-
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!
The Exclusivity of Christianity: Myth or Reality
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
What in the world?
Yeah, you didn't know that?
Thank you for your response. There are possibly a few contradictions in what you say but then again I consistently contradict myself.
If you are saying that we interpret this verse literally, would that not imply Jews are not saved? There are some verse from Romans 9 and 11 that would contradict that.
How about Muslims and Baha'is who believe in Jesus but believe in different prophets that have come after Jesus?
I simply ask the questions because I want to explore the best way of viewing these verses from John. Hope you're good with that
Sonny
Active Member
Yes, He did. And in the most adamant of ways. He said, BeforeAbraham was, I AM. The Jewish people (and leaders) knew exactly what He was saying and meant. John records a few places. Colossians has a couple, as well. Also, since the word 'Good' is a title, not a name, Jesus went straight for the heart with 'I AM'.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
It sounds like it's up to god that does the savin'. Whomever he choses, is whoever is saved. Romans 9:
15 For he says to Moses, x“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 2 but on God, who has mercy.
In what way do they believe in jesus? and what are the characteristics of the creator that match what jesus describes as the creator's characteristics?
If they don't match up, then, logically, how can they be "saved"? If you don't believe the creator (characteristics of jesus' father in this example), and only jesus not Bahaullah, Muhammad, and Joe Smith, how, by default, can you be saved? How can you go through jesus to get to the jesus' father when the father you (a person in general) believes in is different than the one jesus believed in? and if you are saying it's the same god, why not be Christian rather than Bahai or Muslim.
So, I don't agree with the Muslim and Bahai claim based on Christian teachings. But this is coming from a non-personal point of view. Just seems logical.
I don't know about John, specifically. Many Christians don't see that what they are reading is not from Jesus but from his disciples depiction of jesus. But according to @Neo Deist , if I'm not mistaken, the gospels weren't written by jesus' disciples.
So, I wouldn't take it too seriously. It's interesting to ponder. Studied it awhile back but loss interest since it unsettled my spirit.
This is perhaps the most important point. It is not up to us to judge the soul of another. To do so would be to play God and to have a massive log in our eye. For it is written:
"Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Matthew 7:1-5
What if they do match up though? For example Baha'u'llah writes of Jesus:
"Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole of Creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent spirit . . . He it is who purified the world. Blessed the man who, with a face beaming with light, hath turned towards Him."
Where is the line where we say Baha'u'llah was wrong?
I believe the Gospel of john to be written by the Apostle John the disciple whom Jesus loved. If @Neo Deist provides compelling evidence to the contrary I will reconsider what I believe.
If we are not prepared to consider our faith in the light of science, history, and our understanding of God's Grace on what foundation do we stand?
Thank you for your sincere reponse
Neo Deist
Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
That is correct.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
This is perhaps the most important point. It is not up to us to judge the soul of another. To do so would be to play God and to have a massive log in our eye. For it is written:
"Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Matthew 7:1-5
What if they do match up though? For example Baha'u'llah writes of Jesus:
"Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole of Creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent spirit . . . He it is who purified the world. Blessed the man who, with a face beaming with light, hath turned towards Him."
Where is the line where we say Baha'u'llah was wrong?
I believe the Gospel of john to be written by the Apostle John the disciple whom Jesus loved. If @Neo Deist provides compelling evidence to the contrary I will reconsider what I believe.
If we are not prepared to consider our faith in the light of science, history, and our understanding of God's Grace on what foundation do we stand?
Thank you for your sincere reponse
Well, the only thing that I have raps with is the Bahaullah statement.
Bahai say that The Buddha, Muhammad, Jesus, and other folks are manifestations of god. While everyone according to believers are children of god, to be a manifestation of god you'd have to have the same god. Jesus is said to be god not a manifestation of him. Muslims, unless I am wrong, does not put any person in par with god but Muhammad. The Buddha has no creator in his dictionary, and the list goes on.
So, from a christian point of view Bahai, Muslims, and so forth are not saved (do not have the spirit of christ for eternal life) because they are without god until they come through christ. In other words, christians say you can't bypass christ to get to god. Most other god-religions go to god directly. Christianity seems to be the odd one out from all god-religions I know and even heard of briefly.
As for what I personally believe, I disagree god as an entity who can do things like love and other actions. So, everyone has their unique spirit and that spirit is the life of each individual person, plant, and energy of an object. As such, going by that logic, we are all part of god but the salvation issue is a political one. Either you believe in what christians believe and be saved by their terms or not.
Salvation isn't copyrighted by christians, ya know.
Exclusivity is not exclusive to Christianity. The main reason each religion cannot make the transition to the latter Manifestation Who is prophesied in their own Books is precisely because of some claim of finality in the followers minds despite another Messenger prophesied to come.
"I am the Way", "Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets" and other such references have stalled billions of people from moving on. They can't transition to the new age because this test is too great for them.
A sincere follower of any religion will always accept the next Manifestation foretold by their own Holy Books.
This is called the Day of Judgement, the separation of the sheep from the goats. No one is spared.
Everyone's sincerity is being tested. Are we followers of the Light or the lamp??
"I am the Way", "Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets" and other such references have stalled billions of people from moving on. They can't transition to the new age because this test is too great for them.
A sincere follower of any religion will always accept the next Manifestation foretold by their own Holy Books.
This is called the Day of Judgement, the separation of the sheep from the goats. No one is spared.
Everyone's sincerity is being tested. Are we followers of the Light or the lamp??
buddhist
Well-Known Member
My question would be: Why is his father's realm is the one I wish to reach?
Perhaps there are other heavens, and more blissful ones, that I'd rather go to. In the Buddhist view, what Jesus said could possibly be true, as far as he can see, regarding his father's specific realm, but generally speaking there are other heavens above and besides their own that deities cannot perceive, and often they (delusionally) believe that their realm is the highest and the greatest.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Yes of course, and so many can't see it because they are so warped up in the story and the story teller.
Neo Deist
Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
I will tell you what I know. Theologians disagree on who wrote the Gospel of John. Some swear that it was the Disciple John, while others maintain that the author is anonymous. The writer never identifies himself, so no one can say for certain. The style of writing, and the details of Jesus' life, differ greater from the Synoptic Gospels. What we do know is that the author is supposedly the "disciple that Jesus loved the most." But it might not be who you think!
Not to go all Da Vinci Code on you, but Mary Magdalene also wrote a book, which is considered an apocryphal writing, not canonical. It was discovered in 1896, and other fragments have been found since then. Mary was always by Jesus' side, she was present during the crucifixion, and she was the first one at the tomb. The culture back then was very male chauvinistic, and even Peter opposed Mary's words. It would come as no surprise that they would not officially include her as part of the "inner circle closest to Jesus." If anyone knew Jesus' life, it would have been Mary.
It is quite possible that the Disciple that Jesus loved the most, was Mary Magdalene, and she was the author of the Gospel of John. Levi (Matthew) even acknowledges that Jesus loved her the most.
Last edited:
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
I'm not sure Christians would agree. The key words here are "... when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God..." Baha'u'llah makes Jesus' death the thing that the "infused" the world. But he says nothing of the resurrection, because Baha'is don't believe in the physical resurrection.
But, without the resurrection, Christians have nothing. Their only claim to exclusivity is because they believe Jesus rose from the dead. From there they not only proclaim him Messiah, but God in the flesh. And that is what Christian believe the NT says... and if NT is true and not a man- made "myth", then there is no need for any other religion.Believe on Jesus, get your sins forgiven, die and go to heaven. But is it true?
Like Loverofhumanity points out, several religion claim exclusivity. They all can't be right. The only way to reconcile the different religions is by making certain verses figurative and not so literal. And that's what the Baha'i Faith does. They can say the NT is true, but not in a literal sense. By doing this the "exclusivity" is taken away from Christianity. So if we don't have a literal devil, if there is no literal hell, then who needs a literal God/man who died for your sins then rose again? However, if you do believe in a devil and hell, then it's probably a good idea to stick with Jesus, exclusively.
The Mary connection is interesting and there is so much we don't know about the life of Jesus.
It was certainly a time where women were not the equals of men however Christians phrase it. I'm good with that as it was 2,000 years ago.
The Gospel of John provides profound and mystic insights as to the reality of Christ, His relationship with God, and assisting us to understand His purpose. The verse in question is an example but I do not believe in the interpretation that some Christians would reach.
In regards to who is the author I believe it was the apostle John but could not prove it with certainty.
The apostle John was "the disciple whom Jesus loved" 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, 21:20, 21:24. He was not mentioned in the Gospel which makes sense if he did not write it. He knew Jewish life well. There are phrases that suggest a first hand eye witness account. Early Christian writers such as Irenaeus and Tertullian thought John wrote the Gospel.
I endeavour to have conversations with Christians based on a shared appreciation of the authenticity and authority of Scripture. I'm aware that there is uncertainty and problems as you highlight so well. I suppose I could use these arguments as a get out of jail free card
I've never felt the need for it
I'm sure many wouldn't
Not true. They have a religion similar to other religions.
Early Christians viewed hell below the earth and heaven up in the sky. If we still believe these are the physical locations in the phenomenal world we are in trouble. If we believe that heaven is in an invisible realm, then Jesus physically rising into the sky makes no sense.
A spiritual resurrection in light of the symbolism of the bread and wine representing the body and blood of Christ makes profound sense. It accounts for the 'ascension' of the Christian faith or ascendancy of the body of His faithful believers through trials and tribulations. Besides Paul who insisted on the resurrection as an indispensable aspect of Christian belief claimed to have seen the resurrected Christ himself never did literally. He has blinded and heard the voice of Jesus on the road to Damascus.
There is a great deal of allegorical story telling in the bible. Do you believe the earth was literally created in 7 days?
A better question is how that works. How does Jesus save us? Part of that is by providing an example and teachings around good living. Another aspect is the capacity of these Divine Teachings to assist us transcend this world. Of course thats what other religions do as well.
But they can be part right. Perhaps after 2,000 years the original message either becomes distorted or becomes no longer relevant.
Best Wishes
"As to thy question concerning the worlds of God. Know thou of a truth that the worlds of God are countless in their number, and infinite in their range. None can reckon or comprehend them except God, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise." Baha'u'llah
And He also said:
"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd."
John 10:16
Shem Ben Noah
INACTIVE
Salvation is the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by Salvation
buddhist
Well-Known Member
"The Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.' ... Then the Great Brahma, taking the monk by the arm and leading him off to one side, said to him, 'These gods of the retinue of Brahma believe, "There is nothing that the Great Brahma does not know. There is nothing that the Great Brahma does not see. There is nothing of which the Great Brahma is unaware. There is nothing that the Great Brahma has not realized." That is why I did not say in their presence that I, too, don't know where the four great elements... cease without remainder. So you have acted wrongly, acted incorrectly, in bypassing the Lord Buddha in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Go right back to the Lord Buddha and, on arrival, ask him this question. However he answers it, you should take it to heart.'" (DN 11).
Citation please?