Who is the Baha’i Jesus and how does He differ from the Christian Jesus?

[MJFlores]

Yes, exactly. Everybody, that is in the major religions, was right.

But that is what most Christians say, yet their belief are different from each other. How can that be resolved logically?

Sorry, it won't be resolved logically. When Judgement day comes, people will see the real Jesus as written in the Bible. History mentions that people have tried showing what is right but what was the result?

But what you need to understand is that all these different kinds of Christians -- Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Baptists, Catholics, Protestants, etc. -- and ALL of them believe they have the REAL JESUS, and they are all reading from the same Bible. the Muslims also believe that they have the real Jesus.... So how can we know who the real Jesus is?

How can we know who the real Jesus is?
How do they know there was a Jesus?
Where is the source?
Mel Gibson?

I do not believe that Jesus was 'just a man' and I do not think that Christianity would even be a religion if Jesus has been 'just a man.' It would be a philosophy. I say that because 'I believe' that religion is based upon a revelation from God

I believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God. A Manifestation of God is not an ordinary man... If He was, there would be absolutely no reason to 'believe' Him at all. As a Manifestation of God, Jesus possessed two stations: one was the physical station pertaining to the world of matter, and the other was the spiritual station, born of the substance of God. In other words, one station is that of a human being, and one, of the Divine Reality. It is because Jesus had both a human and a divine station that He could act as mediator between God and man.

Let us ask Jesus Christ shall we?
Jesus are you a god?

John 8:39-40 Expanded Bible (EXB)
They answered, “Our father is Abraham.”

Jesus said to them, “If you were really Abraham’s children, you would do the things Abraham did. I am a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God, but you are trying to kill me. Abraham did nothing like that.

He is what? Jesus said: "I am a man"
He distinguished himself from who is God by saying:
I am a man who has told the truth which I heard from God
He did not say: I am a God who told you the truth which I heard from myself.
I hope that is clear.

Now who is God according to Jesus Christ?

John 17:1;3 New King James Version (NKJV)
Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

Where was Jesus Christ looking? He was looking up - in heaven.
Who was he praying to? the Father
What did he say to the Father? He is the ONLY TRUE GOD.
And what did Jesus say to the Father about himself? He was sent by the only true God.
Is this knowledge important? Yes it is because it is ETERNAL LIFE.

If a person does not believe that the Father is the only true God and does not believe that Jesus Christ was sent by the only true God [who is the Father] will the person gain eternal life?

I do not know what you mean by "doctrines of Christ."

2 John 9 New King James Version (NKJV)
Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.

in another version of the Bible

2 John 9 New International Version (NIV)
Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

and where can we find the doctrine of Christ or the teaching of Christ?

Galatians 1:6-9 New International Version (NIV)
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

and people are perverting the gospel of Christ as the Bible prophesied a long time ago.
That is why you have different Jesuses around.

2 Corinthians 11:4 New International Version (NIV)
For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.

What did the apostles teach about Jesus? Was he man or god or demi-god or a 50% god and 50% human?

Acts 2:14; 22 New International Version (NIV)
Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.

“Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

Peter was one of the trusted apostles of Jesus Christ, wasn't he?
Did Peter preach that Jesus Christ is God? He did not.
He said Jesus of Nazareth was a man approved by God by the miracles, wonders and signs - all of these God did through Jesus.

Was Jesus Christ an ordinary man? Of course not.

He is the Son of God Mark 15:39
God made Jesus both Lord and Christ Acts 2:36
God exalted Jesus to His right hand and made him Savior Acts 5:30-31
Jesus is the mediator between God and mankind I Timothy 2:5
Jesus was sent by the only true God John 17:1; 3

[Muslims do not believe that] The Quran denies Jesus is the son of God in several verses, including one (Q.5:116) quoting Jesus as denying he is the son of God.

And the Muslim Jesus did not die on the cross, well that is according to them.

The issue of the crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus (Isa) is rejected by Muslims, but similar to Christians they believe that Jesus ascended to heaven and will, according to hadith, return before the end of time. Muslims believe Jesus was not crucified, but was raised bodily to heaven by God.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam...e of the crucifixion,bodily to heaven by God.
Islamic views on Jesus' death - Wikipedia

I do not believe that Jesus was 'just a man' and I do not think that Christianity would even be a religion if Jesus has been 'just a man.' It would be a philosophy. I say that because 'I believe' that religion is based upon a revelation from God

I believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God. A Manifestation of God is not an ordinary man...

Of course Jesus Christ is not just a man.
He is the Son of God - which Muslims do not believe he is.
He is the Messiah / Christ, because God made him to be.
He is seated in the right hand of God and made Lord and Savior

Romans 5:15-17 New International Version (NIV)
But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

 

[firedragon]

Sorry, it won't be resolved logically. When Judgement day comes, people will see the real Jesus as written in the Bible. History mentions that people have tried showing what is right but what was the result?

View attachment 41336View attachment 41337

How can we know who the real Jesus is?
How do they know there was a Jesus?
Where is the source?
Mel Gibson?

View attachment 41338



Let us ask Jesus Christ shall we?
Jesus are you a god?

John 8:39-40 Expanded Bible (EXB)
They answered, “Our father is Abraham.”

Jesus said to them, “If you were really Abraham’s children, you would do the things Abraham did. I am a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God, but you are trying to kill me. Abraham did nothing like that.

View attachment 41339

He is what? Jesus said: "I am a man"
He distinguished himself from who is God by saying:
I am a man who has told the truth which I heard from God
He did not say: I am a God who told you the truth which I heard from myself.
I hope that is clear.

Now who is God according to Jesus Christ?

John 17:1;3 New King James Version (NKJV)
Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

View attachment 41340

Where was Jesus Christ looking? He was looking up - in heaven.
Who was he praying to? the Father
What did he say to the Father? He is the ONLY TRUE GOD.
And what did Jesus say to the Father about himself? He was sent by the only true God.
Is this knowledge important? Yes it is because it is ETERNAL LIFE.

If a person does not believe that the Father is the only true God and does not believe that Jesus Christ was sent by the only true God [who is the Father] will the person gain eternal life?

2 John 9 New King James Version (NKJV)
Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.

in another version of the Bible

2 John 9 New International Version (NIV)
Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

and where can we find the doctrine of Christ or the teaching of Christ?

Galatians 1:6-9 New International Version (NIV)
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

and people are perverting the gospel of Christ as the Bible prophesied a long time ago.
That is why you have different Jesuses around.

2 Corinthians 11:4 New International Version (NIV)
For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.

What did the apostles teach about Jesus? Was he man or god or demi-god or a 50% god and 50% human?

Acts 2:14; 22 New International Version (NIV)
Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.
View attachment 41341
“Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

Peter was one of the trusted apostles of Jesus Christ, wasn't he?
Did Peter preach that Jesus Christ is God? He did not.
He said Jesus of Nazareth was a man approved by God by the miracles, wonders and signs - all of these God did through Jesus.

Was Jesus Christ an ordinary man? Of course not.

He is the Son of God Mark 15:39
God made Jesus both Lord and Christ Acts 2:36
God exalted Jesus to His right hand and made him Savior Acts 5:30-31
Jesus is the mediator between God and mankind I Timothy 2:5
Jesus was sent by the only true God John 17:1; 3

[Muslims do not believe that] The Quran denies Jesus is the son of God in several verses, including one (Q.5:116) quoting Jesus as denying he is the son of God.

And the Muslim Jesus did not die on the cross, well that is according to them.

The issue of the crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus (Isa) is rejected by Muslims, but similar to Christians they believe that Jesus ascended to heaven and will, according to hadith, return before the end of time. Muslims believe Jesus was not crucified, but was raised bodily to heaven by God.
Islamic views on Jesus' death - Wikipedia



Of course Jesus Christ is not just a man.
He is the Son of God - which Muslims do not believe he is.
He is the Messiah / Christ, because God made him to be.
He is seated in the right hand of God and made Lord and Savior

Romans 5:15-17 New International Version (NIV)
But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

Interesting.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I stand corrected - David is a prophet

Sorry I don’t have much time to engage with many of the points you have raised and thank you for acknowledging King David was a Jewish Prophet. Beyond that David is of monumental importance to both Jews and Christians. So if God forbade polygamy as you claim, why would God allow David to have so many wives? Of the 613 commandments of Moses, the basis for Jewish law where is polygamy forbidden?

613 commandments - Wikipedia

The short answer is that God did not forbid polygamy in the laws revealed to Moses and that is why it was permissible for David, who represents the ideal King of a United Israel and a Prophet to have had at least eight wives that we know of.

This doesn’t mean that polygamy was intended for a future civilisation. It wasn’t. It simply acknowledges that polygamy, like slavery, emperors and male domination were integral to ancient civilisations. The world of the Jewish people three thousand years ago was characterised by polygamy, slavery, male domination and autocratic rulers as during the time of Muhammad, sixteen hundred years ago.

So the fact Muhammad had multiple wives is no more reason to reject Muhammad as a Divinely appointed tribal leader and Prophet than we should King David. We should be fair in our judgment and consistent.

 

[Dawnofhope]

What is the Baha'i interpretation of the Quran story about the clay birds that Jesus makes and then brings them to life? I was wondering, because then we'd have the gospel stories of Jesus bringing a couple of people back to life, and then he, himself, coming back to life... and Christians took that literally.

Then in the Quran, accepted as more authoritative than the Bible by Baha'is, I believe, has birds come to life from clay. Was that taken a literal by Moslems? If so, then I'm sure the Baha'i interpretation is going to have to have the people, Jesus and the clay birds coming back to life as all being symbolic. But any Baha'i writings on these things?

It is the verse 110 of the 5th Sura of the Quran you reference. Yusuf Ali’s translation reads:

Then will Allah say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! recount my favor to thee and to thy mother. Behold! I strengthened thee with the holy spirit so that thou didst speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. Behold! I taught thee the Book and Wisdom the Law and the Gospel. And behold! thou makest out of clay as it were the figure of a bird by My leave and thou breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave and thou healest those born blind and the lepers by My leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) thee when thou didst show them the Clear Signs and the unbelievers among them said: `This is nothing but evident magic'.

I’m not sure how much you know of the Surah from which this verse arises, its historical context and textural significance.

There are no Baha’i writings to my knowledge that make reference to this verse. The Western audience to which ‘Abdu’l-Baha addressed had little knowledge of the Quran and most Muslims in Persia at the time of Bahá’u’lláh were unlikely to have studied the Bible.

The verse is often raised by Christian apologetics who claim Muhammad plagiarised the verse from early apocryphal works such as the infancy Gospel of Thomas.

Parallelism: Jesus Christ and Clay Birds - WikiIslam

Muslims do appear to take key verses about Jesus in the Quran quite literally and in a similar manner to the Biblical literalists. This contributes to significant irreconcilable differences between these two major religions. Baha’is while acknowledging the possibility of miracles would be more inclined to look for deeper understandings.

 

[CG Didymus]

and Effendi is dead wrong. That will never happen IMO. It has not happened in millennia and is about as unlikely as another “virgin” birth and a “resurrection”. The Baha’i are supposed to be non violent. IF they try to “impose” anything the others will simply wipe them out. See the history of my people and the Jewish people. Minorities but successfully wiped out or held their own against those that sought to impose their will. That is as stupidly IMO grandiloquent and untrue as Abdul’i’baha claiming that Bahaullah was Kalki.

There are so many inconsistencies. One of them is how Baha'is virtually ignore the Sikhs. Always glad to hear from you.

 

[CG Didymus]

It is the verse 110 of the 5th Sura of the Quran you reference. Yusuf Ali’s translation reads:

Then will Allah say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! recount my favor to thee and to thy mother. Behold! I strengthened thee with the holy spirit so that thou didst speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. Behold! I taught thee the Book and Wisdom the Law and the Gospel. And behold! thou makest out of clay as it were the figure of a bird by My leave and thou breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave and thou healest those born blind and the lepers by My leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) thee when thou didst show them the Clear Signs and the unbelievers among them said: `This is nothing but evident magic'.

I’m not sure how much you know of the Surah from which this verse arises, its historical context and textural significance.

There are no Baha’i writings to my knowledge that make reference to this verse. The Western audience to which ‘Abdu’l-Baha addressed had little knowledge of the Quran and most Muslims in Persia at the time of Bahá’u’lláh were unlikely to studied the Bible.

The verse is often raised by Christian apologetics who claim Muhammad plagiarised the verse from early apocryphal works such as the infancy Gospel of Thomas.

Parallelism: Jesus Christ and Clay Birds - WikiIslam

Muslims do appear to take key verses about Jesus in the Quran quite literally and in a similar manner to the Biblical literalists. This contributes significant irreconcilable differences between these two major religions. Baha’is while acknowledging the possibility of miracles would be more inclined to look for deeper understandings.

I only took an introductory course on Islam, so most of what I know about Islam is what I've learned from the Baha'i Faith. I was just asking, because the new manifestation should correct the errors that have crept in to the teachings and interpretations of the previous manifestation. So from what people knew about Jesus from the NT is that he walked on water etc. etc. and rose from the dead. Then Islam makes it sound like maybe Jesus didn't die? So was there a body double? They didn't kill his spirit? They didn't kill the religious movement based on his teachings? But it confirms the virgin birth? Is there any thing that confirms the resurrection? And better yet, anything that would support a literal physical resurrection or, instead, point to a symbolic spiritual resurrection?

But, if the Quran is more authoritative than the Bible, and it says that Jesus made clay birds and they came to life, then why couldn't dead flesh be reanimated by God? Clay or dead cells? Both are lifeless? So then, the Baha'is would have to make this clay bird story symbolic also. And that is what I was wondering... if they do? Thanks Adrian

 

[CG Didymus]

And come to think of it - I haven't touched Buddha and the rest yet.

Just from what I remember hearing, so it could be wrong, but the man who became the Buddha, gained enlightenment. He showed others how they too could gain enlightenment.

So how does that fit with a Buddha that is a manifestation, a special creation of the one God? What we need to know from the Baha'is... What do they believe about the Buddha's teachings? I've heard one of them say the originally the Buddha taught about one God. Is this true and where does it say that in Baha'i writings? How do Baha'is define "enlightenment"? And is it something attainable by ordinary people or is it just manifestations that can attain it?

I'm not going to wait for them but I'll do a search myself and see what I can find.

 

[CG Didymus]

This concept seeks to appease every religion but in the end resulted in a conflicting mumbo jumbo mixture of a religion. It is my opinion that some of the alleged manifestation's doctrine is in conflict with the others.

Yes, exactly. Everybody, that is in the major religions, was right.

Since that doesn't complete everything I said in the post, I don't want to leave it hanging with everybody in every religion was right. No. Baha'is make them right and wrong at the same time. God sent the messenger that started the religion, even though some did not start a religion, but the followers messed up the teachings of the messenger by misinterpreting them and then by adding in man made traditions. So the religion does not completely reflect accurately what the messenger originally taught. So, essentially, Baha'is say the messenger was right but the religion is wrong.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

How do Baha'is define "enlightenment"?

You will find enlightenment is part of all Faiths.

In the Bible Jesus told us plainly how that path is achieved, that is to be born again in the spirit and live life in that spirit.

In that short statement, is the immensity of Faith as we know it. As all Faiths ask us to arise above self to find that enlightenment and all Faiths have the golden rule.

So how is it we have fought wars in the Name of any Faith? At the same time defence has been allowed by God against the tyrants of this reality.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

And come to think of it - I haven't touched Buddha and the rest yet.

From an "unofficial" Baha'i site, but it does contain a quote from Abdul Baha...

Baha’is believe that Buddha was a Manifestation of God, like Christ, but that his followers do not possess His authentic writings. This problem of authenticity plagues many Faiths, including Judaism, Christianity and (to a lesser extent) Islam. But despite that problem, and the parallel problem of the gradual corruption of the authentic and original teachings of each of the Prophets over time, the core teachings of these great religions have a remarkable consistency and congruity:

The real teaching of Buddha is the same as the teaching of Jesus Christ. The teachings of all the Prophets are the same in character. Now men have changed the teaching. If you look at the present practice of the Buddhist religion, you will see that there is little of the Reality left. Many worship idols although their teaching forbids it. – Abdu’l-Baha, Abdu’l-Baha in London, p. 63.
​

From another no doubt "unofficial" Baha'is site. But this one gives a reason why there is so little "official" teachings about Buddhism.

The student of the Bahá'í Faith and Buddhism is at first struck by the scarcity of Bahá'í expositions on Buddhist themes. In contrast to Christian and Muslim themes which are taken up and elaborated in detail by the founder himself, the Bahá'í writings do not deal explicitly with the complex philosophical arguments which concern many Buddhists. Moreover, there are no surviving documents by the Bab or Bahá'u'lláh referring directly to Buddhism.​

An official quote from from Abdul Baha...

The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God, but later the original principles of His doctrines gradually disappeared, and ignorant customs and ceremonials arose and increased until they finally ended in the worship of statues and images. – Abdu’l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 165.
​

So no authentic writings. Yet, supposedly, the real teachings of Buddha are the same as the teachings of Jesus. How would we know what the real teachings of either one were when there are no "authentic" writings we can refer to? And there isn't "surviving" documents by Baha'u'llah to refer to? So he is the "Maitreya"

Among Baha’u’llah’s messianic claims, the Baha’i International Community, in a statement “prepared at the request of the Universal House of Justice,” included the future Buddha:

He [Baha’u’llah] is the one promised in all the scriptures of the past, the “Desire of all nations,” the “King of Glory.” To Judaism He is “Lord of Hosts”; to Christianity, the Return of Christ in the glory of the Father; to Islam, the “Great Announcement”; to Buddhism, the Maitreya Buddha; to Hinduism, the new incarnation of Krishna; to Zoroastrianism, the advent of “Sháh-Bahrám.”—Baha’i International Community, Baha’u’llah, p. 26.

Similarly, Shoghi Effendi stated that Baha’u’llah is “to the Buddhists the fifth Buddha” (God Passes By, p. 94) and, further:

He [Baha’u’llah] alone is meant by the prophecy attributed to Gautama Buddha Himself, that ’a Buddha named Maitreye, the Buddha of universal fellowship’ should, in the fullness of time, arise and reveal ’His boundless glory’” – God Passes By, p. 95.​

The difficult thing with Baha'is is they say their concept of "progressive" revelation explains how God had sent different messengers, but we all know those messages are different. That is where they can always say the "original" messages all agreed and complemented each other. So they can use Scriptures and prophecies when needed and not use them when they contradict their own teachings. That way... they can't lose.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

From an "unofficial" Baha'i site, but it does contain a quote from Abdul Baha...

Baha’is believe that Buddha was a Manifestation of God, like Christ, but that his followers do not possess His authentic writings. This problem of authenticity plagues many Faiths, including Judaism, Christianity and (to a lesser extent) Islam. But despite that problem, and the parallel problem of the gradual corruption of the authentic and original teachings of each of the Prophets over time, the core teachings of these great religions have a remarkable consistency and congruity:

The real teaching of Buddha is the same as the teaching of Jesus Christ. The teachings of all the Prophets are the same in character. Now men have changed the teaching. If you look at the present practice of the Buddhist religion, you will see that there is little of the Reality left. Many worship idols although their teaching forbids it. – Abdu’l-Baha, Abdu’l-Baha in London, p. 63.
​

From another no doubt "unofficial" Baha'is site. But this one gives a reason why there is so little "official" teachings about Buddhism.

The student of the Bahá'í Faith and Buddhism is at first struck by the scarcity of Bahá'í expositions on Buddhist themes. In contrast to Christian and Muslim themes which are taken up and elaborated in detail by the founder himself, the Bahá'í writings do not deal explicitly with the complex philosophical arguments which concern many Buddhists. Moreover, there are no surviving documents by the Bab or Bahá'u'lláh referring directly to Buddhism.​

An official quote from from Abdul Baha...

The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God, but later the original principles of His doctrines gradually disappeared, and ignorant customs and ceremonials arose and increased until they finally ended in the worship of statues and images. – Abdu’l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 165.
​

So no authentic writings. Yet, supposedly, the real teachings of Buddha are the same as the teachings of Jesus. How would we know what the real teachings of either one were when there are no "authentic" writings we can refer to? And there isn't "surviving" documents by Baha'u'llah to refer to? So he is the "Maitreya"

Among Baha’u’llah’s messianic claims, the Baha’i International Community, in a statement “prepared at the request of the Universal House of Justice,” included the future Buddha:

He [Baha’u’llah] is the one promised in all the scriptures of the past, the “Desire of all nations,” the “King of Glory.” To Judaism He is “Lord of Hosts”; to Christianity, the Return of Christ in the glory of the Father; to Islam, the “Great Announcement”; to Buddhism, the Maitreya Buddha; to Hinduism, the new incarnation of Krishna; to Zoroastrianism, the advent of “Sháh-Bahrám.”—Baha’i International Community, Baha’u’llah, p. 26.

Similarly, Shoghi Effendi stated that Baha’u’llah is “to the Buddhists the fifth Buddha” (God Passes By, p. 94) and, further:

He [Baha’u’llah] alone is meant by the prophecy attributed to Gautama Buddha Himself, that ’a Buddha named Maitreye, the Buddha of universal fellowship’ should, in the fullness of time, arise and reveal ’His boundless glory’” – God Passes By, p. 95.​

The difficult thing with Baha'is is they say their concept of "progressive" revelation explains how God had sent different messengers, but we all know those messages are different. That is where they can always say the "original" messages all agreed and complemented each other. So they can use Scriptures and prophecies when needed and not use them when they contradict their own teachings. That way... they can't lose.

Well done, good research.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

You will find enlightenment is part of all Faiths.

In the Bible Jesus told us plainly how that path is achieved, that is to be born again in the spirit and live life in that spirit.

In that short statement, is the immensity of Faith as we know it. As all Faiths ask us to arise above self to find that enlightenment and all Faiths have the golden rule.

So how is it we have fought wars in the Name of any Faith? At the same time defence has been allowed by God against the tyrants of this reality.

Regards Tony

But we're talking about what Buddhists mean by it. This is from Wikipedia, so I'm sure it's just a generalization...

In Buddhism, enlightenment (called bodhi in Indian Buddhism, or satori in Zen Buddhism) is when a Buddhist finds the truth about life and stops being reborn because they have reached Nirvana. Once you get to Nirvana you are not born again into samsara (which is suffering). Buddhists believe a person can become enlightened by following the Middle Way;​

So Buddha became enlightened, so now he didn't have to be reborn, and others can become enlightened. So what we are trying to sort out here is why does this make him a "manifestation" of God? Other than what he taught, which can't be authenticated by Baha'is, became a major religious movement. And which of the sects of Buddhism most closely follows the teachings of Buddha? We don't know do we? Yet, Baha'is say he taught about the one God?

 

[CG Didymus]

Well done, good research.

Regards Tony

Why doth call me good. All I did is press a few keys on the computer. But thanks Tony. You've probably already seen my questions to your other post. Any comments will be appreciated. But, as usual, will be questioned. I'll check back in a couple of hours.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Divorce is never OK in our Church and the Philippines is the only country in the planet which Divorce laws are non existent.

Marriage is sacred. Even if the union becomes a horror story.

A spouse could leave the family home but he is not to marry.
That is the teaching of the Bible and we observe these teachings.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 Common English Bible (CEB)
I’m passing on the Lord’s command to those who are married: A wife shouldn’t leave her husband, but if she does leave him, then she should stay single or be reconciled to her husband. And a man shouldn’t divorce his wife.

It is probably worth exploring what Christian Jesus and Baha’i Jesus taught about divorce. There is no difference in this instance as we both use the same scriptures. Baha’is however would reconsider laws of marriage and divorce in light of what Bahá’u’lláh has Revealed as we consider Him the Manifestation of God for this day in much the same way Jesus was the Promised Messiah and fulfilment of scriptures two thousand years ago. However when Christ came, Mosaic law that had been revealed nearly fifteen hundred years previously no longer suited a very different age. So laws that were apparently set in stone needed to be changed and abrogated. Christ had the authority to make those changes and the apostles sealed the deal. So the question becomes what did Jesus teach in regards marriage and divorce and is it still relevant today? Obviously this is another huge topic and where we would differ is interpretation of scriptures in the first instance and secondly whether the new laws set forth by Christ and His apostles remain applicable today.

Of course almost all countries make some allowances for divorce. The Philippines and the Vatican City are exceptions. According to Wikipedia:

Philippine law does not provide for divorce inside the country since 1954, and it remains the only UN-member state beside Vatican City without legal provision for divorce. The only exception is with respect to Muslims, who are allowed to divorce in certain circumstances according to their religion. For majority non-Muslims, the law only allows for annulment of marriages.

The Civil Code of the Philippines asserts that it is binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even if living abroad. If a legally married Filipino citizen obtains a divorce outside of the Philippines, that divorce would not be recognized inside the Philippines.[33]This can lead to complications when Filipinos divorce outside the Philippines.

Divorce law by country - Wikipedia

It appears the reason for the status of divorce laws in the Philippines is because of the influence of Catholicism.

Baha’i law does allow for divorce only under the circumstances of irreconcilable antipathy. However Baha’is who reside in the Philippines are obligated to follow the law of the land so they would not be permitted to divorce.

From a biblical perspective its worth considering Malachi 2:16 where the Lord God of Israel declared He hates divorce. Marriage is a lifetime commitment. According to Matthew 19:6 a husband and wife are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.

However, God realizes, though, that, since marriages involve two sinful human beings, divorces are going to occur. In the Old Testament, He laid down some laws in order to protect the rights of divorcées, especially women (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). Jesus emphasised that these laws were given because of the hardness of people’s hearts, not because such laws were God’s desire (Matthew 19:8).

The controversy over whether divorce and remarriage is allowed according to the Bible revolves primarily around Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9. The phrase “except for marital unfaithfulness” is the only thing in Scripture that possibly gives God’s permission for divorce and remarriage. Some interpreters understand this exception clause as referring to “marital unfaithfulness” during the betrothal period. In Jewish custom, a man and a woman were considered married even while they were still engaged or betrothed. According to this view, immorality during this betrothal period would then be the only valid reason for a divorce.

However, the Greek word translated “marital unfaithfulness” is a word which can mean any form of sexual immorality. It can mean fornication, prostitution, adultery, etc. So arguably Jesus is saying that divorce is permissible if sexual immorality is committed.

Interestingly Jesus has remarriage in mind with the phrase “and marries another” (Matthew 19:9). So divorce and remarriage are allowed in an instance of the exception clause, however it is interpreted. It is important to note that only the innocent party is allowed to remarry.

Some understand 1 Corinthians 7:15 as another exception, allowing remarriage if an unbelieving spouse divorces a believer. However, the context does not mention remarriage but only says a believer is not bound to continue a marriage if an unbelieving spouse wants to leave.

Others in the Christian world claim that abuse (spousal or child) is a valid reason for divorce even though it is not listed as such in the Bible.

Sometimes lost in the debate over the exception clause is the fact that, whatever marital unfaithfulness means, it is an allowance for divorce, not a requirement for it. Even when adultery is committed, a couple can, through God’s grace, learn to forgive and begin rebuilding their marriage. Remarriage after a divorce may be an option in some circumstances, but that does not mean it is the only option.

So the Christian Bible makes it abundantly clear that God hates divorce and that reconciliation and forgiveness should mark a believer’s life. However, God recognizes that divorce will occur. A divorced and/or remarried believer should not feel any less loved by God IMHO, even if the divorce and/or remarriage is not covered under the possible exception clause of Matthew 19:9.

Adapted from:

What does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage? | GotQuestions.org

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But we're talking about what Buddhists mean by it. This is from Wikipedia, so I'm sure it's just a generalization...

In Buddhism, enlightenment (called bodhi in Indian Buddhism, or satori in Zen Buddhism) is when a Buddhist finds the truth about life and stops being reborn because they have reached Nirvana. Once you get to Nirvana you are not born again into samsara (which is suffering). Buddhists believe a person can become enlightened by following the Middle Way;​

So Buddha became enlightened, so now he didn't have to be reborn, and others can become enlightened. So what we are trying to sort out here is why does this make him a "manifestation" of God? Other than what he taught, which can't be authenticated by Baha'is, became a major religious movement. And which of the sects of Buddhism most closely follows the teachings of Buddha? We don't know do we? Yet, Baha'is say he taught about the one God?

That is for you to decide CG, I see Baha'u'llah made all things new and that new guidance is from the One God.

What was practiced in the past, was for the past and each person was also able to choose how they saw a previous Message and how they were to put it into practice.

Today we must find our Unity and if past practices are conducive to that unity, then in reality we should have no issues.

All your questions deserve better responses, I am sorry CG, a month or so left of really busy times.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But we're talking about what Buddhists mean by it. This is from Wikipedia, so I'm sure it's just a generalization...

In Buddhism, enlightenment (called bodhi in Indian Buddhism, or satori in Zen Buddhism) is when a Buddhist finds the truth about life and stops being reborn because they have reached Nirvana. Once you get to Nirvana you are not born again into samsara (which is suffering). Buddhists believe a person can become enlightened by following the Middle Way;​

So Buddha became enlightened, so now he didn't have to be reborn, and others can become enlightened. So what we are trying to sort out here is why does this make him a "manifestation" of God? Other than what he taught, which can't be authenticated by Baha'is, became a major religious movement. And which of the sects of Buddhism most closely follows the teachings of Buddha? We don't know do we? Yet, Baha'is say he taught about the one God?

That is for you to decide CG, I see Baha'u'llah made all things new and that new guidance is from the One God.

What was practiced in the past, was for the past and each person was also able to choose how they saw a previous Message and how they were to put it into practice.

Today we must find our Unity and if past practices are conducive to that unity, then in reality we should have no issues.

All your questions deserve better responses, I am sorry CG, a month or so left of really busy times.

Regards Tony

I say Buddhism is a great example of what happens when a faith is taken hold of by men and make it into what they want in worship.

In saying that I take naught away from those that practice it in good Faith in ages now gone, but the original teaching are lost and how are we now able to know what Buddha Intended?

Along comes the Message of Baha'u'llah and a way to know what Buddha was teaching. We can also balance those teachings with all other past teachings, to get a larger picture.

This then gives the required frames of reference we need to balance and embrace the oneness of God's Faiths.

Teachings that are most likely from man's interpretation are shown to be so when balanced against science, other faiths and the use of logical reasoning based in sound judgements.

To this happen, it must be a unity of mind.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

I say Buddhism is a great example of what happens when a faith is taken hold of by men and make it into what they want in worship.

In saying that I take naught away from those that practice it in good Faith in ages now gone, but the original teaching are lost and how are we now able to know what Buddha Intended?

Along comes the Message of Baha'u'llah and a way to know what Buddha was teaching. We can also balance those teachings with all other past teachings, to get a larger picture.

This then gives the required frames of reference we need to balance and embrace the oneness of God's Faiths.

Teachings that are most likely from man's interpretation are shown to be so when balanced against science, other faiths and the use of logical reasoning based in sound judgements.

To this happen, it must be a unity of mind.

Regards Tony

That is similar to what I've been saying all along, that Baha'is don't believe that the way any religion as believed and practiced today is correct. They all are following false beliefs and teachings. Would you agree with that statement or would you change it some ways?

 

[MJFlores]

So the fact Muhammad had multiple wives is no more reason to reject Muhammad as a Divinely appointed tribal leader and Prophet than we should King David. We should be fair in our judgment and consistent.

Assuming I take into account what you said.
David and Solomon weren't pedophiles but Muhammad was.

Pedophilia (alternatively spelt paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[4] A person must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.[4][5]

Pedophilia - Wikipedia

Aisha bint Abu Bakr
The majority of traditional sources state that Aisha was betrothed to Muhammad at the age of six or seven, but she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine, or ten according to Ibn Hisham, when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina.

The age of the victim alone is enough to conclude that Muhammad is a pedophile. I believe if we were to commit the same vile act of Muhammad, we can be sure that we will be stroking the cold iron bars of prison.

Further, one of the wives of Muhammad was the wife of his adopted son Zayd. Not only was he a literal cradle snatcher, but he was in fact an adulterer.

Now if you really really want to follow Muhammad despite of the fact that he was a polygamist, pedophile and an adulterer - by all means that is your choice. At least you know the character of the person and you know that nothing will come good out of it. And I doubt that if the person was alive today, you wouldn't hire the guy to clean your house while you leave your wife and kids for work.

Interestingly Jesus has remarriage in mind with the phrase “and marries another” (Matthew 19:9). So divorce and remarriage are allowed in an instance of the exception clause, however it is interpreted. It is important to note that only the innocent party is allowed to remarry.

What condition did Jesus Christ said that a man could marry after a divorce?

Matthew 19:3-12 New International Version (NIV)
Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Divorce may be permitted if one party is not faithful to his/her spouse.
Other than that, it is foul.

One cannot simply divorce his/her spouse because there is no more spark in the marriage.
Or the spouse has bad breath, bad hygiene or even bad manners.
It is a foul, on divorces because of domestic violence.
What may be permitted is when the spouse commits infidelity.

Infidelity (synonyms include: cheating, straying, adultery (when married), being unfaithful, or having an affair) is a violation of a couple's assumed or stated contract regarding emotional and/or sexual exclusivity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infid...heating,,emotional and/or sexual exclusivity.
Infidelity - Wikipedia

The Philippines does not have divorce not because of the Catholic church. The Catholic church is in Italy, yet they have divorce. It is basically that the Filipino culture about family is strong in each one of us. However, we have some exceptions to the rule. The absence of any law permitting divorce does not prevent other people of philandering or does it prevent one from having an extended family.

 

[Deeje]

So the fact Muhammad had multiple wives is no more reason to reject Muhammad as a Divinely appointed tribal leader and Prophet than we should King David. We should be fair in our judgment and consistent.

If Mohammad was walking the earth over 500 years after Jesus died, then the fact that he practiced polygamy was proof that he ignored the teachings of Jesus Christ, who reinstated the original standard for marriage....one man, one wife.....

Matthew 19:3-6....
"And Pharisees came to him intent on testing him, and they asked: “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife on every sort of grounds?” 4 In reply he said: “Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female 5 and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? 6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man put apart.”

"Wife" is singular....."one flesh" means the union of two....not several. God has one set of laws, not several different cultural versions of the same law.

Since God’s original standard was for the husband and wife to become one flesh, those taking the lead in the congregations had to be "husband of one wife". (1Timothy 3:2, 12; Titus 1:5, 6) This is used to picture the relationship of Jesus Christ and his congregation, his wife or "bride".—Ephesians 5:21-33.
There was no dispensation to alter that arrangement after Jesus left the earth.

"The first Bible mention of polygamy is a descendant of Cain.....Lamech, of whom it says: “[He] proceeded to take two wives for himself.” (Genesis 4:19) Concerning some of the angels, the Bible mentions that before the Flood, “the sons of the true God . . . went taking wives for themselves, namely, all whom they chose.”—Genesis 6:2.

Concubinage was practiced under patriarchal law and under the Law covenant. A concubine had a legal status; her position was not a matter of fornication or adultery. Under the Law, if a man’s firstborn son was the son of his concubine, this son would be the one to receive the firstborn’s inheritance.—Deuteronomy 21:15-17.

Concubinage and polygamy no doubt enabled the Israelites to increase at a much faster rate, and therefore, while God did not establish these arrangements but only allowed and regulated them, they served some purpose at the time. (Exodus 1:7) Even Jacob, who was tricked into polygamy by his father-in-law, was blessed by having 12 sons and some daughters from his two wives and their handmaidens who became concubines to Jacob.—Genesis 29:23-29; 46:7-25."
( Excerpts from Marriage — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY )

So the Christian Bible makes it abundantly clear that God hates divorce and that reconciliation and forgiveness should mark a believer’s life. However, God recognizes that divorce will occur. A divorced and/or remarried believer should not feel any less loved by God IMHO, even if the divorce and/or remarriage is not covered under the possible exception clause of Matthew 19:9.

God's Laws do not have "exemption" clauses for people who want to create their own rules based on their own wants. The Bible's recommendation is clear...choose carefully and with spiritual maturity....because this partnership is for life.

The Bible does give grounds for separation if there is physical or mental abuse, or failure to provide life's necessities, but there is no freedom for remarriage unless the partner commits adultery. Yet separation is always undertaken with a view to reconciliation. It is God's sanctified arrangement......not something to be entered, or exited, lightly.

 

[MJFlores]

From an "unofficial" Baha'i site, but it does contain a quote from Abdul Baha...
Baha’is believe that Buddha was a Manifestation of God, like Christ, but that his followers do not possess His authentic writings.

My impression is that Baha'i Faith is like a buffet restaurant where a customer can pick a set of viand he likes without examining who cooked this viand and is it safe to eat.

I believe we should examine everything we are taking in.
It is our souls which are at stake.

2 Corinthians 6:14-18 New International Version (NIV)
Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will live with them
and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they will be my people.”

Therefore,

“Come out from them
and be separate,
says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you.”

And,

“I will be a Father to you,
and you will be my sons and daughters,
says the Lord Almighty.”