What was the intent of the Gospel authors when writing of the resurrection of Christ?

[CG Didymus]

What happen is that the Bab and Baha'u'llah gave Messages they say came from God, Messages that fulfilled all past scriptures.

The Baha'i do not have to say anything but to offer just that. All that was offered is in those Messages.

The rest is up to each individual and a vast majority of Bahais have come from all Faiths, they have seen what the Bab and Baha'u'llah offered challenges what we once thought was truth.

Regards Tony

For the most part the Baha'i message is awesome... except, to make it work, the Christian belief in a literal, inerrant, infallible Bible, which includes that Jesus predicted he would rise from the dead, has to be shown to be a misinterpretation. But the gospels make it seem like that is exactly what they are saying, that Jesus rose from the dead. Maybe it's true, but lots of people are very skeptical. And since most all other people and religions in the ancient world had all kinds of myths and legends, why not Christianity? But to say it is myth and legend is different than what Baha'is are saying... that the stories were parables, therefore they are true... in that they aren't talking about real historical events but are using a fictional, made up story, to convey some deep spiritual truth. I don't see it.

I think the gospel writers were writing things that they intended to be believed as true... that Jesus said the things they quote and that he did the things they said he did. Of course the problem is, lots of it is unbelievable. So is the resurrection a hoax? A parable? Or literally true? However, I think, to make it anything but absolutely true, makes Christianity totally and completely false... and nothing but a religion based on ancient legends and myths of a dying and rising God/man. And, Baha'is are almost saying that. They do say that the beliefs and doctrines of Christianity are founded on misinterpretations. So, for me, I'm hearing Baha'is say that Christianity, as believed and practiced today and pretty much from the beginning, is wrong... That it is not teaching the truth about God.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But the gospels make it seem like that is exactly what they are saying, that Jesus rose from the dead. Maybe it's true, but lots of people are very skeptical. And since most all other people and religions in the ancient world had all kinds of myths and legends, why not Christianity?

The Key here CG is that many people from all faiths still have the Faith they had before Baha'u'llah, but now just see it in a different way. The stories do not change, just our perception.

Really, I ask what harm is in that, that we are prepared to see God in different rays of lights. When they all come together there is but pure white light.

Regards Tony

 

[rational experiences]

And where do we get the teachings of Jesus? It's the NT?. And the NT has things in it that tell us about the things Jesus did, along with the things he said. How reliable do Baha'is take those things? Well, about the things he did, Baha'is say many of them didn't literally happen. About the things he taught, like things about Satan and hell, Baha'is don't believe are true. So if the story of his life and his teachings changed individuals, a lot of the time it was because people believed them to be literally true. And, I think, that is the case with the resurrection. It is a very powerful belief for a Christian to think that it really happened. And, 2000 years ago, if the people were taught that Jesus "rose" spiritually and not physically, I wonder what the impact would have been?

Today, Baha'is are trying to get people to believe their prophet, Baha'u'llah, is the return of the Christ Spirit and the True Messiah and the promised one of every major religion. To get Christians to believe that Baha'u'llah is the return, Baha'is need to convince people that it is only a spiritual Christ, and not a physical Jesus the Christ, that is returning. But then, what is even the importance of the concept of "resurrection"? Baha'is say the physical body dies and is gone... But the spirit lives on and progresses through different spiritual worlds. If that is so, then resurrection was a false concept... That is not what God had planned. The physical body was never going to come back to life.

Just like the concept of reincarnation. Baha'is say that is not what happens. The spirit never comes back and lives another life in another body. So resurrection and reincarnation, according to the Baha'is, was never what God had in mind. God was always going to make people live, and for a lot of people, suffer through this life, and if they do good, move on to a higher level in some spiritual world.

But the concept of resurrection was developed... and in the NT, it makes it sound like the old body would come back to life, but in a more "glorified" state. To undo those beliefs, Baha'is now have to go back and switch the meaning. All the verses that have people coming back to life have to be changed. And all the verses about Jesus coming back to life and ascending into the sky have to be reinterpreted to mean something else. And, because Baha'is say they believe the Bible and the NT are "God's" Word, and say they believe that Judaism and Christianity are true religions that were revealed by God, they can't simply just say the gospel writers made it all up... There was never a resurrection. That it as a hoax. They have to somehow make it true on a "spiritual" level by saying that the gospel writers meant it to be allegorical, that the resurrection of Jesus was a parable.

Yet, Baha'is here on the forum have said that the body of Jesus was probably stolen and hidden. Which, makes it a hoax doesn't it? If it was just a parable, and not literally true, why would the physical body of Jesus have to be stolen and hidden? So, for me, if it is not true, then it was a made up tradition that got written down as fact. And the empty tomb and missing body of Jesus? Maybe the Romans and the Jews didn't care enough... thinking that the Jesus movement would fade out.

Now there are many "questionable" religious movements that most of us think are false, yet those movements can and do change peoples lives. Like Mormons... do you believe the Angel Moroni spoke with Joseph Smith and told him about the golden plates that told the story of Jesus coming to the Americas? I would doubt that you do. Yet, there might be more Mormons that Baha'is. And they are very committed to their beliefs and good people. But to you and I, their beliefs aren't true. So, for a Baha'i, that is the same way you see most any Christian sect. None of them, to the Baha'is, are teaching the truth about God. Especially the Trinity believing Christians. But most all believe in the devil and hell. Many believe that Jesus rose again. And some even believe the world is less than 10,000 years old. So what are these teachings of Jesus that transformed the world. They are all wrong. So the miracle is what? The gullibility of people? I think yes, in a way. But in another way, I think it shows that people can believe most anything as true, and if they believe it, those beliefs can transform them.

Same with Baha'is, the degree to which a Baha'i takes their faith seriously and tries to apply it, the better they will become... But in some ways, like with all religions, they become locked in to their beliefs as being better and truer than the beliefs of others. And what is really happening here? Baha'is are telling resurrection believing Christians that their beliefs are wrong. That the truth is Jesus' physical body is dead and he is not, himself, the man Jesus, coming back. But that, Baha'u'llah, as the Christ, is the one who has already come back.

Medical science information relative in advice.

Fall out. Body natural light constant sacrificed body taken down by mother of immaculate.

Science describing why human life was given all stigmata. Disease illness.

Jesus unnatural cell loss non ability to form. Chemicals in cell leech out so does blood. The example about why all multi sacrifice existed. Jewish teaching it happened to everyone slave to Satan.

Satan scientist brothers using Sion nuclear spirit gas technologies. RA radiation extra.

Medical science assessment.

O God body earth named as God
O God never went anywhere.

Scientist made sin holes origin to Sun earth attack. Their own selves.

Irradiation effect. Brain chemistry alters you see visions as gases are being ground converted.

The status.

Gods body resurrected meant the fall out effect gas spirit leaving empty tomb. AIN zero.point ST an explanation.

Moses forty letters ST 20 position in alphabetalphabeta.

Letters given number as data review.

God O body spirit stopped leaving.

Cooling balanced brain given back ice melted water and brain oxygenation re used.

Phenomena lived experience.

God O body of science product never left. Attack on God gases stopped.

Explanation needed definition of meaning.

Bahai said gods arisen heaven gases historic once only from earth.

Said returned gases from asteroid wandering star evidence. Savior was the star body not the God body mass.

Science as a thesis of relativity always argued. Evidence was always demanded.

Why Muslims agreed with Christ evidence. Bahai later star witness supported all claims against life harmed also.

 

[loverofhumanity]

And where do we get the teachings of Jesus? It's the NT?. And the NT has things in it that tell us about the things Jesus did, along with the things he said. How reliable do Baha'is take those things? Well, about the things he did, Baha'is say many of them didn't literally happen. About the things he taught, like things about Satan and hell, Baha'is don't believe are true. So if the story of his life and his teachings changed individuals, a lot of the time it was because people believed them to be literally true. And, I think, that is the case with the resurrection. It is a very powerful belief for a Christian to think that it really happened. And, 2000 years ago, if the people were taught that Jesus "rose" spiritually and not physically, I wonder what the impact would have been?

Today, Baha'is are trying to get people to believe their prophet, Baha'u'llah, is the return of the Christ Spirit and the True Messiah and the promised one of every major religion. To get Christians to believe that Baha'u'llah is the return, Baha'is need to convince people that it is only a spiritual Christ, and not a physical Jesus the Christ, that is returning. But then, what is even the importance of the concept of "resurrection"? Baha'is say the physical body dies and is gone... But the spirit lives on and progresses through different spiritual worlds. If that is so, then resurrection was a false concept... That is not what God had planned. The physical body was never going to come back to life.

Just like the concept of reincarnation. Baha'is say that is not what happens. The spirit never comes back and lives another life in another body. So resurrection and reincarnation, according to the Baha'is, was never what God had in mind. God was always going to make people live, and for a lot of people, suffer through this life, and if they do good, move on to a higher level in some spiritual world.

But the concept of resurrection was developed... and in the NT, it makes it sound like the old body would come back to life, but in a more "glorified" state. To undo those beliefs, Baha'is now have to go back and switch the meaning. All the verses that have people coming back to life have to be changed. And all the verses about Jesus coming back to life and ascending into the sky have to be reinterpreted to mean something else. And, because Baha'is say they believe the Bible and the NT are "God's" Word, and say they believe that Judaism and Christianity are true religions that were revealed by God, they can't simply just say the gospel writers made it all up... There was never a resurrection. That it as a hoax. They have to somehow make it true on a "spiritual" level by saying that the gospel writers meant it to be allegorical, that the resurrection of Jesus was a parable.

Yet, Baha'is here on the forum have said that the body of Jesus was probably stolen and hidden. Which, makes it a hoax doesn't it? If it was just a parable, and not literally true, why would the physical body of Jesus have to be stolen and hidden? So, for me, if it is not true, then it was a made up tradition that got written down as fact. And the empty tomb and missing body of Jesus? Maybe the Romans and the Jews didn't care enough... thinking that the Jesus movement would fade out.

Now there are many "questionable" religious movements that most of us think are false, yet those movements can and do change peoples lives. Like Mormons... do you believe the Angel Moroni spoke with Joseph Smith and told him about the golden plates that told the story of Jesus coming to the Americas? I would doubt that you do. Yet, there might be more Mormons that Baha'is. And they are very committed to their beliefs and good people. But to you and I, their beliefs aren't true. So, for a Baha'i, that is the same way you see most any Christian sect. None of them, to the Baha'is, are teaching the truth about God. Especially the Trinity believing Christians. But most all believe in the devil and hell. Many believe that Jesus rose again. And some even believe the world is less than 10,000 years old. So what are these teachings of Jesus that transformed the world. They are all wrong. So the miracle is what? The gullibility of people? I think yes, in a way. But in another way, I think it shows that people can believe most anything as true, and if they believe it, those beliefs can transform them.

Same with Baha'is, the degree to which a Baha'i takes their faith seriously and tries to apply it, the better they will become... But in some ways, like with all religions, they become locked in to their beliefs as being better and truer than the beliefs of others. And what is really happening here? Baha'is are telling resurrection believing Christians that their beliefs are wrong. That the truth is Jesus' physical body is dead and he is not, himself, the man Jesus, coming back. But that, Baha'u'llah, as the Christ, is the one who has already come back.

With Christ , the transforming power came from His moral, ethical and spiritual teachings being put into practice. Things like His teachings on love, forgiveness and the Beautitudes are examples of His transforming power.

Today Christ is not present physically but lives on in the hearts and minds which proves that it is His spiritual power which is His true power not His physical body. God is spirit it says in the Bible so the reality of Christ is His Spirit.

John 4:24

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

So according to this passage, why are Christians worshipping Jesus ‘physical body’ as it is irrelevant in the Bible. The Spirit is what should be worshipped not the physical body.

Unfortunately the concept of a bodily, physical resurrection is not what gives Christianity strength but robs it of accepting future Prophets including Christ’s return because they maintain Muhammad and Baha’u’llah never resurrected physically so are false, untrue or inferior.

This emphasis on the physical resurrection has supplanted true belief in God within Christianity which according to the Bible is based on the Spirit not the body.

Science also has proven that things like resurrection can never happen as the body decomposes.

Many Christians now because of scientific advances no longer believe in a physical resurrection.

Resurrection did not happen, say quarter of Christians

 

[rational experiences]

With Christ , the transforming power came from His moral, ethical and spiritual teachings being put into practice. Things like His teachings on love, forgiveness and the Beautitudes are examples of His transforming power.

Today Christ is not present physically but lives on in the hearts and minds which proves that it is His spiritual power which is His true power not His physical body. God is spirit it says in the Bible so the reality of Christ is His Spirit.

John 4:24

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

So according to this passage, why are Christians worshipping Jesus ‘physical body’ as it is irrelevant in the Bible. The Spirit is what should be worshipped not the physical body.

Unfortunately the concept of a bodily, physical resurrection is not what gives Christianity strength but robs it of accepting future Prophets including Christ’s return because they maintain Muhammad and Baha’u’llah never resurrected physically so are false, untrue or inferior.

This emphasis on the physical resurrection has supplanted true belief in God within Christianity which according to the Bible is based on the Spirit not the body.

Science also has proven that things like resurrection can never happen as the body decomposes.

Many Christians now because of scientific advances no longer believe in a physical resurrection.

Resurrection did not happen, say quarter of Christians

Language and word use changed.

Bahai demonstrate a love of words and manners was community sought as a language expressed to allow humans to feel respected.

I always am saddened at the review mannerisms were lost. That affected morality.

When documents are not read as they were written it is the fault taught misinterpretation of the teacher.

Self idolisation man the problem. We were informed not to read as egotists.

We always owned our human body via human sex. We depended on the presence God spirits to be healthy.

Man in science named those spirit gases. He never owned the spirit gases God did.
Yet man human did all the explanations

Status son of god owned it was not a man. Science used symbolic expression was not science stating Christ was a man.

Reading ownership is an elite status.

 

[rational experiences]

Asteroid came. Bahai notified.

Roman brothers Muslim brothers Jewish brothers hated each other in dark ages.

Brother realised Jesus meaning in relative conscious spirit life body affected. As a reading and teaching. No man is God.

Understood behaviour.

Irradiation effect on minds as gases were lost out of heavenly mass. Human brain irradiated. Brain feelings chemical nature behaviour wrong.

Realised by how he felt when a huge surge gases got released. It changed him. Reasons irradiating heavens owned loss of ground water returned oxygenated his life body. By pressure changes.

So taught his medical spirit self observations and tried to reach a lost human morality based on mutual human life as brothers and sisters.

Actual human reasoning.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Key here CG is that many people from all faiths still have the Faith they had before Baha'u'llah, but now just see it in a different way. The stories do not change, just our perception.

Really, I ask what harm is in that, that we are prepared to see God in different rays of lights. When they all come together there is but pure white light.

Regards Tony

Well, from a Baha'i pov, I think the harm would be not to see the resurrection the way Baha'is interpret it. Like Loverofhumanity is saying, it creates a situation where Christians come to believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead, that leads them to believing in the trinity making Jesus God, they believe Satan is real, which makes them believe that all other religions are part of Satan's deception and so on. If none of that is true, then there is great harm having people believe all that. But the problem all begins with what the gospels writers wrote. If it's wrong, just say so. But Baha'is don't. At times they say the Bible is the greatest thing that ever happened, then turn around and say things like... that is not 100% authoritative. It is not historically accurate. That it can't be taken literally etc.

And you say the "stories do not change"? Yes, they do. Each gospel story is slightly different. So Christians already have to reconcile those differences. I think the disciples and early Church leaders all believed Jesus had come back to life and I think the gospel stories support that. But, they are the ones that made those stories The Word of God. Other believers, who I think believed just like them, wrote the stories. If the perception is wrong. If the interpretation is wrong. And I think, that it very well could be that the stories, themselves, were wrong. I have no problem saying that Jesus did not rise physically from the dead, because it never happened. But Baha'is are stopping short of that. They'll say the perception is wrong, because the Christians interpreted the gospel stories wrong. But Baha'is are kind of saying the resurrection story is true and accurate... but it's not true. It's a fictional story... a parable? I don't think Baha'is have anything substantial that can show that to be true. Like I've continued to say, if it didn't happen as written, then the story is a hoax, that the early Christians preached to others as being real.

So the resurrection story changes in big ways. The Christians way... it happened just as written. And the Baha'i way... Jesus is dead. He is not coming back. His spirit rose and that is all. By changing the perception of the resurrection to being "just" a parable, Baha'is are, essentially, getting rid of literalistic, conservative, fundamentalistic Christianity. But I think it's more than that. I think Baha'is are going all the way back to the earliest Christians and saying they got off track right from the start. Those early Church leaders had a chance to see the resurrection as only a "spiritual" thing, but choose to write against that belief and insist that Jesus rose physically. If they were wrong, then no harm. Baha'is are doing a service to humanity in getting rid of a religion that teaches false beliefs. But, is that really what you're doing? What is so strange to me is that Baha'is will say "no"? And then say how wonderful Jesus is. That his teachings changed the world. Make up your minds. If Jesus is dead. If there is no Satan. If Jesus is not the one coming back. If he did not come back to life, then any religion saying so... is wrong. They are teaching lies. And that includes any Christianity except the very liberal ones.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But the problem all begins with what the gospels writers wrote. If it's wrong, just say so. But Baha'is don't.

CG, I see this has been discussed and made clear many times.

The issue is a Baha'i is not here to proltesze, so why would we keep offering what people have already rejected as false?

We are happy to walk away and agree to disagree and remain friends in the Spirit of all that is good.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Today Christ is not present physically but lives on in the hearts and minds which proves that it is His spiritual power which is His true power not His physical body. God is spirit it says in the Bible so the reality of Christ is His Spirit.

Hey, did the thread on world peace get pulled?

Anyway, about this thread... like what I was saying to Tony, Baha'is, to me, believe that literal, fundamental types of Christians are wrong. But what really does "live" in the hearts and minds of believers? I really think that, because people believe so many different things, and not all of them can be true, or maybe none of them... that it all just depends on what a person accepts, and then convinces themselves, what is true. That becomes their reality. Is what a Catholic believe about Jesus The Truth? I don't think so, but they sure do. Is what a Mormon believes about Jesus The Truth? Same thing, they are convinced of it. So now we add in what Baha'is believe about Jesus. Which, it sure seems to me like, what ever it says in the gospels... isn't true. So what's left? Baha'is, like liberal Christians, dump most of it. So what are you really basing your belief in Jesus on? What did he really do? He was a nice guy? How do we know? Because the gospels say so? We don't trust them.

What did he do? Heal the sick and raise the dead? No, we don't believe those things necessarily happened. He said nice things on a mountain? Really? Were the gospel writers there taking notes? And then it that same story about him giving his talk, he supposedly fed 5000 with a little bit of bread and fish? How is that possible? God doesn't create bread and fish out of thin air does he? Yet, we're supposed to trust what he said in his sermon but what he did after his sermon? If we're going to reject it, then I think we should reject it all as being myth and legend. What "spiritual" power? We reject anything that the gospels say that tries to show the "spiritual" power of God through Jesus. So what's left? Are myths and parables going to be enough to get us to "believe"?

 

[CG Didymus]

, I see this has been discussed and made clear many times.

Okay, I see that Baha'is have made it clear that they believe the body of Jesus is dead... that he never really rose physically from the dead. The whole resurrection story is just an allegory. I don't believe that was the gospel writers intent, but Baha'is do. The gospel writers intended the story to be taken allegorically, but the early Christians, mistakenly, took it literally.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

don't think Baha'is have anything substantial that can show that to be true.

I think science is substantial.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

What did he do?

Jesus showed us that we have a personal connection with God when we choose Salvation in following the example of Jesus the Christ. That is serve each other above all things, pick up that cross and follow him.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So what's left? Are myths and parables going to be enough to get us to "believe"?

To me they are the stories of true life. What is left is our choice to serve each other in the Spirit offerd by Jesus the Christ.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Okay, I see that Baha'is have made it clear that they believe the body of Jesus is dead... that he never really rose physically from the dead. The whole resurrection story is just an allegory. I don't believe that was the gospel writers intent, but Baha'is do. The gospel writers intended the story to be taken allegorically, but the early Christians, mistakenly, took it literally.

That is perfectly OK CG, you can see it how you choose to.

The Message of Baha'u'llah is given as a personal choice. To me, the choice enables us to open our mind to the Oneness of God and that Oneness opens different frames of references.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

Hey, did the thread on world peace get pulled?

Anyway, about this thread... like what I was saying to Tony, Baha'is, to me, believe that literal, fundamental types of Christians are wrong. But what really does "live" in the hearts and minds of believers? I really think that, because people believe so many different things, and not all of them can be true, or maybe none of them... that it all just depends on what a person accepts, and then convinces themselves, what is true. That becomes their reality. Is what a Catholic believe about Jesus The Truth? I don't think so, but they sure do. Is what a Mormon believes about Jesus The Truth? Same thing, they are convinced of it. So now we add in what Baha'is believe about Jesus. Which, it sure seems to me like, what ever it says in the gospels... isn't true. So what's left? Baha'is, like liberal Christians, dump most of it. So what are you really basing your belief in Jesus on? What did he really do? He was a nice guy? How do we know? Because the gospels say so? We don't trust them.

What did he do? Heal the sick and raise the dead? No, we don't believe those things necessarily happened. He said nice things on a mountain? Really? Were the gospel writers there taking notes? And then it that same story about him giving his talk, he supposedly fed 5000 with a little bit of bread and fish? How is that possible? God doesn't create bread and fish out of thin air does he? Yet, we're supposed to trust what he said in his sermon but what he did after his sermon? If we're going to reject it, then I think we should reject it all as being myth and legend. What "spiritual" power? We reject anything that the gospels say that tries to show the "spiritual" power of God through Jesus. So what's left? Are myths and parables going to be enough to get us to "believe"?

Whatever the different sects believed, Jesus was true, and so placing themselves under His shadow had some good effects in their lives. Even plants which are in the shade still benefit from the sun’s rays and grow and develop.

When Jesus said things like He was bread or water He meant spiritual sustenance. Does the verse below mean once we believe in Him we never eat or drink anymore? It explains quite clearly just what the loaves and fishes were that was fed to the people - the Word of God.

John 6:35

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

“Make thy beauty to be my food and thy presence my drink.” (Baha’u’llah)

 

[loverofhumanity]

Okay, I see that Baha'is have made it clear that they believe the body of Jesus is dead... that he never really rose physically from the dead. The whole resurrection story is just an allegory. I don't believe that was the gospel writers intent, but Baha'is do. The gospel writers intended the story to be taken allegorically, but the early Christians, mistakenly, took it literally.

CG just as a compliment to you. I am very grateful for your deep questioning and I believe that you are a very spiritual person because your comments and questioning are very fair and reasonable and you make us look deeper to see we are giving accurate information.

So I warmly appreciate you helping me learn more. I really enjoy reading your posts and love the way you are arguing and reasoning. I think I speak for many of us when I say we are learning from the intelligent way you put your case.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think science is substantial.

Regards Tony

But Baha'is are kind of saying the resurrection story is true and accurate... but it's not true. It's a fictional story... a parable? I don't think Baha'is have anything substantial that can show that to be true. Like I've continued to say, if it didn't happen as written, then the story is a hoax, that the early Christians preached to others as being real.

Anything substantial that shows how, suddenly, from telling the crucifixion story, it goes into an allegorical parable about an empty tomb and that Jesus rose from the dead. Jesus' parables are clearly told as being fictional stories. The gospels, supposedly, are telling about the things Jesus said and did. We don't trust them? We think the writers embellished them? That's different.

Oh, and can science detect God or a spiritual world where the spirits of dead humans go? If not, then are those false beliefs? God, if real, made the universe out of nothing. Jesus made clay birds come to life. God made an unfertilized egg grow into a man. So if these aren't true, then maybe God isn't real or at least not as great as people make him out to be.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Oh, and can science detect God or a spiritual world where the spirits of dead humans go? If not, then are those false beliefs?

Yes it is possible and many have. But materialists have the louder voice at this specific time.

There is overwhelming evidence in dreams, visions, NDE of life is more than material senses.

Those bound to a material mind will not look at what is all around them, but they can not see.

God is selfless Love and a materialist will reject that selfless Love is a proof of God, wheras when we look at Jesus and the Message given we see that it is the greatest proof. Likewise with all virtues.

The greater we live the virtues, the greater the proof of God and the Messages given, as all this takes selfless actions that are not consistent with a scientific principles of evolution, as survival is not a thought in selfless actions.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

Hey Adrian here's some more early Church leaders talking about the resurrection...

Irenaeus argued that his conception of orthodox Christianity was passed down to him from the apostles who knew Jesus personally, while the Gnostics and Marcionites were distorting this apostolic tradition... (H)e sought to disprove what he saw as incorrect interpretations of scripture on the part of Gnostics such as Valentinus. Irenaeus sought to present "what was understood as an authentic form of century-old Christian tradition against various forms of Gnosticism." The Valentinians believed that resurrection was a purely spiritual phenomenon, while Irenaeus insisted that Christians would be raised from the dead in fleshly bodies.
​

So Irenaeus says that what he believe is what was past down from the Apostles themselves. That the "purely" spiritual resurrection was a heretical belief of the Gnostics. Which is similar to what Baha'is say is the "real" truth about the resurrection. So Baha'is are in more agreement with the Gnostics?

I found a little bit about Polycarp...

Polycarp is important as he’s a bridge to the original apostles themselves. According to his student Irenaeus... Polycarp was a student of the apostle John, and he knew other apostles, although they go unnamed...
Polycarp refuted the Gnostic notion that the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus were all imaginary episodes of essentially ethical or mythical significance. These were historical happenings.
​

Tertullian wrote a book about the resurrection of the flesh. Here's another link to another site which opened with this...

The heretics against whom this work is directed, were the same who maintained that the demiurge, or the god who created this world and gave the Mosaic dispensation, was opposed to the supreme God. Hence they attached an idea of inherent corruption and worthlessness to all his works — among the rest, to the flesh or body of man; affirming that it could not rise again, and that the soul alone was capable of inheriting immortality.
​

Anyway, if traditional Christianity , the one that came from the apostles and early Church leaders, is wrong, then when was Christianity ever right? If the body dies and only the soul lives on then the Gnostics and those that had similar teachings were the ones that were correct? Yet, those early Church leaders claimed there was a direct line to what they taught right back to the Apostles. So, for them, there was no "myth" that came to be believed as "fact". They say the resurrection was fact.

It is useful to study the history of early Christianity. It would be incorrect to associate the Baha'is with Gnosticism on the basis of our shared disbelief in the physical, bodily resurrection of Christ. If we took that approach we should also associate atheists with Gnosticism. There are many key differences between Gnostics and Baha'is. Baha'is do not derive their Christology from the writings of the early Gnostics such as Valentinus and Marcion of Sinope. We refer to the Baha'i Writings, Quran, the NT and the works of scholars and historians.

Fundamental problems remain for Christianity that are at the heart of this discourse.

1/ The Gospel accounts are anonymous narratives written to meet the needs of the early Church. We can not determine with certainty who they were written by and when.

2/ Regardless the earliest NT book that mentions the resurrection is Paul's first Epistle to Corinthians. Scholars are in agreement that this account was written by Paul of Tarsus and the book was written between 50 and 60 AD. Paul never met Christ.

3/ Paul uses the phrase 'Body of Christ' on multiple occasions in his epistles as a metaphor for the Church, not literally 'the body of Christ'.

4/ Other than a few scant references from Josephus and Tacitus, there is virtually no literature in the century after Christ's crucifixion (other than the NT books) that refer to Christianity let alone the resurrection.

 

[loverofhumanity]

It is useful to study the history of early Christianity. It would be incorrect to associate the Baha'is with Gnosticism on the basis of our shared disbelief in the physical, bodily resurrection of Christ. If we took that approach we should also associate atheists with Gnosticism. There are many key differences between Gnostics and Baha'is. Baha'is do not derive their Christology from the writings of the early Gnostics such as Valentinus and Marcion of Sinope. We refer to the Baha'i Writings, Quran, the NT and the works of scholars and historians.

Fundamental problems remain for Christianity that are at the heart of this discourse.

1/ The Gospel accounts are anonymous narratives written to meet the needs of the early Church. We can not determine with certainty who they were written by and when.

2/ Regardless the earliest NT book that mentions the resurrection is Paul's first Epistle to Corinthians. Scholars are in agreement that this account was written by Paul of Tarsus and the book was written between 50 and 60 AD. Paul never met Christ.

3/ Paul uses the phrase 'Body of Christ' on multiple occasions in his epistles as a metaphor for the Church, not literally 'the body of Christ'.

4/ Other than a few scant references from Josephus and Tacitus, there is virtually no literature in the century after Christ's crucifixion (other than the NT books) that refer to Christianity let alone the resurrection.

Hi Adrian,

Thank you very much for mentioning the body of Christ which is very profound as Bahá’ís we believe that it was the body of Christ’s Cause which was resurrected not His physical body and these verses throw such a very bright light on this idea.


1 Corinthians 12:27
Verse Concepts
Now you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it.

Romans 12:4-5
For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

Source: 22 Bible verses about Body Of Christ, The Church