Second Coming

[Trailblazer]

Over a period of 2000 years different people have given different dates and so far it's never happened.

and what Christians are waiting for, the same Jesus to return, never will happen since Jesus said he was NO MORE in this world.
There is not one verse in the entire NT where Jesus says he is going to return to this world. As such it is a false belief.

 

[Feedmysheep]

The Revelation of Baha'u'llah is not another gospel. Only Jesus had a gospel.
The Revelation of Baha'u'llah is is a new revelation from God.

Closer examination would reveal that it is a step backwards.
Mahammed also was presented as a new revelation but was really an attempt to become an Arab Moses another law giver.

So I would count your confidence as Baha'ullah being a leap forward in revelation to be deceptive.
Rather it is a rejection of the New Testament and a throw BACK to another law giving Moses like figure.

Now I once was given a copy of the writings of Baha'ullah in the early 80s.
A woman as a fellow computer programmer was Baha'i. We had som econversations.

I did not finish it. I found it unpleasant to my spirit to read.
And I do not have it any more. Nor would I admit to knowing a lot of what it said.

Baha'u'llah never claimed to be another Jesus.

I don't know about that. But he preached "another Jesus" if he preached that Christ's resurrection is a falsehood.
And if the other bullet points you mentioned are core tenants of his teaching, definitely whatever he claimed about himself,
he preached "another Jesus" with "another gospel" as well.

He claimed to be the return of the Christ Spirit in another man with a new name.

I know the New Testament well and immediately am familiar with what passages you refer to.
But the sad thing is that you probably never read from beginning to end many New Testament books.
Have you EVER read from the beginning all the way through, say, Matthew, or Luke, or John, or Romans?

I would doubt that you never let them speak to you on their own grounds.
You came to them, I would wager, filled up with what your teacher prescribed for you to see.

While I am interested that you come with quotes from the NT you're being terribly selective based on
what Baha'u'llah's twistings, re-interpretations, and spinnings to teach "another Jesus".

The Bible says Christ would return with a new name, so we know the return of Christ would not be Jesus.

I will offer a better interpretation based on more of what the Bible says.
But it will have to be brief.

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.

1.) The hidden manna is the "bread from heaven" that was kept as a memorial inside the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies.
Manna literally means "What is It?" Christ as the life giving Spirit which He became in resurrection is something so unique
that He is the "What Is It?" in the deepest part of the saved persons being - his spirit.

the last Adam became a life giving Spirit. (1 Cor. 15:45b)
He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit. (1 Cor. 6:17)

This word spoken to the church where Satan's throne was, the church in Pergamos, means
inspite of the conflict with the world pressing upon the church, INWARDLY they will be nourished and sustained by
the indwelling Jesus Christ. He said He was that bread from heaven. And He said that if we "wat" Him we will live by Him.

As the living Father has sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me.
This is the bread which came down out of heaven, not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread shall live forever. (John 6:47,48)

Christ in His form as "life giving Spirit" implanted within the innermost being of those who receive Him can overcome
worldliness, temptation, distractions, and all of Satan's devices by enjoying the eating of Christ who is dispensed into
the kernel of their spiritual being.

Much more could be said. This is concise and reliable.

2.) The "new name" of the eater of the "hidden manna" means to eat Christ leads to transformation.
Christ is about transforming people from the inside out. Peter was the leading disciple. And Jesus changed his name from Simon
to Peter "a stone". This signaled Christ's intent to transform everyone who follows Him into a living stone for His organic living building
the church.

Peter remembered that Jesus was the God-man as the cornerstone of God's building. And he remembered how Jesus had changed his
name from Simon to "stone" Peter. And he wrote that all us who believe into Christ are ALSO living stones for God's spiritual house.

Coming to Him, a living stone, rejected by men but with God chosen and precious,
You yourselves also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house into a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 2:4,5)

If you believe into the Lord Jesus Christ you also will become a God-man. And you also will become a living stone for the
building up of a corporate dwelling place of God. God is building Himself into His people and His people into Him.

Much more could be said here. This is enough for now.

3.) The "white stone" with the new name written again means transformation from within by the Spirit of Christ.
It is a "white stone" to signify justification, approval, acceptance because of Christ's dynamic transforming salvation.

And it is a stone not for individual display but for BUILDING a collective, corporate building of the mingling of God and man.
These verses on transformation help.

First let's see how the revelation of transformation for the building of the church was received by Peter.

And Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in the heavens.

And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

To see that Christ is the Son of God is a matter of revelation.
And to see that I must be transformed for the building of Christ's church also is seen by revelation.

Now it doesn't suprise me that your teacher insists that reading Paul's letters is a No-No. Of course in competition with
the apostles Baha'ullah must poison your mind against this pioneering apostle Paul. The rather most faithful conveyor
of God's eternal purpose through the gospel MUST be knocked down by a false prophet. You're being cheated.

Paul pioneered in being transformed by Christ. And he was faithful to show Christians the way of this transformation.

And do not be fashioned according to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of the mind that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and well pleasing and perfect. (Romans12:2)

And the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
But we all with unveiled face, beholding and reflecting like a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord Spirit. (2 Cor. 3:17,18)

 

[Feedmysheep]

Revelation 3:12-13 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God,

This has to be brief. This verse shows the same thing as the giving of a white stone with a new name in it.
The brotherly love church Philadelphia produces living pillars for the house of God. They will go in and out NO MORE.
They are transformed to be solidly supporting living pillars in God's living temple which consumates in New Jerusalem.

and he sore outhall go no more out:

Exactly, Instead of going in and out again, backsliding, being distracted by various distractions, the overcomer will be so
transformed as to be a permenant supporting person fully conformed in mind, emotion, will, even in glorified body, to
be a intragal supporing pillar in the building of God. The old nature is throughly discharged. And the new nature, the divine nature
is thoroughly saturating and permeating the saved one. Thus he or she is an overcomer.

Much, much more could be said.

and I will write upon him the name of my God,

This shows thorough possession by God. This shows thorough ownership by God.
This even shows God has been wrought into the fabric of the overcomer's being.
Sooner of latter every saved man will come to this consumation. Why not sooner rather than latter?

and the name of the city of my God,

To be transformed is for the building of the city of God which is seen as a sign in Revelation 21,22.
To be transformed thoroughly in Jesus Christ is to express God in man, be ownedby God to the uttermost, and to be built into the
living city of God.

Paul, whom you are being discourged to trust, already taught the same thing in Ephesians.

Being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone;
In whom all the building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord;
In whom you also are being built together into a dwelling place of God in spirit. (Eph. 2:20-22)

Its the SAME THING Trailbalzer. You are being cheated. You are being taught to pit Jesus against Paul and vica versa.

The building of the habitation of God in spirit is the building of the New Jerusalem.
The transformation that Paul pioneered and taught is the making of living pillars in the temple of God - a living building.

which is new Jerusalem,

The building of New Jerusalem is the meaning of the universe.
God became a man so that man might become God in life and nature and expression (but not in His Godhead).
God came as the God-man Jesus Christ to build the saved who receive Him into a corporate city, temple, and living habitation of God
for His rest and for our enjoyment in eternity.

which cometh down out of heaven from my God:

The source of this eternal dwelling place of God is God in Heaven alone.
Just as Jesus was the bread of life which came down out of heaven - BY INCARNATION,
So the New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven by the Triune God's unique salvation.

The SOURCE of the New Jerusalem is solely of God's salvation and not of man's religion, philosophy, or inginuity.
All we can do is cooperate by opening our entire being that God in Christ, by the Spirit may fill us.

Here we see the Son of God "coming down" out of heaven by incarnation.
For I have come down from heaven not to do My own will but the will of Him who sent Me. (John 6:38)

This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, that anyone may eat of it and not die.
JI am the living bread which came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he shall live forever; and the bread which I will give is My flesh, given for the life of the world. (vs. 50,51)

And here in a sign we see New Jerusalem "coming down" out of heaven from God by His all-inclusive salvation.
And I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. (Rev. 21:2)

I end this post here. But as you can see this living temple New Jerusalem is also called the bride of Christ. That means she is destined to
MATCH the Son of God in every way except in His being the Godhead. The communicable attributes of the Triune God are dispensed into
the beings of all who are saved by Christ.

The destiny of all the myriads who are saved is to match Jesus Christ and be His counterpart, His virtual corporate spouse and wife.
Paul told us this.

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.

Because those whom He foreknew, He also predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the Firstborn among many brothers;

And those whom He predestinated, these He also called; and those whom He called, these He also justified; and those whom He justified, these He also glorified.

What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? (Rom. 8:28-31)

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

and what Christians are waiting for, the same Jesus to return, never will happen since Jesus said he was NO MORE in this world.
There is not one verse in the entire NT where Jesus says he is going to return to this world. As such it is a false belief.

I find it ironic that Christians believe that they properly understand the Bible and have spiritual discernment, but they constantly contradict one another about the Bible and their doctrinal beliefs. They are so divided that they can't even agree about whether salvation in Jesus is conditional or unconditional.

 

[Trailblazer]

Closer examination would reveal that it is a step backwards.

Closer examination would reveal that it is a step forwards, a very big step forwards.

I don't know about that. But he preached "another Jesus" if he preached that Christ's resurrection is a falsehood.

Yes, it is a Bahai belief that Christ's resurrection is a falsehood, although Baha'u'llah did not write that.
His son Abdu'l-Baha, who was the Centre of His Covenant, wrote it.

“Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ’s resurrection is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. No, rather it was lost, for the believers were few in number and were troubled and agitated. The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.

Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection. But as the clergy have neither understood the meaning of the Gospels nor comprehended the symbols, therefore, it has been said that religion is in contradiction to science, and science in opposition to religion, as, for example, this subject of the ascension of Christ with an elemental body to the visible heaven is contrary to the science of mathematics. But when the truth of this subject becomes clear, and the symbol is explained, science in no way contradicts it; but, on the contrary, science and the intelligence affirm it."

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 103-105

And if the other bullet points you mentioned are core tenants of his teaching, definitely whatever he claimed about himself,
he preached "another Jesus" with "another gospel" as well.

I already told you that the Writings of Baha'u'llah are not another gospel because only Jesus had a gospel.
The Writings of Baha'u'llah are new Revelation from God.

I already told you that Baha'u'llah never claimed to be another Jesus. He claimed to be the return of the Spirit of God.

“O kings of Christendom! Heard ye not the saying of Jesus, the Spirit of God, “I go away, and come again unto you”? Wherefore, then, did ye fail, when He did come again unto you in the clouds of heaven, to draw nigh unto Him, that ye might behold His face, and be of them that attained His Presence? In another passage He saith: “When He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 246-249

“We, in truth, have sent Him Whom We aided with the Holy Spirit (Jesus Christ) that He may announce unto you this Light that hath shone forth from the horizon of the will of your Lord, the Most Exalted, the All-Glorious, and Whose signs have been revealed in the West. Set your faces towards Him (Bahá’u’lláh) on this Day which God hath exalted above all other days, and whereon the All-Merciful hath shed the splendour of His effulgent glory upon all who are in heaven and all who are on earth.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 17-23

“This is, truly, that which the Spirit of God (Jesus Christ) hath announced, when He came with truth unto you, He with Whom the Jewish doctors disputed, till at last they perpetrated what hath made the Holy Spirit to lament, and the tears of them that have near access to God to flow….”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 17-23

“The Word which the Son concealed is made manifest. It hath been sent down in the form of the human temple in this day. Blessed be the Lord Who is the Father! He, verily, is come unto the nations in His most great majesty.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 83-86

“Ye make mention of Me, and know Me not. Ye call upon Me, and are heedless of My Revelation…. O people of the Gospel! They who were not in the Kingdom have now entered it, whilst We behold you, in this day, tarrying at the gate. Rend the veils asunder by the power of your Lord, the Almighty, the All-Bounteous, and enter, then, in My name My Kingdom. Thus biddeth you He Who desireth for you everlasting life…”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Page 91

“WE, verily, have come for your sakes, and have borne the misfortunes of the world for your salvation. Flee ye the One Who hath sacrificed His life that ye may be quickened? Fear God, O followers of the Spirit (Jesus), and walk not in the footsteps of every divine that hath gone far astray… Open the doors of your hearts. He Who is the Spirit (Jesus) verily, standeth before them.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Page 92

Baha'u'llah says WE because He is referring to Himself and Jesus Christ. Both of them have borne the misfortunes of the world for our salvation.

(Continued on next post)

 

[Trailblazer]

I know the New Testament well and immediately am familiar with what passages you refer to.
But the sad thing is that you probably never read from beginning to end many New Testament books.
Have you EVER read from the beginning all the way through, say, Matthew, or Luke, or John, or Romans?

I would doubt that you never let them speak to you on their own grounds.
You came to them, I would wager, filled up with what your teacher prescribed for you to see.

If I did listen to them I would not be listening to Jesus, since Jesus did not write any of the New Testament.
Rather, the NT was written by men who never even knew Jesus.

Baha'u'llah was not a teacher. He was a Manifestation of God, equivalent to Jesus. Baha'u'llah did not waste His time talking abut the Bible, which was written for a past age of history. To considered talking about the past to be a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.

“…… To this testify the records of the sacred books. Were the details to be mentioned, this epistle would swell into a book. Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past. God is Our witness that what We even now mention is due solely to Our tender affection for thee, that haply the poor of the earth may attain the shores of the sea of wealth, the ignorant be led unto the ocean of divine knowledge, and they that thirst for understanding partake of the Salsabíl of divine wisdom. Otherwise, this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.” (The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63)

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 41-80

While I am interested that you come with quotes from the NT you're being terribly selective based on
what Baha'u'llah's twistings, re-interpretations, and spinnings to teach "another Jesus".

Like I said, Baha'u'llah did not waste His time talking about the Bible.

Now it doesn't suprise me that your teacher insists that reading Paul's letters is a No-No. Of course in competition with
the apostles Baha'ullah must poison your mind against this pioneering apostle Paul. The rather most faithful conveyor
of God's eternal purpose through the gospel MUST be knocked down by a false prophet. You're being cheated.

Like I said, Baha'u'llah did not waste His time talking about the Bible, so He never even mentioned Paul.

I am not the one who is being cheated because I have recognized Baha'u'llah for who He was, the return of Christ, the messiah of the latter days, and the Promised One of all ages. Can't get much better than that.

Paul pioneered in being transformed by Christ. And he was faithful to show Christians the way of this transformation.

Paul destroyed what Christianity could have become with his false teachings about Jesus. It is despicable.
You do not follow Jesus, you follow Paul.

“That the figure of the Nazarene, as delivered to us in Mark’s Gospel, is decisively different from the pre-existent risen Christ proclaimed by Paul, is something long recognized by thinkers like Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Herder and Goethe, to mention only a few. The distinction between ‘the religion of Christ’ and ‘the Christian religion’ goes back to Lessing. Critical theological research has now disputed the idea of an uninterrupted chain of historical succession: Luther’s belief that at all times a small handful of true Christians preserved the true apostolic faith. Walter Bauer (226) and Martin Werner (227) have brought evidence that there was conflict from the outset about the central questions of dogma. It has become clear that the beliefs of those who had seen and heard Jesus in the flesh --- the disciples and the original community--- were at odds to an extraordinary degree with the teaching of Paul, who claimed to have been not only called by a vision but instructed by the heavenly Christ. The conflict at Antioch between the apostles Peter and Paul, far more embittered as research has shown (228) than the Bible allows us to see, was the most fateful split in Christianity, which in the Acts of the Apostles was ‘theologically camouflaged’. (229)

Paul, who had never seen Jesus, showed great reserve towards the Palestinian traditions regarding Jesus’ life. (230) The historical Jesus and his earthly life are without significance for Paul. In all his epistles the name ‘Jesus’ occurs only 15 times, the title ‘Christ’ 378 times. In Jesus’s actual teaching he shows extraordinarily little interest. It is disputed whether in all his epistles he makes two, three or four references to sayings by Jesus. (231) It is not Jesus’ teaching, which he cannot himself have heard at all (short of hearing it in a vision), that is central to his own mission, but the person of the Redeemer and His death on the Cross.

Jesus, who never claimed religious worship for himself was not worshipped in the original community, is for Paul the pre-existent risen Christ….
This was the ‘Fall’ of Christianity: that Paul with his ‘Gospel’, which became the core of Christian dogma formation, conquered the world, (237) while the historic basis of Christianity was declared a heresy….

Pauline heresy served as the basis for Christian orthodoxy, and the legitimate Church was outlawed as heretical’. (240) The ‘small handful of true Christians’ was Nazarene Christianity, which was already extinct in the fourth century……

The centerpiece then, of Christian creedal doctrine, that of Redemption, is something of which—in the judgment of the theologian E. Grimm (244) --- Jesus himself knew nothing; and it goes back to Paul. “
(Udo Schaefer, Light Shineth in Darkness, Studies in revelation after Christ )

How Paul changed the course of Christianity

This is an excerpt from the book entitled The Light Shineth in Darkness, Studies in revelation after Christ by Udo Schaefer. This section explains how Paul changed the Christianity of Jesus. It is important to note that the views expressed by this author reflect his individual perspective and...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Jimmy]

I find it ironic that Christians believe that they properly understand the Bible and have spiritual discernment, but they constantly contradict one another about the Bible and their doctrinal beliefs. They are so divided that they can't even agree about whether salvation in Jesus is conditional or unconditional.

Most Christians believe Jesus was the only man who rose from the grave on his own accord, is god in the flesh and will return with a new heaven and earth.

 

[Trailblazer]

To be transformed is for the building of the city of God which is seen as a sign in Revelation 21,22.
To be transformed thoroughly in Jesus Christ is to express God in man, be owned by God to the uttermost, and to be built into the
living city of God.

Paul, whom you are being discourged to trust, already taught the same thing in Ephesians.

More false teachings about Jesus from Paul.
Nobody discouraged me from trusting Paul, I figured that out all by myself that he did not teach what Jesus taught.
All I needed was the New Testament to figure that out.

Baha'u'llah explained what the City of God is.

“They that valiantly labor in quest of God, will, when once they have renounced all else but Him, be so attached and wedded unto that City, that a moment’s separation from it would to them be unthinkable. They will hearken unto infallible proofs from the Hyacinth of that assembly, and will receive the surest testimonies from the beauty of its Rose, and the melody of its Nightingale. Once in about a thousand years shall this City be renewed and readorned….

That City is none other than the Word of God revealed in every age and dispensation. In the days of Moses it was the Pentateuch; in the days of Jesus, the Gospel; in the days of Muhammad, the Messenger of God, the Qur’án; in this day, the Bayán; and in the Dispensation of Him Whom God will make manifest, His own Book—the Book unto which all the Books of former Dispensations must needs be referred, the Book that standeth amongst them all transcendent and supreme.“

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 264-270

We are now living in the Dispensation of Baha'u'llah, which is the Dispensation of Him Whom God made manifest.
His own Book—the Book unto which all the Books of former Dispensations must needs be referred, the Book that standeth amongst them all transcendent and supreme, is the Writings of Baha'u'llah.

Its the SAME THING Trailbalzer. You are being cheated. You are being taught to pit Jesus against Paul and vica versa.

Nobody taught me that, I figured that out all by myself that he did not teach what Jesus taught.
All I needed was the New Testament to figure that out.

The building of the habitation of God in spirit is the building of the New Jerusalem.
The transformation that Paul pioneered and taught is the making of living pillars in the temple of God - a living building.

Revelation 21 New International Version
A New Heaven and a New Earth

21 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

The new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, refers to the new Revelation from God that came through Baha'u'llah.

“The time foreordained unto the peoples and kindreds of the earth is now come. The promises of God, as recorded in the holy Scriptures, have all been fulfilled. Out of Zion hath gone forth the Law of God, and Jerusalem, and the hills and land thereof, are filled with the glory of His Revelation. Happy is the man that pondereth in his heart that which hath been revealed in the Books of God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Meditate upon this, O ye beloved of God, and let your ears be attentive unto His Word, so that ye may, by His grace and mercy, drink your fill from the crystal waters of constancy, and become as steadfast and immovable as the mountain in His Cause.

In the Book of Isaiah it is written: “Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of His majesty.” No man that meditateth upon this verse can fail to recognize the greatness of this Cause, or doubt the exalted character of this Day—the Day of God Himself. ”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 12-14

 

[Feedmysheep]

The centerpiece then, of Christian creedal doctrine, that of Redemption, is something of which—in the judgment of the theologian E. Grimm (244) --- Jesus himself knew nothing; and it goes back to Paul. “

This is incorrect. First of all Redemption is FOR something. It is not for its own sake.

Secondly, before Paul wrote of redemption Jesus said -

For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many. (Mark 10:45)

 

[Feedmysheep]

Some eight hundred years (?) before Jesus said He came to give His life as a ransom for many Isaiah the prophet
wrote the Suffering Savior would make Himself an offering for sin.

But Jehovah was pleased to crush Him, to afflict Him with grief. / When He makes Himself an offering for sin, / He will see a seed, He will extend His days, / And the pleasure of Jehovah will prosper in His hand.

He will see the fruit of the travail of His soul, / And He will be satisfied; / By the knowledge of Him, the righteous One, My Servant, will make the many righteous, / And He will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:10,11)

And of course the fact that "He will see the fruit of the travial of His soul" and "extend His days" means He will be resurrected to
see the vindication of His sacrifice.

 

[Feedmysheep]

Most Christians believe Jesus was the only man who rose from the grave on his own accord, is god in the flesh and will return with a new heaven and earth.

Before the age of the new heaven and new earth is an intervening 1,000 years. And after that "a little while" the length of which we cannot determine.

Read Revelation chapter 20. Do not just take my word for it.
Check everything with the Bible.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is incorrect. First of all Redemption is FOR something. It is not for its own sake.

Secondly, before Paul wrote of redemption Jesus said -

For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many. (Mark 10:45)

There is a difference between Redemption and Jesus giving His life as a ransom for many.
Redemption implies that we need to be redeemed from something, and Christians believe that something was the original sin of Adam and Eve.

redemption
an act of atoning for guilt, a fault, or a mistake, or the state of having atoned. · an act or the state of being rescued

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

Baha'u'llah wrote that Jesus offered up His life as a ransom for the sins and iniquities of all the peoples of the earth.
That is not the same as being redeemed from original sin.

“That which thou hast heard concerning Abraham, the Friend of the All-Merciful, is the truth, and no doubt is there about it. The Voice of God commanded Him to offer up Ishmael as a sacrifice, so that His steadfastness in the Faith of God and His detachment from all else but Him may be demonstrated unto men. The purpose of God, moreover, was to sacrifice him as a ransom for the sins and iniquities of all the peoples of the earth. This same honor, Jesus, the Son of Mary, besought the one true God, exalted be His name and glory, to confer upon Him. For the same reason was Ḥusayn offered up as a sacrifice by Muḥammad, the Apostle of God.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 75-76

 

[Trailblazer]

Some eight hundred years (?) before Jesus said He came to give His life as a ransom for many Isaiah the prophet
wrote the Suffering Savior would make Himself an offering for sin.

Jesus did give His life as a ransom for many and He made Himself an offering for sin, but Jesus did not fulfill everything in the following verse.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

It pleased the Lord to bruise Jesus; he hath put him to grief, but the same happened to Baha'u'llah.
Jesus gave His body as an offering for sin, He did not give His soul as an offering for sin.
Jesus did not see his seed, and God did not prolong his days.

But Jehovah was pleased to crush Him, to afflict Him with grief. / When He makes Himself an offering for sin, / He will see a seed, He will extend His days, / And the pleasure of Jehovah will prosper in His hand.

He will see the fruit of the travail of His soul, / And He will be satisfied; / By the knowledge of Him, the righteous One, My Servant, will make the many righteous, / And He will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:10,11)

And of course the fact that "He will see the fruit of the travial of His soul" and "extend His days" means He will be resurrected to
see the vindication of His sacrifice.

Isaiah 53 is not about Jesus. It is about Baha'u'llah, the return of the Christ Spirit that Jesus promised to send (John 14:16, John 14:26, John 15:26, John 16:17). Baha’u’llah was also the Messiah the Jews have been long awaiting. There in the valley of ‘Akká, in sight of holy ‘Carmel’, the entire prophecy of the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was brought to its fulfillment.

Regarding Isaiah 53:3, Jesus was not rejected by most men. Jesus was esteemed by many men. Isaiah 53:8, Isaiah 53:9, and Isaiah 53:10 cannot apply to Jesus because Jesus was not taken from prison and from judgment, Jesus did not make His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death. Jesus made his soul an offering for sin, but He did not see his seed and His days were not prolonged, so there is no way Isaiah 53:10 can be about Jesus.

Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Bahá’u’lláh was rejected by his own countrymen, and was sent into exile. His life was filled with grief and sorrow. The Emperor Franz Joseph passed within but a short distance of the prison in which Bahá’u’lláh was captive. Louis Napoleon cast behind his back the letter which Bahá’u’lláh sent to him, saying: “If this man is of God, then I am two Gods!” The people of the world have followed in their footsteps.

Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

I read the following words of Bahá’u’lláh concerning his persecution and imprisonment: “Though weariness lay Me low, and hunger consume Me, and the bare rock be My bed, and My fellows the beasts of the field, I will not complain, but will endure patiently … and will render thanks unto God under all conditions … We pray that, out of His bounty—exalted be He—He may release, through this imprisonment, the necks of men from chains and fetters…” The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 42–3.

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Bahá’u’lláh was twice stoned, once scourged, thrice poisoned, scarred with hundred-pound chains which cut through his flesh and rested upon the bones of his shoulders. He lived a prisoner and an exile for nearly half a century.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Bahá’u’lláh was taken from the black-pit prison in Tihrán for judgement before the authorities. His death was expected hourly, but he was banished to ‘Iráq and finally to Israel. In the prison-city of ‘Akká, on another occasion, “… the Governor, at the head of his troops, with drawn swords, surrounded (Bahá’u’lláh’s) house. The entire populace, as well as the military authorities, were in a state of great agitation. The shouts and clamour of the people could be heard on all sides. Bahá’u’lláh was peremptorily summoned to the Governorate, interrogated, kept in custody the first night … The Governor, soon after, sent word that he was at liberty to return to his home, and apologized for what had occurred.” God Passes By, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 190–191.

Isaiah 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Bahá’u’lláh was buried in the precincts of the Mansion of Bahjí, owned by a wealthy Muslim. He was surrounded by enemies; members of his own family who betrayed his trust after his death and dwelt in homes adjacent to his burial-place.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Bahá’u’lláh did see his ‘seed’. He wrote a special document called the Book of the Covenant, in which he appointed his eldest son to be the Centre of his Faith after his own passing. This very event was also foretold in the prophecies of the Psalms that proclaim:“Also I will make him my first-born higher than the kings of the earth … and my covenant shall stand fast with him.” (Psalms 89:27, 28) The ‘first-born’ son of Bahá’u’lláh, was named ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, which means ‘the servant of Bahá’(‘u’lláh). Bahá’u’lláh appointed him as his own successor in his Will and Testament. He called ‘Abdu’l-Baháthe Centre of his Covenant.

Bahá’u’lláh’s days were prolonged. He was born in 1817 and passed away in the Holy Land in 1892. In the last years of his life, Bahá’u’lláh was released from his prison cell. He came out of the prison-city of ‘Akká and walked on the sides of Mount Carmel. His followers came from afar to be with him, and to surround him with their love, fulfilling the words of the prayer of David spoken within a cave: “Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise thy name: the righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me.” (Psalms 142:7)
(Thief in the Night, pp. 155-159)

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/s/sears_thief_night.pdf

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I would like to respond to the assertion of what most Christians believe about Jesus, God, and the Bible.

Most Christians believe Jesus was resurrected from the dead whereas other Christians do not believe he was. Most Christians believe that salvation in Jesus is unconditional whereas other Christians believe it is conditional (Calvinism vs. Arminianism). Most Christians believe that baptism or speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation whereas other Christians believe it is solely faith-based. Most Christians believe in the Trinity (Trinitarian) whereas other Christians do not believe in it (Unitarianism). Most Christians believe that women can be pastors whereas other Christians do not believe they can. Most Christians believe in a future rapture event whereas other Christians do not believe it. However, the Christians who do believe in a rapture can't agree when it will allegedly happen (see here). Even pastors disagree with each other and other Christians about the rapture and when the tribulation will occur (see here).

Here is what I've written on a similar topic:

According to the Bible, the Holy Spirit dwells within the people who believe in Jesus (Ephesians 1:13–14; 4:30), not only corroborating to them that they belong to God and are saved (Romans 8:15–17; 10:9–13; 1 Corinthians 12:13), but also endowing them with some spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-11) and spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible (1 Corinthians 2:14). However, if the Holy Spirit resides within all of the followers of Jesus and gives them spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible, then wouldn't Christians from all over the world agree on a single interpretation of the Bible?

In my opinion, if all Christians had this spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible, then the Catholic Bible (with a 73-book canon), the Greek Orthodox Bible (with a 79-book canon), and the plethora of various Protestant Bible translations (with a 66-book canon) would not exist. There would be a single correct interpretation of the Bible and one unified universal Christian Church. However, this is clearly not how it is within Christianity because it is vastly divided into Messianic Jews, Anglicans, Catholics, Orthodox (Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox), and a vast variety of Protestants: Baptist (First Baptist, Second Baptist, Southern Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Anabaptist, Freewill Baptist), Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Church of Christ, Presbyterian, Seventh-day Adventist, Non-Denominational, and hundreds of other Protestant churches.

Many Christians have the perpetual habit of accusing other Christians of not being "true Christians," and this accusation is as old as Christianity itself (1 Corinthians 1:10–17). The problem I have with Christians accusing other Christians of not being true followers of Jesus is that they can never agree on what the Bible truly says, and they constantly argue, insult, and fight one another about what they believe the Bible teaches. They accuse one another of not being "true Christians" and argue about how to correctly interpret the Bible. If you ask the same theological question to a broad group of Christians, you will receive different answers. They will all cite the Bible in an attempt to defend their answers, even though their answers are different and contradictory.

They often claim that they want unbelievers to be saved, yet they can't even agree on the Bible's definition of salvation, which is a key tenet of Christianity. For example, Calvinism vs. Arminianism is an ongoing debate among them. Some of them believe that salvation is unconditional, while others do not. And yet other Christians believe that speaking in tongues or baptism are required for salvation. Most Christians claim to have "spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit," which enables them to properly understand the Bible. However, they have completely different scriptural interpretations that contradict one another and adhere to church doctrines that contradict each other. They use the Bible to defend their version of Christianity, but it is clear that their beliefs, as well as their interpretations and doctrines about salvation are contradictory. How can they expect us to believe them when they can't even agree?

Questions about how to properly baptize believers (fully immersed in water or sprinkled with water), whether it is biblical for women to be pastors, and about the alleged end times (pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, post-tribulation, and the rapture of Christians) would elicit the same level of derision from Christians. Some churches claim to be the "true church, implying that Christians in other churches have incorrect theology and biblical interpretations. They even bicker and debate with one another about whether Jesus' mother remained a virgin after giving birth to him and if she had further children after him.

Ironically, they all believe that they are correct about their beliefs and everyone else (including other Christians) is wrong about theirs, but then they have the audacity to claim that the Bible is the word of God and Christianity is the only true religion in the world. In my opinion, there's no reason to believe any of them. I think it's unreasonable for any Christian to claim that their biblical interpretation and theology are correct while insisting that other Christians are wrong, that the Bible is divinely inspired, and that Christianity is the only true religion in the world. It is also irrational, in my opinion, that Christians expect non-Christians to accept the Bible as divinely inspired and the final authority on moral issues, yet they can't agree on what the Bible actually says.

 

[Jimmy]

I would like to respond to the assertion of what most Christians believe about Jesus, God, and the Bible.

Most Christians believe Jesus was resurrected from the dead whereas other Christians do not believe he was. Most Christians believe that salvation in Jesus is unconditional whereas other Christians believe it is conditional (Calvinism vs. Arminianism). Most Christians believe that baptism or speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation whereas other Christians believe it is solely faith-based. Most Christians believe in the Trinity (Trinitarian) whereas other Christians do not believe in it (Unitarianism). Most Christians believe that women can be pastors whereas other Christians do not believe they can. Most Christians believe in a future rapture event whereas other Christians do not believe it. However, the Christians who do believe in a rapture can't agree when it will allegedly happen (see here). Even pastors disagree with each other and other Christians about the rapture and when the tribulation will occur (see here).

Here is what I've written on a similar topic:

According to the Bible, the Holy Spirit dwells within the people who believe in Jesus (Ephesians 1:13–14; 4:30), not only corroborating to them that they belong to God and are saved (Romans 8:15–17; 10:9–13; 1 Corinthians 12:13), but also endowing them with some spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-11) and spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible (1 Corinthians 2:14). However, if the Holy Spirit resides within all of the followers of Jesus and gives them spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible, then wouldn't Christians from all over the world agree on a single interpretation of the Bible?

In my opinion, if all Christians had this spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible, then the Catholic Bible (with a 73-book canon), the Greek Orthodox Bible (with a 79-book canon), and the plethora of various Protestant Bible translations (with a 66-book canon) would not exist. There would be a single correct interpretation of the Bible and one unified universal Christian Church. However, this is clearly not how it is within Christianity because it is vastly divided into Messianic Jews, Anglicans, Catholics, Orthodox (Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox), and a vast variety of Protestants: Baptist (First Baptist, Second Baptist, Southern Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Anabaptist, Freewill Baptist), Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Church of Christ, Presbyterian, Seventh-day Adventist, Non-Denominational, and hundreds of other Protestant churches.

Many Christians have the perpetual habit of accusing other Christians of not being "true Christians," and this accusation is as old as Christianity itself (1 Corinthians 1:10–17). The problem I have with Christians accusing other Christians of not being true followers of Jesus is that they can never agree on what the Bible truly says, and they constantly argue, insult, and fight one another about what they believe the Bible teaches. They accuse one another of not being "true Christians" and argue about how to correctly interpret the Bible. If you ask the same theological question to a broad group of Christians, you will receive different answers. They will all cite the Bible in an attempt to defend their answers, even though their answers are different and contradictory.

They often claim that they want unbelievers to be saved, yet they can't even agree on the Bible's definition of salvation, which is a key tenet of Christianity. For example, Calvinism vs. Arminianism is an ongoing debate among them. Some of them believe that salvation is unconditional, while others do not. And yet other Christians believe that speaking in tongues or baptism are required for salvation. Most Christians claim to have "spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit," which enables them to properly understand the Bible. However, they have completely different scriptural interpretations that contradict one another and adhere to church doctrines that contradict each other. They use the Bible to defend their version of Christianity, but it is clear that their beliefs, as well as their interpretations and doctrines about salvation are contradictory. How can they expect us to believe them when they can't even agree?

Questions about how to properly baptize believers (fully immersed in water or sprinkled with water), whether it is biblical for women to be pastors, and about the alleged end times (pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, post-tribulation, and the rapture of Christians) would elicit the same level of derision from Christians. Some churches claim to be the "true church, implying that Christians in other churches have incorrect theology and biblical interpretations. They even bicker and debate with one another about whether Jesus' mother remained a virgin after giving birth to him and if she had further children after him.

Ironically, they all believe that they are correct about their beliefs and everyone else (including other Christians) is wrong about theirs, but then they have the audacity to claim that the Bible is the word of God and Christianity is the only true religion in the world. In my opinion, there's no reason to believe any of them. I think it's unreasonable for any Christian to claim that their biblical interpretation and theology are correct while insisting that other Christians are wrong, that the Bible is divinely inspired, and that Christianity is the only true religion in the world. It is also irrational, in my opinion, that Christians expect non-Christians to accept the Bible as divinely inspired and the final authority on moral issues, yet they can't agree on what the Bible actually says.

A true Christian knows that Jesus is God in the flesh, resurrected himself and will return. The rest have a warped sense of what Christianity is in my opinion but they’re in the minority.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

The No True Scotsman fallacy is generally the most common excuse resorted to in order to defend Christianity, but I don't accept it as a valid argument.

 

[Trailblazer]

I would like to respond to the assertion of what most Christians believe about Jesus, God, and the Bible.

Most Christians believe Jesus was resurrected from the dead whereas other Christians do not believe he was. Most Christians believe that salvation in Jesus is unconditional whereas other Christians believe it is conditional (Calvinism vs. Arminianism). Most Christians believe that baptism or speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation whereas other Christians believe it is solely faith-based. Most Christians believe in the Trinity (Trinitarian) whereas other Christians do not believe in it (Unitarianism). Most Christians believe that women can be pastors whereas other Christians do not believe they can. Most Christians believe in a future rapture event whereas other Christians do not believe it. However, the Christians who do believe in a rapture can't agree when it will allegedly happen (see here). Even pastors disagree with each other and other Christians about the rapture and when the tribulation will occur (see here).

Here is what I've written on a similar topic:

According to the Bible, the Holy Spirit dwells within the people who believe in Jesus (Ephesians 1:13–14; 4:30), not only corroborating to them that they belong to God and are saved (Romans 8:15–17; 10:9–13; 1 Corinthians 12:13), but also endowing them with some spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-11) and spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible (1 Corinthians 2:14). However, if the Holy Spirit resides within all of the followers of Jesus and gives them spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible, then wouldn't Christians from all over the world agree on a single interpretation of the Bible?

In my opinion, if all Christians had this spiritual discernment to correctly understand the Bible, then the Catholic Bible (with a 73-book canon), the Greek Orthodox Bible (with a 79-book canon), and the plethora of various Protestant Bible translations (with a 66-book canon) would not exist. There would be a single correct interpretation of the Bible and one unified universal Christian Church. However, this is clearly not how it is within Christianity because it is vastly divided into Messianic Jews, Anglicans, Catholics, Orthodox (Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox), and a vast variety of Protestants: Baptist (First Baptist, Second Baptist, Southern Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Anabaptist, Freewill Baptist), Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Church of Christ, Presbyterian, Seventh-day Adventist, Non-Denominational, and hundreds of other Protestant churches.

Many Christians have the perpetual habit of accusing other Christians of not being "true Christians," and this accusation is as old as Christianity itself (1 Corinthians 1:10–17). The problem I have with Christians accusing other Christians of not being true followers of Jesus is that they can never agree on what the Bible truly says, and they constantly argue, insult, and fight one another about what they believe the Bible teaches. They accuse one another of not being "true Christians" and argue about how to correctly interpret the Bible. If you ask the same theological question to a broad group of Christians, you will receive different answers. They will all cite the Bible in an attempt to defend their answers, even though their answers are different and contradictory.

They often claim that they want unbelievers to be saved, yet they can't even agree on the Bible's definition of salvation, which is a key tenet of Christianity. For example, Calvinism vs. Arminianism is an ongoing debate among them. Some of them believe that salvation is unconditional, while others do not. And yet other Christians believe that speaking in tongues or baptism are required for salvation. Most Christians claim to have "spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit," which enables them to properly understand the Bible. However, they have completely different scriptural interpretations that contradict one another and adhere to church doctrines that contradict each other. They use the Bible to defend their version of Christianity, but it is clear that their beliefs, as well as their interpretations and doctrines about salvation are contradictory. How can they expect us to believe them when they can't even agree?

Questions about how to properly baptize believers (fully immersed in water or sprinkled with water), whether it is biblical for women to be pastors, and about the alleged end times (pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, post-tribulation, and the rapture of Christians) would elicit the same level of derision from Christians. Some churches claim to be the "true church, implying that Christians in other churches have incorrect theology and biblical interpretations. They even bicker and debate with one another about whether Jesus' mother remained a virgin after giving birth to him and if she had further children after him.

Ironically, they all believe that they are correct about their beliefs and everyone else (including other Christians) is wrong about theirs, but then they have the audacity to claim that the Bible is the word of God and Christianity is the only true religion in the world. In my opinion, there's no reason to believe any of them. I think it's unreasonable for any Christian to claim that their biblical interpretation and theology are correct while insisting that other Christians are wrong, that the Bible is divinely inspired, and that Christianity is the only true religion in the world. It is also irrational, in my opinion, that Christians expect non-Christians to accept the Bible as divinely inspired and the final authority on moral issues, yet they can't agree on what the Bible actually says.

As the atheists like to say, Christians cannot all be right, since they disagree on so many things, but they can all be wrong.
I believe they are all wrong, although some are more wrong than others.

 

[Trailblazer]

A true Christian knows that Jesus is God in the flesh, resurrected himself and will return. The rest have a warped sense of what Christianity is in my opinion but they’re in the minority.

Most Christians believe that Jesus is God in the flesh, resurrected himself and will return.
Christians who hold those false beliefs warped Christianity, but sadly they’re in the majority.

 

[Feedmysheep]

Most Christians believe that Jesus is God in the flesh, resurrected himself and will return.

We believe because we have met Jesus and touched God. And we know that we know that we have touched God.
But we know also because the Word who was God became flesh and tabernacled among us on earth.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only Begotten from the Father), full of grace and reality. (v. 14)

Jesus Christ is living in men to transform them to His own image.
And we do await His coming and delivering us from the wrath to come.

And await His Son from the heavens, whom He raised from the dead, Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath which is coming. (1 Thess. 1:10)

 

[Feedmysheep]

I remember well that when I was interested in Zen Buddhism and also the Rosicrucians I really thought
that Christians didn't understand what they believed. With arrogance I thought I REALLY understood
what Christians believed.

**mod edit**