True and False Prophets - Just and Honest Determination

[Trailblazer]

Can you please explain to me the changing of laws to clarify your cloud.

"These “clouds” signify, in one sense, the annulment of laws, the abrogation of former Dispensations, the repeal of rituals and customs current 72 amongst men, the exalting of the illiterate faithful above the learned opposers of the Faith. In another sense, they mean the appearance of that immortal Beauty in the image of mortal man, with such human limitations as eating and drinking, poverty and riches, glory and abasement, sleeping and waking, and such other things as cast doubt in the minds of men, and cause them to turn away. All such veils are symbolically referred to as “clouds.” "
(The Kitab-i-Iqan, pp. 71-72)

Clouds are veils that get in the way of man's recognizing the new messenger of God and cause men to turn away from Him.
The annulment of laws that were present in former Dispensations is one of those veils.

Do you think in the time of Jesus everyone who studied the Torah needed to forget everything in the Torah because it had become a new time for new laws? Then the same thing for those that studied the Gospels needed to forget everything said and move onto the new laws of Muhammad? Then muslims needed to forget everything about the Quran and move to the new laws of Baha'u'llah?

I think that anyone who recognizes Jesus and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.
I think that anyone who recognizes Muhammad and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.
I think that anyone who recognizes Baha'u'llah and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.

Do you think all Bahai will need to forget about Baha'u'llah and his writings after around 1000 years when his age ends?

No, I don't think that they will need to forget about Baha'u'llah and His writings after this age ends.

When the time comes that all Bahai will need to figure out who the next person is that has the next change of laws.

However, I think they should recognize the new messenger of God that comes and follow the laws that He reveals.

Do you think it might be difficult for all Bahai to reach an agreement of who is Baha'u'llahs replacement when the time comes?

Judging by past history, I think it will be difficult for Baha'is to recognize the next messenger of God.
However, that is very far in the future so nobody really knows. If Baha'is are more spiritually advanced by then, it might be easier to recognize the next messenger.

 

[Brian2]

I think that anyone who recognizes Jesus and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.
I think that anyone who recognizes Muhammad and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.
I think that anyone who recognizes Baha'u'llah and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.

Jesus did give a new commandment, that we should love one another as He loved us. (John 13:34-35) This was not a new law however as to love God and our neighbour are said by Jesus to be the most important laws given through Moses. (Matthew 22:34-40)
So we find that there is not really any new law given by Jesus. What Jesus gave is a new heart and the Holy Spirit to dwell in a disciple to guide and teach and strengthen a disciple. (interestingly this giving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost in the New Testament is a remembrance of the law given by God thru Moses at Mt Sinai)
What more can be done? God gives His Spirit to guide and teach and strengthen us in our lives.
The Law of Moses is considered to be lacking in that it cannot perfect us and just shows us where we are lacking and sin. IOW the Christian life is not obedience to laws.
John 1:17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father’s side, has made Him known.…
Jesus came to not only give us forgiveness for our sins but to reveal God to us.
Any cancelling out what Jesus did on the cross and going back to making obedience to law as the way to salvation is going backwards and into a lesser covenant. This is the whole thing that Paul was against with his controversy with the Jewish Christians who wanted the gentiles to be circumcised and obey the law of Moses.
There is nothing better that having the Spirit of God in us to teach us to love, which is the fulfilment of the law.
No other law can replace that and be better. Anything else is going backwards.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But I marvel on their creativity.

The Greatest marvel I see, is the effort you go to to try to make it all so unclear.

Regards Tony

 

[WonderingWorrier]

Clouds are veils that get in the way of man's recognizing the new messenger of God and cause men to turn away from Him.
The annulment of laws that were present in former Dispensations is one of those veils.

Ok. So you are saying those not recognising the removal and changing of Gods laws is the cloud.

I think that anyone who recognizes Jesus and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.
I think that anyone who recognizes Muhammad and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.
I think that anyone who recognizes Baha'u'llah and follows Him should follow the new laws that He revealed.

But do you think they should have changed from old laws as soon as the new laws were revealed?
To forget about the old laws when new laws have come. Removing the cloud.

No, I don't think that they will need to forget about Baha'u'llah and His writings after this age ends.

But how can those that follow the replacement of Baha'u'llah do so without removing the old law of Baha'u'llah?

However, I think they should recognize the new messenger of God that comes and follow the laws that He reveals.

Do you think they should recognise a new law that has nothing to do with the law of Baha'u'llah?

Judging by past history, I think it will be difficult for Baha'is to recognize the next messenger of God.
However, that is very far in the future so nobody really knows. If Baha'is are more spiritually advanced by then, it might be easier to recognize the next messenger.

Do you think on the day after Baha'u'llahs birthday 13th of November in the year 2817 there will be multiple people putting their hands up all saying they are Baha'u'llahs replacement. Each one of them with new laws to follow.

This is according to Baha'u'llah:
"Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor". Baha'u'llah.

Once that thousand years is up Bahai will have a big problem if they don't have super spiritual powers by then to recognise who the true messenger is. Judging by the present time it will be difficult for every Bahai to recognise the next messenger of God and their new laws.

 

[Brian2]

I believe that certain verses in the New Testament are untrue because I accept the teachings of Baha'u'llah which disagree with the New Testament, but even if I was never a Bahai, I would not believe that those verses are true; e.g. rising from the dead and meeting Jesus in the clouds. I cannot believe things that are absurd.

There are many verses that I believe are true but I just interpret them in a different way from Christians.

No, I did not admit to that. Baha'u'llah did not weigh in on the truth of the Bible.

Saying that there are certain verses in the New Testament which are untrue because you accept the teachings of Baha'u'llah is the same as denying the truth of the Bible. And we know that it is a lot more than a verse here and there. It is so much that it is enough to deny the gospel message that Jesus told us of. And certainly Baha'i does not teach the gospel message of Jesus and even says that Jesus dispensation is over. There certainly was no reason for the Spirit of Truth to remind anyone of what Jesus had said and done when Jesus dispensation is non existent now.

There is also a particular context to that passage so you need to read the whole passage to understand what He meant. He was addressing Muslims who claimed that the Bible had been corrupted and saying that the Christians needed the Bible until the rise of the sun of the Muḥammadan Dispensation.

The context does not change the meaning. We have the same scriptures now as we did when Muhammad was alive.

No, Jesus never said that He would return to this world. He said the exact opposite, which is why He has not returned and never will.

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.

Jesus was going to go to heaven and not be seen by anyone, but when combined with the verses where Jesus said He would return we can see that you are taking those passages out of context.
But you missed my point that Jesus actually did say that He (not someone else) would return, and did say that He (and nobody else), the Son who is given the authority to judge everyone, will come and do that.

Baha'is believe that a living human consists of a body and spirit (soul) but when the body dies it remains dead and the soul crosses over to the spiritual world and takes on another kind of body, a spiritual body. This is congruent with what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:35-51.

Jesus rose bodily and that is an indisputable part of the gospel unless you choose to deny it. Our spiritual resurrection body will be similar to Jesus body, our current body will be transformed to be immortal and incorruptible.

I wish you would stop saying that this is just part of the New Testament that I reject because it does not agree with Baha'u'llah. That is not the reason I reject it. I reject it because it is patently absurd to believe these verses if you interpret them literally.

1Thessalonians 4
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

As in the Bible, the return of Jesus is the end of the age, the biggest thing since the creation and the first coming of Jesus 2000 years ago. The dead will be resurrected and judged and the New Jerusalem will come down from heaven.
If you think that Jesus is just one of many Messengers and that life will go on as usual then that is not the message of the New Testament. It sort of boils down to who Jesus is, the one and only Messiah or one of many who all come along and say various versions of "OK people, be nice to one another and worship God".

John 16:16 Jesus went on to say, “In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.”

That verse does not refer to Jesus returning to this world. His disciples could not see Jesus again in this world since as we know Jesus did not return during their lifetimes.

John 16:22 And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.

Yes, Jesus will see His disciples again in heaven, which fits together perfectly with this verse.


John 14:2 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.

You miss the point I was making, and in the process you end up showing that the point I was making is true.
My point is that Jesus said in John 16:16 “In a little while you will see me no more,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"
Taken literally and out of context (as you do with the other times that Jesus says "The world will see me no more...." and "I am in the world no more....." ) John 16:16 means that the disciples would never ever see Jesus again.
But we find out later that the disciples will see Jesus again, so we should not be taking John 16:16 out of context and literally.
So we do not take the other passages literally and out of context. We consider where Jesus said that He would come to judge the earth etc and that every eye will see Him etc We understand it all in context and do not make any part of the message untrue.
You have to make parts of the message untrue because you are trying to justify Baha'u'llah as being whom he claims instead of just listening to the New Testament to see what that teaches us.

Other parts of the New Testament say that the world would see Him again but that was only the belief and hope of those writers.

It is more that just the belief and hope of those writers, it is the inspired message of God for His people and the world.
If you want to justify Baha'u'llah it is not that, it is untrue.

It does not make sense to say that Christianity and Paul teach something and so it is a true belief. That does show where you are coming from however and that you are not really trying to make a logical argument. Your arguments are, the Bible says it so I believe it and so the Bible and Christianity are right.

My argument is not that Baha'u'llah says it so I believe it since Baha'u'llah did not say much about the Bible.

You are justifying Baha'u'llah and so have to say that big and important parts of the Bible are not true.
It makes sense to say that a Messenger from God agrees with other Messengers from God. All Baha'is Messengers disagree with each other.
If Jesus message and what He did is true and forever and for everyone then the other "Messengers" have false messages.
It has something to do with Satan disguising himself as an angel of light to lead people astray. (2Cor 11:14)

 

[Trailblazer]

The Greatest marvel I see, is the effort you go to to try to make it all so unclear.

to make something that is so clear unclear.

 

[Trailblazer]

Ok. So you are saying those not recognising the removal and changing of Gods laws is the cloud.

I am saying that when a new messenger of God removes or changes God's laws that can cloud peoples' judgment and thus prevent them from recognizing the new messenger of God.

But do you think they should have changed from old laws as soon as the new laws were revealed?
To forget about the old laws when new laws have come. Removing the cloud.

The cloud is removed as soon as they recognize the new messenger of God.
I think they should follow the new laws as soon as they recognize the messenger who revealed those laws.

But how can those that follow the replacement of Baha'u'llah do so without removing the old law of Baha'u'llah?

If a new law is revealed by the next messenger of God they should follow that law, not the law of Baha'u'llah.

Do you think they should recognise a new law that has nothing to do with the law of Baha'u'llah?

If a new law is revealed by the next messenger of God they should follow that law, even if it has nothing to do with the law of Baha'u'llah.

Do you think on the day after Baha'u'llahs birthday 13th of November in the year 2817 there will be multiple people putting their hands up all saying they are Baha'u'llahs replacement. Each one of them with new laws to follow.

The year would be 2852, since this age started with the Revelation of Baha'u'llah in 1852 AD. I have no idea if people will be making claims to be the next messenger of God, with new laws to follow, but that could happen.

This is according to Baha'u'llah:
"Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor". Baha'u'llah.

Once that thousand years is up Bahai will have a big problem if they don't have super spiritual powers by then to recognise who the true messenger is. Judging by the present time it will be difficult for every Bahai to recognise the next messenger of God and their new laws.

Who knows what the Baha'is will be like in 1000 years? Hopefully people in general will be a lot more spiritual than they are now, but I don't see that happening until more people recognize Baha'u'llah and follow His teachings and laws. Hopefully Baha'is won't be so attached to Baha'u'llah that they fail to recognize the new messenger, making the same mistake that Christians have made by being so attached to Jesus.

 

[Trailblazer]

Saying that there are certain verses in the New Testament which are untrue because you accept the teachings of Baha'u'llah is the same as denying the truth of the Bible. And we know that it is a lot more than a verse here and there. It is so much that it is enough to deny the gospel message that Jesus told us of.

I believe that there are certain verses in the New Testament which are untrue. Some of the verses I believe to be untrue because I accept the teachings of Baha'u'llah which contradict those verses, but some of them I believe are untrue because I don't believe that everything Paul authored was taught by Jesus.

The Pauline epistles, also known as Epistles of Paul or Letters of Paul, are the thirteen books of the New Testament attributed to Paul the Apostle, although the authorship of some is in dispute.
Pauline epistles - Wikipedia

And certainly Baha'i does not teach the gospel message of Jesus and even says that Jesus dispensation is over. There certainly was no reason for the Spirit of Truth to remind anyone of what Jesus had said and done when Jesus dispensation is non existent now.

What Jesus said is still important even though His dispensation is over.

Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

The context does not change the meaning. We have the same scriptures now as we did when Muhammad was alive.

What Baha'u'lah was saying is that the Christians needed the NT scriptures until they had the Qur'an.
Personally, I don't think that the Qur'an replaces the NT scriptures, but that is what he was implying when addressing the Muslims.

Jesus was going to go to heaven and not be seen by anyone, but when combined with the verses where Jesus said He would return we can see that you are taking those passages out of context.

The problem is that there are no verses where Jesus said He would return.

But you missed my point that Jesus actually did say that He (not someone else) would return, and did say that He (and nobody else), the Son who is given the authority to judge everyone, will come and do that.

Jesus actually did not say that He (not someone else) would return, and did say that He (and nobody else) would return.
During His dispensation Jesus was the Son who is given the authority to judge everyone, but that dispensation is over.

Jesus rose bodily and that is an indisputable part of the gospel unless you choose to deny it.

I choose to disbelieve it.

Our spiritual resurrection body will be similar to Jesus body,

There is nothing in the NT that says that and as such it is just a man-made Christian doctrine.

our current body will be transformed to be immortal and incorruptible.

Our current body will die and be buried in the ground and decompose.
After our body dies our soul will get a new form, a spiritual body which will be immortal and incorruptible.

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” (Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194)

“The world beyond is as different from this world as this world is different from that of the child while still in the womb of its mother. When the soul attaineth the Presence of God, it will assume the form that best befitteth its immortality and is worthy of its celestial habitation.”
(Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 157)

As in the Bible, the return of Jesus is the end of the age, the biggest thing since the creation and the first coming of Jesus 2000 years ago. The dead will be resurrected and judged and the New Jerusalem will come down from heaven.

That is a Christian belief that came about by misinterpreting the NT and listening to the false teachings of Paul.

If you think that Jesus is just one of many Messengers and that life will go on as usual then that is not the message of the New Testament. It sort of boils down to who Jesus is, the one and only Messiah or one of many who all come along and say various versions of "OK people, be nice to one another and worship God".

It does boil down to who Jesus is. Jesus is the Messiah, but he is not the only messenger of God. Of course that is not in the NT since the NT was about Jesus, not about the other messengers.

You miss the point I was making, and in the process you end up showing that the point I was making is true.
My point is that Jesus said in John 16:16 “In a little while you will see me no more,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"
Taken literally and out of context (as you do with the other times that Jesus says "The world will see me no more...." and "I am in the world no more....." ) John 16:16 means that the disciples would never ever see Jesus again.
But we find out later that the disciples will see Jesus again, so we should not be taking John 16:16 out of context and literally.

The disciples did see Jesus again in heaven, but they will never see Jesus on earth again.

So we do not take the other passages literally and out of context. We consider where Jesus said that He would come to judge the earth etc and that every eye will see Him etc We understand it all in context and do not make any part of the message untrue.

The problem is that Jesus never said that He would come to judge the earth etc and that every eye will see Him etc. Other people said those things about Jesus maybe because they believed them at the time, but it never played out and never will.

You have to make parts of the message untrue because you are trying to justify Baha'u'llah as being whom he claims instead of just listening to the New Testament to see what that teaches us.

I am listening to the New Testament to see what it says and that is why I know that Jesus is never coming back to this world.

It is more that just the belief and hope of those writers, it is the inspired message of God for His people and the world.

It was the belief and hope of those writers that Jesus would return. God would not inspire such a message, although He might allow people to believe it.

You are justifying Baha'u'llah and so have to say that big and important parts of the Bible are not true.

The big and important parts? The important parts are the teachings of Jesus, not the resurrection stories which were written decades after Jesus died, and certainly not the Epistles of Paul.

It makes sense to say that a Messenger from God agrees with other Messengers from God. All Baha'is Messengers disagree with each other.

I never claimed that all the messengers agree with each other.

If Jesus message and what He did is true and forever and for everyone then the other "Messengers" have false messages.

Jesus' message and what He did is true and forever and for everyone but that does not mean that the other "Messengers" have false messages.

It has something to do with Satan disguising himself as an angel of light to lead people astray. (2Cor 11:14)

It was not Satan who led people astray, it was Paul.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Greatest marvel I see, is the effort you go to to try to make it all so unclear.

Regards Tony

Hmmm? I make it unclear?

But they also make Muhammad and the Bab "Christs". So, that means the Bible has to have four Messiah that were prophesied.

It's so confusing that Baha'is have confused AI...
AI Overview

Yes, Baha'is believe that Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah are all considered "anointed ones of God" or "Manifestations of God," meaning they were divine messengers sent by God to guide humanity at different stages of its spiritual development, with Baha'u'llah being considered the most recent and complete manifestation of God's will.

AI Overview

No, Baha'is do not believe that Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha'u'llah were all "Christs" in the Christian sense; instead, they believe all three figures were "Manifestations of God," meaning they were divine teachers sent by God at different times in history to progressively reveal God's will to humanity, with Baha'u'llah being considered the most recent and complete manifestation of God.

Poor AI... It doesn't know that Messiah, Christ and Anointed One of God are the same thing.

What else is unclear? Oh, how about Satan in Christianity. It sounds pretty clear in the NT Satan is real. But no, the Baha'i Faith says he's not real.

And again I have to mention the resurrection. The Gospels make it clear. Jesus rose from the dead. Acts says he showed himself to be alive by many proofs. But no, Baha'is say his body died and stayed dead.

And also again, got to mention old Isaac and Ishmael. The Bible says it was Isaac taken to be sacrificed by Abraham, but no, Baha'is say it was Ishmael.

Since there is that prophecy that Baha'is use that does mention Mt. Carmel, then why wouldn't it be clear in that other prophecy? Why make it so confusing?

So, you got your prophecies that say Mt. Carmel. But but aren't satisfied with that. They got to make all the prophecies that say Mt. Zion and Jerusalem to also really mean Mt. Carmel.

So, let's see if I got this right... God meant Mt. Carmel but said Mt. Zion, but didn't worry about it, because he new hundreds of years later Baha'u'llah would clear things up, and tell us the "true" meaning. Sounds more like pulling a switcheroo, because Baha'u'llah never had anything to do with Mt. Zion or Jerusalem.

How how are we supposed to judge fairly? If it don't add up, if it don't make sense, then maybe Baha'is are just making things up? Why would just trust them that the meanings have been changed? Like "woes" means manifestations, Achor means Akka, and in one, when it says he or they will come to you from Assyria, Assyria is changed to Persia, because Persia was once part of the Assyrian Empire. Which would be like saying the U.S. is England, because it was once part of their empire?

Now let's just look at the three "woes". The word "woe" doesn't mean a "manifestation" of God. So, I'd think that it must be the context of what is being said during those "woes" that clear things up and shows that what happens during each "woe" is about a manifestation.

But I don't think it is. Could you clear it up for me? It clearly says when the first "woe" ends and when the second "woe" ends and the third "woe" begins. What does anything that happens during the time of any of those "woes" make it clear that the first "woe" is about Muhammad. The second "woe" is about the Bab. And the third "woe" is about Baha'u'llah? Could you clear it up for me and show me?

 

[CG Didymus]

But do you think they should have changed from old laws as soon as the new laws were revealed?
To forget about the old laws when new laws have come. Removing the cloud.

Supposedly, these were God's Laws. But in ancient times there were several people with different Gods and different laws. Baha'is don't deal with them. They make it sound like the laws in the Hebrew Bible were meant for all people. Then those laws were replaced with a set of new laws that were brought from God by Jesus. But what were those laws? But then with Muhammad and Baha'u'llah there was again a bunch of laws.

None of these "laws" of God were ever universal and given to all people. Except now, with Baha'i laws, they are supposed to someday be for everyone. It was never the way Baha'is make it seem... That one manifestation brought some laws, then those laws were replaced by the next manifestation.

 

[Brian2]

Using that translation doesn't change the fact that Daniel 7:13-14 is not referring to Jesus.

Daniel 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

Psalm 2:6 “I have installed my king
on Zion, my holy mountain.”
7 I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:
He said to me, “You are my son;
today I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You will break them with a rod of iron[b];
you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”
10 Therefore, you kings, be wise;
be warned, you rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear
and celebrate his rule with trembling.
12 Kiss his son, or he will be angry
and your way will lead to your destruction,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

It is the Son of God who rules from Zion and who inherits the ends of the earth in Psalm 2 so it must also be the Son in Daniel 7:13,14 who rules the nations forever.
Interpretation of much of the Bible is very easy and it is very easy to show that Baha'u'llah is not whom he claims to be in the Bible, but that he wants to claim the prophecies about Jesus as being about him (Baha'u'llah). But as I just pointed out, in this case that cannot be.
It is the same with Isa 9:1-7. That child sits and rules on the throne of David forever. That is Jesus according to Luke 1:32 and other NT quotes.
So the Bible shows that the claims of Baha'u'llah are not true unless the Bible is not true.

I never said that a spiritual body is a spirit. I only ever said that a spirit (soul) has a spiritual body after the physical body dies.

According to the Bible, there are two different kinds of bodies. There is no such thing as a physical body that is also a spiritual body.

1 Corinthians 15
New Living Translation
40 There are also bodies in the heavens and bodies on the earth. The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies.
42 It is the same way with the resurrection of the dead. Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever. 43 Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. 44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

This agrees with the Bahai teachings.

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Pages 193-196

Jesus resurrection spiritual body was both physical and a spiritual body. The spiritual body is not necessarily made from spirit. It is no wonder that Baha'i denies the physical resurrection. Baha'u'llah's teachings can't cope with it and so the resurrection story must be false.
The New Living Translation makes it plain.
1Cor 15:42 It is the same way with the resurrection of the dead. Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever. 43 Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. 44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

The Ancient of Days is God. Baha'u'llah never claimed to be God.

Baha'u'llah claimed to be the Ancient of Days,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the guy in the Daniel 7:13,14 prophecy.
Baha'u'llah also claims to be the one like a son of man in that prophecy.

Baha'u'llah was the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, the one who was given dominion is the one whom all rulers will worship and obey.

The King of Kings and Lord of Lords in Revelation is The Word (Jesus of John 1:1) when you read the passage.
Baha'u'llah wants to be whom the Bible declare is Jesus.
Baha'u'llah wants to be God, the Ancient of Days, also.
I suppose it is easy for you because all you do is say that the Bible must be wrong because Baha'u'llah can't be wrong.
But Baha'u'llah gets his identity from Bible prophecy and if Bible prophecy disagrees with Baha'u'llah's claims then to me Baha'u'llah is wrong and is a false Christ and false prophet. It's really as simple as that.

I don't know where that is in the Bible, but of course you know I don't believe it.

Well of course you believe Baha'u'llah over the Bible. Maybe Baha'u'llah did not realise that what he was claiming completely disagreed with the Bible and that is why he praised the Bible as God's greatest message to humanity or something.

I don't know where that is in the Bible, but of course you know I don't believe it.

The fact that it completely disagrees with the Baha'i teachings is certainly NOT the only reason that I believe it has no basis in truth.
If I had never even heard of the Baha'i Faith I would never have believed what Christians believe.

The fact that I do not see the Bible as being true is not the fruit of Baha'u'llah, it is the fruit of my own mind.
If I had never even heard of the Baha'i Faith I would never have believed that certain parts of the Bible are true.

All Baha'is have to agree that the Bible is not true if they want to say that Baha'u'llah is true. It is not just you.
Baha'u'llah according to the Bible is a false prophet who disagrees with the teachings of God.
Even if Baha'u'llah and all Baha'is say that he teaches the true, that has not bearing on the Biblical view of him.
If the Bible is true then it shows Baha'u'llah to be a false prophet and false Christ.
The only way he can be a true prophet and true Christ is if the Bible is not right.
And that is OK with you because you take on the characteristics of the one you follow.

 

[Brian2]

But of course that depends on whether you believe the Bible or not. If you believe the false Christian doctrines instead of the Bible then the Bible proves nothing to you.

The false Christ teachings come from the plain teachings of the New Testament. Those teachings are ones that you have to say are false and that Baha'u'llah has to deny the plain meaning of.

Why would I need to check the Bible? Do you think that Baha'is who were not formerly Christians checked the Bible before they became Baha'is?

No but I think that once Baha'is did check the Bible they should realise that Baha'u'llah is not whom he claimed to be.

The prophecies clearly show that Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ. Even if I had no other proof at all, that would be adequate proof for me to believe that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be.

Baha'u'llah is not Jesus so the Prophecies show that Baha'u'llah is not the return of Christ.

From a plain reading of the Bible, you are the one who has made a mistake.

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.

Jesus never claimed to be a king, and Jesus never said He was coming back to judge the earth and establish an earthly Kingdom

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

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

These two verses in John 18 completely negate that Jesus is the King of this world or that Jesus will ever come to this world to rule it, and they fit perfectly together with John 17:4 and John 17:11. Jesus came into this world to bear witness unto the truth about God. He did that so there is no more reason for Jesus to come back to this world again. That is why Jesus said “I am no more in the world.”

John 18:36 shows that Jesus has a Kingdom and so is a King.
John 18:37 tells us that everyone who is of the truth hears His voice.
Jesus said that He came to ransom many with His body and blood, His life,,,,,,,,,,,, as in the suffering servant of Isa 53, the prophecy that Baha'u'llah want to claim for himself. Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world according to John the Baptist. (John 1:29)
Baha'u'llah comes and claims things for himself which are already applied to Jesus and Baha'u'llah fulfils no Biblical prophecies to show he is whom he claims unless of course you allow him first to change the prophecies so that they mean something else. Even then he does no fulfil them.

 

[Brian2]

Spoiler alert!
Baha'u'llah never weighed in on the resurrection body of Jesus.
Baha'u'llah never claimed to be Jesus.

Not being Jesus is a big problem for Baha'u'llah since the prophecies are that Jesus is the one who is coming back.

The name of Jesus was never a secret. We all know the name Jesus so what do you think that proves about Baha'u'llah? Nothing.

You do not know the secret name of the Word who is on the white horse (Rev 19:11-16), the one who is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
But hang on, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords is The Word? You told me that Baha'u'llah is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Sounds like another take over claim by Baha'u'llah to me. He wants to take the titles that already belong to Jesus according to the Bible.

Jesus was the Word and He was the king of the Jews, but Jesus was not the King of Kings or the Lord of Lords. Those titles belong to Bahaullah.

Here we go, just as I was saying. Read Rev 19:11-16. The guy on the white horse leading the armies of heaven is The Word and is also the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
So the titles that already belong to Jesus are the titles that Baha'u'llah claim. (and he even claims the title that belongs to God, the Ancient of Days.

 

[Trailblazer]

Psalm 2:6 “I have installed my king
on Zion, my holy mountain.”
7 I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:
He said to me, “You are my son;
today I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You will break them with a rod of iron[b];
you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”
10 Therefore, you kings, be wise;
be warned, you rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear
and celebrate his rule with trembling.
12 Kiss his son, or he will be angry
and your way will lead to your destruction,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

It is the Son of God who rules from Zion and who inherits the ends of the earth in Psalm 2 so it must also be the Son in Daniel 7:13,14 who rules the nations forever.

What makes you think that Psalm 2:6 is referring to Jesus?
The Dispensation of Jesus is over and Jesus is never coming back to earth to rule. He said so on multiple occasions.
(John 14:19, John 16:10, John 17:11, John 17:4, John 19:30, John 18:36, John 18:37)

Since Baha'u'llah is the Messiah of the end times, Psalm 2:6 has to be about Him, and that fits together perfectly with Daniel 7:13,14, which is also about Baha'u'llah.

AI Overview
Learn more…

In Judaism, Psalm 2:6 is generally understood as a prophecy about a future Davidic king, often interpreted as the Messiah, who will reign over the entire world from Zion (Jerusalem), signifying God's ultimate dominion over all nations; however, many Jewish commentators, especially in the medieval era, preferred to interpret it as referring directly to King David himself, emphasizing the power and authority God bestowed upon him as the chosen king on Zion.

Interpretation of much of the Bible is very easy and it is very easy to show that Baha'u'llah is not whom he claims to be in the Bible, but that he wants to claim the prophecies about Jesus as being about him (Baha'u'llah). But as I just pointed out, in this case that cannot be.

Interpretation of much of the Bible is very easy and it is very easy to show that Baha'u'llah is who he claims to be by using the Bible coupled with it's fulfillment by Bahaullah, but Christians want to claim the prophecies about Baha'u'llah are about Jesus.

It is the same with Isa 9:1-7. That child sits and rules on the throne of David forever. That is Jesus according to Luke 1:32 and other NT quotes.
So the Bible shows that the claims of Baha'u'llah are not true unless the Bible is not true.

Jesus rules forever in heaven but Jesus will never rule on earth.
(John 14:19, John 16:10, John 17:11, John 17:4, John 19:30, John 18:36, John 18:37)

Baha'u'llah was the Prince of Peace and the Lord of hosts. The following verses fit Baha'u'llah perfectly.

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.

World peace will be established during the dispensation of Baha'u'llah, which will last no less than 1000 years (from 1852 AD, which is when Baha'u'llah received His first revelations from God). 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.

Jesus resurrection spiritual body was both physical and a spiritual body.

No, there is no such thing as a body that is BOTH physical and spiritual.

1 Corinthians 15
New Living Translation
40 There are also bodies in the heavens and bodies on the earth. The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies.
42 It is the same way with the resurrection of the dead. Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever. 43 Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. 44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

The New Living Translation makes it plain.
1Cor 15:42 It is the same way with the resurrection of the dead. Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever. 43 Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. 44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

It certainly does make it plain. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies means that there are two kinds of bodies that are different.

There is no such thing as a hybrid body that is both physical and spiritual

Baha'u'llah claimed to be the Ancient of Days,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the guy in the Daniel 7:13,14 prophecy.
Baha'u'llah also claims to be the one like a son of man in that prophecy.

Baha'u'llah did not claim any of those prophecies, and He did not spend much time writing about the Bible, since He considered that to be a grave mistake and a grievous transgression to waste time talking about the past.

“…… To this testify the records of the sacred books. Were the details to be mentioned, this epistle would swell into a book. Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past. God is Our witness that what We even now mention is due solely to Our tender affection for thee, that haply the poor of the earth may attain the shores of the sea of wealth, the ignorant be led unto the ocean of divine knowledge, and they that thirst for understanding partake of the Salsabíl of divine wisdom. Otherwise, this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.” (The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63)

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 41-80

It is the Baha'is who claim these verses are about Baha'u'llah because we know what Baha'u'llah did and what will happen during His dispensation.

The verse says one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days.
The verse does not say that one like the Son of man was the Ancient of days.

Daniel 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

The King of Kings and Lord of Lords in Revelation is The Word (Jesus of John 1:1) when you read the passage.

The King of Kings and Lord of Lords is Baha'u'llah.

Baha'u'llah wants to be whom the Bible declare is Jesus.

Baha'ullah does not want to be anything, he just is who He is.
Christians are the one with wants. they want verses that are about Bahaullah to be about Jesus.

NOTHING that refers to the return of Christ in the Bible is about Jesus Christ.
Some of the Bible writers believed and hoped it would be Jesus returning but that was is a belief and a false hope.
(John 14:19, John 16:10, John 17:11, John 17:4, John 19:30, John 18:36, John 18:37)

Baha'u'llah wants to be God, the Ancient of Days, also.

That is hilarious. Baha'u'lalh never claimed to be God.

“Certain ones among you have said: “He it is Who hath laid claim to be God.” By God! This is a gross calumny. I am but a servant of God Who hath believed in Him and in His signs, and in His Prophets and in His angels. My tongue, and My heart, and My inner and My outer being testify that there is no God but Him, that all others have been created by His behest, and been fashioned through the operation of His Will. There is none other God but Him, the Creator, the Raiser from the dead, the Quickener, the Slayer. I am He that telleth abroad the favors with which God hath, through His bounty, favored Me. If this be My transgression, then I am truly the first of the transgressors. I and My kindred are at your mercy. Do ye as ye please, and be not of them that hesitate, that I might return to God My Lord, and reach the place where I can no longer behold your faces. This, indeed, is My dearest wish, My most ardent desire. Of My state God is, verily, sufficiently informed, observant.”
(Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 228)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 219-232

Baha'u'llah gets his identity from Bible prophecy

That is hilarious. Baha'u'llah gets His identity from God, not from any Bible prophecies.

and if Bible prophecy disagrees with Baha'u'llah's claims then to me Baha'u'llah is wrong and is a false Christ and false prophet. It's really as simple as that.

And since Bible prophecy agrees with who Baha'u'llah was and what He actually did then to me Baha'u'llah is the return of Christ. It's really as simple as that.

Well of course you believe Baha'u'llah over the Bible.

All Baha'is have to agree that the Bible is not true if they want to say that Baha'u'llah is true. It is not just you.

I certainly believe Baha'u'llah over some of the Bible, since some if the Bible is false.

Baha'u'llah according to the Bible is a false prophet who disagrees with the teachings of God.

Baha'u'llah according to the Bible is a true prophet who agrees with the teachings of God.

If the Bible is true then it shows Baha'u'llah to be a false prophet and false Christ.

If the Bible is true then it shows Baha'u'llah to be a true prophet and the return of Christ.

 

[Trailblazer]

The false Christ teachings come from the plain teachings of the New Testament. Those teachings are ones that you have to say are false and that Baha'u'llah has to deny the plain meaning of.

The false Christ teachings come from the false doctrines of Christianity. Those teachings are ones that you have to say are true in order to deny the meaning of the Bible verses that refer to Baha'u'llah.

No but I think that once Baha'is did check the Bible they should realise that Baha'u'llah is not whom he claimed to be.

Those former Christians checked the Bible and that is how they knew that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be.

Baha'u'llah is not Jesus so the Prophecies show that Baha'u'llah is not the return of Christ.

Baha'u'llah is not Jesus, but since Jesus was never going to return, that means the prophecies have to be about another person who would be the return of Christ.

John 18:36 shows that Jesus has a Kingdom and so is a King.
John 18:37 tells us that everyone who is of the truth hears His voice.

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

John 18:36 shows that the Kingdom of Jesus is not of this world, which means that Jesus is not coming back to establish an earthly Kingdom

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

John 18:37 shows that Jesus came into this world to bear witness unto the truth about God. He did that so there is no more reason for Jesus to come back to this world again and that is why Jesus said “I am no more in the world.”

Jesus said that He came to ransom many with His body and blood, His life,,,,,,,,,,,, as in the suffering servant of Isa 53, the prophecy that Baha'u'llah want to claim for himself.

How manty times do I have to tell you, 100, 200, or 300 times?
Baha'u'llah does not claim any prophecies for Himself except a few propecues that erfer to the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, and the Father in Isaiah. It is the Baha'is who claim that the prophecies are about Baha'u'llah.

Christians and Baha’is believe Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah but only some verses could apply to Jesus whereas all the verses can be applied to Baha’u’llah. Logically speaking then, we know that chapter cannot be about Jesus.

Regarding Isaiah 53:3, Jesus was despised and rejected by certain Jews who wanted Him executed, but He was not rejected by most men. Jesus was a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief, but He was esteemed by many men. Certainly, Isaiah 53:4, Isaiah 53:5, and Isaiah 53:8 could apply to Jesus, but they also apply to Baha’u’llah. However, Isaiah 53:9 and Isaiah 53:10 cannot apply to Jesus because Jesus did not make His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death. Jesus made his soul an offering for sin, but He did not see his seed and His days were not prolonged, so there is no way Isaiah 53:10 can be about Jesus, and that is why we know it is about someone else who would be the Messiah of the end days.

Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Bahá’u’lláh was rejected by his own countrymen, and was sent into exile. His life was filled with grief and sorrow.
The Emperor Franz Joseph passed within but a short distance of the prison in which Bahá’u’lláh was captive. Louis Napoleon cast behind his back the letter which Bahá’u’lláh sent to him, saying: “If this man is of God, then I am two Gods!” The people of the world have followed in their footsteps.

Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

I read the following words of Bahá’u’lláh concerning his persecution and imprisonment: “Though weariness lay Me low, and hunger consume Me, and the bare rock be My bed, and My fellows the beasts of the field, I will not complain, but will endure patiently … and will render thanks unto God under all conditions … We pray that, out of His bounty—exalted be He—He may release, through this imprisonment, the necks of men from chains and fetters…” The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 42–3.

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Bahá’u’lláh was twice stoned, once scourged, thrice poisoned, scarred with hundred-pound chains which cut through his flesh and rested upon the bones of his shoulders. He lived a prisoner and an exile for nearly half a century.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Bahá’u’lláh was taken from the black-pit prison in Tihrán for judgement before the authorities. His death was expected hourly, but he was banished to ‘Iráq and finally to Israel. In the prison-city of ‘Akká, on another occasion, “… the Governor, at the head of his troops, with drawn swords, surrounded (Bahá’u’lláh’s) house. The entire populace, as well as the military authorities, were in a state of great agitation. The shouts and clamour of the people could be heard on all sides. Bahá’u’lláh was peremptorily summoned to the Governorate, interrogated, kept in custody the first night … The Governor, soon after, sent word that he was at liberty to return to his home, and apologized for what had occurred.” God Passes By, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 190–191.

Isaiah 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Bahá’u’lláh was buried in the precincts of the Mansion of Bahjí, owned by a wealthy Muslim. He was surrounded by enemies; members of his own family who betrayed his trust after his death and dwelt in homes adjacent to his burial-place.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Bahá’u’lláh did see his ‘seed’. He wrote a special document called the Book of the Covenant, in which he appointed his eldest son to be the Centre of his Faith after his own passing. This very event was also foretold in the prophecies of the Psalms that proclaim:
“Also I will make him my first-born higher than the kings of the earth … and my covenant shall stand fast with him.” Psalms 89:27, 28
The ‘first-born’ son of Bahá’u’lláh, was named ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, which means ‘the servant of Bahá’(‘u’lláh). Bahá’u’lláh appointed him as his own successor in his Will and Testament. He called ‘Abdu’l-Bahá the Centre of his Covenant.

Bahá’u’lláh’s days were prolonged. He was born in 1817 and passed away in the Holy Land in 1892. In the last years of his life, Bahá’u’lláh was released from his prison cell. He came out of the prison-city of ‘Akká and walked on the sides of Mount Carmel. His followers came from afar to be with him, and to surround him with their love, fulfilling the words of the prayer of David spoken within a cave: “Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise thy name: the righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me.” Psalms 142:7.
These events in the valley of ‘Akká with its strong fortress prison had been foreshadowed in Ecclesiastes 4:14: “For out of prison he cometh to reign; whereas also he that is born in his kingdom becometh poor.”

(Comments from: Thief in the Night, pp. 155-159)

Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world according to John the Baptist. (John 1:29)

That's true.

Baha'u'llah comes and claims things for himself which are already applied to Jesus and Baha'u'llah fulfils no Biblical prophecies to show he is whom he claims unless of course you allow him first to change the prophecies so that they mean something else. Even then he does no fulfil them.

Baha'u'llah comes and claims things for himself
How manty times do I have to tell you, 100, 200, or 300 times?
Baha'u'llah does not claim any prophecies for Himself except a few propecues that erfer to the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, and the Father in Isaiah. It is the Baha'is who claim that the prophecies are about Baha'u'llah.

Baha'u'llah fulfils all Biblical prophecies for the return of Christ and that shows that He is the return of Christ.
Jesus fulfils no Biblical propcies for the return of Christ because Jesus has not returned and never will return.
(John 14:19, John 16:10, John 17:11, John 17:4)

It is really as simple as that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Not being Jesus is a big problem for Baha'u'llah since the prophecies are that Jesus is the one who is coming back.

Not being Jesus is no problem for Baha'u'llah since the prophecies are not that Jesus is the one who is coming back.

You do not know the secret name of the Word who is on the white horse (Rev 19:11-16), the one who is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
But hang on, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords is The Word? You told me that Baha'u'llah is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Sounds like another take over claim by Baha'u'llah to me. He wants to take the titles that already belong to Jesus according to the Bible.

King of Kings and Lord of Lords is not a title that applies to Jesus so there is no takeover.

Here we go, just as I was saying. Read Rev 19:11-16. The guy on the white horse leading the armies of heaven is The Word and is also the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
So the titles that already belong to Jesus are the titles that Baha'u'llah claim. (and he even claims the title that belongs to God, the Ancient of Days.

Sorry, Rev 19:11-16 does not say that the guy on the white horse leading the armies of heaven is The Word and is also the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. YOU are the one who is saying that.

King of Kings and Lord of Lords is not a title that belongs to Jesus. You want everything to be about Jesus, but everything in the Bible is not about Jesus.

O KINGS of the earth! He Who is the sovereign Lord of all is come. The Kingdom is God’s, the omnipotent Protector, the Self-Subsisting. Worship none but God, and, with radiant hearts, lift up your faces unto your Lord, the Lord of all names. This is a Revelation to which whatever ye possess can never be compared, could ye but know it. We see you rejoicing in that which ye have amassed for others, and shutting out yourselves from the worlds which naught except My Guarded Tablet can reckon. The treasures ye have laid up have drawn you far away from your ultimate objective. This ill beseemeth you, could ye but understand it. Wash your hearts from all earthly defilements, and hasten to enter the Kingdom of your Lord, the Creator of earth and heaven, Who caused the world to tremble, and all its peoples to wail, except them that have renounced all things and clung to that which the Hidden Tablet hath ordained….

Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 5-7

 

[WonderingWorrier]

I am saying that when a new messenger of God removes or changes God's laws that can cloud peoples' judgment and thus prevent them from recognizing the new messenger of God.

The cloud is removed as soon as they recognize the new messenger of God.
I think they should follow the new laws as soon as they recognize the messenger who revealed those laws.

If a new law is revealed by the next messenger of God they should follow that law, not the law of Baha'u'llah.

If a new law is revealed by the next messenger of God they should follow that law, even if it has nothing to do with the law of Baha'u'llah.

The year would be 2852, since this age started with the Revelation of Baha'u'llah in 1852 AD. I have no idea if people will be making claims to be the next messenger of God, with new laws to follow, but that could happen.

Who knows what the Baha'is will be like in 1000 years? Hopefully people in general will be a lot more spiritual than they are now, but I don't see that happening until more people recognize Baha'u'llah and follow His teachings and laws. Hopefully Baha'is won't be so attached to Baha'u'llah that they fail to recognize the new messenger, making the same mistake that Christians have made by being so attached to Jesus.

The end of the Bahai could be like the beginning of the Bahai.

Were there multiple "the one whom God shall manifest" claimants after the death of the Bab?

Did the Bab in fact appoint 19 year old Subh-i Azal as leader but was later taken over by his big brother Baha'u'llah?

"Subh-i Azal gradually alienated himself from a large proportion of the Bábís who started to give their alliance to other claimants".

Bábism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And did the Bab claim that he was the gate to the Mahdi but later claimed that he himself was actually the Mahdi?

 

[CG Didymus]

So the titles that already belong to Jesus are the titles that Baha'u'llah claim. (and he even claims the title that belongs to God, the Ancient of Days.

Now there is one interesting title that the Baha'is claim for Baha'u'llah... The Prince of this world.

Of the five key prophecies by Jesus Christ fulfilled by Baha’u’llah, cited by Shoghi Effendi in God Passes By, Baha’u’llah’s messianic identification as the “Prince of this world” is presumably based on this tablet from Abdu’l-Baha:​

​

Thou didst ask as to chapter 14, verse 30 of the Gospel of John, where the Lord Christ saith, ’Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.’ The Prince of this world is the Blessed Beauty [Baha’u’llah]; and ’hath nothing in Me’ signifieth: after Me all will draw grace from Me, but He is independent of Me, and will draw no grace from Me. That is, He is rich beyond any grace of Mine. – Abdu’l-Baha, Selections From the Writings of Abdu’l-Baha, p. 171.​

 

[WonderingWorrier]

None of these "laws" of God were ever universal and given to all people. Except now, with Baha'i laws, they are supposed to someday be for everyone. It was never the way Baha'is make it seem... That one manifestation brought some laws, then those laws were replaced by the next manifestation.

Sounds like a concept of having limited time to figure out the laws before it resets and appears somewhere else totally different.

 

[CG Didymus]

Sounds like a concept of having limited time to figure out the laws before it resets and appears somewhere else totally different.

I do think it is possible for the Baha'i Faith to catch on, but then what? If they ever became the majority in the world or even in a nation, how would it work? Would Baha'is have a secular government along side their National Spiritual Assembly? Either way, they could vote in people that would legislate Baha'i laws. And then, how would those laws, "God's laws", actually work? I don't know if any place the followed the laws of any religion had much success. I think religious laws are too strict to work for all people.