Is Christ superior to other Prophets/Founders

[Aupmanyav]

My understanding is that all the Prophets are one and the same because they are all conduits for same Creator.

But you deny Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of the Ahmadiyyas to be a Messiah. He too was sent by Allah. What criteria you use to accept Bahaollah and reject Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? He too was of Mirza lineage.

 

[Apostle John]

You are on your personal topic not what I said.

I was talking about disproof of flood, none of the things you bring up here. If you cannot cope with disproof of your imaginary flood, just say so.

Oh I thought you meant the thread title. There’s no disproof of a worldwide flood less than 5000 years ago. All I’ve read anywhere is assumption, no hard evidence.

 

[Audie]

Oh I thought you meant the thread title. There’s no disproof of a worldwide flood less than 5000 years ago. All I’ve read anywhere is assumption, no hard evidence.

Guess you've not read much then.

If you like hard- hard, and cold,
the polar ice caps are certainly that.

They deeply predate any possible flood.
Ice floats. And melts.

Flood would destroy the ice caps.

 

[Apostle John]

Guess you've not read much then.

If you like hard- hard, and cold,
the polar ice caps are certainly that.

They deeply predate any possible flood.
Ice floats. And melts.

Flood would destroy the ice caps.

Ice caps either formed after the flood or may even have floated on the flood like they float on water today. it’s not my area of expertise. No dating methods can be used with any credibility when there was a cataclysmic flood of Noah to disprove this flood. Stars cannot date rocks then vice versa.

 

[Audie]

Christ isn't a prophet or founder. Christ is a way of being based on a Divine revelation and a promise, delivered to us via the storied example of the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth. The revelation and promise will be apparent to anyone with eyes to see and a mind that's willing to use them.

The religions that happened as a result are their own entity and are only tangentially related to the revelation and promise of Christ.

The "promise" is more like a carrot, always beyond reach.
You have reports of those who
got it?

As for revelation, those have come so thick and fast.
Lo here, and, lo there.

Not a scrap of evidence that even one of them has anything to it.

But believers tout their superiority based on their choice to believe one of them.

" Eyes to see" are not so readily gulled.

 

[Audie]

Ice caps either formed after the flood or may even have floated on the flood like they float on water today. it’s not my area of expertise. No dating methods can be used with any credibility when there was a cataclysmic flood of Noah to disprove this flood. Stars cannot date rocks then vice versa.

Talk about baseless assumptions!
And total irrelevance / strawman about stars and rocks.

Can you notice yiu just make things up willy nilly to match your
assumption that your chosen reading of Bible has to be true?

Educated Christians don't have to have a literal flood to believe in god- in fact they know that falsehoods have no place.

Ice not floating is just silly.
So is the ice forming in the past
5000 years unless you are one of those " embedded age" people who think God faked the evidence.

You've no idea how the age ofbthe ice is determined, do you?

 

[metis]

Ice caps either formed after the flood or may even have floated on the flood like they float on water today. it’s not my area of expertise. No dating methods can be used with any credibility when there was a cataclysmic flood of Noah to disprove this flood. Stars cannot date rocks then vice versa.

IMO, the Flood narrative is allegorical, not to be taken at the literal level. IOW, it's the message that counts.

 

[Apostle John]

Ice not floating is just silly.

I never said that you did.

IMO, the Flood narrative is allegorical, not to be taken at the literal level. IOW, it's the message that counts.

Then you’re disavowing God’s Word and on shaky ground.

 

[PureX]

The "promise" is more like a carrot, always beyond reach.
You have reports of those who
got it?

We can all "get it". All we have to do is be willing embody those divine instincts within us: to love , to forgive, to be kind, to be generous, to be honest and to be wise. And if we will allow these instaincts to become us, we will be healed and saved from ourselves ... from the fear, selfishness, isolation, and ignorance that will otherwise engulf us.

As for revelation, those have come so thick and fast.
Lo here, and, lo there.

Not a scrap of evidence that even one of them has anything to it.

But believers tout their superiority based on their choice to believe one of them.

" Eyes to see" are not so readily gulled.

I think perhaps you are being blinded by your resentment of religion.

Religion is not the message, nor the promise, nor the way to see and attain them. Religions are at best just echoes of the truth of Christ. And at worst, they become the antithesis of it. The truth of Christ is within us all. And it always has been.

 

[Audie]

We can all "get it". All we have to do is be willing embody those divine instincts within us: to love , to forgive, to be kind, to be generous, to be honest and to be wise. And if we will allow these instaincts to become us, we will be healed and saved from ourselves ... from the fear, selfishness, isolation, and ignorance that will otherwise engulf us.

I think perhaps you are being blinded by your resentment of religion.

Religion is not the message, nor the promise, nor the way to see and attain them. Religions are at best just echoes of the truth of Christ. And at worst, they become the antithesis of it. The truth of Christ is within us all. And it always has been.

Eyes to see what is notbthere is what you have.
Unless you arevjust doing a cheap shot with that stupid " resentment" thing. It doesn't even make sense.

But it dpes stand well for the innate quality of your other hollow assertions.

As for the qualities you speak of- choose to thinkm are divine- those are features of every culture around the world.

Not that they are much acted on,
but they are innate to humanity.

If you like believing the qualities come from some God, fine, it's another of your unevidenved assumptions .
Or maybe a product of falsely so called philosophy.

If you stick to things for which there's evidence rather than faith in your personally
chosen assumptions, there'd be some substance instead of your vapourware.

 

[Audie]

I never said that you did

Ah misread you.
Ice floated in flood, or is formed after flood.

If the ice had floated, it,would have drifted, broken up, and melted. But there it is.

And multiple methods of dating,
and studying the structure show it took tens of thousands of years to form.

Peo0
E have been studying glaciers and ice caps for many years now,

Part of it it is to observe each years snowfall and study how it
forms layers and changes as it gets buried deeper. Each years snowfall has different concentrations of sulfuric acid and dust. Eruptions like from Pinatubo deliver ash to the ice cap. Each volcano has its own "fingerprint" of unique ash.

By drilling the layers from miles deep can be counted.

Each later has a unique chemical composition, different concentrations of ash and dust.

There's tens of thousands of those distinct layers.

What do you suppose that means.

 

[Vinayaka]

But you deny Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of the Ahmadiyyas to be a Messiah. He too was sent by Allah. What criteria you use to accept Bahaollah and reject Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? He too was of Mirza lineage.

Never met an Ahmadiyya I didn't like.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is hypothetical. Everyone needs The Saviour Jesus Christ in order to enter heaven. False religions lead to the other eternal destination.

In your opinion.

 

[metis]

I never said that you did.


Then you’re disavowing God’s Word and on shaky ground.

False, as interpretations can and often do vary. It's not that the Creation accounts (there are two) are somehow bogus but a matter of how to interpret them, especially in light of what we now know scientifically. What truly is "shaky ground" is when we may be arrogant enough think we are the last word and no one else could be correct if they disagree with us.

 

[Apostle John]

False, as interpretations can and often do vary. It's not that the Creation accounts (there are two) are somehow bogus but a matter of how to interpret them, especially in light of what we now know scientifically. What truly is "shaky ground" is when we may be arrogant enough think we are the last word and no one else could be correct if they disagree with us.

Assuming, when you say scientifically, you mean man’s efforts to work out how creation was achieved without God the Creator, then that is pitifully lacking in any knowledge. There’s simply no fact to it.

God has given a nice précis in the Bible how and why He did it and it is obvious to anyone who can think clearly with average intelligence that The Creator was involved.

But I don’t want your forums to become an ‘echo chamber’, I have wisdom but am humble. Carry on as you were. Keep trying to find the facts and good luck.

 

[metis]

Assuming, when you say scientifically, you mean man’s efforts to work out how creation was achieved without God the Creator, then that is pitifully lacking in any knowledge. There’s simply no fact to it.

God has given a nice précis in the Bible how and why He did it and it is obvious to anyone who can think clearly with average intelligence that The Creator was involved.

But I don’t want your forums to become an ‘echo chamber’, I have wisdom but am humble. Carry on as you were. Keep trying to find the facts and good luck.

The Bible was written by people for people but doesn't elevate ignorance-- quite the opposite.

Take care.

 

[CG Didymus]

That's true about the religions as they developed, but what about what about the originators of those religions?

I'm just going by what was taught in intro level Religious and Cultural Anthropology courses. Those beliefs of tribal people and even on up to great cultures and empires like the Egyptians and Aztec had beliefs that I think were made up by the people. Even a religion like Hinduism has several originators of different beliefs and concepts of spiritual truth.

So, with many religions, it's been a process of developing their religion and beliefs. And even with religions that had a prophet/originator, the stories about that prophet sound like myth and legend... And includes Christianity. We have to trust the gospel writers about the things Jesus said and did. Then trust mostly Paul on what Christians should do and believe. And sorting out the details continued with the Church leaders, which included which books were going to be accepted and get called the NT. If one thing about Jesus didn't really happen, then his story is based on something that isn't true... Like the resurrection or walking on water. Those things make him a God/man. Would Christianity have become great if Jesus was just a man?

It's not a problem for me to believe people made up their myths and legends that told their story on how they got here and where they are going. I could easily imagine a storm coming and the people believing there was a god that was mad at them. Or... after several months without rain that the Sun and the rain god were punishing them for something. But their god also helped protect them and helped them defeat their enemies... Even the Bible stories include that. Which means that those religions didn't always include "Love all people" and that "All people were one and loved by God."

Now, as far as the Baha'is go, I can see how they can be a great influence to get people to work towards a unified and peaceful world. But if it is actually the Baha'i administration that is running and ruling the world, I'd still have some doubts and questions about how great that would really be. Some Baha'is have said that is not the intent. But, if it isn't, then that would make the Baha'i Faith still only one religion amongst many, and there would still be secular governments that would be in overall control. But isn't that what Baha'is call the "lesser peace", and the "greater peace" is when God's laws, presumably the Baha'i laws, rule the land?

 

[CG Didymus]

Now how do we decide it. We could have had a duel if we lived in the same city or country. We can abuse or curse each other, but that will not be civil. Actually Krishna is not a historical person. Krishna is a myth, and Hindus ascribe words of wisdom to such figure, Krishna, Rama, VedaVyasa, etc. Since Hinduism is an indigenous pagan religion, not established by any one person, and one of the oldest religions (was there when the Aryans came to India around 2000 BCE).

Strange that there is so little about Krishna in the Baha'i writings, especially in the writings of the one they believe to have access to all knowledge, their prophet, Baha'u'llah. So, what is the claim of the Baha'is? That Krisha really existed? But then what about the other incarnations that came before him? Baha'is don't talk much about them. I wonder what Baha'is in India are saying about Krishna and those other incarnations, though?

And what are those Baha'is in India saying to Hindus that don't believe in Krishna? Are they first trying to get them to believe in Krishna and then telling them that his teachings are outdated? And what do they tell people in the other religions in India, like the Sikhs and the Jains? I get the feeling that they adapt their story to fit whomever they are talking to.

But anyway, if Krishna is a myth, that is already enough to make the beliefs of the Baha'is untrue. So, no matter what, they have to believe he was real, or their religion starts to unravel.

 

[CG Didymus]

Since Hinduism is an indigenous pagan religion, not established by any one person, and one of the oldest religions (was there when the Aryans came to India around 2000 BCE).

This is an important point. Do Baha'is really look at the reality of what is Hinduism? I don't think they do. And I don't think they want to. The easiest thing for them to do to include Hinduism in the chain of true and revealed religions from the one true God, their God, is find a prophet/founder... Krishna was the closest they could find.

 

[CG Didymus]

I believe as God in the flesh He has the right to say that all authority has been given to Him.

Baha'is don't believe God can become flesh, but they believe Jesus, Moses, Baha'u'llah... all of the people they believe were manifestations existed in the Spirit world. Yet, their spirits could become flesh. The angels, in the Bible stories, were spirit beings, but they could appear in the flesh. But the main thing for Baha'is is... they don't want Jesus to actually be God in the flesh. And they don't want him to be the only way to the Father.... They don't want him to be the only way to get one's sins forgiven, and they don't want him to have been physically resurrected.

And that's great, for them. But because they say they believe in Jesus and that Christianity is a true religion, they have to make adjustments to some of the common Christian beliefs and tell Christians why those beliefs are false.