• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How are these Great Beings explained?

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I wonder why Christians don’t take Baptism by fire literally! Ha! Ha!

It would be life changing :D

I go to church each Sunday where they partake of the bread and the wine. Why they Eat the Bread I pray for the grace of the Knowledge of Christ, why they drink the wine I pray that we may be imbued of the choice wine of Christs perfections.

Hope you are both well

Regards Tony
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
I was wondering if you understood this logic. A christian believes in the physical resurrection. They cant be saved by symbols. The resurrection promises any christians a physical ressurrection.

In god all things are possible

If the PR is a symbol so is there salvation. They go together.

How do you seperate the two especially as a former Cathokic?

I cant think of another way to ask. If the rituals are secondary and not needed were you Catholic by belief or were you raised Catholic and only knew rituals as routine isolated practice without the love?

First I saw and see Christ and belief in Him and obedience to Him as the path to salvation.

I don’t view the sacraments or interpretations of others as a means to salvation. Christ’s Physical body was not what was important but His Message of love.

Not all Christians accept a bodily resurrection or see it the same way Catholics do yet claim they are saved?

Jesus’ Body—Was It Flesh or Spirit After His Resurrection? | Bible Questions

To gain salvation, you must exercise faith in Jesus and demonstrate that faith by obeying his commands.—Acts 4:10,12; Romans 10:9, 10; Hebrews 5:9.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
First I saw and see Christ and belief in Him and obedience to Him as the path to salvation.

I don’t view the sacraments or interpretations of others as a means to salvation. Christ’s Physical body was not what was important but His Message of love.

Not all Christians accept a bodily resurrection or see it the same way Catholics do yet claim they are saved?

Jesus’ Body—Was It Flesh or Spirit After His Resurrection? | Bible Questions

To gain salvation, you must exercise faith in Jesus and demonstrate that faith by obeying his commands.—Acts 4:10,12; Romans 10:9, 10; Hebrews 5:9.

There are verses to all the sacraments. Baptism, repentence, conviction, and communion. What church does not have these things when they are in scripture?

Do you understand the logic? A christian's salvation is based on the physical ressurrection of christ. If the PR is symbolic, so is there salvation.

Logically rather than personal beliefs. I dont agree with any of it but logically it makes sense.

Edit: Im asking you about the relationship between your two statements not if the PR is real or not; thats a whole other topic.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
@loverofhumanity

I agree with the logic of JW but I havent Experience their faith. All I know is Catholic. Two totally different christian viewpoint both in scripture and theology.

"For if you publicly declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord,m and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. n for salvation" In red Romans

-Physical verbal conviction goes with spirit. Baptism in water is the same.

You have to point to the verses you are referring to and add commentary.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
There are verses to all the sacraments. Baptism, repentence, conviction, and communion. What church does not have these things when they are in scripture?

Do you understand the logic? A christian's salvation is based on the physical ressurrection of christ. If the PR is symbolic, so is there salvation.

Logically rather than personal beliefs. I dont agree with any of it but logically it makes sense.

Edit: Im asking you about the relationship between your two statements not if the PR is real or not; thats a whole other topic.

As far as the sacraments Christ authored none of them Himself.

“Not one of the sacraments of the Church; not one of the rites and ceremonies … none of these reposed on the direct authority of Christ, or emanated from His specific utterances. Not one of these did Christ conceive, none did He specifically invest with sufficient authority to either interpret His Word, or to add to what He had not specifically enjoined.” (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 20)
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
@loverofhumanity

I agree with the logic of JW but I havent Experience their faith. All I know is Catholic. Two totally different christian viewpoint both in scripture and theology.

"For if you publicly declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord,m and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. n for salvation" In red Romans

-Physical verbal conviction goes with spirit. Baptism in water is the same.

You have to point to the verses you are referring to and add commentary.

And Baptism by fire?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
And Baptism by fire?

It says baptism by water. Unless there is a contridiction in scripture?

It says people were baptised by water before jesus came. Once he comes, people would be baptised in the spirit.

If it is only spiritual, why would John use water and not the holy spirit?
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
As far as the sacraments Christ authored none of them Himself.

“Not one of the sacraments of the Church; not one of the rites and ceremonies … none of these reposed on the direct authority of Christ, or emanated from His specific utterances. Not one of these did Christ conceive, none did He specifically invest with sufficient authority to either interpret His Word, or to add to what He had not specifically enjoined.” (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 20)

So there is no such thing as jesus baptism and telling others to baptise in father, son, and holy spirit? No verbal confirmation of faith with mouth and spirit? No repentence to god and others? No communion regardless jesus and his disciples did it?

The only one I can think of thats not in scripture directly is ordaning priest. Marriage is there though.

What sacraments are you referring to thats not in the bible?

I have scripture for all of these unless youre not going by the bible itself.
 
Last edited:

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Hm.


It can, but we're speaking from a Christian point of view rather than Bahai.



Without jesus actual resurrection, Christianity would be symbolic.



Yes. Physical resurrection is not symbolic as other parts may be.



I'm smothered with Christians, both old school and new school. A lot of the non-denomination christians make it more symbolic. It's a protest against the Church's "literalism" of the Eucharist. Old school seem to put more emphasis on Christ resurrection than his death. If you said the resurrection is symbolic, it's saying their salvation is symbolic. It's literally tearing the heart of a Christian's salvation when you say that their scripture says one thing when either denomination or by christian, it says and means something totally different.

It's not about Bahai views.



Did not mean?

To me, either I agree with it or I don't. I can't make something different all because I personally don't agree it. Jesus rose in scripture. I disagree that he literally did. It's not about me though. It's about scripture in how christian's interpret it. It's their religion not mine.

Anything is debatable. I don't take sides so either side have their views. Though, Christians don't have a view of other religions in a positive light nor do they change other religions other than how they see Judaism and in some cases Islam.



Resurrected means rose from the ground. He was brought up from the ground of his tomb. That's why people saw his body and spirit rise and no one is in the tomb. (Christian view not mine)



I understand why Bahai believe what they do. It's not christianity any more so than The Buddha being part of your faith and calling it Buddhism and likewise Hinduism. It's not what you believe-that is on you-it's interpreting other people's faiths in the light of your own. It's not just religious. Many people do it especially in conversations thinking one party knows what other is saying and means even without asking for clarification and accepting facts over one's own opinions. (aka Pet Peeve)



You'd literally have to experience the resurrection from a literal point of view not just spiritual. I mean, I wouldn't be having this conversation if I haven't experienced it. This would be a foreign language to me as a whole. If I hadn't read the Bible, this would make no sense at all.



We're talking about christians not Bahai.

It is not about me.

That's my point.
You are talking about Christian view of the Bible.
I am also talking about Biblical view of the Bible.
So, if we could have the Authors of Bible here right now, they could tell us if they meant physical resurrection or spiritual resurrection. Just because Christians today say, it is meant a physical Resurrection it is not a proof that is what the Bible means, in the same way that just because Bahais say it was a Spiritual resurrection, is not a proof that it was meant a spiritual resurrection. We need to use our own mind, free from any bias and analyze the text of Bible, and decide what they meant.

It is debatable that the adherents of any religion necessarily interpret the verses of their own book always correctly. For instance, there is no proof that any Christian can correctly interpret all verses of Bible correctly. Different Christian denominations often disagree with regards to interpretation of some of the verses of Bible. When it comes to interpretation of the old testament, there are always conflicting interpretations between Jews and Christians. For example the Christians would say, Jesus matches the description of Messiah in old testament, whereas most Jews do not see it that way. Can we say the Jews are right, just because old testament is their own book? Can we say the Christian belief that Jesus is the Messiah of Jews is false, just because Messiah originated from Jewish holy books?!
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
It's not one book. Being sealed has nothing, nothing to do with the gospels.
How do you know that? Does the Bible say so?

These were accounts of what Jesus said and did.
It is debatable if the Authors of Bible wrote a literal history book. They did not say it is all literal, did they?

Are they accurate and historical? Many people have their doubts. But Christians are told not to doubt it, but to believe and trust in what the gospels say.
That is a different subject.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
You are talking about Christian view of the Bible.
I am also talking about Biblical view of the Bible.
So, if we could have the Authors of Bible here right now, they could tell us if they meant physical resurrection or spiritual resurrection. Just because Christians today say, it is meant a physical Resurrection it is not a proof that is what the Bible means, in the same way that just because Bahais say it was a Spiritual resurrection, is not a proof that it was meant a spiritual resurrection. We need to use our own mind, free from any bias and analyze the text of Bible, and decide what they meant.

It is debatable that the adherents of any religion necessarily interpret the verses of their own book always correctly. For instance, there is no proof that any Christian can correctly interpret all verses of Bible correctly. Different Christian denominations often disagree with regards to interpretation of some of the verses of Bible. When it comes to interpretation of the old testament, there are always conflicting interpretations between Jews and Christians. For example the Christians would say, Jesus matches the description of Messiah in old testament, whereas most Jews do not see it that way. Can we say the Jews are right, just because old testament is their own book? Can we say the Christian belief that Jesus is the Messiah of Jews is false, just because Messiah originated from Jewish holy books?!

I will reply little later. Biblical view is a christian view not bahai nor bahai interpretation.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
You are talking about Christian view of the Bible.
I am also talking about Biblical view of the Bible.
So, if we could have the Authors of Bible here right now, they could tell us if they meant physical resurrection or spiritual resurrection. Just because Christians today say, it is meant a physical Resurrection it is not a proof that is what the Bible means, in the same way that just because Bahais say it was a Spiritual resurrection, is not a proof that it was meant a spiritual resurrection. We need to use our own mind, free from any bias and analyze the text of Bible, and decide what they meant.

Physical resurrection is experienced in a real church with real people.

We cant interpret anything free of bias. You arent christian and neither am I. Since I am not I trust christian interpretation because they make the bible true literally by their practice.

Saying the PR is only spiritual because you dont know is like calling a christian's salvation spiritual and symbolic rather than literal and a fact.

It is debatable that the adherents of any religion necessarily interpret the verses of their own book always correctly. For instance, there is no proof that any Christian can correctly interpret all verses of Bible correctly. Different Christian denominations often disagree with regards to interpretation of some of the verses of Bible. When it comes to interpretation of the old testament, there are always conflicting interpretations between Jews and Christians. For example the Christians would say, Jesus matches the description of Messiah in old testament, whereas most Jews do not see it that way. Can we say the Jews are right, just because old testament is their own book? Can we say the Christian belief that Jesus is the Messiah of Jews is false, just because Messiah originated from Jewish holy books?!

If interpretations are mixed up, which bibles (not bahaullahs writings) are Bahai looking at to prove their connection with scripture?

Catholics, non lurtigical protestestants, and JW have their own bibles. Why look to the bible? Is your experience only defined in a book?
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
My Christian friends say there is symbolism in the story, but that Moses and Elijah appeared.
Your Christian friends?! Who are they? Priest or Bible scholars? I had already quoted wikipedia. Most Christians do not believe Moses and Elijah physically were there, because they think, Moses had died and He would not be resurrected until the End comes. A vision is not physical presence.

Baha'is twist this and the resurrection into things that never happened but we're only symbolic stories.

You can have this opinion. Can you prove it?

So what about the rest of the story about Jesus? What about Jesus himself? Why is he real and historical when the story around him are made up symbolic events?
Why don't you think, part of the Bible can be literal history of Jesus and part of symbolical? Cannot Bible be a mix of literal and symbolical?
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Physical resurrection is experienced in a real church with real people.
When and where such a physical resurrection is experienced?! Where is the evidence? Where is the proof?


We cant interpret anything free of bias. You arent christian and neither am I. Since I am not I trust christian interpretation because they make the bible true literally by their practice.
We can become free from bias. We need to clean our heart from our own desire, then we can see the truth of the matter with a clean heart. It is challenging, but still possible.


Saying the PR is only spiritual because you dont know is like calling a christian's salvation spiritual and symbolic rather than literal and a fact.
Not at all. The spiritual resurrection is the real salvation. When we become spiritually alive, our soul will become powerful and everlasting in the spiritual worlds of God.


If interpretations are mixed up, which bibles (not bahaullahs writings) are Bahai looking at to prove their connection with scripture?
The point is not to accept anything blindly. The Bahais are not supposed to accept Bahaullah's interpretations just blindly. They investigated it, and found them as truth. This is why you see, many Christians became Bahais. But if these Christians were biased before becoming Bahai, why would they accept the view of Bahaullah who was not even a Christian? It is just as how some Jews became Christians. Can we say the Jews who became Christians, were mislead by other Christians?? Perhaps they investigated and realized Jesus matches the description of Messiah in old testament.


Catholics, non lurtigical protestestants, and JW have their own bibles. Why look to the bible? Is your experience only defined in a book?
If we clean our heart from every bias, we can see the true interpretation.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
When and where such a physical resurrection is experienced?! Where is the evidence? Where is the proof?

In Mass. The life of christ is the Mass itself. The death is recieving the blessings and forgiveness from god via repentence (crucifed in christ), the resurrection is the Eucharist.

It is physical. Its about the communion of real people, real church, and real jesus. Are you saying a christian's salvation is symbolic?

We can become free from bias. We need to clean our heart from our own desire, then we can see the truth of the matter with a clean heart. It is challenging, but still possible.

If you have no bias then you wont see faults in another person's scriptures in light of your own interpretation.

Not at all. The spiritual resurrection is the real salvation. When we become spiritually alive, our soul will become powerful and everlasting in the spiritual worlds of God.

Spiritual is literal not symbolic. It has physical ways of the same love etc as whats in your heart.

If we clean our heart from every bias, we can see the true interpretation.

The true interpretation is only made by christians. Its Their scripture not yours and not mine.

Unless you are saying they dont have a clear true heart and dont have the true interpretation??
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
In Mass. The life of christ is the Mass itself. The death is recieving the blessings and forgiveness from god via repentence (crucifed in christ), the resurrection is the Eucharist.
When Christians talk about physical resurrection of Jesus, they mean, Jesus body became alive again physically after the death. What you describe is not an evidence for the physical resurrection. But your interpretation is closer to what Bahais also believe.

It is physical. Its about the communion of real people, real church, and real jesus. Are you saying a christian's salvation is symbolic?
You seem to think symbolic means unreal.
Whereas symbolic does not mean unreal or myth.
Symbolic just means, spiritual truth described with symbolic terms. If you say, his face is as bright as moon. This is symbolic, and real, but it does not mean, his face literally (or physically) is bright.

If you have no bias then you wont see faults in another person's scriptures in light of your own interpretation.
Remember, when you went to school, you took classes and then you wrote a test. Then your teacher marked your test. He told you which one of your answers were correct and which ones are incorrect. Are you saying that, when he found fault with your answers or understanding of the lessons, he was biased?! That is how Holy Books are. People can misunderstand the lessons in the holy Books. The story of Resurrection of Jesus is meant to be a true lesson. The story teaches spirituality. But if some people do not see its intended purpose and lesson, and takes the symbols, as physically true, should not an all-knowing God tells them of their faulty understanding of God's book?!

Spiritual is literal not symbolic. It has physical ways of the same love etc as whats in your heart.
spirituality can be expressed using symbolic expressions and stories, can it not?

The true interpretation is only made by christians. Its Their scripture not yours and not mine.
The Christians who live in our time or even past did not write the Bible. The Bible was written by the apostles of Jesus, not by all other Christians, so, how can you say the book belongs to anyone who is called Christians? Jesus and the apostles many times warned against false Christian teachers, and even those who call Jesus Lord, Lord!

Unless you are saying they dont have a clear true heart and dont have the true interpretation??
I am saying if the heart is not pure and clean, it cannot understand. That is what the Bible said:

"Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand."


This verse of Bible tells us, to become wise, we need to become pure and spotless; our heart needs to be cleaned.



"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."

"My son, if your heart is wise, then my heart will be glad indeed; ...."

"The hearts of the wise make their mouths prudent, and their lips promote instruction"
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
When Christians talk about physical resurrection of Jesus, they mean, Jesus body became alive again physically after the death. What you describe is not an evidence for the physical resurrection. But your interpretation is closer to what Bahais also believe.


You seem to think symbolic means unreal.
Whereas symbolic does not mean unreal or myth.
Symbolic just means, spiritual truth described with symbolic terms. If you say, his face is as bright as moon. This is symbolic, and real, but it does not mean, his face literally (or physically) is bright.


Remember, when you went to school, you took classes and then you wrote a test. Then your teacher marked your test. He told you which one of your answers were correct and which ones are incorrect. Are you saying that, when he found fault with your answers or understanding of the lessons, he was biased?! That is how Holy Books are. People can misunderstand the lessons in the holy Books. The story of Resurrection of Jesus is meant to be a true lesson. The story teaches spirituality. But if some people do not see its intended purpose and lesson, and takes the symbols, as physically true, should not an all-knowing God tells them of their faulty understanding of God's book?!


spirituality can be expressed using symbolic expressions and stories, can it not?


The Christians who live in our time or even past did not write the Bible. The Bible was written by the apostles of Jesus, not by all other Christians, so, how can you say the book belongs to anyone who is called Christians? Jesus and the apostles many times warned against false Christian teachers, and even those who call Jesus Lord, Lord!


I am saying if the heart is not pure and clean, it cannot understand. That is what the Bible said:

"Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand."


This verse of Bible tells us, to become wise, we need to become pure and spotless; our heart needs to be cleaned.



"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."

"My son, if your heart is wise, then my heart will be glad indeed; ...."

"The hearts of the wise make their mouths prudent, and their lips promote instruction"

Symbolism belittles one's literal experience in christ. Ask a Catholic if the Eucharist is symbolic...ask a priest. It's literal. Whether you symbolize the Eucharist is your interpretation. Regardless of your interpretation, it is true. Its not about your interpretation and where you say you got the interpretation from. You hold no authority of the validity and facts of the christian faith.


.....
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
With god all things are possible, right?
You seem to think symbolic means unreal.
Whereas symbolic does not mean unreal or myth.
Symbolic just means, spiritual truth described with symbolic terms. If you say, his face is as bright as moon. This is symbolic, and real, but it does not mean, his face literally (or physically) is bright.

The PR IS the salvation for a christian not a symbol of it.

I cant change scripture and how the majority of christians see it. That is

Their faith

Not mine nor yours

Remember, when you went to school, you took classes and then you wrote a test. Then your teacher marked your test. He told you which one of your answers were correct and which ones are incorrect. Are you saying that, when he found fault with your answers or understanding of the lessons, he was biased?!

That is how Holy Books are. People can misunderstand the lessons in the holy Books. The story of Resurrection of Jesus is meant to be a true lesson. The story teaches spirituality. But if some people do not see its intended purpose and lesson, and takes the symbols, as physically true, should not an all-knowing God tells them of their faulty understanding of God's book?!

You are not a teacher marking christian students wrong. Thats silly and rude. In this case, you are siding with your own view defining other peoples religions.

Its not up to you to point out what you call misinerpretation of another persons faith as a fact-it is your opinion, your belief.

spirituality can be expressed using symbolic expressions and stories, can it not?

If those symbols are based on real events.

Did bahaullah actually rose as a spirit or was it a symbol of a non existant event or story?

The Christians who live in our time or even past did not write the Bible. The Bible was written by the apostles of Jesus, not by all other Christians, so, how can you say the book belongs to anyone who is called Christians? Jesus and the apostles many times warned against false Christian teachers, and even those who call Jesus Lord, Lord!

How does 2000 some odd years make us automatically unable to write spiritual facts?

False teachers? That is very bias and negative.

Unless you follow christ ONLY then you are an unrepented gentile just as I am. They call us pagans. How can pagans speak for tbe word of god, say you follow christian views, call their views symbolic, and follow manifestations that are no where related to christian beliefs?

I dont take sides. Thats why Im not i abrahamic religions. It makes me think onesided. Its unhealthy for my mind and heart, literally.

I am saying if the heart is not pure and clean, it cannot understand. That is what the Bible said:

"Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understan

This verse of Bible tells us, to become wise, we need to become pure and spotless; our heart needs to be cleaned.

The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."

"My son, if your heart is wise, then my heart will be glad indeed; ...."

"The hearts of the wise make their mouths prudent, and their lips promote instruction"

All scripture has a physical element to it. Cultural religions dont seperate the two. Universalist, new age and newer non denominations do. I dont care for universalism. Both sides think they are right.

When Christians talk about physical resurrection of Jesus, they mean, Jesus body became alive again physically after the death. What you describe is not an evidence for the physical resurrection. But your interpretation is closer to what Bahais also believe.


You seem to think symbolic means unreal.
Whereas symbolic does not mean unreal or myth.
Symbolic just means, spiritual truth described with symbolic terms. If you say, his face is as bright as moon. This is symbolic, and real, but it does not mean, his face literally (or physically) is bright.

When christians talk about the PR they are talking about their literal salvation and literal reserection when christ returns in flesh and spirit.

My interpretation involves The Church, physical sacraments, physical Eucharist, literal transubstatiation, and literal reserection in one Body of Christ.

Bahai does not share my views. If you did, you would not be basing your facts on scripture but the body of Christ both scripture And tradition.

You say the PR is not real literally. So you base your symbol on what is not taught in scripture. Its bahai view.

Its about the Body of Christ. Christ even says people look to scripture (hebrew) as if IT has eternal life. Even scripture speaks of christ. You are referring to the wrong recourse.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
With god all things are possible, right?
You seem to think symbolic means unreal.
Whereas symbolic does not mean unreal or myth.
Symbolic just means, spiritual truth described with symbolic terms. If you say, his face is as bright as moon. This is symbolic, and real, but it does not mean, his face literally (or physically) is bright.

The PR IS the salvation for a christian not a symbol of it.

I cant change scripture and how the majority of christians see it. That is

Their faith

Not mine nor yours

Remember, when you went to school, you took classes and then you wrote a test. Then your teacher marked your test. He told you which one of your answers were correct and which ones are incorrect. Are you saying that, when he found fault with your answers or understanding of the lessons, he was biased?!

That is how Holy Books are. People can misunderstand the lessons in the holy Books. The story of Resurrection of Jesus is meant to be a true lesson. The story teaches spirituality. But if some people do not see its intended purpose and lesson, and takes the symbols, as physically true, should not an all-knowing God tells them of their faulty understanding of God's book?!

You are not a teacher marking christian students wrong. Thats silly and rude. In this case, you are siding with your own view defining other peoples religions.

Its not up to you to point out what you call misinerpretation of another persons faith as a fact-it is your opinion, your belief.

spirituality can be expressed using symbolic expressions and stories, can it not?

If those symbols are based on real events.

Did bahaullah actually rose as a spirit or was it a symbol of a non existant event or story?

The Christians who live in our time or even past did not write the Bible. The Bible was written by the apostles of Jesus, not by all other Christians, so, how can you say the book belongs to anyone who is called Christians? Jesus and the apostles many times warned against false Christian teachers, and even those who call Jesus Lord, Lord!

How does 2000 some odd years make us automatically unable to write spiritual facts?

False teachers? That is very bias and negative.

Unless you follow christ ONLY then you are an unrepented gentile just as I am. They call us pagans. How can pagans speak for tbe word of god, say you follow christian views, call their views symbolic, and follow manifestations that are no where related to christian beliefs?

I dont take sides. Thats why Im not i abrahamic religions. It makes me think onesided. Its unhealthy for my mind and heart, literally.

I am saying if the heart is not pure and clean, it cannot understand. That is what the Bible said:

"Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understan

This verse of Bible tells us, to become wise, we need to become pure and spotless; our heart needs to be cleaned.

The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."

"My son, if your heart is wise, then my heart will be glad indeed; ...."

"The hearts of the wise make their mouths prudent, and their lips promote instruction"

All scripture has a physical element to it. Cultural religions dont seperate the two. Universalist, new age and newer non denominations do. I dont care for universalism. Both sides think they are right.

When Christians talk about physical resurrection of Jesus, they mean, Jesus body became alive again physically after the death. What you describe is not an evidence for the physical resurrection. But your interpretation is closer to what Bahais also believe.


You seem to think symbolic means unreal.
Whereas symbolic does not mean unreal or myth.
Symbolic just means, spiritual truth described with symbolic terms. If you say, his face is as bright as moon. This is symbolic, and real, but it does not mean, his face literally (or physically) is bright.

When christians talk about the PR they are talking about their literal salvation and literal reserection when christ returns in flesh and spirit.

My interpretation involves The Church, physical sacraments, physical Eucharist, literal transubstatiation, and literal reserection in one Body of Christ.

Bahai does not share my views. If you did, you would not be basing your facts on scripture but the body of Christ both scripture And tradition.

You say the PR is not real literally. So you base your symbol on what is not taught in scripture. Its bahai view.

Its about the Body of Christ. Christ even says people look to scripture (hebrew) as if IT has eternal life. Even scripture speaks of christ. You are referring to the wrong recourse.
 
Top