Is progressive revelation believable?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Some people ask why is there multiple religions in the world, which God is true the christians God or the Islamic Allah?

But what if I told you that divine revelation is progressive, that truth is not absolute but relative.

That Prophets / Messengers known as Manifestations of God has been sent in every age in human history and evolution to guide humanity in the right spiritual path, that the holy Bible and holy Qur'an was divine education that was suited for the time and age in which it was revealed in. And that we have a current Prophet / Messenger / Manifestation of God, and current divine scriptures / education for this time and age that we live in right now.

What you call "progressive revelation" I usually take as fan fiction, riffing on past religions.

 

[od19g6]

Are you sure?

Yes I am sure.

The spiritual teachings are eternal. But the social teachings change from age to age.

 

[dybmh]

As I understand it the main theological differences between Islam and Christianity include:

1/ The Divinity of Christ
2/ The Sonship of Christ
3/ The Trinity
4/ The means and nature of Salvation
5/ The Resurrection
6/ The crucifixion of Christ

So that has implications as to how Christians and Muslims pray.

What are the Key Theological Differences between Islam and Christianity Regarding Concepts of God

The Baha'i Faith has some interesting similarities to Christianity despite its Islamic origins:

As to the position of Christianity, let it be stated without any hesitation or equivocation that its divine origin is unconditionally acknowledged, that the Sonship and Divinity of Jesus Christ are fearlessly asserted, that the divine inspiration of the Gospel is fully recognized, that the reality of the mystery of the Immaculacy of the Virgin Mary is confessed, and the primacy of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, is upheld and defended.

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Promised Day Is Come, Pages 108-113

No doubt. But the idea presented that I objected to is that Jesus' message was essentially the same as Muhammad's... that just doesn't seem right to me. And I am guessing that Muslims would object strongly to this notion as well.

 

[dybmh]

Yes I am sure.

The spiritual teachings are eternal. But the social teachings change from age to age.

And that's beautiful. But... potentially objectionable to Muslims, and they know Muhammad better than anyone.

 

[Deeje]

@Deeje ,

My current approach/mindset is based on one word: "Countenance". It's a funny word. I'm not sure how often it's used... like ever.

But the idea is that G-d is facing the Jewish people ( G-d's countenance ) and gives the Torah directly to the Jewish people. However, G-d may at any moment offer His Countenance to others? right?

So that's how I've been putting the pieces back together in my own squash ( aka my brain-places ) after learning about world religions and discovering their many similarities. I try to focus on the one boat, Torah, which is offered from G-d directly to the Jewish people. This, I don't know, takes the edge off. I don't feel the need to reconcile all the world's religions. I don't need to figure out which one is correct. But I can still appreciate the beauty and the synergy of the World's religions, and also, ultimately, the beauty and synergy of Creation.

That way I can indulge in my love of learning about world religions and making new friends without feeling the stress of trying to figure out how all of them could possibly be from G-d All-mighty, the creator of ALL.

Oh...OK...decision avoidance then...? I think I understand....LOL...

 

[dfnj]

Some people ask why is there multiple religions in the world, which God is true the christians God or the Islamic Allah?

But what if I told you that divine revelation is progressive, that truth is not absolute but relative.

That Prophets / Messengers known as Manifestations of God has been sent in every age in human history and evolution to guide humanity in the right spiritual path, that the holy Bible and holy Qur'an was divine education that was suited for the time and age in which it was revealed in. And that we have a current Prophet / Messenger / Manifestation of God, and current divine scriptures / education for this time and age that we live in right now.

Words are not the reality they represent. Even though the three major religions have a different word for God each of them really are worshiping the exact same God.

 

[dybmh]

Oh...OK...decision avoidance then...? I think I understand....LOL...

Yeah, basically

 

[od19g6]

What is the point of this thread if not to discuss this? I'm asking you what about his life demonstrates that he's the prophet of a deity.

As for his teachings, his teachings are claims. One of those claims is that he declared himself a prophet. I'm asking what the evidence is that that's correct. You can't point to his teachings as evidence for his teachings.

I would like to say first that, Be careful about what you're asking. If you're asking me to preach to you then that's not what I'm going to do. Preaching is something that was done in the times of old. You have to understand that in this time and age we all have a mind and we all have the responsibility to investigate truths for ourselves.

"I'm asking you what about his life demonstrates that he's the prophet of a deity".

I actually just told you. It's the 'combination' of the Prophet / Messenger / Manifestation's life and teachings that gives you the proofs and demonstration of who the person is.

The reason why we call them Manifestations of God is because all of the Prophets / Messengers displays all of the names and attributes of God at the highest level perfectly, that means that what we know as good human qualities are actually attributes of God, we just don't call them that.


Bahá'u'lláh says in the Kitáb-i-íqán:

"And of all men, the most accomplished, the most distinguished and the most excellent are the Manifestations of the Sun of Truth. Nay, all else besides these Manifestations live by the operation of their Will, and move and have their being through the outpourings of their grace. “But for Thee, I would have not created the heavens.” Nay, all in their holy presence fade into utter nothingness, and are a thing forgotten. Human tongue can never befittingly sing their praise, and human speech can never unfold their mystery. These Tabernacles of holiness, these primal Mirrors which reflect the light of unfading glory, are but expressions of Him Who is the Invisible of the Invisibles. By the revelation of these gems of divine virtue all the names and attributes of God, such as knowledge and power, sovereignty and dominion, mercy and wisdom, glory, bounty and grace, are made manifest".

"These attributes of God are not and have never been vouchsafed specially unto certain Prophets, and withheld from others. Nay, all the Prophets of God, His well-favored, His holy, and chosen Messengers, are, without exception, the bearers of His names, and the embodiments of His attributes. They only differ in the intensity of their revelation, and the comparative potency of their light. Even as He hath revealed: “Some of the Apostles We have caused to excel the others". It hath therefore become manifest and evident that within the tabernacles of these Prophets and chosen Ones of God the light of His infinite names and exalted attributes hath been reflected, even though the light of some of these attributes may or may not be outwardly revealed from these luminous Temples to the eyes of men. That a certain attribute of God hath not been outwardly manifested by these Essences of Detachment doth in no wise imply that they Who are the Daysprings of God’s attributes and the Treasuries of His holy names did not actually possess it. Therefore, these illuminated Souls, these beauteous Countenances have, each and every one of them, been endowed with all the attributes of God, such as sovereignty, dominion, and the like, even though to outward seeming they be shorn of all earthly majesty".


"As for his teachings, his teachings are claims. One of those claims is that he declared himself a prophet. I'm asking what the evidence is that that's correct. You can't point to his teachings as evidence for his teachings".

Not all of His teachings are claims. The claims that He did makes is that he fulfills the prophecies of old. Most of the teachings that He makes is letting the human being know what it really is which is spiritual beings, His teachings is actually divine education, and that was mission of all the Prophets / Messengers / Manifestations. The main motivation for God to send these Manifestations was out of love and education.

Here's an excellent site: prophecy-fulfilled

 

[Vouthon]

No doubt. But the idea presented that I objected to is that Jesus' message was essentially the same as Muhammad's... that just doesn't seem right to me. And I am guessing that Muslims would object strongly to this notion as well.

The popularly held Islamic position would be that Christians and Jews have corrupted scriptures but that, if the distortions in understanding are removed, we are really practising the same underlying religion - submission to God, Islam.

That's the thing, though, certain religious stances are simply irreconcilable. And that's perfectly OK - as Muhammad himself says in one of the surahs of the Qur'an:

I worship not that which ye worship;
Nor worship ye that which I worship.
And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

Quran 109:1-6​

That precisely is how it is and should be.

Ecumenism can helpfully identify areas of concord but also areas where we must agree, respectfully, to disagree but still be "cool" about it.

Christians are never going to agree with Muslims, Jews or Baha'is on the applicability of a "divinely ordained" legal system for society.

The Christian revelation offers no revealed law from God, just the grace of God acting upon the human heart / conscience.

Nor are Christians and Muslims going to, in turn, agree with the cyclical cosmology of the Baha'i Faith over against our much more linear understanding of history.

And nor are Christians, Muslims and Jews going to agree in turn with Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists about samsara or rebirth. Just as Therevada Buddhists aren't going to agree with Hindus with regards to the existence of a Self (Atman) because of their doctrine of Not-self (Anatta).

And what's the problem with that? Tolerance is about being mature and sensitive enough to accept the existence of other perspectives that challenge and conflict with your own, in a spirit of mutual goodwill.

We can't all be alike, and shouldn't be forced or expected to be. But we can learn to live with one another in peace.

 

[LuisDantas]

Some people ask why is there multiple religions in the world, which God is true the christians God or the Islamic Allah?

But what if I told you that divine revelation is progressive, that truth is not absolute but relative.

That Prophets / Messengers known as Manifestations of God has been sent in every age in human history and evolution to guide humanity in the right spiritual path, that the holy Bible and holy Qur'an was divine education that was suited for the time and age in which it was revealed in. And that we have a current Prophet / Messenger / Manifestation of God, and current divine scriptures / education for this time and age that we live in right now.

Unfortunately, once you look at the specifics, it all falls apart rather quickly.

The Bahai idea of progressive revelation reminds me a bit of spyral dynamics. But at some point you people will have to make peace with the need to take stances.

 

[dybmh]

The popularly held Islamic position would be that Christians and Jews have corrupted scriptures but that, if the distortions in understanding are removed, we are really practising the same underlying religion - submission to God, Islam.

Right... but what was Jesus' message? What was Muhammad's message? What did Jesus say? What did Muhammad say?

The underlying message is about God, but Jesus said submit to me ( Jesus ), and I'll do the work. Basically.. apologies if this is an ignorant statement.

Muhammad said submit to no one, nothing, but Allah.

Am I wrong?

Tolerance is about being mature and sensitive enough to accept the existence of other perspectives that challenge and conflict with our own, in a spirit of mutual goodwill.

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is how I want to live my life.

We can't all be alike, and shouldn't be forced to be. But we can learn to live with one another in peace.

Agreed. May we all see it in our lifetime.

 

[Vouthon]

Am I wrong?

No, your quite correct (I was merely stating the mainstream Islamic stance on the People of the Book).

Christianity is an incarnational religion - we believe that God assumed human form and that we should worship the Son of God (God in the human person of Jesus), because He is the pre-existing Logos through whom the universe was created (Second Person of the Trinity).

Islam, at least in its mainstream schools, rejects the fundamental Christian doctrine of the incarnation (indeed Christianity is more similar to the Hindu idea of an "avatar" on this point), because the Qur'an teaches that God neither begets nor was begotten (i.e. Jesus cannot be "begotten not made, of one being with the Father" as the Nicene Creed puts it).

 

[Terry Sampson]

but Jesus said submit to me, and I'll do the work.

Citing your source here for that statement would be appropriate and appreciated.

 

[od19g6]

And that's beautiful. But... potentially objectionable to Muslims, and they know Muhammad better than anyone.

And that's what is keeping them from recognizing their prophesied Mahdi aka the Bab.

 

[dybmh]

but Jesus said submit to me ( Jesus ), and I'll do the work.... Am I wrong?

Citing your source here for that statement would be appropriate.

Or you could just tell me I'm wrong. I would believe you. Seriously.

If I were going to go to NT and find a quote.. I would google something like: "Jesus Quote none get to the father except through me".

Doing that results in John 4:16. Is that enough?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

As for his teachings, his teachings are claims. One of those claims is that he declared himself a prophet. I'm asking what the evidence is that that's correct. You can't point to his teachings as evidence for his

After a Messenger is no longer on this Earth, what else is there?

The Bible remains and the Quran remain as the given standard of that age. Thus the writings of a Messenger will stand upon their own merit as a guide to humanity.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And that's beautiful. But... potentially objectionable to Muslims, and they know Muhammad better than anyone.

That seems to be the eternal problem with faith.

Christ gives us advice that it may not be like that in Matthew 7:22

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

Of the two major Islamic denominations, I'd personally say that Shi'ism has more immediate similarities in theology to my Catholic Christianity than Sunni Islam.

Ashura / Muharram, the commemoration of the martyrdom of Imam Husayn, would remind many observant Catholics of our own Good Friday / Lent (the crucifixion of Jesus), especially in terms of the mourning for the innocent wronged one side of things, and the idea of self-sacrifice.

Muharram is centred around rituals that commemorate the Shia community having been a persecuted "under-dog" minority, alongside Christians, Zoroastrians and Jews, within the Sunni Umayyad Caliphate and their leader, Imam Husayn, suffering martyrdom for refusing to recognise (in Shia eyes) the tyrannical and unconstitutional authority of the Sunni caliphs.

Thus in the Nahj al-Balagha, collected by Sharif Razi, a Shia scholar in the Tenth century, we find the following statements attributed to Imam Ali:

Letter 47

Let the eternal Reward and Blessings of Allah be the prompting factors for all that you say and do. Be an enemy of tyrants and oppressors and be a friend and helper of those who are oppressed and tyrannized.

Letter 17

We (Bani Hashim) still own the glory of prophethood (having the Holy Prophet (s) from amongst us). Prophethood which brought equality to mankind by lowering the position of mighty and despotic lords and raising the status of oppressed and humiliated persons.
​

I see this as somewhat reminiscent, at least in sentiment, of:

25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that among the nations, those who appear to be their kings lord it over them, and their 'great' men are tyrants over them. 26 But it shall not be this way among you, rather whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, 27and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:25-28)

"Who does not know that kings and dukes had their rulership from those who, not knowing God, strove from blind greed and intolerable presumption to dominate their equals, namely mankind, by pride, rapine, perfidy, murder, and crimes of all sorts, urged on by the ruler of the world, i.e., the devil?…"

(Pope Gregory VII in 1081: 552; see also Poole 1920: 201, fn. 5)​

Thus the 'social teachings' of Christianity and Shia Islam (while very different in many other respects) do bear some similarity, in terms of elements of social justice.

But one of the greatest differences - and it is an unbridgeable one, inasmuch as it is just a distinct outlook - has to do with the place of divine law. Islam teaches that Allah has revealed a shariah (in the Sunnah, Qur'an and Hadith), a divinely ordained law to govern human affairs.

Christian theology repudiates this idea.

St. Paul postulated that there was no longer any objective need for a divinely imposed law for governing society but rather that the true source of "the law" was to be sought in the individual human conscience and the corresponding idea that not everyone would interpret this "natural law" in exactly the same way, meaning that difference in custom, dietary habit, clothing and civil or criminal matters had to be tolerated and could be amended in accordance with human need:

Romans 2: 14-15


Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the Law, do by nature what the Law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the Law, since they show that the work of the Law is written on their hearts


Romans 14:1-23

Welcome a man whose faith is weak, but not with the idea of arguing over his scruples. One man believes that he may eat anything, another man, without this strong conviction, eats only vegetables. The one who eats meat [that isn't kosher or is sacrificed to animals] should not despise the one who refrains, nor should the vegetarian condemn the meat-eater.

Again, one man thinks some days holier than others. Another man considers them all alike. Let every one be definite in his own convictions. If a man specially observes one particular day, he does so “to God”. The man who eats, eats “to God”, for he thanks God for the food. The man who fasts also does it “to God”, for he thanks God for the benefits of fasting. The faith you have, have as your own conviction before God.

Let us therefore stop turning critical eyes on one another. If we must be critical, let us be critical of our own conduct and see that we do nothing to make a brother stumble or fall.

We should be willing to be both vegetarians and teetotallers if by doing otherwise we should impede a brother’s progress in faith. Your personal convictions are a matter of faith between yourself and God, and you are happy if you have no qualms about what you allow yourself to eat. Yet if a man eats meat with an uneasy conscience about it, you may be sure he is wrong to do so. For his action does not spring from his faith, and when we act apart from our faith we sin.
​

This is an enormously important idea, because in tandem with Jesus's concept of "render to Caesar what is Caeser's and to God what is God's" and his abrogation of the ritual-cleanliness laws of kashrut and the criminal justice of the Old Testament (i.e. saving the life of the adulterous woman from being stoned to death in accordance with Deuteronomy), it moves away from the concept of prescriptive law as being of divine origin, in favour of a society in which public and private law become separate disciplines from theology, and are deemed to be fundamentally human in origin - a fallible and thus revocable human attempt to encode the intuitions of conscience for a given historical circumstance, as humankind increases in better understanding of natural law.

And that has big ramifications for the two religions.

It is interesting the Baha'i Faith emerged out of Shi's Islam and sees the 12 imams of Shi'a as rightly guided. Perhaps a more important distinction has been the direction Islam and Christianity has taken since their inception. Although the Injil (Gospel) and Tawrat (Torah) are mentioned 12 times and over 130 times respectively in the Quran, Islam (both Sunni and Shi'a) have drifted into the view that the Hebrew Bible and New Testament are corrupted and superseded by the Quran. So while the Christians have put enormous work into reconciling the Hebrew Bible with the New Testament, the Muslims eventually gave up trying to reconcile the Quran with both books.

The Baha'i Faith advocates both personal law and eventually societal law based on Divine law. Christianity while implementing a theocracy of sorts throughout its history has distanced itelf from such an approach in modern times preferring seperation of state and religion. That is certainly the best option for now. In Islam the existence of laws around apostasy and blapshemy not to mention condign punishments for various crimes are long past their used by dates. They are abandoned in many places within Islam now. Some laws were never based on the Quran in the first place. Others were, but like Mosaic laws are no longer applicable to this current age.

 

[dybmh]

And that's what is keeping them from recognizing their prophesied Mahdi aka the Bab.

At this point, I have to claim ignorance. You may be right... I have not learned the Islamic approach to the Mahdi, nor do I know about the Bab. But, I trust my Muslim friends just like I trust my High School Chemistry teacher. And if they say that the Mahdi has not arrived, I trust them to know best.

Just like I trust you to know best about Baha'u'llah, and we Jews know best about Moshiach. Each group has their own wheelhouse... so to speak.

 

[dybmh]

That seems to be the eternal problem with faith.

Christ gives us advice that it may not be like that in Matthew 7:22

Regards Tony

That one ( 7:22 ) didn't land for me... I'm sorry. I didn't see the connection....