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

[Trailblazer]

I've asked Baha'is several times about the verse that says there will be wars and rumors of war but that is not yet the end. That seems to imply that if anyone claims to be the Christ and wars are still going on, then that person is not the Christ.

Matthew 24:6-13
New International Version

6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

I do not agree that these verses imply what you think they do. They say we will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but that is not the end of what will happen because more things will happen: Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

All these things happened before Baha'u'llah came and during His lifetime. These are the beginning of the birth pangs of the new age which was ushered in by the Bab and Baha'u'llah in 1844..

It does not say that wars will not still be going on when Christ returns or after Christ returns.

 

[Skywalker]

Matthew 24:6-13
New International Version

6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

I do not agree that these verses imply what you think they do. They say we will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but that is not the end of what will happen because more things will happen: Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

All these things happened before Baha'u'llah came and during His lifetime. These are the beginning of the birth pangs of the new age which was ushered in by the Bab and Baha'u'llah in 1844..

It does not say that wars will not still be going on when Christ returns or after Christ returns.

Matthew 24:6 says, "And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet."

The end is not yet come means the Rapture hasn't happened, so the return of the Jesus to earth won't happen until years later. The Messiah hasn't returned yet. There are signs that he will. People are saying what's right is wrong and what's wrong is right.

 

[Skywalker]

Matthew 24:6-13
New International Version

6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

I do not agree that these verses imply what you think they do. They say we will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but that is not the end of what will happen because more things will happen: Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

All these things happened before Baha'u'llah came and during His lifetime. These are the beginning of the birth pangs of the new age which was ushered in by the Bab and Baha'u'llah in 1844..

It does not say that wars will not still be going on when Christ returns or after Christ returns.

There are signs of the end times, which is why I believe the Messiah hasn't returned. They “knew not until the flood came”

They “knew not until the flood came”

By David J. Stewart

Matthew 24:37-39, “But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”

In Matthew 24:39, notice carefully the phrase “they knew not until the flood came, and took them all away.” Could they not have known? Yes, of course, but they DIDN'T WANT TO KNOW. While Noah was preaching, they couldn't have cared less. Noah preached for 120 years!!!

The wicked world is the same way today, saturated with evil and indifference. People are selfishly going about life as usual, eating, drinking and giving in marriage; while ignoring THE TRUTH in the face of impending doom and judgment.

Genesis chapter 6 describes an evil and wicked world that didn't care. They ignored Noah's message of righteousness. They could have known, but they didn't want to know. They didn't care.

People need to know the message of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately most people are wrapped up in themselves and don't care. Most people are lost and on their way to Hell. Ironically, most of them are religious. Most religions corrupt the Gospel by adding sacraments, works, water baptism and religious devotion as requirements for salvation. But the Bible says in Romans 4:5, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” This is the simplicity that is in Christ Jesus (2nd Corinthians 11:3-4).

 

[dybmh]

Okay, but is there a particular reason you want to know why Bible scholars in the millennial days were seeking the Messiah by the title ‘the Glory of God’.

I might be able to research this when I have time, or maybe one of the other Baha'is such as @ adrian009, @ Tony Bristow-Stagg , @ InvestigateTruth , or @ loverofhumanity would know.

I'm trying to evaluate which interpretation of who/what the Messiah is/will do is better. Is the Baha'i approach better, or is the Jewish approach better?

So far, I don't see one as better or worse just different. Specifically, I personally don't find the evidence based on Bahaullah's given title to be compelling. However, if there are biblical scholars which deem it important, it would be good to review their justification.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm trying to evaluate which interpretation of who/what the Messiah is/will do is better. Is the Baha'i approach better, or is the Jewish approach better?

So far, I don't see one as better or worse just different.

I do not believe there are two different Messiahs, only two different 'conceptions' of who/what the Messiah is/will do.

Logically speaking, both of these conceptions cannot be correct, if they are different. As such, the Messiah cannot be who Jews expect he will be and do what the Jews expect he will do if the Messiah is who Baha'is believe he was and did the things we believe he did.

To put it more bluntly, the Jews and the Baha'is cannot both be right about the Messiah.

Specifically, I personally don't find the evidence based on Bahaullah's given title to be compelling. However, if there are biblical scholars which deem it important, it would be good to review their justification.

A starting place would be to determine how Baha'u'llah got His name/title. I am not sure how Baha'u'llah got that title, but if memory serves me correctly, it was given to Him by the Bab. He did not just take in on Himself, saying I will be called Baha'u'llah because I am the Glory of God. However, I am not very proficient in Baha'i history, so maybe one of the other Baha'is such as @ adrian009, @ Tony Bristow-Stagg , @ InvestigateTruth , or @ loverofhumanity can help me out.

I also never heard that biblical scholars deemed that title important, so maybe one of the other Baha'is knows more about this.
I can see why biblical scholars would deem that title important though, given all the references to the Glory of God in the Bible.

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (Revelation 21:22-2)

The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose. (Isaiah 35:1)

It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God. (Isaiah 35:2)

In still another chapter, Isaiah says: "Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee." (Isaiah 60:1).

And a few verses later he foresees the following: "The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious." (Isaiah 60:13).

So was Baha’u’llah the Glory of God referred to in the Bible? If He was, I would say He was the Messiah, the Promised One of all the religions.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

1. Will usher in an era of world wide peace (Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore). What we see is war, not peace. Jesus, Baha'u'llah, and anyone else have all failed at being the messiah.

• Baha'u'llah did usher in the era of world wide peace. Absolutely nowhere do any scriptures say when that peace will be established.

Sure it does. It happens during the messianic era, when the Messiah rules. No peace? No Messiah.

2. Will bring all the Jews back to the land. This implies within his lifetime. Not spread out across many lifetimes. Not even half of all Jews live in Israel, and certainly no one has come to find the lost 10 tribes. Therefore the Messiah has not come yet. Not Jesus. Not the Baha'u'lah, not anyone.

• Jews have been brought back to the homeland. Absolutely nowhere do the scriptures say ALL the Jews in the world will return to Israel.

Jews have NOT been brought back to the homeland -- less than half the Jews in the world live in Israel.

3. Will be "David," meaning will be a political king ruling Israel from Jerusalem. This excludes Jesus and the Baha'u'llah, obviously.

• Absolutely nowhere do any scriptures say that the Messiah will be Will be "David," meaning will be a political king ruling Israel from Jerusalem.

Actually, the Messiah IS referred to in the Tanakh as David. Sorry, my friend.

So you see, all these thing DO show that the Baha'u'llah was not the Messiah, these things which I've reviewed with your before (more than once.

 

[Skywalker]

Sure it does. It happens during the messianic era, when the Messiah rules. No peace? No Messiah.

Jews have NOT been brought back to the homeland -- less than half the Jews in the world live in Israel.


Actually, the Messiah IS referred to in the Tanakh as David. Sorry, my friend.

So you see, all these thing DO show that the Baha'u'llah was not the Messiah, these things which I've reviewed with your before (more than once.

David is not the Messiah. I believe that David will rule with the Messiah during the 1000 year reign of Christ.

 

[dybmh]

To put it more bluntly, the Jews and the Baha'is cannot both be right about the Messiah.

I'm not saying they're both right. I'm saying that their theories both have some merit and they both have some flaws.

So was Baha’u’llah the Glory of God referred to in the Bible? If He was, I would say He was the Messiah, the Promised One of all the religions.

This is a bit far fetched, imo. If the title was given to Baha’u’llah, then it sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

"people create consequences regarding people or events, based on previous knowledge of the subject."

"It can be concluded that establishing a label towards someone or something significantly impacts their perception and influences them to establish self-fulfilling prophecy."

Self-fulfilling prophecy - Wikipedia

 

[Skywalker]

I do not believe there are two different Messiahs, only two different 'conceptions' of who/what the Messiah is/will do.

Logically speaking, both of these conceptions cannot be correct, if they are different. As such, the Messiah cannot be who Jews expect he will be and do what the Jews expect he will do if the Messiah is who Baha'is believe he was and did the things we believe he did.

To put it more bluntly, the Jews and the Baha'is cannot both be right about the Messiah.

A starting place would be to determine how Baha'u'llah got His name/title. I am not sure how Baha'u'llah got that title, but if memory serves me correctly, it was given to Him by the Bab. He did not just take in on Himself, saying I will be called Baha'u'llah because I am the Glory of God. However, I am not very proficient in Baha'i history, so maybe one of the other Baha'is such as @ adrian009, @ Tony Bristow-Stagg , @ InvestigateTruth , or @ loverofhumanity can help me out.

I also never heard that biblical scholars deemed that title important, so maybe one of the other Baha'is knows more about this.
I can see why biblical scholars would deem that title important though, given all the references to the Glory of God in the Bible.

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (Revelation 21:22-2)

The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose. (Isaiah 35:1)

It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God. (Isaiah 35:2)

In still another chapter, Isaiah says: "Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee." (Isaiah 60:1).

And a few verses later he foresees the following: "The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious." (Isaiah 60:13).

So was Baha’u’llah the Glory of God referred to in the Bible? If He was, I would say He was the Messiah, the Promised One of all the religions.

Wouldn't Jesus coming back in a different body contradict the Bible because then there would be two different Messiahs?

 

[Trailblazer]

Wouldn't Jesus coming back in a different body contradict the Bible because then there would be two different Messiahs?

The Bible does not say that there would be only ONE Messiah.

 

[Skywalker]

The Bible does not say that there would be only ONE Messiah.

Zechariah 14:4 doesn't mention two Messiahs, because besides the Jewish viewpoint of that verse being about the Messiah, some people believe that that verse is about Yahweh. Why would the verse be about Yahweh and another Messiah?

 

[Skywalker]

I'm not saying they're both right. I'm saying that their theories both have some merit and they both have some flaws.

This is a bit far fetched, imo. If the title was given to Baha’u’llah, then it sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

"people create consequences regarding people or events, based on previous knowledge of the subject."

"It can be concluded that establishing a label towards someone or something significantly impacts their perception and influences them to establish self-fulfilling prophecy."

Self-fulfilling prophecy - Wikipedia

I don't believe that Bahulllah was the Messiah, because the Tanakh never mentions two Messiahs. People differ on whether the prophecies were to be fulfilled in one advent or not, but not even Zechariah 14:4 mentions two Messiahs. The interpretation that the verse is about Yahweh is consistent with the Jewish interpretation of the verse being about the Messiah, because Jesus being the Messiah wouldn't change the details about who the Messiah is.

 

[Trailblazer]

Zechariah 14:4 doesn't mention two Messiahs, because besides the Jewish viewpoint of that verse being about the Messiah, some people believe that that verse is about Yahweh. Why would the verse be about Yahweh and another Messiah?

It would be about Yahweh and another Messiah because another Messiah came in the station of the Father.

 

[dybmh]

I don't believe that Bahulllah was the Messiah, because the Tanakh never mentions two Messiahs. People differ on whether the prophecies were to be fulfilled in one advent or not, but not even Zechariah 14:4 mentions two Messiahs. The interpretation that the verse is about Yahweh is consistent with the Jewish interpretation of the verse being about the Messiah, because Jesus being the Messiah wouldn't change the details about who the Messiah is.

That's one way of looking at it.

 

[Skywalker]

That's one way of looking at it.

What makes the other way to look at it more likely?

 

[Skywalker]

It would be about Yahweh and another Messiah because another Messiah came in the station of the Father.

Why would there be three Messiahs and why wouldn't the Father incarnate alongside Jesus during the time of the first Messiah?

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm not saying they're both right. I'm saying that their theories both have some merit and they both have some flaws.

Okay, thanks for clarifying that. I cannot disagree with that viewpoint.

This is a bit far fetched, imo. If the title was given to Baha’u’llah, then it sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

"people create consequences regarding people or events, based on previous knowledge of the subject."

"It can be concluded that establishing a label towards someone or something significantly impacts their perception and influences them to establish self-fulfilling prophecy."

Self-fulfilling prophecy - Wikipedia

Are you suggesting that just because someone assigned the name Glory of God to Baha'u'llah, that is the reason that Baha'u'llah believed that He was the Glory of God?

Logically speaking, if God determined that Baha'u'llah would be the Messiah, then God determined that He would be the one who would fulfill the Bible prophecies that refer to the Glory of God. In that case, Baha'u'llah would only have been doing what God enjoined Him to do, when God spoke to Him during His Revelation.

The only other possibility is that Baha'u'llah was a false prophet, a pretender.

As I have been saying for years, there are only two possibilities:

1. Baha'u'llah was a true Prophet/Messenger of God, or
2. Baha'u'llah was a false prophet (in which case He was either deluded or lying)

Some people suggest that there is a third possibility, that Baha'u'llah was just a good man with noble ideals and good ideas, but that is not a logical possibility because a good man would not lie.

 

[Skywalker]

Okay, thanks for clarifying that. I cannot disagree with that viewpoint.

Are you suggesting that just because someone assigned the name Glory of God to Baha'u'llah, that is the reason that Baha'u'llah believed that He was the Glory of God?

Logically speaking, if God determined that Baha'u'llah would be the Messiah, then God determined that He would be the one who would fulfill the Bible prophecies that refer to the Glory of God. In that case, Baha'u'llah would only have been doing what God enjoined Him to do, when God spoke to Him during His Revelation.

The only other possibility is that Baha'u'llah was a false prophet, a pretender.

As I have been saying for years, there are only two possibilities:

1. Baha'u'llah was a true Prophet/Messenger of God, or
2. Baha'u'llah was a false prophet (in which case He was either deluded or lying)

Some people suggest that there is a third possibility, that Baha'u'llah was just a good man with noble ideals and good ideas, but that is not a logical possibility because a good man would not lie.

Everybody lies. Nobody is perfect.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why would there be three Messiahs and why wouldn't the Father incarnate alongside Jesus during the time of the first Messiah?

I was not suggesting that there were three Messiahs.

I believe that Jesus was the Messiah who came in the station of the Son, and Baha'u'llah was the Messiah who came in the station of the Father. That is why Baha'u'llah proclaimed the following to the Christians. He did not claim to be God in the flesh. He claimed to be a Manifestation of God who came in the Station of the Father, representing the Father, just as Jesus came in the station of the Son of God. Thus Baha'is believe that when the Bible prophecies say the Lord will come, that refers to Baha'u'llah.

“The Word which the Son concealed is made manifest. It hath been sent down in the form of the human temple in this day. Blessed be the Lord Who is the Father! He, verily, is come unto the nations in His most great majesty. Turn your faces towards Him, O concourse of the righteous… This is the day whereon the Rock (Peter) crieth out and shouteth, and celebrateth the praise of its Lord, the All-Possessing, the Most High, saying: ‘Lo! The Father is come, and that which ye were promised in the Kingdom is fulfilled!…’” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 84-85

“O CONCOURSE of priests! Leave the bells, and come forth, then, from your churches. It behoveth you, in this day, to proclaim aloud the Most Great Name among the nations. Prefer ye to be silent, whilst every stone and every tree shouteth aloud: ‘The Lord is come in His great glory!’” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 94

“Give ear unto that which the Dove of Eternity warbleth upon the twigs of the Divine Lote-Tree: O peoples of the earth! We sent forth him who was named John to baptize you with water, that your bodies might be cleansed for the appearance of the Messiah. He, in turn, purified you with the fire of love and the water of the spirit in anticipation of these Days whereon the All-Merciful hath purposed to cleanse you with the water of life at the hands of His loving providence. This is the Father foretold by Isaiah, and the Comforter concerning Whom the Spirit had covenanted with you.Open your eyes, O concourse of bishops, that ye may behold your Lord seated upon the Throne of might and glory. “ The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, p. 63

 

[Trailblazer]

Everybody lies. Nobody is perfect.

Do you think that Jesus lied?