Out of all the religions - Why Christianity?

[Vico]

Hi Vico,

I still have never seen the term “adopted” to refer to the relationship between Baha’u’llah or Muhammad with God. Could you explain why you think this please?

Secondly, it is impossible for the grace of the Holy Spirit to teach that “Jesus Christ …is the one and only mediator between God and men.”

Impossible.

.

Humans may be adopted sons of God through the reception of baptism, and that baptism may be of water, blood (martyrs), or desire.

There are lesser and subordinate mediators than the one divine mediator. Fr. John Hardon explains in the Catholic Catechism that: “… the Incarnation corresponds to mediation in the order of being, and the Redemption (remission of sin and conferral of grace) is mediation morally. This kind of mediation is incommunicable. No one but the Savior unites in himself the divinity, which demands reconciliation, and the humanity, which needs to be reconciled.”

 

[Servant19]

Humans may be adopted sons of God through the reception of baptism, and that baptism may be of water, blood (martyrs), or desire.

There are lesser and subordinate mediators than the one divine mediator. Fr. John Hardon explains in the Catholic Catechism that: “… the Incarnation corresponds to mediation in the order of being, and the Redemption (remission of sin and conferral of grace) is mediation morally. This kind of mediation is incommunicable. No one but the Savior unites in himself the divinity, which demands reconciliation, and the humanity, which needs to be reconciled.”

While the human nature of Muhammad and Baha’u’llah is well documented, I think it is important that you understand that the human nature of Jesus is equally well documented in Scripture.

What must be asserted however Vico, is that Muhammad and Baha’u’llah also have a Divine nature, equally glorious, equally majestic and equal in all aspects with the Divine Jesus.

Both Muhammad and Baha’u’llah were also the Incarnate Word, without question.

There is no adoptionism here dear friend.

.

 

[Vico]

While the human nature of Muhammad and Baha’u’llah is well documented, I think it is important that you understand that the human nature of Jesus is equally well documented in Scripture.

What must be asserted however Vico, is that Muhammad and Baha’u’llah also have a Divine nature, equally glorious, equally majestic and equal in all aspects with the Divine Jesus.

Both Muhammad and Baha’u’llah were also the Incarnate Word, without question.

There is no adoptionism here dear friend.

.

There is a direct conflict between Christian theology and what you mention. It is because of the concept accepted by Bahá’u’lláh, that the essence of God is absolutely transcendent and is not manifested in the contingent world and that God created the world through a first emanation of First Will.

Catholic’s hold the truth of creation ex nihilo, from the Fourth Lateran Council, so there can be Catholic belief in emanation (First Will). Creation ex nihilo is not symbolic.
Fourth Lateran Council: “We firmly believe and profess without qualification that there is only one true God, eternal, immense, unchangeable, incomprehensible, omnipotent, and indescribable, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit…they are the one and only principle of all things - Creator of all things visible and invisible, spiritual and corporeal,”

And Vatican I council states:
The Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church believes and acknowledges that there is one true and living God, Creator and Lord of Heaven and earth, almighty, eternal, immeasurable, incomprehensible, infinite in will, understanding and every perfection. Since He is one, singular, completely simple and unchangeable spiritual substance, He must be declared to be in reality and in essence, distinct from the world, supremely happy in Himself and from Himself, and inexpressibly loftier than anything besides Himself which either exists or can be imagined. This one true God, by His goodness and almighty power, not with the intention of increasing His happiness, nor indeed of obtaining happiness, but in order to manifest His perfection by the good things which He bestows on what He creates, by an absolutely free plan, together from the beginning of time brought into being from nothing the twofold created order, that is the spiritual and the bodily, the angelic and the earthly, and thereafter the human which is, in a way, common to both since it is composed of spirit and body [10]. Everything that God has brought into being He protects and governs by his providence, which reaches from one end of the earth to the other and orders all things well [11] . All things are open and laid bare to His eyes [12] , even those which will be brought about by the free activity of creatures.

10 See Lateran council IV, const. 1
11 Wis 8, 1.
12 Heb 4, 13

1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.
2. If anyone is so bold as to assert that there exists nothing besides matter: let him be anathema.
3. If anyone says that the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema.
5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema.

Catechism 285 reviews some myths of creation.

**285 **Since the beginning the Christian faith has been challenged by responses to the question of origins that differ from its own. Ancient religions and cultures produced many myths concerning origins.

• Some philosophers have said that everything is God, that the world is God, or that the development of the world is the development of God (Pantheism).
• Others have said that the world is a necessary emanation arising from God and returning to him. Still others have affirmed the existence of two eternal principles, Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, locked, in permanent conflict (Dualism, Manichaeism).
• According to some of these conceptions, the world (at least the physical world) is evil, the product of a fall, and is thus to be rejected or left behind (Gnosticism).
• Some admit that the world was made by God, but as by a watch-maker who, once he has made a watch, abandons it to itself (Deism).
• Finally, others reject any transcendent origin for the world, but see it as merely the interplay of matter that has always existed (Materialism).

All these attempts bear witness to the permanence and universality of the question of origins. This inquiry is distinctively human.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Well, this is what unites Christianity with Islam and the Baha’i Faith.

They all had Messengers of God who existed before they were born on earth. They were from heaven, and came down from heaven, incarnated as the Word made flesh.

Christ, Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah all had a Divine and a human nature. They are very few and far between. The most precious Beings to ever walk the earth.

.

Muhammad was not God. He did not share in the divine nature with God.

Neither did the Bab nor Baha’u’llah. They were not God.

Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah are not members of the one Godhead.

Anyone who offers them worship is committing a grave sin. Anyone who even follows them is following the lesser teachings of mere mortal men.

Jesus Christ is God. Fully God and Fully Man. The Second Person of the Trinity.

Jesus Christ is worshiped as God, and we follow His teachings because He is God.

 

[Randy_Carson]

So for the Pharisees to think that they knew God well enough to be able to see that Jesus was God is a contradiction to the phrase “God is incomprehensible”…

The Pharisees could not comprehend that God is actually a trinity of persons and that Jesus was the Second Person of the Trinity. And why should they? The inner life of God - the Trinity - is a thing that can only be known by revelation.

To be fair to them, Jesus’ claim to be God was a direct violation of the shema: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.”

The Pharisees could not grasp how one God could be two (or three) persons.

Lots of people struggle with that idea to this very day.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I note when you blame “the Jews” you use the term collectively and that is the stem from which anti-semitism was born. Jesus was a Jew Mary and Joseph were Jews the disciples were Jews. It was one group of Jews who persecuted Jesus NOT the whole Jewish people. Indeed the earliest followers of Jesus were not called Christians but Nazarenes and described by Roman writers as quote “a Jewish sect”.
Blaming the Jews collectively for the death of Jesus and conveniently downgrading the part Rome played in it is the oldest slander and the root of genocides.

If not for the actions of the Jewish high court, the Romans probably would have never even heard of Jesus. As it is, we have Josephus, Tacitus and others recounting his death under Pontius Pilate.

So, yes, individual leaders of the Jewish people were responsible for the death of Jesus.

This does not justify hatred and bigotry toward all Jews today, however.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Hi Vico,

I still have never seen the term “adopted” to refer to the relationship between Baha’u’llah or Muhammad with God. Could you explain why you think this please?

I’ve never seen anyone say anything like that about them either. This ought to trouble you. :sad_yes:

However, anyone who will enjoy God’s presence in the life to come must be adopted by God.

Ephesians 1:5
5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—

So, IF Muhammed, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah are in heaven, then it is because they are God’s adopted sons…just as you and I may be some day.

Only Jesus Christ is the Divine Son of God proceeding from the Father and sharing in His divine nature.

Jesus Christ is God.

Secondly, it is impossible for the grace of the Holy Spirit to teach that “Jesus Christ …is the one and only mediator between God and men.”

Impossible.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is EXACTLY what the scriptures teach.

1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,

Of course, a number of false prophets have appeared since then…gaining for themselves followings of various sizes…but then people will run after anyone making claims for himself, I suppose.

 

[Randy_Carson]

While the human nature of Muhammad and Baha’u’llah is well documented, I think it is important that you understand that the human nature of Jesus is equally well documented in Scripture.

What must be asserted however Vico, is that Muhammad and Baha’u’llah also have a Divine nature, equally glorious, equally majestic and equal in all aspects with the Divine Jesus.

Both Muhammad and Baha’u’llah were also the Incarnate Word, without question.

There is no adoptionism here dear friend.

.

Is Muhammad God?

Is Baha’u’llah God?

 

[Servant19]

There is a direct conflict between Christian theology and what you mention. It is because of the concept accepted by Bahá’u’lláh, that the essence of God is absolutely transcendent and is not manifested in the contingent world and that God created the world through a first emanation of First Will.

Catholic’s hold the truth of creation ex nihilo, from the Fourth Lateran Council, so there can be Catholic belief in emanation (First Will). Creation ex nihilo is not symbolic.
Fourth Lateran Council: “We firmly believe and profess without qualification that there is only one true God, eternal, immense, unchangeable, incomprehensible, omnipotent, and indescribable, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit…they are the one and only principle of all things - Creator of all things visible and invisible, spiritual and corporeal,”

And Vatican I council states:
The Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church believes and acknowledges that there is one true and living God, Creator and Lord of Heaven and earth, almighty, eternal, immeasurable, incomprehensible, infinite in will, understanding and every perfection. Since He is one, singular, completely simple and unchangeable spiritual substance, He must be declared to be in reality and in essence, distinct from the world, supremely happy in Himself and from Himself, and inexpressibly loftier than anything besides Himself which either exists or can be imagined. This one true God, by His goodness and almighty power, not with the intention of increasing His happiness, nor indeed of obtaining happiness, but in order to manifest His perfection by the good things which He bestows on what He creates, by an absolutely free plan, together from the beginning of time brought into being from nothing the twofold created order, that is the spiritual and the bodily, the angelic and the earthly, and thereafter the human which is, in a way, common to both since it is composed of spirit and body [10]. Everything that God has brought into being He protects and governs by his providence, which reaches from one end of the earth to the other and orders all things well [11] . All things are open and laid bare to His eyes [12] , even those which will be brought about by the free activity of creatures.

10 See Lateran council IV, const. 1
11 Wis 8, 1.
12 Heb 4, 13

1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.
2. If anyone is so bold as to assert that there exists nothing besides matter: let him be anathema.
3. If anyone says that the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema.
5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema.

Catechism 285 reviews some myths of creation.

**285 **Since the beginning the Christian faith has been challenged by responses to the question of origins that differ from its own. Ancient religions and cultures produced many myths concerning origins.

• Some philosophers have said that everything is God, that the world is God, or that the development of the world is the development of God (Pantheism).
• Others have said that the world is a necessary emanation arising from God and returning to him. Still others have affirmed the existence of two eternal principles, Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, locked, in permanent conflict (Dualism, Manichaeism).
• According to some of these conceptions, the world (at least the physical world) is evil, the product of a fall, and is thus to be rejected or left behind (Gnosticism).
• Some admit that the world was made by God, but as by a watch-maker who, once he has made a watch, abandons it to itself (Deism).
• Finally, others reject any transcendent origin for the world, but see it as merely the interplay of matter that has always existed (Materialism).

All these attempts bear witness to the permanence and universality of the question of origins. This inquiry is distinctively human.

Hi Vico

Don’t you think that this “unchangeable” “Creator” which has eternally had the name “unchangeable creator” is itself an anathema if there was a point that He was not a Creator?

That at some point in time there was no creation indicates a time when He was not a Creator which means at some point He “changed” from non-Creator to Creator.

A logical fallacy, surely…

You can feel free to believe 1+1=3 but I think somewhere somehow God had it right, but a Council somewhere got it wrong. I will leave it to you

The second issue arises from an eternal essence of God which is part of the Universe.
Assuredly this is pantheism.

Would you mind explaining how Christianity is not a pantheistic religion please?
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

.

 

[Servant19]

Muhammad was not God. He did not share in the divine nature with God.

Neither did the Bab nor Baha’u’llah. They were not God.

Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah are not members of one Godhead.

Anyone who offers them worship is committing grave sin. Anyone who even follows them is following the lesser teachings of mere mortal men.

Jesus Christ is God. Fully God and Fully Man. The Second Person of the Trinity.

Jesus Christ is worshiped as God, and we follow His teachings because He is God.

Regarding Muhammad:

Making Du’a (Invoking) and Praying to Muhammad

Muhammad instructed his followers to pray to him directly during their daily acts of worship:

Narrated Shaqiq bin Salama:
'Abdullah said, “Whenever we prayed behind the Prophet we used to recite (in sitting) 'Peace be on Gabriel, Michael, peace be on so and so. Once Allah’s Apostle looked back at us and said, 'Allah Himself is As-Salam (Peace), and if anyone of you prays then he should say, At-Tahiyatu lil-lahi wassalawatu wat-taiyibatu. As-Salamu 'ALAIKA aiyuha-n-Nabiyu wa rahmatu-l-lahi wa barakatuhu. As-Salam alaina wa ala ibadil-lah is-salihin. (All the compliments, prayers and good things are due to Allah: peace be on YOU, O Prophet and Allah’s mercy and blessings be on YOU. Peace be on us and on the true pious slaves of Allah). (If you say that, it will be for all the slaves in the heaven and the earth). Ash-hadu an la-ilaha illa-l-lahu wa ash-hadu anna Muhammadan 'abduhu wa Rasuluhu. (I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and I also testify that Muhammad is His slave and His Apostle).” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 12, Number 794)

This isn’t the only time that Muslims were instructed to pray and/or make invocations to their prophet.

There is a specific narration which says that Muhammad actually taught a blind man to pray to Allah as well as to himself, an invocation which Muslims continued to use long after Muhammad’s death:

Tirmidhi relates, through his chain of narrators from 'Uthman ibn Hunayf, that a blind man came to the Prophet and said, “I’ve been afflicted in my eyesight, so please pray to Allah for me.” The Prophet said: "Go make ablution (wudu), perform two rak’as of prayer, and then say:

“Oh Allah, I ask You and turn to You through my Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy; O MUHAMMAD (YA MUHAMMAD), I SEEK YOUR INTERCESSION with my Lord for the return of my eyesight [and in another version: “for my need, that it may be fulfilled. O Allah, grant him intercession for me”].”

The Prophet added, “And if there is some need, do the same.” (Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law (Umdat Al-Salik) in Arabic with facing English text, Commentary and Appendices, edited and translated by Nuh Hah Mim Keller [Amana Corporation; Revised edition, July 1, 1997], w40.3, p. 935; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Muhammad expressly instructed the blind man to address him directly in his prayer in the same way that he addresses Allah!

The blind man wasn’t told to simply ask Allah to heal him on behalf or for the sake of Muhammad. Rather, he was specifically directed to address Muhammad directly by asking for his intercession.

Now just in case Zaatari attempts to explain this away by saying that this took place when Muhammad was still alive, the following is a report of a man who offered up this same exact invocation during the caliphate of Uthman bin Affan:

Moreover, Tabarani, in his “al-Mu’jam al saghir,” reports a hadith from ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf that a man repeatedly visited Uthman ibn Affan concerning something he needed, but Uthman paid no attention to him or his need. The man met Ibn Hunayf and complained to him about the matter - this being after the death (wisal) of the Prophet and after the caliphates of Abu Bakr and Umar - so Uthman ibn Hunayf, who was one of the Companions who collected hadiths and was learned in the religion of Allah, said: "Go to the place of ablution and perform ablution (wudu), then come to the mosque, perform two rak’as of prayer therein, and say:

‘O Allah, I ask You and turn to You through our Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy; O MUHAMMAD (YA MUHAMMAD), I TURN THROUGH YOU to my Lord, that He may fulfill my need,’ and mention your need. Then come so that I can go with you [to the caliph Uthman]." So the man left and did as he had been told, then went to the door of Uthman ibn Affan, and the doorman came, took him by the hand, brought him to Uthman ibn Affan, and seated him next to him on a cushion. ‘Uthman asked, “What do you need?” and the man mentioned what he wanted, and Uthman accomplished it for him, then he said, “I hadn’t remembered your need until just now,” adding, “Whenever you need something, just mention it.” Then, the man departed, met Uthman ibn Hunayf, and said to him, “May Allah reward you! He didn’t see to my need or pay any attention to me until you spoke with him.” Uthman ibn Hunayf replied, "By Allah, I didn’t speak to him, but I have seen a blind man come to the Messenger of Allah and complain to him of the loss of his eyesight. The Prophet said, "Can you not bear it?’ and the man replied, ‘O Messenger of Allah, I do not have anyone to lead me around, and it is a great hardship for me.’ The Prophet told him, 'Go to the place of ablution and perform ablution (wudu), then pray two rak’as of prayer and make the supplications.’” Ibn Hunayf went on, "By Allah, we didn’t part company or speak long before the man returned to us as if nothing had ever been wrong with him.” (Ibid., w40.4, pp. 936-937; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Here was an individual at the time of the caliphate of Uthman ibn Affan who offers up the same prayer that the blind man did, praying and asking Muhammad in the same way that he asks Allah!(1)

We also have Hadiths expressing the eternal nature of Prophet Muhammad:

.

 

[Servant19]

(Cont. from above)

" “I was a Prophet when Adam was between the water and the mud -before he came into existence.”

I would suggest you study the concept Haqiqat-i Muhammadiyya

Regarding the Bab and Baha’u’llah. There are too many passages to mention which describe the human and divine natures of these two Manifestations of God.

Probably the two most clear ones are:

“When I contemplate, O my God, the relationship that bindeth me to Thee, 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!” -Baha’u’llah

This one sounds just like Jedus addressing the Pharisees:

O ye leaders of religion! Who is the man amongst you that can rival Me in vision or insight? Where is he to be found that dareth to claim to be My equal in utterance or wisdom? No, by My Lord, the All-Merciful! All on the earth shall pass away; and this is the face of your Lord, the Almighty, the Well-Beloved. - Baha’u’llah

Hope this helps

.

 

[Vico]

Hi Vico

Don’t you think that this “unchangeable” “Creator” which has eternally had the name “unchangeable creator” is itself an anathema if there was a point that He was not a Creator?

That at some point in time there was no creation indicates a time when He was not a Creator which means at some point He “changed” from non-Creator to Creator.

A logical fallacy, surely…

You can feel free to believe 1+1=3 but I think somewhere somehow God had it right, but a Council somewhere got it wrong. I will leave it to you

The second issue arises from an eternal essence of God which is part of the Universe.
Assuredly this is pantheism.

Would you mind explaining how Christianity is not a pantheistic religion please?
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

.

Christianity is not materialistic, but dualistic. God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is personal and immaterial and uncreated. Pantheism is not acceptable. (See Catechism 285 which give some of the myths that challenged Christianity.) God exists beyond time, so it is conceivable that time subjective and unreal, as it is in the tenseless b-theory of time. This b-theory is compatible with the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas.

 

[Servant19]

Christianity is not materialistic, but dualistic. God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is personal and immaterial and uncreated. Pantheism is not acceptable. (See Catechism 285 which give some of the myths that challenged Christianity.) God exists beyond time, so it is conceivable that time subjective and unreal, as it is in the tenseless b-theory of time. This b-theory is compatible with the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Thankyou for this information Vico. It is interesting but does not answer any of my questions

Two questions dear friend:

1. How does an unchangeable God go from non-Creator to Creator?
2. How is Christianity not pantheistic? (Other than saying “it’s not pantheistic”)
   You say above that God is “immaterial” yet you also say that Christianity cannot accept that God is “not manifested in the contingent world”…a contradiction dear friend…

Thankyou

.

 

[Vico]

Thankyou for this information Vico. It is interesting but does not answer any of my questions

Two questions dear friend:

1. How does an unchangeable God go from non-Creator to Creator?
2. How is Christianity not pantheistic? (Other than saying “it’s not pantheistic”)
   You say above that God is “immaterial” yet you also say that Christianity cannot accept that God is “not manifested in the contingent world”…a contradiction dear friend…

Thankyou

.

Pantheism posits that God ultimately is everything, which is opposed to Christian teaching. That God is omnipresent does not mean that God is all matter.

All things are totally dependent upon God for their existence. To create is to give existence. Even if the creation is without a temporal beginning, it would depend upon God for its very being.

300 God is infinitely greater than all his works: "You have set your glory above the heavens."156 Indeed, God’s “greatness is unsearchable”.157 But because he is the free and sovereign Creator, the first cause of all that exists, God is present to his creatures’ inmost being: "In him we live and move and have our being."158 In the words of St. Augustine, God is “higher than my highest and more inward than my innermost self”.159

Manifestation has a variety of meanings. Providence of God is described in the Catechism:

308 The truth that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures is inseparable from faith in God the Creator. God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes: "For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure."171 Far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it. Drawn from nothingness by God’s power, wisdom and goodness, it can do nothing if it is cut off from its origin, for "without a Creator the creature vanishes."172 Still less can a creature attain its ultimate end without the help of God’s grace.173

Also, God manifests “this perfection through the benefits which he bestows on creatures”.

293 Scripture and Tradition never cease to teach and celebrate this fundamental truth: "The world was made for the glory of God."134 St. Bonaventure explains that God created all things “not to increase his glory, but to show it forth and to communicate it”,135 for God has no other reason for creating than his love and goodness: "Creatures came into existence when the key of love opened his hand."136 The First Vatican Council explains:

This one, true God, of his own goodness and “almighty power”, not for increasing his own beatitude, nor for attaining his perfection, but in order to manifest this perfection through the benefits which he bestows on creatures, with absolute freedom of counsel "and from the beginning of time, made out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal. . ."137

294 The glory of God consists in the realization of this manifestation and communication of his goodness, for which the world was created. God made us “to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace”,138 for "the glory of God is man fully alive; moreover man’s life is the vision of God: if God’s revelation through creation has already obtained life for all the beings that dwell on earth, how much more will the Word’s manifestation of the Father obtain life for those who see God."139 The ultimate purpose of creation is that God "who is the creator of all things may at last become “all in all”, thus simultaneously assuring his own glory and our beatitude."140

​

 

[Servant19]

Pantheism posits that God ultimately is everything, which is opposed to Christian teaching. That God is omnipresent does not mean that God is all matter.

All things are totally dependent upon God for their existence. To create is to give existence. Even if the creation is without a temporal beginning, it would depend upon God for its very being.

300 God is infinitely greater than all his works: "You have set your glory above the heavens."156 Indeed, God’s “greatness is unsearchable”.157 But because he is the free and sovereign Creator, the first cause of all that exists, God is present to his creatures’ inmost being: "In him we live and move and have our being."158 In the words of St. Augustine, God is “higher than my highest and more inward than my innermost self”.159

Manifestation has a variety of meanings. Providence of God is described in the Catechism:

308 The truth that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures is inseparable from faith in God the Creator. God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes: "For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure."171 Far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it. Drawn from nothingness by God’s power, wisdom and goodness, it can do nothing if it is cut off from its origin, for "without a Creator the creature vanishes."172 Still less can a creature attain its ultimate end without the help of God’s grace.173

Also, God manifests “this perfection through the benefits which he bestows on creatures”.

293 Scripture and Tradition never cease to teach and celebrate this fundamental truth: "The world was made for the glory of God."134 St. Bonaventure explains that God created all things “not to increase his glory, but to show it forth and to communicate it”,135 for God has no other reason for creating than his love and goodness: "Creatures came into existence when the key of love opened his hand."136 The First Vatican Council explains:

This one, true God, of his own goodness and “almighty power”, not for increasing his own beatitude, nor for attaining his perfection, but in order to manifest this perfection through the benefits which he bestows on creatures, with absolute freedom of counsel "and from the beginning of time, made out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal. . ."137

294 The glory of God consists in the realization of this manifestation and communication of his goodness, for which the world was created. God made us “to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace”,138 for "the glory of God is man fully alive; moreover man’s life is the vision of God: if God’s revelation through creation has already obtained life for all the beings that dwell on earth, how much more will the Word’s manifestation of the Father obtain life for those who see God."139 The ultimate purpose of creation is that God "who is the creator of all things may at last become “all in all”, thus simultaneously assuring his own glory and our beatitude."140

​

Dear Vico

If, then, “God is omnipresent does not mean that God is all matter”, then He is transcendent from all created things, which is Baha’i and Islamic teaching.

It is a very simple concept that describes the gradation of created reality. God is not present in physical matter “this keyboard is not God”. In heaven, He is more present, assuredly, but is heaven God? No. Assuredly not. So He is transcendent from the realities of heaven too.

Where, therefore is God present? In the human heart, yes, but is my human heart God? NO

The human heart is a sign of the revelation of God’s attributes. The fruits of the Spirit found in the human heart is the signs that God is present, but the fact that we, as a human heart, can never ever become God is a reality that there is transcendence from all immaterial, spiritual reality too.

Can you become God in heaven?

Will heaven have billions upon billions of Gods?

(I have highlighted in your post some of the parts of the Catechism that hints at this transcendence)

This link may also help you understand the Baha’i and Islamic perspective, which I sense you have misunderstood.
bahaiteachings.org/present-and-omnipresent-is-god-everywhere

.

 

[Vico]

Dear Vico

If, then, “God is omnipresent does not mean that God is all matter”, then He is transcendent from all created things, which is Baha’i and Islamic teaching.

It is a very simple concept that describes the gradation of created reality. God is not present in physical matter “this keyboard is not God”. In heaven, He is more present, assuredly, but is heaven God? No. Assuredly not. So He is transcendent from the realities of heaven too.

Where, therefore is God present? In the human heart, yes, but is my human heart God? NO

The human heart is a sign of the revelation of God’s attributes. The fruits of the Spirit found in the human heart is the signs that God is present, but the fact that we, as a human heart, can never ever become God is a reality that there is transcendence from all immaterial, spiritual reality too.

Can you become God in heaven?

Will heaven have billions upon billions of Gods?

(I have highlighted in your post some of the parts of the Catechism that hints at this transcendence)

This link may also help you understand the Baha’i and Islamic perspective, which I sense you have misunderstood.
bahaiteachings.org/present-and-omnipresent-is-god-everywhere

.

Of course God is simple and perfect and has no cause, so transcendent.

What I posted before is

Vico:

There is a direct conflict between Christian theology and what you mention. It is because of the concept accepted by Bahá’u’lláh, that the essence of God is absolutely transcendent and is not manifested in the contingent world and that God created the world through a first emanation of First Will.

Catholic’s hold the truth of creation ex nihilo, from the Fourth Lateran Council, so there can be Catholic belief in emanation (First Will). Creation ex nihilo is not symbolic.

Modern Catholic Dictionary, explains something about divine immanence.

DIVINE IMMANENCE

Definition

the omnipresence of God permeating all creation. It is the interpenetration of the divine essence and activity within all created beings. In the Christian faith this immanence does not deny but complements the divine transcendence. God remains God and is neither part of the world nor is perfected by the world. In pantheistic immanence God is said to be present and operating in the world, but he is also held to be somehow identical with the universe.

EMANATION

Definition

In the philosophy of emanationism, the flowing out of all things from the divine substance and therefore also that which has flowed out. The emanation is considered a necessary attribute of the divine substance, and that which emanates is said (like rays of light) to lose in perfection as it flows out. As a form of pantheism, emanationism was condemned by the Second Vatican Council, since God, who is absolutely simple and unchangeable, cannot pour out of his being. (Etym. Latin emanatio, discharge, flowing from.)

 

[DAML72]

I haven’t read all the responses, and I’m sure this thread has turned into a debate of some sort, but for me, it was because of truth. It’s the only religion that has a full grasp on Truth, and fulfills all the longings of my soul. I also have had some absolutely amazing “God moments.” With Christ, there is a ‘there there’ - He is there, he is palpable, he is responsive - you can have a relationship with Him. Once He has revealed himself to you, that’s kind of it. Like St. Peter said, “to whom shall we go?” There is nowhere else to go.

 

[Servant19]

Of course God is simple and perfect and has no cause, so transcendent.

What I posted before is

Modern Catholic Dictionary, explains something about divine immanence.

DIVINE IMMANENCE

Definition

the omnipresence of God permeating all creation. It is the interpenetration of the divine essence and activity within all created beings. In the Christian faith this immanence does not deny but complements the divine transcendence. God remains God and is neither part of the world nor is perfected by the world. In pantheistic immanence God is said to be present and operating in the world, but he is also held to be somehow identical with the universe.

EMANATION

Definition

In the philosophy of emanationism, the flowing out of all things from the divine substance and therefore also that which has flowed out. The emanation is considered a necessary attribute of the divine substance, and that which emanates is said (like rays of light) to lose in perfection as it flows out. As a form of pantheism, emanationism was condemned by the Second Vatican Council, since God, who is absolutely simple and unchangeable, cannot pour out of his being. (Etym. Latin emanatio, discharge, flowing from.)

Thankyou Vico

With respect, dear brother, I think that definition of Immanence is a twisting and attempting to fit a square peg in a round hole. How can God’s essence be immanent but not part of the world? He is either immanent or transcendent, these are mutually opposing terms.

The definition of emanation used here is also not reflective of Baha’i theology on emanationism.
In Baha’i theology, the only emanation that occurs is from Gods Essence to Gods Names and Attributes. It is from Gods Names and Attributes that all created reality is manifested, not emanated.

.

 

[TarkanAttila]

Out of all the world religions, from Hinduism to Zoroastrianism, why do you trust that the Christian message and interpretation of God is correct?

Judaism claims he was a false Messiah, and Islam claims Christ was merely a prophet whose message was corrupted. Why follow Christ over the other so called ‘gods’ and other ways of interpretation God (such as spiritualism over religion)?

Copy pasta to the rescue:

I believe Jesus to be the Lord and Saviour of the world, primarily because of these two questions:

1. What thing provides me, and us (the human race) any reason to live?
2. What of these things provides proof it actually happened?

The first question knocks out: atheism, the UFO religions, the Latter-Day Saints, Hinduism, Buddhism, and pretty much any other religion where there is no permanent consequence to what you do in this life.

• In atheism, death is all that awaits you.
• In Hinduism and Buddhism, reincarnation until you reach moksha/nirvana is all that awaits you.
• In the Mormon church, everyone will get deified (their ultimate goal) eventually.
• The UFO religions (including Scientology) do not address our final end.
• In Taoism, Confucianism, ancestor worship, and many forms of paganism, only the afterlife awaits you (I could be wrong).
• And some “Christian” denominations which deny Hell (or, in the case of Christian Science, evil) also take away our ability to choose good. These must also be eliminated.

All of the above religions do not answer the ultimate question, which really is the only reason to choose a religion: what benefit would I, or the world, get from it? Death cancels out all benefits, and so religions where nothing changes after death have nothing to offer.

So, what remains? You have:

Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, some paganism perhaps. I think that’s it.

So, question 2) kicks in: what evidence do these religions provide for their claims being true?

Islam and Zoroastrianism (and the LDS and Scientology for that matter) provide prophets, who have visions. How are we going to test a man’s private revelation?

Paganism provides myths - which contain some truths, but how are we going to test whether these things happened or not? There are no dates. There are no witnesses.

Judaism claims to have received its law at Mount Sinai, from God, who gave it to Moses, who gave it to the People Israel. In effect, Moses is a prophet, like Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Zoroaster, or L. Ron Hubbard. Who will argue with a private revelation?

Christianity claims its founder was executed brutally, buried, and rose from the dead. And He appeared to eleven men, 120 others, 2 men on their way to Emmaus, several women, and (if St. Paul is correct) 500 others, some who were still alive when he wrote of it. This claim pervades all Christian writings of the time - every book of the New Testament makes this claim.

Who stands in to debate the Resurrection?

Only people who came long after the fact. Moslems, deists, atheists. I’ve only heard one Jew ask the foolish question: if Jesus rose from the dead, so what? What does that matter?

It matters very much. Because it means God has blessed Him. A Jew. And if He said so many of the things St. Paul taught, or the things the Gospels wrote, God must really have been backing Him, for no Jew would say a man could be God otherwise.

In short, what fits the mold of history: Christ not rising, or Christ rising?

Christ rising, I think.

 

[Vico]

Thankyou Vico

With respect, dear brother, I think that definition of Immanence is a twisting and attempting to fit a square peg in a round hole. How can God’s essence be immanent but not part of the world? He is either immanent or transcendent, these are mutually opposing terms.

The definition of emanation used here is also not reflective of Baha’i theology on emanationism.
In Baha’i theology, the only emanation that occurs is from Gods Essence to Gods Names and Attributes. It is from Gods Names and Attributes that all created reality is manifested, not emanated.

.

The Catholic Church dealt with immanence extensively in early councils, and resolved it. This is some history from the International Theological Comission (1979):

1. … At the Council of Nicaea in a.d. 325, the Church defined that the Son is consubstantial (homoousios) with the Father. In so doing, the Church both repudiated the Arian compromise with Hellenism and deeply altered the shape of Greek, especially Platonist and neo-Platonist, metaphysics. In a manner of speaking, it demythicized Hellenism and effected a Christian purification of it. In the act of dismissing the notion of an intermediate being, the Church recognized only two modes of being: uncreated (nonmade) and created.

…
5. During the controversies between the schools of Antioch and Alexandria, it was difficult to perceive how transcendence, that is, the distinction between the two natures, could be reconciled with immanence, that is, the hypostatic union. In a.d. 451 the Council of Chalcedon (DS 301-2) undertook to show how the two viewpoints could be reconciled by having recourse to two expressions at the same time: “without confusion” (asygchytos) and “without division” (adiairetos). We can see there the apophatic equivalent of the formula that affirms “the two natures and the one hypostasis” of Christ. “Without confusion” obviously refers to the two natures and asserts that the humanity of Jesus is an authentic one. In keeping with the wishes of the anti-Arians, this formula bears witness at the same time to God’s transcendence, for God is said to remain God, while man remains man. It excludes any intermediate state between divinity and humanity. “Without division” proclaims the very deep and irreversible union of God and man in the person of the world. God’s full immanence in the world is asserted as well. It is on this immanence that Christian salvation and man’s divinization are grounded.

…
6. … the definition of Chalcedon radically transcends Greek thought, for it lets coexist two viewpoints that Greek philosophy had always regarded as irreconcilable: divine transcendence, the very soul of the Platonic system, and divine immanence, which is the spirit of the Stoic theory.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_1979_cristologia_en.html