Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I know that the following is correct:I don't think you know what's correct or not.
Christ is the image of God
Christ is NOT GOD because an image is not what it is imaging...
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I know that the following is correct:I don't think you know what's correct or 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.
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.
It is not that I did not believe you, I just did not understand what you meant.I guess you didn't believe when me earlier I said only the last verses apply. Isaiah could have been referring to Christians, before this they were called Jews. Pondering the second quote, I'm not sure now, but it could be referring to a name that was private to the person, and nobody knew it. Or it's possible that you are right and the new name is Baha'i, or even Muslim, though it probably referred to Baha'i. The last one was referring to His name, not the persons name.
God was known by all the Messengers Names prior to Jesus.It is not that I did not believe you, I just did not understand what you meant.
Now that you pointed out what you did I can see why Isaiah 62:2 could be about Jesus, but if it is about Jesus what was his old name?
"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."
No, I do not think that the name is referring to Jews and Christians. Thou does not refer to a group of people, it refers to a certain individual.
You said that the Qu'ran is God's word...so you should know what you're talking about, right?That would all depend upon what you mean by "God's word."
It is what God allegedly revealed to Muhammad.
What was the mode of revelation to the Prophet Muhammad?
- It is a revelation which came through Angel messenger. - The messenger is Jibril ,( the arch angel) who carried divine messages to prophets. - This mode is the highest form of revelation. - The Quran was revealed to the prophet through this mode( form).
Revelation of the holy Quran during the time of prophet Muhammad..
So a mirror image is reflecting what is being imaged, right?I know that the following is correct:
Christ is the image of God
Christ is NOT GOD because an image is not what it is imaging...
Christ was alive. He was the image of God. You believe in a Trinity of sorts. Is that what Bahaullah said?I know that the following is correct:
Christ is the image of God
Christ is NOT GOD because an image is not what it is imaging...
Right.So a mirror image is reflecting what is being imaged, right?
Correct.Christ was alive. He was the image of God.
I do believe in a Trinity of sorts. That is what the Baha'i Faith teaches, so it is embedded in the Writings of Baha'u'llah.You believe in a Trinity of sorts. Is that what Bahaullah said?
Isaiah 62:1 For Zion’s sake I will not keep silent,No, I do not think that the name is referring to Jews and Christians. Thou does not refer to a group of people, it refers to a certain individual.
I understand what you mean now. That is a great interpretation!I decided to put this in context with verses around it. I think this refers to Jews becoming Baha'is eventually. Most of the jews rejected Jesus, and also Muhammad, thus they were not "a royal diadem". Before that they have been "desolate".
how could a perfect God be split 3 ways ? as soon as one part separates he would no longer be completeWhy do you seize on one word? Okay, it's three persons, each person equal to the others, combining to be one God. I don't see how there is a difference between three aspects and three persons, each person equal to the others, combining to be one God.
Your misunderstanding of the Trinity is tragic. 2 Corinthians 4:4, "The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers [you?], so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."
odd that he did not know that until being baptizedJesus did have a dual nature from birth.
oh ,,thats not happeningYes, I am referring to the man Jesus returning, since Jesus was a man.
No, God cannot be split 3 ways and the chapter below explains why.how could a perfect God be split 3 ways ? as soon as one part separates he would no longer be complete
It is not really odd since the Holy Spirit had not descended upon Him until he was baptized.odd that he did not know that until being baptized
No, you just think I'm confused. Unlike yourself, I understand what the Bible says.You're confused what the image of God relays. As if an image is what it is reflecting. Have a nice day.
I don't use a single translation. I read several in order to understand the ancient languages as clearly as possible.What translation did you use for that?
Where does it say that Noah is God? Or Abraham? Or Moses? Or anyone other than Jesus?God was known by all the Messengers Names prior to Jesus.
Noah
Abraham
Moses
And the many more
Regards Tony
LOL! I and every other person, is body, soul, and spirit. Similarly. God is the Trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.how could a perfect God be split 3 ways ? as soon as one part separates he would no longer be complete
Yes, I saw the trophy you gave me for that post.I understand what you mean now. That is a great interpretation!
Given the context, I don't think that verse should not be included with the New Name verses in the Book of Revelation.