Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection

[siti]

The Jews consider Isaiah 11 Messianic.

"The Jews" - what all of them? And if that was what Isaiah 11 was considered to be referring to how come that almost none of the known second temple era Jewish writings make any specific reference to an individual end-time Messiah? How many of "the Jews" believe it refers to Baha'u'llah - or even Jesus for that matter? Obviously when it was written it was intended to refer to the return of the Jews after the Babylonian exile - what "the Jews" now, or "the Christians" or "the Baha'is" - or even "the humanist heretics" like me (for heaven's sake) - happen to believe is irrelevant. You said we should consider it in the context of the Bible as a whole and in the context of history. I have so considered it and I find that here is nothing in the Bible as a whole, nothing in this passage in particular and nothing in a genuine consideration of the historical background of the time of its composition to suggest that the writer had anything other or anything later than what was happening in the middle east in the 5th/6th centuries BC in mind.

I suppose these verses talk about the temporal peace of Hezekiah's reign?

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
Isaiah 9:6-7

Well obviously this was referring to the birth of some obscure noble Persian prophet 26 centuries later who would have about as much success as either Hezekiah, Zerubbabel or Jesus of bringing about world peace. Clearly this is indeed a prophecy - a failed one!

 

[Trailblazer]

"Well obviously this was referring to the birth of some obscure noble Persian prophet 26 centuries later who would have about as much success as either Hezekiah, Zerubbabel or Jesus of bringing about world peace. Clearly this is indeed a prophecy - a failed one!

The Most Great peace did not come only because Baha’u’llah was rejected by the ones who could bring it about... the Kings and Rulers of the earth. As such, they “refused” the Most Great Peace.

“Now that ye have refused the Most Great Peace, hold ye fast unto this, the Lesser Peace, that haply ye may in some degree better your own condition and that of your dependents.

O rulers of the earth! Be reconciled among yourselves, that ye may need no more armaments save in a measure to safeguard your territories and dominions. Beware lest ye disregard the counsel of the All-Knowing, the Faithful.

Be united, O kings of the earth, for thereby will the tempest of discord be stilled amongst you, and your peoples find rest, if ye be of them that comprehend. Should any one among you take up arms against another, rise ye all against him, for this is naught but manifest justice.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 254

However, that does not make the prophecy a failed prophecy, since there is no time frame on that prophecy. It is very early in the Messianic Age, only 165 years into a new religious cycle that will last no less than 500,000 years... Peace will come and the rest of the prophecy will be fulfilled during the Baha’i Cycle.

 

[siti]

It is very early in the Messianic Age, only 165 years into a new religious cycle that will last no less than 500,000 years...

Well yes - we wouldn't want to repeat Jesus' "I am coming soon" mistake and have yet another in a seemingly endless succession of Messianic "great disappointments" would we! I should think half a million years ought to do it - I doubt humanity will survive that long but even if we do, I guess by then our collective amnesia will have wiped out any traces of failed bronze age prophecy and replaced it with something at least slightly less anachronous. 500,000 years indeed! And you guys are denying a literal resurrection on the grounds of implausibility! Pots and kettles...

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well obviously this was referring to the birth of some obscure noble Persian prophet 26 centuries later who would have about as much success as either Hezekiah, Zerubbabel or Jesus of bringing about world peace. Clearly this is indeed a prophecy - a failed one!

A certain carpenter from Galilee was hardly the best fit for Jewish Messianic prophecies either, and now 1/3 of the world's population consider themselves Christian, and nearly another 1/4 are Muslims who see Jesus as an important prophet. Prophecies like Isaiah 9:6-7 have been the basis for believing in world peace for centuries. I haven't lost hope. Have you?

 

[siti]

I haven't lost hope. Have you?

In the possibility of world peace - no - in making sense of the human propensity for religious credulity in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence - just about!

I'm still trying to get over @Trailblazer 's 500,000 years thing - I mean what is that? Was it just the biggest number you guys could think of at the time or what?

Well during that time I'm guessing that we'll have a few more things to worry about than the coming of the next Messiah - half a dozen glacial periods, at least a couple of dozen supervolcanoes, at least one or two life-threatening gamma ray bursts from relatively local supernovas and several house to football field size asteroid impacts including at least one a kilometer across, the days will be several seconds longer than now and the constellations (on which the outmoded cosmology that also has heaven up was based) will have morphed into new arrangements that would be entirely unfamiliar to either us or Adam. Our late-Baha'i cycle descendants will see a very different world - if they see any world at all.

I'm also guessing that my long term predictions (in the above paragraph) will turn out to be more accurate than Baha'u'llah's - and almost any of them could bring about world peace by eliminating homo sapiens. Make a note - but don't hold your breath.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well yes - we wouldn't want to repeat Jesus' "I am coming soon" mistake and have yet another in a seemingly endless succession of Messianic "great disappointments" would we! I should think half a million years ought to do it - I doubt humanity will survive that long but even if we do, I guess by then our collective amnesia will have wiped out any traces of failed bronze age prophecy and replaced it with something at least slightly less anachronous.

If humanity does not survive, it won't be because of "the Baha'i Faith." It will be because the Christians are STILL WAITING for Jesus. I will save you the trouble of going to the other thread where I just posted this:

kjw47 said: ↑
this is reality.

Trailblazer said: No, it is a complete fantasy. The body of Jesus never rose from the grave so the body of Jesus never ascended to heaven so the body of Jesus can never come to earth again, ever.

Jesus is never coming back but Christians will keep waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting.... They will only find out that Jesus never planned to return after they die and see Jesus in heaven.

Moreover, it is such a travesty that Christians are continuing to wait and wait and wait and wait for Jesus to come and fix everything that is wrong in the world just so they won't have to do anything about these serious problems... God has entrusted humans to fix the problems in the world; Jesus is not going to come floating down on a cloud and wave a magic wand and poof, all the world's problems are fixed, climate change and the whole bit.

God has entrusted humans to build the Kingdom of God on earth, according to the blueprint instructions laid out by Baha’u’llah. There is no quick fix, no magic wand, just a lot of hard work.

Because Christians misinterpret the Bible they think the same Jesus is coming down from the sky on a physical cloud. All the prophecies for the Return of Jesus had been fulfilled by 1844, but when Christians did not see Jesus come down from the sky on a cloud, they rejected Baha’u’llah when He came. Son of man coming on the clouds means that the return of the Christ Spirit will appear in the form of another human being. The term “clouds” as used in the Bible means those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Just like the physical clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, these things hindered men from recognizing the Return of Christ.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

500,000 years indeed! And you guys are denying a literal resurrection on the grounds of implausibility! Pots and kettles...

I do not deny the literal resurrection on the grounds of implausibility, but rather on the grounds of... well, never mind.... I do not care of Jesus resurrected bodily and some Baha'is are undecided on that...

Why mince words? Let's get real... The only reason the resurrection matters so much to Christians is because it is tied in with the Return of Jesus... So if Jesus did not rise from the grave, Jesus could not ascend to heaven and return from heaven... But whether Jesus resurrected bodily or not does not matter because Jesus did not ascend into the clouds bodily and the same body of Jesus is not going to return from the sky on a cloud... I have been discussing this on other forums with a Christian for four years... The Return of the same Jesus has no support from the Bible, none. Jesus never said He was going to return, never. The Return of the same Jesus was fabricated by Christians by gross misinterpretation of OT and NT verses. Jesus said:

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

Can't people read?

So what is implausible about a religious Cycle that lasts 500,000 years?

 

[Dawnofhope]

In the possibility of world peace - no

It is clear that we (the different nations and peoples of the world) are becoming increasing interdependent on each other. Through trade, travel, the worldwide web we are increasingly one people. What one country does, affects everyone. The United Nations was born out of necessity, not high ideals. Whether its avoidance of conflict between nations, the environment, a natural disaster, the different nations of the world do need to work together. As technology advances and the population continues to climb, that need will only intensify.

in making sense of the human propensity for religious credulity in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence - just about!

You're a funny guy for sure.

I'm still trying to get over @Trailblazer 's 500,000 years thing - I mean what is that? Was it just the biggest number you guys could think of at the time or what?

As well as sounding seriously nutty, its completely unrelated to the resurrection of Christ. It probably represents an extended period where we have international cooperation and governance based on the types of democratically elected institutions envisaged by Baha'u'llah. Taking God, Manifestations and Prophets out of the equation, humanity won't be going back to the despotic types of empires that ruled much of the world in the nineteenth century.

 

[siti]

Why mince words? Let's get real... The only reason the resurrection matters so much to Christians is because it is tied in with the Return of Jesus...

Yep - that's what I was telling Adrian - and that's also why a discussion of the resurrection necessarily brings in the other related Messianic prophecies...

...because it is also true that the only reason it matters to Baha'is that Jesus was not resurrected literally is because if he was then he, not Baha'u'llah, would be the one to fulfill the Messianic prophecies...

...but to deny the resurrection is to deny the validity of the entire Christian tradition you are attempting to syncretize into Baha'ism. You just can't have it both ways - as I may have suggested before.

 

[siti]

You're a funny guy for sure.

It wasn't a joke. Addressing the issue of religious (and political) credulity through education (in the broadest sense) based on a genuine understanding of what really makes the credulous human brain tick is probably the key to ensuring our long term survival as a species - with or without (religious and political) messiahs, despots or empires - but the profoundly religious are tougher nuts to crack than I could ever have imagined (I mean in terms of figuring out how their thinking faculties work). But I am convinced it really is that serious.

 

[Dawnofhope]

It wasn't a joke. Addressing the issue of religious (and political) credulity through education (in the broadest sense) based on a genuine understanding of what really makes the credulous human brain tick is probably the key to ensuring our long term survival as a species - with or without (religious and political) messiahs, despots or empires - but the profoundly religious are tougher nuts to crack than I could ever have imagined (I mean in terms of figuring out how their thinking faculties work). But I am convinced it really is that serious.

Its a serious concern for Baha'is too:

Religious fanaticism and hatred are a world-devouring fire, whose violence none can quench. The Hand of Divine power can, alone, deliver mankind from this desolating affliction….
Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 287-289

The remedy for you is reason and humanism.

The remedy for Baha'is is Baha'u'llah's Teachings.

 

[siti]

The remedy for you is reason and humanism.

The remedy for Baha'is is Baha'u'llah's Teachings.

Hmmm! Religious fanaticism as the cure for religious fanaticism - a kind of "hair of the dog" remedy - I'm guessing you don't generally recommend that approach professionally? I can quite see why an aspiring spiritual "Great Physician" would though. I fear we still have a very, very long way to go - I'm not sure even 500,000 years or a resurrection is going to be enough (Genesis 6:5, Luke 16:31)

 

[Dawnofhope]

Hmmm! Religious fanaticism as the cure for religious fanaticism - a kind of "hair of the dog" remedy - I'm guessing you don't generally recommend that approach professionally? I can quite see why an aspiring spiritual "Great Physician" would though. I fear we still have a long way to go.

OK, so you see the Baha'is being religious fanatics. Sorry to hear that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yep - that's what I was telling Adrian - and that's also why a discussion of the resurrection necessarily brings in the other related Messianic prophecies...

...because it is also true that the only reason it matters to Baha'is that Jesus was not resurrected literally is because if he was then he, not Baha'u'llah, would be the one to fulfill the Messianic prophecies...

I do not speak for the other Baha’is but as I said, it does not matter one iota to me if Jesus resurrected bodily and I have even conceded to Christians that it is possible...

As I said, even if Jesus resurrected bodily that does not mean that Jesus would be the one to fulfill the Messianic prophecies.... b does not follow from a.

Moreover, talk is cheap. If Jesus was going to return, then where is He? All the prophecies for the Return of Christ/Messiah have been fulfilled... Of course the prophecies for the “Messianic Age” have not been fulfilled yet because (as I said before) we are only 165 years into the Messianic Age... That does not prove anything. However, if we look at those prophecies, many are “in the process” of being fulfilled right now, all over the world.

If you want to get serious, let’s look at the prophecies that point to the identity of the Return of Christ/Messiah... I am game, but I guess a new thread would be in order.

...but to deny the resurrection is to deny the validity of the entire Christian tradition you are attempting to syncretize into Baha'ism. You just can't have it both ways - as I may have suggested before.

Why on earth would anyone want to synchronize the “Christian tradition” into the Baha’i Faith? Many Christian doctrines are flat out wrong according to the Baha’i Faith. The Bible is not wrong, it was just terribly misconstrued. Clearly, the Bible interpretation of the Church is not what Jesus taught.

If you really want to understand what Baha’is believe not only about Jesus but also about the Bible and its place in history, I would highly recommend you read this book: The Heart of the Gospel. The book is all online to read.

 

[siti]

If Jesus was going to return, then where is He?

Maybe he's giving himself a longer time frame too - whats the odd half million years between faiths?

But my main problem with your argument is the standard Baha'i forked-tongue double speak thing. How can you possibly defend both of these positions at the same time:

All the prophecies for the Return of Christ/Messiah have been fulfilled..

and

Many Christian doctrines are flat out wrong according to the Baha’i Faith. The Bible is not wrong, it was just terribly misconstrued.

FYI - the "Return of Christ" IS a Christian doctrine, the Bible (both the concept and the choice of contents) IS a Christian doctrine.

And by the way I said "syncretize" not "synchronize".

 

[Trailblazer]

Maybe he's giving himself a longer time frame too - whats the odd half million years between faiths?

That is not funny considering the shape the world is in today. Any God that would take any longer than it did to send a Messenger is not God at all...

“We can well perceive how the whole human race is encompassed with great, with incalculable afflictions. We see it languishing on its bed of sickness, sore-tried and disillusioned. They that are intoxicated by self-conceit have interposed themselves between it and the Divine and infallible Physician. Witness how they have entangled all men, themselves included, in the mesh of their devices. They can neither discover the cause of the disease, nor have they any knowledge of the remedy. They have conceived the straight to be crooked, and have imagined their friend an enemy.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213

And that was written about 150 years ago.

But my main problem with your argument is the standard Baha'i forked-tongue double speak thing. How can you possibly defend both of these positions at the same time:

Trailblazer said: ↑ All the prophecies for the Return of Christ/Messiah have been fulfilled..
and
Trailblazer said: ↑ Many Christian doctrines are flat out wrong according to the Baha’i Faith. The Bible is not wrong, it was just terribly misconstrued.

FYI - the "Return of Christ" IS a Christian doctrine, the Bible (both the concept and the choice of contents) IS a Christian doctrine.

Yes, the “Return of Christ” is a Bible teaching we agree with but the Return of the same man Jesus is a Christian doctrine we do not agree with. Jesus never promised to return so that is not in the Bible.

All the prophecies for the Return of Christ/Messiah have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah.

The Bible is the Word of God, it is not a Christian doctrine. Christian doctrines are the word of man.

 

[siti]

OK, so you see the Baha'is being religious fanatics. Sorry to hear that.

I presume you are objecting to "fanatics" not "religious".

fanatic
noun
1A person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.
​

Yep - I think that is a fair assessment - the notion that ALL the previous religious traditions were really getting us ready for the appearance of an otherwise entirely unremarkable Persian prophet/messiah to appear exactly on time in the middle of the 19th century in fulfillment of altered versions of all the religious prophecies ever written in order to usher in (at least formally) a 500,000 year religious cycle during which the divine commissions of Krishna, Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Zoroaster, Jesus and Muhammad would all be rolled into one and their combined "cause" finally brought to fruition thereby rescuing a desperate and otherwise doomed humanity from its own divisive nature...that seems like a pretty "extreme religious cause" to me...and no amount of reasoned argument can sway any one of them from the notion of that "cause" - I think the phrase "single-minded zeal" definitely sums up the Baha'i approach to religious discourse (despite their claims of the pursuit of religious "untiy" - which really translates as "religious uniformity")...and "excessive" - I could cite a thread with more than 17,000 posts about half (I guess) of which are Baha'is doggedly defending their reinterpretations of other religious traditions...

...yes, I think "fanatic" is a reasonable tag.

BTW - I certainly consider myself a "reason and evidence" fanatic - and I am sure you think my insistence on reason and evidence is "excessive" sometimes and almost always "single-minded"...I probably agree. So "fanatic" isn't necessarily a bad thing...

Its the word you didn't object to - "religious" - that makes fanaticism dangerous - if we are abdicating our responsibility to use our individual and collective human reasoning faculties in favour of one individual's personal interpretation of the "divine will" - that's the dangerous part.

You're probably even sorrier to hear all that - but there it is - my take on Baha'i religious fanaticism.

 

[siti]

Jesus never promised to return so that is not in the Bible.

"There be some standing here which shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16:28 - read the context vs 21-28 - this is obviously after his death and resurrection), "I will come again" (John 14:3), "I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you" (John 14:18), "I go away and come again unto you" (John 14:28), "A little while and ye shall not see me and again a little while and ye shall see me" (John 16:16), "And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again" (John 16:22)...the idea of Christ promising to return is very definitely in the Bible.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I presume you are objecting to "fanatics" not "religious".

fanatic
noun
1A person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.
​

Yep - I think that is a fair assessment - the notion that ALL the previous religious traditions were really getting us ready for the appearance of an otherwise entirely unremarkable Persian prophet/messiah to appear exactly on time in the middle of the 19th century in fulfillment of altered versions of all the religious prophecies ever written in order to usher in (at least formally) a 500,000 year religious cycle during which the divine commissions of Krishna, Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Zoroaster, Jesus and Muhammad would all be rolled into one and their combined "cause" finally brought to fruition thereby rescuing a desperate and otherwise doomed humanity from its own divisive nature...that seems like a pretty "extreme religious cause" to me...and no amount of reasoned argument can sway any one of them from the notion of that "cause" - I think the phrase "single-minded zeal" definitely sums up the Baha'i approach to religious discourse (despite their claims of the pursuit of religious "untiy" - which really translates as "religious uniformity")...and "excessive" - I could cite a thread with more than 17,000 posts about half (I guess) of which are Baha'is doggedly defending their reinterpretations of other religious traditions...

...yes, I think "fanatic" is a reasonable tag.

BTW - I certainly consider myself a "reason and evidence" fanatic - and I am sure you think my insistence on reason and evidence is "excessive" sometimes and almost always "single-minded"...I probably agree. So "fanatic" isn't necessarily a bad thing...

Its the word you didn't object to - "religious" - that makes fanaticism dangerous - if we are abdicating our responsibility to use our individual and collective human reasoning faculties in favour of one individual's personal interpretation of the "divine will" - that's the dangerous part.

You're probably even sorrier to hear all that - but there it is - my take on Baha'i religious fanaticism.

Ok. No one likes to hear such a damning assessment of their religious beliefs but I'm good with it.

Thousands of early Baha'is were killed in the process of bringing what I see as a peaceful and tolerant religion to fruition. I'm really happy to be a Bahai and wish you well in your endeavours.

 

[Trailblazer]

"There be some standing here which shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16:28 - read the context vs 21-28 - this is obviously after his death and resurrection), "I will come again" (John 14:3), "I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you" (John 14:18), "I go away and come again unto you" (John 14:28), "A little while and ye shall not see me and again a little while and ye shall see me" (John 16:16), "And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again" (John 16:22)...the idea of Christ promising to return is very definitely in the Bible.

Matthew 16:27-28 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Jesus came in the station of the Son. Baha’u’llah came in station of the Father. The Son of man coming in his kingdom was Baha’u’llah.

From a Tablet that Baha’u’llah wrote to Pope Pius IX:

“Give ear unto that which the Dove of Eternity warbleth upon the twigs of the Divine Lote-Tree: O peoples of the earth! We sent forth him who was named John to baptize you with water, that your bodies might be cleansed for the appearance of the Messiah. He, in turn, purified you with the fire of love and the water of the spirit in anticipation of these Days whereon the All-Merciful hath purposed to cleanse you with the water of life at the hands of His loving providence. This is the Father foretold by Isaiah, and the Comforter concerning Whom the Spirit had covenanted with you. Open your eyes, O concourse of bishops, that ye may behold your Lord seated upon the Throne of might and glory.” The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, p. 63

The idea of the Christ Spirit coming again is definitely in the Bible, but the idea of the same Jesus coming again is nowhere in the Bible.

John 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

• Jesus says He is going to heaven to prepare a place for His disciples and then His Spirit will come again, not His body. This glorification of the flesh of Jesus is the polar opposite of anything Jesus taught.

John 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

John 14:28 We have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

• The Spirit of Jesus would come again, not the body of Jesus.

John 16:16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

John 16:22 And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.

• They would see the Spirit of Jesus, not the body of Jesus.

All the verses in John about the Comforter and the Spirit of truth refer to Baha’u’llah. Jesus was the first Comforter. Baha’u’llah was another Comforter.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

John 16:12-14 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

John 16:16 A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

That means that we would not see the man Jesus again on earth because He went to the Father in heaven, but in a little while we would see Him again (His Spirit) in another Comforter that the Father would send.

That verse is congruent with the following verses wherein Jesus said that His work was finished here on earth:

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

 

[Neb]

You still haven't explained your beliefs about heaven and hell? If heaven is up in the physical heavens then you have a problem with the ascension of Christ. If heaven isn't up in the physical heavens you have an even bigger problem.

Is there a physical heaven? In a sense, if we look or point up in the sky we objectively say, it’s the heaven, but do we see God? No, we don’t, because our physical eyes cannot see what is spiritual.

Stephen, before he died, saw a spiritual heaven in,
Ac 7:55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
Ac 7:56 and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.

But the Jews did not see the glory of God and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.

The Most Holy Place and the Shekinah glory of God. So, every time the Israelites settle in one place in the desert and put up the tabernacle the Shekinah glory of God goes inside the tabernacle and settle into the mercy seat inside the Most Holy Place. Now, if the Glory of God is visible throughout the tabernacle and into the Most Holy Place on the Mercy Seat then the presence of God is among the Israelites. Only the High Priest can go in and out of the Most Holy Place in the presence of God. This is the glory of God.

Baha’u’llah, a Shiite, thought he is the Messiah in Judaism, the Christ in Christianity, and the Twelfth Imam in Islam all in one. Baha’u’llah means the glory of God. This is blasphemy.