The Exclusivity of Christianity

[Trailblazer]

With a hard, dogmatic belief system like that, you will probably be very disappointed when the Christ Returns. When that happens, I am not sure if you will reject the Christ or you will reject Christianity (when you find out it is not exclusive). But in either case, it will be pretty devastating. Hopefully you won't do anything extreme or drastic, because the Christ will be returning very soon.

FYI, that is not my belief system, it is an article I posted about The Exclusivity of Christianity.

Christians have been saying that Christ is going to return to earth for 2000 years, and when asked why He has not returned yet, they usually say He is right around the corner, but I have a better explanation as to why Jesus Christ has not returned to this world. He never planned to.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

Of course, that means that all the Bible verses about the return of Christ must be about someone other than Jesus.

Who is the Son of man who will come in the clouds of heaven?

 

[dybmh]

Hi dybmh. Good afternoon.

Hello, nice to chat with you again.

I'm not sure if you are simply ignorant on the matter of Yahweh's Name or are just being dishonest. There's absolutely no way that any Jew - at least any Jew that is accustomed to the Hebrew language - should ever say that Jehovah is the accurate pronunciation of the Name.

Wow. So we went straight from friendly greetings to questioning my integrity. I didn't say that Jehovah was an accurate pronunciation. I said it was more accurate than Yahweh. And my reason for that is precisely because I am accustomed to the Hebrew language. The issue is the number of syllables. Hopefully we agree that the name of God we are speaking about has 4 letters. A yud, designated with a "Y", a hei, pronoucned "hay" and designated with an "H", a vav or waw depdending on dialect, designated as "W", and a final hei, "H". That's 4 letters. The middle "H" is the issue. It is extremely uncommon, I cannot think of an example, where this middle "H" in Hebrew has no vowel sound at all.

To check myself I went through 1 Chronicles 1-9 in Hebrew looking for any name with a middle "H" that wasn't voweled. Guess how many I found? Zero. There's only 1 name which maybe counts as non-voweled, but technically it's a "H" with a glottal stop, a "sh'vah". So, the name would be verbalized "Ya-H'Dai". 3 syllables. The middle "H" doesn't have a vowel sound, but it still is a placeholder. It's not there for nothing.

Again, the actual vowel sounds are not really that important to the point I was making when comparing the minor ugarite god YW with the name of God in the Hebrew bible. Neither of the original texts have vowels. So we're comparing numbers of letters and numbers of syllables.

The pronunciation Jehovah was unknown till about 1520, when it was introduced by Galatinus; but was contested by Le Mercier, J. Drusius and L. Capellus as against grammatical and historical propriety. It came about by combining the Tetragrammaton and the Hebrew word for L-rd, substituted by the Jews for YHWH, because they shrank from pronouncing the Name owing to an old misconception of two passages, Exodus 20:7 and Leviticus 24:16.

This is only partially true. The date you have is off by about 500 years or more. The source of Jehovah as a name comes from those vowels are included as part of the Jewish tradition. The long "o" sound in the middle is explicitly stated in some places, and assumed to be included in other places. This is a good fit, again, because the middle "H" would not be unvoweled in Hebrew. The next letter, vav, implies the long "o" sound. So, it makes sense to conclude that the dot was omitted as deemed redundant. See below:

Tetragrammaton - Wikipedia

If you look at this wikipage you'll see this:

The scholarly consensus is that the original pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton was Yahweh (יַהְוֶה‎)
​

However, they are not being completely accurate in their transliteration. The two little dots under the middle "H", that's Sh'vah, a glottal stop. So it really should be, "Ya-H'weh" 3 syllables. Greek and english don't have glottal stops, so, it's natural for Christians and english speakers to omit it. But, ugaritic indeed has a glottal stop character. So, that's more reason to reduce the liklihood that the ugaritic "YW" is the same deity as "Ya-H'weh". They would have included that glottal stop. But they don't.

To give the name YHWH the vowels of the word for L-rd [Heb. Adonai] and pronounce it Jehovah, is about a hybrid combination it would be to spell the name Germany with the vowels in the name Portugal viz, Gormuna. The monstrous combination Jehovah is not older than about 1520 A.D so why are you supporting its use. Yahweh was the Name of the Most High in Biblical times, and still remains that way today as His Name does not change.

I hear you, and I appreciate the passionate response. Really, the application of the vowels used in Yahweh are just as questionable. They both come from the same place, the masoretic text, which dates to 1000CE or earlier.

Yahshua our Messiah referred to those who had suppressed and replaced the Sacred Name in Luke 11:52 when he spoke of the lawyers taking away the 'key of knowledge'. Yahshua also said He wouldn't return until Jerusalem says:

"Blessed is He that comes in the Name of Yahweh" (Matthew 23:39)​

I think we both know that it doesn't say "Yahweh" in Matthew 23:39. It says "Κυρίου" pronounced "Kyriou". The choice to insert Yahweh into the Christian bible began in 1800s, correct?

...not in the Name of Jehovah which was certainly not his Name and only a few centuries old. Truth matters. It's the difference between eternal life and eternal death.

I certainly agree with you about the truth. So, why post a verse from Matthew if it's not truly what is written in the original version?

 

[Trailblazer]

The author used a wrong text (Ephesians 4) to back up his claims. A better one should be for example:

"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus." (Timothy 2:5)

I agree that verse would have been a better verse to try to prove His point...

I believe that Jesus was the one mediator during the Christian dispensation but that verse does not apply to all of time.
Of course it says there is only one mediator, since Jesus was the mediator at that time, until another mediator was sent by God.

Although this is what Christians believe, the verse does not say: "For there is one God, and there will never be another mediator between God and mankind except the man Christ Jesus."

The Christian dispensation ended when Muhammad appeared and then Muhammad was the one mediator.
The Islamic dispensation ended when Baha'u'llah came and now Baha'u'llah is the one mediator.
Some time in the future there will be another mediator.

What does a mediator between God and mankind do? He mediates between God and mankind during His dispensation by revealing God's will for mankind during that dispensation..

Dispensation

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

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

Definition of dispensation | Dictionary.com

A Biblical term for this is "covenant" (a contract between God and man/people). Jesus is the mediator of a new covenant. Why do the Christians think this is the definite and final covenant? The good old answer: Because the Bible says so:

"Unlike the other high priests, He [Christ] does not need to offer daily sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people; He sacrificed for sin once for all when He offered up Himself." (Hebrews 7)

" Now may the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, that is, Jesus our Lord..." (Hebrews 13:20)

"To Him who loves us and has released us from our sins by His blood, who has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father — to Him be the glory and power forever and ever! Amen." (Revelation 1)

"So the angel told her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Behold, you will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to give Him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David, and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever. His kingdom will never end!" (Luke 1)

Unfortunately for the Christians, none of those verses say that we are NOW living under the new covenant they believe we are living under.

The eternal covenant is not that Jesus our Lord since Jesus is not the Lord, God is the Lord.

Baha’is believe that there is an everlasting covenant which remains in force today.

The overall covenant God made with His followers in Judaism, known to Jews as the Mosaic Covenant, and to Christians as the Old Covenant, put forth the stipulation of the oneness of God – “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:2) – as the primary law of the Ten Commandments. In exchange for following those principles, God promised that he would never leave His followers without guidance:

Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid … for the Lord thy God, he it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee. – Deuteronomy 31:6.

This eternal covenant between God and humanity, the Baha’i teachings say, remains in force today. The Creator has bestowed bounties on us all, and in return asks us to recognize His prophets and messengers and abide by their laws and spiritual principles. The Baha’i teachings joyously celebrate that covenant:

How to Understand the Baha’i Covenant

The everlasting covenant is like the umbrella which covers all religions. It began with Moses and it will last forever.

In addition to that covenant, the Messengers of God make a Covenant with their followers. This is called the Greater Covenant.
Jesus made a Covenant with His followers. Baha'u'llah also made a Covenant with His followers

Greater covenant

The greater covenant refers to the covenant made between each messenger from God, which the literature of the Baháʼí Faith name Manifestations of God, and his followers regarding the coming of the next Manifestation from God.[1] According to Baháʼu'lláh, the founder of the Baháʼí Faith, God has promised that he will send a succession of messengers that will instruct humankind.[2] In Baháʼí belief, this covenant is seen to be expressed in prophecy in the religious scripture of each religion, and each Manifestation of God, such as Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, the Báb,[3] and Baháʼu'lláh, prophesied the next Manifestation.[1] In return, the followers of each religion are seen to have a duty to investigate the claims of the following Manifestations.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh

The Lesser Covenant refers to succession of authority within each religion.

Lesser Covenant

This is the covenant that is made regarding the successorship of authority within the religion.[1] In Baháʼí belief the manner in which the Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh was clearly put forth is seen as being a fundamental defining feature of the religion and a powerful protector of the unity of the Baháʼí Faith and its adherents.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh

Baha'u'llah is the mediator of a new covenant. Why do the Baha'is think this is the Covenant we are now living under? The good old answer: Because Baha'u'llah says so.

"You call Me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord’; and you are correct, for so I am." (John 13:13)

"... and just as My Father has granted Me a kingdom, I grant you that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Luke 22:29-30)

"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me." (Matthew 28:18)

Jesus was Lord in a certain sense since He was a Manifestation of God, but Jesus was not God incarnate.

What then do we make of this verse which contradicts Luke 22:29-30?

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Jesus never claimed to be King, and when asked Jesus disclaimed it by answering with what He came into this world for.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

These two verses in John 18 completely negate that Jesus is the King of this world or that Jesus will ever come to this world to rule it, as Christians believe.

All authority in heaven and on earth was given to Jesus by God but that authority was only in force during the Dispensation of Jesus.
All authority has now been given to Baha'u'llah.

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." (Mark 13:31)

"I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints." (Jude 1:3)

Those verses do not mean that there would never be any more religions revealed after Christianity.

Yes, but the word was about adding to the commandments. Jesus didn't do that.

My point was that Jesus revealed new things that Moses had not revealed and that is why Christianity is a new religion, separate from Judaism.

 

[dybmh]

I believe that Jesus was the one mediator during the Christian dispensation but that verse does not apply to all of time.

Well, in theory, Luke 1:31-35 states that the son of Mary will have an eternal kingdom over Jacob and will be called the Son of God. Now, that doesn't really speak about mediation literally, but, the Son of God + eternal kingdom suggests that he will always and forever have an audience with God where he could plead a person's case.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, in theory, Luke 1:31-35 states that the son of Mary will have an eternal kingdom over Jacob and will be called the Son of God. Now, that doesn't really speak about mediation literally, but, the Son of God + eternal kingdom suggests that he will always and forever have an audience with God where he could plead a person's case.

Luke 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Jesus will always and forever have an audience with God where he could plead a person's case, but in heaven, not on earth.

“The Throne upon which He sat is the Eternal Throne from which Christ reigns for ever, a heavenly throne, not an earthly one, for the things of earth pass away but heavenly things pass not away. He re-interpreted and completed the Law of Moses and fulfilled the Law of the Prophets. His word conquered the East and the West. His Kingdom is everlasting.”
Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks

 

[dybmh]

Luke 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Jesus will always and forever have an audience with God where he could plead a person's case, but in heaven, not on earth.

“The Throne upon which He sat is the Eternal Throne from which Christ reigns for ever, a heavenly throne, not an earthly one, for the things of earth pass away but heavenly things pass not away. He re-interpreted and completed the Law of Moses and fulfilled the Law of the Prophets. His word conquered the East and the West. His Kingdom is everlasting.”
Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks

Nothing wrong with that, but, a Christian doesn't need Bahaullah to mediate for them. They've already got Jesus?

 

[Trailblazer]

Nothing wrong with that, but, a Christian doesn't need Bahaullah to mediate for them. They've already got Jesus?

And the converse also applies. Baha'is don't need Jesus to mediate for them. They've already got Baha'u'llah.

 

[dybmh]

And the converse also applies. Baha'is don't need Jesus to mediate for them. They've already got Baha'u'llah.

Well, it's a maybe. What about 1 Corinthians 8:6? Note that it mentions Jesus by name, not just "Christ". Apologies if that's already been addressed. I haven't read all the posts in this thread.

 

[soulsurvivor]

FYI, that is not my belief system, it is an article I posted about The Exclusivity of Christianity.

If it is not your belief system, then why post it? There is nothing unique about that belief. Most Muslim also believe that their religion is an exclusive one and that only their religion is the true one. In fact, there are probably more Muslims who believe that than there are Christians.

ll the Bible verses about the return of Christ must be about someone other than Jesus.

This is true, when the Christ Returns, it will very likely not be Jesus, but another Avatar.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, it's a maybe. What about 1 Corinthians 8:6? Note that it mentions Jesus by name, not just "Christ". Apologies if that's already been addressed. I haven't read all the posts in this thread.

It is not a maybe that Baha'is have Baha'u'llah to mediate for us, just as Christians have Jesus.

What is in that verse could also be applied to Jesus or Baha'u'llah, since there is only one of each of them.
There is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Jesus Christ.
There is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Baha'u'llah.

Why is Jesus so special, so much better than every other Messenger of God?

 

[Trailblazer]

If it is not your belief system, then why post it? There is nothing unique about that belief. Most Muslim also believe that their religion is an exclusive one and that only their religion is the true one. In fact, there are probably more Muslims who believe that than there are Christians.

That's true, but the difference is that Muslims don't reject Jesus whereas Christians reject Muhammad.
Moreover, Christians believe that Jesus is unique because Jesus is God whereas Muslims believe Muhammad was only a Messenger of God, not even divine, and Muslims validate all the Messengers who preceded Muhammad.

Christianity is unique in its exclusivity of everyone who is not Jesus.

This is true, when the Christ Returns, it will very likely not be Jesus, but another Avatar.

I believe that already happened.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I think for Christianity and Christians it is a self-created trap, as they believe in the literal truth of their dogma, and that means any competing dogma and religion is by default untrue. Some behave as if they believe this, and other do realize they share religious "truth" with others and show an uneasy tolerance. I find it odd that some Christians think non-believers are bound for hell when they don't even believe in it. Ironically hell is empty because the only ones who believe it exists are going to heaven.

If a religious leader named Yehoshua (also called Yeshua, Jesus) existed in biblical times, he was most likely just an ordinary man and popular religious teacher whose devoted followers embellished the stories about him, and more embellishment and folklore were later added to these stories to make him appear to be more than he actually was. I think it's probable that he was simply a well-liked religious teacher whose loyal followers spread false stories about him to make him appear godlike. I also think that it's likely that a few stories about him were copied and adapted from Greek mythology and other ancient pagan religions as well, which predate both Christianity and the Bible. I believe that paganism had a significant influence on the stories about Jesus, and as I have explained in other posts (such as this one), paganism also had a significant influence on Christianity. I believe that Christianity is a copycat religion.

The savior story of Jesus isn't the first of its kind, and in my opinion, it isn't any more believable than all the other savior stories that predate his, such as "10 Christ-Like Figures that Predate Jesus" and "Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ." In fact, these articles give a few more examples of pagan Christ-like figures whose lives are similar to Jesus', such as being born of a virgin, being tempted by the devil before starting a ministry on earth, miraculously healing the sick, dying to pay for the sins of the world, going to the underworld after death, and rising from the dead after three days. The stories of Jesus' crucifixion, death, and resurrection are similar to those of Attis, the Phrygian-Greek god of vegetation (1250 BCE). According to the stories about Attis, he was born of a virgin by a god; he was hung on a tree and died; he went to the underworld after he died; he came back to life after three days; and he brought salvation with him when he did. Moreover, the article "Attis: Born of a Virgin on December 25th, Crucified and Resurrected after Three Days" contains further stories about the Greek god Attis and Jesus that share a few more similarities.

In my personal opinion, these other stories of Christlike figures demonstrate that some of the stories of Jesus were influenced a lot by paganism and that Christianity isn't unique in its beliefs, despite the claims by Christians that the Bible is divinely inspired by God and that Christianity is the only true religion in the world. Personally, I don't believe that Christianity is the only true religion in the world.

As I said in a previous post (read it here), I don't believe that the existence of God can be empirically proven or disproven. And in my personal opinion, I believe that we—meaning you, me, and everyone else (including Christians)—make decisions on whether or not to believe in God, in other deities, or in anything else supernatural based on the limited knowledge that we have. And as I explained in the same previous post, I'm an agnostic, not an atheist, when it comes to the biblical God. I'm not an atheist because I can't honestly prove or disprove the existence of any gods or goddesses, and that includes the God of the Bible, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

To be honest with you, I can't say with certainty that I know that any deities exist or don't exist because I'm not all-knowing and all-powerful, and I can't transcend time and be in all places at once to prove or disprove the existence of deities. I believe in multiple gods because I'm inclined to believe in the supernatural, and I have my reasons for believing as I do. I wouldn't be honest with myself or with others if I said that there aren't any gods that exist. After leaving Christianity, I reread the Bible and researched its accuracy, and I came to the conclusion that if a man named Yehoshua (Yeshua, Jesus) existed during biblical times, he was most likely just an ordinary man and a popular religious teacher, and his devoted followers embellished a few stories about him as well as copied and modified some Greek myths and attributed godlike traits to him. The embellished stories about him and the godlike myths about him were then spread to other regions of the world, where even more people believed them. Some stories about Jesus were most likely argued about and changed by various Christian leaders, just like other myths, to fit the beliefs of different groups, such as pagans.

In my opinion, what I believe happened was that the stories of Jesus have often been disputed and debated among Christians, and this is clearly evidenced by the fact that Christians are divided into various churches and adhere to different doctrines and scriptural interpretations, which has occurred in both historical and contemporary Christianity. For example, Catholics and Protestants have different church doctrines, dogmas, and interpretations of the Bible. So do Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Messianic Judaism, and Orthodox Christians, which include Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, and Greek Orthodox. Also, there are Baptists (First Baptist, Second Baptist, Southern Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Anabaptist, Freewill Baptist), Nazarenes, Lutherans, Methodists, Mennonites, Seventh-day Adventists, Assemblies of God, Apostolic Church, Pentecostals, Quakers, Church of God, and many other Protestant churches that aren't on the list. In fact, the precise number of Christian denominations is debatable.

 

[PearlSeeker]

I believe that Jesus was the one mediator during the Christian dispensation but that verse does not apply to all of time.

All authority in heaven and on earth was given to Jesus by God but that authority was only in force during the Dispensation of Jesus.
All authority has now been given to Baha'u'llah.

Jesus is to Christians (and the Bible) not just one of mediators (prophets) but THE Mediator - the Word/Son of God - fullness of all revelation.

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the world. (Hebrews 1:1-2)
​

Commentary of St. John of the Cross:

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behaviour but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.
​

There will be no further Revelation

66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfilment, as is the case in certain nonChristian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations".

Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

 

[PearlSeeker]

Jesus will always and forever have an audience with God where he could plead a person's case, but in heaven, not on earth.

You are missing the final part of the plan:

David himself says in the Book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." (Lk 20, Mt 22, Mk 12, Heb 1, Acts 2, Ps 110)​

Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put everything under His feet.” Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him. And when all things have been subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will be made subject to Him who put all things under Him, so that God may be all in all. (1 Cor 15)​

But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. (2 Pet 3:13)​

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away... (Rev 21:1)​

... regarding His plan of the fullness of the times, to bring all things together in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. (Ef 1:10)​

 

[PearlSeeker]

Jesus was Lord in a certain sense since He was a Manifestation of God, but Jesus was not God incarnate.

Equality with God is not so clear in the Bible but it is certain that the person who incarnated as Jesus was in the beginning the (only) co-Creator of the world. So God and he alone are above all creation (including all "messengers").

The Bible also says that angels worship God and Jesus together...

What then do we make of this verse which contradicts Luke 22:29-30?

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world...

"My kingdom..." So he is a king. But his kingdom is different from worldly kingdoms. No contradiction here.

 

[Trailblazer]

Jesus is to Christians (and the Bible) not just one of mediators (prophets) but THE Mediator - the Word/Son of God - fullness of all revelation.

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the world. (Hebrews 1:1-2)​

Yes, God spoke through His Son Jesus in the last days.
Christians are still waiting for Jesus to return, so they believe we are still living in the last days.

The meaning of the word “latter-day” refers to scriptural accounts of apostles and prophets that spoke of the “last days.” The time in which we now live is the “latter-days”; the days (or dispensation of time) just before the Second Coming of the Lord.Apr 19, 2022

What does the word "Latter-days" mean? - TempioDiRoma.org​

Baha'is believe that Christ has already returned, in the Person of Baha'u'llah, and as such, we are no longer living in the last days, we are living in the Age of Fulfillment. It is called that because it is the age if the fulfillment of all the Bible prophecies.

Commentary of St. John of the Cross:

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behaviour but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.
​

There will be no further Revelation

66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfilment, as is the case in certain nonChristian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations".

Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

"In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son."​

Their own Bible refutes that claim that Jesus spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say.

John 16:12-14 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

Baha'is believe that Baha'u'llah was the Spirit of Truth who brought the "many things" that people in the days of Jesus could not bear.

"Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfilment, as is the case in certain nonChristian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations".​

Can't get much more exclusive than that, or more arrogant. Christians have to be the best. There can be no comradery between Baha'is and Christians because Christians 'believe' they have 'the only way' to God. It really is inexcusable that they dismiss 67% of the world population and believe they alone have the one true revelation from God.

This furthers my point about The Exclusivity of Christianity. I thought it was mainly Protestants who believe that way, but it s good to know that Catholics are also on board.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are missing the final part of the plan:

David himself says in the Book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." (Lk 20, Mt 22, Mk 12, Heb 1, Acts 2, Ps 110)​

Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put everything under His feet.” Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him. And when all things have been subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will be made subject to Him who put all things under Him, so that God may be all in all. (1 Cor 15)​

But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. (2 Pet 3:13)​

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away... (Rev 21:1)​

... regarding His plan of the fullness of the times, to bring all things together in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. (Ef 1:10)​

I am not 'missing' anything, it is the Christians who are missing everything that happened when Christ returned and what has happened since. It is very sad that all those people are still waiting for what has already occurred.

Here is the salient problem: Christians are waiting for the same Jesus in the same body to come barreling down from the sky and land on earth, but Jesus did not come to earth that way the first time, so there is no reason to believe he would come that way when He returned. What Christians believe is all based upon a misinterpretation of verses.

Who is the Son of man who will come in the clouds of heaven?

Revelation 21 New Heaven and New Earth
King James Version (KJV)

21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

I believe those verses above pertain to the new Law of God, sent down from God out of Heaven. Law of God refers to the Revelation from God. It is also interesting to note that Jerusalem, and the hills and land thereof is where Baha'u'llah appeared and pitched His tent, and it is also where the Baha'i World Centre is located, atop Mt. Carmel.

All the Bible prophecies for the return of Christ have been fulfilled and Christians just ignore that and keep waiting for the same Jesus, but how would it even be possible for the same Jesus in the same body to return to earth on the physical clouds, given there are no physical bodies in Heaven?

Coming in the clouds is obviously metaphorical, not literal. The term “clouds” as used in the Bible means those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Just like the physical clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, these things hindered men from recognizing the return of Christ.

“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.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 12-13

 

[Trailblazer]

Equality with God is not so clear in the Bible but it is certain that the person who incarnated as Jesus was in the beginning the (only) co-Creator of the world. So God and he alone are above all creation (including all "messengers").

According to who? Certainly not according to Jesus.

More Christian exclusivity.

Christians can 'believe' anything that they want to believe but it's not going to do them any good because Jesus has come and gone, and Jesus is never coming back to earth.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

 

[Trailblazer]

"My kingdom..." So he is a king. But his kingdom is different from worldly kingdoms. No contradiction here.

This part is true. His kingdom is in heaven, not on earth.

 

[dybmh]

It is not a maybe that Baha'is have Baha'u'llah to mediate for us, just as Christians have Jesus.

What is in that verse could also be applied to Jesus or Baha'u'llah, since there is only one of each of them.
There is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Jesus Christ.
There is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Baha'u'llah.

Why is Jesus so special, so much better than every other Messenger of God?

Well, you did leave out a word from the verse. There is one Lord, Jesus Christ. So, treating this as a more common noun, and not a divine name which you would object to ( see for example Matthew 9:38 ) there is only one mediator, only one eternal ruler. That's from the Christian perspective. And, if I understand, the purpose of this thread is to address the Christian scripture which presents Jesus as exclusive. So, various verses/passages are being brought to see if they indeed describe Jesus as the exclusive, only mediator. There can only be one Lord, means yes Jesus is exclusive.

So, reviewing the verses we've talked about so far: The verse from Galatians is a pretty good one. No evangalizing outside of what is evangalized by Paul is permitted. Luke brings an element of eternity to Jesus' station, Jesus being the son of Mary, not a claimed returned spirit of Christ. And here in 1 Corinthians there is a statement of exclusivity. Bahaullah would be behind Jesus, if he's anywhere according to their scripture.

Putting all that together, there is an eternal exclusive station for only Jesus the son of Mary above all others. And anyone preaching outside Paul's doctine is deemed to be cursed even if they are a divine being. That means no additional dispensation is valid per their scripture, and even if Bahaullah is able to predict the future, and perform open miracles, it doesn't matter if he is preaching that Jesus never rose from the dead. Same goes for Muhammad. And since I'm not Christian, there's probably other scriptural proofs of this that I'm missing.

As far as what's so special about Jesus? I think you know that answer. Generally speaking Christians believe their scripture. The Baha'i approach is to, forgive me, deny the scripture. If a person accepts the Christian scripture, no one compares to Jesus.