Disagreements regarding Chosen Ones of God

[TransmutingSoul]

Only people belonging to the Jewish religion can be called "Jew" because the name itself is taken from our last kingdom to mean the nation of people who follow the Jewish religion and is unrelated to any theological doctrine.

I would also offer, apart from the other reply made, that I see a glorious future for the Jew in the Holy Land, a future promised to the historical line of Jewish people.

I offer this as our Oneness is to be a Unity in our Diversity of understandings. Baha'u'llah has written of Moses;

"..Armed with the rod of celestial dominion, adorned with the white hand of divine knowledge, and proceeding from the Párán of the love of God, and wielding the serpent of power and everlasting majesty, He shone forth from the Sinai of light upon the world. He summoned all the peoples and kindreds of the earth to the kingdom of eternity, and invited them to partake of the fruit of the tree of faithfulness. Surely you are aware of the fierce opposition of Pharaoh and his people, and of the stones of idle fancy which the hands of the infidels cast upon that blessed Tree. So much so that Pharaoh and his people finally arose and exerted their utmost endeavor to extinguish with the waters of falsehood and denial the fire of that sacred Tree, oblivious of the truth that no earthly water can quench the flame of divine wisdom, nor mortal blasts extinguish the lamp of everlasting dominion......"

It has also been said;

"Few peoples can trace their history continuously over thirty-two centuries. But even more remarkable is the fact that so much of the history of the Jews is embodied in one book- -the Hebrew Bible. Thus the Hebrew Bible is the history of a people as well as a sacred scripture. In describing the development of a single people, representative of the entire human race, the Bible makes sacred the history of all humanity...."

Notes on Judaism from a Bahá'í Perspective

Peace be with you always, regards Tony

 

[Deeje]

That would be a personal opinion of what has been offered in the Bible. It has no more weight than this following suggestion.

I see there is more to what it is to be a Jew, this from the web is an example;

"..But there is also a deeper meaning to the name "Jew. The first individual to be called a Jew (Yehudi) in the Scriptures was Mordecai, of Purim fame. "There was a man, a Yehudi, in Shushan the capital, whose name was Mordecai . . . a Yemini" (Esther 2:5). The Talmud (Tractate Megillah12b) asks on this: "He is called a Yehudi, implying that he descended from Judah; he then is called Yemini, implying that he is a Benjaminite!" Rabbi Jochanan responds: "He was a Benjaminite. Yet he was called a Yehudi because he rejected idolatry—and anyone who rejects idolatry is called a Yehudi."

The commentaries explain that the name Yehudah shares the same root as the Hebrew word hoda'ah, which means acknowledgement or submission. One who acknowledges G‑d's existence and submits to His authority—to the extent that he is willing to sacrifice his life for the sanctification of His name—he is called a Yehudi...."

Thus with this we can see a Jew could also be a person that submits to Gods Law, a major teaching of Islam and the Baha'i Faith also.

Could I have a link for that quote please? I'd be interested to see what his connections are.

Interesting also that a commentary by this person can have such an impact on you Tony. Could it be that you need to believe him?

I think the Jews know what a Jew is according to their scripture, as Tumah has said.

That means all humanity is covered by Gods Laws and has a choice of Gods Messengers.

That, of course fits your own chosen belief system, but it isn't what the Bible teaches. God has only ever dealt with one nation to whom he gave his laws and obligated them from birth to follow them....penalties applied if they failed to obey them. He did not do that with any other nation. Nor did he send any other prophets to his people. When Israel mixed their worship with pagan practices, he let them know in no uncertain terms that he was displeased with that.

In order to worship the true God of Israel, one had to be accepted into that nation as a proselyte and thereafter live as a Jew according to Jewish law. There was no place for anyone with foreign beliefs....there was only a place for foreigners who complied with all the rules that applied to Israel. So that does not allow for the wide acceptance of other faiths....just the opposite in fact.

This adds weight to Christ saying I have more sheep that are not of that fold and tells of a day of One Fold and One Shepherd, our One and Only God.

We have a completely different understanding of that scripture. An interpretation that agrees with all that Jesus taught. The Bible's narrative plays out over many thousands of years, and the gradual unfolding of the understanding of its many features has to blend with all that has gone before.....it is one story and the Jews play a vital role in it because they were chosen as the only family line who would produce the Messiah. His death would accomplish all that Adam's disobedience brought upon the whole human race.

The flock that Jesus gathered were from Jewish stock because they are the ones with whom the covenant was made...but Jesus was sent to the "lost sheep of Israel", not to the Pharisees and Sadducees. These "lost sheep" would come into a new pen, under a new covenant, with a new Shepherd, and they would be joined later by the Gentile converts to Christianity, rather than to Judaism.

As all these had the promise of a heavenly resurrection; all the first Christians made up the original flock with one faith, one hope, one baptism and one destination....heaven. These were a finite group however, but as "kings and priests" who would be resurrected "first" (Revelation 20:6) they need subjects to rule over, and sinners for whom to act as priests. The "other sheep" to our understanding are the earthly subjects of the heavenly kingdom....these, it says are from 'all tribes, peoples and languages'. But the one thing they will have in common is the worship of the true God.

The "sheep" worship Yahweh alone and support Christ's "brothers"....the "goats" do not and because they do not recognize who Christ's "brothers" are, they render them no assistance. (Matthew 25:31-46)

That is how we understand these things.

 

[nPeace]

In Jewish theology, if Satan is taken to be a physical entity, he is an angel of G-d and he is not evil. He brings souls before G-d and accuses them, hence he is called, sometimes, The Accuser. He is something like G-d's attorney. This is, of course, in-case you were unfamiliar with this aspect of Jewish theology.

Jewish theology is not what I follow though. My doing so would be equivalent to living back in Jesus' day, and listening to the teachings of the religious leaders, and the opinion of the Jews.
Jesus was against this.

Beware of the scribes who want to walk around in robes and want greetings in the marketplaces 39 and front seats in the synagogues and the most prominent places at evening meals. 40 They devour the houses of the widows, and for show they make long prayers. These will receive a more severe judgment.

- Mark 12:38-40

Matthew 16:5-12 Keep your eyes open and watch out for the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. or teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

So, I go by what's written. That's best.

They pick parts of prophecies that are not applicable to the messiah and apply them to Jesus, or turn things into prophecies which are not.

Ones which immediately come to mind are 'Out of Egypt I called my son.' [Matt. 2:15]

The full verse is Hosea 11:1, which says:

"When Israel was a child, I loved him,
And out of Egypt I called my son."

(Both from the NKJV)

And,

'A voice was heard in Ramah,
Lamentation, weeping, and great mourning,
Rachael weeping for her children,
Refusing to be comforted,
Because they are no more.'
[Matt: 2:18]

Here is the full context from Jeremiah 31:15-17

Thus says the L-rd:

“A voice was heard in Ramah,
Lamentation and bitter weeping,
Rachel weeping for her children,
Refusing to be comforted for her children,
Because they are no more.”

Thus says the L-rd:

“Refrain your voice from weeping,
And your eyes from tears;
For your work shall be rewarded, says the L-rd,
And they shall come back from the land of the enemy.
There is hope in your future, says the L-rd,
That your children shall come back to their own border.

This is about Israel returning from their exile in their enemies' lands.

I understand that persons have made that argument, but the number of those they can pick out still pale in comparison to the others that are direct, clear, and precise.
So I don't see that argument holding any weight.

The High Priest was, at this time, a Sadducee. The Sadducees and Pharisees were radically different in their theology. Modern Rabbinic Judaism is the same as Pharisaic Judaism. The Sadducees, however, denied the resurrection, eternal life and so on, and thus were not exactly on great terms with the Pharisees.

Acts 9:1

Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

Saul/Paul does not need any authority from the High Priest, a Sadducee, because Paul is a Pharisee. He tell us so:

Acts 23:6
But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.

Paul even gives us one of the differences between the two as 'of the hope and resurrection of the dead' to cement his being a Pharisee.

Note, I am not trying to crush your faith by explaining these. I understand that my saying this is not going to make you sit up and go, 'Well I never! I can't be a Christian anymore now!'

No, please don't hold back, if you feel that something is against my faith.
I would rather have my faith challenged, than not.
I want everything thrown at my foundation. That way I can test how solid it is, and have added proof that it is worth standing on.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see how a Pharisee having to go to a Sadducee in authority causes any problem with the Biblical record.
In fact, I think it would rather lend support to it, since we know that the Romans appointed the High Priest in the province of Judah, which would explain why the Pharisees had so much fear.
John 11:48, 49
48 If we let him go on this way, they will all put faith in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them: “You do not know anything at all,

See the list of High Priest here: List of High Priests of Israel - Wikipedia
This is the guy - Ananus the successor to Caiaphas - who was High Priest at the time.
It doesn't say whether or not he was a Sadducee, but there were others with a name like his, whom Josephus said was responsible for James' death. So it's highly likely he was a Sadducee. (Ananus [Perhaps the Romans didn't trust the Pharisees as far as they could throw them. ])

What is known of him, would only gives further support to the Bible, if certain details could be confirmed.
Theophilus ben Ananus
A growing but still uncommon belief points to this person as the person to whom the Gospel of Luke is addressed, but Theophilus is a common enough name that there are many other possibilities for the addressee of Luke's Gospel and Acts......................
Archeological evidence confirming the existence of Theophilus, as an ossuary has been discovered bearing the inscription, "Johanna granddaughter of Theophilus, the High Priest".The details of this ossuary have been published in the Israel Exploration Journal. Therefore, Theophilus had at least one other son named Jonathan, father to Johanna. The name Johanna appears twice in the New Testament in the Gospel of Luke. First as one of women healed by Jesus who travels with Jesus and the disciples to Jerusalem. Her second appearance also in the Gospel of Luke is on Easter Sunday when she and other women visits the empty tomb. It is uncertain, however, whether the Johanna in the Gospel of Luke is the same Johanna as the one mentioned on the ossuary.

Yes, that's why I quoted the Qur'an to you, so we agree. Muslims are forced to claim that our scriptures are corrupted, however, because of the glaring inconsistencies between the two. What a conundrum!

This is funny. There are many funny ahadith, indeed.

Yup.

 

[nPeace]

Boy, did I miss a lot.
I don't even have the time to even go through all either.
@Deeje Hey sis. I really enjoyed that post - the one with the tree illustration. Excellent!

Thanks guys - Tony Bristow-Stagg , adrian009, for the information.
@Tony Bristow-Stagg
Going by scripture... 1. We agree that when the Messiah arrived, he started out preaching the good news to the lost sheep of Israel (Jews), and we know that the way was opened to the Gentiles, when Peter preached to Cornelius - 36 C.E.

However, before Jesus left the earth, he said this...
8 But you will receive power when the holy spirit comes upon you, and you will be witnesses of me in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the most distant part of the earth.” 9 After he had said these things, while they were looking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their sight.
- Acts 1:8, 9

So 2. we know that Jesus commissioned the preaching of the good news of the Kingdom, to his followers, and we know that it was something that would be done throughout the world - to people of all nations, according to Matthew 24:14, and it would continue to the end, according to Matthew 28:19, 20.

3. It is evident that the prophecy in Daniel, which Jesus referred to was fulfilled in 70 C.E., when the holy place - the holy city Jerusalem was destroyed, by the Roman armies surrounded them with stakes.
We would arrive at this from comparing the following:
Compare Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14-18; Luke 21:20; Daniel 9:27; 11:31; Daniel 12:11

There likely is a second fulfillment.
With regard to prophecy though, as I said before, anyone can interpret it as they wish, and unless specific details are given, there is no way we can prove we have the correct interpretation, so this is not sufficient to claim that we have reason to accept that it applies to any future prophet, or book. (The same applies to the book of Revelation.)

We can be sure of its first fulfillment since Jesus gave specific details concerning the siege and destruction of Jerusalem.

Gaius Cestius Gallus attacked Jerusalem in 66 C.E. and lay seige to it.
After a siege of nine days, Gallus decided to fall back to the coast. His decision appears to have been based on the loss of siege equipment by ambush and the threatened cutting of his supply lines as the October rains began.

Unable to take the Holy City upon the Temple Mount, he withdrew.
This break in the attack would have allowed persons to heed Jesus' warning to flee to the mountains, which they would have done.

Vespasian reengages in 67 C.E.
... leaving his son, General Titus to finish it - which he did in 70 C.E.
Titus reportedly refused to accept a wreath of victory, as he claimed that he had not won the victory on his own, but had been the vehicle through which their God had manifested his wrath against his people.

However, it is possible to use scriptures to determine if Jesus would have a successor from God, and Jesus himself tells us.
4. We know that when John the Baptist, who was in prison, sent to ask Jesus, “Are you the Coming One, or are we to expect a different one?”
Jesus responded...
Go and report to John what you are hearing and seeing: 5 The blind are now seeing and the lame are walking, the lepers are being cleansed and the deaf are hearing, the dead are being raised up and the poor are being told the good news. 6 Happy is the one who finds no cause for stumbling in me.. . .
Matthew 11:1-6

@adrian009 I don't understand why you went from Elijah to Jesus' coming though. Were you making a connection? We know that there are prophecies about Jesus coming, and many other things, but I don't see how that is connected to Elijah.

Jesus continued to speak about John, and said this...
7 . . .“What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed being tossed by the wind? 8 What, then, did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft garments? Why, those wearing soft garments are in the houses of kings. 9 Really, then, why did you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and far more than a prophet. 10 This is the one about whom it is written: ‘Look! I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way ahead of you!’ 11 Truly I say to you, among those born of women, there has not been raised up anyone greater than John the Baptist, but a lesser person in the Kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it. 13 For all, the Prophets and the Law, prophesied until John; 14 and if you are willing to accept it, he is ‘Elijah who is to come.’ 15 Let the one who has ears listen.
Matthew 11:7-15

Going back to the prophecy, this is what we read...
Malachi 4:5 Look! I am sending to you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awe-inspiring day of Jehovah.

Matthew 17:10-13 However, the disciples put the question to him: “Why, then, do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 11 In reply he said: “Elijah is indeed coming and will restore all things. 12 However, I say to you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him but did whatever they wanted with him. In this way also, the Son of man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples perceived that he spoke to them about John the Baptist.

5. We have Jesus' confirmation.
Elijah came and fulfilled his assignment, paving the way to the one Moses spoke of. (Deuteronomy 18:15) . . .Jehovah your God will raise up for you from among your brothers a prophet like me. You must listen to him.
Luke 7:16; John 1:45; 6:14; Acts 3:22; 7:37

Is there another? Not according to scripture, from what we can tell. To use Daniel and Revelation to try to support an arrived of a future prophet, leaves those who believe, open to deception, by anyone who would interpret those scriptures in which ever way they will.

That cannot be said of the scriptures that were fulfilled in Jesus. So I think if Bahai truly believes that it is the interpretation of scripture - not scripture - that is corrupt, then we should be careful.

I really like Deeje's post. Her explanation and illustration is worth considering. I like mine too. I think it makes a very important point, but I like Deeje's illustration better.

The Bible we all agree is the original, and nothing replaces it, but Satan the Devil, the crafty one, is out to get us, and Christians don't have to question his success.

He has many fooled with his counterfeit imitations.
It's really up to us whether we end up like Eve, and the rest after her.
2 Corinthians 11:3, 4 . . .But I am afraid that somehow, as the serpent seduced Eve by its cunning, your minds might be corrupted away from the sincerity and the chastity that are due the Christ. 4 For as it is, if someone comes and preaches a Jesus other than the one we preached, or you receive a spirit other than what you received, or good news other than what you accepted, you easily put up with him.

Don't be a victim friends.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

3. It is evident that the prophecy in Daniel, which Jesus referred to was fulfilled in 70 C.E., when the holy place - the holy city Jerusalem was destroyed, by the Roman armies surrounded them with stakes.
We would arrive at this from comparing the following:
Compare Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14-18; Luke 21:20; Daniel 9:27; 11:31; Daniel 12:11

Hello,

I suggest this passage from the Book I had provided the link before.

"In Matthew, chapter 24, verse 3, Christ clearly says that what Daniel meant by this prophecy was the date of the manifestation, and this is the verse: “As He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?” One of the explanations He gave them in reply was this (v. 15): “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand).” In this answer He referred them to the eighth chapter of the Book of Daniel, saying that everyone who reads it will understand that it is this time that is spoken of. Consider how clearly the manifestation of the Báb is spoken of in the Old Testament and in the Gospel."

Now, referring to Daniel, chapter 8:

"In the eighth chapter of the Book of Daniel, verse thirteen, it is said: “Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?” Then he answered (v. 14): “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed”; (v. 17) “But he said unto me … at the time of the end shall be the vision.” That is to say, how long will this misfortune, this ruin, this abasement and degradation last? meaning, when will be the dawn of the Manifestation? Then he answered, “Two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” Briefly, the purport of this passage is that he appoints two thousand three hundred years, for in the text of the Bible each day is a year. Then from the date of the issuing of the edict of Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem until the day of the birth of Christ there are 456 years, and from the birth of Christ until the day of the manifestation of the Báb there are 1844 years. When you add 456 years to this number it makes 2300 years. That is to say, the fulfillment of the vision of Danieltook place in the year A.D. 1844, and this is the year of the Báb’s manifestation according to the actual text of the Book of Daniel. Consider how clearly he determines the year of manifestation; there could be no clearer prophecy for a manifestation than this."

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 36-44

See, how clearly the dates matches with Manifestation of the Bab?

 

[Dawnofhope]

The Bible we all agree is the original, and nothing replaces it, but Satan the Devil, the crafty one, is out to get us, and Christians don't have to question his success.

He has many fooled with his counterfeit imitations.
It's really up to us whether we end up like Eve, and the rest after her.
2 Corinthians 11:3, 4 . . .But I am afraid that somehow, as the serpent seduced Eve by its cunning, your minds might be corrupted away from the sincerity and the chastity that are due the Christ. 4 For as it is, if someone comes and preaches a Jesus other than the one we preached, or you receive a spirit other than what you received, or good news other than what you accepted, you easily put up with him.

Don't be a victim friends.

Its good we agree on the Bible as a reference point and that Jesus is the Messiah foretold in the Tanakh.

Baha'is don't believe in Satan as the JWs believe. He is a symbol of our lower nature, our ego and misplaced passions if you like.

The belief that different religions such as Islam and the Baha'i Faith are the work of Satan because they differ from Christianity makes it difficult to have a meaningful discussion about our respective faiths. The argument that it must be from Satan because it differs from your understanding of Christianity (that most Christians reject) sounds like how most of the Jews felt and still do in regards Jesus's Teaching.

As John the Baptist was Elijah before Christ, so too was the Bab in regards the Return of Christ, Baha'u'llah.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@adrian009 I don't understand why you went from Elijah to Jesus' coming though. Were you making a connection? We know that there are prophecies about Jesus coming, and many other things, but I don't see how that is connected to Elijah.

I think i know the point @adrian009 was making by referring to return of Elijah.
Conceptually, the Bible teaches that the return of a prophet is not physical. John was the return of Elijah, even though, He was not physically Elijah.
Likewise, when Jesus promised He returns, it does not have to be a physical return of the same person, but a new Christ who spiritually is the return of Jesus is in line with the Scripture and Logic. Did not Jesus say, He shall come back with a new name? Therefore, if He returns spiritually, what excuse can be made for rejecting Him? Can anyone say, No, you are not return of Christ because your body and name is not Jesus? If this excuse is acceptable, then, rejection of John as Return of Eijah would have also been acceptable. Now, do you see the connection?

The proof that Jesus did not mean He physically returns, is the fact that no where in old testament says that Messiah will leave the world the first time, and that same Messiah returns again.

 

[Trailblazer]

The proof that Jesus did not mean He physically returns, is the fact that no where in old testament says that Messiah will leave the world the first time, and that same Messiah returns again.

Not only that, but Jesus said he was not coming back...
Jesus said that He had finished the work that God gave Him to do and He was no more in the world and He was going to the Father. This indicates that Jesus never planned to return (I am no more in the world) and there was no need to return since He finished the work God gave Him to do.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

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.
​

Then in the next chapter you have these verses:

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
​

These two verses completely negate that Jesus is the King of this world, or that Jesus will ever come to this world to rule it, and they fit perfectly together with John 17:4 and John 17:11. Jesus came into this world to (1) glorify God (glorified thee on the earth) and (2) that I should bear witness unto the truth. He did that so there is no more reason for Jesus to be IN this world again.
That is why Jesus said “I am no more in the world.”

 

[Trailblazer]

Question: why there is always disagreement about interpretations of the Books of God when it comes to those verses related to a promised person? Can we say God cannot get His message clear to prevent disagreements?

The answer to that question is really simple. Those of each religion have made the Messiah/Promised One in their own image. He has to fulfill their prophecies the way they interpret them so they will be the chosen people when the Messiah returns.

Also, since they do not believe the Messiah has come yet, they have to retain this image of the Messiah in their heads in order to retain their beliefs in their religion. In short, they are attached to their religion and they refuse to relinquish it. This is basic psychology.

 

[Deeje]

There are many ways of interpreting sacred writings that are nearly two thousand years old. In the modern multicultural world it makes no sense to many of us to take an exclusive approach. In my day to day work as a medical doctor I meet many people from different faiths and the experience I have with many Muslims, Buddhists, Christians and Hindus is they live lifes worthy of admiration. The Christians don't distinguish themselves as any better or worse than other religious adherents. I read the sacred writiings of these faiths and see how they would bring out the excellent qualities in the people I see. It reminds me of the words of Jesus, by their fruits ye shall know them.

Adrian, it is my understanding that being a "good" person is only half of what God requires. It occurs to me that atheists are sometimes the best humanitarians and advocates for planet Earth. Being 'godless' does not win them any favor with the Creator however.

When Jesus was asked what were the the greatest commandments, he only listed two..... 'loving God with our whole being...and to love our neighbor as ourselves'. What came first? We can be the best neighbors in the world, but if we don't love God, where does that leave us? And if we only love our own version of God we have defeated ourselves as well. We have to love him for who he is, not who we want to make him out to be.

In Eden what did God require first and foremost? Wasn't it obedience, out of an acknowledgment of who God was and respect for what belonged to him? What was it that should have prompted that obedience? Wasn't it love for a generous Father?

These are qualities that all the main religions teach and are reflected in the lives of their followers. So we need to be sensible when interpreting scipture to ensure it reflects reality.

Being sensible doesn't mean putting a convenient interpretation on Jesus' words to make things more palatable. It means seeing what Jesus said and not allowing reality to bend it out of shape so that it sits better.

I see the Baha'i religion to be one that wants to be all things to all people, but sacrificing the principles of Christ and the Creator in the process.

Realistically, what story does the Bible tell with regard to those who followed God's commands and those who didn't? Was it about being good? Or was it about following God's commands to the letter, out of obedience?
Why was there a law? Why was it only given to Israel? Why did God not give these laws to everyone? Why keep Israel separate from all the nations in their worship and conduct if everyone was acceptable to him? It makes no sense.

Jesus taught an almost exclusively Jewish audience and the author of Matthew refers repeatedly Jesus's claim to be the Messiah prophecised in the Tanakh. There's nothing to suggest any criticism of religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism that were largely unknown to Jesus's audience or to Islam that wasn't to emerge as a religion for nearly 600 years.

Can I ask why you think he would? What in all of Christ's teachings gives you the impression that those of any other belief system could be acceptable to his Father? All that effort to keep Israel's worship separate, was for what purpose then? All the effort to teach Gentiles to leave their former religions and become Christians was for what purpose then? That is very illogical to me.

The way many Christians have interpreted their scripture turns their faith into an "I'm right and your wrong religion" and the JWs if I understand correctly takes it to another level and says to all the other Christians "We're right and your wrong".

We as God's worshippers do not do anything that Jesus didn't tell us to do.
We see the conduct of Christendom, as a parallel of Judaism in the first century. Once they were God's people, but they both fell into the trap of adopting human tradition instead of just keeping their worship as God prescribed. This led to sectarianism and division. Both lost God's favour and Jesus is again leading "lost sheep" out of a pen of religious corruption and confusion.

There are only two roads Adrian....all of us are on either one or the other.....it isn't one superhighway with everyone going in one direction. Only one road leads somewhere...the other is a dead end. (Matthew 7:13-14)

The call to remove ourselves from "Babylon the great" (Revelation 18:4-5) means nothing if we have no idea what we are removing ourselves from.

The problem with that approach is Christians are not that good and the adherents of faiths they condemn not that bad. Similiarly, can you honestly claim JWs distinguish themselves from their fellow Christians.

It's never been about just being "good". Unless our form of worship is acceptable to the true God, being "good" is nice, but it doesn't lead anywhere. We are distinguishable from other "Christians" in that we hold very few beliefs in common with them. We do not worship the same God even. We are no part of Christendom....just as Jesus was really no part of what the Jewish system had become. He castigated its leaders at every opportunity...so did John the Baptist. That system was incorrigible and God knew it. (Matthew 23:37-39)

It IS about being "right" because that is what Jesus taught.....he came to divide and to separate people, not to unite all religions into one big happy family. We have choices to make and sometimes those choices involve separating from unbelieving family members who want us to stop serving the true God. (Matthew 10:34-38) What does it mean to be "worthy" of Christ?

The Bible's whole scenario is about a rebel spirit who wanted to take worship away from God and siphon it off for himself. Any worship that is given by men that is rejected by Jehovah, automatically goes to his adversary by default. if you are found on the wrong side of this issue, by mistaking whose side you are supporting, then those who think they are sheep, may well find that Jesus judges them as goats. (Matthew 7:21-23)

All humans justify their beliefs....as they must, but looking at their track record, humans are lousy judges of their own thinking and behavior.....don't you see....this is what the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" represented.....God's right to tell us what to do and our obligation to obey him because he knows better than we do. This is where humans fell short at the beginning and they are still falling short today. They want to worship God "their way".

Barking up the wrong tree will not get anyone anywhere. We have to be barking up the right tree.

JW's have a mission and that is what Jesus commanded all his disciples to do. (Matthew 28:19-20) The message that we preach forms the basis for the judgment to come. It is the only "witness" that the nations will get. (Matthew 24:14) We are known for our preaching work.....all over the world.

It is one message of salvation, preached in all nations by those whom Jesus appointed.....the pretender has a lot of fakes all hoodwinked by his deceptions, but you won't be led out of those deceptions unless you can see who Babylon the great is and extract yourself from her clutches.

That is how I see the situation.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Not only that, but Jesus said he was not coming back...
Jesus said that He had finished the work that God gave Him to do and He was no more in the world and He was going to the Father. This indicates that Jesus never planned to return (I am no more in the world) and there was no need to return since He finished the work God gave Him to do.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

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.
​

Then in the next chapter you have these verses:

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
​

These two verses completely negate that Jesus is the King of this world, or that Jesus will ever come to this world to rule it, and they fit perfectly together with John 17:4 and John 17:11. Jesus came into this world to (1) glorify God (glorified thee on the earth) and (2) that I should bear witness unto the truth. He did that so there is no more reason for Jesus to be IN this world again.
That is why Jesus said “I am no more in the world.”

Yes, and these verses too:

23In that day you will no longer ask me anything. Very truly I tell you, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. 24Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.

25“Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father. 26In that day you will ask in my name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf. 27No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. 28I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.”

These verses tells us that on the Promised Day, Jesus will no longer be with anyone on the earth, but the Father Himself will be with them.

 

[Tumah]

You may very well have accepted a wrong conclusion, as G_d to me is all inclusive of all His Creation. It lacks Humility to think one is chosen or special, as this is the Station of the messenger and Prophets chosen by G_d.

You can argue that Judaism is wrong. But you cannot argue that Jews don't understand what Judaism is about. We study our texts. And imposing Baha'i interpretation on Jewish texts is supercessionist.

For us our actions and deeds determine who we are and it is G_d to judge each and all of us.

Consider in all Faiths there have been people that fulfilled the following requirement as you have stated it.

"The Talmud clearly expresses that only those who reject idolatry at the risk of their life is given the epithet Yehudi. This has nothing to do with submitting to G-d's Law and is therefore not applicable to anyone who has not done so."

So Christains have done this, Muslims have done this, Babi and Baha'i have done this and Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists and the list goes on. They have become the chosen people by that sacrafice. The rank of Martydom can also be obtained in selfless service. Thus many millions of others also qualify.

I do not see any person following a different religion, I do see all of humanity struggling to find we are one people with One G-d. No one is special unless they serve all humanity, give their life to G_d.

Regards Tony

What you see and what the Talmud do not need to be the same. According to Judaism, half the religions you mentioned here are idolatrous. In fact, the Talmud that you quoted was written in the country of the Zoroastrians when Zoroastrianism was the dominant religion.
Do not conflate or interpolate your ideals and thoelogies into our texts. That is nothing more than self-serving and clearly not the intended understanding of the ones who made the statement and added it to the text.

 

[Tumah]

I would also offer, apart from the other reply made, that I see a glorious future for the Jew in the Holy Land, a future promised to the historical line of Jewish people.

I offer this as our Oneness is to be a Unity in our Diversity of understandings. Baha'u'llah has written of Moses;

"..Armed with the rod of celestial dominion, adorned with the white hand of divine knowledge, and proceeding from the Párán of the love of God, and wielding the serpent of power and everlasting majesty, He shone forth from the Sinai of light upon the world. He summoned all the peoples and kindreds of the earth to the kingdom of eternity, and invited them to partake of the fruit of the tree of faithfulness. Surely you are aware of the fierce opposition of Pharaoh and his people, and of the stones of idle fancy which the hands of the infidels cast upon that blessed Tree. So much so that Pharaoh and his people finally arose and exerted their utmost endeavor to extinguish with the waters of falsehood and denial the fire of that sacred Tree, oblivious of the truth that no earthly water can quench the flame of divine wisdom, nor mortal blasts extinguish the lamp of everlasting dominion......"

It has also been said;

"Few peoples can trace their history continuously over thirty-two centuries. But even more remarkable is the fact that so much of the history of the Jews is embodied in one book- -the Hebrew Bible. Thus the Hebrew Bible is the history of a people as well as a sacred scripture. In describing the development of a single people, representative of the entire human race, the Bible makes sacred the history of all humanity...."

Notes on Judaism from a Bahá'í Perspective

Peace be with you always, regards Tony

I have a total lack of interest in the perspective of other religions on Judaism or the Jewish people, so long as it doesn't lead them to violence against us. While Baha'u'llah is I'm sure quite important in your religion, he's nothing in mine.

 

[Trailblazer]

A perfect example of what I said in post #69 is exemplified in posts #72 and #73.

I rest my case.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I have a total lack of interest in the perspective of other religions on Judaism or the Jewish people, so long as it doesn't lead them to violence against us. While Baha'u'llah is I'm sure quite important in your religion, he's nothing in mine.

Then you have nothing to worry about the Baha'i Faith, we will always work with you in Love and Unity.

Regards Tony

 

[Deeje]

Is this not just repeating the rejection the Jews offered about Christs first apperance? The Jews said it would be unmissable and thus rejected Jesus the Christ.

You do understand why the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah don't you? In their minds, they had made him into some sort of superhero who would come with military might and liberate Israel, reestablish Israel as an dependent Kingdom, subjugate Rome, and elevate their religious leaders. Jesus was nothing like what they hoping for. He exposed them for what they really were, and he was associating with sinners and leading people away from the form of worship that elevated them. The liberation Jesus provided was spiritual and his teachings affected many of the people of the time profoundly because they could be relieved of the heavy yoke placed on them by the Pharisees and given true freedom to serve a loving God who wanted to forgive those who were made to feel that they were unforgivable.

When Christ returned it was to be in two distinct stages....one required a "sign" with a succession of world events to signal that Christ was "present" as King of God's Kingdom and actively guiding his disciples through this difficult period. (Matthew 24:3-14; Matthew 28:19-20) The culmination of that time period that Jesus called "the end of the age" was to be a visible event where Jesus, accompanied by his vast army of angels was to perform the final judgment on all living humans and to preserve a "great crowd" of his disciples through that time of "great tribulation".

This adds weight to the 2nd apperance that apart from sin will be for Salvation. A Salvation offered to the whole of mankind.

Salvation IS offered to all mankind, but not in the way Bahai's imagine. It is conditional. Life here on earth has always been conditional, right from day one. The condition was always obedience.

This is the world at this very moment, those that offer rebellion against the needed change and those that are working for the needed change. All that is happening at this time will pave the way for humanity to look for unity.

I believe that Bahai's see the need for the world to change but isn't it something you see being accomplished by the mutual co-operation of men and nations? According to the Bible, that will never happen. At the final part of the days, the Bible says that an "eighth king" will rise and take over control of the world. That eighth kings "springs from the seven" meaning that it is a co-operative arrangement of all nations giving their collective power over to one ruling entity under the auspices of the UN. This is the "one world government" that has been mooted for decades. It used to be called "the new world order" but as time has gone on, its gradually changing its appearance so as to be more palatable to the people who will ultimately give their support to it. It will seem like the answer to a prayer....."peace and security" at last for this world....but it is an illusion. There will be dreadful repercussions when people realize that they have lost the freedoms that so many fought for. It will become totalitarian in its approach. Religion will be outlawed. There will be one law for all and the enforcers are already trained and ready for the declaration to be made, so what will seem like a dream to many, will actually become a controlled nightmare. The powers that be will revel in their success.

Only Jesus' coming will save his disciples out of what will become the greatest tribulation in man's history. (Matthew 24:21; 1 John 2:15-17) Then those powers will understand who they are fighting against. There will be nowhere to run...nowhere to hide.

That is what we see looming. This is what we try to prepare ourselves for, and the message we preach can help to save others.

What are we getting saved from? From God's anger fully and rightfully expressed on this world under the devil's control. (Matthew 24:30; Daniel 2:44)

 

[Tumah]

Wheras Abraham and Moses and all the Prophest are

If the end of this statement was "are important in your religion", then yes, they are.
If the end of this statement was "are important in my religion", then so what? Their words are meaningless when you re-interpret their words to say whatever you want, rather than the message their texts convey.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You do understand why the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah don't you?

My observation is it is much the same reason that Christians rejected Muhammad, then the Christians and Muslims have rejected the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

What do we need to be saved from?

I see it is from our own selves, the selves that would argue against God and His Revelations.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If the end of this statement was "are important in your religion", then yes, they are.
If the end of this statement was "are important in my religion", then so what? Their words are meaningless when you re-interpret their words to say whatever you want, rather than the message their texts convey.

As this statement is applicable to the answer given below, then that would be a good reply;

The answer to that question is really simple. Those of each religion have made the Messiah/Promised One in their own image. He has to fulfill their prophecies the way they interpret them so they will be the chosen people when the Messiah returns.

Also, since they do not believe the Messiah has come yet, they have to retain this image of the Messiah in their heads in order to retain their beliefs in their religion. In short, they are attached to their religion and they refuse to relinquish it. This is basic psychology.

Regards Tony

 

[InvestigateTruth]

If the end of this statement was "are important in your religion", then yes, they are.
If the end of this statement was "are important in my religion", then so what? Their words are meaningless when you re-interpret their words to say whatever you want, rather than the message their texts convey.

But God spoke to prophets in an unclear language:

“When there is a prophet among you,

I, the Lord, reveal myself to them in visions,

I speak to them in dreams.

7But this is not true of my servant Moses;

he is faithful in all my house.

8With him I speak face to face,

clearly and not in riddles;

he sees the form of the Lord.

Why then were you not afraid

to speak against my servant Moses?”

Numbers 12

This verse tells us, that God only spoke to Moses clearly, and not in riddles. Many of the Parts of the Bible are conversations between God to other prophets, which according to this verse are not much clear. They are in riddles. Perhaps the readers of the Book would not clearly understand them. The Book also in several places says, it is sealed until the Time of End, in such a way that would be difficult to understand. To claim that the adherents of these Holy Books completely understood everything right does not seem to be in line with what the Book itself saying.