True and False Prophets - Just and Honest Determination

[Trailblazer]

Actually Bahaollah claimed that he is the sender of prophets like Abraham. Moses, Jesus and Muhammad.

Can you quote Baha'u'llah saying that?

 

[Trailblazer]

For arguments sake we could look at the Bible from an Ahmad point of view.
Do you think it would be possible that we could find Bible verses that sound exactly like events in the life of Ahmad?

No.

Do you think we could also find verses that sound vaguely (twisted) about events in the life of Ahmad?

Maybe.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are still talking but not actually saying anything. You are just saying Baha'u'llah is a true prophet because there are good fruits and evil fruits. You have not shown any difference between Baha'u'llah and Ahmad. You have not clarified any difference between good fruits and evil fruits.

I haven't done that because it is not my job to do.
If people want to know that they have to do their own research.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Of course maybe the Baha'i Faith is true.

There is no evidence that Judaism, Christianity, Islam or Bahaism is true. There is no evidence of existence of God, and no evidence that God sent messages through Moses, Jesus, Muhammad or Bahaollah. Or even Zoroastrianism.
No one should claim God or any thing because of God without providing evidence.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Since you don't offer a clear explanation I will have to say they are both false prophets because the words of the true prophets are structured. They both don't have it.

That is your prerogative even if you did not partake of a honest and just determination of the entire Message.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Where do you think that Jesus was saying He was going from and coming again to?
If you can't answer that then maybe you are just saying that the gospel is wrong here when it has Jesus say that He is coming again.

John 14:2-3 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Jesus was addressing His disciples.
Jesus said that he was going to His Father's House to prepare a place for His disciples. The Father's House is in heaven.
Jesus said "I will come again, and receive you unto myself"
We know that Jesus did not come back to this world again during the lifetimes of the disciples.
Jesus could not come back to earth again NOW and take His disciples to heaven because His disciples are no longer on earth.
That is how we know that "I will come again" is not referring to Jesus coming again in this age.

Jesus must have said that He was coming again or they would not ask Him about it and the signs of His coming.

Not necessarily. Maybe they mistakenly believed that Jesus was coming again because they hoped that He would come again, just like all the others who believed and hoped.

There is nothing in the NT where Jesus says He is coming again, only verses where other people say He is coming again. I don't know where they ever got that idea so I have to conclude it was only what they had believed and hoped for.

That is right. That is what I said. Baha'u'llah came in his own authority. He said things about himself and Jesus etc etc and he did not show anyone that he had any authority from God to say those things. If he had come in the authority of God then he would have fulfilled the prophecies about the return of Christ without denying them and/or changing the meaning.

Baha'u'llah came on God's authority and He fulfilled the prophecies about the return of Christ according to their true meaning, but I am not going around that block again.

"Clouds of heaven" means what it says, it does not need redefining, especially by the man who wants to fulfill the prophecy with that expression in it.
If you are looking to the Bible to show you that Baha'u'llah is whom he said, then you don't let Baha'u'llah tell you what the prophecies really that he should have fulfilled, really mean. If you do that it means that you just believe Baha'u'llah already and trust him to change the prophecies to whatever he wants to. Let the con man tell you what the prophecies really mean. Hmmm.

Anyone who has studied the Bible knows how much symbolism there is in the Bible. Clouds is just another word that symbolizes something.
Clouds of heaven does not mean physical clouds. Nobody drops down from the sky in physical clouds.

I am not looking to the Bible to show you that Baha'u'llah is whom He said He was. It is you who wants me to show you that, but since you cannot understand what verses mean, and insist they mean what they do not mean, that is an impossibility.

Maybe Jesus will fly around for a while so that everyone can see Him.
Maybe people will say "Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Hmm maybe it is Jesus, that is what He said He would do."
Then Jesus will resurrect His disciples and judge the nations etc etc and nobody will be able to stop Him and it will be pretty clear to everyone what is happening.

Dream on. If you think this is a realistic belief I feel sorry for you.
That is not even worth responding to, it is too ridiculous.

Certainly not become a Baha'i with a founder who alters the meaning of the Bible prophecies and does not actually fulfill any of them.

Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies for the return of Christ and nothing had to be changed.
That is all explained in the book Thief in the Night by William Sears.

It is too bad that you have to insist that you know what the prophecies mean in order to hang onto your beliefs.
Your deathbed might be your last chance.

Baha'u'llah did not come on the clouds.
Baha'u'llah did not raise the dead.
Baha'ullah did not judge the living and the dead.

Baha'u'llah did all of the above.

Baha'u'llah did not bring world peace.

The coming of Baha'u'llah will bring world peace.
The prophecies say that world peace will eventually be established but it will unfold gradually.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Baha’u’llah was the Prince of Peace and the Lord of hosts. World peace will be established during His religious dispensation. Please note that the prophecy does not say 'when' peace will be established, but where it says there shall be no end to the peace that indicates that it won't happen all at once but rather it will unfold gradually. That is exactly what is happening right now. The same is true for the government. It says that there shall be 'no end' to the government which means it will begin and be established gradually and continue to develop over time. The government will be more developed in the future as the prophecy says (increase in government).

Baha’u’llah set up a 'system of government' and it has already been established among the Baha’is. The institutions of that government are fully operational, but still in their infancy. What we now refer to as Local Spiritual assemblies (LSAs) and will eventually evolve into what will be called Houses of Justice.

Baha'u'llah is not ruling in the New Jerusalem on the throne of God.

Baha'u'llah is ruling in the New Jerusalem on the throne of God.

The New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, refers to the new Law of God that came by way of Revelation of Baha'u'llah.

“The time foreordained unto the peoples and kindreds of the earth is now come. The promises of God, as recorded in the holy Scriptures, have all been fulfilled. Out of Zion hath gone forth the Law of God, and Jerusalem, and the hills and land thereof, are filled with the glory of His Revelation. Happy is the man that pondereth in his heart that which hath been revealed in the Books of God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Meditate upon this, O ye beloved of God, and let your ears be attentive unto His Word, so that ye may, by His grace and mercy, drink your fill from the crystal waters of constancy, and become as steadfast and immovable as the mountain in His Cause.

In the Book of Isaiah it is written: “Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of His majesty.” No man that meditateth upon this verse can fail to recognize the greatness of this Cause, or doubt the exalted character of this Day—the Day of God Himself. ”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 12-14

Baha'u'llah has fulfilled nothing but Baha'is claim that he has fulfilled things. You cannot point to one Bible prophecy however that you can say has been fulfilled in any concrete way that anyone can see is true.

Baha'u'llah has fulfilled all the Bible prophecies for the return of Christ. I have shown this numerous times.
Jesus has not fulfilled ANY Bible prophecies for the return of Christ because Jesus never planned to return to earth.

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

John 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.

 

[CG Didymus]

There is no evidence that Judaism, Christianity, Islam or Bahaism is true. There is no evidence of existence of God, and no evidence that God sent messages through Moses, Jesus, Muhammad or Bahaollah. Or even Zoroastrianism.
No one should claim God or any thing because of God without providing evidence.

Sure, there's plenty of evidence for those that want to believe it.

Things like... "The Scriptures say so." Or, "Our prophet says so." But then each supposed manifestation in each religion didn't necessarily say the same thing about God. And since Baha'is do include Hinduism and Buddhism, there is a question as to how many Gods there are or if there even is a God.

But their particular "belief" about God certainly becomes real to them and a necessary part of what they believe. Without that unprovable belief, what would they have? So, they have to fight, argue and find ways to show just how real their God is. And they have to fight, argue and find ways to "prove" the Gods of other people aren't true.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is no evidence that Judaism, Christianity, Islam or Bahaism is true. There is no evidence of existence of God, and no evidence that God sent messages through Moses, Jesus, Muhammad or Bahaollah. Or even Zoroastrianism.
No one should claim God or any thing because of God without providing evidence.

I would offer no one should reject God, as there is truckloads of spiritual evidence.

If one does a just and honest determination of the life of the Messengers, that is a great place to start.

Regards Tony

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would offer no one should reject God, as there is truckloads of spiritual evidence.

If one does a just and honest determination of the life of the Messengers, that is a great place to start.

That is not verifiable evidence.
What was so different in the message of these people whom you term as messengers/manifestations?
There are thousands of gurus, swamies, faqirs in India (male and female), who spout similar (choose one or even multiple):

balderdash, baloney, bull, bunk, drivel, foolishness, gibberish, hogwash, hooey, jive, palaver, poppycock, prattle, rubbish, silliness, trash.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Without that unprovable belief, what would they have? So, they have to fight, argue and find ways to show just how real their God is. And they have to fight, argue and find ways to "prove" the Gods of other people aren't true.

That is what 'God of Gaps' is about. Is it neccessary to have a unproven belief? That is all that these people do - argue, fight, loot, maim, rape, kill. It is a method in madness. A nice way to show 'God's love'! How can they prove anything when you yourself accept that it is unprovable? CG, just think about what you have written.

 

[Sumadji]

The hundred million dollar question is why you have to compare Baha'u'llah to Jesus.

The only times I post on these threads is in response to Baha’i comparing Baha’u’llah to Jesus or other Biblical figures and distorting and cherry-picking from the New Testament to support their claims. Your whole post #627 above is dedicated to comparing Baha'u'llah to Jesus, and so are countless other of your posts on this thread alone.

The second hundred million dollar question is why one of them has to be superior to the other in your view.

It is the Baha’i who regard Baha’u’llah as the return of the Christ in the station of the Father, above the station of Jesus Christ the Son. You just said it yourself, right in this same post

Two can play at this game. Baha'u'llah is the Greatest Name, so Jesus is nothing compared to Baha'u'llah.

Anyway, since I’m not interested in trying to compare a false Christ to the true one I only respond to Baha’i claims and distortions of the Christian scriptures that may mislead others who don’t know.

Ah, so you say that right now someone somewhere has got the original letters of Paul but you have no idea where they are or who's in charge of these documents that are two millennia old. I do thank you for your time & effort.

No I do not say that. I say that the authentic letters of Paul have a provenance recognized by historical experts on the subject who are not apologists. They are happy that the Pauline letters in modern editions of the New Testament basically faithfully reproduce the original words of Paul.

The original copies of Julius Caesar's writings, or those of Plato do not exist.

But what you seem to be saying is that because Baha’u’llah wrote down his thoughts where Jesus did not, and because his original writings survive, that makes his thoughts authentic and that makes him the returned Christ?

Those of us that doubt Christianity do that. We say it was all myth... taking all the power away from those Christians that keep telling us that the Bible is the inerrant "Word of God"... And that Jesus is the only way.

The mostly American, evangelical ‘we Christians club’ does not speak for all Christians, as you know

 

[WonderingWorrier]

That is your prerogative even if you did not partake of a honest and just determination of the entire Message.

Regards Tony

I am open to listening to your explanation. The problem is you haven't explained anything. Which means you only accept anything Baha'u'llah says by the assumption that he is right.

Your belief is of assumption and repetition. You accept everything, but you don't actually know anything. That is why you can't explain it.

What do you think an honest and just determination is?

 

[WonderingWorrier]

My first thought was that we were going around in circles, one time saying that things could have many meanings and other times saying there was always one meaning. Now my thinking is that it's not healthy to focus on what we don't like but rather to bring our efforts into agreement and harmony. That's where I'm studying now.

Different words that share the same position would all have one meaning because the position is the meaning of the words. It is because of the shared position that one word can be as another, or another.

 

[WonderingWorrier]

I haven't done that because it is not my job to do.
If people want to know that they have to do their own research.

I have done my own research. I was asking about your research. With no explanation it seems clear that you don't know a difference between a true prophet and a false prophet.

So you don't actually know if Baha'u'llah is a true prophet or not. Your belief is only based on the assumption that he is.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Of course if you said that there'd be a disagreement...
My thinking is that if I did not say that I would be lying about what I believe.

I can only move on to Baha'u'llah if I am honest about what I believe about the Bible and everything else.

“Truthfulness is the foundation of all human virtues. Without truthfulness progress and success, in all the worlds of God, are impossible for any soul. When this holy attribute is established in man, all the divine qualities will also be acquired.”
– Abdu’l-Baha, quoted by Shoghi Effendi in The Advent of Divine Justice, p. 22.

”Consider that the worst of qualities and most odious of attributes, which is the foundation of all evil, is lying. No worse or more blameworthy quality than this can be imagined to exist; it is the destroyer of all human perfections, and the cause of innumerable vices. There is no worse characteristic than this; it is the foundation of all evils.” Bahá’í World Faith, p. 321

It's good for us to stick to Baha'u'llah's teaching when discussing faith.

Something I've been learning here is the fact that while nobody has found any quote from an authoritative source that says the Bible is not the word of God, neither have any of us produced a similar quote say that it is. While there's still another source that I could check later, for now my thinking is that a core Baha'i belief is the oneness of religion and the oneness of God's messengers and that the idea of the Bible being the word of God is in the opinion department.

While anyone can give an opinion of the Bible, it'd be good to mention that the thought was from the Katabi Mesay.

 

[Pete in Panama]

Different words that share the same position would all have one meaning because the position is the meaning of the words. It is because of the shared position that one word can be as another, or another.

I'm not sure how I could repeat what you're saying in my own words w/o your saying I'm misquoting you. Not a problem, everyone has a right to say what they think and what they don't think.

 

[Pete in Panama]

...No I do not say that. I say that the authentic letters of Paul have a provenance recognized by historical experts on the subject who are not apologists. They are happy that the Pauline letters in modern editions of the New Testament basically faithfully reproduce the original words of Paul.

The original copies of Julius Caesar's writings, or those of Plato do not exist.

But what you seem to be saying is that because Baha’u’llah wrote down his thoughts where Jesus did not, and because his original writings survive, that makes his thoughts authentic and that makes him the returned Christ?...

Perhaps our misunderstanding came from how I read your post...

Nonsense. Paul was the first Christian writer, his authentic letters before 65 ad and earlier. Do you dispute the authenticity or dating? Or transmission?...

--and when I read the parts about "authentic" and "dating" my poor mind raced to assume you were talking about actual letters. Maybe I could guess is that you weren't but my guessing may very well draw out some other objection on your part so I'll confine my post to wishing you well and thanking your for your time & effort.

 

[Truthseeker]

Do you think you can identify true prophets and false prophets by the order they appear?

Nope, obviously not.

 

[Sumadji]

Perhaps our misunderstanding came from how I read your post...

--and when I read the parts about "authentic" and "dating" my poor mind raced to assume you were talking about actual letters. Maybe I could guess is that you weren't but my guessing may very well draw out some other objection on your part so I'll confine my post to wishing you well and thanking your for your time & effort.

Thank you. Not all of the letters attributed to Paul are now thought to have really been written by him. But seven of the letters are regarded as authentically written by Paul himself.

Best wishes

 

[Truthseeker]

Except... many of the times, it tells you... this is a parable... Jesus was talking symbolically. One of my main arguments with Baha'is is why they make the resurrection story symbolic? They might say, "Because we know, scientifically, that it can't be literal." Yes, now we know that. Did people know that 2000 years ago?

The story is told as if it was all true. For me, if it's not, then why can't it just be a fictional, made up story to made Jesus into a God?

It could be fictional, I don't really know. I prefer to acknowledge that I don't really know the truth of that. To me, whether the story is symbolic or fictional is not important.