Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I suspect peace would come from BELIEVING (possibly mistakenly believing) that everything is as it should be. If your newborn dies unexpectedly, you can have peace if you truly believe that this apparent tragedy was somehow necessary in God's plan.If he tells me he can't give me perfect peace & bliss, then shall I not conclude that he cannot be the highest? and continue to seek something higher than him? I would then probably believe that he's likely a deluded demiurge-type deity.
I'm reminded of what the medieval mystic Marguerite Porete wrote when she distinguished between two kinds of churches. The first is the Great Holy Church, which preaches Love. The second is the Little Holy Church, which preaches rules and law and order.The rules are there to help us to learn what LOVE is. Everything stems from the two greatest commandments of LOVE:
(New Testament | Matthew 22:36 - 40)
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
The law of sacrifice was fulfilled by the atonement. Our goal should be to LOVE the way Christ LOVED.
Some people I suspect are open if they found some reasons to believe (evidence), and other people have reasons to disbelieve that would trump any evidence.
Regarding Canaanite beliefs and Israelite beliefs, I think you are using a text critical method which employs the idea of an evolution in the passing on of information from a single source to a multitude of sources. The problem with this method is that it is employed under the presumption that the information is false or local to begin with. Under the belief that it is false or local it must have an originating account, which then must be passed down. However if the belief is true and broad, then the account itself is the explanation for why it is multiply reported. Everyone in the entire ancient near east had the same core beliefs but they structured those beliefs differently. Both the Israelites and the Canaanites structured the adversary as leviathan/Lotan but the Babylonians had the same creature under Mushussu. Same with the angels, Watchers, Apkallu, Igigi. They all shared the same core system, but expressed them with minor variations. Imagine a mountain which is encompassed by 4 countries. If the mountain explodes, or some other event happens at it's peak we will find 4 different accounts of that event without requiring a progressively transmitted narrative.I it seems obvious to me that Judaism evolved from Canaanite religion gradually and Christianity evolved from Judaism. Jesus hanging on the cross as a some sort of sacrifice for the sins of the world is just not something I think I can take seriously ever again.
Sadly many have died that did not deserve to die, and many have been misjudged and tormented by others who did not deserve to be treated thus. God is LOVE.I'm reminded of what the medieval mystic Marguerite Porete wrote when she distinguished between two kinds of churches. The first is the Great Holy Church, which preaches Love. The second is the Little Holy Church, which preaches rules and law and order.
It needs to be noted that the latter Church, the one that preaches rules and law and order, burned her at the stake.
Some people I suspect are open if they found some reasons to believe (evidence), and other people have reasons to disbelieve that would trump any evidence.
Not exactly. According to Jewish and Christian claims, their religions result from great revelations at key moments in time. I would expect to see historical evidence for great changes in their religions at key moments followed by periods of stability. Instead, I see something more like one of those online collective stories where one person writes a paragraph and then another person writes a paragraph so that the story has no direction. If God is inspiring a religion then I expect to see a consistent direction and theme and a rate of progress that contrasts that religion with the bumbling uninspired competing religions. Instead Judaism and Christianity seem to bumble along like all the other religions.Regarding Canaanite beliefs and Israelite beliefs, I think you are using a text critical method which employs the idea of an evolution in the passing on of information from a single source to a multitude of sources.
We could consider the question by asking what would it take for a Christain to become a Jew?
One knows, that as a Christain, the Old Testament has found fulfillment in Christ, thus a Christain is in reality a Jew that has found the fulfillment.
How could one then revert back to be only a Jew?
Now we move on in History and we have another Message from Muhammad given in Quran, that also is a fulfillment. The Muslim Faith thus embraces Jew and Christain. Then we move on further and we Have the Revelation of Baha'u'llah that embraces Quran and Bible.
So my answer is the only way forward, is not backwards. There is no way that all Muslims will go back to only Christ and likewise a Baha'i will not reject any Messenger when we already see they are all Christ.
Regards Tony
What if (hypothetically) you saw evidence that Baha'u'llah wrote letters to friends chuckling about the gullibility of his followers (somewhat like we have for L. Ron Hubbard)? That would probably kill your faith in Baha'i if you believed the letters were authentic? Where would that land you? Would you be an atheist or would you try backtracking to Christianity or would you try something else entirely?
We could consider the question by asking what would it take for a Christain to become a Jew?
One knows, that as a Christain, the Old Testament has found fulfillment in Christ, thus a Christain is in reality a Jew that has found the fulfillment.
How could one then revert back to be only a Jew?
Now we move on in History and we have another Message from Muhammad given in Quran, that also is a fulfillment. The Muslim Faith thus embraces Jew and Christain. Then we move on further and we Have the Revelation of Baha'u'llah that embraces Quran and Bible.
So my answer is the only way forward, is not backwards. There is no way that all Muslims will go back to only Jesus and likewise a Baha'i will not reject any Messenger when we already see they are all Christ.
Regards Tony
My understanding is that Baha'i believes in the Manifestations and the initial forms of their Revelations that formed the preceding religions, but Baha'i believes these Revelations have been garbled. So the contradictions between these religions are a result of the garbling rather than fundamental differences in the Revelations. Of course @Tony Bristow-Stagg can correct me if I am misunderstanding their view.This answer presumes the religions all build on one another. They don't. What would it take for you as a Bahai to become a Christian? I imagine you would have to be convinced that all the religions you say agree with each other actually contradict each other, right?
This answer presumes the religions all build on one another. They don't. What would it take for you as a Bahai to become a Christian? I imagine you would have to be convinced that all the religions you say agree with each other actually contradict each other, right?
A Christian according to Jesus, is one who builds their belief upon the knowledge that Jesus is the Christ, the Son and this is what Jesus confirmed from Peter.
I am a follower of Christ, this same Holy Spirit is in all Gods Messengers. The first and the last. The alpha and omega, the beginning and the end.
I see Baha'u'llah (Glory of God) is the promised Father, Christ the Son returned as Christ the Father.
Regards Tony
Bahai will never say it as clearly or openly as you say it. Though I agree, this is what they believe. Hence I doubt the Bahai will actually say what it would take to make them a Christian and answer your question. Though I suppose if it could be substantially demonstrate that the Church and later Christians have not distorted the Gospel they would have to concede that as legitimate grounds for considering Christianity true.My understanding is that Baha'i believes in the Manifestations and the initial forms of their Revelations that formed the preceding religions, but Baha'i believes these Revelations have been garbled. So the contradictions between these religions are a result of the garbling rather than fundamental differences in the Revelations. Of course @Tony Bristow-Stagg can correct me if I am misunderstanding their view.
Doesn't answer my question. Rather your just asserting your beliefs as if that answers the OP on what would it take to make you a Christian. Essentially you've redefined the word Christian to mean what you as a bahai want it to mean, making it completely devoid of it's historical context.
It would be much like me saying I am the truer Bahai because I follow the splendor of Christ who is God almighty. Doesn't do us any good in actually answering this question.
So, are you able to question of what it would take to make you a Christian? (not your definition of a Christian but the actual historic definition). You can say nothing though that seems unhelpful.
I would say that what made me a Christian was the Message of Baha'u'llah.
Of course, you do not have to see it can be so, or agree with it.
Regards Tony
My understanding is that Baha'i believes in the Manifestations and the initial forms of their Revelations that formed the preceding religions, but Baha'i believes these Revelations have been garbled. So the contradictions between these religions are a result of the garbling rather than fundamental differences in the Revelations. Of course @Tony Bristow-Stagg can correct me if I am misunderstanding their view.
Bahai will never say it as clearly or openly as you say it. Though I agree, this is what they believe. Hence I doubt the Bahai will actually say what it would take to make them a Christian and answer your question. Though I suppose if it could be substantially demonstrate that the Church and later Christians have not distorted the Gospel they would have to concede that as legitimate grounds for considering Christianity true.
As I said before, redefining a word doesn't make you that thing. I'm an atheist because I deny your God, but I'm also a Bahai because I believe in the splendor of Christ and let's not forget how much of a Jew I am despite the fact I am neither circumcised nor Jewish by birth.
I guess when you belong to a religion like Bahai, where obfuscation and confusion are mandatory, you can say whatever you want. You are a Christian, despite not being part of any Church, despite dismissing all Christian history and theology, despite denying the core principles of the Christian religion. Yes Tony, you are a Christian, if and only if the term Christian means nothing and can be applied to any who claim to follow Jesus. Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, certain Jews, certain Atheists. They are all Christians.
Do you have a serious response to the question asked? Or will just be like, lol, we're all one guys. It's not about me not agreeing, it's about whether or not Bahai can actually answer a question or argue for the proposition all religions are true so that the question cannot be answered in a way.
In which case you have to demonstrate how modern Christianity is false, yet as a Bahai you cannot do that for you are afraid to criticize other religions directly.
I see that I say what I beleive to he so and of course others do not have to see it that way.
One of the Biblical warnings is not to add to the Word in the Bible. When the church created doctrine and made it fundamental to being a Christain, it is clear that is adding to the Word in the Bible.
It is also clear the Bible is not for private interpretation.
Thus as I have said, it took the Message of Baha'u'llah before I could understand what it was to be a Christian, a Lover and dedicated follower of Christ.
It is also apparent when I say that, that my frame of reference is not based on Christain doctrines. That is as honest as it can get, without offering many more details as to why and how that can be so.
Regards Tony
Avoiding answering the question yet again.It is most likley the early Christains heard much the same responses when they tried to explain how Jesus the Christ was who the Jews were awaiting.
Thus it is best we leave it there, as Faith is about producing fruits of the spirit.
Regards Tony
It's somewhat clever but at the same time it's obvious to see through. So the question (so you cannot avoid answering it), can be rephrased, what would it take to make you a historic Christian of some kind? Historic in this context refers to those traditions, Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant and Oriental.
Thus it is best we leave it there, as Faith is about producing fruits of the spirit.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?