What if these Christian beliefs are not true?

[Colt]

You said: If it (4 things) isn’t true then Jesus isn’t and wasn’t trustworthy which would cast doubt on all religions.

1) Jesus is God -- Jesus never claimed to be God
2) Jesus is the only way to God -- based upon one verse that has been misconstrued.
3) Jesus rose from the dead -- based upon conflicting stories men wrote about Jesus.
4) Jesus is going to return to earth -- Jesus never said he was going to return to earth, he said he would never return.

1) I disagree, Jesus did in fact reference his divinity. Regardless of your disagreement with that, the people who heard him speak ALSO agree that he compared himself to God! They had him put to death for that very reason!

2) God the Son is the only way to God the Father. All people who have faith in God will pass through the Sons administration regardless of weather or not you like it or believe it.

3) Jesus said he was going to be killed on several occasions. He said that to prove his authority he would return from death on his own. He said he had the power to do that. But followers doubted up until they met with the resurrected Jesus.

4) It’s strange that you think you are the only person in the world who understands the Bible correctly?

 

[Trailblazer]

1) I disagree, Jesus did in fact reference his divinity. Regardless of your disagreement with that, the people who heard him speak ALSO agree that he compared himself to God! They had him put to death for that very reason!

I believe that Jesus had a divine nature and a human nature, but Jesus referencing a divine nature is not the same as him saying that he was God incarnate.

Yes, Jesus compared himself to God, which means he could not have been God.

John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself:

John 8:40 But now ye seek to slay me, a man that have spoken to you [the] truth, that I heard of God; Abraham did not this thing.

John 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

John 16:23 And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.

Jesus said that God was greater than he was and that he could do nothing without God.

Mark 10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

Matthew 4:10 Jesus said to him, 'Away from me, Satan! For it is written: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

2) God the Son is the only way to God the Father. All people who have faith in God will pass through the Sons administration regardless of weather or not you like it or believe it.

That is not a fact, it is only a faith-based belief.
No, all people who have faith in God will not pass through Jesus, as evidenced by the fact that many people who have faith in God do not even believe in Jesus.

3) Jesus said he was going to be killed on several occasions. He said that to prove his authority he would return from death on his own. He said he had the power to do that. But followers doubted up until they met with the resurrected Jesus.

Jesus said? Nobody knows what Jesus said since Jesus never wrote it down.
Those are just stories that men wrote and I have no reason to believe them.

4) It’s strange that you think you are the only person in the world who understands the Bible correctly?

Far from it, but I can read plain English.

Jesus never said he was going to return to earth. If the NT is accurate, Jesus said he would never return to earth.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

If the NT is not accurate there is no reason to believe anything else Jesus allegedly said. That is how logic works.

 

[CG Didymus]

1) I disagree, Jesus did in fact reference his divinity. Regardless of your disagreement with that, the people who heard him speak ALSO agree that he compared himself to God! They had him put to death for that very reason!

2) God the Son is the only way to God the Father. All people who have faith in God will pass through the Sons administration regardless of weather or not you like it or believe it.

3) Jesus said he was going to be killed on several occasions. He said that to prove his authority he would return from death on his own. He said he had the power to do that. But followers doubted up until they met with the resurrected Jesus.

4) It’s strange that you think you are the only person in the world who understands the Bible correctly?

That Jesus you describe can't be real for a Baha'i.

They need a physically dead Jesus. They are okay with his spirit having risen. But... how is that special? They believe everybody's spirit rises.

They need Jesus to be a "manifestation" of God, not God himself. So, he's still divine. But it makes him equally divine as Muhammad, Baha'u'llah, Moses, Buddha and other people from the other religions. And "his" way then, was only "The Way" for his time. All those religious figures were also "The Way"... during their time. And, for Baha'is, the true "Way" right now is their religion and whatever their prophet said.

And of course, a Baha'i is going to sound like their way is the correct way... their way is the correct way to interpret things. Which makes the way the people in the religion itself, the wrong way.

But Christians do that to Jews. Muslims do it to Christians... And now add the Baha'is. Their interpretation makes all the religion true... almost, except for the things they got wrong. And what are those things? That's easy. It is whatever the Baha'is tell is wrong.

 

[Trailblazer]

That Jesus you describe can't be real for a Baha'i.

It does not matter if it is real (meaning true) for a Baha'i. It only matters if it is true or false.

They need a physically dead Jesus. They are okay with his spirit having risen. But... how is that special? They believe everybody's spirit rises.

They need Jesus to be a "manifestation" of God, not God himself. So, he's still divine. But it makes him equally divine as Muhammad, Baha'u'llah, Moses, Buddha and other people from the other religions. And "his" way then, was only "The Way" for his time. All those religious figures were also "The Way"... during their time. And, for Baha'is, the true "Way" right now is their religion and whatever their prophet said.

We do not NEED any of those things. We BELIEVE those things.
Our beliefs are either true or false but as beliefs they can never be proven true or false.

And of course, a Baha'is is going to sound like their way is the correct way... their way is the correct way to interpret things. Which makes the way the people in the religion itself, the wrong way.

And of course, a Christian is going to sound like their way is the correct way... their way is the correct way to interpret things. Which makes every other religion in the world the wrong way. If that makes sense to you, go for it. The main reason I am a Baha'i is because it makes no sense to me that only one religion is true.

But Christians do that to Jews. Muslims do it to Christians... And now add the Baha'is. Their interpretation makes all the religion true... almost, except for the things they got wrong. And what are those things? That's easy. It is whatever the Baha'is tell is wrong.

The Christian interpretation makes all the religion true... almost, except for the things they got wrong.
And what are those things? You get to decide for yourself. You don't need to listen to the Baha'is.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

With all due respect for your beliefs, I think is the most dangerous thing about Christians believing that Christ rose from the dead is them believing that they will also rise from the dead because I consider that belief to be completely false. As such, I believe millions of Christians are waiting for something to happen that will never happen.

Won’t the Dead Rise Again?

If Christ’s resurrection is a spiritual one, then so must ours be. Paul makes this exact point when he compares the “first Adam” with “the last Adam”.

bahaiteachings.org

Ok, I’d like to clarify your belief…

Didn’t you just say:
“….the most dangerous thing about Christians believing that Christ rose from the dead is them believing that they will also rise from the dead because I consider that belief to be completely false.”?

But the link you posted, says that there is a resurrection.

Am i missing something?

 

[Trailblazer]

Ok, I’d like to clarify your belief…

Didn’t you just say:
“….the most dangerous thing about Christians believing that Christ rose from the dead is them believing that they will also rise from the dead because I consider that belief to be completely false.”?

But the link you posted, says that there is a resurrection.

Am i missing something?

Yes, the article says that there is a resurrection, but it is a spiritual resurrection, not a physical one.
In other words, we are resurrected into a spiritual body, not into a physical body.
After we die physically the human soul takes on another form, a spiritual body.

From the article, my emphasis added.

“Here, Paul depicts resurrection as spiritual, not physical. He says plainly that the “body” resurrected is not the physical body that is “sown” and that a “natural body” is followed by a “spiritual body”. He makes it clear that this spiritual body is nothing like the physical one, and uses two metaphors to make this point: the difference between mature grain and bare seed, and the difference between a moon and a sun.

A moon, an inert rock that casts no radiance of its own, can only reflect what shines on it — an apt metaphor when applied to the human condition. A sun, made of a different substance altogether, sheds its own radiance. “So also is the resurrection of the dead,” Paul says. “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body.”

Christ’s resurrection, of course, is the prototype of the resurrection of the human soul. His victory over death illustrates the potential of the believer: “But every man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.” (I Corinthians 15:23). It follows that if Christ’s resurrection is a spiritual one, then so must ours be. Paul makes this exact point when he compares and contrasts the “first Adam” (a “living being”) with “the last Adam” (Christ), whom he says is “a life-giving spirit.”

Won’t the Dead Rise Again?

If Christ’s resurrection is a spiritual one, then so must ours be. Paul makes this exact point when he compares the “first Adam” with “the last Adam”.

bahaiteachings.org

 

[PearlSeeker]

1) I disagree, Jesus did in fact reference his divinity.

3) Jesus said...

We don't know what Jesus said.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Yes, the article says that there is a resurrection, but it is a spiritual resurrection, not a physical one.
In other words, we are resurrected into a spiritual body, not into a physical body.
After we die physically the human soul takes on another form, a spiritual body.

From the article, my emphasis added.

“Here, Paul depicts resurrection as spiritual, not physical. He says plainly that the “body” resurrected is not the physical body that is “sown” and that a “natural body” is followed by a “spiritual body”. He makes it clear that this spiritual body is nothing like the physical one, and uses two metaphors to make this point: the difference between mature grain and bare seed, and the difference between a moon and a sun.

A moon, an inert rock that casts no radiance of its own, can only reflect what shines on it — an apt metaphor when applied to the human condition. A sun, made of a different substance altogether, sheds its own radiance. “So also is the resurrection of the dead,” Paul says. “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body.”

Christ’s resurrection, of course, is the prototype of the resurrection of the human soul. His victory over death illustrates the potential of the believer: “But every man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.” (I Corinthians 15:23). It follows that if Christ’s resurrection is a spiritual one, then so must ours be. Paul makes this exact point when he compares and contrasts the “first Adam” (a “living being”) with “the last Adam” (Christ), whom he says is “a life-giving spirit.”

Won’t the Dead Rise Again?

If Christ’s resurrection is a spiritual one, then so must ours be. Paul makes this exact point when he compares the “first Adam” with “the last Adam”.

bahaiteachings.org

Yes, I agree with pretty much everything. Are you aware, though, that was referencing “the earlier resurrection (Philippians 3:11)”, of those who “belong to Christ”, as the Scripture said?

So let me ask you this… if there is an “earlier resurrection”, what does that imply?
That there must be another later resurrection. Right?

Because, obviously, not everyone who has died, ‘belonged to Christ’ at their death. These would include the “unrighteous”, mentioned at Acts 24:15.

Would you like more details?

 

[LeftyLen]

What is wrong with the NLT?
The important verses say essentially the same things.

1 Corinthians 15
King James Version

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:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
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.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

Other versions were written by those with a host of agendas, some may come close to the KJV, but others depart greatly, debating which Bible is best is far less an issue than ignoring the Bible completely as our secular society is doing

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, I agree with pretty much everything. Are you aware, though, that was referencing “the earlier resurrection (Philippians 3:11)”, of those who “belong to Christ”, as the Scripture said?

Why do you think that Philippians 3:11 refers to an earlier resurrection? Look at the verse in context.

Philippians 3
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

So let me ask you this… if there is an “earlier resurrection”, what does that imply?
That there must be another later resurrection. Right?

Because, obviously, not everyone who has died, ‘belonged to Christ’ at their death. These would include the “unrighteous”, mentioned at Acts 24:15.

Would you like more details?

Why do you think that there is an earlier resurrection and a later resurrection?
You are still talking about the resurrection as if it means people will rise out of their graves at some point in time. That is not what happens.
When people die, whether they believed in Christ or not, they are resurrected (which really means transformed) into a new body, a spiritual body.

That is why the verse says:
1 Corinthians 15: 51 But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed!

The reason that we must be transformed is because physical bodies cannot exist in heaven, which is the Kingdom of God.
Only spiritual bodies exist in heaven. That is explained in this verse:

50 What I am saying, dear brothers and sisters, is that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. These dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever.

 

[Madsaac]

What did you mean by "there not but neither are yours" ?

Not much really, just that all beliefs have so call truths and falsehoods. A bit of a trivial comment really.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Why do you think that Philippians 3:11 refers to an earlier resurrection? Look at the verse in context.

Philippians 3
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

Why do you think that there is an earlier resurrection and a later resurrection?
You are still talking about the resurrection as if it means people will rise out of their graves at some point in time. That is not what happens.
When people die, whether they believed in Christ or not, they are resurrected (which really means transformed) into a new body, a spiritual body.

That is why the verse says:
1 Corinthians 15: 51 But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed!

The reason that we must be transformed is because physical bodies cannot exist in heaven, which is the Kingdom of God.
Only spiritual bodies exist in heaven. That is explained in this verse:

50 What I am saying, dear brothers and sisters, is that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. These dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever.

Pardon me....
(I forgot that most translations simply say "resurrection" at that verse, but that's not the word Paul used; instead of "anastasis", Paul used "exanastasis", which is literally "out-resurrection".)

Please read Revelation 20:6.

If there is a "first" resurrection then, logically, there must be a second.

You're right, the Kingdom of God is in Heaven. But does everyone get to go there?
When Jesus said at Matthew 5:5, "the meek will inherit the earth" (quoting from Psalm 37:11), how do you think this will happen?

Take care, my friend.

 

[Trailblazer]

Pardon me....
(I forgot that most translations simply say "resurrection" at that verse, but that's not the word Paul used; instead of "anastasis", Paul used "exanastasis", which is literally "out-resurrection".)

Please read Revelation 20:6.

If there is a "first" resurrection then, logically, there must be a second.

It says first resurrection. It says nothing about a second resurrection; it says second death.

Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

What does Revelation 20:6 mean? ​

According to this verse whoever participates in the first resurrection is blessed and holy. "Blessed" is a beatitude that means "happy" or "spiritually prosperous." A blessed person may not be materially rich, but he is happy and spiritually prosperous. All who rise from the dead in the first resurrection, regardless of when or how they died, are blessed, and they are free forever from the second death. The second death refers to suffering forever in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14).

What does Revelation 20:6 mean? | BibleRef.com

Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him for a thousand years. - What is the meaning of Revelation 20:6?

www.bibleref.com

I think this interpretation incorrect firstly because nobody is ever going to be raised from the dead. That contradicts what Paul said in 1 Cor 15.
Secondly, I guess that second death is supposed to mean dying a second time, so those who are blessed will never die again. It is true that the blessed will never die again since we only die once, but it is also true that nobody is ever going to die twice so second death is an oxymoron.

The souls of people who are distant from God will continue to exist in the spiritual world after their physical body dies but they will be “as dead” compared to those souls who are close to God.

“In the same way, the souls who are veiled from God, although they exist in this world and in the world after death, are, in comparison with the holy existence of the children of the Kingdom of God, nonexisting and separated from God.”
Some Answered Questions, p. 243

You're right, the Kingdom of God is in Heaven. But does everyone get to go there?
When Jesus said at Matthew 5:5, "the meek will inherit the earth" (quoting from Psalm 37:11), how do you think this will happen?

I do not believe that Heaven is a place people go to after thy die, I believe it is a state of the soul who is near to God, and since not all souls are near to God not everyone will be in Heaven after they die. However, since the soul is immortal all souls will go to the spiritual world and souls that are far from God will be as dead souls since they will be spiritually dead.

Wherever the Bible says that the meek will inherit the earth that means that the new earth/kingdom of God on earth will be inherited by people who are living on earth and their progeny. Nowhere does the Bible say that means that dead people who were meek will rise from their graves and live on earth forever.

 

[Colt]

We don't know what Jesus said.

Then answering the OP is pointless if we just throw everything out that is foundational to a debate!

 

[PearlSeeker]

Then answering the OP is pointless if we just throw everything out that is foundational to a debate!

The OP was not a debate if the foundational beliefs of Christianity are true or not. It was "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?"

 

[Twilight Hue]

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?

Well if beliefs cannot be proven true or false some facts certainly can.

Like someone who is actually and truly dead in every sense of the word cannot be brought back to life.

 

[CG Didymus]

3) Jesus said he was going to be killed on several occasions. He said that to prove his authority he would return from death on his own. He said he had the power to do that. But followers doubted up until they met with the resurrected Jesus.

Didn’t you just say:
“….the most dangerous thing about Christians believing that Christ rose from the dead is them believing that they will also rise from the dead because I consider that belief to be completely false.”?

You're right, the Kingdom of God is in Heaven. But does everyone get to go there?

It's not that hard to find things in the Bible and the NT that sound like they could not have possibly happened. Baha'is take great advantage of that.
Right from the start they make the Bible story of Adam and Eve symbolic. Then they turn around and say that Adam was a manifestation of God. They do the same with how the NT ends. They say that is not Jesus coming back as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, that is their guy, Baha'u'llah.

It doesn't matter to a Baha'i what a Christian believes. No matter what... it is wrong. But ironically, Baha'is say that all the major religion are true and from God. And then they pick apart all the beliefs and practices of the other religions and point out how they are wrong. But how does that make the Baha'i Faith true?

What are their beliefs and practices? Can they be picked apart? Yes, I believe they can be. I think their claims about God and truth are just as flawed as the beliefs of any religion. So, where does that leave us? Religions are different. They all have different beliefs and practices. And they work very well for those that believe in them. But the new one always has to find something wrong with the older religions to justify why there is a need for their religion.

Peace and unity is what the Baha'i Faith says it can bring to the world. Can it? Is it bringing peace and unity? Actually, I'd have to say "yes".... to those who believe in it.

But what does it do for those people that continue to believe in their old beliefs? Does it bring peace and unity? No, how can it? The Baha'i Faith is telling them that their old beliefs are false and have been replaced by a newer, better revelation.

So, Baha'is claim that those Christians that believe in these things are wrong.... Jesus in not God. Jesus in not coming back. There is no inherited or original sin from Adam. There is no Satan and no demons. So any verse that says that Jesus cast out a demon, isn't true. Jesus, the man, is dead. He did not rise from the dead and ascend into the clouds. And all those verses that have Jesus appearing and saying that he has flesh and bone? Not true. Baha'is make those verses symbolic. So, did Jesus even save people from their sins? Save them from what? Baha'is say there is no hell.

It's a different religion with different beliefs. It has a way to interpret the Bible and the NT to support their beliefs. And has a way to interpret things to make Christian beliefs false. But still... does that make what they say true? To an outsider, it makes both religions look bad.

 

[I Am Hugh]

@Trailblazer

Yeah, I don't think I have ever even heard your religion until I came here some time ago. By the sound of it I would have imagined it to be some Eastern religion. Glancing at Wikipedia, I see that it was founded by Ḥusayn-ʻAlí (Baháʼu'lláh) from Persia in 1844? Or 1863? It seems confusing because of the influence of the Báb. It seems, again, at a glance, that the Bab foretold a prophet who turned out to be Baháʼu'lláh, who founded the religion. It reminds me of John Smith and Mormonism, except that he (Smith) wasn't foretold. Unity seems a key tenant. Of religion, God and humanity. I think the world disagrees. Especially the world from which the religion comes.

The beliefs throw me off. Adam comes from the Bible, it says Adam had sons and daughters, Genesis 5:4, as someone pointed out. God, Jehovah, also comes from - is known to us - through the Bible. Here's my take on that. God created Adam, according to the most accurate Biblical chronology I can find, in 4026 BCE. 1,656 years later, 2370, the flood occurred. (Genesis 5:1-29; 7:6) Peleg is an often-overlooked significant person in the Bible. The name means division, he was born in 2269 and died in 2030. Sometime in that period the events at the tower of Babel took place. From my website: "Soon after the founding of the world of men, or katabole as the ancient Greeks had called it, came rivers of blood. There was a division which was first created in the lifetime of a primitive forefather who was all but forgotten. His name was Peleg, meaning division. (Genesis 10:25) He lived during the first kingdom and its king, the Sumerian Dumuzi; also known as Tammuz and Nimrod מְרוֹד in the ancient Hebrew language. (Ezekiel 8:14) He founded Accad, Babel and Calneh in the land of Shinar. (Genesis 10:8-10) The people left the great tower in Babel and scattered throughout the planet Earth. History became legend and legend became myth."

Nimrod (Sumerian Dumuzid;Tammuz, Ezekiel 8) built the tower of Babel and people wanted to centralize around it. God wanted them to fill and subdue the earth so he confused their language. They spread out, taking the concept of God, creation, giants (Nephilim who provoked the flood), the flood itself and the fertility symbol Tammuz used, the mystic Tau, the first cross with them. Mythologies intertwined and evolved. For example, Gilgimesh. Since Moses didn't write Genesis until 1513 that leaves what (my math sucks) about 517 years for those stories the scattered people took with them to begin to influence religion as we know it today. So, the Christian missionaries were surprised to find the cross already being used in the places they visited. The cross wasn't used in Christianity until Constantine in 325 CE. 400 years after Christ. Mythologies intertwine.

Why talk about Adam and God if what you talking about isn't really Adam and God according to the Bible?

Sin means to miss the mark. Archers, stone or spear throwers, or someone using a slingshot would miss the target, it was called sin. If you are late for work you sin against your employer. If you break the speed limit you sin against your government and its law. God's law applies to specific people in specific times and places. The laws to the angels, to Adam, Noah, Moses, and Christians differ. People tend to make up their own laws in God's name. The Pharisees, for example, criticizing Jesus and his disciples for not washing their hands before eating when they actually did according to God's law. The Pharisees, self-righteously insisted you had to wash up to the elbow.

Have you looked into the syncretism of religion in Baha'i beliefs? Where it gets its parts that don't line up with the Bible?

You mention Adam descendants. His children and his children's children, et cetera. The Bible says God created us for one reason. To enjoy ourselves. What was Adam's law? Don't touch the tree or its fruit, fill and subdue the earth. We were already separated from God. God created us to fulfill his purpose. Out of love, to enjoy ourselves. He gave us a period of time in which we could become complete. The seventh day, the Sabbath, was symbolic for the seventh day of creation because in that day we would be complete and unseparated from God. The seventh day continues to this day. That's what God's Rest or God's day of rest means. (Genesis 2:2; Psalm 92:4; John 5:17; Hebrews 4:3-6)

"Sanctified breezes of Ghrist and the holy light of the Greatest Luminary." That raises all sorts of red flags with me. That sort of language transcends the practical spirituality I explore into the mysticism of a guru or someone following a guru. I don't trust gurus. There are a couple here who use terminology like that. It doesn't have any real meaning to me so it can be used to distort a meaning into ambiguous metaphysics to be used by the guru like a slippery fish.

Though I'm always cautious with words like soul, spirit, sin, God, world et cetera, since the meanings or applications of words like that can be misleading. This guru jargon isn't exclusive to religion. You can see it in philosophy, psychology, economics, politics, science. It's unfortunate in two distinct ways. 1. It deceives the believer and 2. repels the practical thinker. Ultimately casting a shadow on truth, making it repulsive and obscuring it. Jesus and Jehovah didn't teach mysterious. He explained practical things he could easily explain.

But what did Jesus mean by the world was, exactly?

I agree. God creates calamity, discipline, which is bad or evil. The terms are subjective. A child being disciplined or restricted perceives these things to be evil. Bad.

What puzzles me is why wouldn't Eden be real and why would everything else be real but the story allegorical?

There are two problems with spirit beings having been created, Genesis 2:1; Psalm 148:2, 5 says he did create them and why would the angels that forsook their original position become humans? (Genesis 6:1-4; Jude 1:6; 2 Peter 2:4; 1 Peter 3:19-20; Ephesians 6:12)

Why would Adam have been taken from freedom to be put into bondage?

The word prophet means to tell. Adam was a prophet in that he told Eve about God's instructions, but that is only inferred. Since God isn't stated as having told her directly. Enoch was the first prophet for simply saying Jehovah had come to execute judgment and Ezekiel prophesied to the wind by just expressing to it God's command. Jesus was asked to prophecy who had struck him. (Jude 1:14-15; Ezekiel 37:9-10; Matthew 26:67; Luke 22:63-64)

The we there, in the mansions, were those people he was talking to. So, you have to figure out why. What is the practical reason? Jesus and Jehovah don't know sin. They aren't experienced with it. So, it wouldn't be fair for them to judge sinners. The people he was talking to do know sin, and they are our peers. A jury of our peers. They, a very few, go to heaven to judge with Christ.

What do you make of Jesus saying that no one has ascended to heaven except for himself, who had descended from heaven. That would include Adam.

Resurrected? I can't remember, had you already said you didn't believe in the resurrection?
It says not to touch the fruit at Genesis 3:3.

Jesus' demonstration of resurrection was beneficial in that people would know that he could do that, because that is what he plans to do. (Hosea 13:14; 1 Corinthians 15:21)

 

[Link]

3) Jesus said he was going to be killed on several occasions. He said that to prove his authority he would return from death on his own. He said he had the power to do that. But followers doubted up until they met with the resurrected Jesus.

Did he really die though from this perspective? From one perspective, it was a death, from another, it was a feign death. It appeared like he did die and a normal human would die, but he didn't because he remained in the world and returned. A proof of that is Jesus (a) said he was the light of the world so long as he was in this world. It doesn't make sense, that the light of God ceased at this point nor that Elijah (a) came back for this period then Jesus (a) came back to life, and then after he rose to heaven, took the role of the light/holy spirit.

What makes more sense, is that what Jesus (a) means, he will be killed in the sense a normal human would die, but he was not dead in actuality, because this foreshadowed, that Jesus (a) says he only dies if he wills it. So his spirit remained in his body, and he didn't move on, and it appeared like he was dead, but God and Jesus (a) had other plans, as shown when he comes back in three days.

And Jesus (a) can go all out in miracles, the problem with that that is God would no longer be hidden if too extensive and the day of judgment would lose it's meaning or people if subdued like people were during Solomon (a) time and Jinn were subdued, they rebel more and people hated Solomon (a) for his dominance and envied him more and saw him a sorcerer even more so when "miracles" were more common during his rule.

Solomon (a) wore a ring so that doubters would think of it giving him power. It has little to do with the ring but rather the ring helps the wielder and wielder is a greater sign then the ring.

Solomon (a) body in contrast was still and appeared alive, but he was dead. Jesus (a) body appeared dead but he was alive. This all signs for a people who believe. Ibrahim (a) was put in a fire, but his body was untouched by the fire.

Imam Hussain (a) in Karbala was given an option to be helped and victorious, but told the Angels to ascend and help Imam Mahdi (a). God never takes any of his chosen leaders life unless they will it. Solomon (a) willed it in a way that it appeared like he was alive for a long time while he was dead. He wanted to show how ignorant of the unseen the Jinn really were. Jesus (a) wanted to show that leaders of God starting from Adam (a) till now, they don't die except they will it. This means John the Baptist willed to die a martyr like Imam Hussain (a) and both of these the sky rained blood for per our hadiths.

There is a whole section in Al-Kafi that Imams (a) don't die unless they will it and God never forces it on them either. They do so out of love of God but God doesn't say "die now" either.

 

[Trailblazer]

Like someone who is actually and truly dead in every sense of the word cannot be brought back to life.

Agreed.....
Tell that to the Christians.