The Return of Christ

[CG Didymus]

Those replies are based on God given authorised Baha'i Wrirings and there is no stronger foundations and never has been any stronger foundation.

Rational Proofs and Traditional Arguments from the Sacred Scriptures

Commentary on the Eleventh Chapter of the Revelation of John

Commentary on the Eleventh Chapter of Isaiah

Commentary on the Twelfth Chapter of the Revelation of John

The Explanations given by Abdul'baha offers that there are also other truths that can be found in those same passages, it is our own blindness that prevents us from seeing these truths.

We can all benefit from all these talks given by Abdul'baha, as there are many ropocs that will assist us in understandingtge "Return". The Kitab-i-iqan by Baha'u'llah is the best of choices to read.

The Kitáb-i-Íqán | Bahá’í Reference Library

A treatise revealed by Bahá’u’lláh in Baghdad in 1861/62 in response to questions posed by one of the maternal uncles of the Báb, translated by Shoghi Effendi and first published in English in 1931.

www.bahai.org

Regards Tony

Yes, "God given" for Baha'is. But to do an independent investigation of truth, as Baha'is believe a person should do, do these interpretations of Abdul Baha' make sense? You like them and you think they are true, but I see nothing but problems with how he interprets things. But since he is not the manifestation himself, like his father, Baha'u'llah, do Baha'is take everything he says as if it is the "word" of God? Anyway, here's part of what he says in one of your links...

“And the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months”; that is, the Gentiles will seize and subdue Jerusalem for forty-two months, or 1,260 days, or—each day being equivalent to a year—1,260 years, which is the duration of the Qur’anic Dispensation.​

​

When did the Islamic calendar start? I think it was 622AD. And the year 1260 in the Islamic calendar was the year 1844. An important year in Baha'i history. The year the Bab declared himself.

But... was 622AD the year Jerusalem got conquered? If you think it is, then who were these "Gentiles" that conquered it that year? And did those "Gentiles" trample it for the forty-two months, which Baha'is change into 1260 lunar years?

Then you say...

it is our own blindness that prevents us from seeing these truths.

Yes, we all have our "truths". And everyone else is blind to see "our" truths. I get the same thing from Christians. I'm blind to see their truth that these are the end times and Jesus is coming soon... That he will conquer Satan and do away with evil. So, which "truth" should I believe? Yours or theirs? Or... should I, like I said earlier, do like the Baha'is say and without bias, investigate the truth for myself? Trouble is... when I did... I disagree with both Baha'is and those Christians. And I wonder... am I the one that's blind or is it those people that have fallen in love with their religion so much that whatever it says, they believe without question?

Now of course when Baha'is or Christians are told to live a good, holy and spiritual life of showing love and respect to all people is great. And if Baha'is as a group live in peace and unity with each other, that's awesome. But does that make all of its religious beliefs true?

When Christians live holy and loving lives does that make their beliefs true? No. So, an important point... any religious belief can make people better people if they believe in their religion and actually apply those teachings that call for them to "love thy neighbor." But, since all those other beliefs are all over the place and contradictory, they all can't be true and maybe none of them completely true.

And for all the good stuff taught in the Baha'i Faith, I can't believe everything it teaches as true. And that goes for the wild interpretations of Abdul Baha' too.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The Holy Spirit does not have to be a person to be personally present for me, as an advisor and comforter. Jesus didn't offer mirrors. He promised to be personally present

You are just choosing a different frame of reference as to how the Holy Spirit permeates our lives and are basically offering the same thing I offer in return.

All the best, Regards Tony

 

[Sumadji]

You are just choosing a different frame of reference as to how the Holy Spirit permeates our lives and are basically offering the same thing I offer in return.

All the best, Regards Tony

Do you therefore agree with my post?

The Holy Spirit does not have to be a person to be personally present for me, as an advisor and comforter. Jesus didn't offer mirrors. He promised to be personally present

 

[TransmutingSoul]

When did the Islamic calendar start?

This is why I am not discussing this much any more CG. We would have answered that question 100 times. It is very simple CG it needs no calculation.

Islam was terminated in the year AH1260, the fulfillment is in that the abrogated date was Islam going ro the year 1260. Tge Ywo Witnesses were given authority of Revelation until the year 1260.

If Christianity fi is he'd today, it would be recorded as finishing in 2024.

Now if a passage in the Bible said Christianity had the authority to give prophecy for 2024 years, then one could expect to find the fulfillment in that year.

The issue Christianity faces was, is they were not looking at Islam nor the year 1260 of Islam. If they embrace this, all of a sudden they see Islam is from God. Same as Islam, if they embrace this prophecy from the Bible, they have to also admit the Bab and Baha'u'llah have abrogated Islam.

So all I can offer is, they have to choose as we all have to choose.

I made my choice and I see that AH1260 of Islam is valid date of fulfillment.

Remember it was William Miller that found AD1844 as the fulfillment date using g calculations from the Bible. The fact that this was also AH1260 should spark every seeking mind with amazement and joy.

God only know why people choose to overlook the significance.

I am tired of the disunity CG, I get a glimpse of the suffering of the Messengers and the suffering of Bahá'u'lláh. Imagine holding the keys to the peace and security of mankind, knowing they would not unlock the door for centuries, all the while becoming more bloodthirsty.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Do you therefore agree with my post?

I understand the significance of your post to your own frame of reference.

My frame of reference sees that significance in a differnt light.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Actually no more is a present term.

No more is a future term.

If Jesus said no more ever then you would have a point but he didn’t.

No more in this world means means never again in this world.

If I jump behind a wall and say you see me no more does that mean forever? No it just means until I come out from behind the wall.

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 in this world means means never again in this world.

And besides, Revelations specifically tells us Jesus will come back.

Revelations is not about Jesus. Christians only BELIEVE it is about Jesus.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm interested to know how you interpret the second part of this phrase: "but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also."

To me it means that although Jesus is no longer visible to 'the world' He is still present in Spirit.

That is essentially what I think it means.

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.

Since Jesus was addressing His disciples (ye) I think it means that they see Him (meaning they know Him) because He is present in Spirit.

I think it also means that because Jesus still lives (in heaven and in Spirit) His disciples will have eternal life.

 

[Trailblazer]

What is your view on slavery in the Bible? Are you for or against slavery?

I am against slavery. As far as slavery in the Bible is concerned, that was another age in history, so maybe slavery was necessary back then, but I don't think slavery is necessary or moral anymore.

The Bahá'í sacred writings explicitly prohibit slavery, and the teachings of the Bahá'í Faith emphasize the promotion of equality, justice and unity.
Faith in Action to End Slavery - Free the Slaves

 

[CG Didymus]

This is why I am not discussing this much any more CG. We would have answered that question 100 times. It is very simple CG it needs no calculation.

But then... here you are in a debate section. You put the Baha'i claims out there and refuse to deal with the problems with those claims.

For you 1260/1844 is the fulfillment. That's just great. Subtract the 1260 lunar years from that and what do you get? 622AD, the year of Hegira.

Did Jerusalem get conquered that year?

The Islamic history of Jerusalem begins with the conquest of the city by Caliph Umar in 635 (or 638).​

Then Baha'is have Muhammad and Ali, as the "Two Witnesses," teaching for 1260 years. But then they are killed are their bodies are in the street for 1260 years. They did both things at the same time? And both ended in 1844?

But it gets worse... The Baha'is have the Umayyads and the Abbasids, as the beasts and the dragon from Revelation, having power for 1260 years. Did their reign end in 1844" Did they first gain power in 622AD?

Umayyad dynasty, the first great Muslim dynasty to rule the empire of the caliphate (661–750 ce)​

​

The Abbasid dynasty were an Arab dynasty that ruled the Abbasid Caliphate between 750 and 1258.​

And then there is Abdul Baha' claiming that the number 666 refers to the year the Umayyads first took power. But they took power in 661AD, so Abdul Baha has to add five years to that to make it 666. The Baha'i say it is because Jesus was not born in year "zero" but four or five years before that. But here it says that Abdul Baha' claimed that the Umayyads took power in 666AD. Either way, he is wrong. And he is wrong about them having power for 1260 years.

‘Abdu'l-Bahá in a Tablet has given an explanation for the reference to the "beast" mentioned in Revelations 13:18, saying that the numerical value given to the beast in that passage referred to the date of the year, i.e. 666 A.D., when the Umayyad ruler arose. This is obviously a reference to Mu'áwíyih, the Umayyad Caliph who opposed the Imamate. He speaks further on this subject in "Some Answered Questions", Chapter XI."​

The Umayyads were the first Muslim dynasty, established in 661 in Damascus.​

​

So, don't discuss it. Stay with your beliefs. But that makes Baha'is no better than all those other religions that make claims and can't back them up.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is why I am not discussing this much any more CG. We would have answered that question 100 times. It is very simple CG it needs no calculation.

You can say THAT again!

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But then... here you are in a debate section. You put the Baha'i claims out there and refuse to deal with the problems with those claims.

There will always be problems with our interpretations CG.

The important thing is, there is enough proof in Prophecy to confirm those that have found a Messenger, not because of the Prophecy, but because of their person, their lives and their Message to Humanity.

So, don't discuss it. Stay with your beliefs. But that makes Baha'is no better than all those other religions that make claims and can't back them up.

We have discussed all this in great detail, over many years and supplied the answers that we have accepted. What you choose to do with all that, is 100% your choice CG.

I no longer see the need to offer it over and over again, repeating the same answers offered many times before, as It is no longer a debate, it becomes an argument of difference. I do not need to argue the points CG

The answers to our recent discussions are posted in the links provided.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

But then... here you are in a debate section. You put the Baha'i claims out there and refuse to deal with the problems with those claims.

Tony has dealt with those 100 times over but it falls on deaf ears.

 

[MelancholicPotatoChip]

Baha'is do not have to believe that the Bible is "the inerrant, infallible, literal word of God" in order for it to be considered evidence for God.
That would constitute black and white thinking.

black-or-white

You presented two alternative states as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.

Also known as the false dilemma, this insidious tactic has the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities than the either/or choice that is presented. Binary, black-or-white thinking doesn't allow for the many different variables, conditions, and contexts in which there would exist more than just the two possibilities put forth. It frames the argument misleadingly and obscures rational, honest debate.

Example: Whilst rallying support for his plan to fundamentally undermine citizens' rights, the Supreme Leader told the people they were either on his side, or they were on the side of the enemy.

Your logical fallacy is black or white

You presented two alternative states as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

So the logical fallacy that you commit is saying it is either black or white. The Baha'is have to believe that the Bible is the inerrant, infallible, literal word of God (black) or the Bible cannot be used for anything (white). For you there are no other alternatives. Can't you understand that is illogical? There are many Christians who do not believe that the Bible is 'the inerrant, infallible, literal word of God' yet they use the Bible as their holy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What the Baha'is believe about the Bible

From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet

...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

Bahá'í Library Online

Baha'i articles, books, translations, and historical materials

www.bahai-library.com

Wake up and smell the coffee....
Many Christians do not believe that the creation story and that whole thing about Adam and Eve, or the resurrection and Satan are literally true.

Those are beliefs of Christianity but they are not the essential elements of Jesus' teachings. In fact they are not even related to His teachings!

NONE of those 'beliefs' are necessary in order to say that the Bible contains spiritual truth and the truth about God, and is evidence for God.

Wake up and smell the coffee....
Everyone who reads the Bible, including Christians, interprets and believes according to how they interpret the Bible.
Why do you continue to single out the Baha'is?

The Bible does not SAY anything because books do not talk. All texts need to be interpreted in order to apply a meaning to the words.
All Christians do not apply the same meanings to the same verses. Otherwise we would not have these continual debates between Christians ob this forum.

Baha'is do not 'want' the Bible to mean anything. Baha'is do not care what the Bible means because it is NOT our holy book.
Baha'is discuss the Bible here because they are on a religious forum. Do you think that Baha'is discuss the Bible when they meet among themselves, or even at interfaith gatherings with Christians? This is a debate/discussion forum, so that is why we disuss and debate about the Bible!

I have made the Baha'i position on the Bible perfectly clear to you and others on this forum on innumerable occasions, but I feel like what I have posted has fallen on your deaf ears, since you keep saying the same things over and over again, as if I never explained our position.

Religious texts whether it is the Bible or any other doesn't demonstrate an existence for any god. I'm still waiting on how the bible is a demonstration of a god existing.

 

[Trailblazer]

I think this stuff that they will see him no more is very weak. I have never seen that claimed by any of the main Baha'i leaders. It very possibly could have been invented by TB.

No, I did not invent it. It is right in the Bible for everyone to read.
There is only ONE plain meaning but Christians just cannot face reality.

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 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.

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.

The key here is that Baha'is can't have Jesus being the one that comes back. His body has to be dead and gone and the "flesh" mean nothing. So much so that they say that Jesus did not physically come back to life, but that the resurrection was not a physical resurrection but only spiritual. That the spirit of Jesus rose and his body rotted away.

This has nothing to do with the Baha'is. We do not NEED anything because we have Baha'u'llah.
It is the Christians who need Jesus to come back, or so they believe.

The key here is that Jesus said that He was NO MORE in the world, and that is why Jesus has not come back.
The other notable FACT is that Jesus never said He was coming back to this world, not even once in the entire New testament
It's not there, it's just not there.

So, even if Baha'u'llah was not the return of Christ, the same Jesus just ain't coming back to earth.
I do not need the Baha'i Writings to tell me that, it is all in the Bible.

 

[MelancholicPotatoChip]

Still waiting on your demonstration of god existing.

 

[Trailblazer]

Religious texts whether it is the Bible or any other doesn't demonstrate an existence for any god.

No, religious texts whether it is the Bible or any other do not demonstrate an existence for any god.

I'm still waiting on how the bible is a demonstration of a god existing.

and you will be waiting a long time, since the bible is not a demonstration of a god existing.

 

[Trailblazer]

Still waiting on your demonstration of god existing.

You will be waiting a long time, since there is no way anyone can ever demonstrate that God exists.

 

[MelancholicPotatoChip]

Exactly!

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Tony has dealt with those 100 times over but it falls on deaf ears.

Maybe it all boils down to a 100% faith issue.

I think the issue is that one first has to have established that Baha'u'llah is trustworthy and truthful. Without that foundation, everything will be questioned.

Before I accepted fulfillment of Prophecy, I had already accepted the person of Baha'u'llah could be trusted, thus the explanations I was reading were based in that trust.

In the end, no Messenger of God has as much proof as the Bab and Baha'u'llah, they have truck loads compared to wheelbarrow loads for other Messengers.

If we reject the Prophecy fulfilled by the Bab and Baha'u'llah, then we basically have rejected all the signs of the previous Messengers. No one can use prophecy to validate any Messenger.

Baha'u'llah asks us to determine if he is trustworthy and truthful, is there any evidence he was not trustworthy or truthful from a reliable source?

Regards Tony

 

[MelancholicPotatoChip]

Maybe it all boils down to a 100% faith issue.

I think the issue is that one first has to have established that Baha'u'llah is trustworthy and truthful. Without that foundation, everything will be questioned.

Before I accepted fulfillment of Prophecy, I had already accepted the person of Baha'u'llah could be trusted, thus the explanations I was reading were based in that trust.

In the end, no Messenger of God has as much proof as the Bab and Baha'u'llah, they have truck loads compared to wheelbarrow loads for other Messengers.

If we reject the Prophecy fulfilled by the Bab and Baha'u'llah, then we basically have rejected all the signs of the previous Messengers. No one can use prophecy to validate any Messenger.

Baha'u'llah asks us to determine if he is trustworthy and truthful, is there any evidence he was not trustworthy or truthful from a reliable source?

Regards Tony

Yes it is 100% faith based.