Jesus as Christ

[Redemptionsong]

Baha'u'llah was not the Son of man, nor did He ever claim to be.
He was the return of the Son of Man, one like the Son of Man.

If Jesus was the Son of Man the following verses cannot be about the Jesus.
I believe that they are about Baha'u'llah who was one like the Son of man.

Daniel 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

Jesus ascended into heaven in the clouds. Baha’u’llah, one like the son of man, descended from the clouds of heaven of the Will of God, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. These verses are about an earthly Kingdom, not a heavenly Kingdom. Jesus’ Kingdom is in heaven, Baha’u’llah’s Kingdom will be on earth, after it is built by humans.

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.

If you believe it will be the same man Jesus returning to earth how do you explain 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 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.

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.

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.

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.

The new name means that the return of Christ would be another man. Why would Jesus change his name if he wanted people to know He was Jesus? Sadly, Christians do not bother to think about what these verses actually mean -- what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

The New Testament was written to apply to the Dispensation of Jesus (the Christian dispensation), nowhere does Jesus say that no Messengers of God would be sent in the future who would wield authority from God. The authority that was given to Jesus was for the Dispensation of Jesus, it was not for all of time.

Dispensation

1. the divine ordering of the affairs of the world.
2. an appointment, arrangement, or favor, as by God.
3. a divinely appointed order or age:

e.g. the old Mosaic, or Jewish, dispensation; the new gospel, or Christian, dispensation.

Definition of dispensation | Dictionary.com

Baha'is believe that the divine ordering of the affairs of the world is through the latest Manifestation of God and that Manifestation is Baha'u'llah. Baha’u’llah is the Messenger (Manifestation of God) for the present dispensation and God wants us to recognize and follow Him since He alone has the remedy for the problems humanity faces in the present age.

As I said above, the Father committed judgment unto the Son during the Dispensation of Jesus, but not for all of time. When Baha'u'llah received His Revelation, judgment was passed on to Baha'u'llah, and we are now living in the Dispensation of Baha'u'llah.

The dispensation of Jesus Christ, which truly began when he ascended to heaven to be given dominion over heaven and earth, is an everlasting dominion. The passage in Daniel says nothing about descending in clouds and coming to the 'Ancient of days' (God the Father). The expression 'one like the Son of man' does not mean someone different but 'one that appeared to be the Son of man' to Daniel (who did not know what he looked like). Daniel is, therefore, talking about the ascension of Jesus Christ to the throne of his Father, not the descending of Baha'ullah to earth to judge.

The Gospel of John tells us that the world will see Christ Jesus no more. Why? Because the world views things that are material, not spiritual. When a man is resurrected he is changed from being mortal to immortal, from corruptible to incorruptible. So it makes sense to say that the spiritual body of the Lord will not be seen by the world any more. Even the return of Christ will be a spiritual return. Jesus Christ will not return in flesh again, according to the scriptures.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

To paraphrase Carl Sagan, there is a difference between having an open mind and a huge gaping hole in your head. And, even in the bible, not all prophecies came true.

I see that Bible Prophecy covers a large expanse of time. Many of the Prophecies do not have a miraculous display of unfolding in the material world, so even though they are fulfilled, they are not seen as being fulfilled.

A good example is that every eye shall see. That may very well unfold, let's say in another 200 to 300 years, but every one thinks it will be overnight, in an instant. But spiritually it is fulfilled, as when a new Message is given, a new capacity is also given to every person. Every person has the ability to embrace and practice the new standard we are asked to implement in our lives, even if to our outward senses, we see nothing has changed.

The world marvels at its new capacity in science, but will not consider if it is God given and that a Message has been given that has allowed for that capacity to unfold.

All the best, good to meet yoU. Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

You have claims.

I have claims and facts that support those claims.

That's the belief. Not the evidence. It is in fact the belief that is in need of evidence.

God is not verifiable because God cannot be observed. That is not a belief, it is a fact, unless you have ever observed God. Have you?

The evidence that shows that God exists is the Messenger of God who was observable.

Those are beliefs.

God is not demonstrable or verifiable is a fact, unless you have ever observed or verified God. Have you?
We can have knowledge of God through what the Messenger of God reveals about God is a belief.

Again, these are the claims; the religious beliefs. Those are the things in need of evidence. They are not the evidence.

Religious beliefs are not claims, they are beliefs which are based upon the claims of the Messengers of God.
Baha'u'llah, the Messenger of God, made claims and He backed up those claims with evidence that supports the claims.

Are you going to share that evidence any time soon?
So far, all you have given here are mere claims and beliefs.

The claims and the evidence that supports those claims are delineated in the following post:

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

Evidence is what allows you to distinguish true beliefs from false beliefs.

That's right.

But you would never know about it. And thus wouldn't have rational reasons to believe it.

You might not know it or believe it but that does not mean the man did not commit the murder.

Yes, one needs evidence to believe or know something happened. A court of law does not convict with no evidence so nobody should be expected to believe that God exists with no evidence. God certainly has no such expectation and that is why God sends Messenger who are the evidence.

Will this evidence be forthcoming any time soon?

See above link to post.

Having rational mind certainly is a prerequisite. However, that by itself is not enough.
You still need independently verifiable evidence. If you don't, all you have are mere beliefs.

You can certainly verify the evidence independently. Baha'is call that the independent investigation of truth.

Independent Investigation of Truth

That completely depends on the nature of the claim being believed.
Unfalsifiable, unverifiable claims (like religious claims) indeed can't be tested / verified / supported in reality.
This is why it's not rational to accept them as correct.

Religious beliefs cannot be tested but they can be verified by you and supported to be true in reality by looking at how they affect the real world and people in it.

Which is kind of hard to do when there is no evidence and the very nature of the claims makes them unverifiable.

There is evidence and some of the claims are verifiable.

The "other way", is to reject claims that can't be verified, are unfalsifiable and thus are indistinguishable from pure fantasy.

Go ahead and do that. I certainly won't stand in your way. God gave everyone free will to choose.

This is just preaching. This is just you stating your religious beliefs again.

No, it is just a logical statement. Everyone has the capacity to believe in God because we all have a brain and mind. If we did not have the capacity God would not hold us accountable.

Either you have evidence or you don't. You can't have it both ways.

I do have evidence that God exists and sends Messengers but predictable you will say "that's not evidence."
But it is evidence although it is not proof. Evidence is not the same as proof.
Evidence: anything that helps to prove that something is or is not true: EVIDENCE | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Evidence is anything that you see, experience, read, or are told that causes you to believe that something is true or has really happened. ‘
Objective evidence definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search

You don't need to say it. It's implied.
You just said it again: you have faith that god exists and sends messengers and you can't support those beliefs. You just believe them. On faith. So clearly, you think this faith thing is good enough for you to accept those claims.

But it isn't, off course. Because faith is not a pathway to truth.

I did not say: "I have faith that God exists and sends Messengers and I can't support those beliefs. I just believe them on faith."

I said I have evidence that God exists and sends Messengers even though I cannot prove that to you. I have however proven it to myself by doing my homework and looking at the evidence.

Give me break. "absolutely proven". Come on now................................
"proof" is for mathematics. I'm just talking about evidential support.
Faith is what you need when you got nothing.

I am glad to hear you don't expect proof. I have plenty of evidential support.

False.
It can't be "absolutely proven" that I'll die from jumping down the Eiffel Tower, unless I actually take the jump.
But I don't need "faith" to believe that I won't live to tell the story if I'ld take that jump.

You don't need faith because you have SEEN what happens when people jump off tall buildings.
But you do need some faith to believe that an UNSEEN God exists even if you have evidence because evidence is not proof.

Then why do you believe a god exists and sends messengers?

Because of the evidence the Messenger provided.

 

[Trailblazer]

The dispensation of Jesus Christ, which truly began when he ascended to heaven to be given dominion over heaven and earth, is an everlasting dominion. The passage in Daniel says nothing about descending in clouds and coming to the 'Ancient of days' (God the Father). The expression 'one like the Son of man' does not mean someone different but 'one that appeared to be the Son of man' to Daniel (who did not know what he looked like). Daniel is, therefore, talking about the ascension of Jesus Christ to the throne of his Father, not the descending of Baha'ullah to earth to judge.

The Gospel of John tells us that the world will see Christ Jesus no more. Why? Because the world views things that are material, not spiritual. When a man is resurrected he is changed from being mortal to immortal, from corruptible to incorruptible. So it makes sense to say that the spiritual body of the Lord will not be seen by the world any more. Even the return of Christ will be a spiritual return. Jesus Christ will not return in flesh again; according to the scriptures.

You can take any verses in the Bible and make them say and mean whatever you want them to say and mean. That can go on forever. You are going to make the verses say and mean what you want to believe they say and mean and as a result you, like most Christians, will be waiting forever for the same Jesus to return to earth. I can cite verses that refute that Jesus is ever coming back but then you will find other verses that you believe refute my verses or assign other meanings to the verses I cite, and that can go on forever.

I cannot change your mind nor do I want to because that is not a job that Baha'u'llah gave me to do. i am only responsible to carry the message, not to convince people it is true. Belief has to be a personal choice.

 

[Trailblazer]

All these posts will be winners Susan. Sorry I do not have the Paitence to continue the battle of Prophecy. My last post will tell you why. My mother and 2 sisters, who are born again Christian, indicated to me there is just so much that can be offered.

I won't be doing it much longer either as you can see by my post above that explained the futility of arguing over what verses mean and whether or not they mean that the same Jesus will return someday.

If Christians insist upon believing that Jesus is going to return they can wait for Jesus, and wait and wait, till hell freezes over. I think it is really sad, but I cannot do anything about it nor is it my responsibility.

My mother and One sister passed on and the other remains waiting for a flesh Jesus. Oh that they could have found what their heart was asking for in this life, but God gives to who God chooses to.

My brother, mother and sister all became Baha'is. That was everyone in the nuclear family since my father died before any of us ever heard about the Baha'i Faith. Both my parents were raised as Christians but they dropped out of the church before we were born. My mother retained a belief in God and my father became an atheist.

You are right, God gives to whom He chooses to give. I don't believe I deserve the gift but that was not my decision.

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73

“No God is there but Him. All creation and its empire are His. He bestoweth His gifts on whom He will, and from whom He will He withholdeth them. He is the Great Giver, the Most Generous, the Benevolent.” Gleanings, p. 278

For the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I won't be doing it much longer either as you can see by my post above that explained the futility of arguing over what verses mean and whether or not they mean that the same Jesus will return someday.

If Christians insist upon believing that Jesus is going to return they can wait for Jesus, and wait and wait, till hell freezes over. I think it is really sad, but I cannot do anything about it nor is it my responsibility.

My brother, mother and sister all became Baha'is. That was everyone in the nuclear family since my father died before any of us ever heard about the Baha'i Faith. Both my parents were raised as Christians but they dropped out of the church before we were born. My mother retained a belief in God and my father became an atheist.

You are right, God gives to whom He chooses to give. I don't believe I deserve the gift but that was not my decision.

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73

“No God is there but Him. All creation and its empire are His. He bestoweth His gifts on whom He will, and from whom He will He withholdeth them. He is the Great Giver, the Most Generous, the Benevolent.” Gleanings, p. 278

For the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will.

This verse has been of interest to me since first reading it back in the 1980's.

"Be thankful to God for having enabled you to recognise His Cause. Whoever has received this blessing must, prior to his acceptance, have performed some deed which though he himself was unaware of its character, was ordained by God as a means whereby he has been guided to find and embrace the Truth. As to those who have remained deprived of such blessing, their acts alone have hindered them from recognising the truth of this Revelation."

Bahá’u’lláh, The Dawnbreakers, p. 586

Regards Tony l

 

[Trailblazer]

This verse has been of interest to me since first reading it back in the 1800's.

"Be thankful to God for having enabled you to recognise His Cause. Whoever has received this blessing must, prior to his acceptance, have performed some deed which though he himself was unaware of its character, was ordained by God as a means whereby he has been guided to find and embrace the Truth. As to those who have remained deprived of such blessing, their acts alone have hindered them from recognising the truth of this Revelation."

Bahá’u’lláh, The Dawnbreakers, p. 586

Regards Tony l

Yes, I am aware of that verse and I have often cited it when people ask me how I know that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be....
how I KNOW, not only believe.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I find at 1 Timothy 2:5-6 that there is named one Mediator between God and man -> Jesus Christ.

One of the differences between you and me is that I do not accept the New Testament, which contradicts the Tanakh. You can try to quote from 1 Tim, but to me that quote in on par with the vedas, or the quran, or the book of mormon.

 

[Redemptionsong]

So would you be offering there was no Mediation from God to man before Jesus?

Maybe that one verse needs the context of time and place.

Regards Tony

A mediator is not a mediator of one. The reason Jesus Christ is the only mediator is that he fully represented both man and God. No other man receiving word from God can claim this title.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Yes indeed it is. The Tablet of Carmel really says it all.

"All glory be to this Day, the Day in which the fragrances of mercy have been wafted over all created things, a Day so blest that past ages and centuries can never hope to rival it, a Day in which the countenance of the Ancient of Days hath turned towards His holy seat. Thereupon the voices of all created things, and beyond them those of the Concourse on High, were heard calling aloud: 'Haste Thee, O Carmel, for lo, the light of the countenance of God, the Ruler of the Kingdom of Names and Fashioner of the heavens, hath been lifted upon thee.'"(31)

From the Tablet of Carmel by Baha'u'llah.

IMHO Regards Tony

Carmel is not heaven, and the 'Ancient of days', who is God the Father, resides in heaven. IMO.

 

[Redemptionsong]

You can take any verses in the Bible and make them say and mean whatever you want them to say and mean. That can go on forever. You are going to make the verses say and mean what you want to believe they say and mean and as a result you, like most Christians, will be waiting forever for the same Jesus to return to earth. I can cite verses that refute that Jesus is ever coming back but then you will find other verses that you believe refute my verses or assign other meanings to the verses I cite, and that can go on forever.

I cannot change your mind nor do I want to because that is not a job that Baha'u'llah gave me to do. i am only responsible to carry the message, not to convince people it is true. Belief has to be a personal choice.

I don't believe that the Bible is open to private interpretation in the way that you claim. Jesus said 'scripture cannot be broken' and ultimately it's Christ that unlocks the whole truth. The important thing in any exegesis is to discover the meaning intended by God! To do that, one has to embrace all the scriptures of the Bible. Other writings are not seen as canonical and should be viewed critically, and trusted only as they compliment the biblical text.

Let's not forget that the Bible has been thoroughly studied within the Church over centuries. One should be ready to scrutinise any unorthodox reading of the scriptures, especially when the interpretation introduces people not previously mentioned in prophecy.

If one believes that the Bible is the inspired word of God, it follows that words are not used carelessly, and cannot be twisted to mean anything one likes.

The reason that many Christians argue the case for Jesus Christ so vehemently is because they feel a responsibility to share what they understand to be the truth. If Jesus Christ is believed to be the only path to salvation, as l believe, it would be selfish not to argue his case, nor to refute what is heresy.

 

[Redemptionsong]

One of the differences between you and me is that I do not accept the New Testament, which contradicts the Tanakh. You can try to quote from 1 Tim, but to me that quote in on par with the vedas, or the quran, or the book of mormon.

Sorry, but IMO the New Testament does not contradict the Tanakh. Where, exactly, do you think this occurs?

One of the differences between the NT and the other books you mention is that the NT arises from within 'lsrael'. Jesus and all his chosen disciples were Jews.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Sorry, but IMO the New Testament does not contradict the Tanakh. Where, exactly, do you think this occurs?

One of the differences between the NT and the other books you mention is that the NT arises from within 'lsrael'. Jesus and all his chosen disciples were Jews.

The message of the Tanakh is: obey God's laws. Is this the message of the gospel? No. Indeed, Paul says that the law brings a curse. A curse. The Psalms say that the law is perfect and good and sweeter than the honey and honeycomb. But Paul teaches that the only reason for the law is to show us how diplorable we are. So, what kind of God would bring his people out of slavery in Egypt, only to burden them with a law that brings a curse, an obligation they can't possibly keep? Not the same kind of God that gives us a Law that is sweet.

I can think of any number of religious books written by Jews that you would not accept as canon. And then there is the likelihhood that the gospels and other epistles were NOT written by the Jews taht are commonly associated with them. It's just all around bad reasoning to say that the NT must be God's word simply because it was written by Jews.

 

[Redemptionsong]

The message of the Tanakh is: obey God's laws. Is this the message of the gospel? No. Indeed, Paul says that the law brings a curse. A curse. The Psalms say that the law is perfect and good and sweeter than the honey and honeycomb. But Paul teaches that the only reason for the law is to show us how diplorable we are. So, what kind of God would bring his people out of slavery in Egypt, only to burden them with a law that brings a curse, an obligation they can't possibly keep? Not the same kind of God that gives us a Law that is sweet.

I can think of any number of religious books written by Jews that you would not accept as canon. And then there is the likelihhood that the gospels and other epistles were NOT written by the Jews taht are commonly associated with them. It's just all around bad reasoning to say that the NT must be God's word simply because it was written by Jews.

The message of the NT is to follow the Lord faithfully, as demonstrated by Abraham. Paul states, in Galatians 3,
'ls the law then against the promises of God [made to Abraham and his seed]? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
But after the faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.'

If you read these words carefully, you will see that Paul is not critical of God's law. It was necessary to teach and recognise sin. But the law becomes a curse to sinners because sinners cannot keep the law! Only Christ has fulfilled the law in love.

And whilst l acknowledge that not all Jewish literature qualifies as scripture, one of the basic requirements of all literary prophets was that they came from amongst the 'chosen people' of God. I believe this requirement holds true of all the NT writers.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

If you read these words carefully, you will see that Paul is not critical of God's law. It was necessary to teach and recognise sin. But the law becomes a curse to sinners because sinners cannot keep the law! Only Christ has fulfilled the law in love./QUOTE]
And this sort of teaching is exactly why I say the NT contradicts the Tanakh. The Law is not a curse.

 

[Redemptionsong]

This verse has been of interest to me since first reading it back in the 1980's.

"Be thankful to God for having enabled you to recognise His Cause. Whoever has received this blessing must, prior to his acceptance, have performed some deed which though he himself was unaware of its character, was ordained by God as a means whereby he has been guided to find and embrace the Truth. As to those who have remained deprived of such blessing, their acts alone have hindered them from recognising the truth of this Revelation."

Bahá’u’lláh, The Dawnbreakers, p. 586

Regards Tony l

Tony, what does Baha'ullah teach as the way of salvation?

 

[Redemptionsong]

The law is good. It is sinful humans that fail to live up to the law.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I think the phrase in Daniel is, “someone like a son of man.”

BTW, Ezekiel was called “son of man” by God.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't believe that the Bible is open to private interpretation in the way that you claim. Jesus said 'scripture cannot be broken' and ultimately it's Christ that unlocks the whole truth. The important thing in any exegesis is to discover the meaning intended by God! To do that, one has to embrace all the scriptures of the Bible. Other writings are not seen as canonical and should be viewed critically, and trusted only as they compliment the biblical text.

The problem with that is that Christians all say they know what the Bible means but what they say they know the Bible means is different and often contradictory. If Christ unlocked the whole truth for some and not others what criteria was used to decide who would discover the meaning intended by God?

Let's not forget that the Bible has been thoroughly studied within the Church over centuries. One should be ready to scrutinise any unorthodox reading of the scriptures, especially when the interpretation introduces people not previously mentioned in prophecy.

Who was mentioned in prophecy? Are there any prophecies that say that Jesus, the same man Jesus, would return? If that is true, how do you explain 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 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.

What do you think is the meaning of the following verses?

Daniel Chapter 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

I believe that the early Church fathers interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it. Now, Christians continue to interpret the Bible the way it has always been interpreted...

The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. A day is a year according to the day-year principle, and the 2,300 years came in 1844 when the Bab declared His mission, and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. The math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

I am not saying that Christians did not understand anything in the Bible, I am saying that they did not fully understand the Bible... As Daniel said, we will know more in the future, in 2300 years:

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased

12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand the true meaning of the Bible. By reading the Baha’i Writings that explain the true meaning of the Bible, we can understand what much of the Bible means that could never be understood before (knowledge shall be increased).

If one believes that the Bible is the inspired word of God, it follows that words are not used carelessly, and cannot be twisted to mean anything one likes.

This would apply to everyone who reads the Bible.

The reason that many Christians argue the case for Jesus Christ so vehemently is because they feel a responsibility to share what they understand to be the truth. If Jesus Christ is believed to be the only path to salvation, as l believe, it would be selfish not to argue his case, nor to refute what is heresy.

The reason that many Baha'is argue the case for Baha'u'llah is because they feel a responsibility to share what they understand to be the truth. If Baha'u'llah is believed to be a Manifestation of God, the return of Christ, as l believe, it would be selfish not to share that with other people.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The law is good. It is sinful humans that fail to live up to the law.

The Law was given to Israel, not the world. Are you saying that you are obligated to refrain from shrimp, not mow your lawn on Saturday, and make sure that your wool suits don't have linen thread button holes?