• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Jesus did not Rule the first time, but will Rule the second time?

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
G
What kind of "forest" and "trees" are you talking about? The events had a starting date. Was it 622AD? No. Not one of them. But, for Baha'is, they all had an ending date, I260 in the Islamic calendar.

But Baha'is keep laying it on. Was 666AD the year the Umayyad's got control of Islam? No, it was 661AD.

Umayyad dynasty, the first great Muslim dynasty to rule the empire of the caliphate (661–750 CE),​
So, what do Baha'is do? They add five years to that, because they say Jesus wasn't born in the year "zero". Great, but Baha's also keep switching from the lunar years of the Islamic calendar to the solar years of the Gregorian calendar.

And on top of that Baha'is make the Umayyad's the Beast power. Did they start in 622AD and last until 1844? No.

So, call it "forests" and "trees" if you want, but I just don't agree with the math and the interpretations.

I'd expect nothing less than for you to believe them completely and believe that I'm wrong in my thinking.
That reply CG is the essence of not seeing the Forrest because of the trees.

The 1260 Prophecy does not needs maths. Islam was to be abrogated in the year 1260, the Bible simply references AH1260.

Just the same as it was to be be abrogated in the year 1844, William Miller calculated that via mathematical calculations of prophecy and uses the Christian Calander, but when did that start, year 1 was not the birth of Christ.

I will offer no more on this.

Regards Tony
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
G

That reply CG is the essence of not seeing the Forrest because of the trees.

The 1260 Prophecy does not needs maths. Islam was to be abrogated in the year 1260, the Bible simply references AH1260.

Just the same as it was to be be abrogated in the year 1844, William Miller calculated that via mathematical calculations of prophecy and uses the Christian Calander, but when did that start, year 1 was not the birth of Christ.

I will offer no more on this.

Regards Tony
Well, you know what... your reply is the "essence" of what a "true believer" would say.

For Baha'is Muhammad and Ali are the "Two Witnesses". For Baha'i the "Three Woes" are Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah. For Baha'is 1844 is the day that Christ, Kalki, Maitreya and everybody else ever promised will return.

It can be no other way no matter what dates and times might have been given, no matter what events were predicted to take place... For Baha'is, they all have to add up to 1844 and to be a prophecy about Baha'u'llah... even though, it was the Bab that declared that year.

No problem... maybe for Christ. Baha'is have found verses to make it necessary for "Elijah" to come first. But does the prophecy say, "In 1844 Elijah will come and announce the coming of Christ"? No.

But what about the prophecies in some of the other religions? Does Kalki and Maitreya have an "Elijah" predicted to come announce their arrival?

It wouldn't matter... If Baha'is need there to be one, they will find a way to invent one. They will find a vague verse that alludes to something that can be interpreted to be whatever they need.

Instead of the "forest and trees" what if we look at the claims of the Baha'i Faith as a big puzzle. From far away, things look good. But do all the pieces really fit?

Baha'is say "yes." But I'm looking a little closer and seeing a reshaping of some the pieces to make them fit.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Just the same as it was to be be abrogated in the year 1844, William Miller calculated that via mathematical calculations of prophecy and uses the Christian Calander, but when did that start, year 1 was not the birth of Christ.
Daniel 8:8 The goat became very great, but at the height of its power the large horn was broken off, and in its place four prominent horns grew up toward the four winds of heaven.​
9 Out of one of them came another horn, which started small but grew in power to the south and to the east and toward the Beautiful Land. 10 It grew until it reached the host of the heavens, and it threw some of the starry host down to the earth and trampled on them. 11 It set itself up to be as great as the commander of the army of the Lord; it took away the daily sacrifice from the Lord, and his sanctuary was thrown down. 12 Because of rebellion, the Lord’s people[a] and the daily sacrifice were given over to it. It prospered in everything it did, and truth was thrown to the ground.​
13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to him, “How long will it take for the vision to be fulfilled—the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, the surrender of the sanctuary and the trampling underfoot of the Lord’s people?”​
14 He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated.”​
Who's this goat? Who are these horns? Who is this horn that grows out of the other horn?

This horn took away the daily sacrifice and threw down the sanctuary and there is a rebellion that causes desolation and the trampling of the Lord's people. When did that happen?

Now we have this prophecy... how long before the sanctuary will be reconsecrated? The answer is 2300 evenings and mornings. What does that mean? A morning and evening is one day. So, is it 1150 days? Who knows and I know you don't care.

What's important... William Miller didn't count his 2300 years from any of this. He started counting from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem in 457BC.

The decree by Artaxerxes empowered Ezra to ordain laws and to set up magistrates and judges for the restored Jewish state. It also gave him unlimited funds to rebuild whatever he wanted at Jerusalem.​
Miller concluded that 457 BC was the beginning of the 2,300-day (or -year) prophecy, which meant that it would end about 1843–1844 (457 BC + 2300 years = 1843 AD). And so, too, the Second Advent would happen about that time.​
What does that have to do with all those things about desecrating and trampling? Nothing. But here's what it says later in Daniel...

Daniel 9:25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.​
So, that's better. We have a decree going out to rebuild Jerusalem. And one of them was in 457BC. But do we add 2300 years to it? No, we add seven sevens and sixty-two sevens to it. Whatever that adds up to. But it says that after the sixty-two sevens some Anointed One is killed.
William Miller has all that adding up to the time of Jesus. But it says nothing about the 2300 evenings and mornings with this prophecy.

But it does say that the sacrifice will be stopped, and an abomination will be set up in the Temple. So, why not start the 2300 evenings and mornings from whenever that happened?

But, of course, I know why not... Because it will not add up to 1844. The only way to get to 1844 is to start counting 2300 days that gets converted to years from 457BC when the decree to start rebuilding Jerusalem happened.

Why complicate things? We should just start backwards. We want it to end in 1844. So, from that we subtract 2300 years and get to 457BC or so.

But still... is it 2300 days? Must be. 2300 evenings and mornings was probably a typo.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Well, you know what... your reply is the "essence" of what a "true believer" would say.

For Baha'is Muhammad and Ali are the "Two Witnesses". For Baha'i the "Three Woes" are Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah. For Baha'is 1844 is the day that Christ, Kalki, Maitreya and everybody else ever promised will return.

It can be no other way no matter what dates and times might have been given, no matter what events were predicted to take place... For Baha'is, they all have to add up to 1844 and to be a prophecy about Baha'u'llah... even though, it was the Bab that declared that year.

No problem... maybe for Christ. Baha'is have found verses to make it necessary for "Elijah" to come first. But does the prophecy say, "In 1844 Elijah will come and announce the coming of Christ"? No.

But what about the prophecies in some of the other religions? Does Kalki and Maitreya have an "Elijah" predicted to come announce their arrival?

It wouldn't matter... If Baha'is need there to be one, they will find a way to invent one. They will find a vague verse that alludes to something that can be interpreted to be whatever they need.

Instead of the "forest and trees" what if we look at the claims of the Baha'i Faith as a big puzzle. From far away, things look good. But do all the pieces really fit?

Baha'is say "yes." But I'm looking a little closer and seeing a reshaping of some the pieces to make them fit.
It is naught to do with the needs of any Baha'i CG, and we are not have to make the pieces fit, they either do, or do not.

Regards Tony
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
It is naught to do with the needs of any Baha'i CG, and we are not have to make the pieces fit, they either do, or do not.

Regards Tony
No. The pieces need to be found and pulled out of the Scriptures of the other religions and then interpreted. They don't come perfectly shaped. Like the "Comforter" verses... Christians shape them to fit their beliefs. Baha'is shape them to fit theirs.

But you know, the resurrection verses are still good ones to look at. Evangelical Christians are fine with a very literal interpretation of those verses. Jesus died, came back to life. then ascended into the clouds and will one day return.

That doesn't work for Baha'is. So, there must be a different way to interpret those verses. And yes, there is. Jesus died and stayed dead. His spirit rose. Maybe it was a vision or something, but the disciples did not see a physically resurrected Jesus. Since bodies can't float off into the sky and survive, that too must have some other meaning. And is the same man, Jesus, going to come back? No, that would be crazy to think that. Must be that the "Spirit" of Christ is what rose and what is coming back. But not in the same body, but with a different body and a new name.

Now, after a little fudging and interpretation, the pieces fit perfectly. But do all the pieces fit? Are there some pieces sitting on the side. Pieces that don't seem to fit anywhere? Even if there are, why would they matter to Baha'is? The Baha'i puzzle is finished and complete. It doesn't need nor want any other pieces.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No. The pieces need to be found and pulled out of the Scriptures of the other religions and then interpreted. They don't come perfectly shaped. Like the "Comforter" verses... Christians shape them to fit their beliefs. Baha'is shape them to fit theirs.

But you know, the resurrection verses are still good ones to look at. Evangelical Christians are fine with a very literal interpretation of those verses. Jesus died, came back to life. then ascended into the clouds and will one day return.

That doesn't work for Baha'is. So, there must be a different way to interpret those verses. And yes, there is. Jesus died and stayed dead. His spirit rose. Maybe it was a vision or something, but the disciples did not see a physically resurrected Jesus. Since bodies can't float off into the sky and survive, that too must have some other meaning. And is the same man, Jesus, going to come back? No, that would be crazy to think that. Must be that the "Spirit" of Christ is what rose and what is coming back. But not in the same body, but with a different body and a new name.

Now, after a little fudging and interpretation, the pieces fit perfectly. But do all the pieces fit? Are there some pieces sitting on the side. Pieces that don't seem to fit anywhere? Even if there are, why would they matter to Baha'is? The Baha'i puzzle is finished and complete. It doesn't need nor want any other pieces.
If that works for you CG. Personally I know I am not able to know it all.

I can attempt to embrace the Forrest of the Oneness of Humanity, embracing living life in virtue, morality, trustworthiness and trufulness.

Regards Tony
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
As if during the time of Jesus, before the time of Jesus, or after the time of Jesus, there has never been a "false" prophet.

Again, it's amazing what people can do when they quote mine the Bible. This one verse is supposed to be "proof" that Muhammad is not a false prophet?

Now one thing I know is true is what it says in Mark 16... We will be able to handle snakes and drink poison and not be harmed. And naturally, the reason I know it's true is because it says so in the Scriptures.
That seems to be a problem of defining what "scriptures" are. Who is Mark? And who is the "worthless shepherd" of Zechariah 11:17? A "false prophet" is defined in "scripture" as one who deems themselves to speak for God and make an untrue prediction. That would include the false prophet Paul, who said "we shall not all sleep/die", yet here we are, he and the "we" he spoke to are all dead, and that night they had slept.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Now, after a little fudging and interpretation, the pieces fit perfectly. But do all the pieces fit? Are there some pieces sitting on the side. Pieces that don't seem to fit anywhere? Even if there are, why would they matter to Baha'is? The Baha'i puzzle is finished and complete. It doesn't need nor want any other pieces.
No, the Baha'i puzzle is not finished and complete, but we do not need to figure out the entire puzzle and have all the pieces fit perfectly together in order to believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God.

There will always be more pieces that can be added to the puzzle. You can add as many pieces as you want to the puzzle but that won't change the fact that if Baha'u'llah was a Messenger from God, that is who He was. Those added pieces that 'you believe' don't fit only serve as distractions.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
The doors to the process actually started in the year AH1260 or AD1844, before Baha'u'llah was exiled to the Holy Land.

It started with the "Edict of Toleration" which basically allowed the Jews ro return unhindered. It is remarkable that the door opened in the same year the Messiah was prophesied to return.


Regards Tony
Which "edict of toleration"? 313 by Constantine for the "Christians", or the one of 1844 were the Ottoman empire decreed to quit killing Bahist and other apostates? Edict of Toleration (1844) - Wikipedia Whereas "Jews" could be considered "apostates" to Muslims, but the term "Jew" was not used in "your edict of Toleration.

On 21 March 1844, the Sublime Porte of the Ottoman Empire submitted a note to the British and French embassies promising to cease the executions of apostates from Islam.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Sorry, I don't think Paul is a false prophet. But, I think he is often misunderstood.
Paul is according to him, all things to all men, a Jew to Jews, and a Gentile to the Gentiles. His message is found in the eye of the beholder. 6.5 billion people, would have 6.5 billion different views. Or in the case of "Christianity", with around 34,000 different sects, with differing views within those sects.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
The issue we have is wanting promisses fulfilled in our lifetime, but God's days are 1000 years, and the prophecies unfold over decades and centuries.

The false prophets will not be allowed into the Land of Isreal, the true Prophets will be. Ezekiel 13:9.

Baha'u'llah taught and has brought peace, the Baha'i live it, numbers are temporary, as Jesus alao did not have a significant amount of followers for a few hundred years. It is a world religion, so no optimism needed. It is known as the 2nd most widespread religion only behind Christianity in its geographical establishment.


Regards Tony
The false prophets are described in Matthew 7:13-15 as "wolves in sheep's clothing". Muhammad may have wanted to be viewed as a sheep, but he comes across as a "ravenous wolf", whereas your average Bahist, a son of Muhammad, tries to come across as a woke Marxist Progressive, and appears as the empathetic type, that the "woke" will surely follow. (Mt 7:13). I think the carrot on his stick is one of Marxism, and his followers are mostly from the dispossessed, excepting for the variable woke elite women and any men in their wake.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Show me any verses where Jesus promised to come back.
For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to everyone according to his deeds.
Matt. 16:27

And this scripture shows he means himself, when he says Son of Man.

But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins..." (then he said to the paralytic), "Get up, and take up your mat, and go up to your house."
Matt. 9:6
How do you explain the following verses?
John 14:19, John 16:10, John 17:4, John 17:11
I think those means Jesus is going to his Father and therefore people can't see him. I don't think it means people will never see him again, because he promised to come back.

Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more; but you will see me. Because I live, you will live also.
John 14:19
about righteousness, because I am going to my Father, and you won't see me any more;
John 16:10
I glorified you on the earth. I have accomplished the work which you have given me to do.
John 17:4
I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them through your name which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are.
John 17:11

And I think it is possible to see Jesus when one dies, as said in this:

Jesus said to him, "Assuredly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise."
Luke 23:43
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
The idea of the equality of human beings was introduced in the very first Christian documents. "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" wrote St. Paul.
One day, while staring at the ceiling, I asked myself that if women were so bad off prior to Jesus, how did they get rich enough to let him mooch off of them?
 

jimb

Active Member
Premium Member
One day, while staring at the ceiling, I asked myself that if women were so bad off prior to Jesus, how did they get rich enough to let him mooch off of them?
I don't understand where you're coming from. Some women (but by no means the majority) held important positions in their communities and in their churches.

In the Old Testament it calls Miriam a prophet: "Then Miriam the prophet, Aaron’s sister, took a timbrel in her hand, and all the women followed her, with timbrels and dancing. (Exodus 15:20).

In the New Testament, it says women will prophesy: "So then, brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid anyone from speaking in tongues." 1 Corinthians 14:39

I think that this clearly shows the role of women in both Testaments.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
If Jesus established the kingdom of God on earth as you claim, then why are Christians waiting for Jesus to return to earth and rule as King?
I believe we can obey Jesus but we will run against the rules of other governments doing so. If I went to Saudi Arabia and preached the gospel I would be put in jail and/or maybe executed.
 
Top