We love both in exactly the same way, necessarily because it’s an article of our faith that though appearing in different bodies at different times, They have in reality one common animating purpose, which is to foster love and fellowship among the peoples of the world. In that regard, Baha’u’llah came to help to fulfill the Mission of Christ and should be welcomed by all for that reason. He spoke of Christ in glowing terms and referred to Him as the Son of God.

Another thing I want to say is that I am duly impressed by the sincerity I see here on this thread from my fellow Christians as much as from my fellow Baha’i, Servant19, who has to be congratulated for his tenacity in his effort to put forward his ideas.

Jesus said (in Matthew): “…where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

And I have no doubt that His spirit will continue to guide and confirm those of us who sincerely seek the truth. And as someone rightly said here (I think it was Steve), the truth is one - it cannot be multiple, which is what the Baha’i believe as well.

For my part, I’ve been a dormant member for some 10 years, amazingly. But I guess your loving spirit here has helped bring me to life. That to me is a true resurrection, and what it really means. .

Welcome to the forum Sam

God bless you

.

 

[tonyfish58]

Hi All, mind if I weigh in?

First of all let me say that as far as I know there is no dichotomy in the minds of Baha’is between the aims of Christ and Baha’u’llah. We love both in exactly the same way, necessarily because it’s an article of our faith that though appearing in different bodies at different times, They have in reality one common animating purpose, which is to foster love and fellowship among the peoples of the world. In that regard, Baha’u’llah came to help to fulfill the Mission of Christ and should be welcomed by all for that reason. He spoke of Christ in glowing terms and referred to Him as the Son of God.

Another thing I want to say is that I am duly impressed by the sincerity I see here on this thread from my fellow Christians as much as from my fellow Baha’i, Servant19, who has to be congratulated for his tenacity in his effort to put forward his ideas.

Jesus said (in Matthew): “…where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

And I have no doubt that His spirit will continue to guide and confirm those of us who sincerely seek the truth. And as someone rightly said here (I think it was Steve), the truth is one - it cannot be multiple, which is what the Baha’i believe as well.

For my part, I’ve been a dormant member for some 10 years, amazingly. But I guess your loving spirit here has helped bring me to life. That to me is a true resurrection, and what it really means. .

Sam I too wish to welcome you in Love and Faith

God Bless your Journey and may each day be better then the last

As of now I pack the lap Top away and Fly towards a destiny unknown, God Bless you all until I can post again!

God Bless all and Regards Tony

 

[Servant19]

Sam I too wish to welcome you in Love and Faith

God Bless your Journey and may each day be better then the last

As of now I pack the lap Top away and Fly towards a destiny unknown, God Bless you all until I can post again!

God Bless all and Regards Tony

God bless you Tony, have a safe trip.

May your selfless and sacrificial services be accepted in the sight of God!



.

 

[Sam]

Thank you for the warm welcome. I hope to read more of what everyone has to say, especially because here I truly sense a common love for God and Those He sends to guide us to reality.

 

[eddie_too]

since Jesus conquers death, gifts to all mankind salvation and promises to all mankind eternal life, I am curious as to why people think that God needs or needed to add to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

exactly, what more do I or anyone else need beyond the Gospel of Jesus Christ and why do I or anyone else need this if we have salvation from our sins and eternal life through our faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

 

[Sam]

since Jesus conquers death, gifts to all mankind salvation and promises to all mankind eternal life, I am curious as to why people think that God needs or needed to add to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

exactly, what more do I or anyone else need beyond the Gospel of Jesus Christ and why do I or anyone else need this if we have salvation from our sins and eternal life through our faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Hi Eddie, I recommend you read the book, the Kitab-i-Iqan (which is Arabic for ‘the Book of Certitude’), in which Baha’u’llah explains at length how religious communities bitterly oppose the coming of every new Prophet of God. That behavior is in itself a sign of their legitimacy. It’s the very reason Jesus was put to death.

In order to dispute the authority of Jesus, in fact, the Jews proclaimed: “The hand of God is chained up,” and there could thus be no further book to follow the Old Testament. To them, the New Testament was a blasphemy. And thus, in refusing to acknowledge that Jesus was in fact their Messiah, they thereby deprived themselves of the soul-reviving bread of heaven that came in the form of the Revelation of Jesus.

Divine truth is not finite, but progressively revealed over the ages. Just as God revealed Himself in Abraham and Moses and others at intervals, and only later, Jesus, He has once again revealed Himself in Baha’u’llah.

No man can add to the Gospels, this is true, but certain God can add to it and He does. There is no statement in the Gospel to suggest that His revelation would come to an end in the future. On the contrary, Jesus said, “I have many things to tell you, but you cannot bear them now.” Clearly all that He wanted to tell us is not contained in the Bible, but He promised that it would be revealed at a future date. He said, “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.” - John [16:13]

Clearly, He was referring to a Person, real flesh and blood, given that the above text makes it clear that He would have ears with which to hear and a mouth with which to speak.

That isn’t to diminish the station of Jesus in any way, but rather to confirm and vindicate it. This isn’t like a soccer match, in which one team opposed the other. We’re all playing on the same side, even if we don’t realize it at first.