What if these Christian beliefs are not true?

[danieldemol]

The following list contains some beliefs that are central to Christianity.

1) Jesus is God
2) Jesus is the only way to God
3) Jesus rose from the dead
4) Jesus is going to return to earth

But what if these beliefs are not true?

Of course this is hypothetical since these are beliefs that cannot be proven either true or false.

However, this post is based on the assumption that the above list of beliefs are false.
If that is the case, I have two questions:

- Could Christianity still be a true religion from God?

I'd argue that if it could be true and have its central beliefs false then you are using a semantic definition of true that differs from the way I would use it.

- How would that change Christianity now and in the future?

It probably wouldn't as Christianity grows through a combination of birth rates and people credulous enough to believe in its in my view ridiculous stories, and until people are educated in critical thinking and willing to put the principles of critical thinking into action their is likely to be no shortage of either of these.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'd argue that if it could be true and have its central beliefs false then you are using a semantic definition of true that differs from the way I would use it.

The central beliefs of Christianity are not what would make Christianity a true religion because beliefs don't make anything true.
What would make Christianity a true religion is that it was revealed by God through Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

The following list contains some beliefs that are central to Christianity.

1) Jesus is God
2) Jesus is the only way to God
3) Jesus rose from the dead
4) Jesus is going to return to earth

But what if these beliefs are not true?

Of course this is hypothetical since these are beliefs that cannot be proven either true or false.

However, this post is based on the assumption that the above list of beliefs are false.
If that is the case, I have two questions:

- Could Christianity still be a true religion from God?
- How would that change Christianity now and in the future?

I am particularly interested in 4), the belief that Jesus is going to return to earth. Many Christians will continue to wait for Jesus to return as long as they 'believe' that Jesus will return someday, but what if all Christians realized that Jesus is never going to return to earth?

1. If this is not true then you are still in your sin and due to be punished by God for it.

 

[Trailblazer]

How come no one talks about the 13 commandments Jesus gives as the way to Heaven

I don't know those. What are they?

 

[Muffled]

The religion of God is consistent in all times. Paul showed how consistent it was and showed the Torah and Gospels with commentary of the Welayat of God and the holy spirit from Adam till the present moment.

His viewpoint on Lot being righteous and other things are not consistent with the Torah. Yet it's consistent with the Quran.

Can anyone show me Trinity in a clear way in either Gospels or Paul words? The closest thing is "the word was God" expression.

I believe the Trinity is clear to me but I can see where it would appear a bit fuzzy for those who wish it were not so.

 

[Trailblazer]

1. If this is not true then you are still in your sin and due to be punished by God for it.

Why would we still be in our sin if Jesus was not God?
We would still be in our sin if Jesus had not died on the cross, but that has nothing to do with Jesus being God.
In fact, God cannot die and Jesus died on the cross, so that means Jesus was not God.

 

[Muffled]

1) According to the Bible, Jesus is not the God. - > No problem for Christianity, if it is Biblical.
2) Would make Jesus not truthful. -> Credibility lost.
3,4) Would make Bible not true. -> Credibility lost.

I believe your 1. is false according to the Bible. Jesus is God in the flesh.

2. I believe what Jesus said was true but it just does not mean what people say it means. So no loss there.

3. I don't believe that is the point.

 

[Muffled]

Why would we still be in our sin if Jesus was not God?
We would still be in our sin if Jesus had not died on the cross, but that has nothing to do with Jesus being God.
In fact, God cannot die and Jesus died on the cross, so that means Jesus was not God.

I believe you would still be in your sin because only God can forgive sin. Of course you could simply believe what God says in the Torah and in the Qu'ran but unfortunately I have met Jews and Muslims who do not believe they are forgiven despite what the texts say.

 

[Trailblazer]

The way I see it, 1) is irrelevant (and should be).

Why is it irrelevant?

2) is either irrelevant or very worrisome, depending on what people (mainly Christians) perceive as being a proper "way to God". It is just not obvious what that would be, or even whether it is for good or worse.

I don't think it is irrelevant, it is very relevant.
But it is worrisome, because if Jesus was the only way to God that would mean that only Christians have access to God.

3) is irrelevant as well - except for Jesus himself, I would think.

It is very relevant to Christianity since it is central to their belief system and it is one way they can claim superiority over all the other religions..
But it is irrelevant, because a man rising from the dead, even if he did, serves absolutely no purpose.

4) ... I just don't know. Again, it should be important for Jesus the person, I suppose.

It is important for Christians, because that is really the only way they can keep the illusory beliefs of Christianity going, the beliefs that Jesus will come back to judge them and raise them from the dead and build the kingdom of God on earth.

I never understood why Christianity relies so much on Jesus specifically.

What else would Christianity rely upon?

- Could Christianity still be a true religion from God?
Sure, by certain expectations and/or definitions of the terms.

Whether it would be valid is an entirely different question.

Not only could Christianity still be a true religion from God, it would then be valid.
What makes Christianity invalid are these false beliefs (1-4).

I think that history has made it entirely clear, for millennia now, that nothing would change.

If all Christians knew that Jesus is never going to return to earth I think Christianity would have to change. How it would change I do not know.

Christianity might conceivably change, even radically, if many Christians convinced themselves that one, some or all of those four beliefs is innacurate. But even that is not entirely clear.

I think that Christianity would change radically if many Christians convinced themselves that one, some or all of those four beliefs is inaccurate, since those beliefs are all central to Christianity. How it would change I do not know. Maybe Christians would be forced to go back to basics, the teachings of Jesus, which is what makes Christianity a true religion!

Dump those Christian doctrines (1-4) and we would have a true religion from God.

 

[Trailblazer]

I believe your 1. is false according to the Bible. Jesus is God in the flesh.

Jesus never claimed to be God in the flesh, not once in the NT.

Jesus is God is a man-made Christian doctrine and it is false.

 

[Trailblazer]

I believe you would still be in your sin because only God can forgive sin. Of course you could simply believe what God says in the Torah and in the Qu'ran but unfortunately I have met Jews and Muslims who do not believe they are forgiven despite what the texts say.

No, not only God can forgive sins. God gave Jesus the power to forgive sins.
However, that does not mean Jesus was God, as the Jews mistakenly thought Jesus was claiming to be.

“It is also recorded in the Gospel according to St. Luke, that on a certain day Jesus passed by a Jew who was sick of the palsy, and lay upon a couch. When the Jew saw Him, he recognized Him, and cried out for His help. Jesus said unto him: “Arise from thy bed; thy sins are forgiven thee.” Certain of the Jews, standing by, protested saying: “Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” And immediately He perceived their thoughts, Jesus answering said unto them: “Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, arise, and take up thy bed, and walk; or to say, thy sins are forgiven thee? that ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins.” 7 This is the real sovereignty, and such is the power of God’s chosen Ones! All these things which We have repeatedly mentioned, and the details which We have cited from divers sources, have no other purpose but to enable thee to grasp the meaning of the allusions in the utterances of the chosen Ones of God, lest certain of these utterances cause thy feet to falter and thy heart to be dismayed.”
7 Luke 5:18–26.

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 121-160

 

[LuisDantas]

(Previous posts, for context):

Post #1 by Trailblazer

Post #239 by LuisDantas

1) Jesus is God

Post #249 by Trailblazer

Why is it irrelevant?[/quote]

Because it doesn't really mean anything in and of itself. You may call Jesus a god, or you may not. You may believe that he is a manifestation of the creator of existence, but that does not really mean anything either even if somehow true.


2) Jesus is the only way to God

I don't think it is irrelevant, it is very relevant.
But it is worrisome, because if Jesus was the only way to God that would mean that only Christians have access to God.

That... I guess I just don't see how anyone could sincerely believe in that.

It is a worrisome belief, but not because it might somehow turn out to be true. That is no worry whatsoever.

3) Jesus rose from the dead

It is very relevant to Christianity since it is central to their belief system and it is one way they can claim superiority over all the other religions..
But it is irrelevant, because a man rising from the dead, even if he did, serves absolutely no purpose.

I see the point in the second statement. The first... is an unnecessary vulnerability that Christianity owes itself to fix, IMO.


4) Jesus is going to return to earth

It is important for Christians, because that is really the only way they can keep the illusory beliefs of Christianity going, the beliefs that Jesus will come back to judge them and raise them from the dead and build the kingdom of God on earth.

What else would Christianity rely upon?

Not only could Christianity still be a true religion from God, it would then be valid.
What makes Christianity invalid are these false beliefs (1-4).

If all Christians knew that Jesus is never going to return to earth I think Christianity would have to change. How it would change I do not know.

I think that Christianity would change radically if many Christians convinced themselves that one, some or all of those four beliefs is inaccurate, since those beliefs are all central to Christianity. How it would change I do not know. Maybe Christians would be forced to go back to basics, the teachings of Jesus, which is what makes Christianity a true religion!

Dump those Christian doctrines (1-4) and we would have a true religion from God.

Or, most likely, just a true religion with no qualifiers.

Or maybe I am just too optimistic in this particular matter.

 

[CG Didymus]

I'd argue that if it could be true and have its central beliefs false then you are using a semantic definition of true that differs from the way I would use it.

Yes, what exactly do Baha'is believe is true about Christianity? Especially about what Christianity believes about Jesus? By the time Baha'is are done with them, I wouldn't call Christianity a "true" religion but a false, made-up religion.

But then they have quotes that say things like the "immaculacy" of Mary? And the "primacy" of Peter"? Which Baha'is go around saying that? For me, that makes it worse. It's like they are trying to pretend they believe in Christianity.

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. The Founder of the Christian Faith is designated by Bahá’u’lláh as the 'Spirit of God', is proclaimed as the One Who 'appeared out of the breath of the Holy Ghost', and is even extolled as the 'Essence of the Spirit'. His mother is described as 'that veiled and immortal, that most beauteous countenance', and the station of her Son eulogized as a 'station which hath been exalted above the imaginings of all that dwell on earth,' whilst Peter is recognized as one whom God has caused 'the mysteries of wisdom and of utterance of flow out of his mouth.​

Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 490​

 

[cataway]

oh how ironic "Baha'is do not follow the doctrines of men. We follow the Laws of Baha'u'llah which He penned in His own hand.''

he was a man

 

[TransmutingSoul]

he was a man

The Messengers are more than a man, they are Annointed of the Holy Spirit, the remainder of humanity is born of the human spirit.

7:158 Say [O Muhammad]: "O mankind! Verily, I am an apostle of God to all of you, [sent by Him] unto whom the dominion over the heavens and the earth belongs!

Baha'u'llah confirms this.

“I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” Bahá'u'lláh

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I wouldn't call Christianity a "true" religion but a false, made-up religion.

Your choice CG, not a Baha'i point of view.

This is a Baha'i view on the foundations of Christianity, the Word of God..

Inscription in the Old Bible Written by 'Abdu'l-Bahá in Persian

"THIS book is the Holy Book of God, of celestial Inspiration. It is the Bible of Salvation, the Noble Gospel. It is the mystery of the Kingdom and its light. It is the Divine Bounty, the sign of the guidance of God 'Abdu'l-Bahá 'Abbás.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, what exactly do Baha'is believe is true about Christianity?

The spiritual teachings of Jesus, that which Christians pay little attention to since that are caught up in the false Christian doctrines.

Especially about what Christianity believes about Jesus?

No, as you well know Baha'is do not believe what Christianity teaches about Jesus, the top 4 beliefs being:

1) Jesus is God
2) Jesus is the only way to God
3) Jesus rose from the dead
4) Jesus is going to return to earth

By the time Baha'is are done with them, I wouldn't call Christianity a "true" religion but a false, made-up religion.

Then you would be in agreement with George Townshend.

“As Jesus prophesied, the false prophets contrived to change the essential meaning of the Gospel so that it became quite different from that which the Bible recorded or Jesus taught. (Matt. Vii 15-23 and see pp. 11, 12.)

It has long been generally believed that Jesus Christ was a unique incarnation of God such as had never before appeared in religious history and would never appear again. This tenet made the acceptance of any later Prophet impossible to a Christian. Yet there is nothing in Christ’s own statements, as recorded in the Gospel, to support this view, and it was not generally held during His lifetime……

Another opinion which Christians universally hold about Christ is that His teaching was absolute and final. They believe that if the Truth were partly withheld from them for a time because they could not bear it, it was divulged at Pentecost in its fullness and that now nothing remains to be revealed. But there is nothing in the account of Pentecost to suggest such an interpretation and there is no one who will believe that Jesus would have named the false prophets as characteristic of His age if this warning was to be followed by an immediate release of all Truth to the Church. What the Bible shows is rather a succession of teachers—Abraham, Moses and Christ, each measuring His Revelation to the needs and maturity of His authors: Jesus, for example, changes the divorce law and says, “Moses gave you this because of the hardness of your hearts but from the beginning it was not so.” Many times He says, Ye have heard it said by them of old time . . . but I say unto you . . .”

Another universal opinion among the Christians is that Christ was the Lord of Hosts of the Old Testament. Yet the Jewish Prophets had foretold that when the Lord of Hosts came He would not find the Jews in the Holy Land, all would have been scattered among the nations and would have been living in misery and degradation for centuries; but when Jesus came Palestine was full of Jews and their expulsion did not begin until the year 70 A.D.; it may be said to have continued till the year 1844.

To confirm orthodox Christian opinion it is customary in all churches to read on Christmas morning, as if it referred to Jesus, the passage which Isaiah wrote about the Lord of Hosts (Isaiah ix 6-7).

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.”

Yet the descriptive titles given do not belong exclusively to Christ, while some of them He specifically repudiated as if to make such a mistaken reference to Himself impossible. He disclaimed being the Mighty God when He called Himself “the Son of God;” John v 18-47 where Jesus repudiates the charge that He claimed equality with God, disclaimed being the Father when He said, “my Father is greater than I;” (John xviii 36) and being the Prince of Peace when He said, “I came not to send peace, but a sword.” He disclaimed bearing the government upon His shoulder or that it would be His judgment and justice forever when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” (John xviii 36).

Many of these false interpretations involve repudiation of the Word of God in favor of the word of man. This impious act is so craftily performed, with such an air of humility, that it might escape the notice of the most sincere and devout of worshippers. Probably few churchgoers realize today that the Gospel of Christ as known to the few in the pulpit is wholly different from the Gospel which Christ preached in Galilee as recorded in the Bible.

In spite of Christ’s promise of further revelation of Truth, through the Comforter, through His own return, through the Spirit of Truth, the Christian Church regards His revelation as final, and itself as the sole trustee of true religion. There is no room for the Supreme Redeemer of the Bible to bring in great changes for the establishment of the Kingdom of God. In fact this Kingdom is often described as a world-wide Church.

Having thus closed God’s Covenant with the Bible, sacred history—God-directed—came to an end, and secular history, having no sense of divine destiny nor unity, began.

Jesus’ revelation was purely spiritual. He taught that “My kingdom is not of this world” and that the “Kingdom of heaven is within you.” His great gift to man was the knowledge of eternal life. He told men that they might be physically in perfect health and yet spiritually sick or even dead. But this was a difficult truth to communicate and Jesus had to help men to realize it. He would say that He was a spiritual physician and that men whom He cured of a spiritual disability were cured of blindness, deafness, lameness, leprosy and so on. This was the real meaning of His remark at the end of a discourse, “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” For a hearer might hear the physical word of Jesus and yet fail to comprehend the spiritual meaning. Jesus, in other words, was forever trying to heal spiritual infirmities. He thus would be understood by His disciples as a healer of spiritual ailments but by others He might be taken as relieving physical ills only.

Doubtless Jesus could, and often did, heal bodily ills by spiritual means, but this was nothing to do with His real work as a Redeemer. On the other handthese spiritual cures which he effected might be misinterpreted as physical miracles, and so were little stressed by Him. (“See that no man know it.) Matt ix 30.

Christ’s spiritual mission was, at an early date, materialized, specifically in regard to such things as the miracles, curing the blind and deaf, raising the dead. Even His own resurrection was made physical, missing the point entirely. Moreover, none of the complex order, of the ceremonies, rituals and litanies of the Church can be attributed to Christ. All are man-made, by inference or invention.

Well might Christ warn His followers that false prophets would arise and misinterpret His teachings so as to delude even the most earnest and intelligent of His believers: from early times Christians have disputed about Christian truth in councils, in sects, in wars.

To sum up, if Christians say “our acts may be wrong,” they say truly. If they say “however our Gospel is right” they are quite wrong. The false prophets have corrupted the Gospel as successfully as they have the deeds and lives of Christian people.”

Christ and Baha'u'llah

The Kingdom of God, as foretold in the Bible, has come and Bahá'u'lláh is the Return of Christ.

bahai-library.com

But then they have quotes that say things like the "immaculacy" of Mary? And the "primacy" of Peter"? Which Baha'is go around saying that? For me, that makes it worse. It's like they are trying to pretend they believe in Christianity.

That is just how you imagine Baha'is think, like we are trying to 'pretend' we believe in all of Christianity to fool people, just because we share some Christian beliefs.

We believe what the three central figures of the Baha'i Faith wrote, period. We are not 'pretending' to believe in anything else.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is a Baha'i view on the foundations of Christianity, the Word of God..

It is one Baha'i view on the Bible but not a view shared by all Baha'is.

Although Bahá'ís universally share a great respect for the Bible, and acknowledge its status as sacred literature, their individual views about its authoritative status range along the full spectrum of possibilities. At one end there are those who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God. At the other end are Bahá'ís attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is no more than a product of complex historical and human forces. Between these extremes is the possibility that the Bible contains the Word of God, but only in a particular sense of the phrase 'Word of God' or in particular texts. I hope to show that a Bahá'í view must lie in this middle area, and can be defined to some degree.

A Bahá'í View of the Bible

From a Bahá'í viewpoint, the Bible is a reliable source of divine guidance and salvation, but is not necessarily historically accurate, nor can t...

bahai-library.com

 

[Trailblazer]

1) Jesus is God

Why is it irrelevant?

Because it doesn't really mean anything in and of itself. You may call Jesus a god, or you may not. You may believe that he is a manifestation of the creator of existence, but that does not really mean anything either even if somehow true.

It means what it says, but then you would also need to have a conception of God for it to mean anything.

2) Jesus is the only way to God

I don't think it is irrelevant, it is very relevant.​

But it is worrisome, because if Jesus was the only way to God that would mean that only Christians have access to God.​

That... I guess I just don't see how anyone could sincerely believe in that.

It is a worrisome belief, but not because it might somehow turn out to be true. That is no worry whatsoever.

I fully agree that it is a worrisome belief but Christians sincerely believe that Jesus is the only way to God.

3) Jesus rose from the dead

It is very relevant to Christianity since it is central to their belief system and it is one way they can claim superiority over all the other religions..​

But it is irrelevant, because a man rising from the dead, even if he did, serves absolutely no purpose.​

I see the point in the second statement. The first... is an unnecessary vulnerability that Christianity owes itself to fix, IMO.

Why would the first statement make Christianity vulnerable?

4) Jesus is going to return to earth

It is important for Christians, because that is really the only way they can keep the illusory beliefs of Christianity going, the beliefs that Jesus will come back to judge them and raise them from the dead and build the kingdom of God on earth.​

​

What else would Christianity rely upon?​

​

Not only could Christianity still be a true religion from God, it would then be valid.​

What makes Christianity invalid are these false beliefs (1-4).​

​

If all Christians knew that Jesus is never going to return to earth I think Christianity would have to change. How it would change I do not know.​

​

I think that Christianity would change radically if many Christians convinced themselves that one, some or all of those four beliefs is inaccurate, since those beliefs are all central to Christianity. How it would change I do not know. Maybe Christians would be forced to go back to basics, the teachings of Jesus, which is what makes Christianity a true religion!​

​

Dump those Christian doctrines (1-4) and we would have a true religion from God.​

Or, most likely, just a true religion with no qualifiers.
Or maybe I am just too optimistic in this particular matter.

Yes, I think you are too optimistic concerning what a true religion consists of.

 

[CG Didymus]

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.

Hey Tony, glad you pop in once in a while. Now... can you tell how and why the "immaculacy" of Mary and the "primacy" of Peter is "confessed", "upheld", and "defended"?

Your choice CG, not a Baha'i point of view.

Yet, so many other things in the Bible and the NT are not upheld, defended and confessed? Like do Baha'is believe in the Adam and Eve story? The world-wide flood and all the animals being on the ark? The parting of the seas story? The Christian stories about hell, demons and Satan? The story of Jesus walking on water? Or Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead? And of course, the resurrection story?

Which, if any, of these stories are upheld, defended and confessed?

Why pretend that Baha'is believe any of these stories? I don't even believe them. And I don't defend them except to say I understand why most Christians believe them, confess them, and defend them. It is because they believe the Bible and the NT to be the inerrant, infallible Word of God. I don't see how Baha'is can honestly say that. Especially when Baha'u'llah says that the Bible is wrong about which son got taken by Abraham.

Oh, and I read what Baha'u'llah said about Noah. He never mentioned the flood at all. Then there's a Baha'i quote that says that the Quran is more authoritative than the Bible. Why is that? Unless there's something wrong with the Bible.

So, again I'll ask... in the Quran it says Mary gave birth to Jesus under a date palm. No mention of a manger in a barn in Bethlehem. Which story is true? The one in the Gospels or the one in the Quran?

This is another way that Baha'is lose credibility. You can't both believe in the Bible and the NT and at the same time not believe in them. And, although I disagree with almost everything else she says, with this I agree with TB. The stories are fiction.

From a Bahá'í viewpoint, the Bible is a reliable source of divine guidance and salvation, but is not necessarily historically accurate, nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God'; biblical scholarship.​