Manifestations of God

[BruceDLimber]

So, here's my question: is it possible, IYO, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

Precisely what the Baha'i Faith teaches!

(Though His Manifestations <aka Divine Messengers> are each distinct individuals, not "incarnations" of God Himself.)

Peace,

Bruce

 

[metis]

Using the criterion above, then it's not true that Jesus is not an avatar. At the age of 12 years old he was already debating the Law with the temple scholars, who were astounded at the depth of his knowledge. He also said at times that his authority to teach was from God himself. Jesus appeared with his knowledge already present.

Actually a very significant number of Christian theologians disagree with you as they tend to think he likely grew up as a relatively normal child, which may explain why so little is said about his childhood in the gospels. OTOH, some of the pseudepigrapha have Jesus performing miracles as a child and even uprooting trees by hand as a child just for the fun of it.

 

[metis]

Precisely what the Baha'i Faith teaches!

(Though His Manifestations <aka Divine Messengers> are each distinct individuals, not "incarnations" of God Himself.)

Peace,

Bruce

Yes, and thanks for this. BTW, have you ever visited the Baha'i Temple in Haifa? I saw it when traveling up Mt. Carmel but I didn't have time to actually tour the grounds or the temple.

 

[Aupmanyav]

There is no distinct individual, human, animal, vegetation, or even inanimate object. All seemingly different things are Brahman only, constituted of "physical energy".

 

[Jainarayan]

Actually a very significant number of Christian theologians disagree with you as they tend to think he likely grew up as a relatively normal child, which may explain why so little is said about his childhood in the gospels. OTOH, some of the pseudepigrapha have Jesus performing miracles as a child and even uprooting trees by hand as a child just for the fun of it.

Yes, this is all true. There is also the missing 18 years between that incident at 12 years old and the beginning of his teaching during which time we really don't know what he did. For the record, I don't believe he was/is an avatar, because I don't believe he was/is God. Rather, perhaps a prophet and enlightened person. I'm just pointing out that if he was indeed enlightened from an early age, that blows the contention that he was not an avatar, based on the definition above. Personally I don't care what he was or wasn't, I just like his teachings.

 

[metis]

Yes, this is all true. There is also the missing 18 years between that incident at 12 years old and the beginning of his teaching during which time we really don't know what he did. For the record, I don't believe he was/is an avatar, because I don't believe he was/is God. Rather, perhaps a prophet and enlightened person. I'm just pointing out that if he was indeed enlightened from an early age, that blows the contention that he was not an avatar, based on the definition above. Personally I don't care what he was or wasn't, I just like his teachings.

Yes, I understand and agree. BTW, the vast majority of his teachings is basic Judaism, such as what we read in his Sermon on the Mount.

 

[Jainarayan]

Yes, he did not set out to "create" a religion. He simply set out to bring real Judaism and God (and comfort) to the common people, something they lost sight of. And something that was held back from them by the religious elite. At least that's how I see it.

 

[metis]

Yes, he did not set out to "create" a religion. He simply set out to bring real Judaism and God (and comfort) to the common people, something they lost sight of. And something that was held back from them by the religious elite. At least that's how I see it.

Actually, we didn't lose sight of it, although some did, no doubt. Where the difference seems to be is his approach to Torah whereas he equates all of the Law to just two of the Commandments: love of God and love of man. Even though Judaism teaches that these indeed are extremely important Commandments, they are not the only ones.

BTW, here's where you can find all of the Commandments and where they're found in Torah: Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)

 

[George-ananda]

This is an opinion I'm also comfortable with, although I don't know if it's correct or not. The likes of Spinoza and Einstein are in your camp, and that's pretty good company, I would suggest.

My camp is more the masters of eastern thought and teachings; Satya Sai Baba, Prahmahansa Yogananda, Vivekananda, etc.. I think you are comfortable with them too, I hope. Einstein, I think, had a more impersonal view of God and not the God that is the spark of our consciousness also.

 

[George-ananda]

Using the criterion above, then it's not true that Jesus is not an avatar. At the age of 12 years old he was already debating the Law with the temple scholars, who were astounded at the depth of his knowledge. He also said at times that his authority to teach was from God himself. Jesus appeared with his knowledge already present.

I take that story as showing His precociousness, not His omniscience.

 

[metis]

My camp is more the masters of eastern thought and teachings; Satya Sai Baba, Prahmahansa Yogananda, Vivekananda, etc.. I think you are comfortable with them too, I hope. Einstein, I think, had a more impersonal view of God and not the God that is the spark of our consciousness also.

Einstein tended to believe that God may well be the energy of creation itself, sometimes equating the "laws of physics" to actually being God.

 

[George-ananda]

Einstein tended to believe that God may well be the energy of creation itself, sometimes equating the "laws of physics" to actually being God.

Right, I just don't see how that view could mean much to anyone personally.

 

[idav]

A good friend of mine studied Hinduism in India quite a few years back, and on one day his study group visited a home of a Hindu family that his tour guide knew. As they sat down drinking tea, my friend walked around the house and saw something that really caught his eye: a picture of Jesus on the wall. Also on some other walls and tables were statues of Shiva, Vishnu, etc.

The owner of the house noticed my friend looking at the picture with what must have been a puzzled look, and he asked my friend if he had any questions. My friend asked why they had a picture of Jesus if their household was Hindu, and the man responded back that his family believes that Jesus was one of the manifestations of God.

So, here's my question: is it possible, iyo, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

Yes I don't see why anyone couldn't be a manifestation of god. That is what is taught by all the major religions in one way or another that such thing is attainable. Different parts of the world, certainly because each culture ends up with their own hang ups to get passed and thus need to be shown a little differently but all amounts to the same thing.

 

[idav]

Yes, this is all true. There is also the missing 18 years between that incident at 12 years old and the beginning of his teaching during which time we really don't know what he did. For the record, I don't believe he was/is an avatar, because I don't believe he was/is God. Rather, perhaps a prophet and enlightened person. I'm just pointing out that if he was indeed enlightened from an early age, that blows the contention that he was not an avatar, based on the definition above. Personally I don't care what he was or wasn't, I just like his teachings.

Yes, he did not set out to "create" a religion. He simply set out to bring real Judaism and God (and comfort) to the common people, something they lost sight of. And something that was held back from them by the religious elite. At least that's how I see it.

This certainly would be an enlightened individual that ended up making huge impacts on the world at large even if it was aimed at a specific culture at the time. His enlightenment proved to transcend even Judaism, certainly transcended the culture of his time and even his own followers had trouble keeping up with his train of thought which proved to be beyond inspirational.

 

[Jainarayan]

Actually, we didn't lose sight of it, although some did, no doubt.

Right, I mean the people of that time.

Where the difference seems to be is his approach to Torah whereas he equates all of the Law to just two of the Commandments: love of God and love of man. Even though Judaism teaches that these indeed are extremely important Commandments, they are not the only ones.

True, but he didn't say they were the only ones. He said they were the most important because all the rest of the Law rests on them. And in a way that's true... if you love God with everything you have, you'll keep all his other commandments.

BTW, here's where you can find all of the Commandments and where they're found in Torah: Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)

Yeah, and out of those 613, there is one that right wing Christians love to bash people over the head with, yet they forget the other 612. As an add-on, it irritates the snot out of me that some Christians pretend to know more about the Torah and its interpretations than Jews do. Take about appropriation!

 

[metis]

True, but he didn't say they were the only ones. He said they were the most important because all the rest of the Law rests on them. And in a way that's true... if you love God with everything you have, you'll keep all his other commandments.

But the new church didn't. In Acts we see them walking away from the kosher Laws, for example (Peter's vision), and most of the rest of the Laws soon got ignored.

Yeah, and out of those 613, there is one that right wing Christians love to bash people over the head with, yet they forget the other 612. As an add-on, it irritates the snot out of me that some Christians pretend to know more about the Torah and its interpretations than Jews do. Take about appropriation!

Unfortunately, so many of them pick-and-choose. For example, many churches demand their congregants tithe, but if they require that, then why not the other 612?

BTW, we as Jews who live here in the States generally don't have to tithe since tithing in biblical times included taxes to help the poor and widows whom today are aided through taxes.

 

[Jainarayan]

But the new church didn't. In Acts we see them walking away from the kosher Laws, for example (Peter's vision), and most of the rest of the Laws soon got ignored.

Yes indeed, which always leads me to the next point:

Unfortunately, so many of them pick-and-choose.

Often to negative and damaging effects.

 

[BruceDLimber]

BTW, have you ever visited the Baha'i Temple in Haifa? I saw it when traveling up Mt. Carmel but I didn't have time to actually tour the grounds or the temple.

It's not in fact a "temple": the primary building there is the Shrine of the Bab (which is His tomb). There are four major administrative buildings nearby.

There is a temple site on top of Mount Carmel about a mile away, but that one's not built yet, and currently has only an obelisk marking it.

We have seven temples in the world, one per continent--soon to be eight when the South American one is completed. The Asian temple is in New Delhi, India. It's commonly called the "lotus temple" because of its shape, and it's the single most-visited building in the world, getting five million visitors per year (about 13,000 every day)! If you check the Web, you can see pictures of it: just look for "Baha'i lotus temple," for example.

And yes, I've been there--several times, in fact! Once on pilgrimage, and twice on choir tours.

The area--as well as the Shrine of Baha'u'llah and a garden frequented by Him, both in nearby Akka--is open to the public every day, so I hope you get a chance to visit there again!

Regards,

Bruce

 

[metis]

It's not in fact a "temple": the primary building there is the Shrine of the Bab (which is His tomb). There are four major administrative buildings nearby.

There is a temple site on top of Mount Carmel about a mile away, but that one's not built yet, and currently has only an obelisk marking it.

We have seven temples in the world, one per continent--soon to be eight when the South American one is completed. The Asian temple is in New Delhi, India. It's commonly called the "lotus temple" because of its shape, and it's the single most-visited building in the world, getting five million visitors per year (about 13,000 every day)! If you check the Web, you can see pictures of it: just look for "Baha'i lotus temple," for example.

And yes, I've been there--several times, in fact! Once on pilgrimage, and twice on choir tours.

The area--as well as the Shrine of Baha'u'llah and a garden frequented by Him, both in nearby Akka--is open to the public every day, so I hope you get a chance to visit there again!

Regards,

Bruce

I would love to but age is catching up to my wife and I so I'm quite positive we'll not make it back. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Vouthon]

So, here's my question: is it possible, iyo, that God may have had possibly many manifestations to different peoples in different parts of the world?

I think that God has revealed Himself, in some way or measure, to every people and society on earth , usually through the medium of inspired men and women who have sought after him and founded religious rites which they have then passed on to others.

This has been the position, historically, of prominent Catholic theologians such as the cardinals Nicholas of Cusa (in the 15th century) and John Henry Newman (in the 19th century), ie

"...We must confess, on the authority of the Bible itself, that all knowledge of religion is from God, and not only that which the Bible has transmitted to us. There never was a time when God had not spoken to man, and told him to a certain extent his duty. His injunctions to Noah, the common father of all mankind, is the first recorded fact of the sacred history after the deluge. Accordingly, we are expressly told in the New Testament, that at no time He left Himself without witness in the world, and that in every nation He accepts those who fear and obey Him. It would seem, then, that there is something true and divinely revealed, in every religion all over the earth...

The word and the Sacraments are the charac*teristic of the elect people of God; but all men have had more or less the guidance of Tradition, in addition to those internal notions of right and wrong which the Spirit has put into the heart of each individual.

This vague and uncertain family of religious truths, originally from God, but sojourning without the sanction of miracle, or a definite home, as pilgrims up and down the world, and discernible...may be called the Dispensation of Paganism, after the example of the learned Father already quoted. And further, Scripture gives us reason to believe that the traditions, thus originally delivered to mankind at large, have been secretly reanimated and enforced by new communications from the unseen world...

Accordingly, there is nothing unreasonable in the notion, that there may have been heathen poets and sages, or sibyls again, in a certain extent divinely illuminated, and organs through whom religious and moral truth was conveyed to their countrymen...

These were based on the mystical or sacramental principle, and spoke of the various Economies or Dispensations of the Eternal. I understood these passages to mean that the exterior world, physical and historical, was but the manifestation to our senses of realities greater than itself. Nature was a parable: Scripture was an allegory: pagan literature, philosophy, and mythology, properly understood, were but a preparation for the Gospel. The Greek poets and sages were in a certain sense prophets; for "thoughts beyond their thought to those high bards were given." There had been a directly divine dispensation granted to the Jews; but there had been in some sense a dispensation carried on in favour of the Gentiles...

The process of change had been slow; it had been done not rashly, but by rule and measure, at sundry times and in divers manners...As far as we know, there never was a time when...revelation was not a revelation continuous and systematic, with distinct representatives and an orderly succession..."


- Blessed John Henry Newman (circa. 1845-65), cardinal & theologian of the Catholic Church

This became the official position of the Catholic Church in the 20th century after being taken up by the Second Vatican Council and emphasised very much by Pope Saint John Paul II:

"...Every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God's Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions..."

- Pope Saint John Paul II, General Audience Address, September 16, 1998, Vatican