The misuse and abuse of John 17:3 by Unitarians to promote Unitarianism.

[Johann]

The thread started as a discussion of a specific verse (John 17:3) in regard to who is God, and has evolved into a discussion on soteriology.
I suggest we transfer our discussion on how a person is saved to the Soteriology subforum.

I believe I have a deeper understanding of the Bahá'í faith than most here, brother.

However, with all due respect, I prefer not to continue this dialogue, @Pancho Frijoles.

Johann.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I believe I have a deeper understanding of the Bahá'í faith than most here, brother.

However, with all due respect, I prefer not to continue this dialogue, @Pancho Frijoles.

Johann.

I thank your honesty and respect your decision.

If someone else is interested in debating this aspect of soteriology, I have open a thread here:
https://berean-apologetics.communit...lood-atonement-or-physical-resurrection.2218/

 

[TomL]

Dear @Johann , @civic , @TomL, @synergy

You are having a conversation with a person who is not a Christian.
In a conversation of this kind, we exchange views on why we believe what we believe.

Let me insist on this:
I find no ethical problem in believing in the deity of Jesus, an atonement of sins based on blood shedding, and a physical resurrection, even if I hold different views. You have reasons to believe these things. You are all intelligent and sincere. You all have brought verses that, according to your understanding, support those beliefs. If such doctrines have helped to love God and your neighbor, I congratulate you. I wouldn't want you to change anything.

Having said that, I do have an issue with thinking that people who do not share these beliefs, which account to the majority of people on earth, deserve to be tormented forever, physically and mentally, due to their religious convictions. That's a not-negotiable item for me. I am absolutely committed to fight such idea, not only because it is wrong... but because it is also perverse. It distorts God character, the purpose of religion, and it justifies genocide (not in this life, but in the afterlife). Being an atheist would be much better than holding such view. I say it seriously. My wife identifies herself as an atheist, and she would never approve an eternal torment for any religious people. So, her atheism is infinitely more moral than a false Christianism that sees justice in the permanent torture of Jews or Muslims .

So, in summary

• I am not at war with the Trinity, or blood atonement, or physical resurrection, even when I hold different views about these things.
• I am at war with the justification of an afterlife genocide based on divergent views on such doctrines.

Let me know if I must clarify my position further.

You are entitled to your opinion, but your opinion simply does not carry the weight of scripture.

Scripture states what it states, and it is contrary to your opinion.

So bottom-line your opinion means nothing to one who believe the bible is the word of God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

You are entitled to your opinion, but your opinion simply does not carry the weight of scripture.

Scripture states what it states, and it is contrary to your opinion.

So bottom-line your opinion means nothing to one who believe the bible is the word of God.

My stance is that Scripture does not support the notion that those beliefs are requested by God as a condition to get his grace.
My stance is that such view is not biblical.
I will be presenting the evidence on the corresponding thread. You are invited to discuss.

 

[TomL]

My stance is that Scripture does not support the notion that those beliefs are requested by God as a condition to get his grace.
My stance is that such view is not biblical.
I will be presenting the evidence on the corresponding thread. You are invited to discuss.

Well then address the scriptures which were posted


John 8:24Thus I said to you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am he, you will die in your sins.”
John 6:53 (LEB) — 53 Then Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life in yourselves!

John 17:3 (LEB) — 3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

John 14:6 (LEB) — 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

[synergy]

You were not saved by the baptism or Lord’s Supper.
Ancient Israelites were not saved by circumcision or animal sacrifices.
Pastors or priests do not heal people spiritually by performing rituals on them or for them. That’s primitive paganism.

You are flat out rebelling against what John 3:5 explicitly states is a non-negotiable fact. One's entrance into the Kingdom of God is at stake here. You can never say that we never warned you.

(John 3:5) Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Only inasmuch as those beliefs lead you to seek repentance and be born again into a life of love.
If a belief leads you to think that a Jehovah Witness is not your brother and deserves eternal torment, then such belief is satanic and you must reject it.

• Scriptures don’t save.
• Rituals don’t save.
• Sacrifices don’t save.
• Creeds don’t save.
• God’s grace saves.

The verses you are quoting are not from the gospel of Matthew and do not represent Jesus direct teachings.
You are quoting Paul, who is speaking to the church in Rome within the context of the Greek-Judaizer controversy. A totally different context to discuss.

The word “creed” comes from the Latin word credo, which means "I believe" or "I believe and trust". What one believes must follow the following guidelines (Rom 10:8-13) if one is to be saved and is non-negotiable.

8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach):
9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
13 For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Jesus was not teaching salvation by rituals.
He was using metaphors like “being born again”, “water”, “wind/spirit”, “kingdom” as tools to convey spiritual truths: repentance and newness of life.

Another non-negotiable is the Lord's Supper through which we spiritually partake of the Life of Christ.

(John 6:53) Then Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you do not have life in yourselves.

It is Platonic Paganism that makes one rebel against the non-negotiables of the Christian Faith.

 

[synergy]

Of course it is the view Jesus had about forgiveness and salvation. He explained it several times in unequivocal terms and examples.
Haven’t you reflected on the parable of the tax collector and the Pharisee? The parable of the prodigal son? The parable of the king who forgwve his subject’s debt? Havent you reflected on the words of the Lord’s prayer and the Sermon of the Mountain?
On the story of the woman who washed and anointed his feet? On the crippled man whose sins sere forgiven? On the prayer of intercession of Jesus for the Roman soldiers?

Only the Cross could possibly cure the sin infection that plagued mankind. It is sheer folly to think our sin infection can be eradicated in any other way.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in the deviations and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all the deviations,
Col 2:14 blotting out the handwriting in the ordinances against us, which was contrary to us, even He has taken it out of the midst, nailing it to the cross;

Jesus was bleeding and sweating in his way to Calvary for having sustained the pure, naive view of forgiveness that you had as a child.

Jesus had nothing to be forgiven of. To think otherwise is sheer heresy.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Only the Cross could possibly cure the sin infection that plagued mankind. It is sheer folly to think our sin infection can be eradicated in any other way.

No. It is a sheer folly to think that God requires blood, or the payment of a ransom, or a confession of a creed, to forgive a sin or change a life.
Sin infection is cured by God’s mercy, power, grace. Nothing else is required. He is All Powerful, All Merciful. He is Love.
Salvation is not a transaction. Not a ritual. Not an intellectual achievement.
This is Jesus’ teaching.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in the deviations and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all the deviations,
Col 2:14 blotting out the handwriting in the ordinances against us, which was contrary to us, even He has taken it out of the midst, nailing it to the cross;

In Colossians 2:13 and 14, Paul is not teaching that forgiveness requires accepting the doctrine of blood atonement.
Paul is saying that Jesus ended the need to follow the Law of Moses, in its ritual ordinances, like circumcision.

Jesus had nothing to be forgiven of. To think otherwise is sheer heresy.

I agree. Who said something different?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

You are flat out rebelling against what John 3:5 explicitly states is a non-negotiable fact. One's entrance into the Kingdom of God is at stake here. You can never say that we never warned you.

I can respect many beliefs that I don’t share.
But believing that a ritual of sinking in water is necessary to enter the kingdom of God is not one of them.
It distorts God’s character, and the very concept of salvation by grace.
If you demand from others to be baptized in order to be forgiven, then how could you criticize those who demanded cutting the foreskin?

(John 3:5) Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

The word “creed” comes from the Latin word credo, which means "I believe" or "I believe and trust". What one believes must follow the following guidelines (Rom 10:8-13) if one is to be saved and is non-negotiable.

8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach):
9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
13 For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Which confessions did Jesus require?
On the contrary, Jesus despised to be called “Lord, Lord” and exalted humble obedience to his teachings.
The verses you are quoting from Paul were written in the context of the Greek-Judaizer controversy in the church of Rome, that we will examine in the thread that I have opened in the Soteriology subforum.

Another non-negotiable is the Lord's Supper through which we spiritually partake of the Life of Christ.

It is great and inspiring that you participate in the Lord’s Supper.
Just don’t consider it a condition for God’s forgiveness.

 

[synergy]

No. It is a sheer folly to think that God requires blood, or the payment of a ransom, or a confession of a creed, to forgive a sin or change a life.
Sin infection is cured by God’s mercy, power, grace. Nothing else is required. He is All Powerful, All Merciful. He is Love.
Salvation is not a transaction. Not a ritual. Not an intellectual achievement.
This is Jesus’ teaching.


In Colossians 2:13 and 14, Paul is not teaching that forgiveness requires accepting the doctrine of blood atonement.
Paul is saying that Jesus ended the need to follow the Law of Moses, in its ritual ordinances, like circumcision.

I agree. Who said something different?

Let's take this step by step.
Col 2:14 clearly mentions our deviations (sins) being nailed to the Cross (Christ's Blood Atonement). You are flat out denying this fact.
Col 2:14 is not talking about rituals. It is talking about the Cross. You are presenting a non-sequitur here.

Conclusion: Muslims always lose whenever they attempt to transform the Bible into a Quran.

 

[mikesw]

I can respect many beliefs that I don’t share.
But believing that a ritual of sinking in water is necessary to enter the kingdom of God is not one of them.
It distorts God’s character, and the very concept of salvation by grace.
If you demand from others to be baptized in order to be forgiven, then how could you criticize those who demanded cutting the foreskin?

Uh oh. what would people say if you got baptized in water in accord with the conventions of Christ's teaching? That could be horribly embarrassing confessing that you came to God through Christ. That would be as big of a work of the law as taking a shower in the morning before going to your job. Pancho, baptism is hardly that action that should be despised by someone who has received the gift of grace through Christ Jesus blood shed for that person.
Your view distorts the way someone responds in kind to the grace they received. Your view can even remove the joy that people gain through baptism. Your view despises what God has done through Christ by rejecting the act that people should do out of obedience. But you do not believe in that obedience since you do not follow Christ. The equation is easy -- you do not come to God just to be disobedient to him.

 

[synergy]

I can respect many beliefs that I don’t share.
But believing that a ritual of sinking in water is necessary to enter the kingdom of God is not one of them.
It distorts God’s character, and the very concept of salvation by grace.
If you demand from others to be baptized in order to be forgiven, then how could you criticize those who demanded cutting the foreskin?

The abhorring of Biblical imperatives is a very Quranic and Islamic view.

Which confessions did Jesus require?
On the contrary, Jesus despised to be called “Lord, Lord” and exalted humble obedience to his teachings.
The verses you are quoting from Paul were written in the context of the Greek-Judaizer controversy in the church of Rome, that we will examine in the thread that I have opened in the Soteriology subforum.

Paul did not limit the audience scope of those verses. Therefore, those verses are imperatives applicable to anyone & everyone throughout the ages.

It is great and inspiring that you participate in the Lord’s Supper.
Just don’t consider it a condition for God’s forgiveness.

First and foremost, the Lord's Supper is the spiritual partaking of the Life of Christ. That's an alien concept to those who esteem the Quran above the Bible.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Paul did not limit the audience scope of those verses. Therefore, those verses are imperatives applicable to anyone & everyone throughout the ages.

I disagree and can discuss that in the other thread I opened. Paul was not bringing in a new religion with new requirements for salvation.
If we don’t understand the Greek-Judaizer controversy, we will not be able to understand the use of symbols in regard on atonement, Sabbath and circumcision.

First and foremost, the Lord's Supper is the spiritual partaking of the Life of Christ.

That’s a beautiful understanding.
My point is not whether you can profit spiritually from such partaking. I am glad you do.
My point is that it is not a condition to get God’s forgiveness.
God never demanded the participation in Lord’s Supper as a requisite to be forgiven. Do you agree with me on this?

 

[synergy]

I disagree and can discuss that in the other thread I opened. Paul was not bringing in a new religion with new requirements for salvation.

Nobody said that Paul was bringing in a new religion. He was reiterating the same Gospel that Jesus was proclaiming.

If we don’t understand the Greek-Judaizer controversy, we will not be able to understand the use of symbols in regard on atonement, Sabbath and circumcision.

If we don't break away from the disdain that the Quran has for Christianity, we will never understand Christianity.

That’s a beautiful understanding.
My point is not whether you can profit spiritually from such partaking. I am glad you do.
My point is that it is not a condition to get God’s forgiveness.
God never demanded the participation in Lord’s Supper as a requisite to be forgiven. Do you agree with me on this?

The reason I mentioned the Lord's Supper was to bring forward another Christian non negotiable that the Quran disdains. As for forgiveness, Col 2:14 exposes how the Quran is negligent and naive in its understanding of how man's sin infection can be cured by God.

 

[Studyman]

I see your point.
I encourage you to think: Why didn't God send Jesus once and for all since the beginning?

I think HE did for me.

Yeshua was sent to me once and for all since the very beginning. I didn't meet Him personally as in a face-to-face meeting, but from the very beginning of my existence Jesus was sent from God for me once and for all. The Words HE came to give me, were given to me in the very beginning of my existence, once and for all. Now I can be convinced by others, if I choose to listen to them, that God didn't send Him once and for all since the beginning. But I would have to reject most of what is written about Him in scriptures.

I believe it was the Same for Abraham, given the teaching that Jesus was Slain from the foundation of the world. I can understand this because God is not constrained by "Time" as I am. He can go into the future and see something if HE chooses, since Time itself, as we know it, is a creation of God. He can also go into the past and see something, if HE wants to. Not just in my existence, but every human ever born. If God is under the same restraints of time as I am, and only has power in the "Now", as I have, then HE is not God by very definition. This is how I know Jesus was sent by God, but was not God, given HE too only had Power in the NOW. He knew the future had already happened in His Father's Realm, and He knew His Father could go into the future and change whatever He had a mind to change. But HE placed His Father's Will before His own, as it is written "nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done." Jesus, as a man didn't have the power to go into the future, no man does. He didn't know when the hour of His Own Return would be, but He knew the hour of His death and resurrection because it was shown Him in the Law and Prophets. God knew because HE was there. In His Realm Jesus had already been born, proven, murdered, resurrected, ascended and returned with His Reward, "to give every man according as his work shall be." I believe Abraham knew this as well, because He too, was given the Spirit of Truth..

Gen. 22: 7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? 8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

So for Abraham, Jesus was also sent from the very beginning of His existence once and for all, even though HE never met Jesus face to face, just like me.

Why did God waited for millenia?

Not for you or me my friend. Not for Isaiah, or David. Zacharias Simeon and Anna all knew and believed in the Prophesied Messiah before HE was even born, Yes? And Abraham as well.

Why did God send messenger after messenger, prophet after prophet, to convey the same essential message?

And what was the message? To turn from their sins because "their atonement had already been provided for", Yes? Once and for all. David knew, Zacharias knew.

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us "in the house of his servant David"; 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, "which have been since the world began":

It was from Isaac that the SEED was prophesied to come, not from Ishmael.

Gen. 26: 1 And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar. 2 And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: 3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in "thy seed" shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Did God not also then, send Abraham the Spirit of Truth?

John 8: 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

Why did Jesus ascended to God instead of staying here, on this earth, to keep teaching us?

He teaches me every time I open up the Inspired Word of God. He teaches men through children, hardships, donkeys, even other men. How can I say He isn't teaching me when He promised to pray to His Father and send me a Comforter, the Spirit of Truth?

And if Jesus had to ascend to God, why would He need to send Another Comforter? He could just had said whatever He had to say and go, without the need of anyone else, do you agree?

I do agree. I have the Oracles of God in my own Home, I have His Warnings not to listen to or be like the Hypocrites in the manmade Synagogues who behave a certain way. But HE didn't promise of "Another Prophet" like Moses did, did HE? He could have said, "I go to My Father, but HE will send you another Messiah that is tempted in all ways as His Brethren, but without Sin", but HE didn't, did He? He didn't tell us to be on the lookout for another Christ who was Sinless. He said the "comforter would bring to remembrance what HE had taught them". And HE said the below. For me, this is instruction to "Seek God's Righteousness" and then walk in them in hopes Jesus will share this same Comforter with me.

John 14: 15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that "he may" abide with you for ever; 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. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

I would ask you a question. Do you believe God gave Zacharias the Comforter spoken here by Jesus, the Spirit of Truth? And David, another Faithful obedient servant of God, do you believe God also gave Him the Same Spirit of Truth? And Abraham?

And why weren't the Pharisees given this "Comforter", this "Spirit of Truth"? Is it not because they "Professed to know God, but rejected His Laws in favor of the religious traditions and philosophies of man?

Please reflect on that. God's communication with men does not seem to be a single, once-for-all event, but a permanent process in history.
Just something to think about, my friend.

For me, I don't believe the "Comforter" is another Messiah. Let me give you an analogy.

I was raised a cowboy and learned to live by pretty rough standards. When someone did you wrong, you let them know, usually by punching them in the mouth. This is part of the Cross that I bear, the old man I fight against in my mind, a thorn in my flesh. When I repented and turned to God, and HE gave me to His Son, I was instructed to "turn the other cheek", to not repay evil with evil, to not exact revenge which is reserved for God alone. I can say without reservation that I struggle with these instructions, even though I know they are truth, and are the right way to deal with certain circumstances in this world God placed me in.

Recently I was accused of having the same views of Jesus, that the Pharisees had. And this by a man who has transformed himself into an apostle of Christ. This would mean I believe Jesus was from Galilee, that HE had a devil on Him, that He wasn't the Son of God, or the Prophesied Messiah, the High Priest of God. Of course these are wicked lies, and Paul and David spoke of these false accusers, "Whose damnation is Just", in Romans 3, and Ps. 5 and 14 that Paul quoted. So when I hear these lies being promoted, I get angry and want to lash out. But I am flooded in my mind with the Christ's Words. "Turn the other cheek", "they lied about ME, they will lie about you too if you believe in Me", blessed are you if you suffer for righteousness sake, David and Shimei, and on and on. Jesus isn't here in the flesh to direct me, as HE was for Peter when Peter drew his sword. Instead HE prays to His Father who sends me these Words HE spoke before into my mind, the Temple of God, to bring me in remembrance, to calm me down, to Comfort me, and to direct me in the way that I should go.

Some men do not have this, and I am far from perfect myself, as I fail to listen to the Comforter sometimes.

Nevertheless, "but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God (that is) in Christ Jesus".

It is for these reasons and more that I do not look for another Christ, another Prophet, another Messiah, even though there are many who believe they exist. I am thankful for the Christ "of the Bible" who I believe was sent from the foundation of the world, "Once and for all", but was made manifest to me, as HE was to Abraham, in our time on earth.

1 Peter 1: 18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times "for you",

21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God. (As it was for Abraham)

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I would ask you a question. Do you believe God gave Zacharias the Comforter spoken here by Jesus, the Spirit of Truth? And David, another Faithful obedient servant of God, do you believe God also gave Him the Same Spirit of Truth? And Abraham?

Yes, I believe so.
The Spirit, also called Spirit of God, Holy Spirit, Spirit of Truth, Spirit of Christ, The Word, has acted through many channels and different ways.
Now, when I read "Comforter" I do not only think in an impersonal power of God (which it is), but also as a personal manifestation of that power of God, through historical characters like Jesus. When Jesus talks about "Another Comforter", that "another" implies that Jesus Himself was a Comforter. And Jesus, certainly, was somebody people could see, hear, touch.

If I could summarize what I am trying to say, the Holy Spirit acts on humanity through physical beings. This is why the Scriptures talk about people who were "filled" with the Spirit... as if they were containers of that "wind", so to speak, that power, light, or word from God.

And why weren't the Pharisees given this "Comforter", this "Spirit of Truth"? Is it not because they "Professed to know God, but rejected His Laws in favor of the religious traditions and philosophies of man?

Yes, I agree.

It is for these reasons and more that I do not look for another Christ, another Prophet, another Messiah, even though there are many who believe they exist. I am thankful for the Christ "of the Bible" who I believe was sent from the foundation of the world, "Once and for all", but was made manifest to me, as HE was to Abraham, in our time on earth.

I understand your position and sympathize with your experience profoundly.
I see you as a genuine follower of Christ, one who has gone from returning violence with violence to one who returns violence with forgiveness.
You don't need any other Messenger, as you are already living the eternal gospel of all Messengers.
Thanks for sharing with us your experience!

 

[TomL]

Well then address the scriptures which were posted


John 8:24Thus I said to you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am he, you will die in your sins.”

John 6:53 (LEB) — 53 Then Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life in yourselves!

John 17:3 (LEB) — 3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

John 14:6 (LEB) — 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

bump for @Pancho Frijoles

 

[Johann]

bump for @Pancho Frijoles

The Bahá'í Faith does not view the "gospel" as Christians do, focusing on the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the foundation for salvation. Instead, the Bahá'í perspective on the "gospel" is part of their broader belief in progressive revelation, where all major religions are seen as chapters in a single, unified divine message.

Here’s an overview of what the "gospel" might mean according to the Bahá'í Faith:

1. Progressive Revelation
Bahá'ís believe that God sends different messengers or "Manifestations of God" (e.g., Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster, Bahá'u'lláh) at various times in history to reveal His will. Each messenger provides teachings appropriate for the era and the capacity of humanity at that time.

The message of Jesus, including love, mercy, and forgiveness, is seen as one stage in humanity's spiritual development.
Bahá'u'lláh, the founder of the Bahá'í Faith, is considered the latest and most complete revelation from God. His teachings are believed to fulfill and expand upon the previous religions.
Relevant Quote from Bahá'í Writings:
“There is no doubt that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh).

2. Universal Gospel
In Bahá'í theology, the "gospel" is understood as the principles of love, unity, and moral conduct taught by Jesus, which Bahá'ís believe align with the teachings of other faiths. However, the Bahá'í Faith rejects the exclusivity of the Christian gospel—particularly the idea that salvation comes only through Jesus Christ.

Key Differences:

Bahá'ís emphasize unity in diversity rather than the uniqueness of Jesus’ salvific work.
The resurrection of Jesus is often interpreted symbolically, and doctrines like the Trinity and atonement are not accepted.
Relevant Quote:
“The purpose of religion as revealed from the heaven of God's holy Will is to establish unity and concord amongst the peoples of the world.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh).

3. Salvation in the Bahá'í Faith
The Bahá'í concept of salvation focuses on personal spiritual growth, good deeds, and service to humanity. While repentance and turning toward God are valued, there is no belief in atonement for sin through Jesus Christ. Instead, salvation is seen as a process of spiritual refinement across this life and possibly the next.

Bahá'í View on Jesus’ Gospel:

Bahá'ís regard Jesus as a divine teacher whose teachings about love and forgiveness are timeless.
However, they believe Jesus' role was specific to His time and that Bahá'u'lláh has brought the message for the current age.
Rejection of Exclusivity:
The Bahá'í Faith rejects the Christian gospel’s exclusive claim that salvation comes only through Jesus. They see such exclusivity as divisive and contrary to the unity they believe God desires.

Relevant Quote from Bahá'u'lláh:
“Consort with all religions with amity and concord, that they may inhale from you the sweet fragrance of God.” (Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh).

Conclusion
In the Bahá'í Faith, the "gospel" is a universal message of love, unity, and moral guidance rather than the specific teachings of Jesus about His divinity, atoning sacrifice, and resurrection. The Christian gospel, with its focus on Jesus as the only way to salvation (John 14:6), is replaced with the idea of progressive revelation and Bahá'u'lláh’s teachings as the culmination of God’s message for humanity.

He is redefining the gospel and promoting his brand of religion and he's doing it with full permission, getting bolder with each post.

J.

 

[TomL]

The Bahá'í Faith does not view the "gospel" as Christians do, focusing on the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the foundation for salvation. Instead, the Bahá'í perspective on the "gospel" is part of their broader belief in progressive revelation, where all major religions are seen as chapters in a single, unified divine message.

Here’s an overview of what the "gospel" might mean according to the Bahá'í Faith:

1. Progressive Revelation
Bahá'ís believe that God sends different messengers or "Manifestations of God" (e.g., Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster, Bahá'u'lláh) at various times in history to reveal His will. Each messenger provides teachings appropriate for the era and the capacity of humanity at that time.

The message of Jesus, including love, mercy, and forgiveness, is seen as one stage in humanity's spiritual development.
Bahá'u'lláh, the founder of the Bahá'í Faith, is considered the latest and most complete revelation from God. His teachings are believed to fulfill and expand upon the previous religions.
Relevant Quote from Bahá'í Writings:
“There is no doubt that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh).

2. Universal Gospel
In Bahá'í theology, the "gospel" is understood as the principles of love, unity, and moral conduct taught by Jesus, which Bahá'ís believe align with the teachings of other faiths. However, the Bahá'í Faith rejects the exclusivity of the Christian gospel—particularly the idea that salvation comes only through Jesus Christ.

Key Differences:

Bahá'ís emphasize unity in diversity rather than the uniqueness of Jesus’ salvific work.
The resurrection of Jesus is often interpreted symbolically, and doctrines like the Trinity and atonement are not accepted.
Relevant Quote:
“The purpose of religion as revealed from the heaven of God's holy Will is to establish unity and concord amongst the peoples of the world.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh).

3. Salvation in the Bahá'í Faith
The Bahá'í concept of salvation focuses on personal spiritual growth, good deeds, and service to humanity. While repentance and turning toward God are valued, there is no belief in atonement for sin through Jesus Christ. Instead, salvation is seen as a process of spiritual refinement across this life and possibly the next.

Bahá'í View on Jesus’ Gospel:

Bahá'ís regard Jesus as a divine teacher whose teachings about love and forgiveness are timeless.
However, they believe Jesus' role was specific to His time and that Bahá'u'lláh has brought the message for the current age.
Rejection of Exclusivity:
The Bahá'í Faith rejects the Christian gospel’s exclusive claim that salvation comes only through Jesus. They see such exclusivity as divisive and contrary to the unity they believe God desires.

Relevant Quote from Bahá'u'lláh:
“Consort with all religions with amity and concord, that they may inhale from you the sweet fragrance of God.” (Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh).

Conclusion
In the Bahá'í Faith, the "gospel" is a universal message of love, unity, and moral guidance rather than the specific teachings of Jesus about His divinity, atoning sacrifice, and resurrection. The Christian gospel, with its focus on Jesus as the only way to salvation (John 14:6), is replaced with the idea of progressive revelation and Bahá'u'lláh’s teachings as the culmination of God’s message for humanity.

He is redefining the gospel and promoting his brand of religion and he's doing it with full permission, getting bolder with each post.

J.

I am aware of all that. My point is he picks and chooses the verses he likes while ignoring those which are contrary to and cannot be reconciled with his view

 

[Studyman]

The question was

but why do you imagine it is rare that anyone holds as important the works of Jesus?

Perhaps if you would exercise even the simplest and most common of decencies, like answering the questions others ask of you, maybe your honest answer would explain why it is rare that "many" religious men, who call Jesus Lord, Lord, hold as important the actual works of Jesus.

Do you think you can assume it without proof?

I provided the proof, the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about. Including you it seems.

BTW personal kindness does not save.

I'm quite sure I never said, suggested or even implied that personal kindness "saves". But it is a fruit of the Spirit, at least in my understanding of Scriptures.