If Christ comes today, how do you know it is really Him?

[Unfettered]

Well, He said that ,every eye shall see Him, but what about those whose eyes are not open, or are sleep?

Well, it is an event, not a moment. The light of his coming, and his voice, will be seen and heard by all. Prophets have described the effect of the brilliance of his presence at that time as causing the mountains to "flow down." No one will miss it; it will not be an event anyone will sleep through.

Apparently He also said, He comes, in the night, like a thief.

That is understood to be a metaphor for those who are not watching for him—as surprised as any of us would be at the unexpected entry of a burglar, so they will be surprised who are living life indifferent to, ignorant or, or not vigilant toward his promised return. But, clearly, immediately before he comes, it will be night on half the planet. When he comes, it will be night no longer, anywhere. It will be a miraculous event; a supernatural event, not something we should expect to be able to evaluate as the operation of natural forces, as we understand them.

It also refers to the dark times that will immediately precede his coming. Evil and darkness will build such that men will say he delays his coming until the end (that is, until there is nothing left because of the destruction being wrought by the wicked). When the hope of mankind seems at last on the very brink of complete and final dissolution—of a sudden Christ will return and put an end to the wickedness of mankind.

A thief does not only come Suddenly, but also, very quietly, unnoticeable.

His coming, largely, will sneak up on those not waiting and watching. His arrival, however, will be known by all. He came quietly once, as a baby. He has said that his return will not be an event similarly shrouded in obscurity.

 

[InChrist]

Well, He said that ,every eye shall see Him, but what about those whose eyes are not open, or are sleep?
Apparently He also said, He comes, in the night, like a thief.
A thief does not only come Suddenly, but also, very quietly, unnoticeable.

Yes, Jesus said He would come as a thief in the night, as well the scriptures also say He will come in glory and power where everyone will see and be aware of His coming. My understanding of this…

1. He comes first in the clouds unexpectedly to remove His body of believers, the church, from this world before the Great Tribulation period begins.

2. During the 7 year Tribulation God again focuses upon the nation of Israel and brings judgment on the nations of this world who follow after the antichrist. After the Tribulation period is complete Jesus comes to earth in power and glory to rule and reign for 1000 years, the Millennial Period.

 

[danieldemol]

That's too bad, because you don't need to believe the Bible is accurate in order to believe in God.

Although this is true, when the original story is faulty it makes post-hoc rationalisation of the story suspect of being faulty as well in my view.

 

[Trailblazer]

Although this is true, when the original story is faulty it makes post-hoc rationalisation of the story suspect of being faulty as well in my view

So you believe that the Bible is the original story?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Yes, Jesus said He would come as a thief in the night, as well the scriptures also say He will come in glory and power where everyone will see and be aware of His coming. My understanding of this…

What does "glory and power" mean to you?
Power, as in military power? Glory, as in wealth?
Please describe it.

1. He comes first in the clouds unexpectedly to remove His body of believers, the church, from this world before the Great Tribulation period begins.

2. During the 7 year Tribulation God again focuses upon the nation of Israel and brings judgment on the nations of this world who follow after the antichrist. After the Tribulation period is complete Jesus comes to earth in power and glory to rule and reign for 1000 years, the Millennial Period.

Can you please quote this 7 years of tribulation from the Bible? Also the 1000 years of reign.

 

[Truthseeker]

Revelation 3:12-13 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

This is the one of the three that is applies to a new Revelation today in my view, the others may not.

Isaiah 62:2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name.

This is in the Old Testament, so it can apply to followers of Christ.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

This doesn't necessarily mean that the name applies to a new revelation, The person has a new name. I think of this Hidden Word when I see this.

4. 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.
(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

 

[Trailblazer]

This doesn't necessarily mean that the name applies to a new revelation, The person has a new name.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

My point was that the name will not be Jesus, it will be a new name, and since the verse in context refers to the return of Christ, hopefully you can do the math, since you are good at math.

 

[Altfish]

Holy Carp what a terrible answer .. who cares what your actual beliefs are .. the fact of the matter is you don't have the faintest idea whether or not your belief is true .. whether a he .. she .. or primordial It .. Yet you act and speak as if you do .. telling me what God gonna do .. when the pearly gates I go through ... Tis True..

and of course there are Gods .. .. what are you defining as a God .. such that you can say such a thing does not exist ?

I care what my beliefs are.
I think my belief is correct, just as you do.
God isn't going to do anything ... please think for a moment ... I DO NOT BELIEVE SHE EXISTS ... so the Pearly Gates, etc are also made up rubbish.

 

[Sargonski]

I care what my beliefs are.
I think my belief is correct, just as you do.
God isn't going to do anything ... please think for a moment ... I DO NOT BELIEVE SHE EXISTS ... so the Pearly Gates, etc are also made up rubbish.

This question has nothing to do with what your beliefs are - "So please think for a moment" and try to understand that your belief in nothing does not mean that the belief in Pearly gates is false... U Understand ? Your belief has absolutely no relevance to the question of whether or not another belief is true or false .. flawed logic is at work.

Now -- time to think more .. perhaps for first time on this topic-- this time having some relevance to your beliefs about God .. beliefs you claim to care about .. but it seems you have not thought about so can't care that much right !?

What is it you are claiming does not exist .. you say (X) does not exist. what is (X) ? You need to define your terms ... what is it that you believe is correct ? What is it that you are claiming does not exist as by one fellow's definition of God your claim is false and by another it might be true.. For example .. for many millions lf people .. the Sun was believed to be a God .. being the creator of Life , a powerful force.

By Sun Worshipers definition of God .. your claim is false. What definition are you using .. such that your claim is true ?

 

[Altfish]

This question has nothing to do with what your beliefs are - "So please think for a moment" and try to understand that your belief in nothing does not mean that the belief in Pearly gates is false... U Understand ? Your belief has absolutely no relevance to the question of whether or not another belief is true or false .. flawed logic is at work.

Now -- time to think more .. perhaps for first time on this topic-- this time having some relevance to your beliefs about God .. beliefs you claim to care about .. but it seems you have not thought about so can't care that much right !?

What is it you are claiming does not exist .. you say (X) does not exist. what is (X) ? You need to define your terms ... what is it that you believe is correct ? What is it that you are claiming does not exist as by one fellow's definition of God your claim is false and by another it might be true.. For example .. for many millions lf people .. the Sun was believed to be a God .. being the creator of Life , a powerful force.

By Sun Worshipers definition of God .. your claim is false. What definition are you using .. such that your claim is true ?

Do not tell me how to think.
I am old enough and wise enough to have considered life and come to the conclusions I have. I have a degree, I am a fellow of an Institution, I am not ignorant.

I notice you have failed to define your god.

 

[Altfish]

This question has nothing to do with what your beliefs are - "So please think for a moment" and try to understand that your belief in nothing does not mean that the belief in Pearly gates is false... U Understand ? Your belief has absolutely no relevance to the question of whether or not another belief is true or false .. flawed logic is at work.

Now -- time to think more .. perhaps for first time on this topic-- this time having some relevance to your beliefs about God .. beliefs you claim to care about .. but it seems you have not thought about so can't care that much right !?

What is it you are claiming does not exist .. you say (X) does not exist. what is (X) ? You need to define your terms ... what is it that you believe is correct ? What is it that you are claiming does not exist as by one fellow's definition of God your claim is false and by another it might be true.. For example .. for many millions lf people .. the Sun was believed to be a God .. being the creator of Life , a powerful force.

By Sun Worshipers definition of God .. your claim is false. What definition are you using .. such that your claim is true ?

You've posted this twice

 

[Sargonski]

Do not tell me how to think.
I am old enough and wise enough to have considered life and come to the conclusions I have. I have a degree, I am a fellow of an Institution, I am not ignorant.

I notice you have failed to define your god.

I am not telling you how to think .. YET .. for now have just been pointing out the logical flaws in your thoughts and pointing out the flawed conclusions made on the basis of this false logic.

I have given a definition of God that show's your claim "God does not exist" is false. Providing my personal definition of God will not help to change this fact .. but am more than happy to provide the definition that I use. A God - in my books - is an entity who .. through force of will, can manifest those thoughts into physical reality external to its own physical body.

In simple terms .. you have all the qualities of a God -- being able to manifest a thought into physical reality through force of will "internally" - Except you can not do this externally .. for example .. you can .. through force of will .. cause your pinky finger to wiggle .. what you can not do .. is move the chair you are sitting on through force of will ..

So -- The ability to manipulate matter and/or energy through force of will -- external to yourself.

 

[Altfish]

I am not telling you how to think .. YET .. for now have just been pointing out the logical flaws in your thoughts and pointing out the flawed conclusions made on the basis of this false logic.

I have given a definition of God that show's your claim "God does not exist" is false. Providing my personal definition of God will not help to change this fact .. but am more than happy to provide the definition that I use. A God - in my books - is an entity who .. through force of will, can manifest those thoughts into physical reality external to its own physical body.

In simple terms .. you have all the qualities of a God -- being able to manifest a thought into physical reality through force of will "internally" - Except you can not do this externally .. for example .. you can .. through force of will .. cause your pinky finger to wiggle .. what you can not do .. is move the chair you are sitting on through force of will ..

So -- The ability to manipulate matter and/or energy through force of will -- external to yourself.

I see no flaws in my thoughts.
There is no evidence of a god, so I choose not to believe in them, There is more evidence for Harry Potter (I've been on the Hogwarts Express) than there is of god. Pixies, fairies, ghosts all have more evidence.

I am VERY happy not believing, it keeps me sane.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Moreover, Christians claim that the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven will be Jesus. but all the verses referring to the Son of man appearing say that we will see Him.

It's obviously Jesus.

Ephesians 1
"... [God] worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places..."

Acts 3
19 Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out,
20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus...

Acts 10:42
42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead.

Acts 17
30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,
31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.

The problem is that spiritual bodies cannot be seen by ordinary people, and that is why the disciples were staring up into the sky and had to be told by the angels that it was the spiritual body of Jesus going up to heaven. So, if Jesus returned to earth in a spiritual body nobody would be able to see Him. The invisible Jesus. What would be the point?

No. The disciples saw him and heard him right before he ascended.

Acts 1
3 After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God...
9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

 

[PearlSeeker]

What does "glory and power" mean to you?
Power, as in military power? Glory, as in wealth?
Please describe it.

This is how Bible describes it:

"... when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire..."

 

[Sargonski]

I see no flaws in my thoughts.
There is no evidence of a god, so I choose not to believe in them, There is more evidence for Harry Potter (I've been on the Hogwarts Express) than there is of god. Pixies, fairies, ghosts all have more evidence.

I am VERY happy not believing, it keeps me sane.

Unfortunate to not see one's mistakes in logic (logical fallacy) .. thus not able to correct false conclusion . While very happy to "not believe" - and have not the faintest idea what it is that you do not believe .. is just fine and as far as keeping one sane .. I can not argue that point -- what is that saying about Bliss ? but, this is not the problem .. the Poison Lizard if you will --- The problem is not "not Believing" .. but what you do believe - and continuing to make false claims on this basis.

"More evidence for Harry Potter" --- than for what God ? - What God are you talking about - and how hard is it for one to understand that without defining the term God .. your claim is absolutely meaningless .. and quite worthless .. which is somethign you should care about .. because you claimed to care.

"More evidence for Pixies and fairies than evidence for the wind" is a demonstrably false claim ...
"There is no evidence of the Sun" is a demonstrably false claim.

Now while it may keep you sane .. running around spouting demonstrably false claims .. You said you care .. but I am getting the feeling that you do not care about these logical inconsistencies in your thoughts. .. but you must care on some level .. here debating the issue alone proves that much .. so what are we talking here

What "God" is there no evidence for ? -- define what you are saying .. quit the Pixie and fairy dust arguments .. come up with something valid .. put that college degree to use .. Not sure if you took any Philosophy - Logic - Logical Fallacy - what constitutes a valid argument -- but I did so no worries .. together we can straighten out the crooked path .. send you towards the light at the end of what appears to be a very dark tunnel.

 

[1213]

Spiritual bodies are made for heaven, physical bodies are made for earth.

I don't see any reason why spiritual body could not be on earth also.

There are no verses in the Bible where Jesus said He was going to return to earth. Rather, what we have are these verses:

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.

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.

How do you explain these verses?

Jesus said we would see the Son of man in the clouds of heaven, but I do not believe He was referring to Himself.

For example in Matt. 11:19 Jesus is calling himself son of man. That is one reason why I think he is referring to himself, when he speaks about son of man.

The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold, a gluttonous man and a wine drinker, and a friend of tax collectors, and of sinners. And wisdom was justified by her children.
Matt. 11:19

That people don't see him now, or then, doesn't mean that people will not see him ever again.

 

[CG Didymus]

This is the one of the three that is applies to a new Revelation today in my view, the others may not.

A couple of things for Baha'is to explain...

Baha'is believe that there were three manifestations of God after Jesus. Why is the "new name" Baha'u'llah and not the Bab or Muhammad?

Then... Baha'is are taking a "new name" as being literally true, while verses that point to the person returning as Jesus not literally true.

 

[CG Didymus]

I don't see any reason why spiritual body could not be on earth also.

For example in Matt. 11:19 Jesus is calling himself son of man. That is one reason why I think he is referring to himself, when he speaks about son of man.

The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold, a gluttonous man and a wine drinker, and a friend of tax collectors, and of sinners. And wisdom was justified by her children.
Matt. 11:19

That people don't see him now, or then, doesn't mean that people will not see him ever again.

Again... it's a Baha'i taking a few verses from the gospel of John literally. But any verse that has anything to do with Jesus returning as not literal or credible. But for a Baha'i, even the verses in John cannot be taken to be credible enough to build a doctrine on.

Who was this, John?. Was the writer really the apostle? Why was his gospel accepted and canonized? How can we know if Jesus really said this?

For some Christians, I can see why the gospels are taken literally and believed to be accurate. But Baha'is don't. Any talk of Satan, hell and the resurrection are all taken as being symbolic. A Baha'i taking these few verses in John as literal is only to prove their point that the resurrection is not literal.

 

[Trailblazer]

It's obviously Jesus.

It's obviously not Jesus unless the Bible is errant or Jesus lied, in which case there is no logical reason to trust anything that is recorded in the Bible.
You cannot win this one, no Christian can.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.

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.

No more means no further, never again.

no more

1. nothing further.
   "there was no more to be said about it"
2. no further.
   "you must have some soup, but no more wine"
3. exist no longer.
   "the patch of ground was overgrown and the hut was no more"
4. never again.
   "mention his name no more to me"
5. neither.
   "I had no complaints and no more did Tom"

Definitions from Oxford Languages


And that is why we have never seen Jesus in this world again and never will.