When did early Christianity become corrupt if it ever did?

[daler]

I’m not speaking personally here to you or Servant
or anyone else. Yes it’s awful that these sufferings
occur.
My point is believing somehow we all put our differences
aside, deny doctrines that conflict in the interests
of peace is not the answer. In other words
concentrating on just what we have in common which
of course is we don’t want our loved ones killed- that
is a commonality.
Our religions DO contradict each other on this forum.
Denying that in order to not be seen as divisive is not
the answer.

Mary,

. I do understand that the outward doctrines and dogmas create the appearance of “different religions” within the Institutions which are identified in such discussion and dialogue. On the surface, men would have others believe that the religion of Jesus is different than the religion of Moses, or Abraham, or Noah.

. Surely one could point to outward practices and rituals, even laws, and assert that therefore they are different religions. There is, however, a single Source of spiritual water which flows from these different wells, though this one be over here, or that one there. We might peer down the well of Abraham and find nothing today, but that does not mean that there never was any water before, or that it was in fact the same pure water which flowed appropriate to the needs of that day.

. So this well may be constructed of stone, that one of concrete, this one of brass, that one of copper. What is important is the water of life flowing out of these different wells and streams, and not to stand beside them (the different wells) and argue why the water in this one or that cannot be pure because, because, because…

. We tend to get caught up in ourselves sometimes, and the importance of our position, negligent that the Spirit behind the appearance of these spiritual Wells is One and the same. That may be difficult if all we focus on are the rocks and mortar, or the cup one brings to the well, or the manner of head dress, etc.

. “Religion should unite all hearts and cause wars and disputes to vanish from the face of the earth, give birth to spirituality, and bring life and light to each heart. If religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred and division, it were better to be without it, and to withdraw from such a religion would be a truly religious act. For it is clear that the purpose of a remedy is to cure; but if the remedy should only aggravate the complaint it had better be left alone. Any religion which is not a cause of love and unity is no religion. All the holy prophets were as doctors to the soul; they gave prescriptions for the healing of mankind; thus any remedy that causes disease does not come from the great and supreme Physician.”

reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/PT/pt-41.html

 

[Durnford]

The primary corruption that I would offer up is the division into several, then dozens, now thousands of competing sects who have at time treated one another as anathema and even (God forbid!) at times waged war and killed one another in the name of Christ.

I would also suggest that the ill treatment of Muslims, Jews and others by various Christians (individually and at times collectively and organizationally) also falls under this category of “corruption”.

I do not see debates such as the primacy of Rome, Filoque, Sole Scriptura, the Real Presence etc. as nearly as important as the first two.

It was the Muslims who oppressed Christians in the most cruel and barbarous ways possible.
They are still doing it

 

[drac16]

Do you know what happened to Peter and his followers Jesus departed? When about did he die and did he plant any Church’s/Mosques??

I don’t know. As I said in my initial post, I don’t know much about this kind of history. I’m open to learning about the Catholic Church’s perspective, though. That’s why I came to this site to begin with.

The same Paul that spoke of the basket, which is a story that you can accept is the same Paul who spoke of meeting up with the Apostles three years later, which is also in the Acts story. So if the basket story is true, did Paul know Peter personally? As you know he constantly spoke of his relationship with Peter and the Acts records their relationship as well. ?

I personally don’t believe that Paul had any meaningful relationship with guys like Peter and James. Paul says in Galatians that he met them-- and I believe him, but that’s as far as I’d go. Paul’s gospel was and is a gross corruption, as far as I’m concerned.

Do you believe the relationship was non-existent?

Well, Paul and Peter might’ve met, but yes, I think that they had no relationship (I’m not asserting that, though).

Which is extremely concerning considering what Ibn Kathir used to write. What do you think of his prefacing mention of the Jew’s with “may Allah”s continued curse fall on them until the Day of Resurrection”

or his commentary on Surah 4 vs 157: “When Allah sent “˜Isa [Jesus] with proofs and guidance, the Jews, may Allah”s curses, anger, torment and punishment be upon them, envied him because of his prophethood and obvious miracles”

I know he has many explanations on warfare that I won’t get into right now. But my question is, is he really the person we want influencing Muslims?

Of course I want his writings influencing muslims, but also people who are interested in knowing about Islam (and indeed, he does. His tafseer is, to this day, one of the most trustworthy and influential). Being that surah 4:157 is talking about the jews who thought that they killed Jesus [peace be upon him], I have no problem with Ibn Kathir [may Allah have mercy on him] wanting Allah’s curse to be brought upon those jews. I don’t have his tafseer because it’s huge and expensive, but, insha Allah, one day I will have it.

Wanting to kill a prophet is already bad enough, and the jews have a long history of murdering their own prophets, but actually bragging about what they thought they did, that’s almost unspeakably evil. Is there any level of Hell low enough for that?

 

[marywarfield]

Mary,

. I do understand that the outward doctrines and dogmas create the appearance of “different religions” within the Institutions which are identified in such discussion and dialogue. On the surface, men would have others believe that the religion of Jesus is different than the religion of Moses, or Abraham, or Noah.

. Surely one could point to outward practices and rituals, even laws, and assert that therefore they are different religions. There is, however, a single Source of spiritual water which flows from these different wells, though this one be over here, or that one there. We might peer down the well of Abraham and find nothing today, but that does not mean that there never was any water before, or that it was in fact the same pure water which flowed appropriate to the needs of that day.

. So this well may be constructed of stone, that one of concrete, this one of brass, that one of copper. What is important is the water of life flowing out of these different wells and streams, and not to stand beside them (the different wells) and argue why the water in this one or that cannot be pure because, because, because…

. We tend to get caught up in ourselves sometimes, and the importance of our position, negligent that the Spirit behind the appearance of these spiritual Wells is One and the same. That may be difficult if all we focus on are the rocks and mortar, or the cup one brings to the well, or the manner of head dress, etc.

. “Religion should unite all hearts and cause wars and disputes to vanish from the face of the earth, give birth to spirituality, and bring life and light to each heart. If religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred and division, it were better to be without it, and to withdraw from such a religion would be a truly religious act. For it is clear that the purpose of a remedy is to cure; but if the remedy should only aggravate the complaint it had better be left alone. Any religion which is not a cause of love and unity is no religion. All the holy prophets were as doctors to the soul; they gave prescriptions for the healing of mankind; thus any remedy that causes disease does not come from the great and supreme Physician.”

reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/PT/pt-41.html

Again I say to you your view is a secular view. If the
problem is religion then we just throw out religion
and get along. One hunza God, we are the world,
we are the children,and all that.

Except we have it on the authority from the divine
source Himself that that is not what He proposed.
There is only one savior. His name is Jesus Christ.
And He simply stated that adherence to HIM would
cause strife and division and so it does. The
answer is not in denying Him or claiming that
all He wants is for all to dismantle their
religions in the interests of a temporal peace.

 

[HeteroDoxical]

I have heard the claim from Muslims, Mormons, JW, Messianics and more recently on these forums the bahai, that the true and pure faith that Jesus had given the world was distorted as the teachings of men were more prominent in the Christian community.

I want to ask those bahai or if there are any Muslims or anyone else for that matter if they can present a substantial argument for the corruption of the Christian faith that modern day Christians of the five main traditions, Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Oriental and Syriac Christianities, do not reflect the main faith which the apostles of Jesus held that they received by Jesus Christ.

Also if anyone has heard a credible argument, that they might reproduce that argument.

Most people claim it was the council of Nicea that started it, with CONSTANTINE being some sorta demonic influence.

Unfortunately most folks making those claims read more fantasy novels than historic ones.

 

[dronald]

I don’t know. As I said in my initial post, I don’t know much about this kind of history. I’m open to learning about the Catholic Church’s perspective, though. That’s why I came to this site to begin with.

I personally don’t believe that Paul had any meaningful relationship with guys like Peter and James. Paul says in Galatians that he met them-- and I believe him, but that’s as far as I’d go. Paul’s gospel was and is a gross corruption, as far as I’m concerned.

Well, Paul and Peter might’ve met, but yes, I think that they had no relationship (I’m not asserting that, though).

Of course I want his writings influencing muslims, but also people who are interested in knowing about Islam (and indeed, he does. His tafseer is, to this day, one of the most trustworthy and influential). Being that surah 4:157 is talking about the jews who thought that they killed Jesus [peace be upon him], I have no problem with Ibn Kathir [may Allah have mercy on him] wanting Allah’s curse to be brought upon those jews. I don’t have his tafseer because it’s huge and expensive, but, insha Allah, one day I will have it.

Wanting to kill a prophet is already bad enough, and the jews have a long history of murdering their own prophets, but actually bragging about what they thought they did, that’s almost unspeakably evil. Is there any level of Hell low enough for that?

My response here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=11938537#post11938537

 

[daler]

Again I say to you your view is a secular view. If the
problem is religion then we just throw out religion
and get along. One hunza God, we are the world,
we are the children,and all that.

Except we have it on the authority from the divine
source Himself that that is not what He proposed.
There is only one savior. His name is Jesus Christ.
And He simply stated that adherence to HIM would
cause strife and division and so it does. The
answer is not in denying Him or claiming that
all He wants is for all to dismantle their
religions in the interests of a temporal peace.

Mary,

. There is a concept which I believe is somehow missing, or not being understood. Let me say it this way. The sun in the sky had no name before people learned to call it sun, or sol, or sunn, araw, etc

. People can point to the sun (or sol) and say: This is what I mean when I say this word. No one can point to Allah, or God, or the Great Spirit

. Now take it a step further. The One Whom we identify the Spirit with, i.e. Jesus, existed before Jesus, for He Himself said that He was before Abraham. So in a certain sense, that Spirit has no name, or precedes names, and words.

. It is for our sake, as humans, that we identify that Spirit and have a Name to associate it with. Similarly, we have our ways, or religions, which have been handed to us. When any of us on the planet truly follow that Spirit, it is the same Spirit we follow, by whatever Name.

. For we speak different languages, come from different cultures, and different lands. No single language, or culture, or land can dominate everyone else. That is subjugation and oppression, the imposition of one set of values upon another.

. Of course I understand that there are certain doctrines and issues which appear in one set of religious traditions, and not in another. Also, that there are purely man made dogmas attached to these various “religions”. We need to see past what man has thrown in to the pot and look for what God, the Great Spirit, put into the pot to begin with. When we find those soup bones and get to the heart of the Gospel, or what was given to Abraham and Moses, or Muhammad, or Krsna, and other Prophets, the question then arises: Why does this soup taste different than that one? What are these bay leaves doing in my soup?

. We’ve all been given a pot of soup that somebody handed down to us. You and I were raised Christian (I was Methodist), and the recipes were pretty similar. Had we been born in India, well yes, there would be a different flavor, much of it added by people over the past several thousand years. We could have been born in Egypt to Muslim ancestry. We have no control over that which we have inherited, and our initial “beliefs” stem from our experience growing up as this or that “religion”.

. So yes, it is challenging to see the similarity and set aside the doctrinal differences and man made dogma. When we do that, we find much in common, and even may learn to appreciate the differences which flavor the soup. I know I do…
.

 

[marywarfield]

Mary,

. There is a concept which I believe is somehow missing, or not being understood. Let me say it this way. The sun in the sky had no name before people learned to call it sun, or sol, or sunn, araw, etc

. People can point to the sun (or sol) and say: This is what I mean when I say this word. No one can point to Allah, or God, or the Great Spirit

. Now take it a step further. The One Whom we identify the Spirit with, i.e. Jesus, existed before Jesus, for He Himself said that He was before Abraham. So in a certain sense, that Spirit has no name, or precedes names, and words.

. It is for our sake, as humans, that we identify that Spirit and have a Name to associate it with. Similarly, we have our ways, or religions, which have been handed to us. When any of us on the planet truly follow that Spirit, it is the same Spirit we follow, by whatever Name.

. For we speak different languages, come from different cultures, and different lands. No single language, or culture, or land can dominate everyone else. That is subjugation and oppression, the imposition of one set of values upon another.

. Of course I understand that there are certain doctrines and issues which appear in one set of religious traditions, and not in another. Also, that there are purely man made dogmas attached to these various “religions”. We need to see past what man has thrown in to the pot and look for what God, the Great Spirit, put into the pot to begin with. When we find those soup bones and get to the heart of the Gospel, or what was given to Abraham and Moses, or Muhammad, or Krsna, and other Prophets, the question then arises: Why does this soup taste different than that one? What are these bay leaves doing in my soup?

. We’ve all been given a pot of soup that somebody handed down to us. You and I were raised Christian (I was Methodist), and the recipes were pretty similar. Had we been born in India, well yes, there would be a different flavor, much of it added by people over the past several thousand years. We could have been born in Egypt to Muslim ancestry. We have no control over that which we have inherited, and our initial “beliefs” stem from our experience growing up as this or that “religion”.

. So yes, it is challenging to see the similarity and set aside the doctrinal differences and man made dogma. When we do that, we find much in common, and even may learn to appreciate the differences which flavor the soup. I know I do…
.

And again you have backed yourself into that porch
that CS Lewis calls “mere Christianity”- those points
in which we all meet but fail to experience God fully.

 

[Servant19]

And again you have backed yourself into that porch
that CS Lewis calls “mere Christianity”- those points
in which we all meet but fail to experience God fully.

Dear Mary, what is it that makes you (and CS Lewis it seems) the recipient of experiencing “God fully” and all other sacred and holy experiences of non-Catholics throughout the world as “lacking” somewhat?

Is my encounter with the Holy Spirit a deception, yet your encounter a valid one?

Is it “containing” God’s all-encompassing nature to even think in these terms?

What is it that made Peter declare that Jesus was the Son of the Living God? It wasn’t Jesus’ resurrection, Jesus hadn’t even been crucified yet.

Is it or is it not the same thing as what made Anis be willing to give up His life in order that He may be with His Beloved, the Bab, eternally in the Shiraz barrack square in 1850?

Why is everyone else lacking?

More importantly why does Christianity think in this way? It is the remnants of these thoughts that has oppressed the beautiful spiritual Traditions of indigenous peoples around the world, to the point that these souls are so oppressed, so downtrodden that they cannot see beyond the black hole that they have been placed in by this kind of thinking. If this is “fully God”, then God is evil and deceives His children for even allowing spiritual and sacred experiences to touch the hearts of those outside the Church…



.

 

[daler]

And again you have backed yourself into that porch
that CS Lewis calls “mere Christianity”- those points
in which we all meet but fail to experience God fully.

Mary,
. There is nothing “mere” about Christianity, nor Jewish tradition, nor Islam, nor Buddhist, nor Baha’i. In your scope you seem to aim at other faiths than your own one in particular and shoot at them as though they were ducks in a pond. I don’t follow this line of reasoning, and don’t “mere down” any of them. Rather, I adhere to the belief that they are all part of an ongoing process of Progressive Revelation from the One God, Whom we all worship.

. Did Moses say: “the mere religion of Abraham”, or Jesus say: “That mere religion of Moses” No, for He knew, and I suspect that you agree, that all of these Prophets were from God, and that He was the latest in that line of Prophets. Is this a fair assessment so far?

. Now for the Jews, the coming of the blessed Christ Jesus, professing Himself to be their promised Messiah, their great commentators might well have accused His followers of “mere Judaism”. Isn’t this the case, and the same parallel to what you are saying? Is your faith in Jesus threatened by the notion that God “doeth what He willeth”, raising Prophets according to His will and plan for mankind?

. So if Christians say to their Jewish brothers and sisters, “We are a continuation of your ancestor’s Faith, and see it as a single Faith.” would that be an accurate statement so far, which you adhere to?

. Where I think you are challenged may be represented by the appearance of another Prophet after Jesus, even as the Jews were challenged by the claim of Jesus as Messiah. Consider this verse from the Quran:

. “We believe in Allah and in what has been sent down to us, and what was sent down to Ibrahim (Abraham), Isma’il (Ishmael), Ishaque (Isaac), Ya’qub (Jacob) and Al-Asbat [the twelve sons of Ya’qub (Jacob)] and what was given to Musa (Moses), 'Iesa (Jesus) and the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between one another among them and to Him (Allah) we have submitted (in Islam).” Surah 3:84

. Now from the Baha’ perspective, the above is true, and Revelation did not stop with Moses, as any Jew who embraced Baha’u’llah will attest, and every Jew who does so embraces Jesus the Christ. That should give you some comfort, I should think, knowing that 10% of all the Jews in Iran, for example, have accepted Christ in the past 150 years or so due to the coming of Baha’u’llah. Although you cannot make the connection, they can.

. So the crux of the issue is somehow in the mix between “mere Judaism”, mere Christianity, mere Islam, and mere Baha’i, as though each is somehow separate and competing with the other. That is the old world view, I do understand, along with the reasons why, as each group expresses it.

. I don’t mean to try and persuade you of this, but am merely attempting to identify and articulate the matter as clearly as I can, and leave you with your position, respectfully. The words of Baha’u’llah: “All of the Prophets proclaim the same Faith” assumes the station of Their being actual Prophets of the One God, discounting the many false prophets. For to include the prophets of Baal, for example, would indeed reduce a former faith to “mere”. For it is the inclusion of valid beliefs in the nature of Progressive Revelation which allows this, resting upon the supposition of Who these Prophets are, for which there are differing opinions and traditions. That is acknowledged.

. Thank you kindly for your sincere dialogue and the willingness to specify what the nature of the problem is as you see it.

. May the God of Jesus Christ be with you, and with us all.
. Amen!

 

[tonyfish58]

I have heard the claim from Muslims, Mormons, JW, Messianics and more recently on these forums the Baha’i, that the true and pure faith that Jesus had given the world was distorted as the teachings of men were more prominent in the Christian community.

I want to ask those Baha’i or if there are any Muslims or anyone else for that matter if they can present a substantial argument for the corruption of the Christian faith that modern day Christians of the five main traditions, Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Oriental and Syriac Christianities, do not reflect the main faith which the apostles of Jesus held that they received by Jesus Christ.

Also if anyone has heard a credible argument, that they might reproduce that argument.

IgnatianPhilo - Sorry have been away and do not have time to read the entire thread.

I also do not see it as the “corruption of the Christian faith”.

My answer would be based on the observation of History.

If one asked when did the Jewish Faith lose the path it should of taken, the answer is obviously when they rejected Christ. Thus the Jew did not have the Healing and Unifying Words of Christ to carry on with.

This could then be said of Christianity upon the rejection of the Words of Muhummad. Christianity lost its direction by not heeding the Guidance from God as given by Muhummad.

In reality it is as simple as that.

It can be looked at from this analogy - If one chooses to drive the Vintage Car it does not mean He has Corrupted the use of this Car, it just means He has not see the benefit of the Later Model!

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[rinnie]

Mary,

. There is a concept which I believe is somehow missing, or not being understood. Let me say it this way. The sun in the sky had no name before people learned to call it sun, or sol, or sunn, araw, etc

. People can point to the sun (or sol) and say: This is what I mean when I say this word. No one can point to Allah, or God, or the Great Spirit

. Now take it a step further. The One Whom we identify the Spirit with, i.e. Jesus, existed before Jesus, for He Himself said that He was before Abraham. So in a certain sense, that Spirit has no name, or precedes names, and words.

. It is for our sake, as humans, that we identify that Spirit and have a Name to associate it with. Similarly, we have our ways, or religions, which have been handed to us. When any of us on the planet truly follow that Spirit, it is the same Spirit we follow, by whatever Name.

. For we speak different languages, come from different cultures, and different lands. No single language, or culture, or land can dominate everyone else. That is subjugation and oppression, the imposition of one set of values upon another.

. Of course I understand that there are certain doctrines and issues which appear in one set of religious traditions, and not in another. Also, that there are purely man made dogmas attached to these various “religions”. We need to see past what man has thrown in to the pot and look for what God, the Great Spirit, put into the pot to begin with. When we find those soup bones and get to the heart of the Gospel, or what was given to Abraham and Moses, or Muhammad, or Krsna, and other Prophets, the question then arises: Why does this soup taste different than that one? What are these bay leaves doing in my soup?

. We’ve all been given a pot of soup that somebody handed down to us. You and I were raised Christian (I was Methodist), and the recipes were pretty similar. Had we been born in India, well yes, there would be a different flavor, much of it added by people over the past several thousand years. We could have been born in Egypt to Muslim ancestry. We have no control over that which we have inherited, and our initial “beliefs” stem from our experience growing up as this or that “religion”.

. So yes, it is challenging to see the similarity and set aside the doctrinal differences and man made dogma. When we do that, we find much in common, and even may learn to appreciate the differences which flavor the soup. I know I do…
.

I agree with you that when we put aside our doctrinal differences we find much more in common with one another.

But I think where the problem comes into play, we are truly not here as much to find out what we have in common, as defending our faith, that’s why its called Catholic Answers.

We are here to not only defend our faith, but help others to see why we love and need it, and help explain it to them.

man made doctrine is much easier to find what we all have in common, its usually accepting sin and we all unfortunately have that in common. Or say its going to be okay, you do what you want its right and I will do it my way and that’s okay. Because in the end it does not work.

My proof? Look at the world today. Its a mess.

And its not because of people fighting over God anymore, its people killing themselves or others because they don’t know God. But to some unknowing to themselves know the devil quite well.

 

[rinnie]

IgnatianPhilo - Sorry have been away and do not have time to read the entire thread.

I also do not see it as the “corruption of the Christian faith”.

My answer would be based on the observation of History.

If one asked when did the Jewish Faith lose the path it should of taken, the answer is obviously when they rejected Christ. Thus the Jew did not have the Healing and Unifying Words of Christ to carry on with.

This could then be said of Christianity upon the rejection of the Words of Muhummad. Christianity lost its direction by not heeding the Guidance from God as given by Muhummad.

In reality it is as simple as that.

How could Christianity lose its direction for listening to God and not Muhammad. ITs Christ himself who warned us to not listen to Muhammad. He warned us of Muhammad and thousands like him.

If we would obey the words and listen to Muhammad we lost God. We turned our backs on him.

Here is my proof.

Go to Timothy in the bible. ITs speaks constantly not to yield to false teachers or doctrines.

In the O.T. we were told by God to look for Christ. In the N.T. we are told Christ will come again.

There is nothing Christ left out that we need to know. It told us everything we need to know to have everlasting life with him. He left us the Church to lead us and teach us.

I challenge you on one thing.

Tell me what thing you feel Muhammad revealed that Christ did not tell us?

It can be looked at from this analogy - If one chooses to drive the Vintage Car it does not mean He has Corrupted the use of this Car, it just means He has not see the benefit of the Later Model!

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[rinnie]

Dear Mary, what is it that makes you (and CS Lewis it seems) the recipient of experiencing “God fully” and all other sacred and holy experiences of non-Catholics throughout the world as “lacking” somewhat?

Is my encounter with the Holy Spirit a deception, yet your encounter a valid one?

Is it “containing” God’s all-encompassing nature to even think in these terms?

What is it that made Peter declare that Jesus was the Son of the Living God? It wasn’t Jesus’ resurrection, Jesus hadn’t even been crucified yet.

Is it or is it not the same thing as what made Anis be willing to give up His life in order that He may be with His Beloved, the Bab, eternally in the Shiraz barrack square in 1850?

Why is everyone else lacking?

More importantly why does Christianity think in this way? It is the remnants of these thoughts that has oppressed the beautiful spiritual Traditions of indigenous peoples around the world, to the point that these souls are so oppressed, so downtrodden that they cannot see beyond the black hole that they have been placed in by this kind of thinking. If this is “fully God”, then God is evil and deceives His children for even allowing spiritual and sacred experiences to touch the hearts of those outside the Church…



.

I think the point that you missed with God leading us by the power of the Holy Spirit is this.

Not that the Holy Spirit can work through anyone, the RCC teaches it can. Look at ST Paul he was not a follower or Christ, tried to crucify the Church.

Its when these people claim a new doctrine, apart from what Christ taught that they are false prophets.

If it is a true vision from the Holy Spirit it would not teach the opposite of the Holy Spirit. Because there is only one truth, and one Holy Spirit and both are unchanging Forever.

 

[marywarfield]

Mary,
. There is nothing “mere” about Christianity, nor Jewish tradition, nor Islam, nor Buddhist, nor Baha’i. In your scope you seem to aim at other faiths than your own one in particular and shoot at them as though they were ducks in a pond. I don’t follow this line of reasoning, and don’t “mere down” any of them. Rather, I adhere to the belief that they are all part of an ongoing process of Progressive Revelation from the One God, Whom we all worship.

. Did Moses say: “the mere religion of Abraham”, or Jesus say: “That mere religion of Moses” No, for He knew, and I suspect that you agree, that all of these Prophets were from God, and that He was the latest in that line of Prophets. Is this a fair assessment so far?

. Now for the Jews, the coming of the blessed Christ Jesus, professing Himself to be their promised Messiah, their great commentators might well have accused His followers of “mere Judaism”. Isn’t this the case, and the same parallel to what you are saying? Is your faith in Jesus threatened by the notion that God “doeth what He willeth”, raising Prophets according to His will and plan for mankind?

. So if Christians say to their Jewish brothers and sisters, “We are a continuation of your ancestor’s Faith, and see it as a single Faith.” would that be an accurate statement so far, which you adhere to?

. Where I think you are challenged may be represented by the appearance of another Prophet after Jesus, even as the Jews were challenged by the claim of Jesus as Messiah. Consider this verse from the Quran:

. “We believe in Allah and in what has been sent down to us, and what was sent down to Ibrahim (Abraham), Isma’il (Ishmael), Ishaque (Isaac), Ya’qub (Jacob) and Al-Asbat [the twelve sons of Ya’qub (Jacob)] and what was given to Musa (Moses), 'Iesa (Jesus) and the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between one another among them and to Him (Allah) we have submitted (in Islam).” Surah 3:84

. Now from the Baha’ perspective, the above is true, and Revelation did not stop with Moses, as any Jew who embraced Baha’u’llah will attest, and every Jew who does so embraces Jesus the Christ. That should give you some comfort, I should think, knowing that 10% of all the Jews in Iran, for example, have accepted Christ in the past 150 years or so due to the coming of Baha’u’llah. Although you cannot make the connection, they can.

. So the crux of the issue is somehow in the mix between “mere Judaism”, mere Christianity, mere Islam, and mere Baha’i, as though each is somehow separate and competing with the other. That is the old world view, I do understand, along with the reasons why, as each group expresses it.

. I don’t mean to try and persuade you of this, but am merely attempting to identify and articulate the matter as clearly as I can, and leave you with your position, respectfully. The words of Baha’u’llah: “All of the Prophets proclaim the same Faith” assumes the station of Their being actual Prophets of the One God, discounting the many false prophets. For to include the prophets of Baal, for example, would indeed reduce a former faith to “mere”. For it is the inclusion of valid beliefs in the nature of Progressive Revelation which allows this, resting upon the supposition of Who these Prophets are, for which there are differing opinions and traditions. That is acknowledged.

. Thank you kindly for your sincere dialogue and the willingness to specify what the nature of the problem is as you see it.

. May the God of Jesus Christ be with you, and with us all.
. Amen!

I’m sorry. What makes you think Christ was merely
another Moses?
Where you and Servant fail is attempting to prove
there is no difference between Christianity, Judaism and
all the rest. In other words you are doing nothing
differently from Pliny or Tacitus by insisting that
Christ was no more than any other god, Roman,
Greek or Baha’i. So just like Pluny and Tacitus
you wish us to deny Christ as who He is the
ONLY Son of God so we can all be peaceful and
non divisive.

 

[rinnie]

I’m sorry. What makes you think Christ was merely
another Moses?
Where you and Servant fail is attempting to prove
there is no difference between Christianity, Judaism and
all the rest. In other words you are doing nothing
differently from Pliny or Tacitus by insisting that
Christ was no more than any other god, Roman,
Greek or Baha’i. So just like Pluny and Tacitus
you wish us to deny Christ as who He is the
ONLY Son of God so we can all be peaceful and
non divisive.

I think that’s what I am seeing also. Its okay to divide truth and the Holy Spirit and accept lies so no one argues,

Its not going to work, Its saying lets have the devil and God get along and have a happy world.

God saves the Devil destroys.

As Christ taught us we cannot be lukewarm. You have to accept all of the truth not just what works for you.

 

[Servant19]

I think that’s what I am seeing also. Its okay to divide truth and the Holy Spirit and accept lies so no one argues,

Its not going to work, Its saying lets have the devil and God get along and have a happy world.

God saves the Devil destroys.

As Christ taught us we cannot be lukewarm. You have to accept all of the truth not just what works for you.

Dear Mary and angel rinnie.

I think the ONLY contradiction we have between the Bahai religion and Christianity is the resurrection of Christ being a physical one or a spiritual one. (It actually turns out that it’s in reality a “glorified” one . )

But anyway, if the works and the Faith of the Baha’is is to be deemed invalid and a deception given by the Devil based on this one matter alone, I’m quite happy to let it be.

If seriously, Catholics are unwilling to work with the Baha’is to herald the unification of the human race PURELY because we do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, and also question the historical authenticity of the concurrent resurrection of the Saints at that time, then it is truly sad indeed.

When faced with a questioning Jesus upon your entry into the next world, how would you respond if He asked you why you would not even entertain the thought of collaborating with other religions who are sincerely trying to provide a sustainable foundation for the unification of the human race?

Just some perspectives to explore dear sisters

.

 

[rinnie]

Dear Mary and angel rinnie.

I think the ONLY contradiction we have between the Bahai religion and Christianity is the resurrection of Christ being a physical one or a spiritual one. (It actually turns out that it’s in reality a “glorified” one . )

But anyway, if the works and the Faith of the Baha’is is to be deemed invalid and a deception given by the Devil based on this one matter alone, I’m quite happy to let it be.

If seriously, Catholics are unwilling to work with the Baha’is to herald the unification of the human race PURELY because we do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, and also question the historical authenticity of the concurrent resurrection of the Saints at that time, then it is truly sad indeed.

When faced with a questioning Jesus upon your entry into the next world, how would you respond if He asked you why you would not even entertain the thought of collaborating with other religions who are sincerely trying to provide a sustainable foundation for the unification of the human race?

Just some perspectives to explore dear sisters

.

I think if it were me and Jesus today having this conversation (saying today was the day judgment day) it would go like this.

Here it goes, hope you have a little humor.

Okay, God says okay Rin, what’s one problem that you 2 could not agree on.

I would say they say you did not rise from the dead, I could not get past that and say okay, that’s cool.

I can’t see how we could be united in truth if they deny your resurrection.

 

[Servant19]

I think if it were me and Jesus today having this conversation (saying today was the day judgment day) it would go like this.

Here it goes, hope you have a little humor.

Okay, God says okay Rin, what’s one problem that you 2 could not agree on.

I would say they say you did not rise from the dead, I could not get past that and say okay, that’s cool.

I can’t see how we could be united in truth if they deny your resurrection.

I always wanted to have this question answered, but no one ever really addresses it for me sweet sister rinnie.

Were Peter to have died BEFORE Jesus’ resurrection, would it have mattered if he did not believe in the Resurrection of Jesus?

What made Peter recognize and acknowledge ALL TRUTH before Jesus’ resurrection had taken place?

.

 

[marywarfield]

Dear Mary and angel rinnie.

I think the ONLY contradiction we have between the Bahai religion and Christianity is the resurrection of Christ being a physical one or a spiritual one. (It actually turns out that it’s in reality a “glorified” one . )

But anyway, if the works and the Faith of the Baha’is is to be deemed invalid and a deception given by the Devil based on this one matter alone, I’m quite happy to let it be.

If seriously, Catholics are unwilling to work with the Baha’is to herald the unification of the human race PURELY because we do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, and also question the historical authenticity of the concurrent resurrection of the Saints at that time, then it is truly sad indeed.

When faced with a questioning Jesus upon your entry into the next world, how would you respond if He asked you why you would not even entertain the thought of collaborating with other religions who are sincerely trying to provide a sustainable foundation for the unification of the human race?

Just some perspectives to explore dear sisters

.

Obviously if we were on the same sheet of music as
to the identity of Christ and what he wants to accomplish
you would not be Bahai. Lol.
Facts: the divisiveness does not come from me.
It comes from Him. Consider the following:
I will sift them like wheat, seperating the chaff and
throwing it in the fire.
I bring division, a sword. Households will be divided
against each other on account of my Name.
I will seperate the sheep from the goats with the
sheep on my right and goats on my left.
Etc etc.

Does that sound like someone who is just interested
in our human world having the warm fuzzy feeling? I’m ok you are ok?

Secondly you come here to Catholic Answers to
correct our thinking about the Resurrection. We
say nope. Christ really did die physically and he
really did resurrect physically but you insist
this is just a trivial point of disagreement in man
made doctrine so let’s just set it aside and get along.

But we can’t simply because your Christ is NOT
our Christ but more of a Hollywood producer
singing we are the world.
He bears very little that is recognizable to the
person we know as Lord.