Do Any Other Religions Boast Such A Claim?

[elephunky]

I need to know if a comparable exists before I can shame other religions in my next sermon. We have here written accounts of someone other than Christ, performing miracles and the people attribute that power of miracles to Christ Jesus. I dont think the same can be said of any other supposed prophets of other religions that came along after Christ. Visible miracles led the people to Christ and not eloquence of speech or supposed scriptures handed over to someone by an angel. Visible miracles is what allowed Paul to retain the people's attention and I would say obedience. The people would have given him their own eyes if Paul had asked for them -- a clear description of awe the people felt over the power of those miracles. The people were clearly overwhelmed by what they experienced thru Paul and that Spirit remained with them enabling them to form churches and congregations. Paul's mere eloquence of speech had little to do with church building. Today that power is not as visible or evident for various reasons but that is a subject for another thread.

"You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? Have you suffered so much for nothing--if it really was for nothing? Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?" -- Galatians 3

and

"As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me." -- Galatians 4

*blind post*

What is the purpose of shaming other religions? Do you appreciate members of other religions shaming yours?

I think there are examples of prophets in other religions but in my experience the focus is more on the gods and goddesses, as it should be.

 

[awitch]

What is the purpose of shaming other religions? Do you appreciate members of other religions shaming yours?

You noticed that, too?
Something is wrong when you have to make everyone else look bad to make yourself look good.

 

[elephunky]

You noticed that, too?
Something is wrong when you have to make everyone else look bad to make yourself look good.

It kind of makes me nervous when people think naming and shaming is necessary...why not focus on the messages the religion itself instead? When I was a christian and attended a specific church the main thing I could boast was that we never felt the need to talk down other religions. It was always messages from the bible that were taught.

 

[Mikeb85]

I need to know if a comparable exists before I can shame other religions in my next sermon. We have here written accounts of someone other than Christ, performing miracles and the people attribute that power of miracles to Christ Jesus. I dont think the same can be said of any other supposed prophets of other religions that came along after Christ. Visible miracles led the people to Christ and not eloquence of speech or supposed scriptures handed over to someone by an angel. Visible miracles is what allowed Paul to retain the people's attention and I would say obedience. The people would have given him their own eyes if Paul had asked for them -- a clear description of awe the people felt over the power of those miracles. The people were clearly overwhelmed by what they experienced thru Paul and that Spirit remained with them enabling them to form churches and congregations. Paul's mere eloquence of speech had little to do with church building. Today that power is not as visible or evident for various reasons but that is a subject for another thread.

"You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? Have you suffered so much for nothing--if it really was for nothing? Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?" -- Galatians 3

and

"As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me." -- Galatians 4

Even the Egyptian magicians performed 'miracles' (rather, magic).

Many miracles were attributed to the historical Buddha, and later to his followers. Hindus and Muslims also have a tradition of miracles. And of course, there are many stories about Taoist sages that involve miracles and supernatural powers...

 

[SanFrank]

pious legend

Christianity ultimately prevailed because of its curious mixture of intolerant exclusivism ("We've got a monopoly on Truth, and everybody else worships evil spirits") and possessive inclusiveness ("you don't need to be especially insightful, enlightened or even willing to learn if you want to join. Everyone's welcome"), and because it was even more suited to building and maintaining a hierarchical society with a small ruling class than the Roman state cult.

Interesting pov, not that I see things the same way of course. But how did rome maintain a heirarchial society thru the papacy?

I'm not sure what counts as comparable in your mind, but there are many miracle workers, and their powers are presumably attributed to the divine, if not necessarily a previous prophet (which seems needlessly specific -- I mean, you could say "Jesus is the only prophet born in Bethlehem. No other religion can claim that!")

Sai Baba worked miracles, and was even the reincarnation of the earlier Sai Baba, who also worked miracles.

For Buddhism, we have Ichadon.

Shinto kannushi are "capable of miracles" with the power of the kami (spirits).

Plenty of Jewish mystics with miraculous powers.

Shame miracles don't happen anymore.

And yet sai baba relied on quran and never saw past its flaws? He prophesied his own death would be 96 but died at 84.

Yep, i accept that.
I didn't know there are many walks of life in Mecca.They were Indeed dirt poor as many of them go hungry.There was a hadith on that.
Now, Back to Miraculous Quranic revelations.Tell me what Miracles of Quran impressed his followers ?. I only see some people impressed with Muhammad's oratory. Apart from that free loading proposed by muhammad seems to impress some others and promises of Abundance in heaven.

Tell me what is miraculous about looting caravans ?. Muhammad failed in initial attempts to loot them but his persistence payed off and with some support from Quranic revelations.

Beautiful replies that allow me to recall reading that somewhere.

*blind post*

What is the purpose of shaming other religions? Do you appreciate members of other religions shaming yours?

I think there are examples of prophets in other religions but in my experience the focus is more on the gods and goddesses, as it should be.

And you think the 'shame' bit was the gist of the thread?

 

[elephunky]

And you think the 'shame' bit was the gist of the thread?

It stood out to me.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Interesting pov, not that I see things the same way of course. But how did rome maintain a heirarchial society thru the papacy?

Rom 13,1: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Rom 13,2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Rome already featured a hierarchical social structure, but for as long as there was a multitude of religions, spiritual leaders did not contribute that much to maintaining an estate-based society. In fact, the mystery religions were downright egalitarian, and pagans advocated social progress for slaves, for example:
In 82 BCE murder of slaves were forbidden by the Cornelian Law. Around 30 BCE the Petronian Law forbade the sending of slaves to fight in the amphitheater. The Stoic teaches Seneca (c 5 BCE-65 CE), while he still had influence over the insane emperor, Nero (37-68 CE) managed to induce him to pass a law to forbade the cruel treatment of slaves. The Emperor Hadrian (76-138), an Epicurean, revived the laws prohibiting the murder of slaves and of sending them to the amphitheater. He also suppressed the inhuman practice of housing slaves underground. Hadrian was also known to have banished a wealthy Roman lady, named Umbricia, for cruelty to her slaves. By the second century slaves had already acquired the right, under certain circumstances, to bring legal action against their masters. The Emperor Antoninus Pius (86-161) issued an imperial decree which gives freedom to a slave running from a cruel master; on the condition that the runaway slave must embrace a statue of the emperor before he is considered a free man.

The voices of conscience raised against slavery was also pagan. The pagan Dio Chrysostom, who was the greatest orator of his age, delivered a speech around AD100 in a public hall in the Forum of Rome where he explicitly and at great length condemned slavery as unjust.

Now, the same does not apply to Christianity. Down to the year 1000 CE, no Christian leader, let alone a pope or a council, condemned slavery. St. Augustine explicitly advocated the godliness of slavery in his "City of God", arguing that through the fall, slavery had become part of the natural (and divinely sanctified) order of the cosmos: "The first cause of slavery, then, is sin - that a man should be put in bonds by another; and this happens only by the judgement of God, in whose eyes it is no crime."

Emperor Constantine (c274-337) actually undid most of the humane laws to alleviate the position of slaves laid down by his pagan predecessors. He permitted parents to sell their children into slavery and allowed finders of abandoned children to bring them up as slaves. He also issued a decree which stipulates the death penalty for any Christian woman who had sexual intercourse with a slave; that the slave would also be put to death is a foregone conclusion.

The Roman pontiffs made many remarks about slaves and slavery. none of which helped to abolish the practice. Pope Leo The Great (d.461) ruled that no slaves can become priests because their "vileness" will "pollute" the sacred order. Pope Gregory the Great (c540-604), who was the richest slave owner in sixth century Europe, forbade the marriage of Christian women to slaves. In the eleventh century, Pope Benedict VIII (d1024), in an effort to stop priests from having sex, decreed that all children produced by these unlawful coupling should be made slaves. Pope Paul III (1468-1549) decreed that all Englishmen who supported the errant King, Henry VIII should be reduced to slavery. In the fifteenth century, the papacy gave the king of Portugal permission top conquer "heathen" countries and reduced their population in "everlasting slavery."
The churches and the monasteries, far from being a haven for escaping slaves, actually owned slaves. When ancient slavery ended, the monasteries were among the last to give up their slaves. Ancient slavery ended in the twelfth century, or more correctly evolved into serfdom, not because of any concerted Christian action but for purely economic reasons. It became cheaper for the wealthy to have serfs working their land and feeding themselves than to own dependent slaves.

 

[Eyes wide Open]

I need to know if a comparable exists before I can shame other religions in my next sermon. We have here written accounts of someone other than Christ, performing miracles and the people attribute that power of miracles to Christ Jesus. I dont think the same can be said of any other supposed prophets of other religions that came along after Christ. Visible miracles led the people to Christ and not eloquence of speech or supposed scriptures handed over to someone by an angel. Visible miracles is what allowed Paul to retain the people's attention and I would say obedience. The people would have given him their own eyes if Paul had asked for them -- a clear description of awe the people felt over the power of those miracles. The people were clearly overwhelmed by what they experienced thru Paul and that Spirit remained with them enabling them to form churches and congregations. Paul's mere eloquence of speech had little to do with church building. Today that power is not as visible or evident for various reasons but that is a subject for another thread.

"You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? Have you suffered so much for nothing--if it really was for nothing? Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?" -- Galatians 3

and

"As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me." -- Galatians 4

Yogic Hinduism has many examples of miracles. Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramahansa Yogananda has many first hand accounts. Also the book gives many bible interpretations which are far more insightful than most Christian views.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

In a way, it is irrelevant whether a religion puts forth claims of miraculous events or not - because each and every one of them has "contingency measures" to explain away similar occurrences in other religions - especially when they happen to be exclusivist like the Abrahamic "family".

To inclusivistic religions like Hinduism or Baha'i, other religions' miracles are not that much of an issue. If you tell a Hindu that Jesus walked over water and drove out demons, chances are that he might say something like: "Ah, yes, he was an avatar of Vishnu, then!" Or perhaps: "Sure, that's what you can do when you attain control of your crown chakra and become a holy man. But such flashy parlour tricks only serve to detract you from your true goal, which is to tear the veil of Maya and escape the cycle of rebirth."

Exclusivist religions, on the other hand, usually follow the approach of: "that's just evil spirits trying to confuse people". (Or, in the case of henotheist proto-Judaism as in Exodus: "Our god can beat up your gods.")

 

[BruceDLimber]

We have here written accounts of someone other than Christ, performing miracles and the people attribute that power of miracles to Christ Jesus. I dont think the same can be said of any other supposed prophets of other religions that came along after.

Then you are quite mistaken.

There are indeed miracles attributed to Divine Messengers Who appeared after Christ!

But they aren't typically used in teaching or as proofs because NO account of a miracle is reliable, especially for anyone not an eyewitness!

I quote the Baha'i scriptures:

Chapter 22: MIRACLES​

“Question.—It is recorded that miracles were performed by Christ. Are the reports of these miracles really to be accepted literally, or have they another meaning? It has been proved by exact science that the essence of things does not change, and that all beings are under one universal law and organization from which they cannot deviate; and, therefore, that which is contrary to universal law is impossible.

“Answer.—The Holy Manifestations are the sources of miracles and the originators of wonderful signs. For Them, any difficult and impracticable thing is possible and easy. For through a supernatural power wonders appear from Them; and by this power, which is beyond nature, They influence the world of nature. From all the Manifestations marvelous things have appeared.

“But in the Holy Books an especial terminology is employed, and for the Manifestations these miracles and wonderful signs have no importance. They do not even wish to mention them. For if we consider miracles a great proof, they are still only proofs and arguments for those who are present when they are performed, and not for those who are absent.

“For example, if we relate to a seeker, a stranger to Moses and Christ, marvelous signs, he will deny them and will say: ‘Wonderful signs are also continually related of false gods by the testimony of many people, and they are affirmed in the Books. The Brahmans have written a book about wonderful prodigies from Brahma.’ He will also say: ‘How can we know that the Jews and the Christians speak the truth, and that the Brahmans tell a lie? For both are generally admitted traditions, which are collected in books, and may be supposed to be true or false.’ The same may be said of other religions: if one is true, all are true; if one is accepted, all must be accepted. Therefore, miracles are not a proof. For if they are proofs for those who are present, they fail as proofs to those who are absent.

“But in the day of the Manifestation the people with insight see that all the conditions of the Manifestation are miracles, for They are superior to all others, and this alone is an absolute miracle. Recollect that Christ, solitary and alone, without a helper or protector, without armies and legions, and under the greatest oppression, uplifted the standard of God before all the people of the world, and withstood them, and finally conquered all, although outwardly He was crucified. Now this is a veritable miracle which can never be denied. There is no need of any other proof of the truth of Christ.

“The outward miracles have no importance for the people of Reality. If a blind man receives sight, for example, he will finally again become sightless, for he will die and be deprived of all his senses and powers. Therefore, causing the blind man to see is comparatively of little importance, for this faculty of sight will at last disappear. If the body of a dead person be resuscitated, of what use is it since the body will die again? But it is important to give perception and eternal life—that is, the spiritual and divine life. For this physical life is not immortal, and its existence is equivalent to nonexistence. So it is that Christ said to one of His disciples: ‘Let the dead bury their dead;’ for ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.’ Matthew 8:22; John 3:6.

“Observe: those who in appearance were physically alive, Christ considered dead; for life is the eternal life, and existence is the real existence. Wherever in the Holy Books they speak of raising the dead, the meaning is that the dead were blessed by eternal life; where it is said that the blind received sight, the signification is that he obtained the true perception; where it is said a deaf man received hearing, the meaning is that he acquired spiritual and heavenly hearing. This is ascertained from the text of the Gospel where Christ said: ‘These are like those of whom Isaiah said, They have eyes and see not, they have ears and hear not; and I healed them.’ Ibid.
“The meaning is not that the Manifestations are unable to perform miracles, for They have all power. But for Them inner sight, spiritual healing and eternal life are the valuable and important things. Consequently, whenever it is recorded in the Holy Books that such a one was blind and recovered his sight, the meaning is that he was inwardly blind, and that he obtained spiritual vision, or that he was ignorant and became wise, or that he was negligent and became heedful, or that he was worldly and became heavenly.

“As this inner sight, hearing, life and healing are eternal, they are of importance. What, comparatively, is the importance, the value and the worth of this animal life with its powers? In a few days it will cease like fleeting thoughts. For example, if one relights an extinguished lamp, it will again become extinguished; but the light of the sun is always luminous. This is of importance. “

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Ishraqiyun]

Similar miracles have been attributed to a good number of the worlds spiritual heroes and religious founders. Christianity has a lot to offer but I don't think we can really one up everyone else on that account. Sure you can say "our miracles are true and yours are fake" but we have no way of proving the reality of miracles that we might think took place over 2,000 years ago so our claims would be on equal footing with theirs.

Like another poster mentioned a Buddhist might claim that Buddha was born of a virgin and started walking and talking as soon as he jumped out of the womb. Like certain Christians do they might claim that they have evidence for this in their scriptures and the stories passed down by people who actually knew the Buddha... etc...

A Taoist might say that Lao Tzu stayed in the womb so long he was 80 years old when he came out and he had a full head of gray hair too. He actually did the walking around and making lotus's appear thing too. We have books attributed to eye witnesses!

 

[SanFrank]

Rom 13,1: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Rom 13,2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Rome already featured a hierarchical social structure, but for as long as there was a multitude of religions, spiritual leaders did not contribute that much to maintaining an estate-based society. In fact, the mystery religions were downright egalitarian, and pagans advocated social progress for slaves, for example:
In 82 BCE murder of slaves were forbidden by the Cornelian Law. Around 30 BCE the Petronian Law forbade the sending of slaves to fight in the amphitheater. The Stoic teaches Seneca (c 5 BCE-65 CE), while he still had influence over the insane emperor, Nero (37-68 CE) managed to induce him to pass a law to forbade the cruel treatment of slaves. The Emperor Hadrian (76-138), an Epicurean, revived the laws prohibiting the murder of slaves and of sending them to the amphitheater. He also suppressed the inhuman practice of housing slaves underground. Hadrian was also known to have banished a wealthy Roman lady, named Umbricia, for cruelty to her slaves. By the second century slaves had already acquired the right, under certain circumstances, to bring legal action against their masters. The Emperor Antoninus Pius (86-161) issued an imperial decree which gives freedom to a slave running from a cruel master; on the condition that the runaway slave must embrace a statue of the emperor before he is considered a free man.

The voices of conscience raised against slavery was also pagan. The pagan Dio Chrysostom, who was the greatest orator of his age, delivered a speech around AD100 in a public hall in the Forum of Rome where he explicitly and at great length condemned slavery as unjust.

Now, the same does not apply to Christianity. Down to the year 1000 CE, no Christian leader, let alone a pope or a council, condemned slavery. St. Augustine explicitly advocated the godliness of slavery in his "City of God", arguing that through the fall, slavery had become part of the natural (and divinely sanctified) order of the cosmos: "The first cause of slavery, then, is sin - that a man should be put in bonds by another; and this happens only by the judgement of God, in whose eyes it is no crime."

Emperor Constantine (c274-337) actually undid most of the humane laws to alleviate the position of slaves laid down by his pagan predecessors. He permitted parents to sell their children into slavery and allowed finders of abandoned children to bring them up as slaves. He also issued a decree which stipulates the death penalty for any Christian woman who had sexual intercourse with a slave; that the slave would also be put to death is a foregone conclusion.

The Roman pontiffs made many remarks about slaves and slavery. none of which helped to abolish the practice. Pope Leo The Great (d.461) ruled that no slaves can become priests because their "vileness" will "pollute" the sacred order. Pope Gregory the Great (c540-604), who was the richest slave owner in sixth century Europe, forbade the marriage of Christian women to slaves. In the eleventh century, Pope Benedict VIII (d1024), in an effort to stop priests from having sex, decreed that all children produced by these unlawful coupling should be made slaves. Pope Paul III (1468-1549) decreed that all Englishmen who supported the errant King, Henry VIII should be reduced to slavery. In the fifteenth century, the papacy gave the king of Portugal permission top conquer "heathen" countries and reduced their population in "everlasting slavery."
The churches and the monasteries, far from being a haven for escaping slaves, actually owned slaves. When ancient slavery ended, the monasteries were among the last to give up their slaves. Ancient slavery ended in the twelfth century, or more correctly evolved into serfdom, not because of any concerted Christian action but for purely economic reasons. It became cheaper for the wealthy to have serfs working their land and feeding themselves than to own dependent slaves.

Well.. Romans was written before constantine and I doubt Paul was writing on behalf of the roman rule. The Lord also says, "blessed are you when you are persecuted for my names sake, for great is your reward" -- the Lord was not helping Rome but it might have seemed so to roman authorities. Is it possible slavery slowly waned favor due to morals christianity brought forth such as 'love one another'? That was the driving force behind civil rights in the US - a crutch for MLK Jr. And it made its influence on american civil war as 'equality' was something the christian american public favored.

Im curious, how would the american government re-incorporate serfdom or servitude on the masses in a peaceful manner? Could the christian path be used over again effectively.

 

[awitch]

Is it possible slavery slowly waned favor due to morals christianity brought forth such as 'love one another'? That was the driving force behind civil rights in the US - a crutch for MLK Jr. And it made its influence on american civil war as 'equality' was something the christian american public favored.

No, slavery was largely an economics issue and many Christians in the south used the Bible to support slavery.

 

[SanFrank]

Then you are quite mistaken.

The point is Paul, a follower, did miracles on behalf of Christ. Again, someone performed miracles by someone else's power.

I might bring to your recollection the manner by which Paul came into service; he did not start on a spiritual path but on a murdering physical path.

There are indeed miracles attributed to Divine Messengers Who appeared after Christ!

But they aren't typically used in teaching or as proofs because NO account of a miracle is reliable, especially for anyone not an eyewitness!

I quote the Baha'i scriptures:

Chapter 22: MIRACLES​

“Question.—It is recorded that miracles were performed by Christ. Are the reports of these miracles really to be accepted literally, or have they another meaning? It has been proved by exact science that the essence of things does not change, and that all beings are under one universal law and organization from which they cannot deviate; and, therefore, that which is contrary to universal law is impossible.

“Answer.—The Holy Manifestations are the sources of miracles and the originators of wonderful signs. For Them, any difficult and impracticable thing is possible and easy. For through a supernatural power wonders appear from Them; and by this power, which is beyond nature, They influence the world of nature. From all the Manifestations marvelous things have appeared.

“But in the Holy Books an especial terminology is employed, and for the Manifestations these miracles and wonderful signs have no importance. They do not even wish to mention them. For if we consider miracles a great proof, they are still only proofs and arguments for those who are present when they are performed, and not for those who are absent.

“For example, if we relate to a seeker, a stranger to Moses and Christ, marvelous signs, he will deny them and will say: ‘Wonderful signs are also continually related of false gods by the testimony of many people, and they are affirmed in the Books. The Brahmans have written a book about wonderful prodigies from Brahma.’ He will also say: ‘How can we know that the Jews and the Christians speak the truth, and that the Brahmans tell a lie? For both are generally admitted traditions, which are collected in books, and may be supposed to be true or false.’ The same may be said of other religions: if one is true, all are true; if one is accepted, all must be accepted. Therefore, miracles are not a proof. For if they are proofs for those who are present, they fail as proofs to those who are absent.

“But in the day of the Manifestation the people with insight see that all the conditions of the Manifestation are miracles, for They are superior to all others, and this alone is an absolute miracle. Recollect that Christ, solitary and alone, without a helper or protector, without armies and legions, and under the greatest oppression, uplifted the standard of God before all the people of the world, and withstood them, and finally conquered all, although outwardly He was crucified. Now this is a veritable miracle which can never be denied. There is no need of any other proof of the truth of Christ.

“The outward miracles have no importance for the people of Reality. If a blind man receives sight, for example, he will finally again become sightless, for he will die and be deprived of all his senses and powers. Therefore, causing the blind man to see is comparatively of little importance, for this faculty of sight will at last disappear. If the body of a dead person be resuscitated, of what use is it since the body will die again? But it is important to give perception and eternal life—that is, the spiritual and divine life. For this physical life is not immortal, and its existence is equivalent to nonexistence. So it is that Christ said to one of His disciples: ‘Let the dead bury their dead;’ for ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.’ Matthew 8:22; John 3:6.

“Observe: those who in appearance were physically alive, Christ considered dead; for life is the eternal life, and existence is the real existence. Wherever in the Holy Books they speak of raising the dead, the meaning is that the dead were blessed by eternal life; where it is said that the blind received sight, the signification is that he obtained the true perception; where it is said a deaf man received hearing, the meaning is that he acquired spiritual and heavenly hearing. This is ascertained from the text of the Gospel where Christ said: ‘These are like those of whom Isaiah said, They have eyes and see not, they have ears and hear not; and I healed them.’ Ibid.
“The meaning is not that the Manifestations are unable to perform miracles, for They have all power. But for Them inner sight, spiritual healing and eternal life are the valuable and important things. Consequently, whenever it is recorded in the Holy Books that such a one was blind and recovered his sight, the meaning is that he was inwardly blind, and that he obtained spiritual vision, or that he was ignorant and became wise, or that he was negligent and became heedful, or that he was worldly and became heavenly.

“As this inner sight, hearing, life and healing are eternal, they are of importance. What, comparatively, is the importance, the value and the worth of this animal life with its powers? In a few days it will cease like fleeting thoughts. For example, if one relights an extinguished lamp, it will again become extinguished; but the light of the sun is always luminous. This is of importance. “

Peace,

Bruce

* meh *
insightful

 

[Carmella Prochaska]

I don't think there is a comparison with other religious figures. You can visit the grave of Muhammed & Buddha & see the place where their bodies are resting. You can visit the Sepulchre site but Jesus' body isn't there. His body is gone.

 

[SanFrank]

No, slavery was largely an economics issue and many Christians in the south used the Bible to support slavery.

yeah, yeah - you offer no comment on the last sentence in that post. Im surprised.

 

[SanFrank]

I don't think there is a comparison with other religious figures. You can visit the grave of Muhammed & Buddha & see the place where their bodies are resting. You can visit the Sepulchre site but Jesus' body isn't there. His body is gone.

Amen sister. Keep giving us exhortation, christians need it now and then.

 

[LoAmmi]

I don't think there is a comparison with other religious figures. You can visit the grave of Muhammed & Buddha & see the place where their bodies are resting. You can visit the Sepulchre site but Jesus' body isn't there. His body is gone.

How exactly do we know the body was buried there to begin with?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Is it possible slavery slowly waned favor due to morals christianity brought forth such as 'love one another'?

No. As I pointed out, pretty much the opposite happened, and slavery only disappeared because serfdom turned out to be more economically sensible in a feudal context.

Christians like to retroactively attribute all kinds of social advances to their religion, but the heart of the matter is that more often than not, it served as a HUGE stumbling block to these developments, often actively opposing them.
There have always been liberal minorities that were in favour of these changes (as in the case of American slavery, for example), but these were always condemned as unbiblical and/or heretical. And to be fair, in a sense they were. The Bible definitely delivers more arguments for the pro-slavery crowd than for the abolitionists. And it's the same with monarchism/despotism vs. parliamentary democracy/republicanism, equal rights for men and women vs. women as second class citizens, etc.

Conservative Christianity had to be fought with tooth and claw every single step of the way, each and every time. But fifty years from now, conservative Christians will probably proclaim that LGBT-rights have only been achieved because of Christian love and tolerance, citing some contemporary liberal spokespeople as the torchbearers of "true" Christianity. Just wait and see.

 

[SanFrank]

How exactly do we know the body was buried there to begin with?

You didnt see the photos??