Christianity is not the only way to God

metis said:

But this also applies to all religions and denominations well, including yours and mine, and yet we still believe.

Click to expand...

It applies to all major religions except the Baha'i Faith since we have the original writings of Baha'u'llah and thus we know exactly what He wrote.

metis said:

This is illogical since we don't know what he might have originally said with any certainty of being correct.

Click to expand...

That is true, we don't know what the Buddha originally said, but regarding Buddha teaching that there is one God, I believe that because it is in the Baha'i Writings which I consider authoritative. Baha'is believe that the Buddha was a Manifestation of God so He had to believe in God.

metis said:

Per what I previously posted in your response to my referencing he Buddha, how do you know the above is accurate?

Click to expand...

I know from the recorded history of the Baha'i Faith as well as from the original Writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah penned in their own hands. This is contemporary history, not ancient history. That said, nobody can ever prove anyone was a Manifestation of God, that is a belief, just like the belief that Jesus was sent by God.

Aupmanyav said:

- I would talk about Advaita Hinduism which does not accept exisence of God. Brahman is just the brick with which the edifice of universe is made of. Therefore, no oneness with God but oneness with whatever exists in the universe.

Click to expand...

What you describe as Brahman, in my understanding can be seen in two ways: Nirguna Brahman (God without qualities, or the Unmanifest, Ground of Being, Source, etc), and Saguna Brahman or 'God with qualities or attributes, the Manifestation of the Divine, Satchitananda', etc. To say "God", can mean either the Absolute in manifestation, or form, or it can mean the Impersonal Absolute or Formless ALL. It depends on the focus, and it is not seen as one or the other, but different perspectives of the ONE itself.

Same thing in Christian language. "God" is both the Unmanifest, Formless Ground of Being, the "Father". And then you have "God" as that self same Absolute Manifesting, the Son, or Logos (which is comparable to OM). These are just different systems of language and metaphors to speak about the same realization of the nature of the the Absolute, or the Divine Reality, both unmanifest and manifest.

"Oneness with God", therefore is simply the Realization of the Absolute as your true identity or nature. That we are not other to this fundamental Reality. It is not an intellectual grasp of that as an idea or a concept, but a Realization in the sense of perceptual and experiential reality. That is what Enlightenment is. That is what 'salvation' as a metaphor is pointing to as well, even if it is dressed up in a variety of symbols about "heaven', and 'streets of gold' and such.

Aupmanyav said:

- Salvation is different, it is forgiveness from sins, the original and the later ones, a promise to be resurrected on the intervention of Jesus with his father in your favor, and thereafter an eternal live doing what I do not know.

Click to expand...

Those are simply the metaphors or the language to speak about "deliverance" from the ego to the realization of the True Self, or God, or the Absolute. God does not just mean "a deity".

As far as forgiveness of sins goes, that is what I see as the focus of the Christian path, as a tool to letting go of the pangs of guilt and shame, which hinder one's spiritual path to Awakening, or Deliverance, or Salvation (all the same thing) from the ego. Just as you have multiple yogas, as paths to the Divine, each helping the human work with and overcome the human condition, Christianity itself is a path like these, devotion, meditation, service to others, etc.

I read past the literalism of the symbols, to the intent and effects of them. There are not paths up different mountains, but different paths up the same mountain from different sides of it, sides which make us who we are as a total being.

Aupmanyav said:

- In Advaita Hinduism that I follow, jnana / enlightenment, there is no such exemption and no promise of next or eternal life. We live only once. And the bricks which were used to construct our edifice and then used to construct other edifices, chemical recycling. Jnana /enlightenment is understanding how the universe works. It is a 'no-nonsense' view of the world.

Click to expand...

Eternal life is a metaphor for describe Life itself. People struggle with such abstractions, and so they literalize the metaphors. I too see that this far-too-common perspective of Christians that "salvation" is the 'afterlife". That to me is just an avoidance of Life right now here. Being freed from looking to tomorrow for liberation from Maya (salvation), is "overcoming the world", and results in "Life more abundant" right here and now, as Jesus taught, but Christians keep imagining it comes after death - or as those who believe in reincarnation, that the next lifetime they will be Liberated. It's all just avoidance.

But if you mean to say "understanding how the universe works", and using only the intellectual, rational, scientific mind, then I'd say, maybe in the "next lifetime" that might work. That doesn't really give that understanding to break free from the world of illusion of the ego. That's just more of the same thing. Even our sciences as "the Truth", is Maya.

No. My view does not incorporate convenient dualities, nirguna or saguna. If it is 'truth', it is not 'maya', and if it is 'maya', then it is not 'truth'. It can't be both.

Aupmanyav said:

No. My view does not incorporate convenient dualities, nirguna or saguna. If it is 'truth', it is not 'maya', and if it is 'maya', then it is not 'truth'. It can't be both.

Click to expand...

But aren't you looking at all of this from the atheistic, scientific point of view? That is dualistic. It says "no God". This, and not that. That's dualism.

sojourner said:

6

Click to expand...

Potato ?

Barry Johnson said:

Potato ?

Click to expand...

The word means what it means. In fact, the NRSV translates the word as “dome.” A dome will only cover a disc, not a sphere.

Trailblazer said:

It applies to all major religions except the Baha'i Faith since we have the original writings of Baha'u'llah and thus we know exactly what He wrote.

That is true, we don't know what the Buddha originally said, but regarding Buddha teaching that there is one God, I believe that because it is in the Baha'i Writings which I consider authoritative. Baha'is believe that the Buddha was a Manifestation of God so He had to believe in God.

Click to expand...

But you are assuming that he was right on some things that generally cannot be verified objectively. Thus, your position essentially matches what is believed by most Buddhists to likely be correct about the Buddha. The difference is they recognize and admit it.

When dealing with events that supposedly took place thousands of years ago, certainty is really not much of an option without slipping into "blind belief". IMO, the best option to learn from each tradition and see which makes the most sense to us, and then utilize that in our lives.

Therefore, I have no problem going to various churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples. I think we're each trying to do our best with limited objective information, but we can learn from each other's traditions that which we may find useful-- iow, ecumenism. I have learned a lot from Buddhist teachings even though I'm not a Buddhist, and the Catholic monk Thomas Merton felt much the same way.

metis said:

Therefore, I have no problem going to various churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples. I think we're each trying to do our best with limited objective information, but we can learn from each other's traditions that which we may find useful-- iow, ecumenism. I have learned a lot from Buddhist teachings even though I'm not a Buddhist, and the Catholic monk Thomas Merton felt much the same way.

Click to expand...

I admire that attitude towards other religions and only wish other Christians shared it.

Meandflower said:

Christianity is not the only way to God

I have evidence from the Bible itself:

God is love, whoever abides in love abides in God, and God in him, 1 John 4:16

What do you think about that?

Click to expand...

Yes, most religions can help you avoid hell if you are observant. Most churches, too. We just have to watch out for the churches and religions that teach us to remain in our sins. The New Testament also says that Jesus shall have to reward us according to our works, which after all is the only fair standard.

Windwalker said:

But aren't you looking at all of this from the atheistic, scientific point of view? That is dualistic. It says "no God". This, and not that. That's dualism.

Click to expand...

There is no that. It is this only. That is 'maya'.

Aupmanyav said:

There is no that. It is this only. That is 'maya'.

Click to expand...

Yet you say there is no God? Haven't you defined reality mentally, as this, but not that? "Reality does not include God", is defining reality as this, and not that. Isn't maya the illusion of believing that what the mind defines in dualistic terms, is the actuality of reality itself?

Windwalker said:

Yet you say there is no God? Haven't you defined reality mentally, as this, but not that? "Reality does not include God", is defining reality as this, and not that. Isn't maya the illusion of believing that what the mind defines in dualistic terms, is the actuality of reality itself?

Click to expand...

I have already tried to explain to you that I do not believe in Gods and Goddesses, though we have hundreds of them. Brahman, the ultimate constituent of whatever exists in the world is not God. It does not require worship, does not help anyone if the person is in trouble. It does not create the universe. Yeah, I have a fair idea of reality as to how physical energy forms all things in the universe.

"In physical cosmology, baryogenesis is the physical process that is hypothesized to have taken place during the early universe to produce baryonic asymmetry, i.e. the imbalance of matter (baryons) and antimatter (antibaryons) in the observed universe." Baryogenesis - Wikipedia

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Did you look at the interactive tool in the link?

Click to expand...

I believe that would be a waste of time. At any rate if one is reading a text then it isn't common sense; it is listening to teaching that may or may not have veracity. Any attempts to perceive contradictions that I have seen lacked veracity.

Trailblazer said:

Baha’u’llah cannot be the anti-christ you speak of because He did not do any of those things.

Baha’u’llah cannot be the Anti-Christ because..........

The Bible says that the Anti-Christ:

1. Denies that Jesus is the Christ. ** Baha'u'llah affirms that Jesus is the Christ.

1 John Chapter 2
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

2. Denies the Father and the Son. ** Baha'u'llah affirms the Father and the Son.

1 John Chapter 2
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

3. Denies that Jesus came in the flesh and cleansed us of sin.
** Baha'u'llah affirms that Jesus came in the flesh and cleansed us of sin.

1 John Chapter 4
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
** Baha'u'llah confessed that Jesus Christ came in the flesh.

3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
** Baha'u'llah was not already in the world when John was written.

1 John Chapter 1
6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
** Baha'u'llah wrote that Jesus cleansed us of sin.

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
** Baha'u'llah acknowledged that we have sin.

4. Is equated with deceivers and linked with false prophets.

1 John Chapter 4
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
** Baha'u'llah is not linked to any false prophets because He had good fruits (Matthew 7:16-20).

5. Is already in the world during the writing of the epistles of John (100 AD)

1 John Chapter 4
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
** Baha'u'llah was not already in the world when John was written.

6. Is a former Christian.

1 John Chapter 2
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
** Baha'u'llah was not a former Christian. He was a former Muslim.

Click to expand...

Everone of these "Baha'u'llah affirms that....." is semantics . Just like when cults use the same terms as the bible uses like ' grace , faith , saved , Jesus , Christ , Son of God, free gift , justified, salvation ect . They do not mean the same things . Its the same words but they don't mean the same things as the bible says .

Barry Johnson said:

Everone of these "Baha'u'llah affirms that....." is semantics . Just like when cults use the same terms as the bible uses like ' grace , faith , saved , Jesus , Christ , Son of God, free gift , justified, salvation ect . They do not mean the same things . Its the same words but they don't mean the same things as the bible says .

Click to expand...

Give it up for lost, because you cannot make Baha'u'llah into the anti-Christ just because you want to dismiss Him.
There is proof that Baha'u'llah said these things about Jesus in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, which were penned in His own Hand.
His original writings are in a vault in Haifa, Israel.

Why not just accept that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be? The proof is all in the prophecies that were fulfilled by His coming. Baha'u'llah did not come to take anything away from Jesus that rightly belonged to Jesus or to usurp the glory of Jesus. Baha'u'llah testified of Jesus and glorified Jesus, just as Jesus said the Comforter would do, thus fulfilling NT prophecies.

John 16:14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it 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:

Referring to Jesus as the Son of Man, Baha’u’llah wrote:

“We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 86