Why do you believe what you believe?

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Thank you brother Vouthon and Judas for your responses. Naturally questions arise from your posts. If I may list them?

1. In the Roman Catechism, 1566, (quoted by Vouthon) it states that “…God, who is pure spirit and can admit of nothing corporeal.” If God is pure spirit, and Jesus clearly says in the resurrection stories that He “is not a spirit”, how then is Jesus God?

Is God, as to his eternal nature, a physical human being? No, and
I resent the accusation of saying otherwise. The God is the Father,
the Son, & the Holy Spirit, One God, whose nature is Spirit.
What you seem to be suggesting is that God is NOT capable of creating
a body of flesh and bone in which to be embodied, thus being locked out
of his own Creation. Jesus is not JUST a spirit, he’s not ONLY Divine Be-
ing, but Jesus is also Man. He is God and Man.

1. Following on from the study of this statement from the Roman Catechism, how does this align with the concept of incarnation? Namely, “God…can admit of nothing corporeal”?

I just answered that. God, as to his eternal nature, does not have a physical part,
but rather God is Spirit. Jesus then BECAME incarnate, entered into human his-
tory, which your God appears to be incapable of doing.

1. Brother Vouthon, the concept of symbolism with clouds may not be revolutionary and fixed to Benedict’s statements, but the reality is that the literal-ness of Jesus Ascension is asserted by Catholic adherents, even by those who are pretty well versed and have completed RCIA. Why is such a critical aspect of Jesus’ life not universally known?

Because it’s not a high priority on our list, believe it or not.
The difference between Judaism/Christianity’s Sacrifice of
Isaac vs Islams/Baha’i’s Ishmael is something of a critical
nature, but not EXACTLY what happened. The Ascension
account says Jesus returned to Heaven. That is the point.

I can quote very well versed Catholics on this forum who were critical of Baha’is for referring to Baha’u’llah’s passing as an “Ascension” because it was not a literal Ascension into the clouds. If this symbolic meaning has been known since the 1500’s, how would you rate the Church’s efforts in making this understanding universally known amongst its adherents?

uh . . . rephrase por-fae-vwa.

1. If there are two entities, one being the Father (who according to Catholicism is “pure spirit”) and the other being Jesus (who is now a “glorified body” and not a pure spirit), then for Jesus to “be taken up into Gods very being” surely they should occupy the same substance no? One is pure spirit and the other is not. How would one clarify this dichotomy please?

Not “one being and other being”, ONE BEING, ONE GOD, who is three persons,
one person being the Father, the other the Son, ans still the other the who is the
Holy Spirit. Anywho, Jesus in his very eternal essence is Spirit, that has not yet
changed, nor will that ever change. Jesus was also taken up to the Presence of
the Father, that’s what that “taken up into God’s very being” means.

To solve this dichotomy, we must understand that it is a “false dichotomy”, as
there are many more options than just two. Jesus is not just God. Jesus isn’t
just a Man. Jesus is both God & Man, both at the same time.

 

[tonyfish58]

I think it goes with common sense, gut feeling’s and what works for you.

The Church and the gospel works for me because it seems when you do what is right, believe in the word of God and do your best to obey it your life is content.

You can sleep at night, you can accept disaster when it comes around, and take the goods and the bad with a grain of GOD!

Sorry I have not more time , this has been an interesting discussion I will be back next week and go through these replies.

Yes Christ and the Gospel are the Truth to which we must all submit What else can one say without seeing to be attacking the Church.

I can assure you as a Baha’i we in no way wish to take away from what the Church has contributed to the Faith of Christ.

But it is the Love of God that Prevails and if God has Resurrected as promised and as God intended, then it is us Humans that must let go and reconsider where we may have got it wrong.

Is this not true Humility:blush: Is this not the greatest of all Clouds that hide the splendor of Christ return in all His Glory

Imagine how hard it will be if the Church has to change the ideas it has held for thousands of years…

It is all explained in this Link - reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/KI/

Regards Tony

 

[daler]

His Ascension wasn’t him bring lifted up into the clouds, the clouds are a symbol for the glory of God. It was a change of state and not a change of place because heaven isn’t a place and glorified bodies do not need “space” as my quotation from St. Thomas explained.

In all honesty, I just don’t see what is so explosive abut what the Pope Emeritus said

Vouthon,
. I greatly appreciate your scholarship and understanding which you bring to this conversation without emotional overtones. It is very helpful to all of us who strive to communicate “whatever it is” that we believe in the logical constructs of words for the transmission of ideas and concepts, which are often hard to grasp and articulate.

. I should like to ask you if you might clarify your understanding of: “Where two or three gather and make mention of Me, there I am also.”

. A couple of years ago I heard a very good talk by Dr Pauline, head of the theological department of Loma Linda University, and an Adventist. He spoke of the “shekinah glory” as a historical source of Jesus’ words.

. My question is in regards to the disappearance of Jesus after the Resurrection, His entrance into the room, “not using the door”, and exit. Post this please to consideration of where two or more gather, for my own testimony is that I feel His presence in such gatherings of sincere prayer and in this sense know it to be true: That He “is” present, but not physically. His presence does not depend upon physicality, form, or substance. This, to me, is what was trying to be conveyed at the time of His Resurrection - that He was “present” spiritually, as His True Reality transcends and is not dependent upon His physical body. When people recognize His Presence, although there is no physical body upon which He is contingent, they can truly “know” that He has indeed been what we call “Resurrected”.

. Please forgive me if I am complicating the question… I hope you follow my thoughts which I am trying to convey, for I truly believe in Him, and His presence, independent of a physical body, and testify to this.

. Thank you so much, Vouthon, and God bless you in the New Year.

. Dale

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I can assure you as a Baha’i we in no way wish to take away from what the Church has contributed to the Faith of Christ.

Regards Tony

Except for the doctrine of the ressurection.

Except for the doctrine of the trinity.

Except for the doctrine that thought Jesus alone we receive Salvation.

Except for the practice of Monastaicism.

Except for the practice of Celibacy.

Except for the teaching of the sacraments being actually holy and ordained things by God.

Except for these and other things right you don’t want to take away from Christianity right? What a pandering statement which is in no way true. You dissagree with Christinaity with the profession of your faith.

 

[Arizona_Samson]

In another thread, an interesting question was posed.

“Why do you believe what you believe?”

I believe in what I believe because God, in His infinite mercy (Romans 9:23), chose to lift the scales from my eyes (Acts 9:18), and give me a new heart (Jeremiah 24:7), by the power of His* breathed out *word (John 20:31, 21:24), which bestowed the eternal life that was heard, seen, looked upon, touched, made manifest, and proclaimed to me (1 John 1:1-3).

 

[tonyfish58]

Except for the doctrine of the ressurection.

Except for the doctrine of the trinity.

Except for the doctrine that thought Jesus alone we receive Salvation.

Except for the practice of Monastaicism.

Except for the practice of Celibacy.

Except for the teaching of the sacraments being actually holy and ordained things by God.

Except for these and other things right you don’t want to take away from Christianity right? What a pandering statement which is in no way true. You dissagree with Christinaity with the profession of your faith.

Focusing on the Doctrinal differences has always been used as the rejection of the New Manifestation. The mistake the Jews made etc!

I was thinking of the Good that the Church has done, I could Focus on the Bad it has done, but what does that ever achieve

True Faith is the Love of God and living the Virtues. That includes looking for Good in everything, turning the cheek to the bad.

Look beyond the Doctrine into the Love of God and the unity of religion becomes manifest

Regards Tony

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Focusing on the Doctrinal differences has always been used as the rejection of the New Manifestation. The mistake the Jews made etc!

I was thinking of the Good that the Church has done, I could Focus on the Bad it has done, but what does that ever achieve

True Faith is the Love of God and living the Virtues. That includes looking for Good in everything, turning the cheek to the bad.

Look beyond the Doctrine into the Love of God and the unity of religion becomes manifest

Regards Tony

I notice you are back tracking and refusing to admit that you want to fundamentally do away with everything that makes Christianity, Christianity. That you were beyond mistaken in suggesting you don’t want to do away with anything Christianity has traditionally believed and accepted. We both know that was a lie sir.

You tell me to look beyond doctrine, yet you would never do the same, you have doctrines and they cannot be changed. you woul dnever look beyond Doctrine and confess the NIcene creed with a Christian would you? You know why? BEcause it goes against your doctring.

 

[SteveVH]

My question is in regards to the disappearance of Jesus after the Resurrection, His entrance into the room, “not using the door”, and exit. Post this please to consideration of where two or more gather, for my own testimony is that I feel His presence in such gatherings of sincere prayer and in this sense know it to be true: That He “is” present, but not physically. His presence does not depend upon physicality, form, or substance. This, to me, is what was trying to be conveyed at the time of His Resurrection - that He was “present” spiritually, as His True Reality transcends and is not dependent upon His physical body. When people recognize His Presence, although there is no physical body upon which He is contingent, they can truly “know” that He has indeed been what we call “Resurrected”.

This question has been answered about a thousand times on each of the other Baha’i threads. Are you expecting a different answer to your question?

 

[Servant19]

I notice you are back tracking and refusing to admit that you want to fundamentally do away with everything that makes Christianity, Christianity. That you were beyond mistaken in suggesting you don’t want to do away with anything Christianity has traditionally believed and accepted. We both know that was a lie sir.

You tell me to look beyond doctrine, yet you would never do the same, you have doctrines and they cannot be changed. you woul dnever look beyond Doctrine and confess the NIcene creed with a Christian would you? You know why? BEcause it goes against your doctring.

Ignatian, there’s no need to go around accusing people and entire religions of lying, friend.

The Bahai position in relation to other religions is not too dissimilar to the Christian position in relation to Judaism.

Is Christianity a religion that lies too?

.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Ignatian, there’s no need to go around accusing people and entire religions of lying, friend.

The Bahai position in relation to other religions is not too dissimilar to the Christian position in relation to Judaism.

Is Christianity a religion that lies too?

.

So you do want to do away with Christianity? The doctrines and worldview of Christianity right? That being said I christinaities connection to judaism is much more fundamental than the connection of Bahai to Chrsitianity. We have embraced a jewish worldview in that we accept ressurection, the goodness of God’s creation and other things whereas you have deviated deeply from the traditional Christian view of such things. you maintain something of a gnostic or platonic outlook on things combined with some strange idea of salvation being found in a utopian society created by man.

 

[Servant19]

Is God, as to his eternal nature, a physical human being? No, and
I resent the accusation of saying otherwise. The God is the Father,
the Son, & the Holy Spirit, One God, whose nature is Spirit.
What you seem to be suggesting is that God is NOT capable of creating
a body of flesh and bone in which to be embodied, thus being locked out
of his own Creation. Jesus is not JUST a spirit, he’s not ONLY Divine Be-
ing, but Jesus is also Man. He is God and Man.

I just answered that. God, as to his eternal nature, does not have a physical part,
but rather God is Spirit. Jesus then BECAME incarnate, entered into human his-
tory, which your God appears to be incapable of doing.

Because it’s not a high priority on our list, believe it or not.
The difference between Judaism/Christianity’s Sacrifice of
Isaac vs Islams/Baha’i’s Ishmael is something of a critical
nature, but not EXACTLY what happened. The Ascension
account says Jesus returned to Heaven. That is the point.

uh . . . rephrase por-fae-vwa.

Not “one being and other being”, ONE BEING, ONE GOD, who is three persons,
one person being the Father, the other the Son, ans still the other the who is the
Holy Spirit. Anywho, Jesus in his very eternal essence is Spirit, that has not yet
changed, nor will that ever change. Jesus was also taken up to the Presence of
the Father, that’s what that “taken up into God’s very being” means.

To solve this dichotomy, we must understand that it is a “false dichotomy”, as
there are many more options than just two. Jesus is not just God. Jesus isn’t
just a Man. Jesus is both God & Man, both at the same time.

It seems very clear that the concept of a glorified body introduces more questions than answers.

If Christs Ascension was not a physical Ascension into physical clouds, then where is Christ today?

If He is in heaven, is heaven a physical or spiritual place?

If heaven is a spiritual place, then what condition is the glorified body, physical or spiritual or neither?

If the glorified body is both a physical and a spiritual body at the same time, then is heaven also both a physical and a spiritual place/condition?

The difficult questions just keep on rolling on and on, and the questions above are just the tip of the iceberg.

If these are questions which we must have faith in rather than seek to answer, why is that not blind faith? If it is reasonable to have blind faith, why are asked to reason together? There is no “reason” in blind faith. We could just as easily believe in so many other blind faiths…

.

 

[SteveVH]

It seems very clear that the concept of a glorified body introduces more questions than answers.

If Christs Ascension was not a physical Ascension into physical clouds, then where is Christ today?

If He is in heaven, is heaven a physical or spiritual place?

If heaven is a spiritual place, then what condition is the glorified body, physical or spiritual or neither?

If the glorified body is both a physical and a spiritual body at the same time, then is heaven also both a physical and a spiritual place/condition?

The difficult questions just keep on rolling on and on, and the questions above are just the tip of the iceberg.

If these are questions which we must have faith in rather than seek to answer, why is that not blind faith? If it is reasonable to have blind faith, why are asked to reason together? There is no “reason” in blind faith. We could just as easily believe in so many other blind faiths…

LOL. Do you realize how many times all of this has been discussed? I’ll ask you the same question as Daler. Are you expecting a different answer each time you ask the same question? What do we have now, four or five Baha’i threads, each with 1000 or more posts. Why will you not just accept the answer given, multiple times, as to what we believe? One has no need to review these threads. Every page is the same, over and over and over again.

 

[Servant19]

LOL. Do you realize how many times all of this has been discussed? I’ll ask you the same question as Daler. Are you expecting a different answer each time you ask the same question? What do we have now, four or five Baha’i threads, each with 1000 or more posts. Why will you not just accept the answer given, multiple times, as to what we believe? One has no need to review these threads. Every page is the same, over and over and over again.

Dear friend, Steve, the difference is that it has been clarified that it is official Catholic teaching that Christs Ascension was a symbolic one, not a literal one, contrary to common Catholic understanding.

Did you know this? I believe the world has been misinformed on the reality of Christs Ascension, including Catholics such as Judas…

I remember it was yourself who accused Baha’is of being deceptive in referring to Baha’u’llah’s passing as an Ascension. Well it seems we have commonality in our meaning of the word “Ascension”

Hence the questions above

.

 

[SteveVH]

Dear friend, Steve, the difference is that it has been clarified that it is official Catholic teaching that Christs Ascension was a symbolic one, not a literal one, contrary to common Catholic understanding.

It has been clarified that Christ’s ascension was a symbolic one? By who? You understand, of course, that if his ascension was only symbolic then he never really ascended. Since this is clearly in contradiction to the Catholic dogma of the Ascension, your statement is preposterous.

Did you know this?

No, I did not. I never dreamed that it would take a Baha’i who rejects Catholic teaching to enlighten me as to that teaching

I believe the world has been misinformed on the reality of Christs Ascension, including Catholics such as Judas…

Yes, we are all aware that you believe this.

I remember it was yourself who accused Baha’is of being deceptive in referring to Baha’u’llah’s passing as an Ascension. Well it seems we have commonality in our meaning of the word “Ascension”

We do not, I assure you.

 

[tonyfish58]

I notice you are back tracking and refusing to admit that you want to fundamentally do away with everything that makes Christianity, Christianity. That you were beyond mistaken in suggesting you don’t want to do away with anything Christianity has traditionally believed and accepted. We both know that was a lie sir.

You tell me to look beyond doctrine, yet you would never do the same, you have doctrines and they cannot be changed. you woul dnever look beyond Doctrine and confess the NIcene creed with a Christian would you? You know why? BEcause it goes against your doctring.

One could consider what actually makes a person a Christian

When one considers this, then the other remarks you made will also be answered!

Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

So you do want to do away with Christianity? The doctrines and worldview of Christianity right? That being said I christinaities connection to judaism is much more fundamental than the connection of Bahai to Chrsitianity. We have embraced a jewish worldview in that we accept ressurection, the goodness of God’s creation and other things whereas you have deviated deeply from the traditional Christian view of such things. you maintain something of a gnostic or platonic outlook on things combined with some strange idea of salvation being found in a utopian society created by man.

Is the Faith of a Jew done away with when they accept Christ? Or is the Faith of a Jew Fulfilled when they accept Christ.

Would the Jew have to deny any of the Old Testament to accept Christ?

This would be your answer to what you ask of us.

Regards Tony

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

One could consider what actually makes a person a Christian

When one considers this, then the other remarks you made will also be answered!

Regards Tony

Im going to guess you are going to reduce being Christian to being good in which case you do not understand the gospel.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Is the Faith of a Jew done away with when they accept Christ? Or is the Faith of a Jew Fulfilled when they accept Christ.

Would the Jew have to deny any of the Old Testament to accept Christ?

This would be your answer to what you ask of us.

Regards Tony

So your previous statement that you do not want to contradict Christianity or show it false or whatever the exact phrasing was; it was a false statement right?

 

[tonyfish58]

“So your previous statement that you do not want to contradict Christianity or show it false or whatever the exact phrasing was; it was a false statement right”?
“Im going to guess you are going to reduce being Christian to being good in which case you do not understand the gospel”.

I am not going to play your game of words. Attempting to impute thoughts and words to a person is just that.

I will leave my replies to what is already posted, if you wish you can consider them in more detail.

God Bless you and all the Catholics on this site, may your Christmas and new year bring you happiness, Love and Faith.

Regards Tony

 

[Servant19]

It has been clarified that Christ’s ascension was a symbolic one? By who? You understand, of course, that if his ascension was only symbolic then he never really ascended. Since this is clearly in contradiction to the Catholic dogma of the Ascension, your statement is preposterous.

No, I did not. I never dreamed that it would take a Baha’i who rejects Catholic teaching to enlighten me as to that teaching

Yes, we are all aware that you believe this.

We do not, I assure you.

Well then dear friend, i would humbly suggest you read Pope Benedict XVI’s magesterial work entitled “Jesus of Nazareth”

God bless you brother Steve

.