Unsaved?

[benhur]

*Baha’is accept the spiritual resurrection of Jesus after He was crucified.
*

Hi a,

How does a spirit resurrect if it can not die, cease to exist ? Is the above denying the bodily resurrection ?

The meaning is not that the Sun, which is the Essence of the Divinity, became divided and multiplied – for the Sun is one- but appeared in a mirror.

“one” as the Holy Spirit not being a "person’’ or Christ not being God but only a perfect reflection, mirror ? Hard to imagine a reflection creating . By definition the Trinity is still One. Polytheism would not have been so bad if the many gods were one in mind. But they were not, and often were at odds with each other. So monotheism (Jewish) is much about onenes in mind and will of God, and the extraordinary “advantages” that has for a beseeching mankind.

Blessings

 

[Seekerjn316]

Seekerjn316;13404449:

Hi Seeker,

I’m a bit surprised at what you say, to tell you the truth. The Catholic church also let’s us have our own opinion on certain matters; for example evolution. It’s difficult to believe that a church would not have a position on who wrote a gospel or book. I know there are differing opinions on some books, but not all. For instance, every scholar is unsure of Hebrews. They’re pretty sure Paul didn’t write it - although some are hanging in there .

This idea of people being more educated today, and thus needing different information, is a false premise, as far as I’m concerned. That the Church of the Nazarene could make the statement that each pastor is to decide for himself on authorship is a bit wrong, in my opinion. That means a Nazarene from NYC could believe something different from a Nazarene from Ohio. Never expected this.

I give importance to your post because you speak of ministerial students. I hear from studies in secular universities that teach the bible as a book and this really does not interest me since I wouldn’t trust anything liberal, secular professors have to say about my faith and/or religion. J

I’m glad you responded and brought me up to date. Now, if I could just digest this new information!

Fran

Fran, who the author is of a certain book really should have no impact on worshiping together nor should it be dictated by the pastor of any congregation.

Does unity in Christ require every Subject concerning faith must be believed exactly the same. Does every Catholic believe the exact same concerning biblical authorship?

If earlier manuscript of scripture are discovered that sheds light on some historical issue that was not known before, should that not be cause to update ones beliefs, we now have tools that can be used to assist scholars to know more about scripture. Computers for instance, all of Paul’s authentic letters can be scanned into a computer and examined by a program that takes into account syntax, grammer, word choices, re messages etc, do things humans wouldn’t be able to do. Then the information gathered could then be compared against a book that may have its authorship disputed compared.

Hebrews doesn’t match up in composition, theme, syntax, word choices to Paul’s authentic letters, 1&2 Timothy and Titus which bear Paul’s name as author, has been determined to be not written by Paul, but someone very well versed in Paul’s authentic letters. They were written by Paul. Marcion did not include them in his canon, Marcion was a devoted Paul fan.

I’m surprised you would reject new information discovered. How can better and more accurate information found and taught people making them in the process more knowledgeable and better educated be a “false premise”

How does a scholars “liberal” beliefs on some subjects make the new information discovered false? The scholar didn’t generate the new information he’s examining it and making a scholarly evaluation. I don’t understand that. Whether he’s liberal or conservative doesn’t make his words and conclusion any less valuable for study.

I want to know as much about the development of scripture and history as I can…I don’t believe there’s any point in my life that I’ll say “Nope, don’t want to hear it. I’ve learned enough, I can’t be taught anything new and up to date. I don’t want to learn any thing new as I know it all now,”

I don’t have more than a decade left in this world, and I want to learn everything I can.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Hypostasis because within the Son, the express image of the Father is shared. It is only through the Son (in Christianity) that the image of the Father is gifted to humanity.

It is no different to the Perfectly Polished Mirror reflecting the light of the Sun (Archetype). There is hypostasis in that relationship between Mirror and Sun.

Hope that helps

.

Okay. I know what you mean. The Express Image of the Father is God - that’s the hypostatic union as you explain it. We say Jesus was fully God and Fully man.

Of course, it could be slightly different. You say the image is shared - we clearly say Jesus is God.

My aunt is 93 and not doing so well. I thank you for your prayers.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Dear Fran - It is called “Frame of Reference” - Have a look at the studies done on this topic on the internet and you may find it interesting.

I look at ancient Religion that time would have changed the intent of the original teaching and thus we look at a later revelation to Clarify what it may have meant.

Thus if I use the Bible in this Case we get a Hint of what Reincarnation might have been in its original concept, without man adding His “Two cents Worth”. (My Ideas and not in Baha’i Scripture as such)

The Return of Elijah in John the Baptist is an idea on this subject. It is not the same person returning but the Values/Potentials/Promise of the First Elijah.

There are writings that explain this subject Further but will leave it there and Conclude.

We can Believe in a lot of this if we look at it in a New Frame of Reference, the Frame of Reference is Provided by God and His Messenger for the age in which we live.

In saying that one also has to consider that all explanations are in the Holy books of the Past, but they become veiled with Mans Reasoning and are not always seen in the Light they should be seen. Again Big Topic

God Bless and Regards Tony

Some thought Jesus was Elijah. We also understand it as you say - not the actual person returning but his values and his promises. We also see “types” of Christ in the Old Testament. Isaac was a type of Christ, Moses, Noah, and others. Isaac was “sacrificed”, Moses freed the slaves, Noah saved humankind. Jesus then completed all these things in a more perfect way.

Christians also have ongoing revelation. The Trinity is not mentioned anywhere in the bible and yet we believe it exists.

Your explanation of reincarnation and how man understands it in his “own way” is interesting. They who believe in reincarnation are very insistent about this belief, however.

Take care
Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Fran, Thanks for your post… !

You wrote above:

I’m still not very clear on whether you accept Jesus’ resurrection. It’s difficult to concentrate on one concept in these threads.

I’ll reply in* italics.*…

*Baha’is accept the spiritual resurrection of Jesus after He was crucified.
*

Fran wtrote:

But, for instance, if you believe what you say about the afterlife, doesn’t that mean that reincarnation is wrong? It does confuse me a bit how you could accept something so different.

*Baha’is don’t believe in reincarnation… We believe the soul ascends to the spiritual worlds and does not return or re-incarnate in this world. *

I do have one last question. I know this can’t go on forever. I understand about the mirror and the light coming through the mirror. The light is God.

*The Light is the Holy Spirit radiating from God…and perfectly reflected in the Mirror to humanity.
*

Okay, now regarding Baha’u’llah being the mirror, we christians understand Jesus to be the Son of God and God also. Was Baha’u’llah a Son of God? Was he a prophet of God? Was he God come to earth in some form? In other words, HOW was he a representation of God?

*Baha’u’llah was a Perfect Mirror that reflected the attributes of God … just as Jesus was the “…The Son ·reflects [or radiates; shines forth] the glory of God [John 1:14] and ·shows exactly what God is like [L is the exact representation/imprint/stamp of his being/essence/nature].” Expanded Bible (Hebrews 1:3)

The epitome of the discourse is that the Reality of Christ was a clear mirror, and the Sun of Reality – that is to say, the Essence of Oneness, with its infinite perfections and attributes – became visible in the mirror. The meaning is not that the Sun, which is the Essence of the Divinity, became divided and multiplied – for the Sun is one – but it appeared in the mirror. This is why Christ said, “The Father is in the Son,” meaning that the Sun is visible and manifest in this mirror.*

*Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 113

And how about John Smith (mormonism) or Charles Russell (Jehovah Witnesses, MAYBE) would men such as these be considered revealers of the light?

*I think you mean Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell? Why not compare the lives of these men you’ve brought up with the life of Baha’u’llah. I believe you’ll find an answer.
*

Thanks for reading Fran!

Hi Arthra,

Yes. Reincarnation makes no sense to me either. It would mean that there is no ME. Every soul is unique.

Regarding Russel and Smith. I don’t think I’ll be doing any in depth studies on them. I don’t believe they’re like the ones we’ve been talking about. There is light in every religion, but they certainly are not The Light!

My last observation is regarding the spiritual resurrection. This will always create a problem when speaking with christians. We believe in a physical resurrection. Our faith in Christ depends on this. If there was no resurrection then we christians have been told lies and our faith is based on nothing. I know that you don’t understand it this way from my conversations with Servant and Tony. I’m just telling you the christian point of view, which I’m sure you know and understand.

It’s a pleasure to exchange ideas with you.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

frangiuliano115;13406752:

Fran, who the author is of a certain book really should have no impact on worshiping together nor should it be dictated by the pastor of any congregation.

Does unity in Christ require every Subject concerning faith must be believed exactly the same. Does every Catholic believe the exact same concerning biblical authorship?

If earlier manuscript of scripture are discovered that sheds light on some historical issue that was not known before, should that not be cause to update ones beliefs, we now have tools that can be used to assist scholars to know more about scripture. Computers for instance, all of Paul’s authentic letters can be scanned into a computer and examined by a program that takes into account syntax, grammer, word choices, re messages etc, do things humans wouldn’t be able to do. Then the information gathered could then be compared against a book that may have its authorship disputed compared.

Hebrews doesn’t match up in composition, theme, syntax, word choices to Paul’s authentic letters, 1&2 Timothy and Titus which bear Paul’s name as author, has been determined to be not written by Paul, but someone very well versed in Paul’s authentic letters. They were written by Paul. Marcion did not include them in his canon, Marcion was a devoted Paul fan.

I’m surprised you would reject new information discovered. How can better and more accurate information found and taught people making them in the process more knowledgeable and better educated be a “false premise”

How does a scholars “liberal” beliefs on some subjects make the new information discovered false? The scholar didn’t generate the new information he’s examining it and making a scholarly evaluation. I don’t understand that. Whether he’s liberal or conservative doesn’t make his words and conclusion any less valuable for study.

I want to know as much about the development of scripture and history as I can…I don’t believe there’s any point in my life that I’ll say “Nope, don’t want to hear it. I’ve learned enough, I can’t be taught anything new and up to date. I don’t want to learn any thing new as I know it all now,”

I don’t have more than a decade left in this world, and I want to learn everything I can.

Hi Seeker,

I’m afraid I didn’t explain myself properly. American universities are very liberal and very secular and, I’d say, also very anti-christian. Did you hear about the student, I think in high school, that had to write an essay on God: Myth or Lie. She couldn’t choose Truth. Just a few days ago. The teacher was fired because she gave an essay on God, not because the student’s choice was not there! Move to college level and it just gets worse. So, yes, I don’t care for the bible to be taught as a book or literature by a liberal and secular person. I like it to be taught by someone who believes in God and who h as some personal knowledge of God so he could really understand the concepts of christianity. Did you know that a catechist has to be practicing catholic, knowledgeable of all church doctrine and dogma, and must believe it also. I think this is the least we would want to expect from someone who has a bible in their hand and is going to speak to us about it!

Re the authors. We could start a debate. I have bibles here written by scholarly people, doctors, theologians. Even before computers they took into consideration syntax, word choice, grammar,etc. What I mean is that it’s not like people were dumb before now. So we’re smarter today. Maybe, maybe not - that could be debated too! - but God’s word is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. What change has occurred has not been good, and I’m speaking of some particular churches, which I’m also sure you’re familiar with. Word of Faith, for instance, some churches believe you can’t ever lose your salvation, Rock music to draw teens in some churches, etc.

So some new information is found and now we’re not sure who wrote what book. But can we still trust them? Let’s stick to that. Or it’s my PhD against your PhD and that would be silly. You say a pastor should not dictate authorship. I think you said that this is the way it is now. I might have misunderstood. And I said from the get go that Hebrews was not written by Paul. This is agreed upon by all.

My comment on today’s knowledge being a false premise regarding the bible: I just know so many people who have told me they’re too smart for the bible. that’s all I meant. I’ve always been amused at this statement because one could have little education and the bible will speak to him, and a person could be super intelligent and the bible will also speak to him. I don’t believe you have to have “today’s knowledge” to understand the bible.

So, yes, let’s not get too mixed up with this - it wasn’t the intent of my post. Worship is what counts as you say. The person of Jesus is what counts and our belief in Him!

Fran

 

[TonyBS]

Hi Arthra,

Yes. Reincarnation makes no sense to me either. It would mean that there is no ME. Every soul is unique.

Regarding Russel and Smith. I don’t think I’ll be doing any in depth studies on them. I don’t believe they’re like the ones we’ve been talking about. There is light in every religion, but they certainly are not The Light!

My last observation is regarding the spiritual resurrection. This will always create a problem when speaking with christians. We believe in a physical resurrection. Our faith in Christ depends on this. If there was no resurrection then we christians have been told lies and our faith is based on nothing. I know that you don’t understand it this way from my conversations with Servant and Tony. I’m just telling you the christian point of view, which I’m sure you know and understand.

It’s a pleasure to exchange ideas with you.

Fran

Fran an observation from me and yes great exchanging Ideas/concepts from our Faiths.

It could be considered that the Return of the Spirit is always in the Physical Frame

The question could be asked what are we then looking for in the Physical Frame?

Regards Tony

 

[frangiuliano115]

Fran an observation from me and yes great exchanging Ideas/concepts from our Faiths.

It could be considered that the Return of the Spirit is always in the Physical Frame

The question could be asked what are we then looking for in the Physical Frame?

Regards Tony

Are we speaking of the same idea?
The return of the spirit, such as Elijah, or any Light of God, is always in the physical form.

I’m speaking, rather, to the resurrection of Jesus after crucifixion. Some believe that the resurrection (of Jesus) was spiritual. That He didn’t appear to the apostles, and others, in a physical form, but only spiritually. I’m not 100% sure what is meant by this since I don’t understand it. Do they mean like as a cloud or as how an angel appeared to Mary ath the annunciation, or as a dream given to Joseph to flee Bethlehem?

Whatever is meant, I cannot agree with this. The bible tells me Jesus appeared in physical form. (after His death). He ate with the apostles, He fished with them, Thomas put a finger in Jesus’ wound, He walked with two disciples on the road to Emmaus and they treated Him like a normal person, not as a spirit. They also ate with Him. (First communion!).

This is what I was referring to. We’ve been taught that Jesus’ appearances were physical. This is what I mean: If this would turn out to be false - my beliefs would be decimated !

I’ve met Jesus in a spiritual way - that’s different. If it WAS just spiritual and the writers of the NT didn’t say it this way, it means I cannot trust them for any other information either. I understand that a spiritual appearance after crucifixion and death would be more easily understood, I just cannot accept it based on biblical information.

Fran

 

[Faithful_Seeker]

Is there a glitch in the Quote feature? I see some Quotes appear to be working fine. But the last 3 or 4 pages have Quotes that appear to be originally made by ‘Seeker’ or ‘Tony’ that are actually Quotes by Fran. Though I now see it seems to be working for Tony properly.

I was enjoying reading everyone but its a bit confusing with the Quotes being from someone other than who is stated as original poster.

Can this be fixed?

 

[frangiuliano115]

Is there a glitch in the Quote feature? I see some Quotes appear to be working fine. But the last 3 or 4 pages have Quotes that appear to be originally made by ‘Seeker’ or ‘Tony’ that are actually Quotes by Fran. Though I now see it seems to be working for Tony properly.

I was enjoying reading everyone but its a bit confusing with the Quotes being from someone other than who is stated as original poster.

Can this be fixed?

Hi Faithful Seeker,

I haven’t noticed anything here but there are many posts and each one cannot be checked. However, on a different thread I noticed that someone ADDED a paragraph to a post of mine stating something I didn’t even agree with! I did complain to the other poster. So, yes, we should be careful. Also, something had happened a couple of pages back. Maybe there IS something wrong.

Fran

 

[Faithful_Seeker]

Thanks Fran, I was enjoying the conversation, learning some things too, but it just became confusing.

What I would see is it would say ‘quote’ & have your name, then below that the blocked in quote BUT it would say at the top within the blocked quote that is was originally posted by–for example Seeker. But it definitely your post. Your quote.
It would seem that your are making statements seeker and Tony are making and vise versa!
Like I said, confusing!

Maybe it’s fixed now. I’d never seen a quote displayed in that manner. Wasn’t sure if you guys knew about it.

Love your explanations Fran.

 

[guanophore]

I’m glad you agree with me , but you added a paragraph to what I originally said - the highlighted one above -

I’m not too happy you did that since you’re adding something I might not even agree with!

For instance, I totally agree with the first part of your sentence.
The second part is a bit too Calvinistic for me and I never would phrase anything like that.

Maybe you don’t kinow how to work the quote thingy - it took me over a month.

Just for the readers, I don’t want them thinking God picks us in some Calvinistic type way.

God bless you
Fran

---

Are you sure?

Eph 1:3-6Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. 5He destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6to the praise of his glorious grace which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

 

[TonyBS]

Are we speaking of the same idea?

This is what I was referring to. We’ve been taught that Jesus’ appearances were physical. This is what I mean: If this would turn out to be false - my beliefs would be decimated !

Fran

Dear Fran - I can assure you one’s belief can not be Decimated, but it can change, as you will note the world is full of change all the time.

So you may have to consider, is change Decimation or is it a necessary part of Life and Growth?

Some of the best Gardens are the most Pruned!

We can discuss or leave it alone, I would be happy to discuss.

I will leave you with a thought. Sometimes I have found one has to have Crisis of Faith to start to look deep within themselves, upon this reflection one finds the change was but a bounty, a great gift that would have not been found any other way!

It is God, at the end of all things that knows what is Saved and what will be unsaved, as it is all but in His Hands.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[guanophore]

 I think Hebrews is probably talking about someone who was never saved to begin with.

This is a classic Reformed position.

The problem is that the book of Hebrews, as was the rest of the NT, written by, for, and about Catholics. It reflects the Catholic faith, so the meaning of “partaking of the heavenly gift” (eucharist) is also Catholic. Those who were not initiated into the faith did not receive communion.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Are you sure?

Eph 1:3-6Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. 5He destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6to the praise of his glorious grace which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

Yes. I’m sure when something is Calvin’s theology and not mainline christian theology.

I can’t remember your religious affiliation right now, but:

1. Please do not add your own words to any post of mine.
2. Christians, not only catholics, believe in predestination. NOT Calvin’s predestination.

Predestination is the most difficult concept I have to explain at times. More so than the Trinity or God’s Providence. So I can only say that there are some fineline differences. If you just read what you quoted above it sounds like God CHOSE whom He will to be saved. AND using the doctrine of God’s Providence, He did. Does that mean we have no choice in the matter? NO. Okay. Now explain that to me!! See, it’s not easy.

You could study on christian predestination - you don’t need me for that. The best I can do here is to say that we understand it as God knowing from the beginning who would be saved and He thus chose us for His salvation plan. He chose the saved to be holy and blameless (study that for a pleasant change!) before Him, and that he planned for us to be sons through Jesus Christ.

If it were not like this, why send missionaries abroad?? Who will be saved will be saved! See. Can’t work as Calvin has it. So I’m careful with my wording - and in my post, to which you added, the wording was not to my liking.

So, it’s different from what Calvin believes. I don’t really like to bring this up, and, the difference in wording makes a world of difference. We CAN choose to be saved.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

This is a classic Reformed position.

The problem is that the book of Hebrews, as was the rest of the NT, written by, for, and about Catholics. It reflects the Catholic faith, so the meaning of “partaking of the heavenly gift” (eucharist) is also Catholic. Those who were not initiated into the faith did not receive communion.

The New Testament was written for Catholics? By Catholics?
There were catholics back then?
The book of Hebrews reflects the catholic faith?
I thought the catholic faith reflected Hebrews.

just wondering.

Fran
Plus, I can’t remember what you’re referring to.

 

[TonyBS]

We CAN choose to be saved.

Fran

Fran - Would have to agree

Having knowledge of how someone will respond does not mean it was already destined to be so, there is always a hope one will change at the last moment!

Prayer a powerful Tool

Regards Tony

 

[TonyBS]

The New Testament was written for Catholics? By Catholics?
There were catholics back then?
The book of Hebrews reflects the catholic faith?
I thought the catholic faith reflected Hebrews.

just wondering.

Fran
Plus, I can’t remember what you’re referring to.

I let that one go

Regards Tony

 

[frangiuliano115]

Dear Fran - I can assure you one’s belief can not be Decimated, but it can change, as you will note the world is full of change all the time.

So you may have to consider, is change Decimation or is it a necessary part of Life and Growth?

Some of the best Gardens are the most Pruned!

We can discuss or leave it alone, I would be happy to discuss.

I will leave you with a thought. Sometimes I have found one has to have Crisis of Faith to start to look deep within themselves, upon this reflection one finds the change was but a bounty, a great gift that would have not been found any other way!

It is God, at the end of all things that knows what is Saved and what will be unsaved, as it is all but in His Hands.

God Bless and Regards Tony

Hi Tony,

I’m afraid on this we must disagree.

I do much pruning in my garden and what a great affect it has on the trees and flowers!

Crisis of faith. Yes. I’ve been christian for about 40 years now. Much crises. Much being upset with God. Much having to accept. Much learning and understanding. Much accepting that we cannot know it all. Much trying to get God out of a small box.

Your last sentence is referring to my last post to guanophore regarding predestination, God’s will and our free choice. What a mix!

Change is not decimation Tony. But if you base your beliefs on ONE PERSON and then you find out that person lied to you or that they were not what you believed they were, yes, I think that would be decimating.

I don’t claim to know your religion (I’ve said this before and I cannot know it) but I think it’s beautiful because you’re following the Light of God - I feel like you’re immersed in it - and you see the light in each religion and the value of each religion’s “God figure”. Or reflection in the mirror, as you put it. I think this is beautiful and freeing.

I also see the light that God shines onto each one’s spiritual beliefs. I also see that some who think they are in the fold are out - and some who are out of the fold are in. But we’ll leave that to God. But, you see, I’ve chosen Jesus as my Way, my Truth and my Light.
It might be due to cultural reasons, although I did do some studying back then - not a lot since I had been raised christian and you tend to stay with that. But I did accept it and its concepts. They make sense to me, they explain why there’s good and evil, it has worked for me.

So, yes, for me it would be decimating.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

I let that one go

Regards Tony

I always find your posts to be encouraging.
The Light!