The Second Coming

[Dawnofhope]

Which was Muhammad? Yet, almost all the major religions are still going? God has to work on transitioning between his religions better. The way he is doing it is not working out very well.

Apparently not. Up until recently in human history we’ve existed on this planet in geographical isolation. So it doesn’t make any sense to think Muhammad would make the Christian dispensation end anymore than Moses would have put an end to Hinduism. However its clear Christianity is the largest religion on the planet at present but its likely that Islam will become the largest in 50 years. So that’s about 60% of the planet following two of the major Abrahamic Faiths and the percentage is growing steadily.

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

 

[firedragon]

What the Quran says about the Torah, Gospels, Moses and Jesus seems very relevant to the theme of the OP. Our different understandings about the authenticity of Christian and Jewish scripture is central. I would appreciate you stating your view of the current Jewish and Christian scripture and why. I’m answering your questions, perhaps not to your satisfaction, but I’m open about what I believe and why.

Brother. The Quran does not quote the Bible, it quotes the Torah. The Quran mentions the Torah as a revelation. It doesn't quote the Bible. You have clearly understood the pentateuch as THE TORAH and even the Bahai scripture has. There is a big difference in that. Right or wrong. Whats irrelevant is which book is right or wrong. And thats a huge subject so thats whats irrelevant.

I thought it was crystal clear actually. Let’s put it another way. The final authority for a Baha’i are the Baha’i sacred scriptures, the authorised interpretations of Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi and the elucidations provided by the Universal House of Justice. Beyond that its a matter of independent investigation of reality.

Great. But the thing is you believe only in certain parts of the Bible as Gods word. Especially the prophecies in Daniel, Ezekiel, Gospels and Revelations. So there is no standard or fair application of one standard.

Abdu’l-Baha clearly outlines the problem with a literal interpretation of the resurrection.

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

I’ve provided you with Bahá’u’lláh’s commentary in regards to two verses from the Olivet discourse. This commentary has significant implications for Baha’is and how we should approach not only those two verses but other similar verses too.

So whats the analysis of problems in the Olivet discourse?

An excellent example really. Were these two New Testament books written by the Apostle Peter? What do the Baha’i writings say? What is the evidence for and against Peter’s authorship?

There is a letter from the Universal House of Justice which indirectly suggests at least one of these books were written by Peter. Besides the primacy of Peter is affirmed by Shoghi Effendi. So for me the question is undecided but I’m leaning towards both books being authored by Peter.

Well. Modern scholarship believes they are not written by Peter at all. This is a widely held belief and the justifications are very valid. I think you are claiming your personal view but whats the evidence towards your opinion?

 

[firedragon]

Khan’s translation was completed 1904 whereas Shoghi Effendi’s translation is more recent 1931 and by the leader of the Baha’i Faith. Most Baha’is will use Shoghi Effendi’s translation and I have provided you with a link that enables you to easily access this work.

I prefer not read internet links. Apologies. I prefer to read the printed book or a downloaded version. I am sure that Shoghi Effendis translation must be a better translation. I was just pointing out that the verses dont correspond to each other so maybe the numbers were added separately by each translator. Thats only for reference I was asking which translation you use.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Things in Matthew 2 seem to me way out of context. “Out of Egypt I called my son.” “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.” "He will be called a Nazarene."

Matthew is the only one that claims the family went to Egypt and that Herod had the children killed. Did he make those things up to "fulfill" prophecy? You, as a Baha'i, I would imagine you have to affirm those things happened. But to a Jew, they could very easily be seen as manufactured prophecies and therefore false. Right there is enough for them to reject the rest of what Matthew and the other gospel writers say.

It certainly appears as an allusion to the nativity story of Moses. Whether it literally happened or not, can we really know for certain? It was over two thousand years ago, historical records weren’t great and the world was full of injustice and tyranny. Baha’is are not provided crystal balls on declaration where we can magically work these things out.

The "Son of Man" and "The Lamb of God" to me mean Jesus. In that other epic thread a couple years ago, one of the Baha'is said that he felt the "Lamb that was Slain" was The Bab because The Bab was shot by a firing squad, thus slain, whereas Jesus was crucified. For me there are other verses that make it sound like any reference to and "Lamb" meant Jesus. But, what about the "Son of Man". The verses in that Olivet discourse say that it is the "Son of Man" returning.

Tell me, what was Jesus’s last name. It wasn’t Christ as people didn’t have a last name. So it was Jesus the Christ or Messiah. It is the Messiah or Christ returning, not the same physical Jesus from two thousand years ago. That would be preposterous.

So, why would any Christian think that it wasn't Jesus coming back? Jesus could have easily said that God will send others like me... that I'm going to be killed but my Spirit will live on and be with God. But no, the NT makes it sound like it is Jesus coming back, and, that other thing, that he came back to life physically. So, since we don't know who wrote it. Since traditions were going around. Why couldn't they be wrong? Why couldn't they have written things that Jesus never said nor did, like walk on water and ascend into heaven. Why couldn't they have written an account that makes Jesus the one and only Son of God and that he is coming back on a white horse to punish evil doers and cast the devil into the lake of fire?

I suppose there are miracles and then there are miracles. The verses can be either literal, allegorical or both. Sometimes its clear, other times we can’t possibly know for certain. Did Jesus walk on water? Its possible. Can we know for certain one way or the other? No. Is Jesus returning on a white horse to judge mankind? Doesn’t seem likely to me. Must be a metaphor. How about returning on clouds for all to see? Metaphor again along with the stars falling from heaven. If Christians want to believe its literal, well we have freedom to believe what we want. I can’t take it seriously though and nor should you.

I know Baha'is need to support the Bible and the NT, but there is so much there that Baha'is can't support and have to find an alternative meaning. Like people coming out of their graves and walking around Jerusalem. Like Jesus saying he is flesh and bone, implying that he had come back to life. Like the walking on water thing. Other religions had their myth. Why can't Christianity? In those other myths there could be moral and spiritual lessons to be learned, but the story was fictional. Is the NT somewhere in between? That's what it seems like the Baha'is are doing. The prophecies, when interpreted correctly are accurate and true. The spiritual teachings of Jesus are absolutely the Word of God. He rose from the dead and ascended into heaven? Not real, but symbolic. And Baha'is are the only ones that know which verses and which stories are which.

I don’t believe Baha’is have special insight beyond what’s made clear through Bahá’u’lláh. You don’t need to be a Baha’i to work out Jesus didn’t ascend through the stratosphere into outer space, nor that his same physical body won’t be coming back.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Brother. The Quran does not quote the Bible, it quotes the Torah. The Quran mentions the Torah as a revelation. It doesn't quote the Bible. You have clearly understood the pentateuch as THE TORAH and even the Bahai scripture has. There is a big difference in that. Right or wrong. Whats irrelevant is which book is right or wrong. And thats a huge subject so thats whats irrelevant.

The Quran mentions Jesus and stories about Jesus. Jesus is the Message of the New Testament.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

Apparently not. Up until recently in human history we’ve existed on this planet in geographical isolation. So it doesn’t make any sense to think Muhammad would make the Christian dispensation end anymore than Moses would have put an end to Hinduism. However its clear Christianity is the largest religion on the planet at present but its likely that Islam will become the largest in 50 years. So that’s about 60% of the planet following two of the major Abrahamic Faiths and the percentage is growing steadily.

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

I believe its a hypocritical stance of us, Muslims and Christians in these calculations. Muslims boast saying Islam is rapidly growing as if that makes them or their faith superior. Well, maybe its true, but then in their discourses there are some Muslims who say Shii's are not Muslim. There are also some who say Qadianis are not muslim. I have heard many protestants say catholics are not Christian.

But when calculating population for superiority we calculate all of those people who define themselves as Muslim or Christian. I believe some of us are hypocrites in doing so.

 

[firedragon]

The Quran mentions Jesus and stories about Jesus. Jesus is the Message of the New Testament.

Regards Tony

Well. You have not understood what I said brother. Yes of course the Quran calls Jesus the Messiah. But doesn't say "messiah of the New Testament".

When Quran mentions the Zabur, are we sure its the psalms? How do we assess it is the psalms? Thats because psalms is attributed to David, and in the Quran Zabur is supposed to be the revelation sent to David. So because the author is attributed to be the same, we associate the Qurans mention of Zabur and the Biblical Psalms as the same book.

that was just an example.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Brother. The Quran does not quote the Bible, it quotes the Torah. The Quran mentions the Torah as a revelation. It doesn't quote the Bible. You have clearly understood the pentateuch as THE TORAH and even the Bahai scripture has. There is a big difference in that. Right or wrong. Whats irrelevant is which book is right or wrong. And thats a huge subject so thats whats irrelevant.

By Torah, I was generally referring to the Pentateuch as is commonly understood but Torah can be extended to the rest of the Tanakh too. For that reason along with its use in English translations of the Quran I like it.

Torah (/ˈtɔːrə, ˈtoʊrə/; Hebrew: תּוֹרָה, "Instruction", "Teaching" or "Law") has a range of meanings. It can most specifically mean the first five books (Pentateuch or five books of Moses) of the 24 books of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible). It can also mean the continued narrative from all the 24 books, from the Book of Genesis to the end of the Tanakh (Chronicles), and it can even mean the totality of Jewish teaching, culture, and practice, whether derived from biblical texts or later rabbinic writings.[1] Common to all these meanings, Torah consists of the origin of Jewish peoplehood: their call into being by God, their trials and tribulations, and their covenant with their God, which involves following a way of life embodied in a set of moral and religious obligations and civil laws (halakha).

Torah - Wikipedia

Torah in Islam - Wikipedia

Of course I realise the Quran doesn’t quote from the Bible as the Baha’i writings do. Let’s put the Quran aside for now. No problem.

Great. But the thing is you believe only in certain parts of the Bible as Gods word. Especially the prophecies in Daniel, Ezekiel, Gospels and Revelations. So there is no standard or fair application of one standard.

There’s no one size fits all approach to the Bible or some simplistic formula I can provide to sum up a Baha’i approach to the Bible. I linked this paper to you previously and it captures a range of approaches Baha’is take along a spectrum of siding with the Evangelicals or the liberals. I grew up Christian and have studied the Bible a great deal. There’s clearly a middle way.

A Bahá'í View of the Bible

So whats the analysis of problems in the Olivet discourse?

The topic is vast. You need to ask more specific questions.

Well. Modern scholarship believes they are not written by Peter at all. This is a widely held belief and the justifications are very valid. I think you are claiming your personal view but whats the evidence towards your opinion?

Modern scholarship reflects a diverse range of perspectives from conservative to liberal. There is no unanimous agreement as to the question of authorship of the two Epistles attributed to St Peter.

The Universal House of Justice was asked about the legitimacy of Paul being an Apostle. They take the traditional Evangelical Christian approach by using 2 Peter 3:15-18 to defend Paul.

Apostle Paul, a "False Teacher"?

 

[firedragon]

By Torah, I was generally referring to the Pentateuch as is commonly understood but Torah can be extended to the rest of the Tanakh too. For that reason along with its use in English translations of the Quran I like it.

I understand that of course. But the Quran is not referring to this book they call the Torah. Its an assumption. Anyway, this is why one should not put the Bahai quotes of the Bible and the Quranic mentions of the word Torah, Zaboor, Injeel etc and mash it up into one. Each view point of each scripture are two separate view points. They are polls apart.

Modern scholarship reflects a diverse range of perspectives from conservative to liberal. There is no unanimous agreement as to the question of authorship of the two Epistles attributed to St Peter.

There is nothing unanimous about any book brother. Thats the reality. You can never get all the scholars inn the world to agree to one thing and its absurd to want that. But the majority of critical scholars agree that it was never written by Peter. Especially going against even naming Peter in the first letter. This is a fact.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I believe its a hypocritical stance of us, Muslims and Christians in these calculations. Muslims boast saying Islam is rapidly growing as if that makes them or their faith superior. Well, maybe its true, but then in their discourses there are some Muslims who say Shii's are not Muslim. There are also some who say Qadianis are not muslim. I have heard many protestants say catholics are not Christian.

But when calculating population for superiority we calculate all of those people who define themselves as Muslim or Christian. I believe some of us are hypocrites in doing so.

Baha’is are neither Christian nor Muslim so there’s no direct benefit for us when stating the facts. We do however share some important similarities with both religions.

For the record, Shi’a are Muslims and Catholics are Christians.

 

[Dawnofhope]

There is nothing unanimous about any book brother. Thats the reality. You can never get all the scholars inn the world to agree to one thing and its absurd to want that. But the majority of critical scholars agree that it was never written by Peter. Especially going against even naming Peter in the first letter. This is a fact.

That may be true, but a Baha’i needs to examine the facts to determine the truth, not just accept it on hearsay or even because his faith has an stake in the matter. That is the principle of independent investigation of reality.

…every individual member of humankind is exhorted and commanded to set aside superstitious beliefs, traditions and blind imitation of ancestral forms in religion and investigate reality for himself. Inasmuch as the fundamental reality is one, all religions and nations of the world will become one through investigation of reality. – Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 433.

Baha’u’llah continually urges man to free himself from the superstitions and traditions of the past and become an investigator of reality, for it will then be seen that God has revealed his light many times in order to illumine mankind in the path of evolution, in various countries and through many different prophets, masters and sages. – Abdu’l-Baha, Divine Philosophy, p. 8.

 

[firedragon]

Baha’is are neither Christian nor Muslim so there’s no direct benefit for us when stating the facts. We do however share some important similarities with both religions.

For the record, Shi’a are Muslims and Catholics are Christians.

Well. I consider the same. I know Bahai's perspective too.

But some of us Muslims and Christians are hypocrites. All said above. Peace.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Judaism and Christianity seem to have taught exclusivity. They both reject the other gods and religions of the people around them. I don't know that either of them supported Hinduism and Buddhism or Zoroastrianism as being from the God of Israel.

Now for wars and suffering. I was under the notion that when The Christ returns, he would usher in peace. He would do away with evil and suffering. So which prophecies in the different religions say that the Promised One is going to be rejected and therefore the world would go through more wars and suffering?

Hi CG.

If we refer to history we can observe that whenever a new Teacher arises He is rejected by the current religion even though in all their Holy Books there is mention of another One to come. So instead of accepting that Teacher, they turned away from Him thus dividing religion. If each religion accepted the One foretold to come after them then to this day there would be only one religion. As it is written....

“This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future (Baha’u’llah)

my understanding of the Promised One doing away with wars and suffering and bringing in peace is not referring to an instantaneous magical event but acceptance over time of His new teachings and principles which of course is always voluntary as we have all been given free will to choose to accept or reject God and His Messengers.

it’s common sense that disunity along with thousands of nukes laying around is a danger. We’ve basically git a couple of choices. We can unite now and disarm these monstrosities simultaneously or wait until they get used by some freak accident or deliberately and then disarm them and try to come together as a world community in peace.

But God only sends His Manifestations to this world to offer us a solution and then it’s up to us if we have 2 or ten world wars. God doesn’t interfere. We make our bed we sleep in it.

Baha’u’llah taught humanity that unity was in our best interests and essential if we are to have peace but if we choose a different path then we can only wait and see if we will establish peace before or after an intense period of suffering similar to the last Great War.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

The Second Coming (also known as the Second Advent or the Parousia) is both a Christian and Islamic belief in regards the Return of Jesus. Christians believe He ascended to heaven and shall return in the same manner as recorded in Acts of the Apostles 1:9-11.

Concepts around the Second Coming have evolved over the centuries based on Messianic Prophecies and eschatologies. Views about the nature of the Second Coming vary amongst different Christian denominations and Islamic schools of thought.

Second Coming - Wikipedia

Over the centuries a variety of claimants have come and gone including some extremely infamous characters in modern times. Over the last 200 years the Baha’i Faith and the Ahmadiyya movement are two religions whose founders claimed to be the Return of Christ and continue to maintain sizeable followings.

List of people claimed to be Jesus - Wikipedia

I have just three questions to consider for this thread.

1/ To what extent are beliefs about the Second Coming of Jesus beneficial or harmful?

2/ If the concept is to be taken seriously, what can we reliably determine will be the distinguishing features of Christ when or if He has come?

3/ Are there lessons to be learned from history about the acceptance or rejection of previous Messianic type figures including Christ Himself?

I'm actually disturbed at the Muslim view of the Second Coming (it has "Jesus" coming to kill the pigs and break the cross). Aside from that, I don't find these questions relevant.

As far as I believe, Jesus already returned, and lives within us.

The Bible refers to Anti-Christs as plural. Meaning, there are a bunch of ppl around with a spirit that is evil because it causes harm to them (often suicidal) and tries to drag others to their depths. This ppl are sometimes in advertising or big government, which creates problems but no we shouldn't think of the Antichrist as a single person (though it would be tempting to give that title to corrupt meddler Soros). Likewise, we shouldn't think of Jesus as returning in a single body, but rather a sort of person as meme, someone who is a common thread among several people.

 

[CG Didymus]

Have you ever considered work as a standup cynic/comic? I nominate you.

Thank you, thank you very much. I am truly honored by your nomination. But, there is another honorary degree I have just been given. I have joined the club with you and Old Badger. I have been told by a Baha'i that I have a vendetta against them. It is truly a great honor to be mentioned along with the two of you as people who are out to get the Baha'is.

 

[Vinayaka]

Thank you, thank you very much. I am truly honored by your nomination. But, there is another honorary degree I have just been given. I have joined the club with you and Old Badger. I have been told by a Baha'i that I have a vendetta against them. It is truly a great honor to be mentioned along with the two of you as people who are out to get the Baha'is.

I always knew you had some potential. Vendetta seems almost worse than what I get told, which is 'having an anti-Baha'i agenda.' Congratulations, and welcome to the fold. As you may have noticed, I've managed to stop acting on that agenda for awhile. I trust thou shalt proceed with confidence in my stead.

 

[CG Didymus]

Apparently not. Up until recently in human history we’ve existed on this planet in geographical isolation. So it doesn’t make any sense to think Muhammad would make the Christian dispensation end anymore than Moses would have put an end to Hinduism. However its clear Christianity is the largest religion on the planet at present but its likely that Islam will become the largest in 50 years. So that’s about 60% of the planet following two of the major Abrahamic Faiths and the percentage is growing steadily.

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

I would hope, if the Baha'i Faith is the true and has the up to date message from God, that they would become the largest religion in the world. So when's this "entry by troops" supposed to happen? When is the great upheaval that causes the people of the world to turn to the Baha'is supposed to happen? You know I heard it all 50 years ago from Baha'is and their Pilgrim Notes that by the year 2000 we would have the "lessor peace" and that major cities would get obliterated. I assume that some of those Pilgrim Notes were based on things said by higher ups in the Baha'i Faith and maybe even Shoghi Effendi. What is the latest on when Baha'is expect things to change? But, you know, any upheaval still fits into the Christian beliefs too. They expect things to get worse and then Jesus comes back.

 

[CG Didymus]

I always knew you had some potential. Vendetta seems almost worse than what I get told, which is 'having an anti-Baha'i agenda.' Congratulations, and welcome to the fold. As you may have noticed, I've managed to stop acting on that agenda for awhile. I trust thou shalt proceed with confidence in my stead.

Yes, I am standing on the shoulders of giants like you and Old Badger. I hope to make you both proud.

 

[CG Didymus]

It certainly appears as an allusion to the nativity story of Moses. Whether it literally happened or not, can we really know for certain? It was over two thousand years ago, historical records weren’t great and the world was full of injustice and tyranny. Baha’is are not provided crystal balls on declaration where we can magically work these things out.

We do have a crystal ball, Baha'u'llah. Baha'is believe Jesus is the true Messiah to the Jews. Because of those "prophecies" in Matthew, just on those, I can see why the Jews would reject Christianity. The verses are taken out of context and the events might not have even happened.

Tell me, what was Jesus’s last name. It wasn’t Christ as people didn’t have a last name. So it was Jesus the Christ or Messiah. It is the Messiah or Christ returning, not the same physical Jesus from two thousand years ago. That would be preposterous.

I'll go even further, why use the name Jesus? Why not his Hebrew name? Which was, I guess, Yehoshua. His last name would be Bar Yosef? Whether you or I believe Jesus rose again physically and is coming back physically isn't the problem. Christians believe those things are true.

They wrote the gospels and epistles. They interpreted them. We can call them crazy. We can say they made things up and added them into the story. We can say that maybe they were meant to be symbolic. But, that's us. We don't believe the NT literal... or at all. We can say the modern liberal Christians don't believe those things were literal, but the early Christians did. Would I trust what people 2000 years ago said about the person they say was the Son of God? If they say he walked on water and rose from the dead, who would believe such a thing? A lot of Christians, that's who. We're telling them that they are wrong. And they are telling us we are doomed and going to hell. They NT says the "Lamb" is coming back. The name Jesus is mentioned a couple of times as returning, but does any of it make sense? No, it is not easy to figure out.

They have Jesus in their hearts. They can feel the power of the Holy Spirit. They can count on the whole Bible as being the inerrant Word of God. You have what you believe to be the truth about God in your heart. But you both believe totally different things about God. So, for me, what is the truth? People can believe many different things. Those things can contradict what other people believe. But, for those that believe, they can feel it. It changes their lives. But one or both of them are really true. But, they are believed as true. So what's real? Your beliefs are real to you. And you have Bible verses that "prove" you are right. Their beliefs are real to them, and they have verses that prove it to them. So what you gonna do? Each has to prove the other wrong.

Or, like you've probably have found with liberal Christians, they don't care about taking the Bible literal. Well then, that solves the problem. Should anybody in any religion take their beliefs so serious? Even Baha'is? You've been about the best at listening to the beliefs and opinions of people in the other religions. But, too many Baha'is sure seem to be pushing people away by being to stuck on their beliefs... that the Baha'i Faith is the truth, and therefore the people in the other religions are wrong. That ain't working.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I would hope, if the Baha'i Faith is the true and has the up to date message from God, that they would become the largest religion in the world. So when's this "entry by troops" supposed to happen? When is the great upheaval that causes the people of the world to turn to the Baha'is supposed to happen? You know I heard it all 50 years ago from Baha'is and their Pilgrim Notes that by the year 2000 we would have the "lessor peace" and that major cities would get obliterated. I assume that some of those Pilgrim Notes were based on things said by higher ups in the Baha'i Faith and maybe even Shoghi Effendi. What is the latest on when Baha'is expect things to change? But, you know, any upheaval still fits into the Christian beliefs too. They expect things to get worse and then Jesus comes back.

Only you and each individual can answer the question as to when they may consider the Message of Baha'u'llah as valid.

In the end it is each person that has to determine if their response to that message was based in justice and reason and more than mere entertainment value.

The writings say the Lesser Peace will be firmly established. That has always given me the vision of foundations that have been set. It may require the future to look back and see that it was established in the 20th century.

I see most forward thinking people now see the earth is but one country and mankind its citizens and that is the foundation of the Lesser Peace.

Regards Tony