• 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!

How can the Jew reject, Jesus, Muhammad, Bab and Baha'u'llah?

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
What evidence would you like?

Let us consider what may be evidence from God, which history has provided.

Isaiah 11 tells the story.

Why is it that up until the mid to late 1800's the Jews were not permitted back into the Holy Land?

More than happy to discuss Isaiah 11, the final verse 16 is my longing to fulfil in my lifetime, a pilgrimage from Baghdad to Akka and Mount Carmel.

Regards Tony
And what exactly do you feel that this is evidence of?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
In John 4:25-26 Jesus outwardly claimed to be the Messiah.
The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”
Bible Gateway passage: John 4:25-26 - New International Version
I never said that Jesus was not the Messiah, I only ever said that Jesus was not the Messiah at the Second Coming.

26: THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST AND THE DAY OF JUDGMENT

“It is said in the Holy Books that Christ will come again, and that His coming depends upon the fulfillment of certain signs: when He comes, it will be with these signs. For example, “The sun will be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven…. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” 1 Bahá’u’lláh has explained these verses in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. 2 There is no need of repetition; refer to it, and you will understand these sayings.

But I have something further to say upon this subject. At His first coming Christ also came from heaven, as it is explicitly stated in the Gospel. Christ Himself says: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” 3

It is clear to all that Christ came from heaven, although apparently He came from the womb of Mary. At the first coming He came from heaven, though apparently from the womb; in the same way, also, at His second coming He will come from heaven, though apparently from the womb. The conditions that are indicated in the Gospel for the second coming of Christ are the same as those that were mentioned for the first coming, as we said before.

The Book of Isaiah announces that the Messiah will conquer the East and the West, and all nations of the world will come under His shadow, that His Kingdom will be established, that He will come from an unknown place, that the sinners will be judged, and that justice will prevail to such a degree that the wolf and the lamb, the leopard and the kid, the sucking child and the asp, shall all gather at one spring, and in one meadow, and one dwelling. 4 The first coming was also under these conditions, though outwardly none of them came to pass. Therefore, the Jews rejected Christ, and, God forbid! called the Messiah masíkh, 5 considered Him to be the destroyer of the edifice of God, regarded Him as the breaker of the Sabbath and the Law, and sentenced Him to death. Nevertheless, each one of these conditions had a signification that the Jews did not understand; therefore, they were debarred from perceiving the truth of Christ.

The second coming of Christ also will be in like manner: the signs and conditions which have been spoken of all have meanings, and are not to be taken literally. Among other things it is said that the stars will fall upon the earth. The stars are endless and innumerable, and modern mathematicians have established and proved scientifically that the globe of the sun is estimated to be about one million and a half times greater than the earth, and each of the fixed stars to be a thousand times larger than the sun. If these stars were to fall upon the surface of the earth, how could they find place there? It would be as though a thousand million of Himalaya mountains were to fall upon a grain of mustard seed. According to reason and science this thing is quite impossible. What is even more strange is that Christ said: “Perhaps I shall come when you are yet asleep, for the coming of the Son of man is like the coming of a thief.” 6 Perhaps the thief will be in the house, and the owner will not know it.

It is clear and evident that these signs have symbolic signification, and that they are not literal. They are fully explained in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. Refer to it.”

Some Answered Questions, pp. 110-112
 
Last edited:

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I never said that Jesus was not the Messiah, I only ever said that Jesus was not the Messiah at the Second Coming.

26: THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST AND THE DAY OF JUDGMENT

“It is said in the Holy Books that Christ will come again, and that His coming depends upon the fulfillment of certain signs: when He comes, it will be with these signs. For example, “The sun will be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven…. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” 1 Bahá’u’lláh has explained these verses in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. 2 There is no need of repetition; refer to it, and you will understand these sayings.

But I have something further to say upon this subject. At His first coming Christ also came from heaven, as it is explicitly stated in the Gospel. Christ Himself says: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” 3

It is clear to all that Christ came from heaven, although apparently He came from the womb of Mary. At the first coming He came from heaven, though apparently from the womb; in the same way, also, at His second coming He will come from heaven, though apparently from the womb. The conditions that are indicated in the Gospel for the second coming of Christ are the same as those that were mentioned for the first coming, as we said before.

The Book of Isaiah announces that the Messiah will conquer the East and the West, and all nations of the world will come under His shadow, that His Kingdom will be established, that He will come from an unknown place, that the sinners will be judged, and that justice will prevail to such a degree that the wolf and the lamb, the leopard and the kid, the sucking child and the asp, shall all gather at one spring, and in one meadow, and one dwelling. 4 The first coming was also under these conditions, though outwardly none of them came to pass. Therefore, the Jews rejected Christ, and, God forbid! called the Messiah masíkh, 5 considered Him to be the destroyer of the edifice of God, regarded Him as the breaker of the Sabbath and the Law, and sentenced Him to death. Nevertheless, each one of these conditions had a signification that the Jews did not understand; therefore, they were debarred from perceiving the truth of Christ.

The second coming of Christ also will be in like manner: the signs and conditions which have been spoken of all have meanings, and are not to be taken literally. Among other things it is said that the stars will fall upon the earth. The stars are endless and innumerable, and modern mathematicians have established and proved scientifically that the globe of the sun is estimated to be about one million and a half times greater than the earth, and each of the fixed stars to be a thousand times larger than the sun. If these stars were to fall upon the surface of the earth, how could they find place there? It would be as though a thousand million of Himalaya mountains were to fall upon a grain of mustard seed. According to reason and science this thing is quite impossible. What is even more strange is that Christ said: “Perhaps I shall come when you are yet asleep, for the coming of the Son of man is like the coming of a thief.” 6 Perhaps the thief will be in the house, and the owner will not know it.


It is clear and evident that these signs have symbolic signification, and that they are not literal. They are fully explained in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. Refer to it.”

Some Answered Questions, pp. 110-112

Jesus said in Mark 13:26, ""At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory." He was talking about himself.
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
Jesus said in Mark 13:26, ""At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory." He was talking about himself.

Not necessarily so. Baha'u'llah offered about Jesus;

"Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit."

So the beleivers, when embracing the Message of Jesus were supposed to be made One in that Spirit and teach naught but that Spirit.

Thus the 'Son of Man' in the Clouds could be the body of Christianity that have created the clouds of doctrine. Clouds blind us from the full intensity of the sun, they are vapours that rise.

Bahá'u'lláh states in The Hidden Words:

" O Son of Man! I loved thy creation, hence I created thee. Wherefore, do thou love Me, that I may name thy name and fill thy soul with the spirit of life."

The great power and glory can be seen as the Father.

That is one way of looking at that passage.

Regards Tony
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Not necessarily so. Baha'u'llah offered about Jesus;

"Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit."

So the beleivers, when embracing the Message of Jesus were supposed to be made One in that Spirit and teach naught but that Spirit.

Thus the 'Son of Man' in the Clouds could be the body of Christianity that have created the clouds of doctrine. Clouds blind us from the full intensity of the sun, they are vapours that rise.

Bahá'u'lláh states in The Hidden Words:

" O Son of Man! I loved thy creation, hence I created thee. Wherefore, do thou love Me, that I may name thy name and fill thy soul with the spirit of life."

The great power and glory can be seen as the Father.

That is one way of looking at that passage.

Regards Tony

There's nothing in the context of that verse that sounded like Jesus was talking about anyone but himself. What is 'the sign of the Son of man in heaven' (Mt 24:30)?

Jesus tells the high priest according to Matthew 26:64 that 'from now on you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven'. The priest did not see the second coming. ... The sign of the Son of man is then interpreted as the sign of Jesus' vindication as the Messiah.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Why can't we discuss the English translations of the Hebrew? That would be like me saying that I have to know Persian and Arabic to understand and discuss the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
Understanding the text requires comparing the precise words in the context of other precise words. Looking at translations is looking at someone's decision about what word to choose in any given context and that may not be consistent; it might be driven by the agenda of the translator.
I do not think the issue here is one of translation, I think it is an issue of interpretation, which is the action of explaining the meaning of something. You believe the text means one thing and I believe it means something else. Who is the final arbiter? I mean why is the meaning you assign any more accurate than the meaning I assign? To say you know Hebrew and I don't really has nothing to do with the meaning, because the Hebrew text has been translated into English for Jews and I would assume that is why it in the Chabad.
The chabad website uses a particular translation that is informed by Jewish thought over the last many years but it is still a translation. A full discussion might include it, but would also include the Hebrew and the Aramaic. The meaning that develops would be more accurate than one made disregarding the cultural, linguistic and theological traditions into which it was delivered initially.
I guess you are referring to chapter 7, not to verse 12, because that verse says nothing about a day of invasion by enemies.
See, that's the point. That is precisely what it does say. In the section you copied, you bolded verse 9, but not the introduction of a masculine noun in verse 10 ("my enemy") which becomes the antecedent for the reference in verse 12 (v'adecha yavo -- and up to you he will come).
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
There's nothing in the context of that verse that sounded like Jesus was talking about anyone but himself. What is 'the sign of the Son of man in heaven' (Mt 24:30)?

I see this is the New Message.

Also a sign is Elijah as Elijah always comes first.

There was 2 Elijah for the Bab and the Bab was the Elijah for Baha'u'llah.

We live in a unique age, there were 2 Mesengers in quick succession, just as the Bible foretold in Revelation 9:12, "The first woe has passed; behold, two woes are still to come". The first woe being Muhammad, the 2 to come the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Revelation 8:13 "Then I looked, and I heard an eagle crying with a loud voice as it flew directly overhead, “Woe, woe, woe to those who dwell on the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!”

Now a great read is Revelation 20.

20:1-4 to me are putting a closure to the Islam Revelation

Revelation 20:4"Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years."

This passage to me tells of the Messages of the Bab and Baha'u'llah and all the martyrs, who had come from Islam and thus not worshipped the beast, nor accepted false doctrine of the church.

It can be considered we can read the Bible in a different light, but first we must receive the New Name.

Revelation 2:17He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, to him I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, and a new name written on the stone which no one knows but he who receives it.’

Isaiah 62:2The nations will see your righteousness, And all kings your glory;
And you will be called by a new name
Which the mouth of the Lord will designate.

Isaiah 65:15“You will leave your name for a curse to My chosen ones, And the Lord God will slay you.But My servants will be called by another name.

Revelation 3:12 He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name

Regards Tony
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Understanding the text requires comparing the precise words in the context of other precise words. Looking at translations is looking at someone's decision about what word to choose in any given context and that may not be consistent; it might be driven by the agenda of the translator.
That is a fair point, but I do not see any way around it because everyone does not know the original languages that scriptures were written in.
The chabad website uses a particular translation that is informed by Jewish thought over the last many years but it is still a translation. A full discussion might include it, but would also include the Hebrew and the Aramaic. The meaning that develops would be more accurate than one made disregarding the cultural, linguistic and theological traditions into which it was delivered initially.
Since I do not know the Hebrew and the Aramaic I guess I cannot have a full discussion, according to your standards.
See, that's the point. That is precisely what it does say. In the section you copied, you bolded verse 9, but not the introduction of a masculine noun in verse 10 ("my enemy") which becomes the antecedent for the reference in verse 12 (v'adecha yavo -- and up to you he will come).
Can you tell me what you believe Micah 7 is about and what 7:12 refers to in particular according to your understanding?

Who do you think is the he that shall come up to you: those from Assyria and the fortified cities, and from the fortress up to the river and the sea from the west, and the dwellers of the mountain?

12 It is a day, and he shall come up to you: those from Assyria and the fortified cities, and from the fortress up to the river and the sea from the west, and the dwellers of the mountain.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Understanding the text requires comparing the precise words in the context of other precise words. Looking at translations is looking at someone's decision about what word to choose in any given context and that may not be consistent; it might be driven by the agenda of the translator.

The chabad website uses a particular translation that is informed by Jewish thought over the last many years but it is still a translation. A full discussion might include it, but would also include the Hebrew and the Aramaic. The meaning that develops would be more accurate than one made disregarding the cultural, linguistic and theological traditions into which it was delivered initially.

See, that's the point. That is precisely what it does say. In the section you copied, you bolded verse 9, but not the introduction of a masculine noun in verse 10 ("my enemy") which becomes the antecedent for the reference in verse 12 (v'adecha yavo -- and up to you he will come).

Do you think the Day of the Lord is consistent with Judaism?
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
That is a fair point, but I do not see any way around it because everyone does not know the original languages that scriptures were written in.
But the solution is not, then, to hold a discussion in ignorance.
Since I do not know the Hebrew and the Aramaic I guess I cannot have a full discussion, according to your standards.
I would suggest that the goal of the discussion would simply have to be different.
Can you tell me what you believe Micah 7 is about and what 7:12 refers to in particular according to your understanding?
Before the time comes when God will level justice against the enemy, the enemy will first invade and the people will suffer at their hands.
Who do you think is the he that shall come up to you: those from Assyria and the fortified cities, and from the fortress up to the river and the sea from the west, and the dwellers of the mountain?
As the text says explicitly, "my enemy."
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I would suggest that the goal of the discussion would simply have to be different.
I did not have any specific goals in mind, did you?
Before the time comes when God will level justice against the enemy, the enemy will first invade and the people will suffer at their hands.
Who do you believe the enemy is?
As the text says explicitly, "my enemy."
So you believe that the "he" in Micah 7:12 refers to my enemy?
The text also says "Where is the Lord your God?"
I believe that the "he" in verse 12 refers to the Lord your God.

"Where is the Lord your God?"
and he shall come up to you:

10 And my enemy shall see, and shame shall cover her who says to me, "Where is the Lord your God?" My eyes shall gaze upon her: now she shall become trodden as the mire of the streets.

11 "The day to build your walls-that day-its time is way off."

12 It is a day, and he shall come up to you: those from Assyria and the fortified cities, and from the fortress up to the river and the sea from the west, and the dwellers of the mountain.
 
Top