The Resurrection: Why does it matter?

[CG Didymus]

Hi CG. I wish you a Happy New Year and New Decade?

I’ll do my best to get as accurate information as is available.

Adam is regarded as the father of humankind by the Quran and Bible and by Baha’is as the first ‘known’ Manifestation of God although Baha’u’llah states there have always been Manifestations. No known religion.

Noah is regarded as a Prophet in both the Bible and Quran and by Baha’is as a Manifestation (Prophet) Called people to God but no known religion.

Abraham a Patriarch in the Bible, a Prophet in the Quran and to Baha’is a Manifestation of God. No known religion but through His descendants Judaism, Islam, the Babi and Baha’i Faiths were born.

Moses A Manifestation of God Who founded Judaism and wrote the Torah.

All these Prophets we believe are part of the one same Faith so at that time Judaism was unfolding progressively but Moses we believe was Judaism’s Founder.

Jainism Founded by Mahavira. Has many teachings similar to Hinduism and Buddhism. Believes in God as a Being but not creator. Believes in reincarnation and Ahimsa (non violence) Mahavira would be viewed as a great religious teacher although not a Manifestation of God as many of His teachings are praiseworthy and of benefit to society.

Sikhism Also considered a great religious teacher and saint who emphasised unity of religion and whom the Universal House of Justice has written.....

... the Universal House of Justice states that He was

"inspired to reconcile the religions of Hinduism and Islám, the followers of which religions had been in violent conflict.... The Bahá'ís thus view Guru Nanak as a 'saint of the highest order' ".

1. ↑ Letter dated 27th October, 1985 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of India

Hope this helps.

Thanks. Good to hear from you again.

 

[CG Didymus]

Jesus did not say that the body of Lazarus would rise again. He said rise: 23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”

You did read later where it says... "43 ...Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44 The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.”

How does that fit into what you were saying?

The main point I want to make, which is the SAME point other Baha’is make, is that the body of Jesus is not important AT ALL because it is just a body. Jesus made this point perfectly clear, yet it flies right over the heads of Christians.

Yes, the body of Jesus is not important to Baha'is. But, it is very important to Christians. They, not me, point to prophecies that say the Messiah will be put to death but come back to life and that his body will not see corruption. Which they say means it will not sit there dead and rot away. Baha'is here have said the body of Jesus is dead and buried, and by now, has rotted away. Do you and the official Baha'i writing believe that?

All I'm saying is if you're not going to take the reporting of the events surrounding the life of Jesus as literal, then they, to me, are fictional. Which, to me, makes it nothing more than religious myth. If it's literal fine. But, like I say, then we're all in trouble. If it's fictional... who cares? You're right. Who cares about another fictional story about a dying and rising God/man? But by saying that, we are making Christians out to be whacked out nut jobs for believing it. And, if you think that is too harsh, then how different is that than what Baha'is often say... that they are following superstitions and man-made traditions?

 

[Samantha Rinne]

When you chunk quotes, this is what I get to look at. All of the bolded sections are missing when I quote your quote (so I had to copy paste), so I typically have no idea of the context.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
These are not six eyewitnesses.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
This is not a court case.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
But if it were, the fact that there are some discrepancies is actually good.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
For example, Luke is written by a physician. He describes in depth various diseases as well as the crucifixion in detail.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
For that matter, Jesus is not a historical figure at all. He's ALSO a historical figure.

Samantha Rinne said: ↑
People accuse Jesus of being a plagiarized figure from Mithras (I think his name was)

This is what I actually said.

These are not six eyewitnesses. This is not a court case. But if it were, the fact that there are some discrepancies is actually good. If there were a conspiracy, you would see six nearly identical texts, as they all compared notes. But they aren't plagiarizing, and they aren't all talking among each other to get a story straight. These are different perspectives by different people.

For example, Luke is written by a physician. He describes in depth various diseases as well as the crucifixion in detail. In The Case For Christ, they mention that the actual US Medical Board, about the most indifferent group in terms of religion, can show medically that Jesus did not swoon and did in fact die on the cross. It's medically accurate.
John on the other hand, is not written by John, despite the name (John was a bit of a narcissist, as shown by his title as one of the "sons of thunder" and his request to be at Jesus's right/left hand with hos brother). The tone of this passage is quite different, making it not written by John at all but by the dusciple Jesus loved. In fact, a book known as The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved makes a convincing case that it's Lazarus who wrote it, since it starts mentioning this disciple just after Lazarus is raised, and the disciple especially believes when he sees the burial rags off to the side (he knows their significance).
Mark is written as if everything happened "immediately" and is targeted towards Gentiles.
Matthew is written for Jews, and tend to emphasize how Jesus fulfilled prophecy.

Each of these (the other two are outside the Gospel) is written from a perspective. Now suppose on Sunday, you had four groups (or six groups). Would they all come at the same time? No, this would be a parade. They would come for different reasons at different times, and see different things. Let's discuss a kidnapping for instance, since essentially this is similar. The first guy arrives first and last, returning later. He sees the place before the kidnapping and after everything else, where the side of the house is blown up and everyone has gone. The second person sees four guys set explosives, and runs to the police. The third guy sees an actual kidnapping take place, and follows after them. The fourth guy arrives as a police officer tells everyone there has been a kidnapping. The first guy arrives again after everyone is gone. Are these four different events? Or is it a kidnapping?

Now, strictly speaking this is probably not as strict a sequence as the above, and some of these women probably stuck around longer and got to see an overlap (one angel leaving or more coming or whatever). These are stories that contradict each other, only if you're stupid and don't understand how events actually work. I've been to political events where you could see the planners setting them up. But then the media comes, and by that time the staging is done, and it looks spontaneous. Different perspective is everything. Likewise, I was actually interviewed by a reporter once, on a store that had been stolen from. The thing is, I saw only the aftermath, and to me it just looked understocked. But I was happt to play the BS game to get my 15 minutes of fame. I've got my own Christ resurrection story to tell, but I imagine you'd not believe that one either.

For that matter, Jesus is not a historical figure at all. He's ALSO a historical figure. This is an important distinction, because he's also something first. People accuse Jesus of being a plagiarized figure from Mithras (I think his name was), and he also bears similarities to Osiris and other deities before or since. This is explained by John. "The Word was in the beginning with God." Jesus ( the Word Made Flesh) was always there, and will always be there, even if the last person forgets Christianity.

But because I have no context, because you picked apart my quote, I cannot even reread what I said, to actually argue. You've basically turned everything I said into nonsensical sound bites. Okay then, let's do it to you.

Quite so. Nothing

of what happened

doesn't matter .

The discrepancies are

evidence of a miracle,

the crucifixion actually occurred and did so around 30 CE,

there was an historical Jesus

a real person somewhere in the story.

There's evidence that

resembles early Christian ones

healing the sick, casting out demons, raising the dead

and still looks after us.

Do you like this? Then stop doing it to me.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" -Christianity
and "Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you." - most religions

 

[blü 2]

When you chunk quotes, this is what I get to look at. All of the bolded sections are missing when I quote your quote (so I had to copy paste), so I typically have no idea of the context.



This is what I actually said.



But because I have no context, because you picked apart my quote, I cannot even reread what I said, to actually argue. You've basically turned everything I said into nonsensical sound bites. Okay then, let's do it to you.




Do you like this? Then stop doing it to me.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" -Christianity
and "Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you." - most religions

As you wish.

I'll leave your posts be.
.

 

[Trailblazer]

You did read later where it says... "43 ...Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44 The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.”

How does that fit into what you were saying?

This is all part of the story meant to convey spiritual truths as far as I am concerned. It does not refer to a physical grave in the ground but rather to the grave of the spiritually dead.

Yes, the body of Jesus is not important to Baha'is. But, it is very important to Christians. They, not me, point to prophecies that say the Messiah will be put to death but come back to life and that his body will not see corruption. Which they say means it will not sit there dead and rot away.

That is what it means to Christians but not what it means to Baha’is. Send me some verses about “seeing corruption” and I will explain what they mean to me.

Baha'is here have said the body of Jesus is dead and buried, and by now, has rotted away. Do you and the official Baha'i writing believe that?

Yes.

All I'm saying is if you're not going to take the reporting of the events surrounding the life of Jesus as literal, then they, to me, are fictional. Which, to me, makes it nothing more than religious myth. If it's literal fine. But, like I say, then we're all in trouble. If it's fictional... who cares? You're right. Who cares about another fictional story about a dying and rising God/man? But by saying that, we are making Christians out to be whacked out nut jobs for believing it. And, if you think that is too harsh, then how different is that than what Baha'is often say... that they are following superstitions and man-made traditions?

Why can’t you understand that it is not all fictional, just some of it? Logically speaking, just because the resurrection story is fictional that does not mean the entire NT is fictional, that just does not make sense. How we can know what is true and what is fictional is another story.

 

[pleinmont]

No one has ever produced any evidence to prove the resurrection happened.

 

[CG Didymus]

Why can’t you understand that it is not all fictional, just some of it? Logically speaking, just because the resurrection story is fictional that does not mean the entire NT is fictional, that just does not make sense. How we can know what is true and what is fictional is another story.

How about a fictional story based on historical characters. In that story are some spiritual things that would be good for us to live by.

Oh, and the corruption thing is in Acts. It is Luke, if that is really who wrote Acts, quoting things that supposedly Peter said. So do we really care what they allegedly said? No, it is only meaningful for those Christians that believe the NT is the inerrant and infallible Word of God.

 

[CG Didymus]

No one has ever produced any evidence to prove the resurrection happened.

A Christian friend of mine can prove it because he feel Jesus in his heart. He also tells me that because the Bible says it's true... it's true. Who can deny such "proof" as that? But the OP is why does it matter? All I can say is it matters a lot to him. But for the rest of us? I think this is one time I agree with Baha'is... some religious beliefs are just plain old superstitions.

 

[Trailblazer]

How about a fictional story based on historical characters. In that story are some spiritual things that would be good for us to live by.

That is very true. In that story there would be some spiritual things that would be good for us to live by.

Oh, and the corruption thing is in Acts. It is Luke, if that is really who wrote Acts, quoting things that supposedly Peter said. So do we really care what they allegedly said? No, it is only meaningful for those Christians that believe the NT is the inerrant and infallible Word of God.

It is also in 1 Corinthians 15.

Baha’is say that souls go to heaven and take on a spiritual body, which is the same thing as what Paul says in 1st Cor: we are raised in a spiritual body and only spiritual bodies can enter heaven.

(1st Corinthians 15:35) "But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?"

36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

 

[CG Didymus]

That is very true. In that story there would be some spiritual things that would be good for us to live by.

It is also in 1 Corinthians 15.

Baha’is say that souls go to heaven and take on a spiritual body, which is the same thing as what Paul says in 1st Cor: we are raised in a spiritual body and only spiritual bodies can enter heaven.

(1st Corinthians 15:35) "But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?"

36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

So... even though some Christians believe in a literal, physical resurrection of Jesus, they do say that his body was in some sort of "glorified" state. So even they are saying that it's not your average "flesh". If you press them on that they'll show you their verses to justify their interpretation. But, that will just go in circles. So, if they are right, how does this change how we are looking at what happened to Jesus' body? It's not the same corruptible flesh. It's something different. It feels real, but it can disappear and float off into the sky? Or, I'm good with believing they just made it all up.

 

[Trailblazer]

So... even though some Christians believe in a literal, physical resurrection of Jesus, they do say that his body was in some sort of "glorified" state. So even they are saying that it's not your average "flesh". If you press them on that they'll show you their verses to justify their interpretation.

Yes thanks, I know that they believe in a glorified physical body, whatever that is. I would just love to see those verses, I would die for them.

The hundred-dollar question is why it has to be flesh at all? Baha’u’llah said we would have some kind of “form” and Abdu’l-Baha said we would all have a heavenly form:

“When the soul attaineth the Presence of God, it will assume the form that best befitteth its immortality and is worthy of its celestial habitation.” Gleanings, p. 157

“in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” Selections, Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194

That is in perfect alignment with what a Christian wrote in the book entitled Heaven and Hell:

421. When the body is no longer able to perform the bodily functions in the natural world that correspond to the spirit’s thoughts and affections, which the spirit has from the spiritual world, man is said to die. This takes place when the respiration of the lungs and the beatings of the heart cease. But the man does not die; he is merely separated from the bodily part that was of use to him in the world, while the man himself continues to live. It is said that the man himself continues to live since man is not a man because of his body but because of his spirit, for it is the spirit that thinks in man, and thought with affection is what constitutes man. Evidently, then, the death of man is merely his passing from one world into another. And this is why in the Word in its internal sense “death” signifies resurrection and continuation of life. Heaven and Hell, p. 351

Note that Swedenborg said: “he is merely separated from the bodily part that was of use to him in the world, while the man himself continues to live.” The point is that the bodily part is of no use in the spiritual world because there is nothing physical there. Apparently, the Christians want the both or best worlds, but that is not how this works. When we die physically the physical body dies... Thus there will be no more food, drink, or sex.... Only God.

Swedenborg also said: “death” signifies resurrection and continuation of life. That means the spirit is raised to the spiritual world where life continues on. This is what Baha’u’llah wrote: “And now concerning thy question regarding the soul of man and its survival after death. Know thou of a truth that the soul, after its separation from the body, will continue to progress until it attaineth the presence of God...” Gleanings, p. 155

But, that will just go in circles. So, if they are right, how does this change how we are looking at what happened to Jesus' body? It's not the same corruptible flesh. It's something different. It feels real, but it can disappear and float off into the sky? Or, I'm good with believing they just made it all up.

If you ask Christians that question they will say “only God knows” and “God can do anything.” But even if God can do anything, that does not mean that God does everything God can do, and any rational person would ask “why would God do that?”

Then we can refer the Christians back to my favorite Bible verse, and no doubt there are more like it:

John 3:5-7 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

I do not think they made it all up. Rather I believe that took a smattering of verses and decided that is what those verses mean. If I had the verses I could explain what I believe they mean. I just love analyzing things.

 

[syo]

1. Why does it matter so much to so many people if Jesus rose from the dead?
2. What is the significance of the bodily resurrection of Jesus?
3. Why is the bodily resurrection so vital to Christianity?
4. Why couldn’t Christianity exist without the resurrection?

According to Orthodox Christians, all creations are dead outside God. God promised eternal life, if we choose to follow him. Death is seen as an enemy and Jesus defeated death.

 

[CG Didymus]

No one has ever produced any evidence to prove the resurrection happened.

Those Christians in the early days had the empty tomb. They could say, "See, his body is not there. And we have seen have alive." Then if we ask. "Well then, where is he?" "Oh, well... he was here... but he ascended into the sky and disappeared. But, he said he was coming soon."

So all kinds of evidence. They said the tomb was empty and that they saw him and spoke with him. They wrote it all down in the NT. Why don't you believe them? Have Christians ever been known to lie or make up stories?

 

[Trailblazer]

According to Orthodox Christians, all creations are dead outside God. God promised eternal life, if we choose to follow him. Death is seen as an enemy and Jesus defeated death.

I agree that death is the enemy and Jesus defeated death, but I do not believe Jesus was ever referring to physical death, but rather Jesus was referring to spiritual death. So I believe that all the following verses about eternal life and everlasting life are referring to the spiritual life of the soul, not the physical life of the body... That makes quite a difference, don't you think?

John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

1 John 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life,and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

John 11:25-26 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

John 4:13-14 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.​

I believe that eternal life refers to the "quality of life" of a soul that is near to God, not to the duration of life. All souls are immortal, but only souls who are near to God have eternal life.

 

[Brian2]

I don’t think it really matters because if it did then I don’t think other religions would have as many members as Christianity because Muslims are around 1.6 billion and no physical resurrection. I think it is more important to Christians in this age because of close proximity to other Faiths and fear of losing members so this doctrine has been used.

It matters because if Jesus did not rise from the dead then He would not be whom He claimed to be. Prophecy tells us of the resurrection of the Messiah and if not fulfilled then Jesus was not the Messiah.

 

[Trailblazer]

It matters because if Jesus did not rise from the dead then He would not be whom He claimed to be. Prophecy tells us of the resurrection of the Messiah and if not fulfilled then Jesus was not the Messiah.

Can you cite the prophecy/prophecies that say that?

 

[Audie]

This is all part of the story meant to convey spiritual truths as far as I am concerned. It does not refer to a physical grave in the ground but rather to the grave of the spiritually dead.

That is what it means to Christians but not what it means to Baha’is. Send me some verses about “seeing corruption” and I will explain what they mean to me.

Yes.

Why can’t you understand that it is not all fictional, just some of it? Logically speaking, just because the resurrection story is fictional that does not mean the entire NT is fictional, that just does not make sense. How we can know what is true and what is fictional is another story.

Of course the entire NT is not fictional, just
the important parts.

 

[CG Didymus]

Of course the entire NT is not fictional, just
the important parts.

Yes, ah... Was there a star that moved across the sky leading the Wise Men? Did Jesus ever go to Egypt? Did he really walk on water? Did he raise the dead and did he rise from the dead? Did he talk with Satan in the wilderness? No, no, and no on all these and more. Ironically, the Baha'is do believe in the Virgin Birth. So after we subtract all those things, what is left? Baha'is usually say, "His teachings". So like what? A page or two of "profound" sayings of what Jesus might have said? So why did he need to be crucified?

No, I like the fictional story much better. He had to die to save humanity from their sins. Now that's a story. And what makes it even better is the dramatic ending. He comes back to life and disappears floating off into space. And then, sets up the sequel, "I shall return". Things exploding. Stars falling. People dying. Angels fighting with beasts and dragons. And, then... here comes Jesus on a white horse conquering all the evil ones and casting the Devil into a fiery abyss. Wow!

But what do we get? A Persian nobleman in a prison in Palestine saying, "Yeah, it's me. The return of Christ. I know I'm not what you expected. But what can I say? Those Christians might have exaggerated just a tad."

 

[Trailblazer]

No, I like the fictional story much better. He had to die to save humanity from their sins. Now that's a story. And what makes it even better is the dramatic ending. He comes back to life and disappears floating off into space. And then, sets up the sequel, "I shall return".

Yeah, that is a lot more exciting that the Baha'i Faith, so maybe that is part of the draw.
The question is which one is the actual truth from God because as presented they both cannot be true...

Stay tuned to this channel as the new thread is coming, but only after I sleep at least 10 hours, as I am completely incoherent right now from lack of sleep. As of tomorrow I have five days off work so I will recuperate.