Re: Help With Holy Titles...
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:27 pm
Hi!
Well, Christ, for one, is a title! Buddha, is a title too. Moses was known as the Law Giver, Abraham as the Friend of God, Muhammad was called Al-amin (the trusted), and I'm sure there are many more. Many manifestations have had a variety of titles. I am sure you are aware of the many titles of Baha'u'llah, and know that Baha'u'llah itself is a title.
As for Son of God, Christ certainly was so. However, it is a fact often missed by Christians, that the title of Son of God is not peculiar to Christ.
"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose" (Genesis 6:1-2).
"Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" (Job 38:1-7).
Also noteworthy, is the mysterious Old Testament figure Melchisedec, high priest and king of Salem who "met" and "blessed" Abraham, and was called "King of Peace" and being:
"Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God" (Hebrews 7:1-3)
Furthermore, in the New Testament the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans states plainly:
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" (Romans 8:14).
Clearly, the title "Son of God" has a meaning which is not only applicable to Christ. It also seems clear to me that there is little basis for arguing a literal interpretation of it. The very notion of God having literally a physical offspring, in my opinion, fanciful and absurd. How could God, the unknowable essence, the supreme being and creator of all, have human offspring? I think the words of 'Abdul-baha, when he was speaking on the subject of sacrifice, in my opinion, can also be applied to the concept of the Son of God:
"These verses have been interpreted by the churches in such a superstitious way that it is impossible for human reason to understand or accept..."(The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 449).
In a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer on November 29, 1937, is an explanation that sums it up perfectly, and coincides with the uses of the term found in the Bible:
"As regards to your questions concerning the station of Jesus Christ, and His return as explained in the Gospel. It is true that Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of God, but this, as explained by Bahá'u'lláh in the 'Íqán, does not indicate any Physical relationship whatever. Its meaning is entirely spiritual and points to the close relationship existing between Him and the Almighty God. Nor does it necessarily indicate any inherent superiority in the station of Jesus over other Prophets and Messengers. As far as their spiritual nature is concerned all Prophets can be regarded as Sons of God, as they all reflect His light, though not in an equal measure, and this difference in reflection is due to the conditions and circumstances under which they appear" (Lights of Guidance, 491).
These names and titles should not become a barrier to belief if we remember that God is the bearer of the "most excellent names" and titles. I am particularly fond of this verse from Baha'u'llah in the Seven Valleys:
"And I praise and glorify the first sea which hath branched from the ocean of the Divine Essence, and the first morn which hath glowed from the Horizon of Oneness, and the first sun which hath risen in the Heaven of Eternity, and the first fire which was lit from the Lamp of Preexistence in the lantern of singleness: He who was Ahmad in the kingdom of the exalted ones, and Muhammad amongst the concourse of the near ones, and Mahmud [1] in the realm of the sincere ones. '...by whichsoever (name) ye will, invoke Him: He hath most excellent names'" (The Seven Valleys, 2).
Well, Christ, for one, is a title! Buddha, is a title too. Moses was known as the Law Giver, Abraham as the Friend of God, Muhammad was called Al-amin (the trusted), and I'm sure there are many more. Many manifestations have had a variety of titles. I am sure you are aware of the many titles of Baha'u'llah, and know that Baha'u'llah itself is a title.
As for Son of God, Christ certainly was so. However, it is a fact often missed by Christians, that the title of Son of God is not peculiar to Christ.
"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose" (Genesis 6:1-2).
"Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" (Job 38:1-7).
Also noteworthy, is the mysterious Old Testament figure Melchisedec, high priest and king of Salem who "met" and "blessed" Abraham, and was called "King of Peace" and being:
"Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God" (Hebrews 7:1-3)
Furthermore, in the New Testament the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans states plainly:
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" (Romans 8:14).
Clearly, the title "Son of God" has a meaning which is not only applicable to Christ. It also seems clear to me that there is little basis for arguing a literal interpretation of it. The very notion of God having literally a physical offspring, in my opinion, fanciful and absurd. How could God, the unknowable essence, the supreme being and creator of all, have human offspring? I think the words of 'Abdul-baha, when he was speaking on the subject of sacrifice, in my opinion, can also be applied to the concept of the Son of God:
"These verses have been interpreted by the churches in such a superstitious way that it is impossible for human reason to understand or accept..."(The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 449).
In a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer on November 29, 1937, is an explanation that sums it up perfectly, and coincides with the uses of the term found in the Bible:
"As regards to your questions concerning the station of Jesus Christ, and His return as explained in the Gospel. It is true that Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of God, but this, as explained by Bahá'u'lláh in the 'Íqán, does not indicate any Physical relationship whatever. Its meaning is entirely spiritual and points to the close relationship existing between Him and the Almighty God. Nor does it necessarily indicate any inherent superiority in the station of Jesus over other Prophets and Messengers. As far as their spiritual nature is concerned all Prophets can be regarded as Sons of God, as they all reflect His light, though not in an equal measure, and this difference in reflection is due to the conditions and circumstances under which they appear" (Lights of Guidance, 491).
These names and titles should not become a barrier to belief if we remember that God is the bearer of the "most excellent names" and titles. I am particularly fond of this verse from Baha'u'llah in the Seven Valleys:
"And I praise and glorify the first sea which hath branched from the ocean of the Divine Essence, and the first morn which hath glowed from the Horizon of Oneness, and the first sun which hath risen in the Heaven of Eternity, and the first fire which was lit from the Lamp of Preexistence in the lantern of singleness: He who was Ahmad in the kingdom of the exalted ones, and Muhammad amongst the concourse of the near ones, and Mahmud [1] in the realm of the sincere ones. '...by whichsoever (name) ye will, invoke Him: He hath most excellent names'" (The Seven Valleys, 2).