Signs of The End: A Baha'i View

[InvestigateTruth]

The signs of the End and the Second Coming of Christ, in Baha'i View are already Passed and the Promised Ones appeared.
In previous scriptures such as Bible, Quran as well as Hinduism and Buddhism certain signs were given.

Please discuss if you believe any of the signs of the End has not passed yet.

 

[Bob Dixon]

Could you tell us about the Baha'i view on which these signs were and in what way they passed?

 

[Quintessence]

Yeah. I'm not particularly familiar with what this "end" is or what it's signs would be. It's not a mythos I've studied.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Could you tell us about the Baha'i view on which these signs were and in what way they passed?

Basically ALL the signs that are described in Bible.
For example:

When they asked Jesus about the signs of His coming, He said to them: “Immediately after the oppression of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the earth shall be shaken: and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet.” - Matthew 24:29–31

Also, for example the year can be calculated from:

The Book of Daniel, From verse thirteen

“Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?” Then he answered: “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed”

“But he said unto me ... at the time of the end shall be the vision.” That is to say, how long will this misfortune, this ruin, this abasement and degradation last? meaning, when will be the coming of the Promised One? Then he answered,

“Two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”

 

[Bob Dixon]

So why do you think that these signs passed?
What did Christ mean when he said that the sun and moon will be darkened, and that the stars will fall from the heavens? What about the Son of Man coming in the clouds with power and glory?

This is interesting to me because I can't take these prophecies literally. But I'm still looking for a good interpretation.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So why do you think that these signs passed?
What did Christ mean when he said that the sun and moon will be darkened, and that the stars will fall from the heavens? What about the Son of Man coming in the clouds with power and glory?

This is interesting to me because I can't take these prophecies literally. But I'm still looking for a good interpretation.

Well, the way Baha'i Scriptures explain these, is that, as you also mentioned, they cannot be literal, because for example It is explained how stars are significantly bigger than the earth, and it's not possible for these stars to find space on earth.

Moreover, these terms, such as stars are used in previous scriptures, such as Old Testament, and had a symbolic meaning. Then Baha'u'llah explains that, these verses have several meaning hidden in them.
On One hand He explains that by stars is meant, the divines and religious leaders who are considered as fallen stars in the sight of God, as they won't give spiritual guidance anymore, but only outwardly they appear to be leaders.
Then He goes on and explains, Moon and the Sun, signify the spiritual teachings of previous dispensations that become darkened, meaning they become faded.
Then he explains, by “oppression" is meant a feeling of not being able to find True Guidance, as everyone would give different religious doctrines, and people feel confused and spiritually oppressed as what is the truth.
Then He goes on and explains, by appearing the sign of the son of man in the Heaven, it is intended two meanings. One is the outward meaning, just like when before Jesus came the first time, a "star" literally appeared in the sky then Maggies saw that and came to worship Him. Likewise in His second coming similar thing happened, and he said recently a star was actually seen just before Baha'u'llah's appearance.
Then there is also an inner meaning as, the sign of sun of Man, refers to the person who gives the glad tiding before the Promised One. For example, for Jesus it was the John the Baptist who appeared in the Heaven of Divine revelation before Jesus, likewise for Baha'u'llah it was the Bab who appeared and gave the glad tiding of the coming of the Promised One.

And then He goes on and explains All these signs are the requirement for every True Messenger, and explains that for Moses and Muhammad similar things had happened.
He then explains, the meaning of "Cloud of Heaven" and other Terms.
I let you read these yourself from page 24 of the Book of Certitude:

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 3-41

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Originally Posted by Lady B
....(best) is subjective and completely not able to be proven, and I assure you genuine real Biblical Christians did not call Bahulah their Christ. Not sure on Muslims, perhaps one who did not understand escotology and the signs that will come before Christ returns fell for it.If it were me, and no chance it will be me, but if, I didn't really know and understand God's word and I decided to follow Bahulala as my Christ returned. I sure would be disapointed when he died!

Well, by best I mean, knowledgable with recorded history of Scholarship and research.
In our view, many of the writings of the Bible is Figurative and symbolic. That includes the story of Raising Jesus from the Dead.

The Body of Christ, according to the Bible is decribed as:

"Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it." 1 Cori. 12:27

The above verse describes the Body of Christ after His cruicification, as His desciples. That is to say, His Desciples were His body members.
Thus, when the Bible said, the Body of Christ raised, in a spiritual sense, when the Desciples after 3 Days raised to serve the cause of Christ, it is said, the Christ has raised.
Otherwise in Baha'i View, Jesus did not raise in a physical sense, but only spiritually.

 

[Madhuri]

According to the Hindu scriptures that deal with the end of the creation cycle, we still have millions of years left before the end.

 

[savagewind]

I believe some signs of the end are past. The sun is so the seasons can progress. It is spiritually dark meaning the spring will not progress because people have learned to love the darkness. I agree that the fallen stars mean there is no true shepherd on Earth. The moon turning to blood pictures mankind's aim for scientific dominance, that is my opinion. The nations will be fighting for the moon. It's for more mining. Also I think it would be a terrorist's lofty goal to reach for the moon. You own the moon, you rule the Earth. In theory. The moon would rather die than be owned. If it had feelings.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

LadyB Wrote:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3091076-post508.html

Originally Posted by Lady B
When we come to Isaiah 7:14, we encounter a prophecy about the Messiah, stating that his name will be Immanuel. Immanuel literally means "God is with us." This is significant because Jesus is God in flesh:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us..." (John 1:1,14).
​

​

For in Him [Jesus] all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form" (Col. 2:9).
​

​

As regards to the station of Jesus, there are different openions.
The Bible itself, describes Jesus, as a Prophet, who is an image of God, who is in unity with the father, but the father is greater than the son, and the son says whatever and however the Father says.

Historically, there has been some argument between Christian Denominations regarding Jesus station.

Firstly, we can see the Bible describes Jesus as an Image of God.
So, in this analogy, the Image of God has appeared in the Mirror, who is Jesus. This Mirror, due to its spiritual perfections, has the ability to reflect the Will, Words and Attributes of God.




"In whom the god of this world hath blinded theminds of them which believe not, lest the light ofthe glorious gospel of Christ, who is the imageof God, should shine unto them." 4:4 2 Corinthians



It is interesting to note that the mirror analogy was not unknown to early Christians; the great theologian Origen (185-254 C.E.), citing the Book of Wisdom, called Christ 'the spotless mirror' of God's workings (Origen, On First Principles 26).

Moreover, the following verses from the Bible confirm this:

"and we all, with unvailed face, the glory of the Lord beholding in a mirror, to the same image are being transformed, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." 2 cori 3-18

and

“The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” Hebrew 1-3

According to Clarke commentary of Bible, the interpretation of Image of God:

The brightness of his glory - Απαυγασμα της δοξης The resplendent outbeaming of the essential glory of God. Hesychius interprets απαυγασμα by ᾑλιου φεγγος, the splendor of the sun. The same form of expression is used by an apocryphal writer, Wis. 7:26, where, speaking of the uncreated wisdom of God, he says: "For she is the splendor of eternal light, απαυγασμα γαρ εστι φωτος αΐδιου, and the unsullied mirror of the energy of God, and the image of his goodness." The word αυγασμα is that which has splendor in itself απαυγασμα is the splendor emitted from it; but the inherent splendor and the exhibited splendor are radically and essentially the same.


And according to Gill’s exposition:
so the phrase , "the brightness of his glory", is used of the divine Being, in the Chaldee paraphrases (r); see the Apocrypha.
"For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness.'' (Wisdom 7:26)
And the express image of his person; this intends much the same as the other phrase; namely, equality and sameness of nature, and distinction of persons; for if the Father is God, Christ must be so too; and if he is a person, his Son must be so likewise, or he cannot be the express image and character of him;
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature" - Colossians 1:14-15

Therefore in this analogy, if the Jesus is the Mirror, and God is the Sun, we can see the Light of the Sun in the Mirror.
Therefore if we look at the mirror, we can say that we see the Sun. On the other hand we can say that is a Mirror, but not the Sun, as the Sun is not physically in the Mirror, but its image is.
Likewise if you saw Jesus, you can say He is the Father, as the Image of God appears in the Mirror of Jesus. And if at the same time you say, He is not God, but a prophet and son of Man, that is also true, because He is the Mirror.

Thus Jesus has said: “I and the Father are one”
He also said: “The Father is greater than I”, and alluded to Himself as a Prophet, who only says what God says.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

The signs of the End and the Second Coming of Christ, in Baha'i View are already Passed and the Promised Ones appeared.
In previous scriptures such as Bible, Quran as well as Hinduism and Buddhism certain signs were given.

Please discuss if you believe any of the signs of the End has not passed yet.

So, explain your views on how Baha'i fulfills supposed Buddhist prophecy, and what prophecies exactly are being fulfilled.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So, explain your views on how Baha'i fulfills supposed Buddhist prophecy, and what prophecies exactly are being fulfilled.

Basically, Baha'i scriptures describes that, in every Major faith, there is a Promised One, who was to come to bring peace and re-establish the original teachings of those Faiths.
Thus we see, for example, Christ said He comes again. Buddha said another Buddha comes again, same as other faiths such as Islam Shia, which believe in 2 promised Ones, and also Hinduism has its own promised One to come at the end of Age.

Baha'u'llah claimed to be that Figure who was promised by all major religions, in a spiritual sense.
The concept of spiritual return, can be understood, as the return of the same spiritual quality of God, in the new person, who is Manifestation of God.
The date of return can be consistently calculated from Islamic, Christian and Jewish Bible, to the exact same date.
As regards to Buddhism, a few Baha'i Scholars have done some research, which I will put a couple of Quotes here:

"In Mahayana sources there are many more prophecies relating to the Maitreya Buddha. One of these is that found in the Mahasannipata sutra (Ta-tsi-king, see Cowell et al. 115-6n), in which it is prophesied that the Maitreya Buddha would come after five epochs of five hundred years each from the time of Gautama Buddha. This period of 2,500 years was completed in 1956 C.E. according to the traditional Buddhist calendar. Also of importance from the Bahá'í viewpoint is the name of the Mahayana savior figure Amitabha, who is considered to preside over a Pure Land (Sukhavati) to the west of India. Bahá'ís point out the similarity between this name (which may be translated as Light of the Infinite) and that of Bahá'u'lláh (which may be translated as Glory or Light of God), who came from a land to the west of India. There is also a parallel between the repetition of the name of Amitabha in many Buddhist Pure Land sects, and the repetition of the Greatest Name (q.v.) in Bahá'í prayer (see "Prayer.4.b"). To detail fully the Bahá'í interpretation of how the various Buddhist prophecies indicate the coming of Bahá'u'lláh is impossible in an article of this nature. In brief, it may be stated that the Buddhist prophecy that the Maitreya Buddha will inaugurate an era of universal peace and tranquillity is regarded by Bahá'ís as having been fulfilled by Bahá'u'lláh's advent and teachings on world peace."

Buddhism and the Baha'i Faith

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Basically, Baha'i scriptures describes that, in every Major faith, there is a Promised One, who was to come to bring peace and re-establish the original teachings of those Faiths.
Thus we see, for example, Christ said He comes again. Buddha said another Buhdda comes again, same as other faiths such as Islam Shia, which believe in 2 promised Ones, and also Hinduism has its own promised One to come at the end of Age.

Baha'u'llah claimed to be that Figure that was promised by all major religions.
The date can be consistantly from Islamic and Christian and Jewish Bible, to the exact same date.
As regards to Buddhism, a few Baha'i Scholars have done some research, which I will put a couple of Quotes here:


"In Mahayana sources there are many more prophecies relating to the Maitreya Buddha. One of these is that found in the Mahasannipata sutra (Ta-tsi-king, see Cowell et al. 115-6n), in which it is prophesied that the Maitreya Buddha would come after five epochs of five hundred years each from the time of Gautama Buddha. This period of 2,500 years was completed in 1956 C.E. according to the traditional Buddhist calendar. Also of importance from the Bahá'í viewpoint is the name of the Mahayana savior figure Amitabha, who is considered to preside over a Pure Land (Sukhavati) to the west of India. Bahá'ís point out the similarity between this name (which may be translated as Light of the Infinite) and that of Bahá'u'lláh (which may be translated as Glory or Light of God), who came from a land to the west of India. There is also a parallel between the repetition of the name of Amitabha in many Buddhist Pure Land sects, and the repetition of the Greatest Name (q.v.) in Bahá'í prayer (see "Prayer.4.b"). To detail fully the Bahá'í interpretation of how the various Buddhist prophecies indicate the coming of Bahá'u'lláh is impossible in an article of this nature. In brief, it may be stated that the Buddhist prophecy that the Maitreya Buddha will inaugurate an era of universal peace and tranquillity is regarded by Bahá'ís as having been fulfilled by Bahá'u'lláh's advent and teachings on world peace."

Buddhism and the Baha'i Faith

I have several problems with this. First would the the obvious Islamic influence on the idea that all nations had some prophet of god sent to them. The Buddha preached that a god is not necessary. This would kind of rule him out to be sent from god, wouldn't it? It's a nice idea to try to make one religion out of all the world's major religions, problem is, it's not practical.

Now with the dating of the coming of Maitreya: there are various scriptures in Buddhism giving various dates as to his coming. 2500 years after the Buddha's paranirvana is the earliest date, but by no means the only date. Some scriptures date his coming to as long as 10,000 years after the Buddha's paranirvana.

Now, I'm not sure how Amitabha Buddha fits into this, but you have said several things in error: Amitabha's pure land of Sukhavati is said to be the western pure land, but this does not mean west of India. The term 'west' was used metaphorically. This is the way directions were understood in Mahayana Buddhist cosmology. Like Akshobya being the Buddha of the eastern pure land. Second, just because the interpretation of the names are similar, does not mean there is a correlation between the two. Light is a common theme amongst religions and spiritualities, and should not be considered evidence that there is some specific similarity between two individuals or ideas. The same can be said of repetitions of a holy name.

There's another problem with assuming that Bahaullah is the fulfillment of Maitreya: there are other 'signs' given by the Buddha that would preceed the coming of Maitreya, such as the length of human life would be in the thousands of years, and the Buddha's dharma would not be found anywhere, which is not the case. And there's one more problem: not all Buddhists believe in a literal understanding of Maitreya, instead opting for a more metaphorical or allegorical interpretation, internalizing the teaching, which, to me, is more in keeping with the spirit of the Buddha's teachings.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I have several problems with this. First would the the obvious Islamic influence on the idea that all nations had some prophet of god sent to them. The Buddha preached that a god is not necessary. This would kind of rule him out to be sent from god, wouldn't it? It's a nice idea to try to make one religion out of all the world's major religions, problem is, it's not practical.

Now with the dating of the coming of Maitreya: there are various scriptures in Buddhism giving various dates as to his coming. 2500 years after the Buddha's paranirvana is the earliest date, but by no means the only date. Some scriptures date his coming to as long as 10,000 years after the Buddha's paranirvana.

Now, I'm not sure how Amitabha Buddha fits into this, but you have said several things in error: Amitabha's pure land of Sukhavati is said to be the western pure land, but this does not mean west of India. The term 'west' was used metaphorically. This is the way directions were understood in Mahayana Buddhist cosmology. Like Akshobya being the Buddha of the eastern pure land. Second, just because the interpretation of the names are similar, does not mean there is a correlation between the two. Light is a common theme amongst religions and spiritualities, and should not be considered evidence that there is some specific similarity between two individuals or ideas. The same can be said of repetitions of a holy name.

There's another problem with assuming that Bahaullah is the fulfillment of Maitreya: there are other 'signs' given by the Buddha that would preceed the coming of Maitreya, such as the length of human life would be in the thousands of years, and the Buddha's dharma would not be found anywhere, which is not the case. And there's one more problem: not all Buddhists believe in a literal understanding of Maitreya, instead opting for a more metaphorical or allegorical interpretation, internalizing the teaching, which, to me, is more in keeping with the spirit of the Buddha's teachings.

Well, Baha'i Scriptures says that the original writings of Buddha are not available, but He originally taught Oneness of God, however His message was gradually changed through out Ages. Now, this may not be accepted by some Buddhists, but I do not see how, this can not be possible.

Regarding the existance of God, I do not see if this can be rejected.

As regards to your problem regarding about why Quran says to every nation a prophet was sent, Baha'i scriptures says, even before Adam there was Prophets, but just because there is no record of History left, is not a proof that they actually did not exist. Their mood of writings was not as advance as now.

Regarding the interpretations of Scriptures, I also believe many of those are figurative.


As regards to how Baha'i Faith can unite all the people, our scriptures prophecises there will be a turning point, and people group by group join the Baha'i Faith.
But the trace of a united community can be seen in Baha'i Faith, because people from various religions and nations has been entering into Baha'i Faith.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Well, Baha'i Scriptures says that the original writings of Buhdda are not available, but He originally taught Oneness of God, however His message was gradually changed through out Ages. Now, this may not be accepted by some Buddhists, but I do not see how, this can not be possible.

You cannot see this as not being possible that the Buddha didn't teach of the oneness of god because you're viewing the info through your own religion's lenses. It's impossible to see what's there and what's not when you refuse to accept the reality in front of you. It's also easier to accept your point of view when all you have to say is "well, the original teachings were lost," because, if that being the case, they can't be found. I personally have no reason to think that what we have as the Buddha's teachings is not the originals.

Regarding the existance of God, I do not see if this can be rejected.

The eternal debate. I don't see how the existence of god is possible.

As regards to your problem regarding about why Quran says to every nation a prophet was sent, Baha'i scriptures says, even before Adam there was Prophets, but just because there is no record of History left, is not a proof that they actually did not exist. Their mood of writings was not as advance as now.

I have no comment on this.

Regarding the interpretations of Scriptures, I also believe many of those are figurative.

We just disagree in how they are figurative.

As regards to how Baha'i Faith can unite all the people, our scriptures prophecises there will be a turning point, and people group by group join the Baha'i Faith.
But the trace of a united community can be seen in Baha'i Faith, because people from various religions and nations has been entering into Baha'i Faith.

I think this is a great ideal, but like all ideals, fail from a practical perspective. First, you alienate traditional followers of the various religions by giving new interpretations to their teachings. Second, you take away all individuality, which is one of my main problems with Christianity and Islam. I think the reason why there are so many various religions with their various teachings and practices, is because we're not all the same. Each person gets to decide and choose for themselves what religion fits them best, because, in the end, they all lead to the same place. If one wants to be a Baha'i, then that's fine. If one wants to be something else, then this is fine too, because they're going to get to the same place.

I have no problem with various religions, their interpretations of events and scriptures, or religious syncretism. However, as a Buddhist, when someone of another faith gives their interpretation on Buddhist scriptures and teachings, I do feel the need to speak up, and give a proper Buddhist view on what these things mean, so that any hearers can make an informed decision, instead of just relying on what one person says, especially when that person is not part of the original religion that he is presuming to give interpretations on.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You cannot see this as not being possible that the Buddha didn't teach of the oneness of god because you're viewing the info through your own religion's lenses. It's impossible to see what's there and what's not when you refuse to accept the reality in front of you. It's also easier to accept your point of view when all you have to say is "well, the original teachings were lost," because, if that being the case, they can't be found. I personally have no reason to think that what we have as the Buddha's teachings is not the originals.

Ok, the foundation of Baha'i Faith is based on the belief that, there is an Unknowable Essence who is the Creator, who makes Himself know from Age to Age through His Messengers and He expresses His Will, through His Manifestations.
Therefore, we believe, that when a Manifestation of God appeared, He has all the knowledge of the Past.

I have no problem with various religions, their interpretations of events and scriptures, or religious syncretism. However, as a Buddhist, when someone of another faith gives their interpretation on Buddhist scriptures and teachings, I do feel the need to speak up, and give a proper Buddhist view on what these things mean, so that any hearers can make an informed decision, instead of just relying on what one person says, especially when that person is not part of the original religion that he is presuming to give interpretations on.

Ok, that is fair.

 

[Lady B]

Well, Baha'i Scriptures says that the original writings of Buddha are not available, but He originally taught Oneness of God, however His message was gradually changed through out Ages. Now, this may not be accepted by some Buddhists, but I do not see how, this can not be possible.

Even If Buddha started out believing in God, your God, why then would a prophet of God teach a totally heretical view of God? This is completely baffling to me how your religion unifies religions that do not fit with your God, My God any God.

As regards to your problem regarding about why Quran says to every nation a prophet was sent, Baha'i scriptures says, even before Adam there was Prophets, but just because there is no record of History left, is not a proof that they actually did not exist. Their mood of writings was not as advance as now.

Before Adam? So Bahai doesn't even believe the creation scriptures? Adam was the first man. Why was there a need for prophets before Adam? Did they prophesy to God? The angels? You don't see the problem here?

Regarding the interpretations of Scriptures, I also believe many of those are figurative.

Your Bias opinion.
Just because you constantly interpret scripture figuratively or symbolically to fit your claims, doesn't make it so.

As regards to how Baha'i Faith can unite all the people, our scriptures prophecies there will be a turning point, and people group by group join the Baha'i Faith.
But the trace of a united community can be seen in Baha'i Faith, because people from various religions and nations has been entering into Baha'i Faith.

We do not and will not be united, Just because you in vision some perfect world where all believe the same , You take a little of each religion and curb it to appeal to all, does not make it true or worthy of a following. You try to tell Christians they can't interpret their own Bible, you tell Muslims what they believe is incorrect (reg.The last prophet and end times) now you tell Buddhists they don't even know Buddha and have no original writings from him.Cmon, Your evidence is what? Because your Bahai scriptures say so?


By the way, You did bring me to this thread against my will, so now you have to put up with me hehehe

 

[savagewind]

Before Adam? So Bahai doesn't even believe the creation scriptures? Adam was the first man. Why was there a need for prophets before Adam? Did they prophesy to God? The angels? You don't see the problem here?

Lady B Adam was not the first man. He is symbolic of the foremost man. He is demonstrative of the reason the World is the way it is. First man as in 1 Corinthians 15:45 means chief or best (example). Strong's Greek: 4413. ?????? (prótos) -- first, chief

 

[Lady B]

Lady B Adam was not the first man. He is symbolic of the foremost man. He is demonstrative of the reason the World is the way it is. First man as in 1 Corinthians 15:45 means chief or best (example). Strong's Greek: 4413. ?????? (prótos) -- first, chief

1 Corinthians 15:45 Greek Study Bible (Apostolic / Interlinear)​

οὕτως καὶ γέγραπται· ἐγένετο ὁ πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος Ἀδὰμ εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν, ὁ ἔσχατος Ἀδὰμ εἰς πνεῦμα ζῳοποιοῦν.

And ">so it is written The first man Adam was made __ a living soul the last Adam was made a quickening spirit

how is it exactly you see this verse says Adam was not the first man?

 

[savagewind]

The evidence is not in the scripture. It is in the fossil record.