Literally NOT the Kingdom described in prophecy where the Messiah literally restores the Kingdom of Israel, and bring peace to the world.
It did not happen.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why Jesus did not Rule the first time, but will Rule the second time?
- Thread starter InvestigateTruth
- Start date
It did not happen.
Jesus established the kingdom of God on earth, and he left his peace to his disciples. I think they still have that peace, and nothing of this world can destroy it.
Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful.
John 14:27
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
1. because he was a failed prophet. Either that or people put words in his mouth.
2. Jesus ruling is not a real thing, but a projection by early believers.
Muffled
Jesus in me
1.
Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
2.
2Pet 3:9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe there is no evidence to support those concepts.
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
So you believe Gospel is not proclaimed throughout the world yet?
Makes sense
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Revelation 11:3 And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.”
From your link to Abdul Baha's' interpretation of Revelation 11...
It is said they were “clothed in sackcloth”, meaning that they appeared to wear not a new raiment but an old one. In other words, they would initially appear to be of no consequence in the eyes of other peoples and their Cause would not seem new. For the spiritual principles of the religion of Muḥammad correspond to those of Christ in the Gospel, and His material commandments correspond for the most part to those of the Torah. This is the symbolism of the old raiment.
Here's a Christian commentary on "Sackcloth"...
Sackcloth and ashes were used in Old Testament times as a symbol of debasement, mourning, and/or repentance. Someone wanting to show his repentant heart would often wear sackcloth, sit in ashes, and put ashes on top of his head. Sackcloth was a coarse material usually made of black goat’s hair, making it quite uncomfortable to wear. The ashes signified desolation and ruin.
When someone died, the act of putting on sackcloth showed heartfelt sorrow for the loss of that person. We see an example of this when David mourned the death of Abner, the commander of Saul’s army (2 Samuel 3:31). Jacob also demonstrated his grief by wearing sackcloth when he thought his son Joseph had been killed (Genesis 37:34). These instances of mourning for the dead mention sackcloth but not ashes.
It seems like Abdul Baha' doesn't know why people in the Bible wore sackcloth. But very creative interpretation.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
There are so many problems with the Baha'i interpretation about the "1260" days. I believe it is six times they use it. When it says, "42 months", 3 1/2 days, times, time and half a time are all converted to be 1260 lunar years to match the Islamic calendar. And 1260 in the Islamic calendar happens to be the year 1844. Remarkable.
But they beat it to death. Every one of the events start and stop at different times. But the Baha'is claim all of them start and stop at the same time?
They have the Gentiles trampling the holy city for 42 months. Then the two witnesses prophesying for 1,260 days. Then they are killed and are dead in the street for three and a half days. All of those start with the Hegira, the start of the Islamic calendar and end in 1844? Truly, remarkable.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
If it says that he will rule from Jerusalem, that is another thing that doesn't fit with the claims of the Baha'i Faith. Mt. Carmel and their headquarters in Haifa have to be the place. But that's only a minor detail for them to get around.
What can I say, but to say you would not offer that about Abdul-Baha, if you had met Abdul-Baha. I could offer more of my thoughts, but that is most likely erroneous, so let's try a metephor with your posted meanings of sackcloth, which Abdul-Baha also would have known about.
Since the Covernant of Muhammad, appointing Ali as the Successor was broken on his deathbed, the faith that did not follow Ali became a faith of laws and not the Spirit.
The wearing of the sackcloth could thus represent the mourning of Muhammad and Ali for the death of the Faith they proclaimed.
There is more than one interpretation CG, there is many meanings and as Muhammad is a true Prophet, the Bible will support Him in many ways.
Regards Tony
Jerusalem means "Abode of Peace", the Bible also offers a new Jerusalem along with the new name.
"Revelation 3:12 The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name."
"Revelation 21:2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband."
The Universal House of Justice is an "Abode of Peace" Haifa is a wonderful reflection of the Jews and all faiths working together from all over the world.
Regards Tony
The bible does not support Muhammad "in many ways" but says to look out for coming false prophets (Mt 24:11). But the Koran does state that Isa Ibn Mariam, Yeshua, is a prophet of Allah.
I don't know. It seems "his disciples" are at peace for the are all dead, excepting John, who I saw at the beach the other day. He looked healthy, but a little aged.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
There are interpretations given by Jews, Christians, Muslims and Baha'is. Each can be seen as being coming from their perspective.
When it comes to Baha'is, though, it is not only the Bible that you have explain and find ways to interpret things to make them fit your beliefs. By the time you're done, too many things are too vague and too generalized to mean much.
Sure, Baha'is have an interpretation. And it makes sense to them.
But let's take another, the "Three Woes." "Woes" comes up probably a hundred times in a word search. How many times do Baha'is say that it means the coming of a "manifestation"? Every time, most of the time, or only one time... That one time in that one verse in Revelation?
It's that type of inconsistency that bothers me. And it is that type of interpreting that allows Baha'is to creatively make the Bible say what they want it to say. Does the context about the "Three Woes" support the belief that the "Woes" are Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah?
Yes, by the time Baha'is are finished interpreting those verses, they do fit... That is, they fit good enough to satisfy Baha'is. If you and other Baha'is are okay with that, then fine.
But does it really reflect the Baha'i belief in doing an unbiased, independent investigation of truth? I don't think so.
For Baha'is, there will always be a way for them to come up with a figurative or symbolic interpretation to make sure that the Baha'i interpretation is shown to be true.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
How many "The Messiahs" were the Jews expecting? The Christian interpretation is that it was one Messiah that comes twice. Do Christians believe that the "Christ" or "Messiah" was going to come more than once after Jesus?
For Baha'is, they have to show where there was going to be three "Messiahs" after Jesus and none of them would be Jesus himself returning. They have Muhammad, the Bab and then Baha'u'llah.
And then there's whatever Islam was expecting. But, because believe that Hinduism and Buddhism are true religions from God, they have to show that those religions predicted the coming of all of them also. But they don't. Baha'is are happy with some Hindus believing that Krishna will come back as the Kalki Avatar. And the same with Buddhism. Baha'is are happy with those Buddhists that believe in the return of Buddha as the Maitreya.
What happen to Jesus, Muhammad and the Bab? In those religions Baha'is skip over them and go right from Krishna and Buddha to their prophet, Baha'u'llah.
So, no matter what was prophesied or what was expected, Baha'is find a way to make their beliefs fit into it.
Now back to Christianity... When Jesus returns the second time, is it predicted that Elijah/John the Baptist will come first to announce his coming?
But it's even more complicated than that.... Baha'i have another "Messiah" or "manifestation, the Bab, coming first before the arrival of the main "Messiah", Baha'u'llah. They have what they call "Twin Manifestations" coming in the end-times. And they say that the Bible predicted that would happen.
One of those "prophecies" they use is the "Three Woes" in Revelation. The first "Woe" they say was Muhammad. The second is the Bab. And the third "Woe" comes quickly, and this is referring to Baha'u'llah who came only a few years after the Bab.
Now maybe all this convoluted mess is true. Maybe the Baha'i Faith is the truth from God. They do have teachings that could unite the world. But these types of interpretations of theirs are way too complicated for me to believe.
By what is said in the Bible, a Christian means a disciple of Jesus. I don't think they all are dead.
…The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.
Acts 11:26
But, it could be that the "Christians" are not truly disciples of Jesus, because a person is truly a disciple of Jesus, if he remains in word of Jesus.
Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, “If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
John 8:31-32
"Christians" are disciples of the false prophet Paul, and his false gospel of grace/lawlessness/wickedness (Mt 13:24-49), and at the "end of the age", be gathered and thrown into the fire (Mt 13:30). They would be generally classed among the "walking dead", with their ensuing plagues (Rev 18:4).
By what is said in the Bible, a Christian means a disciple of Jesus. I don't think they all are dead.
…The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.
Acts 11:26
But, it could be that the "Christians" are not truly disciples of Jesus, because a person is truly a disciple of Jesus, if he remains in word of Jesus.
Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, “If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
John 8:31-32
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Okay, name some of the "many" ways.
Ezekiel 13 verse 9 states that no false Prophets can enter the land of Israel.
As Muhammad entered and is established in the land of Israel, Muhammad is a true Messenger, thus we know God is Lord.
Regards Tony
One will do, no false prophet can enter Israel.
Ezekiel 13:9 And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know that I am the Lord God.
Muhammad is thus not false.
Regards Tony