-
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!
Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
You know so much about the Bible. How is it you haven't read the resurrection stories in the gospels? But, I agree with you. When I read the story, the writers present them as if the events actually took place. In the verses I posted from Matthew, when I asked if you thought anything in there had been embellished, I was especially wondering about the dead people allegedly coming out of their graves and walking around town. I hope that isn't possible. But to the ancient people, to read or be told of these events, they'd probably believe them.
So I agree with so many things you've said about the NT. Things that other Baha'is do try and come up with a kinder, gentler way of saying that it's all BS. But just because I have a problem with it doesn't mean it isn't true. It's just very, very unlikely. So dead people coming to life? Jesus coming back to life? Jesus raising a couple of people back to life? To many people it sounds like made up superstitious, religious myth.
But Christians are stuck with it. So what are they supposed to do? Jesus is their hope and their Savior. He paid their ransom for their sins. He is the one that saved them from hell. He is the one that is coming back to judge the living and the dead. He is the one that is going to cast Satan into a fiery pit. And, you know, when I read the NT, that is pretty much what it teaches. I have a extremely hard time believing it, but I agree with Christians, that is what it teaches. So if it ain't true, then Christianity isn't true. And if Christianity isn't true, where is the truth in the Baha'i concept of "progressive" revelation?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Sorry but no. Saying that Jesus is not coming back is just confirming what Jesus said, it is not the antichrist:
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.
Baha'is do not deny that Jesus is the Christ. Baha'is do not deny the Father and the Son.
The Bible says that the Anti-Christ: 1. Denies that Jesus is the Christ. (1 John 2:22) 2. Denies the Father and the Son. (1 John 2:23) 3. Denies that Jesus came in the flesh and cleaned us of sin. (1 John 4:2, 3; 1 John 1:6-8; ) 4. Is equated with deceivers and linked with false prophets. (1 John 4:1) 5. Is already in the world during the writing of the epistles of John (100 AD). (1 John 4:3) 6. Is a former Christian. (1 John 2:19)
Baha’u’llah did none of these things so He cannot be the antichrist.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Baha'u'llah said that there were many Prophets before Adam, so that means that Adam was not the first man. Below are links to some of what Baha'u'llah wrote in The Kitáb-i-Íqán about Adam and Noah.
Baha'i Reference Library: Search Results
Baha'i Reference Library: Search Results
Below is what Baha'u'llah wrote about Adam and the flood:
“And now regarding thy question, “How is it that no records are to be found concerning the Prophets that have preceded Adam, the Father of Mankind, or of the kings that lived in the days of those Prophets?” Know thou that the absence of any reference to them is no proof that they did not actually exist. That no records concerning them are now available, should be attributed to their extreme remoteness, as well as to the vast changes which the earth hath undergone since their time.
Moreover such forms and modes of writing as are now current amongst men were unknown to the generations that were before Adam. There was even a time when men were wholly ignorant of the art of writing, and had adopted a system entirely different from the one which they now use. For a proper exposition of this an elaborate explanation would be required.
Consider the differences that have arisen since the days of Adam. The divers and widely-known languages now spoken by the peoples of the earth were originally unknown, as were the varied rules and customs now prevailing amongst them. The people of those times spoke a language different from those now known. Diversities of language arose in a later age, in a land known as Babel. It was given the name Babel, because the term signifieth “the place where the confusion of tongues arose.”
Subsequently Syriac became prominent among the existing languages. The Sacred Scriptures of former times were revealed in that tongue. Later, Abraham, the Friend of God, appeared and shed upon the world the light of Divine Revelation. The language He spoke while He crossed the Jordan became known as Hebrew (Ibrání), which meaneth “the language of the crossing.” The Books of God and the Sacred Scriptures were then revealed in that tongue, and not until after a considerable lapse of time did Arabic become the language of Revelation….
Witness, therefore, how numerous and far-reaching have been the changes in language, speech, and writing since the days of Adam. How much greater must have been the changes before Him!
Our purpose in revealing these words is to show that the one true God hath, in His all-highest and transcendent station, ever been, and will everlastingly continue to be, exalted above the praise and conception of all else but Him. His creation hath ever existed, and the Manifestations of His Divine glory and the Day Springs of eternal holiness have been sent down from time immemorial, and been commissioned to summon mankind to the one true God. That the names of some of them are forgotten and the records of their lives lost is to be attributed to the disturbances and changes that have overtaken the world.
Mention hath been made in certain books of a deluge which caused all that existed on earth, historical records as well as other things, to be destroyed. Moreover, many cataclysms have occurred which have effaced the traces of many events. Furthermore, among existing historical records differences are to be found, and each of the various peoples of the world hath its own account of the age of the earth and of its history. Some trace their history as far back as eight thousand years, others as far as twelve thousand years. To any one that hath read the book of Jük it is clear and evident how much the accounts given by the various books have differed.
Please God thou wilt turn thine eyes towards the Most Great Revelation, and entirely disregard these conflicting tales and traditions.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 172-175
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, the sources were not listed. It says the author of the genealogy chart is unknown.
Genealogy of The Báb and Bahá'u'lláh
This has not been a big deal for Baha'is.
I suppose if someone wanted to dig into it they could find out more information.
I just dug into it and I found this:
Genealogy of Shoghi Effendi
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Because that is what it says in our Writings.
1637. Christ, Virgin Birth of
"First regarding the birth of Jesus Christ. In light of what Bahá’u’lláh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá have stated concerning this subject it is evident that Jesus came into this world through the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit, and that consequently His birth was quite miraculous. This is an established fact, and the friends need not feel at all surprised, as the belief in the possibility of miracles has never been rejected in the Teachings. Their importance, however, has been minimized."
(From a letter dated December 31, 1937 written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer)
1639. Bahá’í Teachings in Agreement with Doctrines of Catholic Church Concerning the Virgin Birth
"With regard to your question concerning the Virgin Birth of Jesus: On this point, as on several others, the Bahá’í Teachings are in full agreement with the doctrines of the Catholic Church. In the 'Kitáb-i-Íqán' (Book of Certitude) p. 56, and in a few other Tablets still unpublished, Bahá’u’lláh confirms, however indirectly, the Catholic conception of the Virgin Birth. Also ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in the 'Some Answered Questions', Chap. XII, p. 73, explicitly states that 'Christ found existence through the Spirit of God' which statement necessarily implies, when viewed in the light of the text, that Jesus was not the son of Joseph."
(From a letter dated October 14, 1945 written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer)
Lights of Guidance/Christ - Bahaiworks, a library of works about the Bahá’í Faith
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
What I know about the Bible is from posting to Christians and also looking up verses and chapters online, so I know what is pertinent mostly to prophecies, because those are what Christians normally cite as proof about Jesus returning, which come back to hit them in the face since they are not about Jesus and I can show them that. But it does not matter to them what I show them, they will twist it to BE about Jesus.
I have not read the resurrection stories because it really is not pertinent to who Baha’u’llah was so I consider it a waste of time to conjecture whether Jesus rose or not. Nobody can prove that one way or another and it really does not matter now, unless someone could prove it, because it is just a matter of what people choose to believe. Those stories can have explanations other than that Jesus rose from the grave bodily, even if they make it sound like He actually did. For whatever reason, that was the goal of the writers, we cannot know exactly why that was their goal. Someday I will have time to read the resurrection stories and I might have more of an opinion. Now you have me curious, as I did not know about the parts where it talks about dead people allegedly coming out of their graves and walking around town. I thought it was only Jesus who purportedly rose and walked around.
When I first came on this thread I said that the reasons Christians have to believe Jesus rose is simple: If Jesus did not rise then Jesus could not have ascended and Jesus cannot return, in the same body. The second reason Christians believe that the bodily resurrection of Jesus is crucial is that they believe that means they too will all be resurrected from their graves and get a glorified body after they die, and they believe that is the only way they can have an afterlife. They derive this belief from slapping together some verses from the Old Testament with what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15. The Baha’is interpret that chapter much differently: The Great Resurrection
No, they are not literally stuck with it; they just believe they are stuck with it, which keeps them stuck. But the fact that most Western Baha’is were formerly Christians is proof that they are not stuck. They have free will so they have a choice to look at what Baha’is have to say, but the main reasons they don’t are because of ego (they are so sure they are right) and fear (they are afraid of going to hell if they do not believe in Jesus the way the Church taught them to believe in Jesus). Also, they are slap happy with their beliefs because it means they are going to heaven, even if everyone else goes to hell, wherever they believe heaven is.
I sometimes wonder how the Bible could be the Word of God given all the inconsistencies and all the stories that are not literally true; how and why would God allow it to be written? The only answer I can muster up is that God tests people and it has been that way in every age, so God has now come with a new revelation that explains the Bible and it is there for the taking. If people reject Baha’u’llah, there will be a price to pay. I am not God so I do not know what that price will be but from what I know is in the Writings I think the price will be higher for Jews and Christians who were told about Baha’u’llah than for others, because those religions have scriptures that point straight to Baha’u’llah as being the Messiah. There are various reasons why they cannot see that, and only God knows what those reasons are, and whether they are excusable. I like to think that a just God takes those reasons into account so I do not think that means they will not go to heaven, but they will miss out on what they could have had, which is a better place in heaven, in the Crimson Ark that God has prepared for the people of Baha.
First, looks can be deceiving. I do not think that the NT teaches what Christians believe it teaches and that is explained in this book, Christ and Baha'u'llah.
I would pay particular close attention to these chapters:
1 God's Call to the Christians . . . . . . . . . .11
2 The Kingdom in the Bible . . . . . . . . . . . .14
3 Jesus Christ, Herald of the Kingdom . . . . . . 20
4 The False Prophets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Secondly, you need to separate Christianity from Jesus. Progressive revelation means that Jesus was a Manifestation of God. What Christianity did to change the New Testament with all its stories is not through any fault or doing of Jesus. Jesus did not write the New Testament.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Stuck with it meaning it's their Scripture and they have to defend it. Because some things in the Bible do use symbolism, I hope no one takes it 100% literal. But it's difficult for them to not take it as literal as possible. Because of that, there is no room for truth in other religions. But I think, if it's wrong, it's the fault of the writers of the NT.What I know about the Bible is from posting to Christians and also looking up verses and chapters online, so I know what is pertinent mostly to prophecies, because those are what Christians normally cite as proof about Jesus returning, which come back to hit them in the face since they are not about Jesus and I can show them that. But it does not matter to them what I show them, they will twist it to BE about Jesus.
I have not read the resurrection stories because it really is not pertinent to who Baha’u’llah was so I consider it a waste of time to conjecture whether Jesus rose or not. Nobody can prove that one way or another and it really does not matter now, unless someone could prove it, because it is just a matter of what people choose to believe. Those stories can have explanations other than that Jesus rose from the grave bodily, even if they make it sound like He actually did. For whatever reason, that was the goal of the writers, we cannot know exactly why that was their goal. Someday I will have time to read the resurrection stories and I might have more of an opinion. Now you have me curious, as I did not know about the parts where it talks about dead people allegedly coming out of their graves and walking around town. I thought it was only Jesus who purportedly rose and walked around.
When I first came on this thread I said that the reasons Christians have to believe Jesus rose is simple: If Jesus did not rise then Jesus could not have ascended and Jesus cannot return, in the same body. The second reason Christians believe that the bodily resurrection of Jesus is crucial is that they believe that means they too will all be resurrected from their graves and get a glorified body after they die, and they believe that is the only way they can have an afterlife. They derive this belief from slapping together some verses from the Old Testament with what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15. The Baha’is interpret that chapter much differently: The Great Resurrection
No, they are not literally stuck with it; they just believe they are stuck with it, which keeps them stuck. But the fact that most Western Baha’is were formerly Christians is proof that they are not stuck. They have free will so they have a choice to look at what Baha’is have to say, but the main reasons they don’t are because of ego (they are so sure they are right) and fear (they are afraid of going to hell if they do not believe in Jesus the way the Church taught them to believe in Jesus). Also, they are slap happy with their beliefs because it means they are going to heaven, even if everyone else goes to hell, wherever they believe heaven is.
I sometimes wonder how the Bible could be the Word of God given all the inconsistencies and all the stories that are not literally true; how and why would God allow it to be written? The only answer I can muster up is that God tests people and it has been that way in every age, so God has now come with a new revelation that explains the Bible and it is there for the taking. If people reject Baha’u’llah, there will be a price to pay. I am not God so I do not know what that price will be but from what I know is in the Writings I think the price will be higher for Jews and Christians who were told about Baha’u’llah than for others, because those religions have scriptures that point straight to Baha’u’llah as being the Messiah. There are various reasons why they cannot see that, and only God knows what those reasons are, and whether they are excusable. I like to think that a just God takes those reasons into account so I do not think that means they will not go to heaven, but they will miss out on what they could have had, which is a better place in heaven, in the Crimson Ark that God has prepared for the people of Baha.
First, looks can be deceiving. I do not think that the NT teaches what Christians believe it teaches and that is explained in this book, Christ and Baha'u'llah.
I would pay particular close attention to these chapters:
1 God's Call to the Christians . . . . . . . . . .11
2 The Kingdom in the Bible . . . . . . . . . . . .14
3 Jesus Christ, Herald of the Kingdom . . . . . . 20
4 The False Prophets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Secondly, you need to separate Christianity from Jesus. Progressive revelation means that Jesus was a Manifestation of God. What Christianity did to change the New Testament with all its stories is not through any fault or doing of Jesus. Jesus did not write the New Testament.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I think they take it as literal because that is how they learned it from their Church; you know, Bible study. That does mean there is no room for truth in other religions.
Wow, that is a new spin. I am going to hang that on my mantle-piece.
Let's just say that hypothetically speaking, the writers of the NT are to blame... Then we have to ask where they got their information. Supposedly, they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, so that would mean that God had a part in this deception..... hmmmmm. I think it is more likely that they just got misinformation from someone and then they wrote those stories, and maybe they really believed them, but at the time they had no idea all the problems it would cause humanity down the road...
"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;" -1Thessalonians 4:16
"then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." -1Thessalonians 4:17
It's very clear that on Christ 2nd coming, Christians will be “be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air” -1Thessalonians 4:17
It did not specifically say that it was Baha’u’llah who would come for the 2nd time.
You mean "written by men" "being carried by the Holy Spirit" according to Peter, right?
"knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation." -2 Peter 1:20
"For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being carried by the Holy Spirit." -2 Peter 1:21
Now, since Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí, a Persian Shi'ite, aka, baha’u’llah who came from Ishmael and NOT from Isaac, “wrote His own scriptures”, and was NOT in any way "being carried by the Holy Spirit", but by "his own WILL” to write whatever he wants then “People should be aware” of his writings as full of "errors", right?
Do you see the difference now between Scriptures inspired by the Holy Spirit and "writings" inspired by his/bahaullah own WILL?
You mean "written by men" "being carried by the Holy Spirit" according to Peter, right?
"knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation." -2 Peter 1:20
"For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being carried by the Holy Spirit." -2 Peter 1:21
Now, since Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí, a Persian Shi'ite, aka, baha’u’llah who came from Ishmael and NOT from Isaac, “wrote His own scriptures”, and was NOT in any way "being carried by the Holy Spirit", but by "his own WILL” to write whatever he wants then “People should be aware” of his writings as full of "errors", right?
Do you see the difference now between Scriptures inspired by the Holy Spirit and "writings" inspired by his/bahaullah own WILL?
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Well then, again, the Baha'i Faith doesn't "believe" what the Bible says. Genesis says that Adam was the first man. He was the beginning of human existence. To believe that is to believe the Bible. To contradict that is to say the Bible is inaccurate. Which I could easily believe. But I wouldn't at the same time be saying how I great it is, or how inspired it is. If it's not accurate it is religious myth. It may contain some useful spiritual wisdom, but it can't be taken as absolute truth. Again, which is fine with me. I could easily believe it was written by men who put together laws and rules and a historical tradition to make it sound like an invisible God had put it all together.
So now what do we do with the resurrection? Like I believe and you sort of agreed, the writers presented it as something that actually took place. When someone commits to being a Christian, they are somewhat obligated to believe in the Christian Bible as "God's Word" and the ultimate truth. There is no room for other "Holy" books. There is no room for other Messiahs other than Jesus. Their Scriptures and early Church leaders established that. I have always said that if the Baha'i Faith is correct, these Church leaders and the writings have misinformation in it and have been wrong from the beginning. To be more in line with a "Baha'i" progressive revelation kind of truth, they should have made it clear that prophets/manifestations from other religions also had the truth. But the NT doesn't do that. The Jewish Scriptures don't do that. All other "religions" and beliefs are presented as being false.
The teachings of the Baha'i Faith make the NT untrustworthy and probably the whole of the Bible. There can be no such thing as the Christian belief in the physical resurrection of Jesus. So that makes the resurrection mythology. The NT should be seen as no better than Greek or Roman mythology. There is no proof of a resurrection, 'cause the only place it is mentioned is the NT... and we don't really believe in it do we. So anything good that Christians do isn't because they have the truth. It is because they have been fooled into "turning the other cheek", helping the poor and following 9 of the 10 Commandments, because they have wrongly put their trust in the NT and the Bible as being the truth... and have listened to their religious leaders.
But Baha'is don't take it to that extreme. They'll say how all religions are from God and all have the truth. They'll quote Baha'i verses that say how great the Bible is and how wonderful Jesus was. But then, at the same time, cut to pieces all the things Christians believe true about the Bible. The Baha'is say the resurrection story is symbolic? Symbolic of what? The story is either true or it's fantasy... which makes Christianity a false religion.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Oh my God! I wouldn't expect this from Baha'is. The things you say about religion has to make sense scientifically is one of the things I like about the Baha'i Faith. This blows that whole belief. The whole first page assumes the Bible is accurate. Why? Everything starts with Adam? All branches dead end except for the one leading to Noah? So that presumes everyone else drowned in the flood? Please, you don't have to respond to this post. Please, let this genealogy thing end and never be mentioned ever again. Besides, we know this is not accurate because the line leading to Jesus ends. I think Dan Brown has proven that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had children.No, the sources were not listed. It says the author of the genealogy chart is unknown.
Genealogy of The Báb and Bahá'u'lláh
This has not been a big deal for Baha'is.
I suppose if someone wanted to dig into it they could find out more information.
I just dug into it and I found this:
Genealogy of Shoghi Effendi
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
If I'm going to believe that the resurrection never happened... that it's just myth, then I'd have to believe a story about a star traveling through the sky guiding the Magi's and angels proclaiming that Mary will get pregnant by a spirit being, no matter how holy we make that spirit, is also myth. Only two gospel writers mention the story. They have contradictory facts about what happened. And, who was the eye witness that told the story to Matthew and Luke? Mary? The Wise Men? The shepherds? And how many years after the fact did it get reported? Was there other "nativity" story (myths) floating around? If there was, why this one and not those others get reported as to what went down that first Christmas?
I think it is sad that Baha'is are obligated now to belief the "Virgin" birth and not doubt it. So why make the resurrection symbolic and not the Virgin Birth? I think there is some great possibilities. The magic star. The wise men and shepherds. Born in a barn and laid in a manger. But wait, do Baha'is believe the whole story about the Virgin Birth? Or, is the rest symbolic?
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
I keep hearing things from atheists and liberal Christians that the NT and the Jewish Bible were based on handed down oral traditions. The conservative Christians would say those oral traditions were accurate, but we know that even the written Bible has a few mistakes in it. So did God walk with Adam in the garden? Did Elijah get taken up to heaven in a whirlwind? Did Samson get his strength because his long hair? Did the whole Egyptian army drown? Did Jesus walk on water? Did God speak from heaven when Jesus got baptized? Did he resurrect and ascend into heaven?I think they take it as literal because that is how they learned it from their Church; you know, Bible study. That does mean there is no room for truth in other religions.
Wow, that is a new spin. I am going to hang that on my mantle-piece.
I think it is more likely that they just got misinformation from someone and then they wrote those stories, and maybe they really believed them, but at the time they had no idea all the problems it would cause humanity down the road...
If God had a part of the writing, then maybe it's all true. But, what if men wrote it claiming that God had a part in it? What if religious leaders said, "Hey, we got to get the people to obey us. Why don't we come up with a bunch of rules and say they came from God? And, on top of that, we can tax them to pay us.. but we'll say it is offerings for God."
I could go with either of those. But a wishy washy middle of the road belief? That says God has always guided people? Even though, every religion in the world teaches different things... and some have very different beliefs about who God is or if there is even a God or many Gods? The Baha'i Faith is kind of like that. You're not so much now, but the more you learn about the Baha'i Faith, than more you'll be obligated to align yourself with those teachings. And isn't that the problem we have with Christianity? Those committed to believing in Jesus, now they have to align themselves with every word in the Christian Scriptures. Even if it's as whacked out as a man floating off into space. Or, that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. Or, that believers will rise up to meet Jesus in the air. Oh yeah, it says that in 1 Thessalonians 4. Here it is:
14For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15According to the LORD's word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the LORD, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the LORD himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the LORD in the air.
Weird huh? And it kind of implies that it is Jesus coming back? Now that's super weird. So don't blame Christians for thinking it is Jesus coming back. It's the NT itself.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Hey, I just repeated those same verses. It clearly says the name Jesus verse 14. And it says the Lord himself is the one coming back. So, for me, it's either the truth or it's false. If it's false still puts the Baha'is in a bad position, because they would have to commit to even more of the NT that is wrong or symbolic... anything but true.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
Besides that, Jesus never promised to return a second time. Rather, He said His world was finished and He was no more in the world:
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 also said that His kingdom is not of this world, meaning that His kingdom was in heaven. That means that what Christians believe about Jesus returning and setting up a kingdom on earth is wrong.
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.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
“Say: The heavens have been folded together, and the earth is held within His grasp, and the corrupt doers have been held by their forelock, and still they understand not. They drink of the tainted water, and know it not. Say: The shout hath been raised, and the people have come forth from their graves, and arising, are gazing around them. Some have made haste to attain the court of the God of Mercy, others have fallen down on their faces in the fire of Hell, while still others are lost in bewilderment. The verses of God have been revealed, and yet they have turned away from them. His proof hath been manifested, and yet they are unaware of it. And when they behold the face of the All-Merciful, their own faces are saddened, while they are disporting themselves. They hasten forward to Hell Fire, and mistake it for light. Far from God be what they fondly imagine! Say: Whether ye rejoice or whether ye burst for fury, the heavens are cleft asunder, and God hath come down, invested with radiant sovereignty. All created things are heard exclaiming: “The Kingdom is God’s, the Almighty, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.”” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 41-42
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I have told you at least 5 times that Baha'u'llah was not from Ishmael... Why do you KEEP saying that He was? Please answer my question.
Baha'u'llah was in NO WAY carried by His Own Will... Baha'u'llah was not only being CARRIED by the Holy Spirit like the Bible writers.... Baha'u'llah actually HEARD from the Holy Spirit directly, a distinction that makes a huge difference:
“God is My witness, O people! I was asleep on My couch, when lo, the Breeze of God wafting over Me roused Me from My slumber. His quickening Spirit revived Me, and My tongue was unloosed to voice His Call.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 90
“And whenever I chose to hold my peace and be still, lo, the voice of the Holy Ghost, standing on my right hand, aroused me, and the Supreme Spirit appeared before my face, and Gabriel overshadowed me, and the Spirit of Glory stirred within my bosom, bidding me arise and break my silence. If your hearing be purged and your ears be attentive, ye will assuredly perceive that every limb of my body, nay all the atoms of my being, proclaim and bear witness to this call: “God, besides Whom is none other God, and He, Whose beauty is now manifest, is the reflection of His glory unto all that are in heaven and on earth.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 103-104
“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57