Why did the world reject the Messiah when He Did come?

[TagliatelliMonster]

Note, it is your choice to read on.

That is what the thread is about, so since you have asked 'what Messiah'; To me, this world is all that is the Messiah, it comes into being as a result of the Messiah, without the Messiah this illusion does not exist, this world is the illusion, the Messiah is life.

This advice is from the Messiah;

"The world is but a show, vain and empty, a mere nothing, bearing the semblance of reality. Set not your affections upon it. Break not the bond that uniteth you with your Creator, and be not of those that have erred and strayed from His ways. Verily I say, the world is like the vapor in a desert, which the thirsty dreameth to be water and striveth after it with all his might, until when he cometh unto it, he findeth it to be mere illusion." Baha'u'llah

Regards Tony

Owkay.

Doesn't make any sense to me though.

 

[stvdv]

True.

Sai Baba is said to be a Poorna Avatar. Many accept Him and many reject Him; even without studying His Teaching.

Do you accept Him or reject Him?

The same goes for other Messengers. Some lack the vision to recognise them. Others are satisfied with what they have or they found truth in themselves (but those would not reject a new Messenger).

Rejecting the Messiah means rejecting Love IMO.

There are thousands of messiah claimants on this planet. Most are institutionalised under medical supervision and the diagnosis of grandiose delusions. Grandiose delusions are a side effect of such things as schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder. Are you saying we should accept them all, or we all lack the vision to recognise them?

I think in many cases what some folks haven't seen are the grandiose delusions.

I was talking about Messengers (that is per definition a "real Messenger").
I was not talking about "humans pretending to be Messengers"
So to answer your question "NO, I am not saying we should accept them all; just the Messengers, not the 'pretend Messenger'."

 

[Vinayaka]

I was talking about Messengers (that is per definition a "real Messenger").
I was not talking about "humans pretending to be Messengers"
So to answer your question "NO, I am not saying we should accept them all; just the Messengers, not the 'pretend Messenger'."

Who determines which ones are pretend or not? Meher Baba claimed himself to be an avatar, and had followers. The leaders of several Islamic sects claimed messiah-hood as well.

For me personally, I can only determine for myself, not anyone else. My determination is that there is no such thing as a messiah, avatar, prophet, or messenger. There are wise men and wise teachers certainly.

Edited for this link .... List of avatar claimants - Wikipedia

 

[Shad]

People have known about this day for centuries, it was just not the time to see it.

Assertion.

Daniel 12:4 "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

The Bab and Baha'u'llah knew that they were the bringers of that knowledge, this quote is clear and it is a quote from older tradition;

You are just using the verse to fit your religion and a self-proclaimed point. Beside all I see is useless knowledge from Bab or Bahau'llah.

“Knowledge is twenty and seven letters. All that the Prophets have revealed are two letters thereof. No man thus far hath known more than these two letters. 25 But when the Qá’im shall arise, He will cause the remaining twenty and five letters to be made manifest.” Baha'u'llah

Shoghi Effendi also knew and foretold about what is still unfolding;

"A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole planet, freed from national hindrances and restrictions, and functioning with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity..." (1936)

Regards Tony

Again just assertions

 

[stvdv]

Who determines which ones are pretend or not? Meher Baba claimed himself to be an avatar, and had followers. The leaders of several Islamic sects claimed messiah-hood as well.

For me personally, I can only determine for myself, not anyone else. My determination is that there is no such thing as a messiah, avatar, prophet, or messenger. There are wise men and wise teachers certainly.

I agree, that we can only determine for ourselves which ones are pretend or not.
Even that is problematic for me, because a real Messenger/Avatar is way above my head.

I like evolution, improving myself. And when a fool shows me a good lesson, I accept
And when someone claims to be Avatar or Saint, but teachings feels not good I discard
Even if God personally comes in a vision and tells me BS, I will discard

Edited for this link .... List of avatar claimants - Wikipedia

Aha, did you personally add Sai Baba to this List?

 

[Vinayaka]

I agree, that we can only determine for ourselves which ones are pretend or not.
Even that is problematic for me, because a real Messenger/Avatar is way above my head.

I like evolution, improving myself. And when a fool shows me a good lesson, I accept
And when someone claims to be Avatar or Saint, but teachings feels not good I discard
Even if God personally comes in a vision and tells me BS, I will discard


Aha, did you personally add Sai Baba to this List?

I've known a lot of Sai Baba devotees over the years. The first guy I met was rather overly enthusiastic, but like in many of these situations, everyone seems to mellow over time. Even that guy has mellowed. I truly admire those who took the main message of 'Love All, Serve All' seriously. One of our best friends here got that message loud and clear. She 'teaches' (more like leads) a senior's yoga group, and is a gift and example to humanity. Always in a good mood.

But as you probably know, there are already 5 or more Prema Sai claimants. And so it goes. In the new age world, there are lots. For me, it's really easy as I reject all the claims ... not part of Saivism.

more links to the concept's history ... Messiah - New World Encyclopedia

 

[stvdv]

I've known a lot of Sai Baba devotees over the years. The first guy I met was rather overly enthusiastic, but like in many of these situations, everyone seems to mellow over time. Even that guy has mellowed. I truly admire those who took the main message of 'Love All, Serve All' seriously. One of our best friends here got that message loud and clear. She 'teaches' (more like leads) a senior's yoga group, and is a gift and example to humanity. Always in a good mood.

What I really liked about Sai Baba, was the simple teaching. He once said "You don't need to know the whole Bible ... just practice `Hurt Never Help Ever`.". Once I had an interview with Sai Baba, and I was thinking "Help Ever" is not so easy, as I don't know what is good for others, but at least "Hurt Never" is pretty easy (esp. for me being a pleaser ... never hurting others, but in the process hurting myself a lot). Immediately Sai Baba looked at me, and told me "Help Ever".

But as you probably know, there are already 5 or more Prema Sai claimants. And so it goes. In the new age world, there are lots. For me, it's really easy as I reject all the claims ... not part of Saivism.

Only 5 so far, I am amazed. I was expecting that there might be a few 100 by now. Prema is quite a common name in India.
I remember in India seeing lots of booklets with titles like "talk yourself into being computer expert" etc.
So my guess was that there will be lots of Indians "talking themselves into being Prema Sai"

Sai baba said "no need to wait for Prema Sai", so this does not occupy me
Though, if Sai Baba, as Prema Sai, would invite me in a dream or vision to come (giving exact address including house number), I probably will go
But He should show me in my vision how He looks like, so there will be no confusion. I have learned to be very specific, when trusting visions
Of course God's Maya will always fool me, but if He goes this far (exact address/number+face), then I just go along with the ride or better flight

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And many other messiah claimants have 'submitted' to a life in prison. Apparently Iranian authorities have about 3000 in custody as we write. That's Iran alone, let alone the world. Heck, on this forum of about 200 people, there are a couple of messiah claimants.

The past Messengers knew only too well the way this world works. Thus there is ample guidance and warnings from them, for us to be wise and just in our search to sort out who may be the wolves in sheeps clothing.

I know you are happy in your path, thus that guidance is available to those that arr not happy and want to find the Messiah.

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

I know you are happy in your path, thus that guidance is available to those that arr not happy and want to find the Messiah.

Looking for a Messiah means you need someone else to tell you how to think. Seems like a cop out for thinking to me. Let someone else do the hard work, then convince yourself you believe in him. When I see something that seems hard to understand, I observe it closely, then go meditate on it, reflect on it, and maybe ask an expert. (Like a doctor, if it's a personal medical thing.) But in the outward looking faiths, the first thing to do is pick up a book and try to figure out what some guy from the past said. Often something pops out at you that you can distort just enough to make sense of.

Let's look at the two approaches as it would concern homosexuality, for example.

For me, I would watch two gay people and how they interact. I'd notice the obvious love, the obvious caring, even the obvious attraction. And I'd accept that as part of the diversity of human life. It would be entirely from observation, not from what my Guru wrote (although that would confirm my own conclusions as He (they) were also good observers.

The opposite strategy is to pick up a book, find all the hate filled stuff some others have written and go with that. So which approach do people want to take. Mine, admittedly, is a bit more difficult, takes a bit more time, but in the end it has more than a bit more love to my fellow humans.

As you say, this choice is yours. Use your eyes to see, or use your eyes to read.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Assertion.

You are just using the verse to fit your religion and a self-proclaimed point. Beside all I see is useless knowledge from Bab or Bahau'llah.

Again just assertions

Assertions that can be investigated to see if there is any foundation in Truth.

As an example about the knowledge quote;

If we look at the progress of man in science and discovery, we get to see a long steady rise since records began until the 1800's. Then in the 1800's the line begins to shoot skywards and continues to do so.

Thus the Assertion can be shown to be valid and we can consider the Bab did open the door of that knowledge. Which then also supports the posted Biblical verse. You do not have to see it that way, that is your choice.

Also we have a bonus thought. The first Message ever sent accross the wires, opening the door to modern communications, was taken from the book of Numbers, 'What has God Wrought?" That was the day after the Bab declared in May 1844. Another way to view as to how 25 letters of knowledge were released by God.

You also get to choose if that is useless knowledge, but for me it is just plain wonderfully amazing and thank God for that.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Looking for a Messiah means you need someone else to tell you how to think. Seems like a cop out for thinking to me. Let someone else do the hard work, then convince yourself you believe in him. When I see something that seems hard to understand, I observe it closely, then go meditate on it, reflect on it, and maybe ask an expert. (Like a doctor, if it's a personal medical thing.) But in the outward looking faiths, the first thing to do is pick up a book and try to figure out what some guy from the past said. Often something pops out at you that you can distort just enough to make sense of.

Let's look at the two approaches as it would concern homosexuality, for example.

For me, I would watch two gay people and how they interact. I'd notice the obvious love, the obvious caring, even the obvious attraction. And I'd accept that as part of the diversity of human life. It would be entirely from observation, not from what my Guru wrote (although that would confirm my own conclusions as He (they) were also good observers.

The opposite strategy is to pick up a book, find all the hate filled stuff some others have written and go with that. So which approach do people want to take. Mine, admittedly, is a bit more difficult, takes a bit more time, but in the end it has more than a bit more love to my fellow humans.

As you say, this choice is yours. Use your eyes to see, or use your eyes to read.

We could do it all again, but just be happy Vinayaka, you have your choices.

One point I will comment on, is when you said you would consult an expert.

I see the Messiah as the expert in all things.

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

I see the Messiah as the expert in all things.

Indeed you do.

What did he say about computers?
What did he say about electric cars?
Television?
Donald Trump?
Indigenous peoples?
Nuclear bombs?
Brexit?

Yup, he's an expert all right. Of course, as I mentioned earlier, you can just go to the massive library of delusional mumbo-jumbo and find something that vaguely relates in some offbeat way, quote it, and then claim it's hard evidence. We've been down that road before.

But this is a good thing you do that. It shows the inanity of it all. I would think it beneficial to anyone even remotely considering Baha'i as a possible faith to pursue, as it would lead then in the right direction. Away, and fast.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Indeed you do.

What did he say about computers?
What did he say about electric cars?
Television?
Donald Trump?
Indigenous peoples?
Nuclear bombs?
Brexit?

Yup, he's an expert all right. Of course, as I mentioned earlier, you can just go to the massive library of delusional mumbo-jumbo and find something that vaguely relates in some offbeat way, quote it, and then claim it's hard evidence. We've been down that road before.

But this is a good thing you do that. It shows the inanity of it all. I would think it beneficial to anyone even remotely considering Baha'i as a possible faith to pursue, as it would lead then in the right direction. Away, and fast.

I can answer those questions if you so wish, but I suspect you asked the questions not wanting answers.

If we worry you, or are a concern to you, why do you choose to post?

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

If we worry you, or are a concern to you, why do you choose to post?

Someone has to do the dirty work of calling out proselytising, otherwise it gets unrestrained. But I see a few others have been up for the task, it does take time, and all us folks with that evil anti-Baha'i agenda sort of take turns. Call it the anti-Baha'i club if you wish.

As for experts, I can see that next time you get ill, you'll most likely just pick up a book and see the answer for which meds to take right there. Why bother with a doctor, eh? Heck, the Messiah might even do great stitches if you get cut in the landscaping work.

But I'll take your advice for now. May it rain in Queensland. (A friend's daughter is studying law in Brisbane.)

 

[Desert Snake]

No need to be Christian or Hindu or... . A Christian uses the name Jesus and a Krishnian uses the name Krishna. Others might just use God. No "Real and Unreal Jesus". All Religions are accepted by God.

May as well explain that random garbage, and it's incorrect use of the name G-d.

Linguistically, academically, and religiously, 'G-d', is a name, when used without specification, ie when used as a word, or description.

It's the name of the Biblical G-d.

Thusly, there are other name correlates, however only a certain amount.

El Shaddai,
El Elohim
Elohim
El Elyon
And other names.

JHVH, or the Tetragrammaton , is generally accepted as a name correlate, although that isn't 'totally direct', which is why usually, they use Lord, in the Scripture, for the Tetragrammaton .

Although uncommon, in the English Bible, KJV, they did write 'G-d', for the Tetragrammaton, though again, it's not common in the English Bible, and actually isn't a direct name correlate.
•
When used as word, or description,
The god Thor
The god Zeus
False gods
Other gods

So forth, it has a specification as to which 'other deity', or description, it is referring to.
•
In other words, God as a name, is direct word, and direct inference, [religion combined with literal inference, and not a 'general description', when used without specification.

 

[stvdv]

May as well explain this random garbage, since it seems to be commonly misunderstood

Thank you for your explanation about "G-d"

I use "God", as I am talking from Hindu view. There I never came across "G-d"
(You asked me "So... what is the difference between what I said, and your quote from the Gita?...")

So, you calling my use of God "random garbage" feels quite disrespectful
At least add "in my humble opinion" next time when using such forceful words

 

[Desert Snake]

Hence although there can be agreement on the use of that name, used without specification, it certainly doesn't mean 'any deity'.

Agreement is called syncreticism, and is a tedious process of comparison, with 'rules', that have to be followed, so one doesn't get obfuscation, contradiction, so forth.

So, are there names for God in other languages? [Besides the direct cross language correlates? I believe so, however again, it doesn't correlate to 'any deity', as a name.

 

[Desert Snake]

Thank you for your explanation about "G-d"

I use "God", as I am talking from Hindu view. There I never came across "G-d"
(You asked me "So... what is the difference between what I said, and your quote from the Gita?...")

So, you calling my use of God "random garbage" feels quite disrespectful
At least add "in my humble opinion" next time when using such forceful words

G-d and God are the same, when used as a name, without specification. I and some Jews write 'G-d', and I do that on occasion, or contextually, it's just a religious and linguistic observation.

Hence the English name for my god, is God.

 

[stvdv]

So, are there names for God in other languages? I believe so, however again, it doesn't correlate to 'any deity', as a name.

When I use the name "God", I don't mean deity
In french "God" is called "Dieu"

 

[Desert Snake]

So, you calling my use of God "random garbage" feels quite disrespectful
At least add "in my humble opinion" next time when using such forceful words

It isn't ' in my humble opinion', it's linguistic reference to who and what is being talked about. If you write 'g-d', as a name without specification, I correlate it to the direct word usage, thusly if you use it incorrectly, it isn't clear, and is obfuscatory, in any conversation relating to theistic matters.