Jesus was given all power and authority - and you have no reason to believe it's gone anywhere from Him.
I do not beleive that in any way shape or form.
I see Christ has all power given by God.
Regards Tony
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Jesus was given all power and authority - and you have no reason to believe it's gone anywhere from Him.
Matthew 28:
Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
True Christianity being defined as those who truly follow Christ - not just those who claim to.
I do not beleive that in any way shape or form.
I see Christ has all power given by God.
The Key here that the promises is Jesus the Chrst will be with us to the end of the age, thus when the new age begins, we have new decisions to make. As the Father will come in a New Name and show us of what Christ did offer.
The Bible tells us that by definition you cannot have the power and authority of Christ to operate in without being in Christ. Which means obeying Christ. Which means by definition you'd be a "Christian".It may not be a person that uses the name Christain, that will fulfill this requirement in the New Day of God.
You have raised some very valid points. So, do you think that religion has seen its day because this is the scientific age, so science can replace religion? Baha’is believe this is an entirely new cycle of religion, a new age, the age of reason and science, so the older superstitions religions no longer meet the needs of the times. An essential teaching of the Baha’i Faith is the harmony of science and religion.Does there ever come a time when a notion or an idea that may have been useful at the start is no longer as useful as another alternative?
What I am getting at here is not that "atheism" is more useful than "religion." That's not what I am saying. What I am trying to do is point out that all you have provided here is a completely insufficient argument for why religion may still be of use. And all you state is that it is useful because it helped something along in the past. That is irrelevant to today, honestly. If we were to find ourselves again completely in the dark, without any of the knowledge we have gained over the centuries, then yes, maybe religion would be of some help to get through that time again as you posit it was in your assessment... but we aren't in that time, and so if this is all you have to provide as a counter-point, then you have provided nothing.
Using stones to cut wood may have worked originally, but once you have wielded an ax you are never going to want to pick up a stone for the job again.
It's not clear to me what you're saying.
Are you saying you don't believe the Bible is true?
Or are you saying you don't believe the Bible says all power and authority currently resides with Jesus Christ?
If the later, I can demonstrate the Bible does say precisely that.
It is impossible for your viewpoint to be true based on what the Bible already says will happen.
We see in Revelation the following things happen in order:
1. That followers of Christ continue to do His will, by His power, until the end times tribulation.
2. At which point Jesus returns to rule and reign with His church over the earth for 1,000 years.
3. After which the world is tested one last time and then the earth is destroyed by fire an a new world is created. It is the total fulfillment of God's plan for man.
4. Eternity with Christ begins.
So no where in this does it leave any room for your belief to be true.
You can't say that power and authority is currently no longer with the Christians unless you want to say the Bible isn't true.
Because we know Jesus's hasn't returned yet.
And the 1,000 year reign hasn't even begun, much less ended.
And we definitely know the world hasn't been totally destroyed and restarted as a new creation
The Bible tells us that by definition you cannot have the power and authority of Christ to operate in without being in Christ. Which means obeying Christ. Which means by definition you'd be a "Christian".
A Christian by definition is one who follows Christ. The original orgin of that word is "little christ". Meaning "one who is like Christ". And we know by definition in John 15 that one who obeys Christ will love like Christ. So to obey/follow Christ and be like Him are one in the same.
Therefore, it is impossible for you to claim that anyone could replace Christians to operate in the power and authority of Christ when being a "Christian" by definition is what is required to in order to partake in said power and authority.
I specifically made sure to tell you that this was NOT what I was saying. All I was saying was that what you said was not a valid point in your favor.So, do you think that religion has seen its day because this is the scientific age, so science can replace religion?
What do you mean "all of them met a bad end?". Did Pius IX? He lived to the ripe old age of 86 and is chiefly remembered for calling the first Vatican Council. Did Queen Victoria, who ruled for longer than any previous British monarch, presided over the British Empire as it reached its apogee and lived to 81? Did Wilhelm I of Prussia, who presided over the unification of Germany, lived to the age of 90 and was known subsequently as Wilhelm the Great?The documents are preserved and they were written in Arabic and Persian, so there is no 'supposedly written' quandary. That is now an historical fact.
From a religious perspective, one does not have to be an Einstein to understand that when God sends a Messenger a New World is already unfolding. The fact the 1800's were a time of great change only supports what was written 1000's of years ago, what would happen when God did sent the later day Messiah.
In the end that is the choice people have. There is only two paths I see. The Message is the Truth, or it is not.
Thus, if it is the Truth, then it is the answer to all the issues we face in this age and the prosperity of the world unfolds to the extent we embrace the Mesaage and the demise is to the extent we neglect the Message.
As to the rulers of that time, they one and all met their demise, all of them that ignored the message met a bad end and the ability to impart any future influence.
Those that did not totally ignore the message, did continue to impart some influence. Most notable is that of the Queen of England's ongoing legacy.
The future will submit to the wisdom given and embrace the given Mesaage, but only after much more pain is inflicted by those that chuckle.
Regards Tony
What do you mean "all of them met a bad end?". Did Pius IX? He lived to the ripe old age of 86 and is chiefly remembered for calling the first Vatican Council. Did Queen Victoria, who ruled for longer than any previous British monarch, presided over the British Empire as it reached its apogee and lived to 81? Did Wilhelm I of Prussia, who presided over the unification of Germany, lived to the age of 90 and was known subsequently as Wilhelm the Great?
And did any of these rulers he wrote to NOT ignore the message - or Message? Which ones and what did they do about it?
What Mirza said is irrelevant to me. I don't see why a Christian would care what he has to say about the Pope.This thread is a result of a comment made in;
The Bible a sure Spiritual Guide.
The comment was:
".... God drowned almost all of humanity. Then he drowned the Egyptian army. He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. He had his people kill every living thing in Jericho. He had Elijah kill the prophets of Baal. God didn't seem to like anyone, but his chosen people. And, even with them, it was tough love"."
I personally see God gives a Message as to how Humanity can find Unity and Peace in submission to that Message and the Laws that Message contains.
At the same time the Message of hope also contains the warning of the results of the neglect of that Message.
I see history has repeated. For the purpose of this thread, I offer the view we live in a world where our neglect of a Message, is again reaping the results of our neglect to embrace it.
Imagine as we live a couple of hundred years ago and are a Christian. The Pope and ecclesiastical branch and the priests of other branches that had control over men's minds. It was they that were controlling how people were to see Jesus and Christ, it was they that told the masses how they should see the Bible.
But change was in the air, mankind was awakening to find their own voice in these matters and the change came in the mid 1800's, a time of mass expectation in Christianity.
Pope Pius IX received a letter from a prisoner, from the Holy land no less and when he opened the Letter He would read;
"O Pope! Rend the veils asunder. He Who is the Lord of Lords is come overshadowed with clouds, and the decree hath been fulfilled by God, the Almighty, the Unrestrained. Dispel the mists through the power of thy Lord, and ascend unto the Kingdom of His names and attributes. Thus hath the Pen of the Most High commanded thee at the behest of thy Lord, the Almighty, the All-Compelling. He, verily, hath again come down from Heaven even as He came down from it the first time. Beware that thou dispute not with Him even as the Pharisees disputed with Him without a clear token or proof.... "
The rest of the letter is here.
The Summons of the Lord of Hosts | Bahá’í Reference Library
The letter goes on to offer Promise and warnings of neglect of embracing the promise contained within.
The Pope chose neglect and one of the warnings was that all Power would be seized from the Pope and Ecclesiastes. That they no longer will have the authority to guide the mind of men.
The stage is set. If the Message the Pope read is from God, then....
All Power to influence humanity as a whole no longer resides in the Christain faith as it is now been recorded, “Power hath been seized” indeed from both “kings and ecclesiastics.” The glory of the former has been eclipsed, the power of the latter irretrievably lost.
The question is.
Can it be seen that that power has been seized?
The Debate is about Scriptural promises and warnings. If we have been warned, can we blame the Messenger, who is the voice of God and thus can we blame God for our neglect?
Regards Tony
So Queen Victoria replied , did she? That's interesting. But I note she did not do anything as a result of receiving this Message. Her reply amounts to a polite way of saying "Get lost". And that did her no harm.Thank you for the question.
Some of he individual letters were written to these Rulers
I will start with Queen Victoria.
Baha’u’llah’s tablet to Queen Victoria praised her for the British system of parliamentary democracy and commended her for abolishing the slave trade: ‘We have been informed’ he wrote, ‘that you have forbidden the trading in slaves, both men and women. This truly, is what God has enjoined in this wondrous Revelation’.
The queen is the only person who has been said to respond to Baha'ullah's Message. She reportedly responded “If this is of God it will endure; if not, it can do no harm.”
Baha'u'llah said her reign would last and one of her grand-daughters, who became Queen Marie of Rumania embraced the Message of Baha'u'llah and offered to us all this thought;
" The Bahá'í teaching brings peace and understanding. It is like a wide embrace gathering together all those who have long searched for words of hope. It accepts great prophets gone before, it destroys no other creeds and leaves all doors open. Saddened by the continual strife among believers of many confessions and wearied by their intolerance towards one another, I discovered in the Bahá'í teaching the real spirit of Christ so often denied and misunderstood. Unity instead of strife, hope instead of condemnation, love instead of hate, and a great reassurance for all men."
As for Pope Pius IX, a great example how Gods Message works.
Baha'u'llah the prisoner in Akka writes to the Pope in 1868 and at that time the Pope has reached an apex He had now become notable for convoking the Vatican Council in 1868. But there was no response to the call of Bha'u'llah to embrace the new Message from God and the trouble that was brewing came to a conclusion. The Italian nationalists were against the Papal States, which ended in the seizure of the city of Rome in 1870 and the dissolution of the Papal States. The Pope declaring himself a "prisoner of the Vatican" thus he was the last Sovereign Ruler of the Papal States.
The power of the Catholic Church was seized, its wide embracing influence, lost.
The letters written by Baha'u'llah are available. What happened to the rulers now history. I always consider that a prisoner called all humanity to unity, when He did so he offered the Most Great Peace was obtainable if we accepted. It was also recorded what would happen if we did not choose the Most Great Peace, that we must eventually cling to a Lesser Peace only after the world suffered a series of afflictions brought upon our own selves.
This is a massive subject. Regards Tony
What Mirza said is irrelevant to me. I don't see why a Christian would care what he has to say about the Pope.
I agree that what matters is what religion is accomplishing now, not what happened in the past. The past is gone.That doesn't matter anymore. Yeah, good, great, "religion was able to help foster civilization" - but can it maintain a consistent track record? That's what matters. Make the points about what it is accomplishing now. And if it doesn't stand up to other ideologies that are doing more in certain areas, then that too should be noted, and not just swept under the rug because "religion did 'X' some several thousand years ago."
So Queen Victoria replied , did she? That's interesting. But I note she did not do anything as a result of receiving this Message. Her reply amounts to a polite way of saying "Get lost". And that did her no harm.
As for the pope, the loss of the papal states was obviously inevitable and has been a huge benefit to the Catholic Church. It was quite anachronistic to have a religious leader controlling territory, like a king, in the c.19th.
And Wilhelm I of Prussia seems to have done OK as well.
So your suggestion that they all came to a bad end doesn't stand up.
here we disagree.But the moment they enter the territory of their religious beliefs, it all goes out the window.
How is that evidence? And it's fair enough that this is what you believe, but it have no explanatory meaning to make such statement. Couldn't I just as well say that some aliens, who really like beautiful things brought life to Earth and that image prove that i'm right?here we disagree.
There is sound evidence for a loving God, I think. Take for instance this countryside: God made it look beautiful, because he loves us. This is at least my stance.
https://pixabay.com/photos/polynesia-french-polynesia-tahiti-3021072/
the perception of the landscape is the data, the explanation is God made it look beautiful.How is that evidence? And it's fair enough that this is what you believe, but it have no explanatory meaning
you basically say the same here: a loving creator created the beauty.Give me one reason why that statement is less plausible than yours?
No that is not how one reason... I agree the landscape is beautiful, but that doesn't make God the explanation. The only thing the "data" support is that we or a majority of people perceive the landscape as being beautiful. That's it!!the perception of the landscape is the data, the explanation is God made it look beautiful.
Most people see this landscape as beautiful. That's the data supporting the hypothesis that God made it look beautiful.
Theoretically it could be different and noone would find anything beautiful, for instance.
Yes, or I could make the claim that it materialized out of thin air, doesn't really matter what I claim, when I don't have to prove anything anyway.you basically say the same here: a loving creator created the beauty.
No, why would I assume that, just because we perceive it as beautiful? For all, I know the aliens could have thrown it here and thought "Jeez, this is not good, we are heading back to our own planet.", which makes perfect sense, as they are not around anymore.You seem to assume that humans and your aliens have the same taste.
the bolded phrase is the one I was going to explain.The only thing the "data" support is that we or a majority of people perceive the landscape as being beautiful. That's it!!
this would mean more complexity, as I see it. You would have to assume:it materialized out of thin air,