• 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!

Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
So, if one says “the god” of the muslims or bahai faith or any other religions then it does not mean they are talking about “Jehovah” but about their “gods” or “Elohim” or "allah" or "buddha"

God is above all Names and can not be known by a Name. The Names of God reflect the Attributes that are given of God.

Each Messanger comes in a Name of God and tells us of our One God. Those that become attached to a Name fail to see God in all Names and Attributes.

Baha'u'llah means The "Glory of God" or "Glory of the Lord", Gods "Greatest Name" which means Baha'u'llah has come also as "Jehovah". Baha'u'llah is all the Names.

This passage explains this;

“I testify before God,” proclaims Bahá’u’lláh, “to the greatness, the inconceivable greatness of this Revelation. Again and again have We in most of Our Tablets borne witness to this truth, that mankind may be roused from its heedlessness.” “In this most mighty Revelation,” He unequivocally announces, “all the Dispensations of the past have attained their highest, their final consummation.” “That which hath been made manifest in this préeminent, this most exalted Revelation, stands unparalleled in the annals of the past, nor will future ages witness its like.” “He it is,” referring to Himself He further proclaims, “Who in the Old Testament hath been named Jehovah, Who in the Gospel hath been designated as the Spirit of Truth, and in the Qur’án acclaimed as the Great Announcement.” “But for Him no Divine Messenger would have been invested with the robe of prophethood, nor would any of the sacred scriptures have been revealed. To this bear witness all created things.” “The word which the one true God uttereth in this day, though that word be the most familiar and commonplace of terms, is invested with supreme, with unique distinction.”

This is the "Day of God", no less! The greatest proof that it is not a Physical Resurrection of the body of Jesus, but of the Christ.

Regards Tony
 
Last edited:

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I personally see nothing wrong with the Bible and the way it is written in the light of Baha'u'llahs Explanations.

2000 years ago Christ gave spiritual metaphors to people who could not grasp and understand the potential of a Global Message. Baha'u'llah has explained that level of complexity to us.

Baha'u'llah, has to me, now given a Universal Message and we are yet to grasp the enormity that it will be, we were still not ready to hear what God wished to tell us. There are writings that tell us this is so.

It is not surprising we struggle to see its import.

Regards Tony
You're missing what I'm seeing. I don't see what the gospel writers wrote about what happened after Jesus was crucified as metaphor. Sure when they quote something Jesus allegedly said, that could be a metaphor. But what about when they said Jesus did something? Why would the writers use metaphors? And all four of them come up with a fictitious story about Jesus coming back to life? They go out of their way to say that Jesus proved himself to be alive. As crazy as it sounds, maybe it's true. But how crazy did it sound 2000 years ago? How crazy was it for the early Christians to believe that those that had died believing in Christ would rise? And that they, those that were alive, would be transformed in a twinkling of an eye and be able to meet Jesus in the air?

It's easy for us to doubt the things claimed about the resurrection and ascension. And to point out how unscientific it is, but how about for them 2000 years ago? I think the writers presented the resurrection and ascension as something that really happened, and they say that there were several witnesses. And, that people touched him and confirmed that he had flesh and bone and say the identifying scares on his hands and feet and side.

So I question it and say that maybe they embellished the story a lot to make Jesus more than just a man, but a God. They had to compete with other legends of dying and rising gods. They had to compete with mythical god/men that could do miracles and fly off into the sky. Why not their God/man also? He walks on water, turns water into wine, healed the sick, brought people back to life and cast out demons. Then incredibly ironic, Baha'is believe the virgin birth. God impregnated Mary? And that is scientific? How about the story that goes with it? The star, that angels and the contradictory stories of how the family got to Bethlehem and what they did after Jesus was born? To sounds like legends and myth... including the virgin birth. But again, they needed that to make Jesus special or at least on par with the other legends and myths of the Greek and Roman religions.

But Baha'is don't consider those things. Why not? Why not examine the influence of the religious mythology of the times? Why not take a look at the Egyptian, Roman and Greek religions? The had great empires. What was their religion like? Who were their prophets? Why aren't they included in the prophets from the one true God? I know some people say that those religions did influence Christianity. Have some Baha'is studied those religions? I have never heard of any Baha'i mention any thing about them? But I think it could show a link between religions that are thought to be totally false and man-made compared to the religions that are thought to be true and from the one real God. Both are filled with unbelievable stories. One is considered myth. In the other it is considered true because it came from God's Word.

Jesus never said anything about Adam and Eve, Creation, Satan, hell, the Flood, or anything else in the Jewish Scriptures as not being actual events? Why not? Then the story written about him has even more fantastic things that modern people can't easily believe. Did Muhammad say anything that would make any of these stories only "symbolic"? Or, did he go along with perpetuating the assumption that all these things actual took place? So why now? Why would God finally decide to make it clear that all this was only symbolic? Oh yeah, because in one book , Daniel. One line about sealing up everything until the end. But Daniel wasn't written until long after most of the Jewish Scriptures. And why would Daniel have anything to do with sealing up the NT? And if you use Revelation, how does sealing up anything in one book, seal everything else? It's like an anthology, many stories with many writers. Anyway, I'm moving on to the next posts and your thread. See ya.
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member

Stay well CG, yes lots of questions only you can balance.

In the end I think we covered all the questions. I see the required balance is the explanations given by Baha'u'llah.

Personally I see the seals are placed by our own misunderstandings and that 'sealed books' is a statement of Prophecy. The opening of the seals is the Message given by Baha'u'llah, this Message takes away what we have misunderstood about scripture and our One God.

Likewise Muhammad and the Bab also opened seals of our closed understandings. An example of this is that Muhammad corrected the doctrine that had become the Trinity.

Regards Tony
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
The NT contained enough truth to carry us to the next stage in our spiritual evolution. What Jesus said was that powerful, in spite of the false beliefs of Christianity itself.

I do not know that much about Islam, but from what I know, most Muslims are closer to the truth about God than any other religion except Baha’i, which would make sense since they are right behind us.

Yes, humanity has progressed in spite of the errors that religions have made because what God revealed through the Messengers is that powerful. :)
Hmmm, the Truth about God? So God tells one of the Jewish prophets to kill prophets of the people of another religion. God makes clear that there is such a thing a belief in false gods... and he wants them gone. Then Jesus comes. If we can trust what is written, which it doesn't sound like we can, the rules change. However the beliefs got there who knows for sure. I think they were based on a reasonable interpretation of the NT. But then the NT was written by followers of Jesus. So we don't trust them a 100%. Somewhere in the writings is something so powerful that it will carry us to the next prophet. But what was it? Jesus is God? Jesus saves us from being sent to hell for our sins? I don't know?

But then comes Islam. What does it say about God? There is only one God... and it's not a three part Christian God? That's the same thing Jews believed. But what about the Jews that converted to Christianity? They became convinced that Jesus was their Savior and was God himself... wrong. So those Jews that were Christians should not only forget their abrogated Jewish beliefs but leave their erroneous Christian beliefs and follow exactly what Islam teaches. So how long before Islamic beliefs got mixed in with false beliefs? I assume there must be some, since Baha'is say that the Umayyad dynasty was corrupt. So again and again I ask, why would that original Jew have bothered to convert? He joined a false religion that taught about hell, Satan, a Trinity, a physical resurrection and that Jesus is the only way. But if he could have lived long enough, what would he have gained to convert to Islam?

So now we have the Baha'i Faith... and people are still fallible. They are still prone to do wrong things... and since I doubt if people will ever be perfect, the will do wrong things. Lust for power, lust for love, lie, cheat or steal to get ahead. We already have corrupt people that have tried to take power. But what about the ones in power? They might to pretty good people, but are they perfect? Will some fall into temptation? I'm sure some already have. No, I know they already have. I was around Baha'is in the 70's. The love/lust for a younger woman took down the most respected and nicest guys in a small community. I didn't look into it, but on the web there's something about Judge Nelson. I forget what the problem was, but I do remember that there was a insinuation that it was influenced by an east/west power struggle. Like a Baha'i version of Biggy and Tupac?

But the other thing I remember most was the lack of commitment. So many "inactive" Baha'is? But even the active ones in the community didn't do much. They went to feast, attended the local fireside, that rarely had "seekers". The Baha'is I ended up hanging out with, I was twenty back then, were young Baha'is that went all over to different events. I went with them on "Mass teaching" projects. People were supposed to enter the Faith by "troops". People did sign up. The Baha'is went door to door and invited the people to a meeting about the Baha'i Faith. If they asked the Baha'i Faith was, they told them. At the meeting they had a film and some music and food and a speaker and then an invitation to join. The big problem with the follow up was left to the local community. So most of the new people never became active. But what's happening now? Are Baha'is still waiting for "entry by troops?" Are more Baha'is participating in the Baha'i community? Are the children of Baha'is becoming Baha'is? Is it really growing and changing people and changing the world? Or, is it still in "obscurity"? Sitting in the sidelines?
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
But the other thing I remember most was the lack of commitment. So many "inactive" Baha'is? But even the active ones in the community didn't do much. They went to feast, attended the local fireside, that rarely had "seekers". The Baha'is I ended up hanging out with, I was twenty back then, were young Baha'is that went all over to different events. I went with them on "Mass teaching" projects. People were supposed to enter the Faith by "troops". People did sign up. The Baha'is went door to door and invited the people to a meeting about the Baha'i Faith. If they asked the Baha'i Faith was, they told them. At the meeting they had a film and some music and food and a speaker and then an invitation to join. The big problem with the follow up was left to the local community. So most of the new people never became active. But what's happening now? Are Baha'is still waiting for "entry by troops?" Are more Baha'is participating in the Baha'i community? Are the children of Baha'is becoming Baha'is? Is it really growing and changing people and changing the world? Or, is it still in "obscurity"? Sitting in the sidelines?

CG that is Faith in a nutshell. The Only Baha'i that was a Baha'i was Abdul'baha.

We are asked by Baha'u'llah to look at and be as Abdul'baha was.

The remainder of us are as you are, struggling to be better people, struggling in our knowledge of God.

Abdul'baha says keep trying and little by little day by day strive to do better. Thus Faith is now Deeds not Words.

I can say since 1984, most of my life was for the Baha'i Faith, but even then one still does not understand the level of detachment that is required to have True Faith, a Faith that talks for its own self like this;

“O army of God!” writes ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, “Through the protection and help vouchsafed by the Blessed Beauty—may my life be a sacrifice to His loved ones—ye must conduct yourselves in such a manner that ye may stand out distinguished and brilliant as the sun among other souls. Should any one of you enter a city, he should become a center of attraction by reason of his sincerity, his faithfulness and love, his honesty and fidelity, his truthfulness and loving-kindness towards all the peoples of the world, so that the people of that city may cry out and say: ‘This man is unquestionably a Bahá’í, for his manners, his behavior, his conduct, his morals, his nature, and disposition reflect the attributes of the Bahá’ís.’ Not until ye attain this station can ye be said to have been faithful to the Covenant and Testament of God.” “The most vital duty, in this day,”

Given the world of today is mostly chasing a Meterialistic Liberty and that true Liberty is the Laws of Baha'u'llah, It is not for the Faint of heart, is it CG!

Regards Tony
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Hmmm, the Truth about God? So God tells one of the Jewish prophets to kill prophets of the people of another religion. God makes clear that there is such a thing a belief in false gods... and he wants them gone. Then Jesus comes. If we can trust what is written, which it doesn't sound like we can, the rules change. However the beliefs got there who knows for sure. I think they were based on a reasonable interpretation of the NT. But then the NT was written by followers of Jesus. So we don't trust them a 100%. Somewhere in the writings is something so powerful that it will carry us to the next prophet. But what was it? Jesus is God? Jesus saves us from being sent to hell for our sins? I don't know?

But then comes Islam. What does it say about God? There is only one God... and it's not a three part Christian God? That's the same thing Jews believed. But what about the Jews that converted to Christianity? They became convinced that Jesus was their Savior and was God himself... wrong. So those Jews that were Christians should not only forget their abrogated Jewish beliefs but leave their erroneous Christian beliefs and follow exactly what Islam teaches. So how long before Islamic beliefs got mixed in with false beliefs? I assume there must be some, since Baha'is say that the Umayyad dynasty was corrupt. So again and again I ask, why would that original Jew have bothered to convert? He joined a false religion that taught about hell, Satan, a Trinity, a physical resurrection and that Jesus is the only way. But if he could have lived long enough, what would he have gained to convert to Islam?
I do not live in the past or the future, only in the present. I learned that from a good Buddhist friend. As such, I do not care what Jews did or what Christians did... This is a new Day of God. I am fortunate that I was never any other religion before I became a Baha’i so I was not influenced by the older religions. I did not even know anything g about them until about five years ago when I came to forums.

Regarding the older religions, Baha’u’llah put it this way:

“Please God thou wilt turn thine eyes towards the Most Great Revelation, and entirely disregard these conflicting tales and traditions.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 174-175

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.”

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 171-172
So now we have the Baha'i Faith... and people are still fallible. They are still prone to do wrong things... and since I doubt if people will ever be perfect, the will do wrong things. Lust for power, lust for love, lie, cheat or steal to get ahead. We already have corrupt people that have tried to take power. But what about the ones in power? They might to pretty good people, but are they perfect? Will some fall into temptation? I'm sure some already have. No, I know they already have. I was around Baha'is in the 70's. The love/lust for a younger woman took down the most respected and nicest guys in a small community. I didn't look into it, but on the web there's something about Judge Nelson. I forget what the problem was, but I do remember that there was an insinuation that it was influenced by an east/west power struggle. Like a Baha'i version of Biggy and Tupac?
If one judges the Baha’i Faith by the Baha’is then they will be disappointed. I am not saying the Baha’is are bad, only that they are not perfect, and the standards are so high... So I never look to the Baha’is but rather to what Baha’u’llah wrote, as well as to what Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi wrote. Somewhere Shoghi Effendi wrote that this is an infant Faith and it will have many growing pains before it becomes firmly established. All we can do is our best.

I have been a Baha’i since 1970 but I dropped out for the most part until about five years ago. I am still not active in the Baha’i community, for personal reasons, but I have spent all my free time on forums for the last five years. If I thought I could be useful I would probably be active but because of my personality I do not see how I could be of much use, and that is also one reason I had dropped out for so long, although there were other reasons. Another reason is that I was going through recovery from my childhood issues for about 20 years, and I was in college for more than 15 years, most of which time I also worked full time.

I became a Baha’i only two weeks after I heard about it so it was kind of impulsive, but I have never questioned that Baha’u’llah was a Manifestation of God so I remained a Baha’i, even though there were some times I wanted to turn in my card because I did not feel worthy... There was only one time I questioned Baha’u’llah, when I misunderstood the Tablet of the Maiden a few years ago, but some Baha’is in Planet Baha’i helped me with that. I have issues around sex and the fact that Muhammad and Baha’u’llah and so many wives gives me cause for concern, even though I know it is a cultural thing. Suffice to say that I cannot deal with hypocrisy and if you know what Baha’u’llah wrote about desires of the flesh that was pretty straightforward. I have never broken any Baha’i Laws but I got married three weeks after I met my husband and we were both virgins when we married, at ages 32 and 42. I do not expect that many people are able to adhere that strictly but it is none of my business. There are much worse things such as hate, anger, jealousy, envy, judgmentalness. I have suffered from those but I have improved a lot although it is a constant struggle.

Character is just so important. So if people do not tend to their issues if they had them, they are not much help to the Faith. I knew that which is why I put first things first and was in counseling and 12 step programs and in homeopathic treatment for so long.

What the Guardian wrote I sincerely believe:

“Not by the force of numbers, not by the mere exposition of a set of new and noble principles, not by an organized campaign of teaching—no matter how worldwide and elaborate in its character—not even by the staunchness of our faith or the exaltation of our enthusiasm, can we ultimately hope to vindicate in the eyes of a critical and sceptical age the supreme claim of the Abhá Revelation. One thing and only one thing will unfailingly and alone secure the undoubted triumph of this sacred Cause, namely, the extent to which our own inner life and private character mirror forth in their manifold aspects the splendor of those eternal principles proclaimed by Bahá’u’lláh.” Bahá’í Administration, p. 66
But the other thing I remember most was the lack of commitment. So many "inactive" Baha'is? But even the active ones in the community didn't do much. They went to feast, attended the local fireside, that rarely had "seekers". The Baha'is I ended up hanging out with, I was twenty back then, were young Baha'is that went all over to different events. I went with them on "Mass teaching" projects. People were supposed to enter the Faith by "troops". People did sign up. The Baha'is went door to door and invited the people to a meeting about the Baha'i Faith. If they asked the Baha'i Faith was, they told them. At the meeting they had a film and some music and food and a speaker and then an invitation to join. The big problem with the follow up was left to the local community. So most of the new people never became active. But what's happening now? Are Baha'is still waiting for "entry by troops?" Are more Baha'is participating in the Baha'i community? Are the children of Baha'is becoming Baha'is? Is it really growing and changing people and changing the world? Or, is it still in "obscurity"? Sitting in the sidelines?
I was active for a while in the beginning and a little bit in some communities I lived in. I moved all over the pace during my college years so I was anything but stable. I have lived in Washington State for about 30 years but I have not been active in the Baha'i community on a regular basis and for most years not at all. So I do not really know what the Baha’is are doing, although I know some of them are very active in our area. I admit I have been disheartened by the lack of entry by troops but now that I have been on forums posting to people for five years I understand why that has not transpired. There are just too many people mired in their older religious traditions and that is the primary reason. The other reason is crass materialism; in America people worship material things and activities and desires of the flesh. That is what they live for, so why would they want a religion like Baha’i that tells them they have to sacrifice for God, especially when they can be a Christian and eat drink and be merry and still be forgiven and saved and go to heaven? Most people are just not that noble, so it is just a few souls who carry the load as you have no doubt seen... Of course I do not know why inactive Baha’is are inactive and I do not even like that word. They are still Baha’is and there are reasons they do not participate in activities.

I will close with this: My major problems have never been with the Baha’i Faith or Baha’u’llah, they have been with God. Most of my life has been suffering and I have blamed God for many years. I do not blame God anymore but I am still not that fond of God. There are many days when I wish God did not even exist, but I know He does so I just try to change my attitude. The way I feel, why people ask me, do I promote God or Baha’i? Because I know I am wrong about God and because it is the right thing to do.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The word “god” or “allah” is NOT a name or a proper name like “Jehovah” “the God” of the bible.
The name "God" comes from the German and is a translation, not what He was historically called in Hebrew. "Jehovah" is not proper as there is no "J" sound in Hebrew, thus "Yahweh" is believed to be more likely correct.

"Allah, from the Arabic, and "Eloheim" from the Hebrew, again are from the "El Tradition" and historians well know this. Also, it is very clear that "Allah" and "Eloheim" are dealing with the same God, no doubt, and let me add that there are 17 names for God as found in the Tanakh if my memory is correct, and one can google them if they want.
 

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
"Allah, from the Arabic, and "Eloheim" from the Hebrew, again are from the "El Tradition" and historians well know this. Also, it is very clear that "Allah" and "Eloheim" are dealing with the same God, no doubt, and let me add that there are 17 names for God as found in the Tanakh if my memory is correct, and one can google them if they want.

It is not at all clear of that, metis. Muslims like to tell people that, because it puts them under the aegis of the Judeo-Christian religions, but Islam was founded by a guy who basically lived and traded around such people (there originally were Jews in Saudi Arabia). Mohammad had trouble converting Jews because they actually knew the Torah and could easily say "Moses never said that!"

Allah basically means "the god." It's not a name. Elohim is an actual name. When you type in God to the English to Hebrew, you get YHWH not Elohim. And YHWH itself does not "mean" God, it is a four letter acronym called the Tetragrammaton. Allah means "god".

If you need any further proof that Allah is not the same as Elohim, the Hebrews encountered God during the Exodus and as the patriarchs like Abraham, yet refused any kind of symbol to denote God. They have a symbol for their people (the star of David), and for their cultural tradition (the menorah). But nothing for God.
Allah, on the other hand, is often surrounded by crescent moon symbology.

God is not a moon good. He has nothing to do with the crescent moon. Different god.
 
Last edited:

Neb

Active Member
"Allah, from the Arabic, and "Eloheim" from the Hebrew, again are from the "El Tradition" and historians well know this. Also, it is very clear that "Allah" and "Eloheim" are dealing with the same God, no doubt, and let me add that there are 17 names for God as found in the Tanakh if my memory is correct, and one can google them if they want.
You still did not understand. Let me repeat myself again.

The word “god” in Germanic/English or “allah” in Arabic or "elohim" in Hebrew is NOT a "NAME" or a "PROPER NAME" like “Jehovah” “the God” of the bible.

For example: “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God/El Almighty/Shaddai, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.” –Exodus 6:3

IOW, the True God of the Bible “appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God/El Almighty/Shaddai” only, i.e., without a “PROPER NAME” yet, but now he would be known by HIS “PROPER NAME” as "Jehovah".

Now, if a Muslims or Bahai Faith or Buddhist would read this, do you think they are still talking about the same “God”? NO!
 

Neb

Active Member
The name "God" comes from the German and is a translation, not what He was historically called in Hebrew. "Jehovah" is not proper as there is no "J" sound in Hebrew, thus "Yahweh" is believed to be more likely correct.
Maybe you did not see the "or". Read it again. And so the Buddhist refer to their god as “the god” or “allah” in Arabic or “Elohim” in Hebrew, but that does not mean they are the same as the “True God/Elohim, Jehovah, or Yahweh in the Bible.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The word “god” in Germanic/English or “allah” in Arabic or "elohim" in Hebrew is NOT a "NAME" or a "PROPER NAME" like “Jehovah” “the God” of the bible.

HIS “PROPER NAME” as "Jehovah"

Now, if a Muslims or Bahai Faith or Buddhist would read this, do you think they are still talking about the same “God”? NO!

And so the Buddhist refer to their god as “the god”
The only thing that you have established is that you really don't know what you're talking about, thus repeating the same nonsense over and over again but being obviously way too lazy to actually do the homework.

Therefore, believe in what you want, but I have better things to do.
 

Neb

Active Member
False as there is no creator-god in Buddhism. The Buddha is believed to be "the enlightened one"-- and actual person.
Do Buddhists have a shrine or a statue of Buddha, candles, and an incense burner when they worship, either at home or at the temple? YES!

“Worship involves religious acts of praise, honour and devotion, usually directed towards a deity or another figure worthy of this degree of respect. Most Buddhists do not believe in God. Although they respect and look up to the Buddha, they do not believe he was a god but they worship him as a form of respect.”
 

Neb

Active Member
The only thing that you have established is that you really don't know what you're talking about, thus repeating the same nonsense over and over again but being obviously way too lazy to actually do the homework.

Therefore, believe in what you want, but I have better things to do.
Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known asappeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic.
 

Neb

Active Member
God is above all Names and can not be known by a Name. The Names of God reflect the Attributes that are given of God.

Each Messanger comes in a Name of God and tells us of our One God. Those that become attached to a Name fail to see God in all Names and Attributes.

Baha'u'llah means The "Glory of God" or "Glory of the Lord", Gods "Greatest Name" which means Baha'u'llah has come also as "Jehovah". Baha'u'llah is all the Names.
"ullah/allah" NO PROPER NAME.

The word “god” in Germanic/English or “allah” in Arabic or "elohim" in Hebrew is NOT a "NAME" or a "PROPER NAME" like “Jehovah” “the God” of the bible.

For example: “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God/El Almighty/Shaddai, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.” –Exodus 6:3

IOW, the True God of the Bible “appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God/El Almighty/Shaddai” only, i.e., without a “PROPER NAME” yet, but now he would be known by HIS “PROPER NAME” as "Jehovah".

Now, if a Muslims or Bahai Faith or Buddhist would read this, do you think they are still talking about the same “God”? NO!
This passage explains this;

“I testify before God,” proclaims Bahá’u’lláh, “to the greatness, the inconceivable greatness of this Revelation. Again and again have We in most of Our Tablets borne witness to this truth, that mankind may be roused from its heedlessness.” “In this most mighty Revelation,” He unequivocally announces, “all the Dispensations of the past have attained their highest, their final consummation.” “That which hath been made manifest in this préeminent, this most exalted Revelation, stands unparalleled in the annals of the past, nor will future ages witness its like.” “He it is,” referring to Himself He further proclaims, “Who in the Old Testament hath been named Jehovah, Who in the Gospel hath been designated as the Spirit of Truth, and in the Qur’án acclaimed as the Great Announcement.” “But for Him no Divine Messenger would have been invested with the robe of prophethood, nor would any of the sacred scriptures have been revealed. To this bear witness all created things.” “The word which the one true God uttereth in this day, though that word be the most familiar and commonplace of terms, is invested with supreme, with unique distinction.”

This is the "Day of God", no less! The greatest proof that it is not a Physical Resurrection of the body of Jesus, but of the Christ.

Regards Tony
Interpretation or commentary?
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
The name "God" comes from the German and is a translation, not what He was historically called in Hebrew. "Jehovah" is not proper as there is no "J" sound in Hebrew, thus "Yahweh" is believed to be more likely correct.

"Allah, from the Arabic, and "Eloheim" from the Hebrew, again are from the "El Tradition" and historians well know this. Also, it is very clear that "Allah" and "Eloheim" are dealing with the same God, no doubt, and let me add that there are 17 names for God as found in the Tanakh if my memory is correct, and one can google them if they want.

thought I would give you more thoughts. As you may know Numerical Values of the Hebrew were also used to portray meaning in scriptures...sorry short of time but a quick thought;

"Because the Torah like the rest of the Bible was written under the inspiration of God, it has to be remembered that it was written in an alphanumeric language. Hebrew, like Greek, was numeric values associated with each of its letters. This isn't new age mysticism but old age truth.

Yahweh's sacred and intimate name of Yod-He-Vau-He has a numeric value of 10+5+6+5= 26. In its triangular form of unfoldment it adds up to the Great Number 72.

This is known as the "Greatest Name of God"

26 = 8
72 = 9

Baha'u'llah meaning Glory of God or the Glory of the lord is known as the 'Greatest Name'

the Numerical Value of Baha = 9

So the Message of the Bab and Baha'u'llah is the 8th and 9th Revelation still existing at the close of the Adamic Cycle. The 9th opened the New Age of God.

Regards Tony
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
thought I would give you more thoughts. As you may know Numerical Values of the Hebrew were also used to portray meaning in scriptures...sorry short of time but a quick thought;

"Because the Torah like the rest of the Bible was written under the inspiration of God, it has to be remembered that it was written in an alphanumeric language. Hebrew, like Greek, was numeric values associated with each of its letters. This isn't new age mysticism but old age truth.

Yahweh's sacred and intimate name of Yod-He-Vau-He has a numeric value of 10+5+6+5= 26. In its triangular form of unfoldment it adds up to the Great Number 72.

This is known as the "Greatest Name of God"

26 = 8
72 = 9

Baha'u'llah meaning Glory of God or the Glory of the lord is known as the 'Greatest Name'

the Numerical Value of Baha = 9

So the Message of the Bab and Baha'u'llah is the 8th and 9th Revelation still existing at the close of the Adamic Cycle. The 9th opened the New Age of God.

Regards Tony
Thanks, but I really don't get "into" that, if you know what I mean. Kabbalah does, but I'm not at all enamored by its approach either.

What I do find interesting, however, is the heavy use of numbers as found in Kabbalah that is also used in some forms of Buddhism and Hinduism, which begs the question as whether their approach may have been "borrowed" and incorporated.
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
Thanks, but I really don't get "into" that, if you know what I mean. Kabbalah does, but I'm not at all enamored by its approach either.

What I do find interesting, however, is the heavy use of numbers as found in Kabbalah that is also used in some forms of Buddhism and Hinduism, which begs the question as whether their approach may have been "borrowed" and incorporated.

I appreciate you view on that. I have not looked into it much as well, but I was amazed to find that Gods Messengers speak in ways we do not understand and they do this in each word they offer.

Those that have studied this get a lot more out of the Word of God than I ever could consider.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
Adrian will be wondering what happened to His Post Question!

Sorry dear friend! Must get into the habit of looking at the topic thread title before answering questions :oops:

I got into a habit of opening questions in multiple tabs and just answering the question.

Hope you are well and happy Adrian009 :)
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
“Worship involves religious acts of praise, honour and devotion, usually directed towards a deity or another figure worthy of this degree of respect. Most Buddhists do not believe in God. Although they respect and look up to the Buddha, they do not believe he was a god but they worship him as a form of respect.”
Do you read your own posts? They don't think of him as a god. Why would you bold "do" but not the "not" part?
 
Top