• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Exclusivity of Christianity

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Sorry if I've already asked this before, but how many "The Messiah's" are predicted in the Hebrew Bible? Christians go through a lot of creative interpreting just to get Jesus to come twice. With the Baha'i Faith, Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah all have to be Messiah's that were predicted. With Baha'u'llah being the one that fulfills the prophecies that brings peace. One more thing, I've asked Baha'is this, but they don't give me an answer. How can Baha'u'llah be The Messiah when he never set foot in Jerusalem?
Jeru.. means turn where the temple pyramid circuit turned. So was crucial to only it's technology function.

By type of temple. As each temples formatted transmitter was varied if you studied technology users.

Every single body the all was old technology reviewed only by a returned mans mind. Now healed Aware life had been attacked sacrificed...was not just one race.

It was all things hurt.

The advice was for everyone said the new aware man teacher. As we all share earths body.

Human man. Were you living in Jerusalem born returned DNA man owned as the advised. By not just your life but country people you visited as a healer?

Yes. Just as it said.

All people in the vicinity and animals were known harmed. The teaching returned advice wise thinkers.... life pleaded with mathematicians technology builders by Rome...to not rebuild it.

Ignored.

What has life on earth and it's life got to do with where technology is chosen to be practiced?

The idea of lying greedy men.

I believe in this country DNA position of living energy mass had returned. It's special. I will redo science again and the heavens will leave but instantly return. I know he says lying.

Really bio conscious this position. Why? When information said heavens evolution took maybe millions of years to return healthy biology?

Reason technologies circuit left returned. Position of man's magical machine technology.

Possessed by it in his own memories just as taught. DNA same human returns believes relives expressed the same beliefs. Particular humans.

As thought is instant cells leave get replaced instantly.

Same theist now saying the same false ideals he had before.

Men who thinks magic manifests without a machine. Yet knew manifested phenomenas were caused by machines conditions of the past.

No machine exact. No magic either.

Is the teaching scientists just humans like the rest of us lie.

They thought as a human. They design invention. Then build manifest it...claiming it must be part biology for the knowledge isn't sanity.

Visionary to receive effects was through waters deflective causes as minerals in water conveyed the advice.

All changes are in mass first knew any true scientist.
Isn't a human machine.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
One more thing, I've asked Baha'is this, but they don't give me an answer. How can Baha'u'llah be The Messiah when he never set foot in Jerusalem?
Where does the Bible say that the Messiah would come to Jerusalem when He returns?
I have looked and looked, but I can find no such verses.

Daniel 8:2 And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai.

It appears as if the Throne was set in Elam, not in Jerusalem, as many Christians believe.

The Lord was prophesied to set His throne in Elam, from which the Messiah would rule.
Elam is modern-day Persia, where Baha’u’llah was born.

Jeremiah 49:38 And I will set my throne in Elam, and will destroy from thence the king and the princes, saith the LORD.

When that verse was recorded Elam existed and the verses for the coming of the Lord refer to the latter days.

Jeremiah 49:39 But it shall come to pass in the latter days, that I will bring again the captivity of Elam, saith the LORD.

upload_2023-3-2_18-42-44.png


upload_2023-3-2_18-43-3.png

 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
According to the Bible (and Jesus in the Bible).

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple. (John 8)
"before Abraham I was" means that the soul of Jesus was in the spiritual world before Abraham was in this world.

The Prophets, unlike us, are pre-existent. The soul of Christ existed in the spiritual world before His birth in this world. We cannot imagine what that world is like, so words are inadequate to picture His state of being.
(Shoghi Effendi: High Endeavors, Page: 71)

That verse has nothing to do with Jesus being the (only) co-Creator of the world.
God created the world and Jesus had nothing to do with it.

God alone is above all creation, including Jesus and all the other Messengers.

Jesus is no better than any one of the other Messengers despite what Christians believe.
Jesus simply had a different mission from the other Messengers.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
One more thing, I've asked Baha'is this, but they don't give me an answer. How can Baha'u'llah be The Messiah when he never set foot in Jerusalem?
23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
(King James Bible, Matthew)
He said here clearly that He would not set foot in Jerusalem until he was received as He should. Muhammad never set foot there, the Bab never set foot there, and Baha'u'llah never set foot there because they were not recognized for who they were.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Risen Christ appeared to apostles and ascended to Father in heaven. That he has finished his saving mission on earth and the world will temporary not see him is correct (John 17). No error in Bible verses here.
Jesus did not say he had finished his saving mission on earth and the world will 'temporarily' not see him.
Jesus said the world would not see him ever again.

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 17:11 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.


no more
  1. nothing further.
    "there was no more to be said about it"
  2. no further.
    "you must have some soup, but no more wine"
  3. exist no longer.
    "the patch of ground was overgrown and the hut was no more"
  4. never again.
    "mention his name no more to me"
  5. neither.
    "I had no complaints and no more did Tom"
Definitions from Oxford Languages
For now he is present in Church as his "body". Jesus' last words (in Matthew): "And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
Christians believe that Jesus is present in Church as his "body" and that Jesus will with be them till the end of the age, but that age ended when Christ returned in the person of Baha'u'llah.
If something is in the process of getting fulfilled it means it isn't fulfilled yet. Baha'u'llah didn't change anything. Fulfillment was already in the process in the time when Jesus walked the earth and preached: "The kingdom of God has come near, " and "The kingdom of God is in your midst."
The Kingdom of God on earth did not exist in the days of Jesus. That is why Jesus said to pray for it to come.

Matthew 6
9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.


Jesus laid the foundation for the Kingdom of God on earth. Baha'u'llah revealed what will be necessary to build it.
The Kingdom of God has not come to earth yet, it is in the 'process' of being built by humans.

“Beseech ye the one true God to grant that all men may be graciously assisted to fulfil that which is acceptable in Our sight. Soon will the present-day order be rolled up, and a new one spread out in its stead. Verily, thy Lord speaketh the truth, and is the Knower of things unseen.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 7
You said: Baha'u'llah never claimed to be Christ. Now I'm a little confused. Do you believe he is the second coming of Christ or not?
Baha'u'llah claimed to be the return of Christ thus the second coming, but He did not claim to be Jesus Christ, He came with a new name.

Isaiah 62:2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name.
Jesus didn't just warn of false Christs. He also foretold his second coming and the manner of comming - he will not appear as a human born on earth again - instead he will come in "great glory". He will not be seen here or there but everywhere (like a lightning is seen far away). Great signs will be in the sky...
Those verses refer to the Son of man coming in the clouds, but they are not about Jesus.

Who is the Son of man who will come in the clouds of heaven?
Where does Jesus say it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp full significance of his revelation (with the help of Holy Spirit)? It's in John 16:13: "... when the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth." I know you have a different interpretation of this verse.
John 16:13 does not say it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp full significance of his revelation (with the help of Holy Spirit). That is just what Christians believe it means.

These verses are referring to a man who would bring the Holy Spirit, he will do all these things it says in the verses. The verses do not refer to an 'disembodied' Holy Spirit.

I do have a different interpretation of this verse since I believe that Spirit of truth was Baha'u'llah.

John 16:13-14 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’u’llah did everything these verses say, including glorifying Jesus.

“We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 86

Obviously, there is no reconciling Christian beliefs with Baha'i beliefs. One of them has to be wrong.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
(King James Bible, Matthew)
He said here clearly that He would not set foot in Jerusalem until he was received as He should. Muhammad never set foot there, the Bab never set foot there, and Baha'u'llah never set foot there because they were not recognized for who they were.
But isn't the Jewish Messiah supposed to rebuild the Temple and rule from Zion/Jerusalem? Also, the Mt. of Olives is mentioned as possibly being the place where Jesus returns to. Those Elam quotes of TB's have some problems. Where was Elam? Did it include the cities in Persia where Baha'u'llah came from? Did Baha'u'llah rule from Elam?
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
God created the world and Jesus had nothing to do with it.
To be technical about it the Primal Will created the world.

No sign can indicate His presence or His absence; inasmuch as by a word of His command all that are in heaven and on earth have come to exist, and by His wish, which is the Primal Will itself, all have stepped out of utter nothingness into the realm of being, the world of the visible.
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 98)

It follows that all things have emanated from God; that is, it is through God that all things have been realized, and through Him that the contingent world has come to exist. The first thing to emanate from God is that universal reality which the ancient philosophers termed the “First Intellect” and which the people of Bahá call the “Primal Will”. This emanation, with respect to its action in the world of God, is not limited by either time or place and has neither beginning nor end, for in relation to God the beginning and the end are one and the same.
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, "Some Answered Questions", 53.5
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
But isn't the Jewish Messiah supposed to rebuild the Temple and rule from Zion/Jerusalem? Also, the Mt. of Olives is mentioned as possibly being the place where Jesus returns to. Those Elam quotes of TB's have some problems. Where was Elam? Did it include the cities in Persia where Baha'u'llah came from? Did Baha'u'llah rule from Elam?
The quote from Jesus is clear, and I consider those othe things you refer to as symbolic. i don't know about that Elam stuff, it came from William Sears, and that is his take on that.

Zion can be thought of as the whole of Israel.

In the Hebrew Bible, the Land of Israel and the city of Jerusalem are both referred to as Zion.

Zion - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
How do we get to a place where people declare they are Christians and evangelicals, and basically don’t even understand the most foundational reality of what is true religion? How does this happen? On the face, you might say they lack instruction, and you would probably be right. But even deeper than that, I think they lack courage, because the reason people cave in to say that other religions can give eternal life is so that they don’t wind up offending other people—because that’s hard to deal with.
If one subscribes to biblical inerrancy, then I'd agree with you, but a great many of us don't.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There may be overlap, but why is that meaningful? It's the differences between the two that matter.
Why that is meaningful, is because of influence. Humanistic, or better stated modernist and postmodernist perspectives are part of culture at large. As such they create "grooves" in society for others to follow, like a trickle of water creates a path for other water to follow behind it, which creates a deeper groove for greater volumes to follow that course behind, creating deeper grooves, creating greater flow.

I'll try to explain further.

It is humanism that has shaped Western Christianity over the centuries since the Enlightenment and made the differences narrower.
It is not a philosophical movement per se, but rather it is a certain developmental level that has, from within religion, as well as from outside of it influenced culture at large. The religions or the movements, are reflective of the source of change. They are not the causes of the change, even though once established they may influence change, as in my cutting a groove metaphor above, as a self-amplifying feedback system.

Today, Western Christians prefer democracy to the biblical model of government, often accept the sciences and things such as church-state separation, and recognize that slavery is immoral.
The age of reason, modernity itself is what is responsible for this. Modernity can be found both in religion, and in secular movements, such as secular humanism as well. Those are simply different expressions of the same thing.

They didn't get that from their Bibles.
Historically, that is untrue. If you look at the Apostle Paul, for instance, in his original authentic texts, he was against slavery. It was only the much later Pseudo-Pauline writings that written in the 2nd century by other authors in his name that "radical Paul" was softened so as not to upset the cultural apple cart. So anti-slavery is not solely something that came from modern day humanism.

Furthermore, there were entire Christian movements during Civil War days that were opposed to slavery. As I've said, humanism is in the teachings of Jesus, as well as many of the early church fathers. That the ******** in the South used the Bible to justify slavery, has more to do with their stage of development (tribalistic, warrior meme level), than it does with scripture itself.

The fact that the ancients decided that murder and theft were immoral does not make those moral systems of value today except perhaps from a historical perspective as examples of where we were compared to where we are.
All our systems are a matter of evolution. What we have today in modernity, is due to those earlier systems upon with it was dependent upon in order to evolve into what it is, both the good and the bad.

A recurring theme in our discussions is you seeing value where I don't. My problem with your claim is that you don't explain what that value is except in broad, general terms that also don't actually describe the value, either.
I see baby and bathwater. You see only bathwater. It seems to me that way. I can give you specific examples of what that value is, so it may help you understand what I'm focusing on, that I see you as overlooking.

Each stage of human development has brought something positive that is carried with us into the next stage beyond it. As a state of development is transcended into the next, it brings forward the positive contributions of the previous stage, and discards the outgrown, or unhealthy aspects of it. The motto is "transcend and include". So while we as modernists make look at the mythic, traditionalist systems as old fashioned, or antiquated, in reality the "dignity" of that stage is what we hold onto while discarding the "disaster" of it. That is bringing the baby forward, while discarding the bathwater.

What I feel will help us here, is if you took a look at this link here I found just now to help bring some perspective to what I'm talking about. I like he he lays out for each of these stages of human development with brief explanations and video clip examples of how that appears. I'll add here, no matter where you or I may be at those stages of development, each and every stage before it is a part of who we are today. It informs who we are, and lives and acts out from within each of us. We all have that 'warrior' in us, even if we are socialized postmodernist pluralists today.

Let me know your thoughts to this, as it will be helpful to direct our focus more clearly:

What Are the Stages of Development? – Integral Life

I say that I have not benefitted from myths and find no value in modern or ancient religious moral systems simply because of their method for deciding such things is received morals, which leaves them stuck in the past until a rational ethicists explains why such ideas are irrational, unkind, and how and why they can be improved.
But you actually have, and do, even if you are not consciously aware of it. We evolved to think symbolically, and mythic systems communicate values and meaning through a systems of signs and symbols, even if those are "secular" in nature, they are still mythic in function. "Transcend and include", we simply dress up our myths differently now, getting rid of gods, and replacing them with national flags, for instance.

I don't see a problem with my approach. We did something similar in the sciences, tossing out the failed predecessors of science such as creationism, astrology, and alchemy.
No, we didn't toss them out. We evolved them. We transcended and included the positive lessons, and discarded what no longer worked as we grew. We just got a larger shoe size, not got rid of shoes. We kept the basics of shoe designs however.

This is how evolution works. It doesn't reinvent. It modifies what exists, transcending and including it into the next stage.

They're based in failed principles as are received morals. My moral values don't draw from any religion or any other external source.
Yes, your value did come from the culture, which was informed by the religion, which was informed by the culture, in a self-amplifying feedback system. These are systems in which we "live and move and have our being". They inform and influence our experience of reality and ourselves through them as we move within them.

As you go through that link I shared, which I hope you will, this is what you begins to recognized at the later postmodernist stage, moving into Integral.

They are all endogenous, all the result of applying reason to a compelling utilitarian moral intuition, just as all of science results from tossing out failed systems based in false beliefs believed by faith and starting from scratch. I did not build on the Christian system.
Yes, they are all endogenous. But your internal subjective reality, is shaped and connected with your intersubjective or cultural reality, as well as informed by your external experiences of systems of information and infrastructure, signs and symbols and language and myths (either secular or religious in nature). No one is a subjective island. We were not raised in sensory deprivation tanks. And if we were, what would be? Would we even be human? ;)

So, in that sense, yes you did build upon the Christian system, even if you never went to church one day in your life. You are part of a culture which was shaped by it in the West. It permeates the air we breathe. Even it if is not overtly religious in content, the core values and meanings and worldview are there. The same holds true for Eastern culture for its members as well. They don't need to be a practicing religious Taoist, to think as a Taoist, for instance.

I'd say that it's like saying that now that I'm no longer a child and that therefore, childish thinking is no longer appropriate, which is why I updated it.
As have I. But that doesn't mean throwing out the dignity of the earlier stages with the disasters of them, or to quit wearing footwear, because my shoe size is no longer a 4. Updating how we think is permissible. Denying the imagination and joy of childhood in service of being "mature", is not. That itself is one of the disasters of the modernist stage, tucked in right alongside its many dignities.

And if I teach someone younger than me, I will not teach them what my childish mind mistakenly thought, although had I written those thoughts down as a child, somebody might value them as sage advice like they do scripture written in man's cultural infancy.
The saying, "When I was a child, I thought as a child", is not a put down to children. Children need to think as children. It is part of healthy normal and vital development for them. If they bypass this, if you shove a technical manual in front of them, instead of allowing them play and use their fantasy filled imaginations to create the magical to explore, then you do them a grave disservice.

As I've said, you can't skip stages. You can't kick out the rungs of the ladder they need to climb upon. What needs to be done if you wish to convey higher stages of development to them, is put it in the storybook forms of imaginative symbols and characters that they can understand, given their stage of development, or "thinking as a child".

That is my point. That is why the symbols of myth from scripture, plays a role in development for children (or for biological adults who are still children spiritually), if you have a mature adult somewhere in there helping shape and mold that development, as opposed to children teaching children, which is the disaster of fundamentalist religions.

I'll pause here. Let me know what you thought of that link I shared, if it helps any understanding in our ongoing discussions. I'm certainly hopeful it will.
 
Last edited:

PearlSeeker

Well-Known Member
That verse has nothing to do with Jesus being the (only) co-Creator of the world.
God created the world and Jesus had nothing to do with it.

God alone is above all creation, including Jesus and all the other Messengers.

Jesus is no better than any one of the other Messengers despite what Christians believe.
Jesus simply had a different mission from the other Messengers.

You are free to negate Bible verses about co-Creator and superiority of Jesus and believe what you want. But you can't make Bible mean something different than it means.

Jesus said the world would not see him ever again.

And he said "you will see me again". And although in the Bible Jesus spoke all the time of himself as Son of Man (who will come back and judge the world) you don't believe he was speaking of himself.

Christians believe that Jesus is present in Church as his "body" and that Jesus will with be them till the end of the age, but that age ended when Christ returned in the person of Baha'u'llah.

According to the Bible that age hasn't ended yet. This will be the age/world to come:

"God will wipe away every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying; and there will be no more pain, for the former things have passed away."

The Kingdom of God on earth did not exist in the days of Jesus. That is why Jesus said to pray for it to come.

And it doesn't (fully) exist now. That's how we know this age hasn't ended yet.

These verses are referring to a man who would bring the Holy Spirit, he will do all these things it says in the verses. The verses do not refer to an 'disembodied' Holy Spirit.

No. The Spirit is definitely not a man. It's God's power working inside man. Jesus promised it to the apostles and they received it on the Pentecost.

"... you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you..." (Acts 1:8)

Obviously, there is no reconciling Christian beliefs with Baha'i beliefs. One of them has to be wrong.
Or both are wrong. Christians misinterpreted the Jewish scriptures and Baha'is misinterpreted the Christian Bible. To Jews Jesus is a false Messiah and the real Messiah hasn't come yet. To Christians Baha'u'llah isn't the second coming of Christ and they wait for Jesus Christ to come back in glory and judge the world...
 
Last edited:

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
They are not the causes of the change, even though once established they may influence change, as in my cutting a groove metaphor above, as a self-amplifying feedback system.

The rise of humanism reshaped the West. Humanism is a repudiation of belief by faith and received ethics.

The age of reason, modernity itself is what is responsible for this.

Yes, as described above. Modernity, the Age of Reason, the Enlightenment, and the rise of humanism all refer to the same cutoff in history when the world changed due the restraint of Christianity

Modernity can be found both in religion, and in secular movements, such as secular humanism as well. Those are simply different expressions of the same thing.

Yes, modernity, or humanistic influence, can be found in religion. That's why Christianity, which looks like Islam on paper, is rendered so differently in the parts of the word where they predominate. Christianity was modernized to a great extent by humanism. Whereas the latter are still stoning people, cutting off hands, pushing people off of towers, and burning them alive in cages, the Christians have stopped their inquisitions and witch killings. The Christian West has accepted democracy, church-state separation, freedom of and from religion, and a few other notions alien to much of the Muslim world. These ideas came from humanism, not scripture.

humanism is in the teachings of Jesus, as well as many of the early church fathers.

And yet humanists are in opposition to much of the church's teachings.

So while we as modernists make look at the mythic, traditionalist systems as old fashioned, or antiquated, in reality the "dignity" of that stage is what we hold onto while discarding the "disaster" of it. That is bringing the baby forward, while discarding the bathwater.

Really? That's the baby in the bathwater - dignity? I'd like to see something a little more specific for an answer. Besides, I don't see any dignity in myths, and wouldn't value it if I did.

Let me know your thoughts to this, as it will be helpful to direct our focus more clearly: What Are the Stages of Development? – Integral Life

Please orient me to your purpose for introducing it and apply specific parts of it to this argument.

We evolved to think symbolically, and mythic systems communicate values and meaning through a systems of signs and symbols, even if those are "secular" in nature, they are still mythic in function.

You are really stretching here to find relevance in ancient scripture. Basically, all of math and language are mythic by that reckoning. And I routinely reject comments like that first sentence out of hand if they lack specifics.

your value did come from the culture, which was informed by the religion

Disagree. My values are unrelated to religions. Even where there is overlap, my values do not come from those books. My value that murder is immoral comes from the same place that tells me that homophobia is immoral - the application of reason to the intuitions of conscience. Mine are incompatible with Christianity in many places, and as I said, where they overlap, that's just coincidence, not a source of those ideas.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
The quote from Jesus is clear, and I consider those othe things you refer to as symbolic. i don't know about that Elam stuff, it came from William Sears, and that is his take on that.

Zion can be thought of as the whole of Israel.

In the Hebrew Bible, the Land of Israel and the city of Jerusalem are both referred to as Zion.

Zion - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms
Here's one quote...
Isaiah 2:3 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. 2And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. 3And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares
It is obvious that whatever any of us want to "prove", we can find something in the Bible to back it up. Like here is the gospel of John implying that the Word is God and became flesh meaning who else but Jesus. So, if we take John literally then Jesus is God?
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Here's one quote...
Isaiah 2:3 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. 2And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. 3And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares
It is obvious that whatever any of us want to "prove", we can find something in the Bible to back it up. Like here is the gospel of John implying that the Word is God and became flesh meaning who else but Jesus. So, if we take John literally then Jesus is God?
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
i only got involved because @Trailblazer asked me to. I've said before in the past that prophecy is far from the best way to prove anything about a Prophet.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You are free to negate Bible verses about co-Creator and superiority of Jesus and believe what you want. But you can't make Bible mean something different than it means.
I don't really care what Paul said about Jesus since I believe most of it is false.

How Paul changed the course of Christianity
And he said "you will see me again". And although in the Bible Jesus spoke all the time of himself as Son of Man (who will come back and judge the world) you don't believe he was speaking of himself.
No, Jesus never said that He was the Son of man who would come back and judge the world. That is a Christian belief which is based upon a misinterpretation of verses.

Jesus said we would see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, Jesus never said you will see 'me' coming down from the clouds.

To paraphrase Baha’u’llah, Son of man coming in the clouds means that the return of the Christ Spirit will appear in the form of another human being, which Baha’is call a Manifestation of God. 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.

Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven means that the return of the Christ Spirit promised in the Bible will be made manifest from the heaven of the will of God, and will appear in the form of a human being. The term “heaven” means loftiness and exaltation. Although they were delivered from the womb of their mother, Manifestations of God have in reality descended from the heaven of the will of God. Though dwelling on this earth, their true habitations are the realms above. While walking among mortals on earth, they soar in the heaven of the divine presence.
According to the Bible that age hasn't ended yet. This will be the age/world to come:

"God will wipe away every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying; and there will be no more pain, for the former things have passed away."
What does that mean and when during the new age would it happen?
And it doesn't (fully) exist now. That's how we know this age hasn't ended yet.
Where in the Bible does it say when during the new age the Kingdom of God will be fully built?
No it does not exist full yet, but why would it? An age is an age and it spans a period of time. The Kingdom of God is not going to be built overnight, it takes a lot of time. We are only 160 years into a new age that will last no less than 1000 years.
No. The Spirit is definitely not a man. It's God's power working inside man. Jesus promised it to the apostles and they received it on the Pentecost.

"... you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you..." (Acts 1:8)
The apostles did receive the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and then the Holy Spirit was sent again when Baha'u'llah came and it worked through Him.

Acts 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

Acts 2:17-21And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.


Acts 2:17-21 is a prophecy and it has been fulfilled by the coming of Baha’u’llah.
Or both are wrong. Christians misinterpreted the Jewish scriptures and Baha'is misinterpreted the Christian Bible. To Jews Jesus is a false Messiah and the real Messiah hasn't come yet. To Christians Baha'u'llah isn't the second coming of Christ and they wait for Jesus Christ to come back in glory and judge the world...
All people are free to believe whatever they want to believe and they will certainly do so.
 

PearlSeeker

Well-Known Member
I don't really care what Paul said about Jesus since I believe most of it is false.

It's not just Paul. See for example

Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen - Wikipedia

Jesus said we would see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, Jesus never said you will see 'me' coming down from the clouds.

That's right. Jesus (in the gospels) always spoke of the Son of man in third person. From the context we know that he spoke of himself.

Where in the Bible does it say when during the new age the Kingdom of God will be fully built?

It doesn't say exactly. The age to come will be after the Judgement. The age of the Kingdom is when it is fully built (not before). The time of being prepared is not yet the age to come - it's called the end times (the final chapter before the age to come).

The apostles did receive the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and then the Holy Spirit was sent again when Baha'u'llah came and it worked through Him.
So the Spirit is not a man. It works through people. Many people, not just prophets...
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
There are many ways this parable can be interpreted. I believe that Baha’u’llah is the Lord of the Vineyard.
Below is a brief interpretation of this parable:

Now let’s consider Shoghi Effendi’s claim that Baha’u’llah fulfills Christ’s prophecy as the “Lord of the Vineyard.”

The Gospels include fifty or so parables: “All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them.” – Matthew 13:34. Parables—short, simple stories that teach moral lessons—appear in all scripture.

Remarkably, though, Christ’s parables have no overt religious or theological elements. In fact, God appears only in one of them. Let’s take a brief look at the parable of the Lord of the Vineyard, known as the “Parable of the Tenants”—also known as the “Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen” (Mark 12.1–12; Matthew 21.33–45; Luke 20.9–19; Gospel of Thomas 65–66):

And he began to speak unto them by parables. A certain man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge about it, and digged a place for the winefat, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country.

And at the season he sent to the husbandmen a servant, that he might receive from the husbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard.

And they caught him, and beat him, and sent him away empty.

And again he sent unto them another servant; and at him they cast stones, and wounded him in the head, and sent him away shamefully handled.

And again he sent another; and him they killed, and many others; beating some, and killing some.

Having yet therefore one son, his well beloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying, They will reverence my son.

But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.’

And they took him, and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard.

What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.
– Mark 12:1–9.

Jesus’s parable is based, in part, on the “The Song of the Vineyard” in Isaiah 5:1–7. What follows is the present writer’s brief interpretation of this parable, purely an individual exegesis, not an official Baha’i interpretation:

The “certain man” in verse 1 refers to “the lord of the vineyard” in verse 9. Here, this is generally taken by Biblical scholars to mean God, the Creator of the vineyard, which symbolizes the world at large. Although many Christian interpreters have identified Israel as the vineyard, there are other possible interpretations, such as the kingdom of God, the people of God, or the covenantal relationship between God and His people.

The “husbandmen”—the cultivators of the vineyard—are those who are in charge of the vineyard, i.e. the religious leaders of each prophetic day and age.

In verse 2, the Lord of the vineyard sends a “servant” to “receive” the “fruit of the vineyard.” Here, “fruit” is a common Biblical metaphor for good works and righteous deeds.

The “servant,” being sent by God, is widely understood to be a prophet of God. Having been caught, beaten, and sent away (verse 3), God then sends “another” servant, who is stoned, “wounded” and sent away, “shamefully handled” (verse 4). But then God sends another prophet, who is also “killed,” followed by “many others,” by prophets who suffer similar fates, after the people or their religious leaders end up “beating some, and killing some.”

As a last resort, God then sends his “well beloved . . . son,” who was the “last” prophet to be “sent” to the world (verse 6), but God’s son, understood by most Christian interpreters to be Jesus Christ, is “killed” and “cast … out of the vineyard” (verse 8).

Thereupon, the “Lord of the vineyard” will himself appear and “will give the vineyard unto others” (verse 9). Interpreted literally, this would, of course, mean that God would somehow come to the vineyard in person. Baha’is reject this literal interpretation, however, since God is not a “person” (even though we experience God personally) and, in any case, is infinite and therefore cannot appear in a finite place, bound by time and space. Instead, God will appear by proxy—by sending another representative. This time, Baha’is believe, God’s representative is Baha’u’llah.

This interpretation, in its general contours, appears to be confirmed by the great Baha’i scholar Mirza Abu’l-Fadl:

That is, the Sovereign of the universe and Creator of the peoples brought the world into existence, adorning it with the most perfect form, and set the human race over it as a tenant. In every age He appointed one of His servants as a messenger to inquire into the welfare of the creation. But the people, ignorant wrongdoers, refused to recognize or accept him, greeting him with derision and haughtiness. Finally, He sent the perfect, divine Word in the name of Sonship, and they slew him as well. Naturally, the Lord of all horizons on the Day of Encounter will manifest Himself [as Baha’u’llah], and deliver the world, the divine vineyard, over to the just and trustworthy. – Mirza Abu’l-Faḍl Gulpaygani, “Why Moses Could Not See God,” Letters & Essays, 1886–1913, pp. 24–25.​

As “Lord of the Vineyard,” Baha’u’llah proclaimed that Mt. Carmel in Israel—the site of the Baha’i World Center—would become God’s Vineyard:

Carmel, in the Book of God, hath been designated as the Hill of God, and His Vineyard. It is here that, by the grace of the Lord of Revelation, the Tabernacle of Glory hath been raised. Happy are they that attain thereunto; happy they that set their faces towards it. – Baha’u’llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 145.

Did Baha’u’llah Fulfill the Prophecies of Jesus?

(Continued on next post)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
That's right. Jesus (in the gospels) always spoke of the Son of man in third person. From the context we know that he spoke of himself.
In some verses Jesus was speaking of Himself. We know when Jesus was speaking of Himself since we can connect these verses with what we know Jesus did on His earthy mission.

Mark 2:10 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins - he said to the paralytic

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath .

Matthew 8:20 And Jesus said to him, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.

Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.


From looking at the context we know if Jesus was speaking about Himself or referring to another man.

Look carefully at Mark 8:38. Look at how the verse is separated by a semicolon and Jesus says “also” indicating that the Son of man is someone other than Himself who would come in the glory of his Father with the holy angels

Mark 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

of him also, when he cometh means there is another man involved.

Look carefully at Luke 9:26. Look at how Jesus separated Himself from the Son of man (ashamed of me, of him shall), and then Jesus said that the Son of man shall come in his own glory and in His Father’s glory. Jesus did not say that the Son of man will come in my glory.

Luke 9:26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father’s, and of the holy angels.

ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall means there is another man involved.
It doesn't say exactly. The age to come will be after the Judgement. The age of the Kingdom is when it is fully built (not before). The time of being prepared is not yet the age to come - it's called the end times (the final chapter before the age to come).
The age to come will be after Christ returns, and that is The Day of Judgment (see below).
The end times (end of an age) came when Christ returned.
The Bible does it say when during the new age the Kingdom of God will be 'fully built.'

The Day of Judgment

Christ spoke much in parables about a great Day of Judgment when “the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father … and … shall reward every man according to his works” (Matt. xvi, 27). He compares this Day to the time of harvest, when the tares are burned and the wheat gathered into barns:—

… so shall it be in the end of this world [consummation of the age]. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.—Matt. xiii, 40–43.
The phrase “end of the world” used in the Authorized Version of the Bible in this and similar passages has led many to suppose that when the Day of Judgment comes, the earth will suddenly be destroyed, but this is evidently a mistake. The true translation of the phrase appears to be “the consummation or end of the age.” Christ teaches that the Kingdom of the Father is to be established on earth, as well as in heaven. He teaches us to pray: “Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” In the parable of the Vineyard, when the Father, the Lord of the Vineyard, comes to destroy the wicked husbandmen, He does not destroy the vineyard (the world) also, but lets it out to other husbandmen, who will render Him the fruits in their season. The earth is not to be destroyed, but to be renewed and regenerated. Christ speaks of that day on another occasion as “the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory.” St. Peter speaks of it as “the times of refreshing,” “the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” The Day of Judgment of which Christ speaks is evidently identical with the coming of the Lord of Hosts, the Father, which was prophesied by Isaiah and the other Old Testament prophets; a time of terrible punishment for the wicked, but a time in which justice shall be established and righteousness rule, on earth as in heaven.

In the Bahá’í interpretation, the coming of each Manifestation of God is a Day of Judgment, but the coming of the supreme Manifestation of Bahá’u’lláh is the great Day of Judgment for the world cycle in which we are living. The trumpet blast of which Christ and Muhammad and many other prophets speak is the call of the Manifestation, which is sounded for all who are in heaven and on earth—the embodied and the disembodied. The meeting with God, through His Manifestation, is, for those who desire to meet Him, the gateway to the Paradise of knowing and loving Him, and living in love with all His creatures. Those, on the other hand, who prefer their own way to God’s way, as revealed by the Manifestation, thereby consign themselves to the hell of selfishness, error and enmity.

Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, pp. 219-220
So the Spirit is not a man. It works through people. Many people, not just prophets...
That's right. The Holy Spirit can work through people besides prophets, but it is sent directly to prophets and then reflected off those other people.

The focus of the rays of the Holy Spirit was Christ, and from Christ the Holy Spirit reflected upon the Apostles, who mirrored forth the Holy Spirit. As that passage I quoted said, the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles means that the glorious divine bounties reflected and appeared in their reality, which is their soul. Baha'is do not believe that the Holy Spirit lived inside their bodies, because the Holy Spirit does not descend into the body.

This short chapter explains how Baha’is believe the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples of Christ:

24: THE DESCENT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT UPON THE APOSTLES
 
Top